And Cumberbatch's Character Is? [spoilers]

[Vektor]

As tempted as I am to dismiss the Section 31 speculations, knowing how well steeped Orci and some of the others are in Trek esoterica does make me wonder. We also know from some of their comments that a certain degree of relevance to current events was desirable in this film. I could imagine a scenario in which John Harrison is actually a Section 31 operative, perhaps genetically augmented, who was somehow betrayed or abandoned by his superiors. Peter Weller might well be the head of Section 31, operating from a secretly built, technologically advanced starship, maybe the one with the darker interior we've seen in the previews, and maybe even the one we see crashing into San Francisco bay. All kinds of potential there for commentary on shadow governments, corruption, compromising of principles, abandoned loyalties, etc, and none of it requires an established character like Khan or Mitchell or even Unnamed Redshirt #7.

You know, I wonder if the statements that were made about the "villain" being a character from TOS season 1 were not in reference to the Cumberbatch character but rather to the Peter Weller character. Maybe he is one of the admirals who occasionally appeared on-screen to deliver orders to Kirk and the Enterprise or someone similar. The statements would then technically still be correct.

[Ryan8bit]

Vektor wrote:

---

You know, I wonder if the statements that were made about the "villain" being a character from TOS season 1 were not in reference to the Cumberbatch character but rather to the Peter Weller character. Maybe he is one of the admirals who occasionally appeared on-screen to deliver orders to Kirk and the Enterprise or someone similar. The statements would then technically still be correct.

Supposedly, Weller was new to canon. But Orci also said that Cumberbatch was from canon, so we'll have to see how that goes.

[137th Gebirg]

Vektor wrote:

---

As tempted as I am to dismiss the Section 31 speculations, knowing how well steeped Orci and some of the others are in Trek esoterica does make me wonder. We also know from some of their comments that a certain degree of relevance to current events was desirable in this film. I could imagine a scenario in which John Harrison is actually a Section 31 operative, perhaps genetically augmented, who was somehow betrayed or abandoned by his superiors. Peter Weller might well be the head of Section 31, operating from a secretly built, technologically advanced starship, maybe the one with the darker interior we've seen in the previews, and maybe even the one we see crashing into San Francisco bay. All kinds of potential there for commentary on shadow governments, corruption, compromising of principles, abandoned loyalties, etc, and none of it requires an established character like Khan or Mitchell or even Unnamed Redshirt #7.

You know, I wonder if the statements that were made about the "villain" being a character from TOS season 1 were not in reference to the Cumberbatch character but rather to the Peter Weller character. Maybe he is one of the admirals who occasionally appeared on-screen to deliver orders to Kirk and the Enterprise or someone similar. The statements would then technically still be correct.

I like this - almost like a Jason Bourne-style character gone completely off the reservation.

[Franklin]

Ryan8bit wrote:

---

Supposedly, Weller was new to canon. But Orci also said that Cumberbatch was from canon, so we'll have to see how that goes.

Well, I posted this in another thread about Weller's character, but it's worth bringing up here: in the most technical sense, if he is playing a Starfleet officer (assuming that "CEO" was a mistake), Robert April would be new to canon.

[King Daniel]

trekkiebaggio wrote:

---

Nope, he was said to be playing someone in charge of a CEO wasn't he? I've read some speculation that Harrison could be a Section 31 agent, if that organisation is involved I could imagine Peter Weller being the head of it, or at least a major player. Abrams does like the government conspiracies doesn't he. Hey, maybe they even discover the Botany Bay and revive Khan, which could be the tease for the third film.

Trekmovie.com says Peter Weller is playing Admiral Marcus, Carol's father.

[Ryan8bit]

King Daniel Into Darkness wrote:

---

Trekmovie.com says Peter Weller is playing Admiral Marcus, Carol's father.

Where is that exactly? I must have missed that.

[Xaios]

Who knows though, maybe Admiral Marcus is the head of Section 31, unbeknownst to even his daughter. Cumbersson Harribatch could be playing an agent going rogue after being betrayed by his handlers. In his quest for vengeance, he seeks to hurt Admiral Marcus by taking the thing that is most special to him: his daughter. At some point in the film, he has her in a position to kill her while Admiral Marcus looks on helplessly, and offers to trade her life for his, saying "Is there anything you would not do for your family?"

Intriguing, eh?

[Drago-Kazov]

Vektor wrote:

---

As tempted as I am to dismiss the Section 31 speculations, knowing how well steeped Orci and some of the others are in Trek esoterica does make me wonder. We also know from some of their comments that a certain degree of relevance to current events was desirable in this film. I could imagine a scenario in which John Harrison is actually a Section 31 operative, perhaps genetically augmented, who was somehow betrayed or abandoned by his superiors. Peter Weller might well be the head of Section 31, operating from a secretly built, technologically advanced starship, maybe the one with the darker interior we've seen in the previews, and maybe even the one we see crashing into San Francisco bay. All kinds of potential there for commentary on shadow governments, corruption, compromising of principles, abandoned loyalties, etc, and none of it requires an established character like Khan or Mitchell or even Unnamed Redshirt #7.

You know, I wonder if the statements that were made about the "villain" being a character from TOS season 1 were not in reference to the Cumberbatch character but rather to the Peter Weller character. Maybe he is one of the admirals who occasionally appeared on-screen to deliver orders to Kirk and the Enterprise or someone similar. The statements would then technically still be correct.

J.J.s new conspiracy show also seems to help your argument plus the Archon comic.

[CorporalClegg]

The Section 31 thing wouldn't surprise me.

I've been saying for a while that I'd be really surprised if it didn't show up at some point. The whole concept is just runs right up Bad Robot's alley.

It also wouldn't surprise me if that was the set-up for the next film, and they do some kind of play with 31 and 13.

[trekkiebaggio]

Franklin wrote:

---

Well, I posted this in another thread about Weller's character, but it's worth bringing up here: in the most technical sense, if he is playing a Starfleet officer (assuming that "CEO" was a mistake), Robert April would be new to canon.

I remember some of the Lost casting sheets had character descriptions, something like "character who leads a hostile takeover of a corporation" which was obviously not entirely accurate, so being called a 'CEO' probably doesn't literally mean a CEO.

[King Daniel]

Ryan8bit wrote:

---

Where is that exactly? I must have missed that.

Erm... *searches around* I can't cite it. Maybe it was just some fan speculation I read. Apologies.

[Xaios]

trekkiebaggio wrote:

---

I remember some of the Lost casting sheets had character descriptions, something like "character who leads a hostile takeover of a corporation" which was obviously not entirely accurate, so being called a 'CEO' probably doesn't literally mean a CEO.

Maybe he is in a manner of speaking. After all, CEO stands for Chief Executive Officer. An executive officer on a ship is the second in command. Maybe the chief executive officer is the second in command for all of Starfleet.

Eh, probably not.

[diankra]

Vektor wrote:

---

What I'm having a hard time figuring out is why they would bother with the whole "I have returned to have my vengeance" angle with a character we've never seen or heard of before. Not to say it isn't possible to introduce a brand new character, fill in his back story with a plausible motive for vengeance and make the whole thing work, it just seems... odd.

It's very easy to do, in a way that makes the film self-contained for people watching it as a one-off.
The pre-credits sequence is a spectacular mini-episode in which Cumberbatch's character apparently gets killed. The main movie is set a few years later, when he returns to take his revenge.
Not saying that's what they're going to do, but it's almost as basic an approach to plotting as Act1/2/3/4.

[Vektor]

diankra wrote:

---

It's very easy to do, in a way that makes the film self-contained for people watching it as a one-off.
The pre-credits sequence is a spectacular mini-episode in which Cumberbatch's character apparently gets killed. The main movie is set a few years later, when he returns to take his revenge.
Not saying that's what they're going to do, but it's almost as basic an approach to plotting as Act1/2/3/4.

As I said, it's certainly possible, perhaps even not all that difficult. It still strikes me as odd if that's really all there is to it. If my other theory is correct, that Cumbebatch is not playing the ultimate villain in this movie, then all bets are off.

[trevanian]

There aren't that many people named Harrison in TOS that I recall. Could it be he is related to the William B. Harrison who was a member of the BEAGLE, the ship captained by RM Merrick in BREAD & CIRCUSES? If he was P.O.'d about his brother being lost on a ship surveying an earth-type world, he might have prime directive issues (like OMNE in the PHOENIX novels, for those of you who go WAY back) and decide to interfere in his own way with Earth/Starfleet.

Hey, it's ridiculous, but everybody's grasping at straws here (when I checked the episode's teaser just now, I was really thinking the character mentioned was named John Harrison & I was going to have a real a-ha moment (not the band.)