Interesting Cumberbatch Character theory - Page 2

MadMan1701A · February 7 2013, 10:36 PM

Oh, OK. I clicked on the image attachment, and it said Star Trek Set... not Kirk and Khan. I guess my brain didn't register it on the other one.

-Ricky

SalvorHardin · February 7 2013, 10:37 PM

Here is what is said about Khan in the actual EW cover story written by Geoff Boucher:

Unconfirmed rumors suggest that Harrison also goes by the name of Khan, the genetically upgraded tyrant portrayed by Ricardo Montalban in a February 1967 episode of the original series, as well as in 1982′s big-screen Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/02/07/did-...ty-not-really/

CorporalClegg · February 7 2013, 10:41 PM

I have no doubt the two are connected somehow--it's been a forgone conclusion for years now. However, I still think they're ultimately going to go with the cliffhanger route. It just makes the most sense both artistically and business wise.

Worfmonger · February 7 2013, 10:47 PM

Sindatur wrote:

I know exactly what it says, I'm just not buying that they actually know anything. I think that's just a sloppy web editor, it may turn to be the case, but, I don't believe they have any actual knowledge to support that blurb. Why would JJ choose now to reveal that? It makes no sense to me

I agree that it's most likely sloppy journalism.

As an aside, I strongly support the idea that he likely isn't Khan (who was my original guess), but one of the other augments from Botany Bay, the circumstances surrounding her discovery being substantially different within the new timeline.

bigdaddy · February 7 2013, 10:50 PM

Ryan8bit wrote:

Why does "Voyage into the new Star Trek Kirk & Khan" make it sound like Fantastic Voyage?

From the OP article:

If Abrams pulls the rug out from under moviegoers and the villain is revealed to be utterly unrelated to Khan, there will be a letdown, even for fans indifferent to it being Khan

I'm pretty sure fans who are indifferent by definition don't really care who it is. And even if he isn't Khan, is anybody here actually going to be let down?

Guarding by the trailers the movie just looks like a massive letdown. It could be Khan, it could be Joe Bob Smith, the trailers make the movie look silly.

Ryan8bit · February 7 2013, 10:57 PM

CorporalClegg wrote:

However, I still think they're ultimately going to go with the cliffhanger route. It just makes the most sense both artistically and business wise.

I originally thought the same thing, but didn't Abrams sorta hint at a happy ending? Something along the lines of going into darkness, but coming out? That's not as likely in a cliffhanger, but I guess that could happen in a 3rd movie.

Sindatur · February 7 2013, 10:58 PM

Worfmonger wrote:

Sindatur wrote:

I know exactly what it says, I'm just not buying that they actually know anything. I think that's just a sloppy web editor, it may turn to be the case, but, I don't believe they have any actual knowledge to support that blurb. Why would JJ choose now to reveal that? It makes no sense to me

I agree that it's most likely sloppy journalism.

As an aside, I strongly support the idea that he likely isn't Khan (who was my original guess), but one of the other augments from Botany Bay, the circumstances surrounding her discovery being substantially different within the new timeline.

Yup, and SalvadorHardin's post confirms, EW isn't confirming it, but, rather repeating the unconfirmed rumors.

Yea, it's very likely he is an Augment, and possibly Khan, but, I'm leaning towards not Khan.

Truly, it makes no difference to me. If he does turn out to be Khan, it won't be a retread of Space Seed or Wrath of Khan. It will be an entirely new story, so wether he's Khan or another Augment makes no difference whatsoever, IMHO, the only thing it will have in common with the previous stories is the Super Strength/Intelligence, the long nap, and that he will be the bad guy, nothing else will be the same.

Franklin · February 7 2013, 11:02 PM

SalvorHardin wrote:

Here is what is said about Khan in the actual EW cover story written by Geoff Boucher:

Unconfirmed rumors suggest that Harrison also goes by the name of Khan, the genetically upgraded tyrant portrayed by Ricardo Montalban in a February 1967 episode of the original series, as well as in 1982′s big-screen Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

http://trekmovie.com/2013/02/07/did-...ty-not-really/

"Unconfirmed rumors suggest...." WTF! WTF is an unconfirmed rumor? All rumors are by definition unconfirmed. Jeez. What a load of crap. People get paid to write that stuff? Real newspapers are dying, real reporters are out of work, and this passes as someone being a journalist and doing real work to report a story? Anyone of us on these boards could've written that. I wonder if the reporter is brave enough to stand by those rumors?

SalvorHardin · February 7 2013, 11:04 PM

Ryan8bit wrote:

CorporalClegg wrote:

However, I still think they're ultimately going to go with the cliffhanger route. It just makes the most sense both artistically and business wise.

I originally thought the same thing, but didn't Abrams sorta hint at a happy ending? Something along the lines of going into darkness, but coming out?

Yep

“I don’t like going to the movies to feel bad. I don’t like going to the movies to feel depressed and feel diminished. The reason you go to the movies is to feel bigger and stronger and happier. So this is a movie that they certainly go Into Darkness, but I would be the wrong director if it was about characters staying there. This is very much a movie about hope, about love, about romance, and about facing something that is truly terrifying and finding a way through the connection of your family and surviving and being stronger afterwards.”

CorporalClegg · February 7 2013, 11:07 PM

Err "cliffhanger" =/= sad ending.

Ketrick · February 7 2013, 11:14 PM

The theory in the newsarama article makes a lot of sense. Even if it isn't completely right, I believe it's closer to the truth than all the other theories.

I can even imagine what the reveal will be:

John Harrison: No, Kirk....Khan is my great..great... grandfather!!!

Captain Kirk: Nooooooo!!!!

Ryan8bit · February 7 2013, 11:17 PM

CorporalClegg wrote:

Err "cliffhanger" =/= sad ending.

Yeah, you're right. For every Star Wars there's a Back to the Future. I guess I just got the feeling from Abrams' comments that this story might be self contained.

King Daniel Into Darkness · February 7 2013, 11:56 PM

It would be funny if they botched up and spoiled it. But I read a couple of cheap nasty websites (Hi there, Daily Mail!) which reported that the first Into Darkness teaser somehow confirmed that Cumberbatch was playing Khan.

Joby · February 10 2013, 07:43 PM

Ketrick wrote:

The theory in the newsarama article makes a lot of sense. Even if it isn't completely right, I believe it's closer to the truth than all the other theories.

I can even imagine what the reveal will be:

John Harrison: No, Kirk....Khan is my great..great... grandfather!!!

Captain Kirk: Nooooooo!!!!

John Harrison:"Kirk, you can destroy the Emperor, he has forseen this. It is your destiny, join me and together we will rule the galaxy..."

oh wait, wrong franchises.

Franklin · February 10 2013, 08:02 PM

Joby wrote:

Ketrick wrote:

The theory in the newsarama article makes a lot of sense. Even if it isn't completely right, I believe it's closer to the truth than all the other theories.

I can even imagine what the reveal will be:

John Harrison: No, Kirk....Khan is my great..great... grandfather!!!

Captain Kirk: Nooooooo!!!!

John Harrison:"Kirk, you can destroy the Emperor, he has forseen this. It is your destiny, join me and together we will rule the galaxy..."

oh wait, wrong franchises.

Well, there is this quote from Khan in "Space Seed", although he's directing it to Mr. Scott and not Kirk: "Improve a mechanical device and you may double productivity. But improve man and you gain a thousand fold. I am such a man. Join me. I'll treat you well. I need your training to operate a vessel this complex."

In other words, "Give yourself to the dark side, Scotty."

February 7 2013, 10:36 PM	#16
MadMan1701A Commodore Location: Milton, FL	Re: Interesting Cumberbatch Character theory Oh, OK. I clicked on the image attachment, and it said Star Trek Set... not Kirk and Khan. I guess my brain didn't register it on the other one. -Ricky __________________ -=MadMan=- Check out my new website! MadMan's Shipyard: www.madshipyard.com

February 7 2013, 10:41 PM	#18
CorporalClegg Vice Admiral Location: Nuevo México	Re: Interesting Cumberbatch Character theory I have no doubt the two are connected somehow--it's been a forgone conclusion for years now. However, I still think they're ultimately going to go with the cliffhanger route. It just makes the most sense both artistically and business wise. __________________ More matter, less hyperbole.

February 7 2013, 11:07 PM	#25
CorporalClegg Vice Admiral Location: Nuevo México	Re: Interesting Cumberbatch Character theory Err "cliffhanger" =/= sad ending. __________________ More matter, less hyperbole.

February 7 2013, 11:14 PM	#26
Ketrick Lieutenant Location: Maryland	Re: Interesting Cumberbatch Character theory The theory in the newsarama article makes a lot of sense. Even if it isn't completely right, I believe it's closer to the truth than all the other theories. I can even imagine what the reveal will be: John Harrison: No, Kirk....Khan is my great..great... grandfather!!! Captain Kirk: Nooooooo!!!! Last edited by Ketrick; February 7 2013 at 11:40 PM.

February 7 2013, 11:56 PM	#28
King Daniel Into Darkness Admiral Location: On holiday. Regular service will resume on July 6.	Re: Interesting Cumberbatch Character theory It would be funny if they botched up and spoiled it. But I read a couple of cheap nasty websites (Hi there, Daily Mail!) which reported that the first Into Darkness teaser somehow confirmed that Cumberbatch was playing Khan. __________________ Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US