A Khan Sequel ?

[SheliakBob]

For the love of God, if we HAVE to have an alternate Trek shoved down our throats, at least use it to do something COMPLETELY different! Don't crap on all the characters and stories from TOS. If you want a clean slate, damnit, use a clean slate!
Hell, even a fanatic like me would likely wind up being sucked in at some point, if what is being presented is original and new. If it's all just overblown popcorn rehashing of beloved classics, the pain and anger will keep right on growing.

 

[urbandk]

See, we can all come together and agree, no Khan!

 

[apenpaap]

I want to see Khan again, but not in XII. They should wait a few movies.

 

[CoveTom]

No movie is going to be about exploring strange new worlds, or Paramount would be exploring strange empty box office receipts. That has to be left for the (hopefully) next series. The movies have to have action and a villain. Otherwise, you will lose viewers who we gained with this movie. And it can't retread the same story.

I don't mean any disrespect to you, but bullshit. That's the Hollywood party line, but it's simply untrue and it's the reason why we keep getting these cookie-cutter films out of the studios that are absolutely lacking in any substance.

Up until the release of this current film, what was the most successful of the Star Trek films, both in terms of box office and mainstream crossover appeal? It was The Voyage Home. In which there was no villain. No big action sequences. No battles. No retread of Wrath of Khan. None of that. In fact, Harve Bennet and Leonard Nimoy made that a key point of the film. And it worked brilliantly.

The movie was fun, it did spectacular box office for the time, it achieved great success beyond the Trek fanbase, and it even had a patented Star Trek social message thrown in. And to this day, it's the one non-fans will say "oh, I don't watch Star Trek, but I've seen the one with the whales" about.

Beyond that, look at any list of the top grossing films of all time. Sure, there's plenty of films with lots of action/adventure. But there's plenty of other types of films too. Just a quick look on Wikipedia gives me a list that includes E.T., The Lion King, The Chronicles of Narnia, Forrest Gump, The Sixth Sense, Ice Age: The Meltdown, The Passion of the Christ, Mamma Mia, and Night at the Museum in the top 50, among many others. And yet we can't have a variety of types of films that are successful at the box office?

Star Trek can and should do different types of stories. As I pointed out earlier, the six TOS films were not cookie cutter repeats of the same story. They were a wide variety of types of stories, all of which worked within the realm of Star Trek. It's when the TNG films tried to be too formulaic and not take risks that things went south.

The current Star Trek is a good, fun, exciting film. Now don't just duplicate it. Give us something equally fun and exciting, but in a different way. Try to do a carbon copy of the big action formula over and over again, and you're gonna drive this Trek into the ground too.

 

[urbandk]

The current Star Trek is a good, fun, exciting film. Now don't just duplicate it. Give us something equally fun and exciting, but in a different way. Try to do a carbon copy of the big action formula over and over again, and you're gonna drive this Trek into the ground too.

QFT

 

[Photoman15]

No movie is going to be about exploring strange new worlds, or Paramount would be exploring strange empty box office receipts. That has to be left for the (hopefully) next series. The movies have to have action and a villain. Otherwise, you will lose viewers who we gained with this movie. And it can't retread the same story.

I don't mean any disrespect to you, but bullshit. That's the Hollywood party line, but it's simply untrue and it's the reason why we keep getting these cookie-cutter films out of the studios that are absolutely lacking in any substance.

Up until the release of this current film, what was the most successful of the Star Trek films, both in terms of box office and mainstream crossover appeal? It was The Voyage Home. In which there was no villain. No big action sequences. No battles. No retread of Wrath of Khan. None of that. In fact, Harve Bennet and Leonard Nimoy made that a key point of the film. And it worked brilliantly.

The movie was fun, it did spectacular box office for the time, it achieved great success beyond the Trek fanbase, and it even had a patented Star Trek social message thrown in. And to this day, it's the one non-fans will say "oh, I don't watch Star Trek, but I've seen the one with the whales" about.

Beyond that, look at any list of the top grossing films of all time. Sure, there's plenty of films with lots of action/adventure. But there's plenty of other types of films too. Just a quick look on Wikipedia gives me a list that includes E.T., The Lion King, The Chronicles of Narnia, Forrest Gump, The Sixth Sense, Ice Age: The Meltdown, The Passion of the Christ, Mamma Mia, and Night at the Museum in the top 50, among many others. And yet we can't have a variety of types of films that are successful at the box office?

Star Trek can and should do different types of stories. As I pointed out earlier, the six TOS films were not cookie cutter repeats of the same story. They were a wide variety of types of stories, all of which worked within the realm of Star Trek. It's when the TNG films tried to be too formulaic and not take risks that things went south.

The current Star Trek is a good, fun, exciting film. Now don't just duplicate it. Give us something equally fun and exciting, but in a different way. Try to do a carbon copy of the big action formula over and over again, and you're gonna drive this Trek into the ground too.

Unfortunately, it's also considered the Trek comedy movie. Yes, it had a message, but the audience (non-us) considered it a light-hearted episode. The next good one was TUC, action, adventure. Then FC, action-adventure. And the Trek fan base was stronger and less splintered then. But then Lucas did SW2 & 3 which was action/adventure and now that's what mainstream audiences want. Paramount saw us (et al) abandon Trek when NEMESIS crapped out at the box office and ENTERPRISE crapped out in the ratings. It was time to change - big change if Trek was to survive. An action-thrill ride movie had to be made to get NON-US people to come to the movie and tell their Trek/non-Trek friends how good it was.

Television will again lend itself to thought provoking episodes when Trek is brought back to the small screen.

 

[Red Ranger]

Three words: Ming the Merciless! -- RR

Ha!! I get your point:..but I liked that movie.

But I will give you one word; ZOD.

and the best one I can think of? Terminator. Those Terminators are coming back directly because of their involvement with John Conner. Thats what makes those movies so good..


Rob

I was being a wiseass. Frankly, in three words: Bring Back Balok! "Have some tranya!" And bring back Clint Howard so he's not just in a cameo in ever freaking Ron Howard movie! -- RR

 

[Kelso]

Sure.

I like Khan.

 

[NiteTrek]

I sure as hell don't want to see a Khan sequel. The whole point to the alternate timeline was to open up NEW possibilities and adventures, not re-hash old ones.

 

[Aragorn]

Maybe alternate universe Khan is a good guy... until Chekov takes too long on the toilet and stinks the place up. Then he snaps.

 

[Vigilance]

I think a Khan sequel would ROCK.

Maybe not for the second movie, but they certainly shouldn't be afraid of using Trek's iconic villains.

I'd put Kang and Koloth on that list as well.

 

[Jax]

Even though I posted about the topic a few days ago, I think now that if we do get a trilogy then the 3rd movie would be best for a Khan plot and not the 2nd one.

 

[Skywalker]

I'd actually like to see the new team's take on Khan, but maybe not for the next movie. Still, I'll vote "yes."

 

[writergal]

I'm in the anti-Khan camp too, for a couple of basic reasons:

1. No matter what, it will be compared to WoK. I'd like to see something that will have people saying, "I've never seen this before!" not, "Oh, they redid the Khan movie!"

2. NuKirk is far too young and inexperienced to go up against Khan. As Kirk is now, Khan would grab ahold of that brash, impulsive nature and wipe the floor with him. Kirk doesn't have enough control yet. We need a film that shows him getting the experience, and showing off his intelligence and decency, so he can go up against gigantic foes in the NEXT film. Most of Star Trek XI had other people telling Kirk what to do: Pike first (Join Starfleet!), then Spock Prime (Befriend Spock! Captain the Enterprise!). In the next film, I think we need to see what Kirk does on his own, without someone suggesting what path to take.

3. I really, really want a film that develops the friendships of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy.
In a perfect world, I'd love something along the lines of "The Empath", where the three characters are put in a situation where they're in peril and have only each other to communicate with. Too small scale for a major motion picture, I know, but it was a great episode!

Yes, Khan was a great villain, but he doesn't hold the patent. What the writers should do is look at Kirk and ask, "What are his weaknesses? What kind of a villain would force him to explore and overcome those weaknesses and make him a stronger hero?" and work from there.

Unless the writers decide to do a movie which doesn't have a big villain. Which is OK too. :-)

 

[Captain Pike]

Please, no Khan.

 

[Lowdarzz]

No.

"Space, the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. It's five year mission, to explore strange new worlds. To seek out new lifeforms and new civilizations. To boldly go where no man had gone before."

 

[urbandk]

Must. Get. The. Message. To. Orci. And. Kurtzman. Somehow.

Lassie!

 

[BigC]

I voted no. You cant improve on perfection. then again a couple of weeks ago I would have said that about Trek in general.

 

[dru]

Not just NO but HELL NO.

Write your own damn stories with your own damn villains JJ.

 

[CordrazineOD]

Re: My argument for a Kahn sequel...

I disagree.

I want to see something completely different and new, I don't want retreads of religious canon.

I would much prefer to see something where going in I have absolutely no clue about anyone. I want it all to be a surprise and new.

A new alien species maybe, anything but that which has already been.

How could a new alien species show up without time travel. The area of space within the Federation's range in the movie time period has already been well explored by the TNG era.

Maybe distant aliens detected Nero's debris from the other side of the last singularity and were curious? There are a million possibilities for introduing a new alien species in the alternate universe without time travel.