• 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!

I like STID. Is that wrong?

even Wrath of Khan was torn to shreds by some in fanzines at the time.

And ironically enough as previously stated in another thread for the same reasons Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness are.

Dissatisfied fans with too much time on their hands are the ultimate renewable resource. If only the volume of complaints could be harnessed as some sort of energy source...
 
Come to think of it, I do remember fans in 1982 complaining about how TWOK's production team time-travelled three decades into the future to gank a sequence from a more highly-regarded movie. All of this has happened before... ;)
 
Hey, that's not from 1982.

Very funny that you went to that well, though... :lol:

(Ribbing aside, though, the video at your link is actually really interesting. Quite different from what I'm talking about, but genuinely cool as to what made those scenes work.)
 
Fans certainly complained that the portrayal of Khan and his people in TWOK was inconsistent with "Space Seed." Also that the science sucked and the continuity was lazy - those were among the more trivial and repetitious complaints. There was definitely unhappiness that Trek was being turned into a bargain-basement Star Wars with the climax turning on a big shoot-em-up. But then, what did you expect when Paramount took Trek away from The Great Bird and gave it to that "Six Million Dollar Man" guy? :rolleyes:
 
And ironically enough as previously stated in another thread for the same reasons Star Trek and Star Trek Into Darkness are.

Though there is at least one reason why STID is criticized that doesn't apply to TWOK...

People apparently being fine about white looking guy playing Khan in 1982? :)
I'm sure someone in 1982 wondered why an Indian was being played by some pale assed guy with a Spanish accent. Then he was told the guy had played Khan before, so it was okay
 
The Wrath of Khan and Into Darkness had pastie white guys as villains, huge plot holes and science gaffes, great special effects (for their respective times) and cheesy over-the-top acting. Why exactly is TWOK the better movie? Personally, I prefer Into Darkness, though both are a Hell of a lot of fun to watch. But I prefer both The Motion Picture and The Undiscovered Country over either one. :shrug:
 
I noticed they found the whitest picture of Cumberbatch possible for that article. While the one of Montalban is in full Khan make up, with brownface and wig. :lol:
 
Also, we shouldn't forget Khan's multi-ethnic followers who all magically morphed into pastie skin white people for TWOK.
 
I enjoyed Cumberbatch's version of Khan quite a bit - his performance was brilliantly, coldly menacing and the writers really returned the character to something like the version in "Space Seed," which is always the version I preferred. Granted, the TWOK character seems to be the more popular now, but Montalban was reduced there to an operatic, scenery-chewing attempt to get something out of a two-dimensional villain (but then, he was "mad" - aren't they always just? :lol:).
 
I looked at Montalban's credits around the time he was cast as Khan. While Hispanic named roles dominate, he's also playing guys with names like "Vincent", "Ferguson", "Steele" and "Janacek".
 
I wonder if Montalban had been unavailable, who might Bennett and Meyer cast as Khan? An Indian actor? Another Hispanic? Judging by his followers all being shifted to white people in the film, we may have very well gotten a white Khan in '82.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top