I assume that because if he didn't, khan would kill his family. But yes, it is one of several issues I have with the film, but, like you said it's a damn entertaining movie - classic Abrams tbh, fast paced thrills at the expense of logic.
Why do you rank TFF highly?
- Thread starter EnriqueH
- Start date
I assume that because if he didn't, khan would kill his family. But yes, it is one of several issues I have with the film, but, like you said it's a damn entertaining movie - classic Abrams tbh, fast paced thrills at the expense of logic.
Khan would kill his family. It was clear that this father would do anything to save his daughter.
Dramatic license? Perhaps, but I've seen it before. It worked well enough for the story.
If Khan could kill the guy's family in spite of Starfleet's protection then why did he need him in the first place. Doesn't that suggest that he could blow up this installation all by himself? The guy couldn't know of Khan's extraordinary abilities. The smart thing to do would have been to try to kill Khan instead (after he saved his daughter and had her under protection), dying for dying, at least it would be while trying to do the right thing and rid the planet of a piece of crap!!! His daughter could think of him as a hero instead of someone who sacrificed the lives of forty innocents.
Logic and rationality don't always work when talking about saving the life of your child. It's not a matter of knowing Khan's capabilities; it was a matter that his daughter had limited time to live and he felt like he must act. Federation medicine had failed him and he was desperate. He wasn't thinking of what his daughter would think of him-he wanted her to live. Yes, he could turn Khan in and Khan wouldn't save his daughter and she would die anyway, and possibly his wife and himself too. Khan's question in the film is so on point as the theme of the film: "My crew is my family. Is there anything you would not do for your family?"
Khan needed him to send a message to Marcus-that Marcus' family (i.e. Section 31) was not safe. And he did it in a very personal and pointed way. And Marcus responded in kind in trying to kill Khan.
No, you don't get the point. First, he saves his little girl, and then he goes after Khan and does whatever he could to get that sob. That's not more dangerous than what he did and at least it still makes him one of the good guys instead of a mass murderer!!!
The whole point of Khan’s arc is “wouldn’t you do anything to protect your family?” We weren’t privy to Khan’s conversation with him.
“Do this and I’ll save your daughter. Don’t do it and I’ll kill both your wife and child. Slowly, painfully.” And then proceeds to bend an iron bar with his bare hands to prove Khan is the superior physical specimen. We don’t know where Khan is when the bomb goes off. He could very well be right outside the hospital suite. If that bomb doesn’t go off at the prearranged time, the guy’s family is dead. That’s the whole thing, there’s a giant loophole to explain away why Noel Clarke didn’t call the Star Cops or go after him with a phaser.
“Do this and I’ll save your daughter. Don’t do it and I’ll kill both your wife and child. Slowly, painfully.” And then proceeds to bend an iron bar with his bare hands to prove Khan is the superior physical specimen. We don’t know where Khan is when the bomb goes off. He could very well be right outside the hospital suite. If that bomb doesn’t go off at the prearranged time, the guy’s family is dead. That’s the whole thing, there’s a giant loophole to explain away why Noel Clarke didn’t call the Star Cops or go after him with a phaser.
Last edited:
This assumes much without factoring in any emotion or how Khan manipulated him. As @ssosmcin notes Khan would have any number of ways of leveraging Clarke's character, including lying to him about the nature of the bomb.
I get the point just fine. I disagree with it strongly because it assumes so much.
Sigh. Khan and the man who was responsible for those deaths were victims of circumstance, of course he would've altered that mindless decision if he thought the real villain didn't have all of the cards. The interrogation scene wasn't enough to make that point? It's easy to make a reasonable judgement after those kinds of events but not when the psychological gun is pointed at their heads at the time.
It's not much but crushing the villain's head was a retaliation for what went down.
Well, crushing heads was Khan's thing. He tried it with Spock as well and Spock didn't do anything to him that could even be qualified as unfair, unlike the Admiral.
Admiral Marcus was an asshole but Khan was a much bigger asshole and his words were just self-serving manipulating propaganda meant to sway Kirk et al. to maybe not approve of him but thinking that he wasn't as terrible as he was. The Admiral was a piece of shit but he was right about everything he said about Khan. Although Khan was right in his last words to the Admiral "You should have let me sleep" Yeah, he should have.
Last edited:
Um, yeah. That's kind of the point of the entire movie. That Khan's offer to help is always in Khan's interests not the other party's. Marcus, Kirk, and Harwood (Clark's character) all learned that the hard way.
I've had some issues with STID (mostly to do with the "KHAN!!!" scream but that's an argument for another thread
), but the whole saving his daughter scene was not one of them. Khan saved his daughter's life. Yes, in retrospect someone in Khan's position would probably wait to see if the Section 31 agent carried out his side of the bargain, but then again, the agent probably wanted to know his daughter would live before he sacrificed himself and all his colleagues, so it's sort of a chicken and the egg problem.Whatever the reasons, I never took issue with the agent carrying out the attack after the fact. My guess is Khan probably just held something over the agents head. Khan's a smart guy, he probably had ways of ensuring the deed was done. He was on the scene in fact, probably to make sure the agent did what he was supposed to. That's really a non-issue to me. Could Abrams have been more clear about why the agent did what he did and not warn his Section 31 superiors? I suppose so. But let's face it, no movie can possibly cover every little angle and plot hole. And in this case it wasn't really critical to the overall story the movie was trying to tell.
And yeah. Marcus is most definitely a villain in the movie, but so is Khan. No one should mistaken Khan for some misunderstood bad guy who just wants justice for his people. That's one trait he shares with his Montalban-version. He's out for himself first and foremost. In fact, Captain Kirk even says that on the Vengeance when he and Scotty are trying to catch up. Scott says he thought Khan was supposed to be helping them when Kirk quite astutely points out, "I'm pretty sure we're helping him."
Victim of circumstance doesn't mean misunderstood, but for Khan, and the Black man who killed for his dying daughter, there are factors in the story which were out of their control = Admiral Marcus.
Marcus was perfectly ok with killing the entire crew of the Enterprise and in fact, he killed quite a few of them, which is more than what Khan had killed at that point. He's definitely a mass-murdering scumbag and the head crush was just about what he deserved at that point. Good riddance to bad trash.
Marcus was the villain of the film. I recall reading somewhere that villains are expected to meet bad ends. I think a mouse told me that story once.
Indeed, but spending the rest of his days in a penal colony would have been the worst he could get in a Starfleet tribunal and that seems so inadequate for the kind of crime he was guilty of.
Inadequate for who? I thought Star Trek was about evolved humanity and reforming the darker aspects of human nature not crime, punishments and execution?
That's why Marcus' fate was poetic, his scheme boomerang right back at him and justice prevailed. Khan was punished in the manner of Starfleet.
Similar threads
- Poll
