RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 139,599
Posts: 5,404,640
Members: 24,870
Currently online: 468
Newest member: The Hooded Man

TrekToday headlines

Star Trek: Gold Key Archives Vol. 2 Comic
By: T'Bonz on Oct 1

Cumberbatch In War Of Roses Miniseries
By: T'Bonz on Oct 1

Trek 3 Filming Location Revealed
By: T'Bonz on Oct 1

October-November 2014 Trek Conventions And Appearances
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

Cho Selfie TV Alert
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

TPTB To Shatner: Shhh!
By: T'Bonz on Sep 30

Mystery Mini Vinyl Figure Display Box
By: T'Bonz on Sep 29

The Red Shirt Diaries Episode Five
By: T'Bonz on Sep 29

Shatner In Trek 3? Well Maybe
By: T'Bonz on Sep 28

Retro Review: Shadows and Symbols
By: Michelle on Sep 27


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.

View Poll Results: Grade the movie...
A+ 144 19.25%
A 161 21.52%
A- 101 13.50%
B+ 83 11.10%
B 58 7.75%
B- 27 3.61%
C+ 40 5.35%
C 38 5.08%
C- 25 3.34%
D+ 11 1.47%
D 13 1.74%
D- 10 1.34%
F 37 4.95%
Voters: 748. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old April 29 2013, 12:37 AM   #676
I Am Groot
I Am Groot
 
I Am Groot's Avatar
 
Location: I Am Groot
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Franklin wrote: View Post
Interesting perspective from Ms. Kennedy. What's happened to the simple, "No comment," when asked a question one doesn't want to answer? Why lie?
If you give nine straightforward answers in an interview, but on the last one when they ask you specifically if the villain is Khan you say "no comment," the interviewer and the readers will assume that he or she hit the mark and that the villain is Khan. Saying no comment to such a specific question after answering so many others might as well be like saying "yes" from the perspective of entertainment magazines, websites, and fans with their rampant speculation, exaggeration, and misinterpretation.

The choice would be to either say no comment on everything, in which case you're doing a bad job of promoting and building excitement for your movie, or to do a rope-a-dope or a denial when it comes to the really important stuff, while still talking about the less important things.

Plus, can you imagine the tedium of having to give the same response over and over again in the hundreds of interviews that the top tier cast and crew have to do leading up to the movie? I'm sure after a while they just start screwing around to break the boredom of answering the same questions.

Either way, there's nothing malicious about it, any more than a magician is being a malicious liar because he fools you with a trick. It's all about maintaining the illusion and keeping the audience entertained.

Mach5 wrote: View Post
thumbtack wrote: View Post
That is not what she said.
Kathleen Kennedy wrote:
If we're shooting anything outside, it's almost impossible to not have things end up on the Internet. So my feeling is, you need to embrace that, especially with the fans around something like Star Wars. You need to recognize they're important to the process and acknowledge there are things you're gonna want to make sure they get to know.
Doesn't take a genius to get what she was saying.
She said if you're shooting something openly it's rather silly to deny it, and she said it's sometimes a good idea to include the fans in on the process. Nowhere did she completely rule out keeping secrets or using misdirection and denials to conceal major character and plot points.

I don't think Abrams would disagree with any of that. Despite his accurate reputation for secrecy and misdirection, he does actually share a lot of information with fans when it gets closer to the film's premiere, he just tightly controls which information that is going to be. So you might get a preview of the first nine minutes of the film, but you're not going to find out who the villain is.

Abrams is quite adept at promoting and building up anticipation for his films and TV shows (some of his critics would say that's what he's best at, in fact), so why should he change a formula that works for him?

BillJ wrote: View Post
Can't "Khan" be a title as well as a name?
Khan is a title. It's not part of his name.

Melakon wrote: View Post
It's probably been mentioned, but perhaps they had access to all the original treatments and drafts of "Space Seed" when preparing the script. The use of the name 'John Harrison' might have evolved just from reading Memory Alpha's background on the episode.

Memory Alpha wrote:
In writer Carey Wilber's original treatment, the Khan character is a Nordic superman named Harold Erricsen. This evolved in the first draft, where the character first introduces himself as John Ericssen, but is later revealed to be Ragnar Thorwald, who was involved in "the First World Tyranny".
Yeah, I mentioned that's one of the reasons I thought Khan was the main villain way back before all the spoilers started pouring in.

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
My suspicion that Cumberbatch might be Khan has hinged not only on the several allusions to TWoK in this film, but also to a couple of the original names for Khan in the early drafts of Space Seed:

In writer Carey Wilber's original treatment, the Khan character is a Nordic superman named Harold Erricsen. This evolved in the first draft, where the character first introduces himself as John Ericssen, but is later revealed to be Ragnar Thorwald, who was involved in "the First World Tyranny". (Star Trek Magazine issue 120, The Star Trek Compendium, pp. 57-58)

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Spac..._%28episode%29
John + Harold Erricsen becomes John Harrison. Also, he initially gives a false identity to conceal his infamous name, just as it's been speculated Harrison might be doing here.

Given Orci and Kurtzman's (especially Orci's) knowledge and referencing of Trek lore, and the fact that they would undoubtedly have researched Space Seed extensively while working on the script, that seems like something they might do to give the villain a name that's a hint but at the same time deniable and not completely obvious.
__________________
We are Groot and Locutus of Bored.
I Am Groot is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 12:38 AM   #677
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post
By your reckoning, they got it right, they cast a man as Khan. A Mexican man was cast as someone from the sub-continent almost 50 years ago, they've cast a British guy based on the FACT that Bad Robot thought he was the best bloke for the job.
Which is why I said I'd wait and see how it turns out...

BillJ wrote:
I'll wait and see who Cumberbatch is actually playing and how well he performs before making any determination if he was right for the role.
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post

I suppose I've misunderstood this again.
Yes you have. But that's nothing new...
Dull wrecking argument as per, that's nothing new either.

I'm willing to bet money on it that Cumberbatch will nail the role, and blow Montalban out of the sea straight back to Fantasy Island, because let's be completely objective here, Montalban was a bit part actor for whom this role was probably the best thing in a long career of being an almost man.

Cumberbatch is on an upward trajectory, and in 20 years people will gasp that he ever stooped to play a role in a Star Trek film.

Montalban, the Mexican guy that played someone of undefined nationality from the Indian sub-continent in a 1960's sci-fi show, reprised in a low budget 1982 sci-fi film, and who apparently defined a role by playing it for about 3 hours over 50 years. The guy, who more importantly, to the TV watching public, played the straight man to a comedy midget on a low budget TV series.

Take your pick, define your place in fandom, perhaps you should confine yourself to the other Star Trek Movies forum on BBS, you know, the one where the films and crapola TV shows led to Star Trek's demise before JJ came along and redefined it.

You sir are a one eyed fan.

Last edited by Deck 1 - Bridge; April 29 2013 at 01:02 AM.
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 12:46 AM   #678
Trek or Treat!
Rear Admiral
 
Trek or Treat!'s Avatar
 
Location: Second star to the right
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
Can't "Khan" be a title as well as a name?
Khan is a title. It's not part of his name.
Possible, but I don't think it was the original intent.

When Khan introduced himself in Space Seed, he says that his name is Khan. Furthermore, when they read the name "Khan Noonien Singh" out of historical records, they put the accent on Khan. When we say "Queen Elizabeth", "Prince William", "King Lear", "President Obama" or "Doctor Strangelove," we put the accent on the name, not the title or honorific.
Trek or Treat! is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 12:50 AM   #679
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

I mean, how on earth can anyone other than Adam West play Batman?
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 12:50 AM   #680
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Well, I certainly never suspected that he'd turn out to be Khan.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 12:58 AM   #681
Anduril
Captain
 
Anduril's Avatar
 
Location: Kentucky
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
Well, I certainly never suspected that he'd turn out to be Khan.
How could you not see that coming?
__________________
The world is indeed comic, but the joke is on mankind. -- H.P. Lovecraft
Anduril is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 12:59 AM   #682
trevanian
Rear Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Franklin wrote: View Post
trevanian wrote: View Post
Franklin wrote: View Post
Since the topic is wavering, anyway (WHERE ARE THOSE SPOILERS, PEOPLE?!), there were some great stories in all Trek series, but exactly what were the episodes of TOS (or TNG) that actually "made one think" or were cerebral? The ones that transcended even a great episode of any other weekly drama or action-adventure show?
[snip]

I'm not trying to provoke an argument or set people up to flame their tastes, but honestly, what were the episodes that were not just good strories, but were cerebral and thought provoking? What's the list?
(list clipped by Franklin for space)

I'm doing this on the fly, but if I get back here in the next couple of days, I'll probably have a few more thoughts along these lines. In the meantime youse can tear me one over the above comments.
Meh. Things are about to get busy for me for the next couple of weeks. Maybe I'll get to it after the first week of May. That OK for you?
Abso-friggin-lutely. I'm on a deadline that doesn't let me go to sleep till I have the draft down tonight, and I've got two other ones I need to jump right into, so a few days of reflection will do wonders for me, I'm sure.
trevanian is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 01:12 AM   #683
George Steinbrenner
Fleet Admiral
 
George Steinbrenner's Avatar
 
Location: Mr. Laser Beam is in the visitor's bullpen
View George Steinbrenner's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
Khan is a title. It's not part of his name
Ah. Locutus agrees with me.

*pause*

Oh my God. Locutus agrees with me.
__________________
It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion. It is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed, the hands acquire shakes, the shakes become a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion.
George Steinbrenner is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 01:21 AM   #684
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post

Take your pick, define your place in fandom, perhaps you should confine yourself to the other Star Trek Movies forum on BBS, you know, the one where the films and crapola TV shows led to Star Trek's demise before JJ came along and redefined it.

You sir are a one eyed fan.
I won't dignify this with a response beyond as I type this I'm looking at my entertainment shelf with my copy of Star Trek 2009 (which I've seen numerous times), Star Trek: The Video Game (set in the Abramsverse) and my Abramsverse Captain Kirk action figure.

So I guess I am a 'one-eyed fan'. Whatever the hell that is...

EDIT: Just a note. The last main Trek movie villain played by a non-white actor was Khan. Not a very good track record for a franchise that supposedly prides itself on diversity.
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 01:24 AM   #685
throwback
Captain
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Khan is a region specific title and name.

In the Middle Ages, the title was used by those who led a Mongol, a Tartar, or a Turkish tribe. Mongols were native to Mongolia, in East Asia. Tartar were native to west-central Russia, Siberia, and central Asia. Turkish were native to Turkey.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_%28title%29

The name Khan is used by those who lived in Central and Western Asia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_%28surname%29

So, in summation, Khan is a Asian word.

I understand the sensitivity that some would have in portraying Khan by a person of Asia. However, considering the vast region of Asia that Khan is used in, there are ways I think that this issue could be resolved so that an Asian actor could portray Khan.

Here is a man from Pakistan who has the last name of Khan. He is named Imran Khan, and his occupation is politician.

throwback is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 01:27 AM   #686
Dr. Sevrin
Vice Admiral
 
Dr. Sevrin's Avatar
 
Location: Melakon's grave
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Locutus of Bored wrote:
Yeah, I mentioned that's one of the reasons I thought Khan was the main villain way back before all the spoilers started pouring in.
I probably did read your theory and it stayed in the subconscious. Apologies.
__________________
Dr. Howard, Dr. Fine, Dr. Howard: For duty and humanity! --Men in Black, 1934
Dr. Sevrin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 02:14 AM   #687
Admiral Buzzkill
Fleet Admiral
 
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

throwback wrote: View Post
However, considering the vast region of Asia that Khan is used in, there are ways I think that this issue could be resolved so that an Asian actor could portray Khan.
There's no "issue" to be resolved - the movie has been made; Khan is played by Benedict Cumberbatch.
Admiral Buzzkill is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 02:17 AM   #688
Deck 1 - Bridge
Lieutenant Junior Grade
 
Location: Torbay
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

BillJ wrote: View Post
Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post

Take your pick, define your place in fandom, perhaps you should confine yourself to the other Star Trek Movies forum on BBS, you know, the one where the films and crapola TV shows led to Star Trek's demise before JJ came along and redefined it.

You sir are a one eyed fan.
I won't dignify this with a response beyond as I type this I'm looking at my entertainment shelf with my copy of Star Trek 2009 (which I've seen numerous times), Star Trek: The Video Game (set in the Abramsverse) and my Abramsverse Captain Kirk action figure.

So I guess I am a 'one-eyed fan'. Whatever the hell that is...

EDIT: Just a note. The last main Trek movie villain played by a non-white actor was Khan. Not a very good track record for a franchise that supposedly prides itself on diversity.
'I wont dignify this with a response' before going on to give a response.
Deck 1 - Bridge is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 02:39 AM   #689
Hartzilla2007
Vice Admiral
 
Hartzilla2007's Avatar
 
Location: Star Trekkin Across the universe.
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

My Name Is Legion wrote: View Post
throwback wrote: View Post
However, considering the vast region of Asia that Khan is used in, there are ways I think that this issue could be resolved so that an Asian actor could portray Khan.
There's no "issue" to be resolved - the movie has been made; Khan is played by Benedict Cumberbatch.
Pretty much.
Hartzilla2007 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old April 29 2013, 02:53 AM   #690
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS - Grading & Discussion [SPOILERS]

Deck 1 - Bridge wrote: View Post

'I wont dignify this with a response' before going on to give a response.
Damn. I was really hoping to get a definition of "one-eyed fan". Am I a "one-eyed fan" because I'm blind in one-eye in real life?
__________________
"I tell you what you all need, you need to take a thirteenth step, down off your high horse." - Hank Hill, King of the Hill
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Tags
benedict cumberbatch, grading & discussion, jj abrams

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 09:45 AM.

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