RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,555
Posts: 5,513,831
Members: 25,146
Currently online: 629
Newest member: TM2-Megatron

TrekToday headlines

Two New Starships Collection Ships
By: T'Bonz on Dec 26

Captain Kirk’s Boldest Missions
By: T'Bonz on Dec 25

Trek Paper Clips
By: T'Bonz on Dec 24

Sargent Passes
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

QMx Trek Insignia Badges
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18


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 February 27 2014, 07:21 PM   #31
The Baby Stig
Rear Admiral
 
The Baby Stig's Avatar
 
Location: Dunsfold Aerodrome, Surrey
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

BlueMetroid wrote: View Post
Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
i wonder if theyd have had the appearance change explanation had original choice Benico Del Toro been cast (or if theyd got STID out summer 2011 or 2012 with a pre Skyfall Javier Barhem)

probably not
I've often wondered this. I hope they would have, as Del Toro and Montalban look absolutely nothing alike, other than both being Latino.
Neither does Shatner and Pine or Takei and Cho, or Nichols and Saldana.

Etc, etc, etc.

Actors change, makeup gets better. It doesn't need to be a thing that's explained in-universe because the effort of explaining distracts from the actual objective: telling a good dramatic story.
__________________
Some say that his arrival was foretold by a Check Engine light shining over Bethlehem and that he was born in a manger on Christmas Day.

All we know is, he's The Baby Stig.
The Baby Stig is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2014, 07:59 PM   #32
M.A.C.O.
Fleet Captain
 
M.A.C.O.'s Avatar
 
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

I'm bringing this back.

M.A.C.O. is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2014, 08:38 PM   #33
thumbtack
Commodore
 
Location: Ankh-Morpork
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

While it effectively disarms the whiners, Khan's whiteness was never the real reason the whiners were whining, so I don't think an explanation was needed.
__________________
Last Vote: 2takesfrakes, T'Girl, wulfio. Next Vote: Joel Kirk, orphalesion, Hapless Crewman, Synnove, HIjol.
thumbtack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2014, 09:02 PM   #34
OpenMaw
Commander
 
OpenMaw's Avatar
 
Location: Everett, Washington
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

So, do tell, what were the reasons?
__________________
"Paradise protests too much." SFDebris
OpenMaw is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2014, 10:10 PM   #35
BlueMetroid
Lieutenant
 
BlueMetroid's Avatar
 
Location: Cydonia, Mars
View BlueMetroid's Twitter Profile
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

The Stig wrote: View Post
BlueMetroid wrote: View Post
Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
i wonder if theyd have had the appearance change explanation had original choice Benico Del Toro been cast (or if theyd got STID out summer 2011 or 2012 with a pre Skyfall Javier Barhem)

probably not
I've often wondered this. I hope they would have, as Del Toro and Montalban look absolutely nothing alike, other than both being Latino.
Neither does Shatner and Pine or Takei and Cho, or Nichols and Saldana.

Etc, etc, etc.

Actors change, makeup gets better. It doesn't need to be a thing that's explained in-universe because the effort of explaining distracts from the actual objective: telling a good dramatic story.
In my opinion, the appearance change from Montalban to Del Toro would have been too dramatic to be believable without some sort of back story (i.e. comics). With the main cast, barring a couple exceptions, I think they did a great job casting younger versions. Karl Urban in particular.
__________________
http://nickcagecats.tumblr.com/
BlueMetroid is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 27 2014, 10:46 PM   #36
Wereghost
Part-time poltergeist
 
Wereghost's Avatar
 
Location: Ireland
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

Nebusj wrote: View Post
Wereghost wrote: View Post
It does kind of almost sort of in a way partially make sense if you suspend a resoectable amount of disbelief. Section 31 wanted his genius but not the associated baggage. Though why they didn't just compromise and use one of the 72 others is unclear.
… because the super-secret branch of Star Fleet was worried its project to subvert the legitimate government of the Federation, build an armada of hyper-advanced weaponry, and launch a preemptive invasion of conquest against neighboring powers might suffer from some bad press if they have on staff a secret agent who looks like a half-forgotten warlord who died centuries ago …
Actually, the operation was as much to fool Khan himself as anyone else.
__________________
Time is the boss of me.
Wereghost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 10:11 AM   #37
starburst
Fleet Captain
 
starburst's Avatar
 
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

It makes sense as it not only helps to condition a brainwashed 'John Harrison' but so no historians he meets amongst the fleet remark about his resemblance to a certain 20th century warlord.

I agree though it didnt need to be explained, I had already assumed something like that had happened as it covers all the questions we have despite whether we like the character of 'John Harrison' and how he turned out or not.
starburst is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 10:47 AM   #38
Khan 2.0
Captain
 
Khan 2.0's Avatar
 
Location: earth...but when?...spock?
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

i wonder why they didnt just explain it in the film? E.g. In the brig khan says Marcus gave him a new face....and/or then had a brief scene of Spock using the ships computer to unearth a photo of Montalban - the same photo of Khan from the briefing room scene in Space Seed:
[ IMG] http://img3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb2...ingh,_1996.jpg [/I MG]

Last edited by M'Sharak; March 8 2014 at 05:05 AM. Reason: don't hotlink images from Memory Alpha
Khan 2.0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 03:36 PM   #39
iguana_tonante
Admiral
 
iguana_tonante's Avatar
 
Location: Italy, EU
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

AllStarEntprise wrote: View Post
I'm bringing this back.

While the picture made me laugh, it isn't particularly fair, is it.

I think the casting was great, and most new actors nailed the character, without copying the old actors. But truth to be told, with the exception of maybe Quinto and Urban, the new guys look nothing like their predecessors. Cho, Yelchin and Pegg in particular look very different from Takei, Koenig, and Doohan.
__________________
Scientist. Gentleman. Teacher. Fighter. Lover. Father.
iguana_tonante is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 04:24 PM   #40
The Wormhole
Admiral
 
The Wormhole's Avatar
 
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
i wonder why they didnt just explain it in the film? E.g. In the brig khan says Marcus gave him a new face....and/or then had a brief scene of Spock using the ships computer to unearth a photo of Montalban - the same photo of Khan from the briefing room scene in Space Seed
Likely done for the sake of those in the audience not familiar with TOS. They won't care or notice that Khan is a white guy. It was likely considered an unnecessary distraction, although to be honest so was the bridge scene in Trek XI which is basically "we're in a reboot, that stuff that happened before doesn't matter."

But anyway, it was probably felt only a small percentage of the audience would really care anyway, and so it would be best to serve their desires in the form of a comic instead.
__________________
"Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.
The Wormhole is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 04:51 PM   #41
Khan 2.0
Captain
 
Khan 2.0's Avatar
 
Location: earth...but when?...spock?
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

yeah im thinking that's probably what happened ..

Orci - 'hey lets include a line about why he looks nothing like khan..plus maybe a photo of Montalban that Spock finds'

JJ -'nah the non trekkies wont get it or care..save it for the comics'
Khan 2.0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 05:53 PM   #42
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
yeah im thinking that's probably what happened ..

Orci - 'hey lets include a line about why he looks nothing like khan..plus maybe a photo of Montalban that Spock finds'

JJ -'nah the non trekkies wont get it or care..save it for the comics'
They actually shot a scene explaining Carol's accent change, which was cut. That they didn't even shoot one for Khan shows it had even less priority for them.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 07:36 PM   #43
Khan 2.0
Captain
 
Khan 2.0's Avatar
 
Location: earth...but when?...spock?
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

maybe they didnt figure BC khan would be a problem...until it was finally revealed BC was playing khan and everyone was like "WHAAAAAA???!!" so they though oh crap we better come up with an explanation in the comics
Khan 2.0 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old February 28 2014, 07:40 PM   #44
F. King Daniel
Admiral
 
F. King Daniel's Avatar
 
Location: King Daniel Into Darkness
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

I think it's more that the IDW comics are just being over-the-top fanwanky, rather than anything in any way deemed necessary by Abrams' people. A Trek novel once tried to explain why the TOS-1701 looked more advanced than the NX-01 Enterprise, for example. Anyone who thinks that was necessary needs a reality check, IMHO.
__________________
Star Trek Imponderables, fun mashups of Trek's biggest continuity errors! Ep1, Ep2 and Ep3
F. King Daniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old March 1 2014, 02:15 AM   #45
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Khan's Into Darkness Appearance change finally explained

The Wormhole wrote: View Post
Khan 2.0 wrote: View Post
i wonder why they didnt just explain it in the film? E.g. In the brig khan says Marcus gave him a new face....and/or then had a brief scene of Spock using the ships computer to unearth a photo of Montalban - the same photo of Khan from the briefing room scene in Space Seed
Likely done for the sake of those in the audience not familiar with TOS. They won't care or notice that Khan is a white guy. It was likely considered an unnecessary distraction, although to be honest so was the bridge scene in Trek XI which is basically "we're in a reboot, that stuff that happened before doesn't matter."

But anyway, it was probably felt only a small percentage of the audience would really care anyway, and so it would be best to serve their desires in the form of a comic instead.
In Iron Man 3, Ben Kingsley says he got plastic surgery to act as Mandarin. It's a three second line.
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 01:00 AM.

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