http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1611523/story.jhtml
Kahn would be a bit on the dumb side
Hopefully he isn't serious.
Kahn would be a bit on the dumb side
Hopefully he isn't serious.
JJ Abrams considering Khan in next movie?
- Thread starter Feofilakt
- Start date
Depending on who plays Khan, it could work really well.
It'd be rehashing an old villain in a bad way. He never attempted to take over the ship and was never exiled, so we lose that dynamic.
Please, for the sake of the next movie and my small hope for it: Make a new villain that is at least a little sympathetic.
I would agree that Khan is probably not a good idea for a next movie (or any movie, for that matter. Khan has been done, and doesn't need more doing.) The writers won't even have begun writing the next script yet, and what we don't see is the question which prompted the response quoted. I'd think that the Shatner thing is more of the same -- J.J. just vamping on whatever questions the interviewer raised -- because I can't seriously see Shatner having a major part to play in a sequel to the current movie.http://www.mtv.com/movies/news/articles/1611523/story.jhtml
Kahn would be a bit on the dumb side
Hopefully he isn't serious.
Some people here are talking about ideas for Khan sequels, just in case, though.
It depends on two things.
1) The man who plays Khan and their interpretation. If they do something with Khan like Heath Ledger did with the Joker, it could be a performance that stands out on its own away from Ricardo Montalban, just as Ledger's performance stands on its own from Jack Nicholson.
2) The strength of the script. If the writing is top-notch and the story fresh and mostly original, it should be fine. But if it's a pile of crap, no outstanding performance by the new Khan will elevate it beyond mediocrity.
I'm curious to see what they do if this is the direction they want to take.
1) The man who plays Khan and their interpretation. If they do something with Khan like Heath Ledger did with the Joker, it could be a performance that stands out on its own away from Ricardo Montalban, just as Ledger's performance stands on its own from Jack Nicholson.
2) The strength of the script. If the writing is top-notch and the story fresh and mostly original, it should be fine. But if it's a pile of crap, no outstanding performance by the new Khan will elevate it beyond mediocrity.
I'm curious to see what they do if this is the direction they want to take.
Whatever happened to "This is a new timeline they can do what they want/ They shouldn't have to observe old trek, this is new trek"???
Wouldn't re-hashing Khan be in direct violation of those statements? Either it is going in a new direction or it isn't. It's not going anywhere new, it is simply imitative.
Wouldn't re-hashing Khan be in direct violation of those statements? Either it is going in a new direction or it isn't. It's not going anywhere new, it is simply imitative.
Did you seriously just compare The Wrath of Khan to Casablanca?
Play it again Sam... er, Johnny.
That's like saying Joker is a rehash.
No, its really not
Norrin Radd
Vice Admiral
Please, please no. It's a reboot. You can do anything. Why rehash the past. And Khan does not equal Joker in terms of his importance to Kirk or Trek.
It might be the same, Khan has sort of become iconic. It could certainly work. It wouldn't even have to be the insane, revenge driven Khan. We could actually have Kirk and Khan face to face.
Similar threads
