Garth of Izar is the bad guy?

[Flux Capacitor]

Dukhat wrote:

---

Sure. My authority that says it's not Garth of Izar is the same authority of the OP who thinks it is. Simple enough for you? Or do I have to spoon-feed you the fact that it's my opinion too? I didn't think that was necessary; clearly I was wrong.

No, but it'd be nice if one would back up their opinion with the evidence that lead them to form that opinion. This *is* a discussion board, after all. A drive-by "It isn't him" post does nothing to add to the discussion.

[TiberiusMaximus]

And besides, the OP actually mentioned a few reasons for his speculation, so you can't really compare his post with yours.

It would even have been better if you'd said, "Nah, I don't think it's Garth."

[Pauln6]

Dukhat wrote:

---

Sure. My authority that says it's not Garth of Izar is the same authority of the OP who thinks it is. Simple enough for you? Or do I have to spoon-feed you the fact that it's my opinion too? I didn't think that was necessary; clearly I was wrong.

The odds of it not being Garth are greater than the odds of it being Garth, which is why most of us are saying that the odds of it being Garth are better or worse than some other particular character - in our opinion.

Add something useful to the debate! Would you prefer it to be some other character instead? Are their points for or against some other character?

The villain appears to be in Starfleet - Garth is in Starfleet. By no means conclusive but a point for Garth.

Mitchell appeared and was nobbled in the comics. Ben seems to have no silver eyes. Could be points against Mitchell.

Khan is an indian sikh and not in Starfleet. Points against.

No Irish accent. Points against Riley and Finney.

Matt Decker?

Roger Korby?

Any one of those dodgy commodores?

And so on.

[ChristopherPike]

Garth enables them to have a character with all the characteristics of Khan, but none of the baggage.

Garth is a megalomaniac Napoleon like figure, and so is Khan.

Garth can be affected by the changes made to the Abramsverse. Khan cannot.



So Gary Mitchell it is!

[SalvorHardin]

ChristopherPike wrote:

---

Garth can be affected by the changes made to the Abramsverse. Khan cannot.

Khan cannot?
Everything could change about Khan's story after he's revived and as we've seen it in TOS and TWOK.

[Flux Capacitor]

Really? Khan could be changed from a muscular, tan Indian to a pasty white Brit due to changes in the time line?

Besides, Khan seems to be what people expect. And for that very reason is why Abrams would not make his villain be Khan.

[SalvorHardin]

Flux Capacitor wrote:

---

Really? Khan could be changed from a muscular, tan Indian to a pasty white Brit due to changes in the time line?
.

I was talking about his story not his looks.

As far as looks go it depends if they would care about the changes when recasting. Maybe they would go for the best available actor, not just someone who looks like old Khan.

[Flux Capacitor]

With as close as they tried to get with the key characters, I doubt that they'd then go with someone so different for a key villain like Khan.

Plus, Khan's story would only change from the point that he's revived. He'd still be the same person he was in stasis on the Botany Bay.

And like I said, I can't see the producers carrying so much secrecy for this long as they have only to reveal that it was the guy everyone thought it would be from the very beginning.

Anyway, this is supposed to be a "Why he's Garth" thread and not "why he's not Khan" so I'll suggest we keep on topic.

[ChristopherPike]

SalvorHardin wrote:

---

Khan cannot?
Everything could change about Khan's story after he's revived and as we've seen it in TOS and TWOK.

His future would have changed, but not his backstory... given the point at which this all became an alternate reality, is 2233.

When Khan awoke in 2266 (or 67) he wasn't after vengeance. Everybody he lost the Eugenics War to, would've been dead for centuries. That band of supermen, augments or whatever, had plans to continue their quest for conquest... on a greater scale than Earth, since a faster than light starship like the Enterprise now gave them that ability.

[The Keeper]

Garth is more likely than Gary IMO, because in the teaser we see the villain wielding weapons, Gary didn't need them.

Garth could shapeshift but required a weapon of some sort to exert control on his 'subjects'; the teaser features him wielding a weapon.

He invented a weapon of mass destruction, which is alluded to in the synopsis, (and yes, I realize the way it was termed suggests his physical body is the weapon.)

Both Garth and our mystery villain wears a trench-coat.

I don't fricken know for sure!

[BritishSeaPower]

Yeah, since the trailer aired I've been more and more "convinced" of a Garth of Izar connection. It's canon-enough to appeal to fans, while being basically an open door. Ostensibly, Garth's entire trajectory could have changed since 2233.

If we're being overly pedantic about continuity, using Kahn would mean having a swarthy looking guy with a pony tail wearing a red jumpsuit being awakened on a sleeper ship. All of this is unaffected by the temporal changes. I'm not saying we have to follow things so lock step, but its a problem that presents itself.

[teacake]

You know what convinces me? (As in, convinces me this would be the coolest thing ever).

Cumberbatch would be fantastic as the mania fueled narcissist dandy that was Garth. He's gonna play that like a bitch. It's a great role for him. The character is much more interesting than Mitchell who is just some dude bad stuff happened to.

[RAMA]

Garth's meager backstory was by far the most interesting part of a rather poor episode. I'd give it a 20% change of being Garth.

RAMA

[Dukhat]

I was asked to give my opinion as to why I don't think it's Garth. Fine.

I don't think it's Garth for the same reason why I don't think it's Gary Mitchell, Roger Corby, Ron Tracey, Harry Mudd, or any other TOS baddie that you can come up with. The target viewing audience simply would not care about this. It's purpose would only be to satisfy trufan fanwankery, and that's not necessary anymore.

I've heard the rumors too that BC is supposed to be a TOS character. I personally think that's bullshit (or at the least, he'll be a TOS character in name only). The Dark Knight Rises is a perfect example of this. While Bane was a good villain in that movie, he was completely, completely different than the Bane from the comic. But Bane was chosen for a reason: he broke Batman's back in the comic, and he broke Batman's back in the film.

So with that logic, who in Star Trek's past wanted bloodthirsty revenge against Kirk? Garth? No. Gary Mitchell? No. Harry Mudd? No.

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It's not Garth.