No, but they do call John Harrison a constructed identity which implies a new look as well as a new name for Khan.
No it doesn't.
No, but they do call John Harrison a constructed identity which implies a new look as well as a new name for Khan.
Sure it does. After all, as per my post above, we know for a fact how Khan looks in canon. Is it such a stretch that Khan would need a new face to hide his identity? It would only take one history expert (remember when Picard casually dropped Khan's name next to Hitler's) to tell what was going on and then the jig would be up!No it doesn't.
Obviously it does, on all counts - even ITRW, you can't construct an identity now without altering your looks...
I don't know. It worked for Mr. Hilter.It would only take one history expert (remember when Picard casually dropped Khan's name next to Hitler's) to tell what was going on and then the jig would be up!
Sure it does. After all, as per my post above, we know for a fact how Khan looks in canon. Is it such a stretch that Khan would need a new face to hide his identity? It would only take one history expert (remember when Picard casually dropped Khan's name next to Hitler's) to tell what was going on and then the jig would be up!
A person's identity is very much so tied to their looks as well as their name, their actions, etc. Khan says that John Harrison was "a smokescreen to conceal [his] true identity." Let's not forget that a smokescreen implies a visual facade.
Everything you said is essentially everything I've said in this thread up until the point where you asked if I was angry. No, I'm not angry, why would you ask that?I'm not quite sure what you're arguing about here. Marcus found the Botany Bay, and presumably, a Khan who looks remarkably like a young Ricardo Montalban. Then Marcus had Khan surgically altered in a way that was presumably not even close to what happened with Voq, then gave him a fake identity and told him that he had to work for him or Marcus would kill the rest of his crew. It's implied that Harrison knew he was Khan the entire time, so no brainwashing was involved. Are you just angry that a white English guy was cast, even though the film made it very clear that this was a fake identity?
he can follow the proud footsteps of Mick Fleetwood
![]()
who probably isn't Khan. No faces were slapped by Mick Fleetwood.
You're not an idiot. I was just wondering why you thought I was angry.Because I have no idea what you're arguing about, or what your point is. Perhaps you could clarify for an idiot like me.
Looks like that answer is no.Basically, I was wondering if anyone else saw a connection between Voq and Kelvin Khan.
You're not an idiot. I was just wondering why you thought I was angry.
Basically, I was wondering if anyone else saw a connection between Voq and Kelvin Khan.
There's no point being a defender or apologist for the Khan casting in STiD at this point. Clearly it was too divisive, so much so that they had to address his race-change in the comics.
STiD turned too much of the audience away and soured the franchise.
I find it hard to imagine anybody would actually care enough about the contents of a Trek movie to make a decision one way or another.
It brings up an interesting question - how far can the cultures of Trek go to transform someones identity? And what does it say that the Federation and the Klingons were both using the same means to do?Looks like that answer is no.
If Khan was altered is was probably no more that standard plastic surgery. Only slightly more advanced than what we have today. And not the species altering procedure Voq went through.
Fact that the attempt was made says something. That it was a khantroversy that had to be addressed.Comics which almost nobody reads.
That's not why the franchise was soured.
Star Trek on the big screen isn't dead, its just in a mild dormancy.There's no point being a defender or apologist for the Khan casting in STiD at this point. Clearly it was too divisive, so much so that they had to address his race-change in the comics. And at this point the franchise is dead. STiD turned too much of the audience away and soured the franchise.
Star Trek on the big screen isn't dead, its just in a mild dormancy.
I think it is well known that the cost for Beyond was too highThen Beyond rolls around and flops in theatres.
Fact that the attempt was made says something. That it was a khantroversy that had to be addressed.
4 yr gap and divisive reception to STiD didn't help. Fans were so vocal in their dislike for the film that it soured general audience perception of STiD as well. Then Beyond rolls around and flops in theatres. No coincidence.
Have you watched TNG. In the 24th Century it's SOP and done in a snap. Even in the 23rd quick jobs like Kirk's transformation into a Romulan were possible. I think the Vulcans were doing something similar in the 22nd.It brings up an interesting question - how far can the cultures of Trek go to transform someones identity? And what does it say that the Federation and the Klingons were both using the same means to do?
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.