Star Trek 3: The Edge of Forever

[Set Harth]

He was not a Hitler who massacred people!

Then why mention him in the same breath as Hitler?

Khan being the bad guy in TWOK was the result of 15 years of feeling abandoned on a world that turned it into an inhospitable nightmare where he was powerless to stop the deaths of many of his loyal followers, including his own wife. That was tangible motivation. This NuKhan's motivation all stems from incorrect assumptions.

NuKhan was also powerless to stop the deaths of his followers, or so he had thought. It's the same motivation.

You can't really use Ceti Alpha V as an excuse to throw out what we learned about Khan's character just from Space Seed alone. He wasn't a nice guy. Besides, in TWOK he killed people who had had nothing whatsoever to do with his exile.

 

[JarodRussell]

He was not a Hitler who massacred people!

Then why mention him in the same breath as Hitler?

"What if one of those lives I save down there is a child who grows up to be the next Adolf Hitler or Khan Singh?"

That line from TNG was disingenuous.

There.

Khan being the bad guy in TWOK was the result of 15 years of feeling abandoned on a world that turned it into an inhospitable nightmare where he was powerless to stop the deaths of many of his loyal followers, including his own wife. That was tangible motivation. This NuKhan's motivation all stems from incorrect assumptions.

NuKhan was also powerless to stop the deaths of his followers, or so he had thought. It's the same motivation.

You can't really use Ceti Alpha V as an excuse to throw out what we learned about Khan's character just from Space Seed alone. He wasn't a nice guy. Besides, in TWOK he killed people who had had nothing whatsoever to do with his exile.

I seriously doubt that if he really was a genocidal mad man that Scotty would openly admire the individual. The only thing that Spock could come up with to show how bad of a person he is was to say he was a ruthless dictator who took away limited his people's freedoms. No killing, no wars, just a lot of restrictions. If Khan was everything that post-TWOK material makes him out to be, than the conversation should have gone like this.

Scotty: There were no massacres under his rule.
Spock: I'm afraid you are incorrect Mr. Scott. It was well known especially for Khan that his purpose was to commit mass genocide on anyone he thought was inferior.
Kirk: Mr. Scott, I'm surprised at you. How could you admire a man who was a cold blooded war criminal that wanted to murder every human who wasn't as superior as he was? He was practically Hitler!​

Instead of using Space Seed as a basis for Khan's character, everyone resorts to the revenge seeking Khan from the second movie, and even in STID they don't even get that right.

There again.

 

[BillJ]

SPOCK: No such vessel listed. Records of that period are fragmentary, however. The mid-1990s was the era of your last so-called World War.

Every other statement made by the crew has to be evaluated with this in mind.

Khan would've had no qualms slitting McCoy's throat nor would he have had any issue with executing Kirk and the rest of the bridge crew to get his way. Dictators usually use random fear and terror inflicted on the populace to maintain control. I simply don't see Khan as being any different and I don't see anything in his actions in "Space Seed" and The Wrath of Khan to contradict this evaluation. I also have no doubt that humanity as Kirk and Spock knew it in the 23rd century would eventually perish to make way for Khan's new breed.

 

[BillJ]

The only surviving book from the Eugenics Wars:

Khan by Khan: My Four Years as a Misunderstood Dictator

 

[The Wormhole]

While Khan certainly was more of a villain than he was "misunderstood" I do agree he was shown as more of a "supervillain" in STID than previously. Probably an unfortunate by-product of the weird myth that has developed around Khan that he is Kirk's Joker or Moriarty which certainly wasn't the intention in Space Seed or even TWOK.

 

[BillJ]

While Khan certainly was more of a villain than he was "misunderstood" I do agree he was shown as more of a "supervillain" in STID than previously. Probably an unfortunate by-product of the weird myth that has developed around Khan that he is Kirk's Joker or Moriarty which certainly wasn't the intention in Space Seed or even TWOK.

In universe, I'd say it would be more a by-product of being used and having his people held to make sure he complied to Marcus' whims. In "Space Seed", Khan is woken up and dealt with almost immediately. In The Wrath of Khan, Khan has been allowed to stew for fifteen years in what is essentially Hell.

All three variations act differently, because they've been subjected to different circumstances. I just don't see where Into Darkness Khan contradicts either "Space Seed" or The Wrath of Khan versions of the character.

 

[The Wormhole]

At the very least the STID version of the character is a lot stronger than Khan of the Prime Universe. In TWOK, the Reliant's exploding bridge essentially finished Khan, he was a bleeding and beaten and despite genetically enhance strength had trouble turning the control dial on the Genesis Device's control computer. In STID he's onboard a starship which crashes through a few city blocks and has multiple skyscrapers fall down on top of him, yet he literally walks away unscathed.

Yeah, I know, not exactly what we were talking about but it's something that bothers me anyway. The character is supposed to be superhuman, but that's just being ridiculous.

 

[BillJ]

Yeah, I know, not exactly what we were talking about but it's something that bothers me anyway. The character is supposed to be superhuman, but that's just being ridiculous.

The ships were simply damaged in different ways. Reliant took a couple of torpedoes to an area near her bridge. The Vengeance bridge looked relatively unscathed. Khan aboard Reliant had the bridge coming down around him.

 

[Jeyl]

SPOCK: No such vessel listed. Records of that period are fragmentary, however. The mid-1990s was the era of your last so-called World War.

Every other statement made by the crew has to be evaluated with this in mind.

Didn't that have more to do with Botany Bay not being listed than the actual history of the Eugenics Wars? Nobody had a hard time remembering events such as scientists improving the human race, the supermen seizing power across the world and how they were defeated. The only thing that they can't figure out from history is why Khan left and why there was no record of the Botany Bay. If Khan's rule has missing details that could have been related to the fragmented records, why doesn't Spock tell everyone in the briefing room that they shouldn't rely on that information?

Khan by Khan: My Four Years as a Misunderstood Dictator

History is written by the victors. If they wanted him to be as evil as the other rulers, they could have just said so, but they didn't.

 

[BillJ]

If Khan's rule has missing details that could have been related to the fragmented records, why doesn't Spock tell everyone in the briefing room that they shouldn't rely on that information?

Because Spock has already told the audience this. He doesn't need to repeat himself. How would only spaceflight records be fragmentary from a war that wiped whole populations out of existence?

History is written by the victors. If they wanted him to be as evil as the other rulers, they could have just said so, but they didn't.

I think they leave enough breadcrumbs that tell the audience that Khan isn't some stand up guy. A war where whole populations were bombed out of existence? Surely Khan had nothing to do with that. He controlled a quarter of the planet? Surely Khan was able to achieve that goal by promising everyone lollipops and rainbows.

 

[Jeyl]

Because Spock has already told the audience this. He doesn't need to repeat himself.

A. Spock doesn't know the audience exists.
B. Even if you establish certain details earlier, it can be repeated if those details actually does something. If fragmented records are such an essential part of understanding the dark period of Earth's history, there is no reason why it shouldn't have factored into Spock's arguments when the crew spoke admirably about him.

Plus, aren't you missing the whole point of the episode itself if you're just going to paint Khan as a bona fide bad guy who wants to kill everyone? Space Seed was about an ambitious and ruthless dictator who wanted to start a new life and build a new world away from the inferior humans who over threw him. The one element that is more important than his history on Earth is his superior ambition. We saw that when planning to take over the Enterprise how he was going to attempt to take on the galaxy instead of just the world. When Kirk finally defeated Khan, he gave him what he wanted in the first place. A fresh, unpopulated world that he could build however he saw fit.

Spock: It would be interesting, captain, to return to that world in a hundred years and to learn what crop has sprung from the seed you planted today.
Kirk: Yes, Mr. Spock. It would indeed.​

That's a much better way to represent Khan's character than... well, this.

Spock: Khan Noonien Singh is the most dangerous adversary the Enterprise ever faced. He is brilliant, ruthless and he will not hesitate to kill every single one of you.​

 

[Smellmet]

It would be interesting, captain, to return to that world in a hundred years and to learn what crop has sprung from the seed you planted today.
Kirk: Yes, Mr. Spock. It would indeed.[/INDENT]

That's a much better way to represent Khan's character than... well, this.

Spock: Khan Noonien Singh is the most dangerous adversary the Enterprise ever faced. He is brilliant, ruthless and he will not hesitate to kill every single one of you.​

Pretty much sums up the difference between Prime & JJ Trek

 

[Franklin]

Because Spock has already told the audience this. He doesn't need to repeat himself.

A. Spock doesn't know the audience exists.
B. Even if you establish certain details earlier, it can be repeated if those details actually does something. If fragmented records are such an essential part of understanding the dark period of Earth's history, there is no reason why it shouldn't have factored into Spock's arguments when the crew spoke admirably about him.

Plus, aren't you missing the whole point of the episode itself if you're just going to paint Khan as a bona fide bad guy who wants to kill everyone? Space Seed was about an ambitious and ruthless dictator who wanted to start a new life and build a new world away from the inferior humans who over threw him. The one element that is more important than his history on Earth is his superior ambition. We saw that when planning to take over the Enterprise how he was going to attempt to take on the galaxy instead of just the world. When Kirk finally defeated Khan, he gave him what he wanted in the first place. A fresh, unpopulated world that he could build however he saw fit.

Spock: It would be interesting, captain, to return to that world in a hundred years and to learn what crop has sprung from the seed you planted today.
Kirk: Yes, Mr. Spock. It would indeed.​

That's a much better way to represent Khan's character than... well, this.

Spock: Khan Noonien Singh is the most dangerous adversary the Enterprise ever faced. He is brilliant, ruthless and he will not hesitate to kill every single one of you.​

I agree with a lot of what you say, except Khan did try to kill the bridge crew in "Space Seed", then later, he tried to kill them off individually. He thought he had killed Kirk, then believed he was sending Spock to his death. So, he indeed was prepared to kill the crew of the Enterprise if he had to.

In TWOK, he tortured and killed the crew of the science station in an attempt to get what he wanted. That is certainly ruthless.

So, I think Spock Prime's statement in STID might have been mostly accurate in the moment. Khan is a nuanced character who is convincing and persuasive enough that it would be easy to forget he'd turn on a person in a moment if it suited him. Ultimately, Khan is both cruel and not trustworthy. Kirk even figured that out in STID. When Scotty remarked that he thought Khan was helping them, Kirk said he believed it was probably the other way around. People were useful to Khan only to the extent they were able to help his agenda (such as Noel Clarke's character at the opening of the movie). After serving their purpose, they were disposable.

 

[BillJ]

A. Spock doesn't know the audience exists.

But the writers who are speaking through Spock do. Instead of repeating themselves they present other elements of Khan's character that simply don't jibe with the affection Kirk and Scott show for the character, which leads back to those fragmentary records Spock mentions right at the very beginning of the episode.

* Whole populations bombed out of existence. I'm sure everyone but Khan participated in that.
* Controls a quarter of the planet Earth. Like I mentioned before, I'm sure he accomplished that by promising everyone rainbows and lollipops.
* As soon as he is awake, he nearly kills McCoy.
* Manipulates McGivers into betraying Kirk.
* Cuts off life support to the bridge.
* Believes he has suffocated Kirk. Plans to do the same to the rest of the bridge crew.

I don't know about you, but none of the above points to a particularly outstanding individual any way you slice it.

Kirk and Scott are admiring popular myths about Khan, because they don't have all the facts. I'm sure that if they were asked if they admired Khan after their encounter with him, the answer would be 'no'.

This is nothing more than the "Kobayashi Maru" argument from a couple of years ago all over again. Kirk Prime is this genius for cheating the test, Abrams Kirk is somehow an unworthy douchebag for doing the same exact thing.

 

[JarodRussell]

The Kobayashi Maru argument was about how they got the whole test wrong (at least from what I can remember, and what's still my opinion). From a test of character where there simply IS NO correct solution (and where Kirk's solution was only ONE of many, and it's never mentioned that he got into trouble, and that ONLY his kind of prejudiced son had the opinion that he "cheated"), to a test of fear of certain death.

And, ironically, this is about how they got Khan wrong. Space Seed Khan had more depth, it wasn't just all about b/w revenge and supremacy. The whole idea that Khan would commit genocide on everyone who wasn't genetically engineered didn't come up at all, neither in Space Seed or TWOK.

 

[BillJ]

And, ironically, this is about how they got Khan wrong.

But they didn't get Khan wrong, at least in my opinion. I found him easily recognizable when comparing his actions in Into Darkness with those he took in both "Space Seed" and Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

 

[BillJ]

And, ironically, this is about how they got Khan wrong. Space Seed Khan had more depth, it wasn't just all about b/w revenge and supremacy. The whole idea that Khan would commit genocide on everyone who wasn't genetically engineered didn't come up at all, neither in Space Seed or TWOK.

And since we never saw Kirk eat an apple prior to TWOK, we can make the argument that they got Kirk "wrong". It's nothing but nonsense.

In universe, I'd say it would be more a by-product of being used and having his people held to make sure he complied to Marcus' whims. In "Space Seed", Khan is woken up and dealt with almost immediately. In The Wrath of Khan, Khan has been allowed to stew for fifteen years in what is essentially Hell.

All three variations act differently, because they've been subjected to different circumstances. I just don't see where Into Darkness Khan contradicts either "Space Seed" or The Wrath of Khan versions of the character.

 

[JarodRussell]

And, ironically, this is about how they got Khan wrong. Space Seed Khan had more depth, it wasn't just all about b/w revenge and supremacy. The whole idea that Khan would commit genocide on everyone who wasn't genetically engineered didn't come up at all, neither in Space Seed or TWOK.

And since we never saw Kirk eat an apple prior to TWOK, we can make the argument that they got Kirk "wrong". It's nothing but nonsense.

Aw come on.

 

[BillJ]

And, ironically, this is about how they got Khan wrong. Space Seed Khan had more depth, it wasn't just all about b/w revenge and supremacy. The whole idea that Khan would commit genocide on everyone who wasn't genetically engineered didn't come up at all, neither in Space Seed or TWOK.

And since we never saw Kirk eat an apple prior to TWOK, we can make the argument that they got Kirk "wrong". It's nothing but nonsense.

Aw come on.

The point being: just because something isn't mentioned/seen in an earlier version doesn't make it "wrong". "Wrong" would've been Khan as a Buddhist monk who was running an orphanage for wayward Augments and abhorred violence of any kind.

 

[Franklin]

I didn't like the genocide line, myself (it's a bit over the top for me). But as I think about it, maybe the writers used it as shorthand to tell the audience that this was one cruel dude for whom we should have absolutely no sympathy (after all, they had created some ambiguity about his plight to that point). It was the "big reveal." Khan has no redeeming features. His civility is a façade he erects when he needs something from people that suits his own ends.

Now, given what we know as fans from Khan on screen in "Space Seed" and TWOK, imagine Spock's line as: "Which as I understand it involves mass the subjugation to your tyranny of any beings you find less than superior." That probably more accurately describes Khan and his goal based on our previous encounters with him, but it's not as dramatic. Genocidal trumps tyrannical. And, and BillJ alludes to, perhaps in the new universe, new and different historical evidence was found that genocide for those who didn't subjugate themselves to Khan was considered an option by Khan and his people. Or, Section 31 even planted the story in the historical record to make Khan seem even more evil. There's no reason why both universes should have the same history of the 1990s.