They never renamed George Orwell's 1984, so I don't see why they'd rename 2001. Also, quick thought on the Eugenics War and WWIII: perhaps they're the same war much like WWI and WWII are almost the same war?
They really don't have to give dates as to when Khan ruled the Earth. He's an evil genetically engineered dictator from the Earth's past; that's about the extent of backstory we need (one doesn't even need to know he's Sikh, though you may as well). Basically this is a huge nonissue and I suspect if O&K did put Khan in a movie they'd just sidestep this matter entirely, and they'd be right to. So no, this isn't something that has to be retconned. Just ignored. The new films will be doing a lot of the latter - it's not likely to be visiting the planet where Apollo or Plato's stepchildren or gangsters or TV-watching Romans hang out, for obvious reasons, but in 'canon' these would still be there.
A human genetic engineering program isn't cheap or easy to conceal, though. I mean, who ran it, Hugo Drax? The secret program/few Augments paradigm I just can't truck with. To be effective, there would have had to have been hundreds of millions of them. A few thousand guys with trebled strength and doubled intelligence? So what, they aren't bulletproof. How do you seize power in (what was it?) forty nations with a few thousand guys? To be viable, Augments have to have a large presence in the population. Frankly, I think that's more interesting anyway, in that it elevates the Augies beyond supervillains. Now on this, we're in total agreement. Sometimes, I still kind of think they were only like three LY out from Earth. Enterprise got near the location of the discovery real quickly in TWoK, anyway... plus the sublightness of the whole endeavor.
Yeah, I think he refers to them as "variations on a theme" in the foreword to 3001. Sensible approach. I think that it's one that could easily have been taken with the new movie without tying it to existing continuity. Tweak what it makes sense to tweak, but keep as much of the important stuff intact as you can.
I quit watching ST:ENT during the Xindi arc ("We are evil lizard men bwah hah ha!! ... " ), though I heard that they introduced a ship full of Augments later on in the series. I'm curious how they handled the origin there. Did they re-write their origin, keep it vague and unexplained or just completly ignored it outright?
Vague. Which is also exactly the same thing Wrath of Khan did (remember, TWOK was made a mere ten years before 1992, so such claims of an immenient seizure of power by supermen seemed doubtful even then); although not only did TWOK not mention the date it retconned what Khan's guys were (they were not engineered supermen in the original episode... they were made through selective breeding. Er. Right.) The specific dates of Khan's reign and even the fact he's a Sikh have only ever been things that are important to us, Trekkie nerds. For a new filmic take on him this it's completely irrelevant.
First, I hope they don't resurrect Khan. But if they do, I agree being vague about some of the details of his backstory would be welcome. BTW, the Augments storyline in ENT was a poor rip-off of both Space Seed and TWOK. -- RR
Arik Soong as ably played by Brent Spiner was a bright spot in it all, however, despite the arc being mostly lousy. And the torture bit was intense. The Augments themselves were of course woefully lame, from the depth of their characters to their dialogue to their fashion sense. Seriously weak.
I really enjoyed the Augment arc - particularly because of Brent Spiner, who was fantastic in it - but yeah, the Augments themselves were rather weakly acted and interchangeable pretty people.
Should go Fuck themselves. THEY didn't make Star Trek the success it was and I'll doubt they'll be onboard for Star Trek 2, no matter how much unnecessary asskissing TPTB do. Abrams and the rest of us who love this film should leave those retards behind with their DVD's of TOS.
This is why they should have just done a complete reboot for the movie instead of what they did. I'm of the opinion that Star Trek's history doesn't need to follow our history (it is fiction after all and is entertainment), though TPTB always seem to try and make events 'fit' into Trek's timeline. I didn't read the Eugenics War novels and I think the idea of that war being fought 'in secret' is stupid. The war happened, 30+ million were killed and it was a pivotal moment in human history that culminated in the banning of genetic engineering. How a war that kills that many people could be kept secret is absurd and silly. Khan shouldn't be in the next movie, it would be better to do something else, preferably something new instead of remaking an old movie.
I throw my hat in with the 'no Khan in Nuverse' clan. Been there, done that, we don't need to see that character again at all. Tell his story in Novels and/or comics. TO: Kurtzman/Orci PLEASE don't waste screen time rehashing OU stories!!! (<going in sig! feel free to duplicate!) I may be off topic but I just had to say, IMO, this bit about the new timeline being the same as up to the Kelvin violates my presumed spirit the new PTB intended for the Nuverse. I believe a major point being made in Parallels, (and one I want to hope the writers perceived as I did) is that all AU's are just that; alternate. They were all started at the same time as the PT and grew their separate ways, which may be eerily the same or grossly different. Every person or thing occurs in every Universe but events can play out entirely different in each one. Odo lived in one but died in another. The Enterprise was the O'l Girl in TOS, she is the Nu' Girl in the Nu. A Khan remake would, even if successful & IMO, only serve to indicate they had nothing else of value to add to their baby, Star Trek was only a 'one hit wonder'.
Aren't these things going to always be issues for Star Trek though? If the franchise continues for 40-50 years more, people will wonder when the Vulcans will show up in 2063 and where Zephram Cochrane is. The events in ENT are relatively right around the corner, simply the next century, that's not that far away. Heck, how are all those things from TOS or Trek XI supposed to happen in the next 250 years or so? If they do Khan, they can not give out the 1990s date because mainstream audiences will think "WTF?". They need to ignore the date, retcon Khan's backstory or simply not do a Khan story at all. But if I remember TWOK retconned Khan and his people. Khan sure didn't look like a Sikh Indian in TWOK as he did in "Space Seed", and his followers went from dark haired to becoming all blonde haired Anglo looking people. How did that happen?
Firstly, I am glad to see there's others who think that it's a bad thing to rehash Kahn for the sequel to Star Trek. I'm against it, mainly because the vibe I am getting is that "This is a new timeline, now we can do Kahn MY way, hahaha!" Considering how new this timeline is, and the current setting (and when they net Kahn in TOS), I don't see how it can work out for the sake of argument that it can be done because its a new universe. Not to mention the appeal on Kahn, was that he was a challange, an opposite, to an experienced James Kirk, not someone a couple years into his carreer period, let alone command. Secondly, I am confused they would have to change the days 'because those dates already happened' as it's fantasy/science fiction/fake/whatever term you want to use, anyone who wonders where the Vulcans are come 2063 IMO, is someone who'd need serious mental help.
Pretty much someone like Hugo Drax did run it; that's the premise of the novels, since it was like James Bond skewed 360 degrees. Plus, it had been going on for a loong time. Again, it's all explained in the novels. They were going to launch missiles full of flesh-eating bacteria all over the globe, just like Hugo Drax was goint to launch globes full of deadly gas all over Earth in Moonraker-after the human race had died out, they would have cloned enough Augments to repopulate the world. As I said, you have to read the novel (and the spoiler I've presented.) Then you'll get what I and Mr. Cox are trying to tell you.
This negates the fact that if the war was secret nobody would even know Khan existed let alone three hundred years later. He needs to be infamous. In order for Khan to work he must have a lasting and persistent presence in history like Hitler. "Never again!"
When Khan (who was the most famous of them all) seized power in India in the early '90's, he became known for doing so; the others (Randy Morrison, Chen Tijun, Arcturus, etc.) less so since one was a typical right-wing American survivalist with a bunch of like-minded wackos in Florida, another being a group of neo-Amazons on their own island (Chen even wears body armor), and the third-mentioned one is the head of a global space cult similar to the cult that killed themselves in order to go into space by dying (the one that Nichelle Nicols's brother was a member of.) Khan simply had more resources to do what he wanted since he controlled half of India and Asia, and had even built a submarine fleet and a arsenal of missiles. The war itself is seen by historians from the future as being one, but not perceived by the people of the '90's as being a big conflict, rather just seen as part of the conflicts and events of the time, according to (Greg) Cox.