Giving Kelvin another chance

[fireproof78]

I could be remembering wrong, but I thought the original idea was that the character was just some rogue agent named John Harrison, but then word came from above that they had to make the character Khan. Does anyone else remember this?

Kor

The story I heard (and I'll have to do more digging to confirm) is that one writer wanted to use Khan. They then decided to write a story they wanted and then go back and see if Khan could fit in to it. So, they create John Harrison and thought Khan could work.

It struck me as a weird process.

 

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

The story I heard (and I'll have to do more digging to confirm) is that one writer wanted to use Khan. They then decided to write a story they wanted and then go back and see if Khan could fit in to it. So, they create John Harrison and thought Khan could work.

It struck me as a weird process.

A lot of the processes that went into the Kevlin films struck me as odd, to be honest. Still fun though.

 

[Khan 2.0]

He is a genetically engineered human. That's all the explanation I need. I didn't need a book to figure out the line "John Harrison was a fiction created by your Admiral Marcus" indicated that there was some reconstruction too.

Given that Khan in TOS was recognized by visual archives I would say it was most logical.

i wonder why they didn't stick a photo of Richardo somewhere in the movie just to help win over us fans instead of relying on that line and IDW. e.g. spock uncovers a file that shows John Harrisons pre face - couldve even been the same pic as used in Space Seed:

 

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

^ From Khan 2.0 himself, everyone!

 

[StarMan]

I loved the first one. The second I was monumentally disappointed by, but it kinda grew on me. The third is nearly unwatchable. It's over now, at least - not that what's left on the menu is doing it for me.

 

[M'Sharak]

I could be remembering wrong, but I thought the original idea was that the character was just some rogue agent named John Harrison, but then word came from above that they had to make the character Khan. Does anyone else remember this?

Kor

The original story for "Space Seed" had as the main villain/adversary a Scandinavian named Erickson. The character's name and background were changed at the last minute when Montalban was hired for the role.

The original name of the villain in STID was also Erickson, and for most of principal filming, that was the name in the script. There are places in the movie where spoken dialogue had to be changed in post-production from "Erickson" to "Harrison," and it was reported that even Cumberbatch didn't know the "real" identity of his character until he was almost finished filming his scenes.

I think it was Damon Lindelof who had been pushing for the villain to be Khan, and ultimately the Paramount PTB came down in favor of that. How early or late in the process "possible Khan" became baked into the script, I'm not sure, but hardly anyone outside of the writers knew until well along in the filming schedule.

 

[Ovation]

the line "John Harrison was a fiction created by your Admiral Marcus"

could thus explain

The original name of the villain in STID was also Erickson, and for most of principal filming, that was the name in the script. There are places in the movie where spoken dialogue had to be changed in post-production from "Erickson" to "Harrison," and it was reported that even Cumberbatch didn't know the "real" identity of his character until he was almost finished filming his scenes.

My guess is someone among the writers thought the “Harrison was a fiction” bit would be sufficient to explain away Cumberbatch as Khan for anyone who cared. They miscalculated. While it would work for me (if I were inclined to work up sufficient concern), it was evidently too subtle for “purists” and too thin to assuage those who preferred a more representative casting choice. Oh well. Still my favourite Trek movie by a country mile.

 

[F. King Daniel]

The problem is Trekkies taking the alternate timeline too seriously. It was a handwave for a real-life reboot. In this continuity, Khan's a pastey white Brit and always was. The Gorn (from the 2013 videogame, which is referenced in the movie) are extra-galactic invaders.

Yes, you can accuse them of whitewashing the character, but otherwise he need not resemble the original any more than various versions of The Joker.

 

[Burning Hearts of Qo'nos]

But but, they even said it was an alternate reality in the first movie!

 

[CommanderRaytas]

The problem is Trekkies taking the alternate timeline too seriously. It was a handwave for a real-life reboot. In this continuity, Khan's a pastey white Brit and always was. The Gorn (from the 2013 videogame, which is referenced in the movie) are extra-galactic invaders.

Yes, you can accuse them of whitewashing the character, but otherwise he need not resemble the original any more than various versions of The Joker.

You can argue whether it was misguided or not, but they chose a white guy specifically to avoid a brown person playing a terrorist, which would not have gone over well at all. I suppose they could have just created an original villain (I kind of liked the whole John Harrison thing and wish they'd stuck with it), though, and saved themselves the backlash.

I still like the movie, though. At least one Khan I won't constantly complain about.

 

[fireproof78]

My guess is someone among the writers thought the “Harrison was a fiction” bit would be sufficient to explain away Cumberbatch as Khan for anyone who cared. They miscalculated. While it would work for me (if I were inclined to work up sufficient concern), it was evidently too subtle for “purists” and too thin to assuage those who preferred a more representative casting choice. Oh well. Still my favourite Trek movie by a country mile.

Sadly, I think the whole of the Kelvin films are too subtle in their expanding upon TOS as concept for purists. Khan is just the most visible offender.

And before I get inundated with comments, yes, I know subtle and Abrams do not always go together.

 

[pst]

Sadly, I think the whole of the Kelvin films are too subtle in their expanding upon TOS as concept for purists. Khan is just the most visible offender.

And before I get inundated with comments, yes, I know subtle and Abrams do not always go together.

yeah subtle is not a word i would use to describe these films. but if you mean subtle in that they're deeper, more meaningful films than people give them credit for, then i'm with ya.

 

[fireproof78]

yeah subtle is not a word i would use to describe these films. but if you mean subtle in that they're deeper, more meaningful films than people give them credit for, then i'm with ya.

Yes, that's what I mean. I think they are closer to the original style of TOS than they will ever be given credit for, I think that Kirk's arc is among the best in Star Trek (going across all 3 films) and it has some of the most moving scenes for me in the franchise thus far.

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Yes, that's what I mean. I think they are closer to the original style of TOS than they will ever be given credit for, I think that Kirk's arc is among the best in Star Trek (going across all 3 films) and it has some of the most moving scenes for me in the franchise thus far.

Someone once made a YouTube video talking about Kirk's character arc over the first two movies (the second one hadn't come out yet). I can't for the life of me remember the name, but I agree that his character development was pretty great. It's even better if you include Beyond.

 

[pst]

Someone once made a YouTube video talking about Kirk's character arc over the first two movies (the second one hadn't come out yet). I can't for the life of me remember the name, but I agree that his character development was pretty great. It's even better if you include Beyond.

this video does a fairly good (if cursory) job of rebutting some of the common complaints about the kelvin films:

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[CommanderRaytas]

Thanks for sharing!

 

[Roundabout]

Yes, you can accuse them of whitewashing the character, but otherwise he need not resemble the original any more than various versions of The Joker.

They whitewashed Khan in more ways than one. In addition to the other whitewashing, they whitewashed Khan's personality as well. Cumberbatch's Khan was a bore, imho. He was uninteresting, and his lackluster performance as well as his storyline were negative aspects of STID. Many parts of Cumberbatch Khan's storyline came across as a weak imitation of the original.

Montalban's Khan had charisma. He was colorful and had a presence. Montalban was excellent in "Space Seed" and in TWoK.

What I didn't get was why JJ did another Khan themed movie? If JJ was determined to have his second Trek movie have a direct connection to a TOS episode, why not choose from one of the other 70+ TOS episodes, that is not called "Space Seed"? Why not be relatively "original" instead of rehashing the Khan character?

I felt that STID was a wasted opportunity.

 

[fireproof78]

They whitewashed Khan in more ways than one. In addition to the other whitewashing, they whitewashed Khan's personality as well. Cumberbatch's Khan was a bore, imho. He was uninteresting, and his lackluster performance as well as his storyline were negative aspects of STID. Many parts of Cumberbatch Khan's storyline came across as a weak imitation of the original.

Montalban's Khan had charisma. He was colorful and had a presence. Montalban was excellent in "Space Seed" and in TWoK.

What I didn't get was why JJ did another Khan themed movie? If JJ was determined to have his second Trek movie have a direct connection to a TOS episode, why not choose from one of the other 70+ TOS episodes, that is not called "Space Seed"? Why not be relatively "original" instead of rehashing the Khan character?

I felt that STID was a wasted opportunity.

I appreciate this POV but I do not agree. This Khan felt far more menacing, like his Space Seed counterpart, than TWoK ever did. He was dangerous, but not calculatingly so.

I agree that Into Darkness was a wasted opportunity, from a marketing standpoint to a world-building standpoint. But, Cumberbatch as Khan was not chief among them.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Into Darkness Khan was a soldier doing everything in his power to protect his people. He only went crazy at the every end when he thought they were dead.

Wrath of Khan Khan was utterly bonkers for the entire movie, turned up to 11 the entire time. Cumberbatch is a better comparison to the far more reserved and calculating Space Seed Khan.

Personally I'd have liked Cumberbatch to show a little humour, but I get that it wouldn't have fit with the story. He's also not the main villain but a puppet.

Into Darkness was The Last Jedi before The Last Jedi, a movie that completely bucks fan expectations of the characters and turns out extremely divisive as a result.

 

[Ricky]

Watched the first half of Star Trek last night. I'll finish it today.

I hope nobody minds put I'm going to post a TLDR analysis of the movie over the next week or so. I just wondered if it's okay to put that in this thread? Not so sure of rules regarding post length but I do tend to digress...