RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,945
Posts: 5,390,700
Members: 24,722
Currently online: 615
Newest member: Jadakiss

TrekToday headlines

Forbes Cast In Powers
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Dorn To Voice Firefly Character
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

No ALS Ice Bucket For Saldana
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

Free Star Trek Trexels Game
By: T'Bonz on Aug 22

New Trek-themed Bobble Heads
By: T'Bonz on Aug 21

IDW Publishing November Trek Comic
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Pegg/Wright Trilogy In The Works
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Star Trek: The Compendium Rebate Details
By: T'Bonz on Aug 20

Gold Key Archives Volume 2
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19

Takei Documentary Wins Award
By: T'Bonz on Aug 19


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 27 2013, 11:03 PM   #61
Sindatur
Vice Admiral
 
Sindatur's Avatar
 
Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Why Khan?

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
Greg Cox wrote: View Post
Why make Starbuck a woman? Why didn't Heath Ledger play the Joker exactly like Cesar Romero or Jack Nicholson? Why cast Lucy Liu as Dr. Watson?

Sometimes it's just fun to take an old concept or character and put a new spin on it . . . .
In principle I agree, but this isn't quite a comparable situation. There is no continuity aspect between the different shows you cite. Here, it's been made very clear that prior to 2233, the universe was the "prime" (TOS) one. Sure, the look of ships and technology change to suit budgets, but the people shouldn't. No one is going to switch genders. If Khan appears in this movie, he should be basically the guy we saw in Space Seed: a former middle eastern dictator who was ousted and exiled. He can't suddenly become a white British chap with an attitude to match his voice.
Except he wasn't a Middle Eastern Guy playing the part, he was a Mexican Guy playing the part. you're much more liely to find a British Guy in India/The Middle East, then you are a Mexican Guy.
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am

Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?
Sindatur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2013, 11:14 PM   #62
Greg Cox
Vice Admiral
 
Location: Oxford, PA
Re: Why Khan?

As I've written before, I'm old enough to have lived through at least six different live-action versions of Superman. A new take on Khan doesn't faze me . . . .

If indeed Cumberbatch is playing Khan, which is still just a popular theory at this point. We shouldn't treat it as an article of faith.
__________________
www.gregcox-author.com
Greg Cox is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2013, 11:27 PM   #63
CorporalClegg
Admiral
 
CorporalClegg's Avatar
 
Location: Where my heart is.
Re: Why Khan?

Greg Cox wrote: View Post
If indeed Cumberbatch is playing Khan, which is still just a popular theory at this point. We shouldn't treat it as an article of faith.
Yes. And I still don't think he is Khan. From a story escalation stand point, it makes the most sense to wait for film three.

It just annoys me to no end that people have to get all nuts over a few cosmetic changes that are ultimately meaningless. But as I've pointed out before, you're one of a handful of people who are actually creatively (and financially!) invested in Khan, and you don't care what Paramount does. Others should take that to heart.
__________________
Konnichi wa!
CorporalClegg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 02:40 AM   #64
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Why Khan?

Franklin wrote: View Post
There were some good Klingon characters in TNG and DS9. I wish at least one character that strong had been estabilshed in TOS. I guess part of the problem was the series didn't run long enough for that to happen.
I quite like Kor, Koloth, and Kang, even just based on their appearances in TOS. Granted it may have been better if they had just gone with one Klingon commander who showed up a few times to be Kirk's foil. In fact, wasn't Koloth originally intended to be a recurring character although that never went through? Still, those three characters were great in the one episode they each had.

-- In TMP, they didn't even have names and are out in the first five minutes. Left one wondering, "why even use them?"
Well, Klingons served the story as a means of showing how threatening V'Ger is. Three Klingon ships are no match for this funky cloud, how can the Enterprise possibly fare?

-- TSFS, vile villains, nothing deeper than that.
In all honesty, Kruge certainly isn't my favourite Trek villain, although Christopher Lloyd certainly does an excellent job portraying the character.

-- TFF, it didn't. The thought was dropped, and instead, we get some Klingon goofball in the story.
Yes, the Klingons in that movie are really cheesy, though that is also part of their charm.

-- TUC, a better and more nuanced job using them, but it was the last go-round, too. Too little, too late. And, imagine if it had been Kor meeting up with Kirk on last time, instead of Chang, especially if Kor and Kirk had had more of a history in TOS.
Chang really is a great character, though I see your point, if say Kor had been used three times in TOS instead of two other commanders being created and him and Kirk had one last fight here it could have been quite a profound way to end TOS. Though at the same time, I really can't see Kor, or Koloth or Kang involved in a conspiracy to sabotage peace by framing Kirk and assassinating the Chancellor. Forgive me for trotting this overused term, but they strike me as being more honourable than that.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 03:12 PM   #65
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Why Khan?

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
In fact, wasn't Koloth originally intended to be a recurring character although that never went through?
John Colicos as Kor was slated to be the recurring Klingon adversary for Kirk, but he notified that he was unavailable for "The Trouble With Tribbles". Then, he was supposed to play Kor in "Day of the Dove", but was again unavailable.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 05:18 PM   #66
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Why Khan?

Therin of Andor wrote: View Post
The Wormhole wrote: View Post
In fact, wasn't Koloth originally intended to be a recurring character although that never went through?
John Colicos as Kor was slated to be the recurring Klingon adversary for Kirk, but he notified that he was unavailable for "The Trouble With Tribbles". Then, he was supposed to play Kor in "Day of the Dove", but was again unavailable.
STVI was meant to be a nostalgia-filled end to TOS. It had all the classic plot devices: Kirk vs Klingons, Kirk fighting his "evil twin," McCoy doing the doctor thing on an alien, unmasking the assassin to see "who this really is!" (OK, that was Scooby Doo), etc... In terms of Chang, I felt he was a generalize homage to TOS Klingons: none of this "honor" garbage, just a conniving, cold villain. To top it off, he had the fu manchu mustache and a "smooth" forehead (at least as far as bumpy foreheads go).

I agree, however, that it would have been nice to pit Kirk against a single recurring character one last time. But if there had been such a person, they probably would have appeared in the films long before TUC.
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 05:24 PM   #67
WarpFactorZ
Captain
 
Re: Why Khan?

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
The "alternate/Prime universe" stuff is a fig leaf - they weren't really faithful to it in the first movie, and you can be sure that more and more will diverge with each successive movie.

It's just a reboot, folks.
It's a post-2233 reboot. If it was a clean reboot, there was no need or purpose to include Leonard Nimoy, or the entire time-travel aspect. It wasn't simply a nostalgia bone thrown out to the die hard fans -- there were enough of those peppering the film.

I think the writers are big enough Trek fans to respect the basic premise of canon and continuity. Sure, there will inevitably be errors or ret-cons. But I would be surprised if they went out of their way to radically change what's been established. Unlike Batman, Superman, or Bond films, that's been the established principle of the Star Trek universe for almost 50 years. How would fans react to a Star Wars Ep VII that retroactively makes Darth Vader a woman, or ignores all events from Empire Strikes Back?
WarpFactorZ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 07:35 PM   #68
gastrof
Rear Admiral
 
gastrof's Avatar
 
Location: New Vulcan
Re: Why Khan?

Was it or was it not an official announcement that the villain was one known in the previous timeline?

If it was official, then he's GOT to be someone we already know...

Right?
__________________
Trek:
Onscreen is canon, books are interesting. Movies change canon, scissors wrap paper...or...something.
gastrof is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 07:41 PM   #69
CorporalCaptain
Vice Admiral
 
CorporalCaptain's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: Why Khan?

WarpFactorZ wrote: View Post
But I would be surprised if they went out of their way to radically change what's been established.
Well, they're not going "out of their way" to do anything. Looking at it another way, whatever they do, that's the way they're going. It's tautological like that.
__________________
John
CorporalCaptain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 07:42 PM   #70
Sindatur
Vice Admiral
 
Sindatur's Avatar
 
Location: Sacramento, CA
Re: Why Khan?

gastrof wrote: View Post
Was it or was it not an official announcement that the villain was one known in the previous timeline?

If it was official, then he's GOT to be someone we already know...

Right?
1. Alice Eve's and Benedict Cumberbatch' characters are Canon
2. Alice Eve is Officially revealed as Carol Marcus (A Canon Character)
3. Orci in Interview (Or was it someone else): I may have lied about one of them

So, yea, maybe, or maybe not
__________________
One Day I hope to be the Man my Cat thinks I am

Where are we going? And why are we in this Handbasket?
Sindatur is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 07:42 PM   #71
CommanderRaytas
Rear Admiral
 
CommanderRaytas's Avatar
 
Location: Dr Insano's goggles
Re: Why Khan?

Lance wrote: View Post
I don't think it will be Khan. But this...

HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
If my instinct is right and this is going to be about Captain Kirk's mistakes, it could be a culmination of several missions that come back to bite him.
... is something I really like the sound of. The implication of lots of missions between ST09 and this, possibly even getting to see some of those missions, and the culmination of that building to John Harrison, the villain, taking on the Federation.
And it's Benedict Cumberbatch! He rules! And he IS NOT KHAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!

Thank you, God. I really appreciate it. I do. You did me a real solid, there.

....unless he is Khan. In which case you have to prepare yourselves for some serious ranting, dear readers.
__________________
Joseph Smith...MAGICAL AIDS FROG!The Book of Mormon (Trey Parker & Matt Stone)
It was a nice day ... AND THEN EVIL CAME!
The Collected Works of Stephen King, condensed version
CommanderRaytas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 08:03 PM   #72
thumbtack
Commodore
 
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Re: Why Khan?

Just repost your rants from last year's thread.
__________________
"What went wrong!? All my sockpuppets loved this movie!" - Kevin Smith
thumbtack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 08:09 PM   #73
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Why Khan?

^ Wait, wait - if Raytas is going to fire up the rant engine, then I want an all-new, all-original rant - not just a reprint.

gastrof wrote: View Post
Was it or was it not an official announcement that the villain was one known in the previous timeline?

If it was official, then he's GOT to be someone we already know...

Right?
Click.
__________________
Dinosaurs are just really, really big chickens.
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 08:36 PM   #74
CommanderRaytas
Rear Admiral
 
CommanderRaytas's Avatar
 
Location: Dr Insano's goggles
Re: Why Khan?

Thank you, M. I want to be free to rant anew! Accept no reprints!

It's a win-win for me, you see: if it's not Khan, I'm happy. If it is Khan, I can rant to my heart's delight! In the words of the fantabulous Oberst Landa:

Oooh, THAT'S A BINGO!

__________________
Joseph Smith...MAGICAL AIDS FROG!The Book of Mormon (Trey Parker & Matt Stone)
It was a nice day ... AND THEN EVIL CAME!
The Collected Works of Stephen King, condensed version
CommanderRaytas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2013, 08:51 PM   #75
DalekJim
Fleet Captain
 
DalekJim's Avatar
 
Location: Great Britain
Re: Why Khan?

HaventGotALife wrote: View Post
The casual fan knows the Vulcan hand thing, Captain Kirk and Mr. (or Dr.) Spock, and the Klingons. That's it. The casual fan wants a popcorn flick. I would like to see Star Trek do something unique, to try something that isn't so safe. And doing a movie where a Khan-like villain threatens the universe, the Federation, Earth, or the Starship Enterprise, is boring. I don't want another villain with Khan's screen time. I want something fresh, but whenever the deviate from that, it's killed by this generation of fans. See the thread about Insurrection being "small potatoes, the stakes weren't high enough" in the other forum.
Agreed.

Seriously, him being Khan or not makes no difference to me. Either way he'll be a vengeance-filled villain with a doomsday weapon like in the last 2 movies. I'd like something different.
DalekJim is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:21 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.