And if you're worried about people being afraid of having to read up on Trek history, why not simply market it with “This is not your father's Khan?“ like they did in the first film?
J.J. admits keeping Khan's identity a secret was a mistake
- Thread starter M.A.C.O.
- Start date
JJ should have just stuck with John Harrison and actually try and build some momentum to this new Trek universe. And instead of a reboot we got a rehash. What really irks me is that $195 million went into this movie and there was a significant delay since JJ wanted the right script (or something he said in 2012 or 2011?) and this was it? A finished product which amounted to no more than an average blockbuster summer movie?
With all that time and money the final outcome was something rather timid and unadventurous. It would have been cool to simply explore a lot more the consequences of what happened in ST 2009, and ST 2009 -- a decent movie by the way -- did some insane stuff and it felt daring and adventurous.
I wonder if STID is a beginning of a trend for new ST movies. Are they going to be a collection of Star Trek's greatest 'hits' or iconic characters/moments? If JJ and Hollywood are anything to go by they're going to be playing increasingly safe... And boring.
With all that time and money the final outcome was something rather timid and unadventurous. It would have been cool to simply explore a lot more the consequences of what happened in ST 2009, and ST 2009 -- a decent movie by the way -- did some insane stuff and it felt daring and adventurous.
I wonder if STID is a beginning of a trend for new ST movies. Are they going to be a collection of Star Trek's greatest 'hits' or iconic characters/moments? If JJ and Hollywood are anything to go by they're going to be playing increasingly safe... And boring.
Exactly, you've summed up there exactly why the marketing of the movie sucked so much. My reaction to it actually being Khan wasn't one of "WOW, JJ AND HIS GUYS REALLY KEPT *THAT* A SURPRISE!!!!", it was more like an anti-climax, a sort of "Geeze, so all that was just a load of BS?". 
I felt disappointed in a way I probably wouldn't have been if they'd just come out and said it is Khan... or indeed, if they'd just come out with the 'John Harrison' ruse earlier. That's the thing that baffled me. They let the rumor mill trundle on for ages before coming up with this crap about 'Harrison'. It didn't whet people's appetites, it just made it look like they were hiding something... like, y'know, that it's Khan or something.
Somebody fumbled the ball on this one. JJ is doing his best to make sure nobody thinks it was him.
If you're not going to try and cash on the iconic nature of Kahn, why would you Market Kahn?
I don't see why you wouldn't shout it from the rooftops that Khan is in your movie. If the bad guy were somebody else from TOS then I could understand wanting to maintain some degree of keeping it seperate. But Khan is one of the franchises most iconic villains (for better or worse), heck he's one of the few villains that the wider public *would* recognize thanks to the "Khaaaaaaaannnnn!!!" soundbite entering popular culture. 
From a marketing perspective, it really makes absolutely no sense to pretend he isn't in the movie when he actually is.
From a marketing perspective, it really makes absolutely no sense to pretend he isn't in the movie when he actually is.
Man, JJ loves passing the buck to other people. He seems to have a little Shia LaBeouf in him, admitting mistakes to get in good with the internet crowd.
I can't imagine why you thought that making this post was a good idea. You'll know why it gets you a warning, though.
He's a Hollywood executive, and those kind of people are really good at telling fans what they think they want to hear. For example, look at everything he has said about his upcoming Star Wars film, that it would be more in line with the original trilogy, be more dark and gritty, ect. All that doesn't really mean anything, but it's getting many excited and relieved after the prequel trilogy. He's good at this stuff.
It's a valid point. That question from the interviewer felt planted to me, because JJ wanted to send out a message about what others here say is more JJ bullshit and lie: to say it's not his doing or his fault. My point being the interviewer is just a lapdog and JJ doesn't have the sincerity to answer real questions that would involve - you know - an honest answer. That was the point of what I posted previously. Sorry you missed it. Sorry I had to spell it out.
TMP was more of a rehash of The Changeling than STID was a rehash of TWOK, and this is despite the fact that a few individual scenes were beamed largely intact from TWOK straight into STID. I'm not trying to excuse STID for its faults. Rather, I'm simply pointing out that there not being much new in Trek films would be, well, nothing new, except that not having anything new to offer frankly isn't true of STID. The drone strike metaphor alone was worth the price of admission; for being critical of ongoing US policy in a time of war, how can anyone call that timid?
As for STID being "no more than an average blockbuster", well, first of all, "average blockbuster" is an oxymoron. If every Trek film were an average blockbuster, then we'd be sure of Trek movies forever. So, yay! Secondly, [domestic, worldwide] whaddayawant? Look at what STID beat: Wolverine, my goodness it creamed the Johnny Depp vehicle, it's almost certainly gonna hammer Thor domestically....
Ln X said:
Why assume an original character as John Harrison would be a Khan rip off? The idea of a former Section 31 agent gone rogue sounds closer to Jason Bourne than a Khan rip-off. I would have actually preferred to see that character than the watered down Khan.
A human with super strength and speed? Even the mortal baddies like Shinzon get labeled Khan ripoffs.
I thought this Khan was excellent, far from watered-down. Kirk and Khan working together to stop Admiral Marcus blew my nerdy little mind in the cinema - and when Khan lost his temper after being stunned... bloody hell. And then that was rendered nothing once he thought (for the second time) that his people had been killed. I saw "Space Seed" on TV yesterday and couldn't help but think that even including "Wrath of Khan" it's now the "good" version of how Khan meeting the Enterprise turns out compared to the mass destruction and body count wrought in ID.
I thought this Khan was excellent, far from watered-down. Kirk and Khan working together to stop Admiral Marcus blew my nerdy little mind in the cinema - and when Khan lost his temper after being stunned... bloody hell. And then that was rendered nothing once he thought (for the second time) that his people had been killed. I saw "Space Seed" on TV yesterday and couldn't help but think that even including "Wrath of Khan" it's now the "good" version of how Khan meeting the Enterprise turns out compared to the mass destruction and body count wrought in ID.
Wrong. John Harrison would have just been a normal human, not person with mega strength and speed. Khan's superhuman traits were added after Lindelof convinced the writers into making him Khan.
No the point is that you can actually tell people that they do not have to know anything that came before.
It's not like people needed to read Batman and Joker comics to get The Dark Knight.
He'd have been called a blatant Khan rip-off just as mortal human clone Shinzon was.
Damn.
Shinzon was only called a Khan rip-off by some, because Berman & Co promoted him like it. "This is Picard's Khan" they told us.
And since when do you care when some hardcore fans call the villain a ripoff?
I just think it's a silly situation. Khan'd if you do, Khan'd if you don't...
