SPOILERS!!! NEW AICN RUMORS (APRIL 30)

[LtChange]

I really don't care who plays Khan as long as he is good in the role and the movie will be successful so bring it on. And I really do think that Khan makes an impossible situation and the wise words of Prime Spock could be useful so bring on the first trailer (Comic Con San Diego if I remember correctly ...). I love all the Khan and Abrhams bashing around, especially as many here wanted Khan after the first movie. An after credits scene would have been fun in Trek '09 And I prefer for them to handle Khan on screen than in comics ...

 

[Hartzilla2007]

Except for Spock's line "he knew just where to hit us".

He studied all their manuals back in "Space Seed." The "massive refit" doesn't actually enter into the logic except possibly in some uber-fanboi debate about whether some conduits were supposed to have been moved from deck 50 to deck 74 according to The Compleat TrekFan Continuity Encyclopedia.

Actually from a deleted scene I heard about, I get the feeling that Myers was ignoring the refit idea and just saying the ship always used the TMP design.

 

[section9]

Well, rumor has it over at Trekmovie that there was going to be a scene where the Botany Bay was floating around, so there you have it.

 

[Trekkie2]

A complete lack of originality, quelle surprise. Another raid on classic Trek to make up for a lack of their own ideas, while managing to urinate copiously on the original. Even stupider is casting Cumberbatch, the whitest man ever. Fools.

Are all those comic-book movie-adaptations completely lacking in originality too?
You don't know the story of this movie, only that it will (perhaps) have Khan in it. Where can you see a lack of originality with so little knowledge?

Comic book stores don't charge you $15 a head at the door. Comics only cost $3 if buy, free if you stand there and read them. They do have candy, but it's not rediculously expensive. And they don't sell overpriced popcorn and soda.

Creativity and originality are what draw me to a science fiction movie, not cheap hash and rehash. I guess Abrams, Orci & Kurtzman used it all up on Mission Impossible 3: Ghost Protocol, which I found very entertaining.

Last year, Forbes Magazine lauded Orci & Kurtzman and called them "Hollywood's Secret Weapons" and a "force behind $3 billion in box office receipts." This year, Forbes Magazine will be laughing and calling them "the pair that slung hash for a cheap dinner."

Another Khan movie is like reading a book and going to see the movie, or vice versa. You always end up disappointed.

Maybe we will see Carol Marcus and baby Kirk. After all, in the original first script O & K wrote, they had Kirk growing up with Marcus in Indiana. Yeah, that's the type of movie to expect.

Except for Spock's line "he knew just where to hit us".

He studied all their manuals back in "Space Seed." The "massive refit" doesn't actually enter into the logic except possibly in some uber-fanboi debate about whether some conduits were supposed to have been moved from deck 50 to deck 74 according to The Compleat TrekFan Continuity Encyclopedia.

Actually from a deleted scene I heard about, I get the feeling that Myers was ignoring the refit idea and just saying the ship always used the TMP design.

The whole script was written in 16 days, and the ending had to be rewritten, quickly, because it wasn't well received by fans. Go figure. Hence, Khan knowing Checkov even though he wasn't even a sparkle in the writer's mind in Space Seed.



Here we go....the original script for Space Seed didn't have Khan written as the villain. It was supposed to be "a Nordic superman named Harold Erricsen."

Now we know who Cumberbatch is playing and we have the title name of the movie:

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Harold

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

The whole script was written in 16 days, and the ending had to be rewritten, quickly, because it wasn't well received by fans. Go figure. Hence, Khan knowing Checkov even though he wasn't even a sparkle in the writer's mind in Space Seed.

No, Meyer did his rewrite of the script in sixteen days. The script actually went through many drafts and revisions over a long period of time.

Yes, it makes a difference - lots of differences, actually.

 

[beamMe]

A complete lack of originality, quelle surprise. Another raid on classic Trek to make up for a lack of their own ideas, while managing to urinate copiously on the original. Even stupider is casting Cumberbatch, the whitest man ever. Fools.

Are all those comic-book movie-adaptations completely lacking in originality too?
You don't know the story of this movie, only that it will (perhaps) have Khan in it. Where can you see a lack of originality with so little knowledge?

Comic book stores don't charge you $15 a head at the door. Comics only cost $3 if buy, free if you stand there and read them. They do have candy, but it's not rediculously expensive. And they don't sell overpriced popcorn and soda.

Creativity and originality are what draw me to a science fiction movie, not cheap hash and rehash.

So, I take it you didn't see any of the comic-book movies in the last few years? After all they cheaply rehashed everything you've already paid for when you bought the comics.

 

[Xavier_Storma]

Back in 2009, when the new movie premiered, and everyone was so entertained by it, I already knew what road this was taking.
Now, with your knowledge of the facts today look back at the "masterpiece" movie from 2009... where did all the magic go, you wanted it to have?
JJ Abrams is a mediocre movie maker. It is not original, nor creative to copy a successful concept.
Nolan, he found the formula, now everyone is copying it... Be it the new "Sherlock Holmes" films, or now "Star Trek".
The only thing I cannot understand... it took them 4 years to come up with something most people knew was obvious?
The new movie will go as followed:
- Enterprise is on route to Klingon border, there are political problems
- They find Khan and his followers
- At first everything seems fine
- Then they encounter a Klingon ship and Khan takes it over
- Final battle between Enterprise and Klingon ship
- Throw in some Klingons trying to retake their ship or a subplot with the Klingon empire
Sounding familiar, it better should.
STAR TREK was a copy and paste from A) STAR WARS (lil' farmboy meeting his best friend blowing up a superweapon which will destroy planets), B) "Yesterday's Enterprise" (timetravel creating alternate timeline) and C) NEMESIS (Scimitar = Nero's ship, Nero and his fellows = Remans and Shinzon).
Where is originality these days?
Watch the PROMETHEUS trailer, watch THE DARK KNIGHT RISES. Those feel epic, unperdictible: FRESH.
It's a shame one could perdict the whole setup of the TREK Sequel way back in 2009.
Fill in the story with some oneliners (which are supposed to be funny, at a level that American Idol audiences will understand), come cool shakey camera action scenes... And voila... Another JJ TREK is finished.
As for the "epic conclusion" of the JJ trilogy:
They will use Ruk from that TOS episode with the droids... and he will break Kirk's legs. Starfleet will be taken over by some extremists and Bruce Wayne... pardom me... James Kirk will face his biggest challange yet.

With this news I will pass on this one. After the huge disappointed and deconstruction of the franchise in 2009, I have no interest what-so-ever to see another mainstream-pleasing movie, with no class at all.

With the sincere hope, that one day the franchise I used to care so much about will return with the help of a filmmaker of Ridley Scott's, Christopher Nolan's or Darren Aronofsky's class for example, I wish all the JJ fans a good and hopefully for them entertaining time, until he quits helming the franchise.

Enjoy the film.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Now, with your knowledge of the facts today look back at the "masterpiece" movie from 2009... where did all the magic go, you wanted it to have?

It's as awesome as it ever was, and just as popular. This is why the fan sites on the Internet light up whenever a photograph, comment or rumor about the sequel appears - as has happened to the max in the last twenty-four hours.

This movie will be an even bigger success than the last, cementing this new version of Star Trek as the touchstone for Trek projects going forward.

Oh...some hardcore Trekkies don't like the direction the Franchise is taking? Too bad. Same thing happened in 1987, and the doubters were wrong then, too.

http://khaaan.com/

 

[ITL]

As long as I'm entertained, I don't mind Khan being the big bad. And as the last movie thoroughly entertained me, I remain optimistic. And I trust the Cumberbatch to deliver the goods.

 

[Kosh Naranek]

Outside of Trekdom how many people know Kahn's full name and ethnicity?

Or how to spell it.

Anybody thinks old Spock is becoming a Star Trek Kenobi. i really don't know why do they need him this time.

Tee hee! And only a few weeks ago, you were campaigning for the insertion of Q into the narrative!

So... is Alice Eve playing Marla McGivers? Or will Yeoman Janice Rand be tempted as a traitor?

Ha-ha! I am going to leave in the typo. I deserve the humiliation.

Personally I am hoping for Rand.

 

[Morpheus 02]

This Khan will have very different motivations to the scenery-chewing, giant-chested revenge nut from "Wrath of Khan". My guess is that he'll have been with the Klingons for the past 25 years. There will be no Genesis device or Carol Marcus. The Khan/Kirk fight won't be personal about a dead wife and long exile, it'll simply be Augment genius vs. our genius level repeat offender with the fate of the galaxy at stake.

And it's gonna be FUN.

What makes you think he'd have been with the Klingons? And why would he be wearing the Starfleet uniform and sideburns then?

Just my speculation, based on the knowledge (assuming it's not BS) that Khan and the Klingons will feature. That, some time after George Kirk dies and the timelines diverge, the Klingons come across the SS Botany Bay. Thus, by the time of the movie we get to meet an adjusted-to-the-future Khan without any kind of "Space Seed" rehash.

As for the Starfleet uniform, he's probably infiltrated Starfleet, as an agent of the Klingons.

Or maybe "Khan" is a pure Klingon..after all, don't 90% of Klingons have a name that starts with "K" (the same way Vulcans start with "S"). So they use the "Khan" name, but he's actually a Klingon, not related to Khan Noonian Singh (which i wonder is what people misinterpret as Sikh?).

We'll see....hope it will be original and fun (and that the villain does NOT die in the end)

 

[F. King Daniel]

.

Enjoy the film.

I will!

 

[Trekkie2]

Are all those comic-book movie-adaptations completely lacking in originality too?
You don't know the story of this movie, only that it will (perhaps) have Khan in it. Where can you see a lack of originality with so little knowledge?

Comic book stores don't charge you $15 a head at the door. Comics only cost $3 if buy, free if you stand there and read them. They do have candy, but it's not rediculously expensive. And they don't sell overpriced popcorn and soda.

Creativity and originality are what draw me to a science fiction movie, not cheap hash and rehash.

So, I take it you didn't see any of the comic-book movies in the last few years? After all they cheaply rehashed everything you've already paid for when you bought the comics.

I must have missed the Harry Potter comic books. I'd have to go through somebody else's collection of Transformers. Were the movies depicted in the comics? The Tom Cruise Mission Impossible movies were comics? Missed them. I will admit that Thor was as good as the comic book it was written from, but I didn't pay to see it.

I suppose Alice Eve will be playing the bobble headed boob groupie Khan picks up along the way, and she'll turn out to be Rand. Good movie!

 

[23skidoo]

I must have missed the Harry Potter comic books. I'd have to go through somebody else's collection of Transformers. Were the movies depicted in the comics? The Tom Cruise Mission Impossible movies were comics? Missed them. I will admit that Thor was as good as the comic book it was written from, but I didn't pay to see it.

I suppose Alice Eve will be playing the bobble headed boob groupie Khan picks up along the way, and she'll turn out to be Rand. Good movie!

Actually, a better response to the argument is this:

Star Trek: The Original Series produced 79 episodes. Take away a couple based on Shakespeare plays and you had well over 70 original stories with original characters and original villains. They managed to do it on a budget of $1.98, what the f--k is JJ Abrams' excuse?

Alex

 

[F. King Daniel]

Athough TOS looks cheap and crappy by today's standards, it was actually quite an expensive show for it's time.

 

[Captaindemotion]

As long as I'm entertained, I don't mind Khan being the big bad. And as the last movie thoroughly entertained me, I remain optimistic. And I trust the Cumberbatch to deliver the goods.

One thing's for sure. Cumberbatch has no problem in playing an iconic role previously associated with another actor or actors and making it his own...

 

[beamMe]

Comic book stores don't charge you $15 a head at the door. Comics only cost $3 if buy, free if you stand there and read them. They do have candy, but it's not rediculously expensive. And they don't sell overpriced popcorn and soda.

Creativity and originality are what draw me to a science fiction movie, not cheap hash and rehash.

So, I take it you didn't see any of the comic-book movies in the last few years? After all they cheaply rehashed everything you've already paid for when you bought the comics.

I must have missed the Harry Potter comic books. I'd have to go through somebody else's collection of Transformers. Were the movies depicted in the comics? The Tom Cruise Mission Impossible movies were comics? Missed them. I will admit that Thor was as good as the comic book it was written from, but I didn't pay to see it.

I suppose Alice Eve will be playing the bobble headed boob groupie Khan picks up along the way, and she'll turn out to be Rand. Good movie!

Are you high?
I brought up comic-book adaptations specifically because they rarely introduce new characters but present them, more or less, in a new or different way even though they've been used over and over in the source-material.
Like this new Star Trek film will probably present Khan in a new way.

 

[Dick_Valentine]

So what we've learned is that those who were already against the new franchise are using this latest news to be even more aggressive towards it and those who enjoyed the first film are just waiting until the movie is released before judging.

Ho-hum.

I don't see casting a Brit as any worse as casting a Mexican was back then either.
Sometimes, I suppose, you just have to go with the best actor available rather than limiting yourself in the casting field.
(assuming they'd decided to write the sequel about Kahn before casting and not getting BC and then wondering what role they could give him...)

Oh well, looking forward to a new generation of KAHNNNN!!! Memes

 

[Gagarin]

I didn't get the need for time travel, old Spock, or the 'super weapon' plot of the last movie, though it was fun to watch.

Not that it matters (because 5 people saw them), the last TNG movies basically had the same plot/ending... there has to be another way to make a Trek film that doesn't involve a big ship/weapon and a fist fight with a villain just before he blows up screaming "Noooo".

 

[Rhodan]

I don´t know. So we´ve got news about three things:
-Khan
-Nimoy
-Klingons

All of it sounds very fanwanky, so either someone has pulled the prank or they are obviously thinking that creativity is a risky move. If it´s true I´ll keep my mind open, but it would be just disappointing if they are not trying to add something to cannon of both continuities...

Obviously, whoever is Cumberbatch playing, he´ll be better villain than Queen of Species 8472 Kirk is forced to have sex with. Otherwise, anything can work if written somehow smart.