For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOILER]

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

I think the Star Trek universe is large enough for khan to be interpreted different ways.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

If you want to know a bit about the version of Kahn, Cumberbatch is playing. Look more to Space Seed then Wrath of Kahn.

Also, I found there to be a much more vicious streak than either of the original versions.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

If you reinterpret Khan, then it's a full reboot. By changing his ethnics you are changing the entire ORIGIN of the character. If he's a pale Brit, he can't be a Sikh Asian tyrant. At least Montalban, while Mexican, was trying to give the appearance of a Sikh.


Maybe they didn't make him a Sikh because Americans always confuse them for Muslim terrorists.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

The time period of the eugenics war has been fluffed over by the later Trek shows, so there is little point in discussing the time period continuity.

However being British is not completely messing with the character. British rule in India could explain some of it.

But the fact of the matter is, they did intend to choose "Benicio del Toro" to play the role (if early rumours are to be believed) but for whatever reason, they chose Benedict instead.

Setting part of the film in London, and a good audition probably led them to re-write things a bit, to give us a better performance (possibly).

We know the series is a reboot. And some things have changed. But I think the character as portrayed in the new film, was a wonderful performance, and very menacing as well as sympathetic at parts.

Tough to achieve that kind of duality.

But I am glad they gloss over Kahn's past, keeping it vague and more believable with the 1990's we lived through. And it avoided looking like a direct re-enactment or parody/homage to Ricardo Montalbán

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

They should have changed the character to Joaqin/Joachim and left Khan in one of the cryo tubes.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Wait, is he KHAN or Khan, as in a codename - ? I am assuming he is supposed to be the same exact (physically) dude as the original series and TWOK?

Anyways, I am over the surprise of the character returning, so should enjoy the movie as much as I hoped. Finally opens in the States this Thur

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Yes, even though there's no explanation for why he looks and sounds completely different.

Actually, I'm just realizing that they probably didn't go with a middle-eastern/Indian actor because of the whole terrorist angle. Having the bad guy in this kind of 9/11 allegory look even slightly Arabic might not go over too well with a lot of people.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Pretty blatant example of whitewashing having Cumberbatch play him, if you ask me.

Should've been Sendhil Ramamurthy, or Cumberbatch playing a different superman altogether.

It was just unnecessary.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Are there pictures of Montalban anywhere where he has a similar haircut and clothes to Cumberbatch's do?
We could compare how much they really look alike?

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Sikhism is a religion, not a race. Any male baptised into the Sikh religion is given the last name Singh, and any female baptised into the religion gets the last name Kaur: both mean lion (or lioness). And while the vast majority of Sikhs are from India and Pakistan, there are actually gora (white) Sikhs who have converted who are from the UK, the US, Canada, Australia, East Asia, and Latin America.

BTW, if you actually know what a Sikh is, NOT the Star Trek version, there was nothing about Montalban's portrayal that said "He's a Sikh," no uncut hair, no iron bracelet, no sword/dagger, no wooden comb, no special undergarments. . .items that are sacred and must be on a Sikh's person at all times. So making Cumbertbatch Khan (which is probably a title) Singh is not as problematic as some people would have it to be. . .


~FS

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Just for fun:

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

I think this is the actual reason.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

I'm going to go ahead and suggest it is the same reason why nobody really looks or sounds like the TOS cast. Probably has something to do with them not being those people.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Brandon Routh was a lot like Christopher Reeve in Superman Returns. Wasn't his fault the movie wasn't very good. It's certainly possible to get a closer approximation.

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

Cumberbatch himself said that his pants were so tight that you could almost tell his religion. . . .

~FS

 

Re: For those who've seen movie: Cumberbatch character question [SPOIL

That part fell to Admiral Marcus.
Khan was playing with surprisingly open cards.

Which I'm sure he'll be given.
But in this movie Khan, despite being a murdering superhuman madman, was as much a victim of Admiral Marcus' plans as the rest of Starfleet.