Entertainment Weekly Star Trek Into Darkness Issue

Im still banking this is not Khan but either a parallel Khan-like figure or someone from the Botany Bay or equivalent origin that is superhuman/genetically engineered.

Remember how Lex Luthor was turned into a ruthless businessman is several incarnations of the modern character? It may be something like that, where Khan is a modern terrorist as part of or head of an organization.

RAMA

 

The Illuminati is a fantasy creation, one that Robert Orci ironically believes in.

 

Er, just to be clear, it isn't Paramount that keeps changing its mind. It's the fans and the press that keep jumping on the latest round of rumors and speculation and taking them as gospel. As far as I know, Paramount has never officially confirmed anything.

In the meantime, does anyone want to discuss the actual article, instead of speculating wildly about what it's NOT saying?

 

Now why in heaven's name would anyone want to do that?

 

Especially when it says so little. Pretty pictures, though.

 

I honestly can't say I'm bothered if they retcon Khan a bit.

 

No point in doing Khan....! He's the most painfully obvious (ie boring as hell) choice, that I really hope EW has their head up their ass for this one

 

It's Khan.

 

On the other hand, nobody seemed to mind when THE DARK KNIGHT rebooted the Joker one more time . . .

 

^

True enough, but I honestly feel that having Cumberbatch/Harrison be someone other than Khan would be a hell of a lot more interesting than rehashing the character, or retconning his backstory/origins. I realize I'm the minority on this one, but it just seems to me that there has to be other equally compelling villains in this new timeline.

And though I mentioned this to you in the past, I'll say it again: I really enjoyed your trilogy on Khan.

 

Thanks! To be honest, I have mixed feelings about the possibility of a new take on Khan as well, but who knows? We'll see what we get in May.

 

Agreed. I greatly suspect that we really won't know just who 'Harrison' really is until then.

 

We can always kidnap JJ and force him to tell us...

 

What if we never know? What if Harrison just says he is using a pseudo-name but never reveals his true identity?
We never discovered the Joker's true identity in The Dark Knight, why not here?

 

Cumberbatch as Khan is like somebody who doesn't look anything like Terrance Stamp (Michael Shannon) playing General Zod.

Wait a minute...



Seriously, tho, as long as it's a fun show.

 

The thing of it is, were this a complete reboot of the series/franchise, having The Batch be Khan would be fine, because a re-envisioning of a property allows for changes of that nature (remember Starbuck?)

But since the premise here is that everything in the timeline up to Nero's interference remains the same, then changing Khan's ethnic background, not to mention his backstory (if that's what they've done) is just all wrong, IMO.

If he is Khan, I have no doubts that he'll play the role well. But to say that it's the same character as in the Prime Universe is stretching it a bit.

 

Other than RoboCop, I don't think I've seen anything else that Peter Weller has been in. And I saw RoboCop a looong time ago so I'm not familair with how he has aged. So I decided (just now) to Google his image. I really think that he is going to be Khan. Pull up side by side pics of Montalban and Weller. Just my .02

 

Is the Joker's true identity important to the story of the Dark Knight? The Joker is what matters not who he was before.

 

That is possible, as Weller's identity has yet to be revealed.

 

Weller isn't Khan. But I think he is a bad guy who sets the events of the movie in motion.