• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

SPOILERS!!! NEW AICN RUMORS (APRIL 30)

While I like Cumberbatch and think he's a pretty fantastic actor, I really wasn't sure about him being cast in Star Trek. Now that He's supposed to be Khan, I dislike it even more. If there's a twist and he's not Montalban's Khan, then I might accept it. Still buying the figure when it comes out, though :rommie:
 
wait. there are people who think Cumberbatch is ugly? Now I've seen everything. Everyone I know with an uterus and quite a few with testicles think he's the most sexiest being alive. My gf would leave in a second for Cumberbatch and maybe I join her.
Some peoples tastes are just weird.

This is the best thing I've seen all week. :drool:
 
My one real question here is...How does Nero showing up from the Prime Time line and creating an alternate history manage to transform K. Noonian Singh from an ethic character to someone looking like they strolled off Abbey Road? Nero showing up as he did should have no affect on KNS who launched from earth in 1996. It's just not possible. How are they going to explain this?
Probably the same way they explained Zefram Cochrane's transformation between "Metamorphosis" and "First Contact". Or Saavik's between "Wrath of Khan" and "Search for Spock".
Or how Khan's followers transformed into an all-white, blond-haired group in "Wrath of Khan" despite them looking totally different in "Space Seed"

Nero had the power to change Sulu from Japanese to Korean.

It's MAGIC NERO POWER.

Changing Khan to Cumberbatch is just more Nero magic.

It's all in a day's work.

( Personally, I wouldn't mind if they changed the history of the Eugenics Wars, and not as an indication of a preexisting timeline or anything like that, just as a concession to the reality that no freaking Eugenics Wars happened in 1996. )
 
Since Abrams has pleased the vast majority of long-time Trek fans, changing direction in hopes of satisfying the remaining small minority is neither necessary or advisable.
 
if TrekMovie.com confirmed it then it's 99.9% for sure a sure thing.

Yeah, but did Bob Orci come on and say anything?
They're (Paramount, Abrams & Co.) neither confirming or denying...but....this is what Orci posted in response to another


Poster: I bet Bob Orci is sitting in his chair having a good laugh at all of us.

Orci: No,no. I am commiserating.

I did have a thought. If Khan is stark raving white now, with western features, I wonder what the hell the Klingons are going to look like?
 
Commiserating? He's commiserating? lol.

I really don't know. I have no problem with the casting. I just have trepidations with using "Khan".
 
Since Abrams has pleased the vast majority of long-time Trek fans, changing direction in hopes of satisfying the remaining small minority is neither necessary or advisable.
In other words.....F*** them???????

I wouldn't say that here - it would be considered flaming, at the least.

You thought that was worthwhile? It reads as a fairly typical example of io9's apparent editorial approach to generating "content:" come up with some kind of premise and a headline, then extemporize and represent random opinions as if they're self-evident for a certain number of words - to no particular effect.

I'm not impressed.

btw, I like your .sig, Legion. :techman:

Thank you. Thank Vice President Biden. ;)
 
Since Abrams has pleased the vast majority of long-time Trek fans, changing direction in hopes of satisfying the remaining small minority is neither necessary or advisable.
In other words.....F*** them???????

I wouldn't say that here - it would be considered flaming, at the least.

You thought that was worthwhile? It reads as a fairly typical example of io9's apparent editorial approach to generating "content:" come up with some kind of premise and a headline, then extemporize and represent random opinions as if they're self-evident for a certain number of words - to no particular effect.

I'm not impressed.

a. that's exactly what I thought.

b. it was a response to the "vast majority" statement.
 
it always seemed like an awkward moment to me because the reaction seemed out of character for Kirk, and because Kirk knew the Enterprise would be back for him.

It's supposed to feel awkward - for us. Because we, and Saavik - and Khan - only find out later that Kirk and Spock were communicating in code, as per regulations (and their past camaraderie). The scene plays out quite differently on second and subsequent viewings, because now we are in on the gag.

It's a great piece of melodrama. Exactly what it's supposed to be.
 
Are we saying that only blind actors can play blind characters in movies? That only paraplegic actors can play wheelchair-bound characters? That only aliens can play Vulcans? That only male actors can play male characters?

I seem to recall Linda Hunt winning an Oscar because she was the best person for the job (Billy Kwan, "The Year of Living Dangerously").

Why can't Benedict Cumberbatch play any character he can successfully convince the director and casting agents he can play better than any other candidate?
 
Simple, it always happened that way. Its like watching the Back to the Future films, massive changes after the first trip to 1955 but nothing after the second.

The Xindi attack may have always been a part of the 22nd Century, the Borg however is a little bit of a problem as the Enterprise saw an Assimilated Earth and followed the Sphere back in time.
Nope. Since the Xindi attack was part of the Temperoal Cold War which was an ongoing, changing event and as Daniels had said, those events had not yet reached his future.
 
"Ongoing" is a meaningless term with regard to the TCW. As we see in later episodes like "In a Mirror, Darkly" (Defiant's logs) and "These Are the Voyages", Enterprise is the past of "The Tholian Web" (and TOS) and "The Pegasus" (and all of Next Gen)

The Star Trek Prime timeline is thusly the result of all those temporal incursions that made up the TCW, and it's no more Daniels' history (his diverged when the colony from "Shockwave" was destroyed) than the STXI alternate reality (which diverged when the Narada appeared) is Spock Prime's.
 
Here's a headshot roster from a 2007 beauty pageant

http://www.asiafinest.com/forum/lofiversion/index.php/t111102-0.html.

"Indian" covers a lot of territory.


Those ladies are very pretty. And what do I see? D'Silva? A Portuguese Indian? Indian does cover alot of territory.

Commiserating? He's commiserating? lol.


I really don't know. I have no problem with the casting. I just have trepidations with using "Khan".

Than you'd be interested to know that Trekmovie.com is backpeddaling to cover their butts just in case these confirmed spoilers don't work out. I'm sorry but that is :guffaw:
 
I've always admired the morale fiber of the original characters, it's one of the things causing me to be a fan of the series but most people, and this may be why original Trek had such a limited following, (compared to other shows) most people do not believe their near perfect personas were realistic.

Does anyone here honestly believe we're really going to evolve into a species like that? I used to hope so but hey, I faced facts, (thanks to the internet ;-) things are not getting better. Nutrek says to me, and most of the "new" fans, we're going to make it to the future but Human Nature is what it is and will continue to be so.

Original Trek was eventually labeled "The Human Adventure". Bullcrap. I see now that those characters were only barely human. They did exhibit a few human characteristics but really, were they as Human as Nutrek characters? McCoy excepted, I think not. I do think the Nucharacter flaws are big percentage of why so many more of the general population has embraced NuTrek.

This is a difficult question, but its actually not as clear cut as you believe...it amazes me how people who are sci fi fans and supposedly forward thinking generally seem to be the most ignorant or resistant to the actual future, so to this end, let me suggest to you the myth of the past as a golden age and the "fact" the the future cannot be anything like Star Trek...in fact, we are likely to greatly surpass Star Trek in all its forms...it will just not take the path we thought!

First let me start off by saying this could go either way, but I'm seeing the increasing likelihood of the singularity approaching all the time...to many the Singularity means the end of everything as we know it(well it is..)--its is when machine intelligence surpasses human intelligence, and the resulting flood of change and information is too much for un-enhanced humans brains to digest. But instead of the machines advancing and eliminating or ignoring us (Hans Marovec), what if we humans begin the rapid advance to Transhumanism, and eventually supplant the machines, even without conflict....simply out-evolve them? While for some, the resulting version of humanity would not be humanity by the simplest definition, I see no reason this type of AI/humanity wouldn't be more enlightened than previous versions brought forth by natural evolution. One might say the exponential result of our accelerated evolution is the greatest accomplishment of mankind.

As for all the problems facing the current world or even the following transhuman transition period? Well frankly, we are the the most evolved, wealthiest, peaceful we have ever been, the Blade Runneresque future is fine for fiction and cautionary tales but a myth. We have tremendous problems, but there is no reason to assume they can't be solved with any number of human derived solutions, many of which we already know about. Some examples:

Most peaceful time in history

War..think again

Steve Pinker

Greatest numbers you've ever seen

Beaming solar power

Generation IV reactors

Fusion before 2035

Nanotech for environmental cleanup

Smart matter, post singularity

As for the characters, you claim evolved social humans are not human? How ridiculous!! We aspire to be like them but if we reach it we aren't "human"? The humans in ST are improved but not perfect, striving for improvement and showing social differences is ST what is about, its what makes the show different from the other shows that assume we can advance and stay exactly the same. You might say that making commentary about our times from that perspective is more imaginative and creative than arguing it from dystopia.

RAMA
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top