Rumor that will cause me not to see the sequel!
- Thread starter GalaxyClass1701
- Start date
Do you really not trust the team behind Trek now to give us a great movie? Haven't they earned our trust?
They've earned mine. No matter what they do, I'm confident it will be good.
They did very well reinvigorating the franchise. But, I don't know if I'd give them my blind trust. After all, Gene Coon produced some of the best TOS episodes and wrote Bread and Circuses (with Roddenberry), but he also wrote Spock's Brain and Spectre of the Gun (the latter with Roddenberry).
Raped childhood.
It's customary to provide some links to these interviews so that the rest of us would be able to read them. Otherwise, it's just another rumor, as far as any of us can tell.
A bit early for boycotts, isn't it?
I heard Johnathan Frakes was playing Data in the new movie.
RobertScorpio
Pariah
...and i don't think he will really care if old fart fans like us don't go see it. That is really the whole point of doing this. He wants to bring in NEW fans, and hopes to keep most of the old fans...
And in my opinion he is doing JUST fine...So if he wants to do Khan...or Vgr....or bring the whales back...or Doomsday Machine...
In essense...JJ has a blank check with me...
Rob
I saw Nemesis in the theater and regretted it afterward. I seriously doubt that anything would deter me from seeing it. As much as I would like them to leave Khan alone, and besides which Khan seems to be a fan pushed idea for the sequel than anything coming from the creative team. I think they've just mentioned that they're fans of Khan and Star Trek II.
Here's my problem if they do indeed do a Khan movie.
Aren't they trying to "reintroduce the basic essentials of Trek" or some such? Khan is not a basic essential of Trek. He was in one episode and one movie. A very popular episode and the fan favourite movie, but that's still only two appearances.
So if they really want to bring the basic essentials in for the new audience, Klingons would the logical choice as Trek XII's villains. After all, what could be more bascially essential to Trek then Klingons? And thanks to the deleted scene, Abrams and cohorts already have a head start with them.
"Oh but I'm tired of Klingons. We've seen them too many times."
Klingons of TOS were very different from Klingons of modern day Trek. I got the impression from the deleted scene that theses Klingons were more in the TOS mold. The guy interrogating Nero seemed more sophisticated and cerebral, much like Kor or Kang as opposed to 24th century Klingons or 22nd century for that matter.
Aren't they trying to "reintroduce the basic essentials of Trek" or some such? Khan is not a basic essential of Trek. He was in one episode and one movie. A very popular episode and the fan favourite movie, but that's still only two appearances.
So if they really want to bring the basic essentials in for the new audience, Klingons would the logical choice as Trek XII's villains. After all, what could be more bascially essential to Trek then Klingons? And thanks to the deleted scene, Abrams and cohorts already have a head start with them.
"Oh but I'm tired of Klingons. We've seen them too many times."
Klingons of TOS were very different from Klingons of modern day Trek. I got the impression from the deleted scene that theses Klingons were more in the TOS mold. The guy interrogating Nero seemed more sophisticated and cerebral, much like Kor or Kang as opposed to 24th century Klingons or 22nd century for that matter.
Last edited:
Khan could work. I nominate Naveen Andrews for the role. But thinking about it, I've realized there's something wrong with Andrews and it's that he's not conventionally good looking enough. The creepy aspect of Montelban was how good looking he was - all his "Augments" were - and it was a reminder that these people are unnatural.
What they really need is for Sendhil Ramamurthy to suddenly learn how to act worth a damn, because that guy's looks are just about perfect for the role - too beautiful to be the product of nature.
What they really need is for Sendhil Ramamurthy to suddenly learn how to act worth a damn, because that guy's looks are just about perfect for the role - too beautiful to be the product of nature.
Are you kidding, I'm skipping right over Movie #2 and organizing a boycott of the third movie. So there.
"Basic essentials" is not the same as "most often-repeated elements."
The movie version of Khan, more than the original and somewhat more subtle version seen in "Space Seed," has been one of the most strongly embedded elements of Trek in pop culture since the mid-1980s. In marketing terms, the logic of using him in the second Trek movie is not unlike the logic of using the Joker in "The Dark Knight."
The movie version of Khan, more than the original and somewhat more subtle version seen in "Space Seed," has been one of the most strongly embedded elements of Trek in pop culture since the mid-1980s. In marketing terms, the logic of using him in the second Trek movie is not unlike the logic of using the Joker in "The Dark Knight."
Char Aznable
Lieutenant Commander
Actually, I've often thought that if they wanted to remake an episode, why remake a classic when you can remake a shitty one? I think it could actually work if you tweak the story. Say, make them less space hippies, more crazed and creepy cult. Possibly as parallel to Scientology or those suicide cults if they want to keep it relevant.
Sorry, I just don't view Khan as being the forefront villain of Star Trek the way that the Joker is for Batman. Ask John Everyman or Average Joe who the villains of Star Trek are, and they're more likely to say Klingons, or possibly Romulans as opposed to Khan. And since Romulans have already been used in XI, Klingons are the more logical choice for XII.
Char Aznable
Lieutenant Commander
Agreed. In fact, what I really don't want to see is them trying to capitalize on Dark Knight by throwing in Khan as Kirk's arch nemesis as it would be so obvious and see through that I'd be quite annoyed. I am intrigued by what they have been mentioning about space itself being the enemy or something similar.
^ Agreed. While I do not want to see a Khan movie, I do want to see Yeoman Janice Rand brought in. If it does happen to be a Khan movie, though, I won't boycott it.
Well, he is.
"The Klingons" aren't a villain. They're just a bunch of stock bad guys who folks are confused about because of TNG (in fact, one of the writers of ST '09 gave the "reformation" of the Klingons as a reason for not using them in this one. That works). Khan translates into a very specific image for mainstream folks who are aware of Trek at all, and that's Ricardo Montalban facing off with William Shatner in that Trek movie with Kirstie Alley.
"Kha-a-a-a-an!"
There is no Klingon character in the history of Trek that approaches this level of recognition, and announcing that in the next movie Kirk will fight Klingons buys the studio nothing in terms of cutting through media noise. It's like saying that next time out Batman will fight some bank robbers hiding out in an abandoned warehouse.
Last edited:
I've never met anyone who considered Khan to be Kirk's nemesis as such... he's always instantly associated with number 2, 'cus he was in it, but original Star Trek in general? I disagree with that. I don't think Kirk has an individual nemesis in that fashion as Batman does.
Perhaps I'm hanging out with the wrong people.
Perhaps I'm hanging out with the wrong people.
Similar threads
