Alex Kurtzman Says StarTrek XII is All About the Bad Guy

http://trekweb.com/articles/2012/06...-Star-Trek-XII-is-ALL-About-the-Bad-Guy.shtml


I really do not like this..we are looking at another dark knight where its all about one guy stealing the spotlight.

 

Sounds good.

 

Kind of says the same thing, here, as reported at trekmovie.com

http://trekmovie.com/2012/06/15/ale...s-delayed-to-2013-confirms-no-panel-for-sdcc/

He says sequels are about the bad guy, and they must test the heroes in some signficant way.

It dovetails with something Lindelof said as reported by trekmovie.com here:

http://trekmovie.com/2012/06/08/lin...ed-antagonist-pine-talks-story-vs-special-fx/

The antagonist is more nuanced than Nero was.

The vibe I'm getting from all this is the conflict will center around the first real serious test of Kirk's command abilities and the loyalty of this new crew to him. Cumberbatch could be a charismatic force (maybe even another Federation officer) that creates conflict among the crew and raises questions among them about Kirk's command. Kirk must rise to overcome Cumberbatch in order to keep his crew and his command together (plus at the same time, stop whatever other bad stuff Cumberbatch is up to).
In the end, the crew realizes that Kirk is indeed the type of leader who comes along infrequently. The "family" has bonded and the trust each has in the other is sealed. They are on their way to becoming the legendary crew of the Enterprise.

Of course, your interpretations may vary.

 

I wonder if he's going to be a bad guy in the vein of Admiral Leyton. Someone who believes the Federation didn't do enough to save Vulcan and wants to remodel it to his liking?

 

So has the Khan rumor been debunked at this point?

 

No.

 

Could be. I'd think an event like the destruction of Vulcan would have political, social, and military ramifications that can't be ignored. The events that caused it and how the conflict was resolved (the finding would be that it was based largely on Kirk's luck) would have to be investigated so some type of policy could be put into place to prevent something like that from happening again.

It could be Weller's character has some kind of technology that serves in this area, and Cumberbatch sees a way to use it that goes beyond what was intended. In other words, like Khan with Genesis.

The other thing going on here is this Jim Kirk is in some ways the same as Kirk at the start of TMP and TWOK. A bit uncertain in the captain's chair. The only difference is this Kirk is inexperienced, while Kirk Prime's confidence was challenged by having been away from the captain's chair for a few years.
To that end, in TMP Kirk made a big mistake that came from not being fully comfortable with his ship (the wormhole in TMP). A big part of his character arc in TMP was about him easing back into the captain's chair. In TWOK, a rusty Jim Kirk allowed the Reliant to ambush him, and the rest of the movie was basically cleaning up that mess while Kirk got back his mojo.

I'm thinking this Kirk will have an incident of his own where an error on his part leads him or others to question his command skills and adds to the conflict. And in the end, everyone comes out stronger for it.

 

Hello M'Sharak

I never said I did not like it....I just think a movie like star trek should not be focused on just one big bad guy.

Secondly, I am not into writing or summarising someone comments, sometimes my words get misunderstood this is why I prefer to post a link where other fans can read the writer's exact words instead of mine’s.

Now back to the topic, it looks like Cumberbatch's character based on Kurtzman's interview is going to be another Joker because:

1 Sequel is about the bad guy

2. JJ killed it ( so this means the second trek film by JJ is going to be superior to the 2009 star trek film)


3. he gave a reference to the villain in iron man 2 which to me (personal opinion) was inferior to the villain in the dark knight.


I have no doubts that Star Trek 12 will be better than Iron Man 2 and that puts the new Trek film in The Dark Knight's league. This is the reason why I made the Joker reference.

 

Hello...

 

Busted.

 

What I mean is I do not like it when we have one actor that steals the show and every other actor/character takes the back seat. However this does not mean I hate the film overall.

 

If that bad guy is Sherlock, it'll be awesome. The Adventures of Evil Sherlock in Space, with small cameos from the Enterprise crew.

 

It will be awesome only if he says the following line, "I am your cousin, Spock."

 

Like that Khan guy?

 

What is there to dislike, we don't really know anything at this point.

 

A worthy villain is a good thing. A good actor playing a worthy villain is an even better thing.

 

Nothing in that video worried me. The fact that they said they feel protective and did not want to rush the production actually encouraged me.

 

That's never stopped some people.

 

It's been debunked and confirmed several times, but, neither officially by the Producers, I believe

As far as "being all about the bad guy, to show a challenge to the Heroes", I don't think that at all means he will steal the spotlight and give the heroes cameos, I think it means he will drive the heroes actions and drama.