Novels that would make great movies

[Damian]

Simon Pegg, Zoe Saldana, John Cho, and Anton Yelchin bear/bore hardly any resemblance to the original actors except in ethnicity. Ben Cross looks very little like Mark Lenard and doesn't even have the same accent (though he's a better match than James Frain). These are characters who had been seen in a number of prior movies and were pretty "iconic" in their own rights.

I can agree that Cumberbatch was not the best choice for Khan. But that doesn't mean that there's anything rare or intrinsically wrong about recasting a role with an actor who bears little physical resemblance to their predecessor. Nobody would ever mistake Roger Moore for Sean Connery. Or Dick Sargent for Dick York. Or Val Kilmer for Michael Keaton. Or John Carradine for Bela Lugosi. Actors aren't models. They aren't cast on looks alone.

I guess part of it comes down to the fact that I disagreed with redoing Khan in the first place--when you get down to my most basic objection it is that. It lacked originality to me. They took a villain that was very well acted by Ricardo Montalban from a movie that was one of the best of the series and basically tried to go to the well again. It was also the 3rd movie in a row to go the old villain has a grudge route. I was relieved initially when his name was revealed as John Harrison. There were all kinds of rumors that it was going to be Khan and when it started and wasn't I was like thank God. Then when he revealed his real name was in fact Khan, it was a face palm moment for me.

All my other arguments are just symptoms, secondary to my primary objection and that is I didn't want it to be Khan at all.

But I do love a good debate. And I will say you are an excellent debater who takes nothing for granted.

 

[Christopher]

I guess part of it comes down to the fact that I disagreed with redoing Khan in the first place--when you get down to my most basic objection it is that.

On the one hand, I do think there were problems in how they approached it, most of all in the casting. On the other hand, I think STID is my favorite Khan story in a lot of ways. It's the first time since "Space Seed" that we got to see Khan as a sane but ruthless man who had an admirable intelligence and regard for his people. Everybody talks about how great and iconic TWOK was, but its story is dumb as a brick and it reduces what used to be a complex, nuanced character to a scenery-chewing cartoon obsessed with revenge toward a man who wasn't even responsible for his hardships. TWOK's Khan is a deranged fool who gets his people killed for no good reason. STID's Khan is a leader who cares for his people and seeks their liberation, and I like seeing that side of him. I also like it that he actually gets to interact directly with Kirk, rather than just being on a viewscreen because their scenes were filmed months apart, and that we get to see him in action as an ally, however briefly. (I always love team-ups between heroes and villains. If they can unite against a common foe, it creates hope that they can find other common ground.) Despite problems like casting and magic blood and the like, it's pretty much the richest, most multilayered and developed portrayal of Khan among his three screen appearances. Certainly enormously more so than the caricature he was reduced to in the vastly overrated TWOK.

 

[Damian]

On the one hand, I do think there were problems in how they approached it, most of all in the casting. On the other hand, I think STID is my favorite Khan story in a lot of ways. It's the first time since "Space Seed" that we got to see Khan as a sane but ruthless man who had an admirable intelligence and regard for his people. Everybody talks about how great and iconic TWOK was, but its story is dumb as a brick and it reduces what used to be a complex, nuanced character to a scenery-chewing cartoon obsessed with revenge toward a man who wasn't even responsible for his hardships. TWOK's Khan is a deranged fool who gets his people killed for no good reason. STID's Khan is a leader who cares for his people and seeks their liberation, and I like seeing that side of him. I also like it that he actually gets to interact directly with Kirk, rather than just being on a viewscreen because their scenes were filmed months apart, and that we get to see him in action as an ally, however briefly. (I always love team-ups between heroes and villains. If they can unite against a common foe, it creates hope that they can find other common ground.) Despite problems like casting and magic blood and the like, it's pretty much the richest, most multilayered and developed portrayal of Khan among his three screen appearances. Certainly enormously more so than the caricature he was reduced to in the vastly overrated TWOK.

But in a way his portrayal made sense in TWOK because of his obsession and need for revenge. He felt Kirk left him to die, and he was angry that Kirk never bothered to check on him and he was angry about his wife dying.

I think the key part was that their planet was laid waste only 6 months after they were left there. For 14 1/2 years he probably waited for Kirk or someone to come check on them and rescue them, but no one did. That's a long time for that to simmer and he became more and more obsessed over that time. It got to the point the only thing that mattered to him was his need for revenge. He stopped caring about those around him (except for maybe Joaquin). Probably his wife dying was the last straw and he went insane with revenge.

Now, I'll admit, reading Greg Cox's 'Rise and Fall...' book gave the transition a much richer detail. His novel allowed you to see that his decent into madness didn't happen overnight. It happened over 15 years as their struggles increased and he felt abandoned by Kirk. In the beginning he had a grudging admiration for Kirk, then after Ceti Alpha VI exploded a hope that someone would come to check on them, then a slowly building anger as the years continued to build. At first he was a conscientious leader but that started to give way as his anger subsumed him, and then by the time of TWOK all that mattered was his vengeance.

 

[Kilana2]

True story: I recently described a character as "a young man in his early thirties."

Got a note from the copyeditor informing me anyone in their thirties was not young.

Ouch!

30? It is practically a teenager for a Vulcan.

 

[Christopher]

But in a way his portrayal made sense in TWOK because of his obsession and need for revenge. He felt Kirk left him to die, and he was angry that Kirk never bothered to check on him and he was angry about his wife dying.

That's circular reasoning. It only happened that way because that was the story the filmmakers chose to tell, and it was hardly the most interesting story they could've told about Khan. If anything, I feel it totally squandered the potential of the character. Revenge stories are a dime a dozen. It's a badly overused trope. And Khan and his people had the potential to conquer worlds, to be a serious galactic threat -- or to build something more positive once given a fresh start. There was lip service paid to the former possibility with his theft of the Genesis Device, implicitly and nebulously so that he could use it to dominate and conquer, but it never really came off as anything more than a lure for Kirk.

Besides, it's stupid. Why would it be Kirk's responsibility to check in on him? Logically, he would've notified Starfleet Command, and they would've sent in a support team and monitors, because that sort of thing would be their job, the job of the administrators and specialists back home, not the starship captain whose job requires him to move on to the next thing and the next and the next. Not to mention all the historians and reporters that should've been all over Ceti Alpha V within months, since the discovery of the Botany Bay solved one of the great historical mysteries and should've been huge, huge galactic news. One of the many, many nonsensical aspects about the premise of TWOK is its assumption that none of that ever happened.

The STID scenario is a better Khan story because it makes use of who and what he is. Admiral Marcus awakens and exploits him because he's a conqueror from a more savage age and has the kind of military and destructive genius that's in short supply in the peaceful Federation, and so is useful to Marcus's goal to foment and win a war with the Klingons. But because he was a ruler rather than a lackey, he rebels against being used that way and pursues his own agenda.

More importantly, a sane and nuanced Khan is more interesting than a madman obsessed with vengeance. A Khan who cares about protecting his people is more sympathetic than one who doesn't care if he gets them all killed in his pursuit of Kirk. A Khan that Kirk can find common ground with and mutually respect as an adversary is more satisfying than one whose interaction with Kirk is purely about hatred. The Khan of STID is essentially the same noble antagonist as the Khan of "Space Seed," while the Khan of TWOK has degenerated into a cruder level of villainy.

 

[Damian]

That's circular reasoning. It only happened that way because that was the story the filmmakers chose to tell, and it was hardly the most interesting story they could've told about Khan. If anything, I feel it totally squandered the potential of the character. Revenge stories are a dime a dozen. It's a badly overused trope. And Khan and his people had the potential to conquer worlds, to be a serious galactic threat -- or to build something more positive once given a fresh start. There was lip service paid to the former possibility with his theft of the Genesis Device, implicitly and nebulously so that he could use it to dominate and conquer, but it never really came off as anything more than a lure for Kirk.

Besides, it's stupid. Why would it be Kirk's responsibility to check in on him? Logically, he would've notified Starfleet Command, and they would've sent in a support team and monitors, because that sort of thing would be their job, the job of the administrators and specialists back home, not the starship captain whose job requires him to move on to the next thing and the next and the next. Not to mention all the historians and reporters that should've been all over Ceti Alpha V within months, since the discovery of the Botany Bay solved one of the great historical mysteries and should've been huge, huge galactic news. One of the many, many nonsensical aspects about the premise of TWOK is its assumption that none of that ever happened.

The STID scenario is a better Khan story because it makes use of who and what he is. Admiral Marcus awakens and exploits him because he's a conqueror from a more savage age and has the kind of military and destructive genius that's in short supply in the peaceful Federation, and so is useful to Marcus's goal to foment and win a war with the Klingons. But because he was a ruler rather than a lackey, he rebels against being used that way and pursues his own agenda.

More importantly, a sane and nuanced Khan is more interesting than a madman obsessed with vengeance. A Khan who cares about protecting his people is more sympathetic than one who doesn't care if he gets them all killed in his pursuit of Kirk. A Khan that Kirk can find common ground with and mutually respect as an adversary is more satisfying than one whose interaction with Kirk is purely about hatred. The Khan of STID is essentially the same noble antagonist as the Khan of "Space Seed," while the Khan of TWOK has degenerated into a cruder level of villainy.

It's the story we are left with, and we have to do the best we can with it. From Khan's perspective, he probably held Kirk responsible for leaving him on Ceti Alpha V and not checking on him (or making sure someone did). I guess the reasoning was that Khan's group was just to dangerous. That had they sent a team there'd be the risk Khan and his people would overwhelm them and find a way out of exile. I think the impression was that they really were that dangerous.

Is revenge overused? Absolutely. I think they decided to bank on something that sells because they tried intelligent, true sci fi with TMP and it didn't sell. Now personally TMP is my personal favorite Star Trek film. But I know it didn't wow the general public. TWOK was meant to wow the general public so they went with something safe. I know there's a lot of suspension of disbelief required of TWOK (probably with most Star Trek films in fact). The revenge trope is something I've complained of in the past in fact. I can forgive it in TWOK because they were trying to revive the franchise, and TWOK did it's job in that regard. But my complaint is then too many movies went back to TWOK well, including Nemesis, Star Trek (2009) and STID, for different elements (not all exactly the same, but those 3 movies in particular featured some element of revenge and sacrifice). It's like they are stuck in a time loop. Even Beyond used that same element, but there was enough differences in Beyond that I was able to overlook it more.

 

[Damian]

^I just realized what's amusing about this whole debate is I'm usually trying to argue to people why I personally think TMP is a better film then the TWOK. And in this debate I'm trying to argue why I also like TWOK. It's not a position I usually find myself in because most people I talk to or discuss it with think TWOK is one of, if not the best Star Trek film. So usually I'm the one pointing out what I think are weaknesses compared to TMP.

This is probably one of the first times I'm actually trying to defend TWOK, since I rarely find people that either don't like it or don't think it's as good as billed.

 

[Christopher]

It's the story we are left with, and we have to do the best we can with it.

No, we don't! We're allowed to say that one story is better than another. We're allowed to have opinions about what works and what doesn't. I have said that I think STID is a better Khan story than TWOK, and I've explained why I believe that to be the case.

This is probably one of the first times I'm actually trying to defend TWOK, since I rarely find people that either don't like it or don't think it's as good as billed.

I think it's a really dumb film. The story makes no sense on any level. It throws out Trek's prior aspirations to credibility and thoughtful drama in favor of lowbrow action, scientific absurdity, and over-the-top melodrama. It's distastefully violent and bloodsoaked. It looks cheap, aside from the visual effects. It has some things going for it, like capturing the relaxed, post-TMP Spock pretty well and getting a more nuanced performance out of Shatner than usual, but I don't think it deserves the acclaim it gets.

Then again, I think the Abrams films strike a similar balance of good character work and utterly absurd plotting and overdone action, but there I'm more willing to forgive the plot absurdities due to the strength of the character work. I think that's pretty much how a lot of people feel about TWOK, but somehow it doesn't work for me.

 

[Damian]

No, we don't! We're allowed to say that one story is better than another. We're allowed to have opinions about what works and what doesn't. I have said that I think STID is a better Khan story than TWOK, and I've explained why I believe that to be the case.

Sorry, didn't mean that the way it sounded. I just meant as far as being part of the overall Star Trek storyline (or canon if you will). Not opinions of how good or bad it is.

But I can honestly say this is the first time I actually found someone that didn't like TWOK (well among Star Trek fans anyway). Like I noted, most Trekkies, or even just Star Trek movie fans, usually say how great they think TWOK is. It's actually kind of refreshing to know it's not as universal as I thought.

It was actually nice for a change to try to 'defend' it as a Star Trek film instead of me being the one trying to find criticisms of it as compared to TMP. I'm usually the one trying to pick out the negatives and for once, I had an opportunity to try to look at it from the other end.

 

[Damian]

Then again, I think the Abrams films strike a similar balance of good character work and utterly absurd plotting and overdone action, but there I'm more willing to forgive the plot absurdities due to the strength of the character work.

There are things that I like about STID and I actually do think its a decent Star Trek film. It's just in that case some of the plot elements threaten to overwhelm the good aspects--the Spock scream seen and the magic blood are 2 that I just roll my eyes to this day. In Beyond I felt that way about the Sabotage scene. Beyond was my favorite of the Abramsverse films and that almost ruined it for me (not quite, but almost). It's funny how a moviemaker can take an otherwise good movie, and almost ruin it with stuff like that.

 

[JD]

While I love TWOK, I have to admit Christopher, you do bring up some good points about Khan's role. He really is the weakest part of the movie. It still bugs me that we didn't get at least one in person, face to face scene between him and Kirk.
At least The Search for Spock did give us the Kirk/Kruge fight at the end.

.

The thing about these guys at Bad Robot is that they want to be the sole creators of the their own story sans consideration for something perhaps considerably or even remotely better.

There is nothing wrong with creators wanting to create their own stories.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Then when he revealed his real name was in fact Khan, it was a face palm moment for me.

For me it was as soon as he asked about how torpedoes there were. When they said there were 72, I thought, "Aw, shit. They're doing Khan." I happened to remember the number of survivors from "Space Seed" and as soon as I heard that number, I knew it wasn't a coincidence.

Everybody talks about how great and iconic TWOK was, but its story is dumb as a brick and it reduces what used to be a complex, nuanced character to a scenery-chewing cartoon obsessed with revenge toward a man who wasn't even responsible for his hardships.

Certainly enormously more so than the caricature he was reduced to in the vastly overrated TWOK.

I think it's a really dumb film. The story makes no sense on any level. It throws out Trek's prior aspirations to credibility and thoughtful drama in favor of lowbrow action, scientific absurdity, and over-the-top melodrama. It's distastefully violent and bloodsoaked. It looks cheap, aside from the visual effects.

...Don't mince words, Bones. What do you really think?

 

[Christopher]

It still bugs me that we didn't get at least one in person, face to face scene between him and Kirk.

That was necessitated by Montalban's Fantasy Island shooting schedule, but yes, it is unfortunate.

Still, I would've rather seen a completely different story, one that would follow up on Spock's musing about what could grow from the seed they'd planted. But I guess a more ambitious, expansive portrayal of Khan and his people's achievements, or of whatever threat they could pose if unleashed on the galaxy, was outside the film's budget limitations. I guess, now that I think about it, that I can see why they had to reduce Khan's ambitions to a more one-on-one level, a conflict that could play out mostly on two redresses of the same bridge set. But it's still a disappointing followup on "Space Seed." STID had the budget and room to tell a more epic Khan story, even though I have my quibbles with some of the specifics.

 

[Valenti]

The writers at Bad Robot have to write Star Trek stories, not for their own creation - Frankentrek.

 

[Timewalker]

Why would it be Kirk's responsibility to check in on him? Logically, he would've notified Starfleet Command, and they would've sent in a support team and monitors, because that sort of thing would be their job, the job of the administrators and specialists back home, not the starship captain whose job requires him to move on to the next thing and the next and the next.

You know this. We know this. Kirk knows this. Starfleet may or may not know this, because it's obvious that Khan's existence is on a need-to-know basis and Captain Terrell didn't need to know.

But the point is that KHAN did not know this. The only representatives of Starfleet that Khan knew were his wife and Kirk. His wife was with him, in the same boat, so who else would Khan have focused on, other than Kirk?

Not to mention all the historians and reporters that should've been all over Ceti Alpha V within months, since the discovery of the Botany Bay solved one of the great historical mysteries and should've been huge, huge galactic news. One of the many, many nonsensical aspects about the premise of TWOK is its assumption that none of that ever happened.

Since the whole thing was likely classified in the first place (why else would Terrell not know about it?), I bet Starfleet would just be overjoyed if the media got hold of the information.

 

[Christopher]

The writers at Bad Robot have to write Star Trek stories, not for their own creation - Frankentrek.

That's a rather bizarre straw man, given that Star Trek has been many different things over the decades. When TNG was new, there were years of fierce resistance from fans who refused to accept that anything could be Star Trek if it wasn't about Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. But we're not in that era anymore. By now, people should know that Star Trek is still Star Trek even when it changes and reinvents itself.

The point is, they wanted to tell new stories about Kirk's crew in the 23rd century, but trying to fit new stories about those characters into the existing continuity would be too creatively limiting, because those characters' futures in the Prime timeline are already predetermined. As a result, you couldn't tell any stories about them that were big or transformative enough to be worthy of a feature film. So the only way to revisit those characters and that era without that straitjacket was to start an alternate continuity.

 

[Valenti]

Kirk : The Early Years would have sufficed for me. Some tall stories with Captain Garrovik et al including Pike (there must have been some overlap). I still think it was wrong and a big mistake not to tie it into TOS. I.e., the lost years series fans were pining about ever since the seventies. The only straight jacket there is to lazy unimaginative writers.

 

[Christopher]

The only straight jacket there is to lazy unimaginative writers.

It is nonsensical to say that writers are being unimaginative by choosing to free their imaginations to go anywhere they want instead of being restricted by continuity porn.

 

[Greg Cox]

Exactly. Making them straight prequels to TOS would mean the entire future of the characters and the Federation would be locked in stone. We'd all know that Kirk was eventually going to be killed by Soran, that Sulu was going to become the captain of the Excelsior, that Spock and Uhura weren't going to end up together, that the Borg weren't going to attack Earth until Picard's time, etc. Rebooting the timeline meant that the new movies had a clean slate when it came to the future of the characters and the universe. A new beginning.

Plus, let's be honest here. Nobody makes a $200 million movie just for hardcore fans who want to see Kirk's adventures with Garrovick or whatever. The whole point of the 2009 movie was to make STAR TREK appealing to the general public again--and hopefully create a new generation of Trekkies.

Fleshing out obscure corners of Trek continuity is what the books are for.

 

[Valenti]

I consider all future events after TOS to be alternate and there is nothing restrictive about continuity or at least there shouldn't be.