Star Trek 2 Villain Revealed?

[TrekToday]

An inadvertent slip by Karl Urban may have let slip the name of the villain for Star Trek 2. While doing promotion for Dredd for SFX, Urban’s comment on Benedict Cumberbatch may have revealed the character being played by Cumberbatch in Star Trek 2. Urban had been asked what it was like having Cumberbatch on [...]

More...

 

[R. Star]

An inadvertent slip by Karl Urban may have let slip the name of the villain for Star Trek 2. While doing promotion for Dredd for SFX, Urban’s comment on Benedict Cumberbatch may have revealed the character being played by Cumberbatch in Star Trek 2. Urban had been asked what it was like having Cumberbatch on [...]

More...

Interesting. I'm actually wondering if that slip was intentional or not. Given all the supposed "offical sources" that both confirm and refute the Khan rumor, you have to take these kind of things with a grain of salt.

Mitchell would be interesting to explore for the sole reason that he'd be like Khan in Space Seed getting his movie. This could be big in the potential of pitting an ally against the good guys on the big screen in a dramatic way.

But like so many of these rumors, we won't know for certain until we see an official trailer at the earliest.

 

[Crazy Eddie]

If true, I would be pleased.

VERY pleased.

But it probably isn't true, so I am guardedly optimistic.

 

[Devon]

If true, I would be pleased.

VERY pleased.

But it probably isn't true, so I am guardedly optimistic.

It isn't. Bob Orci refuted this a few days ago and then did again in an interview with TrekMovie.com today, although he did say that Cumberbatch and Alice Eve's characters ARE canon characters though.

 

[Nightowl1701]

Cumberbatch isn't Mitchell, but I'm increasingly thinking - both from the hint in #1 of the comic and her appearance on set - that Alice Eve's role is Dr. Elizabeth Dehner.

 

[R. Star]

If true, I would be pleased.

VERY pleased.

But it probably isn't true, so I am guardedly optimistic.

It isn't. Bob Orci refuted this a few days ago and then did again in an interview with TrekMovie.com today, although he did say that Cumberbatch and Alice Eve's characters ARE canon characters though.

Given how many times the Khan rumor has been confirmed and refuted by "official" sources, that doesn't mean much either way.

 

[M'Sharak]

If true, I would be pleased.

VERY pleased.

But it probably isn't true, so I am guardedly optimistic.

It isn't. Bob Orci refuted this a few days ago and then did again in an interview with TrekMovie.com today, although he did say that Cumberbatch and Alice Eve's characters ARE canon characters though.

Given how many times the Khan rumor has been confirmed and refuted by "official" sources, that doesn't mean much either way.

It's never been confirmed by any official sources, to the best of my knowledge. Have you a link I may have missed?

 

[captainkirk]

It's never been confirmed, only refuted. Twice Simon Pegg refuted it. First he said that he hadn't heard the name come up after learning what the story of the movie was, and then again when he said that the whole rumor was a myth. Add to this the fact the Bob Orci said back in April 2011 that the villain probably wasn't from the first season and Khan looks very unlikely.

 

[Set Harth]

Nah, "reliable sources" said it. If it wasn't accurate they wouldn't be "reliable sources". Or at least they would be recognized as unreliable, until next time.

 

[Trekkie2]

Cumberbatch isn't Mitchell, but I'm increasingly thinking - both from the hint in #1 of the comic and her appearance on set - that Alice Eve's role is Dr. Elizabeth Dehner.

Dehner wasn't in the comic book.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Dehner wasn't in the comic book.

No, but she was an Easter egg in that issue: mentioned as a past romance of McCoy's.

 

[Jon1701]

There is no way, absolutely NO WAY a blockbuster hollywood movie would have a villian in it called "Gary".

Also, could you see Benicio del toro playing someone called "Gary?"

 

[lorrak7]

What about George Kirk(Jim's brother as the villain)?

 

[Therin of Andor]

What about George Kirk(Jim's brother as the villain)?

He's been in the comic, and was left alive. But.. they made him resemble a shaggy-haired George Kirk Sr, ironically a dead-ringer for Marvel's "Thor".


George Kirk Jr by Therin of Andor, on Flickr

 

[Trekkie2]

It isn't. Bob Orci refuted this a few days ago and then did again in an interview with TrekMovie.com today, although he did say that Cumberbatch and Alice Eve's characters ARE canon characters though.

Abrams stated initially that Eve's character was new to canon. Orci is saying that she will play a cannon character. So what is it? Is one wrong, or are both right?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Abrams stated initially that Eve's character was new to canon. Orci is saying that she will play a cannon character. So what is it? Is one wrong, or are both right?

If she's playing Dr Dehner, she's new to the canonical core team of regulars, but still a canonical character.

It's also possible Alice Eve was signed on as a brand new character and the writers, when planting the Dehner namedrop as an Easter egg in the first IDW comic, decided to make her Dehner in the movie script they were shaping up at the same time.

 

[Sindatur]

Abrams stated initially that Eve's character was new to canon. Orci is saying that she will play a cannon character. So what is it? Is one wrong, or are both right?

If she's playing Dr Dehner, she's new to the canonical core team of regulars, but still a canonical character.

It's also possible Alice Eve was signed on as a brand new character and the writers, when planting the Dehner namedrop as an Easter egg in the first IDW comic, decided to make her Dehner in the movie script they were shaping up at the same time.

Or maybe her character gets shot out of a cannon, and both are telling the truth, but, the reporters had a typo and spelled it canon

Yea, your explanation sounds good to me Therin of Andor

 

[susanmary428]

Although I enjoyed the acting and some parts of the Star Trek reboot, I'm not really a fan of the whole "new timeline" thing. That said, if that's the premise, then that means the writers can do anything they want and take any liberty with future movies. So why, then, would they want to re-hash something that's already been done (quite well, I might add), like doing a movie about Khan??

Maybe I'm missing something. I will see the new movie because...well, I will. But it isn't "my" Star Trek.

 

[Greg Cox]

You really had to reboot the timeline if you wanted to use the original crew again. Otherwise we would already know what was in store for them over the next forty years or so.

"Well, Kirk is going to get trapped in the Nexus, Spock is going die but come back, Scotty will be trapped in a transporter buffer, Sulu's going to become captain of the Excelsior, etc."

Now they've got a clean slate.

 

[susanmary428]

You really had to reboot the timeline if you wanted to use the original crew again. Otherwise we would already know what was in store for them over the next forty years or so.

"Well, Kirk is going to get trapped in the Nexus, Spock is going die but come back, Scotty will be trapped in a transporter buffer, Sulu's going to become captain of the Excelsior, etc."

Now they've got a clean slate.

True, Greg, absolutely. I understand it and agree it's the only way the franchise COULD be rebooted even if I don't appreciate it yet. LoL. I think, in a way, it makes me mourn (yeah, maybe that word is overkill) for the stories that I know and love, knowing that with this new timeline they will never have existed.

But you illustrate my point quite well! They DO have a completely clean slate! Introduce new villains and completely unseen missions! Why go back to Khan?