Why Khan?

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by WarpFactorZ, Feb 27, 2013.

  1. WarpFactorZ

    WarpFactorZ Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2013
    "No, Luke: *I* am your mother!"

    Problem solved.

    There's nothing fundamental about Vader / Anakin Skywalker being male that's paramount to the story. The important part was he/she gave birth to Luke and Leia, and passed on the Jedi powers (and savior stuff).

    He was basically androgynous in eps IV-VI. And the fact that he was male in the first three? Ehn. Starbuck and Boomer were recast as women. It was just a reboot.
     
  2. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    I wouldn't hold my breath for the Darth Vader sex change, unless you're an anaerobe.

    P.S. Vader is Dutch for father.
     
  3. Sindatur

    Sindatur The Grey Owl Wizard Premium Member

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2011
    Location:
    Sacramento, CA
    The Emperor was able to manipulate Anakin with the death of his wife due to Child birth, and then the children were sent off to opposite ends of the Galaxy to hide them and keep them safe.

    As stated Vader means Father
     
  4. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    It made no such claims. It was being polite.

    You're right. My definite opinion is lore doesn't matter. That's not the issue. You're false analogy has nothing to do with the two of them both being in space. It's a matter of amplitude.

    If you still don't get it, let's borrow from Dennis's signature for a moment. Darth Vader is iconic. Khan is not.

    Vader has become the physical embodiment of cinematic villainy and the central representative of it. His physical attributes--the red sword, the scary mask, his silhouette and stance, etc.--are what created that icon. Bring a picture of Darth Vader anywhere in the Western world and people will immediately associate the image with movie bad guys. Many of those people have never seen a Star Wars film, but they know exactly what the image represents. Even if they can't detail who Vader is, they know what he is.

    On the other hand, Khan is familiar. He is the bad guy in a mildly successful space film from 1982 who morphed into a modest meme. More importantly, outside of geek circles, this familiarity drops to null.

    In other words, Darth Vader will undoubtedly show up in a cultural anthropology paper or two some centuries down the road. Khan will be completely forgotten within a few decades.

    But even that is not to suggest Vader can't be messed with. If Abrams comes along and says, "I'm going to make Vader a chick for shits and giggles." There would be rage. But if he makes a valid case for doing so that falls within the realms of reasonable artistic license, most of us (the reasonable folk) wouldn't have a problem with it. But all that is moot because Episode VII is going to be a direct sequel. ST09, despite all your attempts to deny it, is a reboot.

    Since you brought them up, lets take things further with Supes, Bats, and Bond. You can argue different formats or whatever your excuse is all you want. But that's really not the issue. They are all bigger than Star Trek, and threw the "canon" charade out the window along time ago.

    Of the three, Supes is really the only one who can claim iconic status, or at least the shield is. But people generally see primary colors and a cape and think uber-goodness. But, ultimately, this is moot as the other two are probably more popular.

    Let's focus on Bond. Unlike, Star Trek, it does have a source--a "bible" if you will--which has been completely ignored from the word "go." Details have been changed on a whim to fit into whatever artistic agenda the director was trying to convey.

    It's only a matter of time before Bond is played by a minority. I suspect it will even be the guy who succeeds Craig. And, yes, EON has seriously considered changing Bond to a woman at least twice. And if Western culture ever gets over its fear of strong women characters, a Jamie Bond is only inevitable.

    Of course people will complain. People still hate Craig because he has blond hair. But to most of us, the difference between complaining about hair color and complaining about gender are indistinguishable. It's all lunatic fringe.

    Most people won't care. And here's the kicker: Bond is the most popular fictional character in the world. Nearly as many people know James Bond as they do Jesus Christ.

    Speaking of Jesus Christ, he's been portrait as white, dark, brown, green, and even a woman. And what about dear old Dad? The same can be said for Him. So if the freaking All Mighty is not immune to reinterpretation, why is some backwater, Melville-quoting supervillain?

    So you see, canon is myth.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Feb 28, 2013
  5. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    Actually, I don't care whether Vader is a male or female. I'm not that invested in this stuff. Entertain me for two hours and then we can talk about continuity and "icons" and nonsense if we must.

    I see all kinds of fan proposals for what they "ought to be doing" with Star Trek - the silliest are the ones talking in glittering generalities about "moving forward" or "exploring new worlds" and then propose that setting a movie in the 27th century or following up on the political fallout of some godforsaken TV war will be "thought-provoking" and somehow improve Trek.

    Or they want to bring back the Klingons again. Enough with the Klingons and that goes double for Romulans. What little Abrams has shown so far promises a great deal more entertainment than any of the other proposals I read on the Internet.
     
  6. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    Hey, I'm not asking for Aesop's fables or a parable from the Bible. I'm asking for THEME. I'm asking for a subject matter that leaves me thinking after the movie. I want them to take a subject and flesh it out in as many different ways as possible. Provide counter opinions for a healthy debate, but still make it true to life. Take "Rent," for instance. You'll agree that's not Star Trek, right? Fulfillment in life--all of that is fleshed out in these characters. They foil each other, intertwine, and deal with the same problem. And I am able to take away that from someone's pain of losing friends to AIDS.

    When I say true-to-life, for instance, I go back to Picard standing on a rock face talking to Soran. That was just to get out Soran's motivation and that's it. I wasn't lost in the movie after that scene. If an artist is just going to put drama on the big screen--this character is angry, that one is happy, they clash and the angry one makes the happy one suffer--then that's not deep enough for me to enjoy it. You what that is called? A soap opera. A bad one.
     
  7. M'Sharak

    M'Sharak Definitely Herbert. Maybe. Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2002
    Location:
    Terra Inlandia, Kelvin timeline
    :techman:
     
  8. Admiral Buzzkill

    Admiral Buzzkill Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2001
    No it's called "your straw man." It's not even a reasonable description of drama.
     
  9. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
    Yes there was: because it was excellent!

    And Nimoy's (and Barrett's voice's) presence was a great stamp of approval. Not needed, but much appreciated! By me and many, many others - esp. those fans who had walked away, jaded and dejected, after ST IV/V/VI, VOY and "Nemesis".
     
  10. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk The Real Me Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    Down in the tube station at midnight
    Do that on a starship and its called space opera. :p
     
  11. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
    I took from ST 2009 that it was the "Nature vs Nurture" debate. Two Kirks we know: one grows up with a Mum and Dad, goes to Starfleet, makes great choices in life, commands a famous starship and makes it more famous. Another loses his Dad at birth, is rudderless for way too many years, makes poor choices, until Pike sponsors him. Isn't it also about fate?: is every Kirk destined to command the Enterprise? Certainly, he does in the Prime Universe, the Mirror Universe and this new timeline.

    Spock and Uhura: their choice to have a relationship in this new timeline puts them on different personal arcs than in the Prime Universe. This Spock also has a very different father/son relationship than the Prime Universe Spock, who did not speak to Sarek as father-and-son for decades. And they have now lost Amanda and their home planet. How will it affect their futures?

    Pike's destiny: crippled in both timelines.

    After the film, my friends and I enjoyed many healthy debates about "Nature vs Nurture" and Fate and Destiny. Too bad you weren't there.
     
  12. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    It's a conflict--the very definition of drama. It's a basic one, but one I see often in movies.
     
  13. HaventGotALife

    HaventGotALife Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Jul 6, 2011
    I also saw that--but I saw it in Nemesis as well. And that's when I had the debate, with my father. This is a better executed version of Nemesis. Vengeance. Trauma that leads to anger. Kirk left without any tempering by his father in comparison to Spock. Shinzon led by his pseudo-father that teaches him that hope is childish and Picard's completely different philosophy because their lives created "a unique individual."

    Spock going on a vendetta after his father's conversation about how he shouldn't try to hide his anger is another reason why it doesn't hold up. Spock isn't any better off than Kirk. I would also add that Kirk has father figures. He has Pike "Your father was Captain of a Starship for 10 minutes...," and Prime Spock.

    It's also on display that Spock is wrong. "A captain cannot cheat death." Kirk cheats death all the time and his recklessness has proven to keep him alive, "something Starfleet's lost." It's encouraged. And I don't think that's all that good to be putting forth. It's a movie and you can manipulate circumstances. Sometimes people lose and what I hope is that they continue with this character trait and have him lose to temper his arrogance.
     
  14. The Wormhole

    The Wormhole Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    According to Memory Alpha Koloth was meant to be a recurring character. In fact, I've often wondered if in Trials and Tribble-Ations Dax's comment about Koloth regretting never facing Kirk in battle was a reference to those plans falling through.
     
  15. Therin of Andor

    Therin of Andor Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Location:
    New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
    And I quote you this page:
    http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Kor#Background_information
    "Kor was to have appeared in 'Day of the Dove', but John Colicos was not available."

    According to David Gerrold's "Making of..." book, IIRC, Kor was first slated to be the Klingon antagonist returning for "Tribbles". Memory Alpha is only as reliable as the fans entering the data.

    John Colicos had even helped with the creation of the Klingon makeup, as used in "Errand of Mercy", and was quite invested in the character. Fred Phillips forgot that they'd used a greenish brown greasepaint combination, so the "Tribbles" Klingons ended up caucasian.
     
  16. CommanderRaytas

    CommanderRaytas Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Location:
    Intergalactic Planetary Planetary Intergalactic
    You know, now I almost want Cumby to be White English! Khan, because if the mere possibility sparks this much enthusiasm / anger, imagine what will happen if it turns out to be true. It will be far more entertaining than the hate the lens flare got. :p
     
  17. The Wormhole

    The Wormhole Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 23, 2001
    I don't know. We're all used to the idea of Cumberbatch being Khan that I'm fairly sure our reaction to him being a white guy is played out. We've had a year to go through "Cumberbatch isn't Indian." "Neither was Ricardo Montalban." "How dare you go there! Your mother!!" Really, even if the movie did make it clear he was Khan, there'd be some grumblings from the Never Happy Crowd but I don't think it would be far beyond that.
     
  18. CorporalCaptain

    CorporalCaptain Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2011
    Location:
    "Who are you?"
    Yeah, it's Khanfounding.
     
  19. CommanderRaytas

    CommanderRaytas Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Oct 1, 2006
    Location:
    Intergalactic Planetary Planetary Intergalactic
    I don't know about that. Never underestimate the power of righteous fan rage. Hell, I'd be ranting just for the sake of it....

    Seriously though, I'm sure the film will be awesome. Cumby will do a great job, Khan or no.
     
  20. King Daniel Beyond

    King Daniel Beyond Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Nov 5, 2008
    Location:
    England
    With the possibility of White British Khan looming, I made this handy comparison:
    [​IMG]
    I think CumberKhan would fit in perfectly:)