Benedict Cumberbatch /John Harrison [SPOILERS]

[F. King Daniel]

A tiny bit of info on the non-Khan version of John Harrison can be found here: http://1701news.com/node/427/find-out-how-khan-almost-wasnt-khan.html

We felt like we were falling into the trap of using a villain based on previous knowledge of the villain, and we were somehow relying on the audience's expectation to love or hate Khan to make that work," Orci said.

So the writers -- which included Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof -- tried an interesting approach: They created a villain that was not Khan, to see how that would work.

"What's the story?" Orci asked. "A villain that has his own situation that doesn't rely on anything."

They created a character that has been used by Starfleet, resorted to terrorism, is found by Kirk who is told about his abuse and how he's a victim of the "national security apparatus."

"There is a cancer within Starfleet, and it's a story you can pitch without saying anyone's name prior," Orci said. "Once we had that story, then it became, 'Now can it be Khan?'"

The choice to use Khan may have been obvious to Star Trek fans, but it wasn't so obvious to non-fans that turned out for the movie, Orci said. Plus, there was a desire to piece specific major elements of the Star Trek mythos together, and in this case, it was Kirk and Khan.

"You can't do Batman without The Joker," he said. "We knew it would be tricky, and we knew it would lead to a vocal outcry by some fans. But, you know, you have to make tough decisions, when you do something like this."

 

[OpenMaw]

I honestly wish he had just been "John Harrison" the terrorist with genetic augmentation. You could call back to Khan as a shadow. Not saying "Khan" not turning him into Khan. Not even going down that path. The "You can't do Batman without the Joker" is interesting, but ultimately the comparison doesn't work. Star Trek is way bigger than one all out villain. I think it would have benefitted from that, too. It would be new territory, relevant to the time, and not suffer from comparisons.

 

[DonIago]

Without knowing how the film would have turned out I don't think we can say that it wouldn't have suffered from comparisons.

 

[OpenMaw]

Without knowing how the film would have turned out I don't think we can say that it wouldn't have suffered from comparisons.

On that one particularly aspect I think it's safe to say their wouldn't have been major comparisons. It wouldn't have been Khan, and thusly their would be no major comparisons between Khan and Khan. Especially since they really are very different takes on the character anyway.

 

[serenitytrek1]

A tiny bit of info on the non-Khan version of John Harrison can be found here: http://1701news.com/node/427/find-out-how-khan-almost-wasnt-khan.html

We felt like we were falling into the trap of using a villain based on previous knowledge of the villain, and we were somehow relying on the audience's expectation to love or hate Khan to make that work," Orci said.

So the writers -- which included Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof -- tried an interesting approach: They created a villain that was not Khan, to see how that would work.

"What's the story?" Orci asked. "A villain that has his own situation that doesn't rely on anything."

They created a character that has been used by Starfleet, resorted to terrorism, is found by Kirk who is told about his abuse and how he's a victim of the "national security apparatus."

"There is a cancer within Starfleet, and it's a story you can pitch without saying anyone's name prior," Orci said. "Once we had that story, then it became, 'Now can it be Khan?'"

The choice to use Khan may have been obvious to Star Trek fans, but it wasn't so obvious to non-fans that turned out for the movie, Orci said. Plus, there was a desire to piece specific major elements of the Star Trek mythos together, and in this case, it was Kirk and Khan.

"You can't do Batman without The Joker," he said. "We knew it would be tricky, and we knew it would lead to a vocal outcry by some fans. But, you know, you have to make tough decisions, when you do something like this."

I completely get what Orci is saying especially on the Joker. However if they had decided to go with Khan they should not have made the film too close to the original.

Orci and Co going with Khan should have inspired them to do something new, fresh, unpredictable and original, devouring themselves of anything that will make STiD get compared to WOK.


The Kirk and Spock glass scene from WOK should never have been done and Spock should not have screamed Khan.



The Dark Knight and Batman 1989 are completely two different films, people hardly compare them.

Nolan was smart to make The Dark Knight his own film, He did not borrow or have his actors react any scene from Batman 1989 and this made both Batman 1989 and The Dark Knight well done films in their own rights. STiD sometimes came off as a WOK parody especially Spock screaming Khan.

I like and respect Orci but I so wish STiD turned out differently and it still doesn't change the fact that STiD is a solid good film.

 

[DonIago]

While the Spock scream was a bit OTT (but kind of a guilty pleasure for me...and it's not like PrimeKirk's was any better!), I felt the rest of the scene was a well-handled homage, if maybe a bit too on-the-nose. Either way, it could have been (and I expected to be) a -lot- worse.

OpenMaw - the point I've tried to make is that I think we might have just been left saying "if they were going to make a villain who couldhave been Khan, wouldn't it have been cooler if they'd just gone ahead and made him Khan?"

I feel like a broken record at this point, but with regards to this, the reboot in general, and certain other elements I feel TPTB are in a total Kobayashi Maru scenario, in that no matter what they do people are going to complain; it's only the nature of the complaints that will change.

 

[OpenMaw]

I don't see the point of doing a reboot if you're not really going to break free of the ties that bind.

I understand what you're saying, but I honestly liked Harrison more before he said he was Khan. Really. I just don't see Khan within him. I was one of the people over on Trekmovie who was nearly in denial by the end that they would do "Khan" again after just restarting the whole universe. They can do anything they want.

Eh, well. To each their own I suppose.

 

[DonIago]

Well, I won't say it might not have been better. My opinion boils down to being reasonably happy with what we've got and simply not knowing what we might have had. I can't say whether a film I've never seen would have been better than one I have seen.

 

[Set Harth]

Even though it might seem like making excuses, I could see Khan saying a few of Harrison-Khan's lines...

 

[Praetor]

I completely get what Orci is saying especially on the Joker. However if they had decided to go with Khan they should not have made the film too close to the original.

Orci and Co going with Khan should have inspired them to do something new, fresh, unpredictable and original, devouring themselves of anything that will make STiD get compared to WOK.

The Kirk and Spock glass scene from WOK should never have been done and Spock should not have screamed Khan.

The Dark Knight and Batman 1989 are completely two different films, people hardly compare them.

Nolan was smart to make The Dark Knight his own film, He did not borrow or have his actors react any scene from Batman 1989 and this made both Batman 1989 and The Dark Knight well done films in their own rights. STiD sometimes came off as a WOK parody especially Spock screaming Khan.

I like and respect Orci but I so wish STiD turned out differently and it still doesn't change the fact that STiD is a solid good film.

This is pretty much exactly how I feel. Partly basing my expectations on the hope that they were going to do something different, around the time Khan and Kirk were "space jumping" to the Vengeance I started to think Khan was going to actually not end up turning on them.

 

[CorporalClegg]

The Dark Knight and Batman 1989 are completely two different films, people hardly compare them.

Nolan was smart to make The Dark Knight his own film, He did not borrow or have his actors react any scene from Batman 1989

Really?

The creator of this video disagrees:

[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qCOl9v0b0zM[/yt]

The point of the video really isn't to show similarity of two films, but to show that homage is everywhere. People can find it in anything if they look hard enough. Sometimes it's intentional and sometimes it isn't. And sometimes it has a purpose.

STiD had a purpose.

While the Spock scream was a bit OTT (but kind of a guilty pleasure for me...and it's not like PrimeKirk's was any better!), I felt the rest of the scene was a well-handled homage, if maybe a bit too on-the-nose. Either way, it could have been (and I expected to be) a -lot- worse.

The thing is, it wasn't just a homage. From the opening scene of ST09, the reboot has primarily been about the relationship of Kirk and Spock and how it is juxtaposed to the relationship of the original. They are different people who think and act differently with a different set of beliefs and philosophies of those of their counterparts. Yet, despite all that, their relationship transcends time.

The whole radiation scene is visual representation of that. Kirk and Spock are literally on different sides of the same fence, yet their bond is still the same.

I don't know why this is such a hard concept for people to understand.

OpenMaw - the point I've tried to make is that I think we might have just been left saying "if they were going to make a villain who couldhave been Khan, wouldn't it have been cooler if they'd just gone ahead and made him Khan?"

I feel like a broken record at this point, but with regards to this, the reboot in general, and certain other elements I feel TPTB are in a total Kobayashi Maru scenario, in that no matter what they do people are going to complain; it's only the nature of the complaints that will change.

This is spot on.

There's a certain portion of Trekdom that has become so accustomed to having a soiled face that it's chops its nose off on a daily basis out of habit.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

A tiny bit of info on the non-Khan version of John Harrison can be found here: http://1701news.com/node/427/find-out-how-khan-almost-wasnt-khan.html

We felt like we were falling into the trap of using a villain based on previous knowledge of the villain, and we were somehow relying on the audience's expectation to love or hate Khan to make that work," Orci said.

So the writers -- which included Kurtzman and Damon Lindelof -- tried an interesting approach: They created a villain that was not Khan, to see how that would work.

"What's the story?" Orci asked. "A villain that has his own situation that doesn't rely on anything."

They created a character that has been used by Starfleet, resorted to terrorism, is found by Kirk who is told about his abuse and how he's a victim of the "national security apparatus."

"There is a cancer within Starfleet, and it's a story you can pitch without saying anyone's name prior," Orci said. "Once we had that story, then it became, 'Now can it be Khan?'"

The choice to use Khan may have been obvious to Star Trek fans, but it wasn't so obvious to non-fans that turned out for the movie, Orci said. Plus, there was a desire to piece specific major elements of the Star Trek mythos together, and in this case, it was Kirk and Khan.

"You can't do Batman without The Joker," he said. "We knew it would be tricky, and we knew it would lead to a vocal outcry by some fans. But, you know, you have to make tough decisions, when you do something like this."

That's interesting. When I read this it made me glad they went with Khan, and the way they establish him as a rogue starfleet officer with a different name as well. I think if you had all that lead up and then just.. didn't.. do Khan.. it would lose impact. This made me appreciate the Khan choice which I've always been meh about.

 

[serenitytrek1]

The Dark Knight and Batman 1989 are completely two different films, people hardly compare them.

Nolan was smart to make The Dark Knight his own film, He did not borrow or have his actors react any scene from Batman 1989

Really?

The creator of this video disagrees:



The point of the video really isn't to show similarity of two films, but to show that homage is everywhere. People can find it in anything if they look hard enough. Sometimes it's intentional and sometimes it isn't. And sometimes it has a purpose.

STiD had a purpose.

While the Spock scream was a bit OTT (but kind of a guilty pleasure for me...and it's not like PrimeKirk's was any better!), I felt the rest of the scene was a well-handled homage, if maybe a bit too on-the-nose. Either way, it could have been (and I expected to be) a -lot- worse.

The thing is, it wasn't just a homage. From the opening scene of ST09, the reboot has primarily been about the relationship of Kirk and Spock and how it is juxtaposed to the relationship of the original. They are different people who think and act differently with a different set of beliefs and philosophies of those of their counterparts. Yet, despite all that, their relationship transcends time.

The whole radiation scene is visual representation of that. Kirk and Spock are literally on different sides of the same fence, yet their bond is still the same.

I don't know why this is such a hard concept for people to understand.

OpenMaw - the point I've tried to make is that I think we might have just been left saying "if they were going to make a villain who couldhave been Khan, wouldn't it have been cooler if they'd just gone ahead and made him Khan?"

I feel like a broken record at this point, but with regards to this, the reboot in general, and certain other elements I feel TPTB are in a total Kobayashi Maru scenario, in that no matter what they do people are going to complain; it's only the nature of the complaints that will change.

This is spot on.

There's a certain portion of Trekdom that has become so accustomed to having a soiled face that it's chops its nose off on a daily basis out of habit.

I have seen that video and I disagree. All those things in the video are not necessary rip offs they are just what you see in batman films. Explosions, batman rides a car, women smiling, Joker threatening people, crowds and people all over the place etc.

That is not necessary a homage that is just what you get in a batman film.

STiD is very different, they reacted a specific and classic scene and Quinto screamed Khan as a tribute to Shatner's Kirk.

It is not the same as TDK and Batmen 1989.