RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,354
Posts: 5,502,991
Members: 25,121
Currently online: 542
Newest member: MsMarrielle

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


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 June 16 2013, 03:30 AM   #61
Clancy_s
Lieutenant Commander
 
Clancy_s's Avatar
 
Re: John Harrison was more interesting than (SPOILER)

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
So we would have had a man with superior abilities, who is out for revenge against a Starfleet admiral and his followers who also have superior abilities who are in cryo-storage for the most part.

So this doesn't sound remotely similar to an already existing trek villain?
That was essentially my conclusion. I was initially disappointed they'd used Khan instead of a new villain, but I liked the story otherwise and I couldn't come up with a new villain who fit the story and wasn't so close to Khan as to be an obvious copy - in which case IMO it's better to be up front about it and have him be Khan.
Clancy_s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 16 2013, 11:49 AM   #62
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: John Harrison was more interesting than (SPOILER)

Hartzilla2007 wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
I expected John Harrison, rogue secret agent with superior abilities. The film didn't need Khan and his 72 followers. It could have been John Harrison and his group of agents held captive by Admiral Marcus.
So we would have had a man with superior abilities, who is out for revenge against a Starfleet admiral and his followers who also have superior abilities who are in cryo-storage for the most part.

So this doesn't sound remotely similar to an already existing trek villain?
With Nero we had a madman who had physically superior henchmen, and who had a doomsday device who was out for revenge.

Nero was a bit of Shinzon, Rua'fo, Soren, Chang, Kruge and Khan. John Harrison wouldn't have been much different from that line of villains. And indeed, nuKhan isn't different either. They are just rehashing the same old bad guy with super weapon is out for revenge plot, no matter what they do and what the villains name is.

Actually I find it funny that people believe the film is somehow elevated by the villains NAME. Change the name BUT NOTHING ELSE and they are suddenly not interested? Essentially you are told what you like. "This is Star Trek, because they call it Star Trek.", "This is a better villain, because they call him Khan!" I find this curious to say the least.
JarodRussell 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 08:15 AM.

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