always irked me. He expects humans to have augmented themselves to his level of strength and mental agility, but his ilk was a proven failure. His hubris and short-sightedness was his downfall every time. Now i like the character, and Montalbans portrayal, but I wished they incorperated some of star trek beyonds khan into his writing. I'm not a huge fan of the abramsverse, however I feel that Khan is a more "complete" personality.
Khans line "how little man has changed"
- Thread starter Vaughn Falstaff
- Start date
I saw his comments meaning that man had developed very little in the mental attitude and not just as in direct contrast to himself or his people! Humans still had no order in their lives or have that spark of domination that he felt they needed to control the entire galaxy!
JB
JB
Yes, I did misquote
He thought mankind should have augmented itself. As an alternative, he offered himself as a leader to follow.
Khan forgot humans do not need to be augmented to choose despotic leaders, sadly we don't need to augment people for them to be despotic dictators. (Which made the franchise's attitude to genetic manipulation/augmented humans stupid)
I like Khan as he is represented in TOS and TWOK, but not Into Darkness, that's not a movie I care for at all.
As for speeches, the one I really like along these lines is Dr. Dehner: "Can't you understand? A mutated, superior man could also be a wonderful thing! The forerunner of a new and better kind of human being!"
http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x03hd/wherenomanhasgonebeforehd346.jpg
The dialogue and guest stars are just fantastic in that one.
As for speeches, the one I really like along these lines is Dr. Dehner: "Can't you understand? A mutated, superior man could also be a wonderful thing! The forerunner of a new and better kind of human being!"
http://tos.trekcore.com/hd/albums/1x03hd/wherenomanhasgonebeforehd346.jpg
The dialogue and guest stars are just fantastic in that one.
His thinking is not much of a leap. Humans have a predilection to viewing their own kind as superior to others, whether it be "race" or culture or religion or fandom. It's unsurprising that any person who has 5x the strength, great recuperative abilities, etc., would see themselves as anything but a model for what people "should" be.
I thought Cumberbatch did a good job, but he wasn't Khan. I wish they had just kept him Harrison, and he could've been like one of the augments in the ENT "Augment" arc. I never bought his Khan as being the 'best of the tyrants' that Kirk, Scotty, and McCoy spoke of in "Space Seed". Cumberbatch's Khan wasn't really charismatic. He was glacial and genocidal. Montalban's Khan had way more charisma and a fire to his performance, even when he eventually went genocidal.
Before I had never actually never taken Khan's statement about mankind to mean they should've augmented themselves, but more so just disappointment and pity at how 'slow' the evolutionary process had been I suppose. Imagine waking up hundreds of years in the future and the humans are basically the same. Despite all the technology, mankind still had many of the same weaknesses and frailties and perhaps lack of drive, that spark Khan and his ilk had in abundance. Tying "Space Seed" Khan to "Into Darkness" Khan, Khan's TOS statement might echo what Cumberbatch's Khan said when he told Kirk that Marcus needed him for his ferocity, that 23rd century humans were lacking in that way. Which didn't make sense in that film because Marcus had plenty of determination and evil intent, but I digress.
Also agree with those who feel that Khan didn't feel he was a failure in "Space Seed". He boasted that his augments would do well in the 23rd century, so I could see him blaming infighting among the augments for their downfall and not being overtaken by 'inferior' regular humans.
^^this
If humanity had evolved to be just like Khan with the added brawns'n'brains, there'd be a near-hilarious irony. But Khan was just saying what he had as a form of mockery, albeit partially misplaced. Humanity clearly had order in the 23rd century. Just with not him ruling it for his desires, moohahahaha.
Montalban really underplays the role with such precision that Khan comes across anything other than a cartoon, was given some nuance, and is far more menacing as a result. Excellent character actor in anything he did...Spock, in TWOK, already pointed out Khan was not perfect with "two-dimensional thinking". It's a
Imagine if TWOK had the two meeting face-to-face. Kirk wouldn't stand a chance. He barely won the previous time and Kirk was in his physical prime back then. Khan was clearly still going strong. And that hair...
STID just has a generic heavy, woefully overplayed and without any of the charm Ricardo put in. The sad part is that he was using a pseudonym and he didn't need to be Khan to begin with to have remained interesting. That alone would have improved. Get rid of Spock's asinine fisticuffs with him later on in the movie would also help. DItto for that stupid mash-up of "KHAAAAAAAAAAN!" at the end, which doesn't even begin to work. But I digress. And to be fair, the revised edition of how Khan and his followers came about was actually rather solid. As was the double double-cross by Admiral Robocop. And the setup of the mystery character before the needless plot twist of "Oooh, he's that guy from the ancient episode from 1967!" The movie's just a mixed bag relying more on nostalgia for cheap points when it clearly didn't need to be as there was enough going on genuinely in its favor without needing to do so.
^^this, x1000
I thought Khan actually meant that he was disappointed that humanity as a whole had not decided to do selective breeding or augments and that the 'elite' people in charge of warships in the future were as physically weak as the people he'd ruled over on Earth 200/300 years ago. That people like Khan weren't the model for everyone. I suppose that Kirk and his crew weren't physically or intellectually better than Khan and his crew even after centuries of scientific improvement.
Khan was probably disappointed that Kirk and his crew had morals and didn't just destroy his sleeper ship on sight as worthless.
Khan was probably disappointed that Kirk and his crew had morals and didn't just destroy his sleeper ship on sight as worthless.
thats what I thought too.
Maybe he saw Fox News appearing in Picard...
Fixed story line: we thawed out Khan, he was too difficult to work with, we killed him. Next we thawed out Khan's top scientist (British John Harrison), he was cooperative, we worked with him, he was secretly plotting revenge for killing his leader, Khan, and to save the rest of his people. Insert ST:Into Darkness.
Last edited:
Agree with every word. Honestly, that movie was pretty much terrible.
My take on this was that it another ship, not the Enterprise, would've found the Botany Bay. Noel Clarke would've played a younger Clark Terrell who was in the landing party that boards the ship. And similar to "Space Seed" when Khan's life pod (or whatever) starts to go haywire, this time it kills him, and perhaps a few others before Harrison is saved. Harrison kills Terrell and others in the landing party before he is eventually taken down.
Last edited:
wow, that would have been a more original plot. I can imagine they would have killed khan when he tried to take over marcus's ship
Similar threads
