Alternate universe idea dilutes the drama of film?

[ST-One]

No, you got it wrong.
Khan was trying to find Kirk. He wanted to kill him. That's his motivation. .

Fair enough - it's been a while since I watched it! Which scene is it in though? Does he say it to Joachim in the scene where Chekov breaks communication with Regula One? If so, Khan does have access to the Federation database on Reliant at this stage. If he had accessed this and noted that Kirk was nearby then his decision to seek revenge there and then makes sense. If not, then it's a plot hole - the universe is huge and no way would he have hung around in the hope that Kirk would come by. That could take months and Reliant isn't the Narada - it's not as if it couldn't be destroyed in a fair fight.

I thought Khan was a bit surprised when Kirk himself showed up... or was that Kruge...? Damn I've been watching this crap for too many years!

Do you really have so much trouble understanding a rather simple, pretty straight-forward story as the one of TWOK?

I can see a difference. Khan portrays a range of emotions, a magnetic personality, and a plan that evolved as events unfold.

Yeah, his emotions range from anger to almost madness.
Just like Nero's.

The novelisation showing him torturing the scientists to death is particularly effective in establishing his villainous credentials - it was a shame that more elements from the book didn't make it into the recent comic adaptation too.

Then why even bring them up.
They are irrelevant to the film.

Nero was just angry and defiant and just chugged along unaffected by anything going on around him in the movie. In fairness to Nero, the movie wasn't about him and his relationship with any of the characters so we don't even scratch the surface about what makes him tick. His anger at Spock had far less resonance than Khan's anger though and that is with the blood of two planets compared to thirty or so victims in TWoK. Size isn't everything.

You said it yourself: the movie wasn't about Nero.
Nero served his purpose as a plot device.
It's really not that complicated.

 

[ST-One]

The thing about Khan was that he blamed Kirk for the death of his wife, and he wanted revenge. And scene. The Genesis Device was not his first goal, nor was it his intention to use it against Kirk. He only wanted to punish and kill Kirk, and THEN move on. The Genesis Device was a lucky coincidence for him, a powerful weapon that would have given him the opportunity to build a new empire, AFTER he killed Kirk. But the longer his confrontation with Kirk lasted, the more his lust for revenge devoured him.

Exactly.

Totally different to Nero. Nero lost his wife, blamed Spock, but then went on a silly amok run to destroy all planets in the Federation. It doesn't make much sense, which would have been okay if Nero's pure insanity would have gotten more screentime. But it didn't. Which makes him appear like a weak and not fully thought through villain.

Yeah, Nero would have needed more screen time.
But he already had his revenge when he destroyed Vulcan and had Spock had witness it.

 

[JarodRussell]

You said it yourself: the movie wasn't about Nero. Nero served his purpose as a plot device. It's really not that complicated.

Reason why I don't like it. I don't like plot device characters. They are not intelligent, they are not reasonable, and they make no sense. They are only there to get the story from plot point A to plot point B.

Bad horror movie: we need this gruesome chain saw death scene in the dark room now. But the character that needs to be killed would not be so stupid to go into that room. Therefore he goes anyway.

Or in the case of Trek XI:
They know they want the image of the drilling laser hit the San Francisco bay. But why would Nero attack Earth? So let's just extend his revenge lust from Spock and Vulcan to the entire Federation, it doesn't need to make sense.
Or they need Kirk to meet old Spock. But he's on the Enterprise, hm... so young Spock simply exiles him on some ice planet for no reason (where are the brigs?) so that Kirk can meet Spock.
We need a cool and violent shootout aboard the Narada. So Scotty just screws up by beaming them into the busiest part of the ship.
We need the fleet to be destroyed but the Enterprise to stay alive, because the image of the Enterprise warping into the debris field will be so awesome. So Sulu just screws up so that the ship arrives a minute later.
And so forth...

 

[illeanacross]

Reason why I don't like it. I don't like plot device characters. They are not intelligent, they are not reasonable, and they make no sense. They are only there to get the story from plot point A to plot point B.

People argue that Penny from "Dr Horrible's Sing-A-Long-Blog" was merely a plot device. The 'movie' was never about her, never for her... she was just there to move Captain Hammer and Dr Horrible into their respective endings. Yet, she's a plot device essential to the story, and much loved.

Basically, some characters who are just 'plot devices' there to serve other characters can work out if they're given enough.

 

[Pauln6]

No, you got it wrong.
Khan was trying to find Kirk. He wanted to kill him. That's his motivation. .

Fair enough - it's been a while since I watched it! Which scene is it in though? Does he say it to Joachim in the scene where Chekov breaks communication with Regula One?

Do you really have so much trouble understanding a rather simple, pretty straight-forward story as the one of TWOK?

Well, it's my memory as opposed to my understanding. But if you don't know the answer to the question, just say so!

Yeah, his emotions range from anger to almost madness. Just like Nero's.

What about Khan's stirring monologues, the way he inspires loyalty in his crew (akin to Kirk), the way he follows a logical plan (until Kirk riles him at the end), the scenes where he is thinking through his options, the way he modifies his plan when events force him to, and the fact that he is a beatable villain whose threat level is down to his skill and luck (again, akin to Kirk) rather than the over-awesome power of a simple mining vessel? He is a far superior villain. I think TWoK is not so simple as you have observed and perhaps why you gloss over some of the flaws in NuTrek. There's nothing wrong with that level of enjoyment but some people also enjoy movies on more levels.

The novelisation showing him torturing the scientists to death is particularly effective in establishing his villainous credentials - it was a shame that more elements from the book didn't make it into the recent comic adaptation too.

Then why even bring them up.
They are irrelevant to the film.

Well, people who have never read the book might be interested to know that it adds something to the movie plot? Several of the scientists on Regula One are given significant roles in the novel and you actually care when they die. Same with Peter Preston actually. I recommend it.

 

[thumbtack]

But what if Star Trek was essentially comfort food to you? What if the fact that nothing ever changes in the Star Trek universe is precisely why you love it so? It's certainly true that one man's "comfortably familiar" is every other man's "repetitive and dull", but imagine if you were addicted to Big Macs. Say the government passed a law regulating the fat content of Big Macs. Would not a small contingent of whiny Big Mac lovers (and their duals) charge to the internet each morning to implore TBTB to return the Big Mac to the way it used to be?

What if the rest of the public were greatly relieved that Big Macs no longer caused weight gain? What if they found the change in flavor to be largely imperceptible? Would you not then demand special treatment on the grounds that you love Big Macs MORE than everybody else does? That your level of Big Mac fandom far exceeds everyone else's. That appeasing the hard core Big Mac fanbase is more important than profit consideration?

Because if they don't, you will go on the internet and complain?

 

[Pauln6]

But what if Star Trek was essentially comfort food to you? What if the fact that nothing ever changes in the Star Trek universe is precisely why you love it so? It's certainly true that one man's "comfortably familiar" is every other man's "repetitive and dull", but imagine if you were addicted to Big Macs. Say the government passed a law regulating the fat content of Big Macs. Would not a small contingent of whiny Big Mac lovers (and their duals) charge to the internet each morning to implore TBTB to return the Big Mac to the way it used to be?

What if the rest of the public were greatly relieved that Big Macs no longer caused weight gain? What if they found the change in flavor to be largely imperceptible? Would you not then demand special treatment on the grounds that you love Big Macs MORE than everybody else does? That your level of Big Mac fandom far exceeds everyone else's. That appeasing the hard core Big Mac fanbase is more important than profit consideration?

Because if they don't, you will go on the internet and complain?

Scarily this hapened in the UK. Jamie Oliver (TV chef) did a big campaign to improve children's school dinners and some schools took unhealthy foods off the menu. A bunch of (fat) mothers were going to the school gates and pushing chips through the fence for teir children to eat instead of vegetables!

It doesn't help to focus on the extremes though. I can't think of a single sci fi film I've seen where there was nothing I'd change. Blade Runner came closest and then they produced the Director's cut and I thought it was better than the original, so there you go - a classic example of how minor alterations can improve an already good film.

 

[ST-One]

Fair enough - it's been a while since I watched it! Which scene is it in though? Does he say it to Joachim in the scene where Chekov breaks communication with Regula One?

Do you really have so much trouble understanding a rather simple, pretty straight-forward story as the one of TWOK?

Well, it's my memory as opposed to my understanding. But if you don't know the answer to the question, just say so!

What about Khan's stirring monologues, the way he inspires loyalty in his crew (akin to Kirk), the way he follows a logical plan (until Kirk riles him at the end), the scenes where he is thinking through his options, the way he modifies his plan when events force him to, and the fact that he is a beatable villain whose threat level is down to his skill and luck (again, akin to Kirk) rather than the over-awesome power of a simple mining vessel? He is a far superior villain. I think TWoK is not so simple as you have observed and perhaps why you gloss over some of the flaws in NuTrek. There's nothing wrong with that level of enjoyment but some people also enjoy movies on more levels.

'Stirring monologues'?
You mean when he quotes Melville and Shakespeare?
There aren't scenes when he thinks through his options or inspires any loyalty in his crew.
Like Nero, Khan simply drives the story along through his actions and reactions.

Well, people who have never read the book might be interested to know that it adds something to the movie plot? Several of the scientists on Regula One are given significant roles in the novel and you actually care when they die. Same with Peter Preston actually. I recommend it.

I don't care.
We are talking about the movie and not the novel.

 

[illeanacross]

I don't care.
We are talking about the movie and not the novel.

Shouldn't this thread really be about Star Trek XI in the first place?

Going off-topic about something that's off-topic isn't really something to pick at.

 

[Pauln6]

Well, it's my memory as opposed to my understanding. But if you don't know the answer to the question, just say so!

That's ok, no shame in being forgetful.

Like Nero, Khan simply drives the story along through his actions and reactions.

That's true from a simplistic, generic viewpoint. EVERY antagonist in EVERY movie does what you say and yet there are many different antagonists. Steering the thread back on track a little, if Khan were to appear in the next movie I would want him to be a mix of Space Seed Khan and TWoK Khan rather than a copy of Nero who 'simply drives the story along through his actions and reactions'. Villains can be multi-layered characters too.

Well, people who have never read the book might be interested to know that it adds something to the movie plot? Several of the scientists on Regula One are given significant roles in the novel and you actually care when they die. Same with Peter Preston actually. I recommend it.

I don't care.
We are talking about the movie and not the novel.

Don't be petulant; I don't post responses just for your benefit. Your opinion is noted, filed, ...and forgotten...

In the context of the movie, there is a limit to how much screen time they can give to supporting characters such as villains. In TWoK for example, Sulu and Uhura do very little to make way for Saavik, Khan, and Chekov & Terrell. Hopefully in the sequel now that the origin stuff is out of the way they can take a bit of time to flesh out the supporting parts. In an alternate universe the personalities of the crew can take on a fresh spin.

 

[ST-One]

Well, it's my memory as opposed to my understanding. But if you don't know the answer to the question, just say so!

That's ok, no shame in being forgetful.

Oh for god's sake!
What is it, in your mind and based on the movie (and only the movie), that drives Khan?

 

[Pauln6]

Firstly, just a quick quote from another thread :

^Concession accepted. Now, back to the OT... :thumbsup:

This childish crap doesn't work in TNZ and it doesn't work here.

Tee hee.

That's ok, no shame in being forgetful.

Oh for god's sake!
What is it, in your mind and based on the movie (and only the movie), that drives Khan?

Now for the record, you still didn't answer MY question. Nevertheless, I shall try to answer yours.

Khan wants his freedom to rule, he wants power and subordinates to serve him. He relishes the challenge set him but Kirk abandoned him and didn't check on his progress (unlike Nero, Khan has an extremely valid point here but Kirk broke the rules putting them on the planet in the first place) meaning he ended up ruling a hellhole that killed his wife.

I do agree that revenge is a burning ambition for him, especially when Terrell mentions Kirk's promotion (that scene stokes his desire for revenge and gives him more depth than Nero got in the whole NuTrek movie) but I don't think it was an all-consuming desire until Kirk started to beat him in the fight. If all he'd wanted was to destroy Kirk he could have detonated the Genesis device on Regula while Kirk was stuck down there.

I do agree that he put Kirk's name out there to taunt him and I have a vague recollection that he tells Joachim that he expects Kirk to respond to the distress signal (this is the part I was asking you to confirm). But, while it was a possibility he relished, I don't think his main goal was to lure Kirk into a fight there and then. I think he wanted Kirk to see his handiwork and it was a bonus to him when Kirk showed up so soon. At that point he has no choice but to take Kirk on because he has to go through Kirk to get Genesis but the fact that he was willing to leave Kirk alive shows that Khan isn't as batshit crazy and one dimensional as Nero. He would have assumed that Kirk would likely starve to death as he doesn't know about the cave but even so, Kirk has communicators and even if Khan destroys Enterprise and the space station, rescue and therefore a rematch is still a possibility. I think Khan loves his confrontations with Kirk on some level - it isn't just about revenge, it's about the battle of wits, power, and leadership so much so that Kirk has to stoke his anger again at the end in order to force him to carry on the fight. How is that not a more complex villain than Nero?

Just my opnion based on what I observe in the movie obviously.

 

[ST-One]

Firstly, just a quick quote from another thread :

^Concession accepted. Now, back to the OT... :thumbsup:

This childish crap doesn't work in TNZ and it doesn't work here.

Tee hee.

That's ok, no shame in being forgetful.

Oh for god's sake!
What is it, in your mind and based on the movie (and only the movie), that drives Khan?

Now for the record, you still didn't answer MY question. Nevertheless, I shall try to answer yours.

Khan wants his freedom to rule, he wants power and subordinates to serve him. He relishes the challenge set him but Kirk abandoned him and didn't check on his progress (unlike Nero, Khan has an extremely valid point here but Kirk broke the rules putting them on the planet in the first place) meaning he ended up ruling a hellhole that killed his wife.

I do agree that revenge is a burning ambition for him, especially when Terrell mentions Kirk's promotion (that scene stokes his desire for revenge and gives him more depth than Nero got in the whole NuTrek movie) but I don't think it was an all-consuming desire until Kirk started to beat him in the fight. If all he'd wanted was to destroy Kirk he could have detonated the Genesis device on Regula while Kirk was stuck down there.

I do agree that he put Kirk's name out there to taunt him and I have a vague recollection that he tells Joachim that he expects Kirk to respond to the distress signal (this is the part I was asking you to confirm). But, while it was a possibility he relished, I don't think his main goal was to lure Kirk into a fight there and then. I think he wanted Kirk to see his handiwork and it was a bonus to him when Kirk showed up so soon. At that point he has no choice but to take Kirk on because he has to go through Kirk to get Genesis but the fact that he was willing to leave Kirk alive shows that Khan isn't as batshit crazy and one dimensional as Nero. He would have assumed that Kirk would likely starve to death as he doesn't know about the cave but even so, Kirk has communicators and even if Khan destroys Enterprise and the space station, rescue and therefore a rematch is still a possibility. I think Khan loves his confrontations with Kirk on some level - it isn't just about revenge, it's about the battle of wits, power, and leadership so much so that Kirk has to stoke his anger again at the end in order to force him to carry on the fight. How is that not a more complex villain than Nero?

Just my opnion based on what I observe in the movie obviously.

Wow... fascinating how you can be so spectacularly off the mark about Khan's motivation.

It's interesting what you read into this film, but the film itself disagrees with you.

 

[JarodRussell]

Wow... fascinating how you can be so spectacularly off the mark about Khan's motivation.

It's interesting what you read into this film, but the film itself disagrees with you.

Though you should try to explain to him why the movie disagrees with him, and not just devon-ly state that he's wrong.

 

[Pauln6]

Wow... fascinating how you can be so spectacularly off the mark about Khan's motivation.

It's interesting what you read into this film, but the film itself disagrees with you.

Though you should try to explain to him why the movie disagrees with him, and not just devon-ly state that he's wrong.

Yes, I'm genuinely interested in hearing a counter-position with reference to particular parts of the movie. But I'm sort of making my own point I suppose. The fact that I can locate evidence to support my opinion (however misguided) is evidence in itself that Khan is a more complex villain

That's what I would want them to preserve (if it was there at all and if not, put it there) in the alternate universe.

 

[ST-One]

The fact that I can locate evidence to support my opinion (however misguided) is evidence in itself that Khan is a more complex villain

That's what I would want them to preserve (if it was there at all and if not, put it there) in the alternate universe.

There is no evidence in TWOK that Khan is more complex than there is for Nero in Star Trek.

I guess it's wishful thinking on your part that the villain in your preferred version of Trek is less shallow.

 

[Pauln6]

The fact that I can locate evidence to support my opinion (however misguided) is evidence in itself that Khan is a more complex villain

That's what I would want them to preserve (if it was there at all and if not, put it there) in the alternate universe.

There is no evidence in TWOK that Khan is more complex than there is for Nero in Star Trek.

I guess it's wishful thinking on your part that the villain in your preferred version of Trek is less shallow.

Wishful thinking on my part or a lack of observation on yours? The jury is out, let others decide whether your lack of any evidence is more persuasive than my subjective observations. I would remind you though that people have been talking constantly about the possible return of Khan. If he is just a plot device, why do we hear so many cries for his return?

But this is nothing new - many people who really enjoyed NuTrek enjoyed it on a purely superficial level. Others enjoyed the more subtle stuff while some deplored the subtle changes to 'Trek canon'. It's different strokes for different folks.

It is cool that Devon has had a style of argument named after him though

 

[ST-One]

Wishful thinking on my part or a lack of observation on yours? The jury is out, let others decide whether your lack of any evidence is more persuasive than my subjective observations.

What you read into a movie, how you interpret what happens between scenes is entirely up to you.

It doesn't change the fact that Khan is driven by revenge.
(For god's sake, I can believe that, nearly 30 years after the film came out, we have to argue about Khan's motivations.)

But this is nothing new - many people who really enjoyed NuTrek enjoyed it on a purely superficial level. Others enjoyed the more subtle stuff while some deplored the subtle changes to 'Trek canon'. It's different strokes for different folks.

Ah, we haven't had a swipe against the intelligence of those who like Star Trek in a (short) while.

 

[Pauln6]

Wishful thinking on my part or a lack of observation on yours? The jury is out, let others decide whether your lack of any evidence is more persuasive than my subjective observations.

What you read into a movie, how you interpret what happens between scenes is entirely up to you.

It doesn't change the fact that Khan is driven by revenge.
(For god's sake, I can believe that, nearly 30 years after the film came out, we have to argue about Khan's motivations.)

But this is nothing new - many people who really enjoyed NuTrek enjoyed it on a purely superficial level. Others enjoyed the more subtle stuff while some deplored the subtle changes to 'Trek canon'. It's different strokes for different folks.

Ah, we haven't had a swipe against the intelligence of those who like Star Trek in a (short) while.

Lol - intelligent people often enjoy films on a superficial level! My opinion is what I read into the movie but your opinion is 'fact'? But you're right, I agree that Khan is driven by revenge; my point was that this isn't his ONLY motivation, based on the things I observed and reported, unlike Nero.

 

[BillJ]

It doesn't change the fact that Khan is driven by revenge.
(For god's sake, I can believe that, nearly 30 years after the film came out, we have to argue about Khan's motivations.)

But Khan's motivations actually make sense. There is a 'cause and effect' between Kirk's lack of action and the suffering it caused Khan. Nero, on the other hand, has sworn revenge against the only person (Spock) who was trying to help him. The motivation for Nero is as poor as the motivation for Shinzon in Star Trek: Nemesis. Though I liked the job Eric Bana did with the material he had to work with.