View Single Post
Old December 3 2013, 07:56 AM   #20
Fleet Captain
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
Re: J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake

doubleohfive wrote: View Post
AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post

"The truth is I think it probably would have been smarter just to say upfront 'This is who it is.' It was only trying to preserve the fun of it, and it might have given more time to acclimate and accept that’s what the thing was," Abrams said. "The truth is because it was so important to the studio that we not angle this thing for existing fans. If we said it was Khan, it would feel like you’ve really got to know what ‘Star Trek’ is about to see this movie. That would have been limiting. I can understand their argument to try to keep that quiet, but I do wonder if it would have seemed a little bit less like an attempt at deception if we had just come out with it."

I bolded what i think is the important text of this quote.

I'm not surprised by Paramount snubbing existing fans but was it really smart to not hype up Trek's most iconic villain? I mean it's not like we're expecting non-fans to watch 2 dozen episodes to understand Khan's character or history.
I don't see anything in Abrams' comments to indicate Paramount was "snubbing" any existing fans. Rather, the obvious read (obvious, if you don't have an anti-Abrams agenda, I suppose, or if you just learned how to use context clues in elementary school) would be that Paramount didn't want to promote the film as something that only fans with a vested interest in Star Trek would be able to enjoy.

Announcing that Khan was the villain in the film would have proclaimed precisely that and anyone who had ever heard of Star Trek or had a passing familiarity with it would know 'Eh, more of the same stuff, why should I go see it?'

So instead, Paramount chose to angle their promotion of the film omitting that little tidbit. There's nothing wrong with that. It makes pefect sense that Paramount would want as many butts in the theaters and as many eyeballs on those screens because means the picture is selling tickets. Why this is such a complex issue to comprehend is beyond me.

The thing every last person on this godforsaken message board needs to have reminded to them is that this is a tiny community of fandom. A small pond of fans in a ginormous ocean of moviegoers. What we want, what we care about doesn't mean jack shit. To assume, nay expect otherwise is foolish.
I don't have an anti-Abrams agenda. I enjoy both his Trek movies, MI3, Cloverfield, Super 8 and Fringe. I was trying to articulate (maybe snubbing wasn't the right word) that trying to keep the villain's identity a secret when it's one the fans know; was a silly idea. The Klingons were added into STID for no other reason than to be fodder for Khan to beat up. And yet Paramount had no reservations about them being put in the film or stating they would be in the film prior to it's release. How many general audience attendees do you think can even describe what a klingon is? There was no expectation for general audiences to go watch all 79 episodes of TOS, and the original 6 movies prior ST09 release. Khan is not some untranslatable villain. He's Star Trek's most iconic villain from what is still perceived as the best film in the franchise. Why not promote that?

Take Star Wars for example. If Disney decided to revive Darth Vader for episode 7. Do you think they would keep that in their pocket till the film was released or promote the hell out the fact that Darth Vader is returning?
M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote