Entertainment Weekly Star Trek Into Darkness Issue

[BillJ]

Many of those traits that make Khan, Khan would've been bred out after three and a half centuries.

[Ketrick]

BillJ wrote:

---

Many of those traits that make Khan, Khan would've been bred out after three and a half centuries.

That's only true if none of his descendents or their mates were augments. Also, you don't seem to be taking into account the aggressiveness of Augment DNA which was shown in "Affliction" and "Divergence".

[BillJ]

Ketrick wrote:

---

That's only true if none of his descendents or their mates were augments. Also, you don't seem to be taking into account the aggressiveness of Augment DNA which was shown in "Affliction" and "Divergence".

I doubt they're going to tie their story to Enterprise, a show no one watched.

Either it's Khan or it isn't. I honestly don't see them make Cumberbatch an off-spring or a clone.

[DalekJim]

The movie comes out in a few months. Would it really be too much to confirm/deny the Khan rumours?

[Ovation]

DalekJim wrote:

---

The movie comes out in a few months. Would it really be too much to confirm/deny the Khan rumours?

Why? Will many fewer people go to the movie if they don't confirm or deny? Will many more go if they do confirm or deny? The answer to each question, of course, is a resounding NO! So again, why?

[DalekJim]

Ovation wrote:

---

Why? Will many fewer people go to the movie if they don't confirm or deny? Will many more go if they do confirm or deny? The answer to each question, of course, is a resounding NO! So again, why?

To avoid confusion?

[Ovation]

DalekJim wrote:

---

To avoid confusion?

Hardly a concern worth noting. What's there to be confused about? Cumberbatch is the villain. It's got Kirk, Spock and the gang on hand to take on the villain and it's a summer action sci-fi movie made by people with a strong track record of providing entertainment that appeals to a wide variety of people. Again, what's there to be confused about?

[DalekJim]

Oh, OK.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I have no idea how they'll justify Khan in this movie. That said, an idea I'm personally fond of is that Khan and his people have many descendants (think about the logic of it), who over the centuries have formed a conspiratorial network while plotting an uprising. Get a little of that Dan Brown action going for them y'know?

[The Stig]

My Name Is Legion wrote:

---

I have no idea how they'll justify Khan in this movie. That said, an idea I'm personally fond of is that Khan and his people have many descendants (think about the logic of it), who over the centuries have formed a conspiratorial network while plotting an uprising. Get a little of that Dan Brown action going for them y'know?

Well, once the timeline gets fucked by Nero, anything could happen to the Botany Bay that preempts the 'scheduled' recovery by the Enterprise. Maybe the fear inspired by the Narada thirty years ago prompted a conspiracy, like you said, that recovers Khan early for some nefarious purpose.

[Procutus]

sttngfan1701d wrote:

---

Having Cumberbatch is fine. Having him as a villain is fine. Having him play John Harrison is fine. Having him play Khan Noonien Singh is just silly.

This. I'm perfectly fine with The Batch as John Harrison or any other new villain, but having him turn out to be Khan is just a wrong fit. I mean, I thought the whole idea of creating a branch universe in the first movie was so they could tell stories that are not strapped by years of Trek history and details. So why NOT create a new antogonist?

[Saul]

Procutus wrote:

---

This. I'm perfectly fine with The Batch as John Harrison or any other new villain, but having him turn out to be Khan is just a wrong fit. I mean, I thought the whole idea of creating a branch universe in the first movie was so they could tell stories that are not strapped by years of Trek history and details. So why NOT create a new antogonist?

Cos Khan is a great villain. Star Trek needs a good villain. Batman has his Joker, Superman has his Lex Luthor. Star Trek needs a good baddie rather than another mustache twirler from the create a generic villain machine. We can't do the borg. That would be a wrong fit. But Khan, he hasn't been done to death and there is space to explore the character a bit more and make him fresh and appealing to a new audience. Isn't that the purpose of branching out into the new universe? Same crew, same ship yet it's different. Why can you accept bringing back those characters but not the villain which proved to be one of the most challenging for them?

[Franklin]

My Name Is Legion wrote:

---

I have no idea how they'll justify Khan in this movie. That said, an idea I'm personally fond of is that Khan and his people have many descendants (think about the logic of it), who over the centuries have formed a conspiratorial network while plotting an uprising. Get a little of that Dan Brown action going for them y'know?

Like the Freemasons?

[DarthTom]

Franklin wrote:

---

Like the Freemasons?

The Illuminati.

Enlightenment-era secret society founded on May 1, 1776. In more modern contexts the name refers to a purported conspiratorial organization which is alleged to mastermind events and control world affairs through governments and corporations to establish a New World Order. In this context the Illuminati are usually represented as a modern version or continuation of the Bavarian Illuminati.

[Ryan8bit]

I wouldn't be surprised if there were some sort of conspiracy given that Orci is writing it. The thing I wonder though is if such a thing happened, why did it not also happen in the original timeline? Regardless of whatever the conspiracy is, how could it even be linked to the Botany Bay since no one even really knew about it? Perhaps the only way anybody would know it now is because Spock Prime told them.