STID: Was There A Real "John Harrison"?

[Dales]

obviously not. there was no real John Harrison but if there was a real one,it would have been better than him been khan.

 

[F. King Daniel]

 

[Disco]

I still firmly think this film would have been infinitely better if John Harrison was John Harrison and one of Khan's lieutenants, but we wouldn't know that. The movie would have shown him as a genetic enhanced. Could have had almost the same exact movie, except that in the final scene where we see the frozen tubes, we see one that has Khan's name on it. Thereby, giving him a reason to have Wrath (because of what happened to Harrison), and setting up a possible sequel down the line.

You couldn't BE more right and your idea is great.

I'd add to that, Harrison could've then died instead of being captured at the end. When Khan awoke, he would have plenty of reason to be pissed because Starfleet dared to capture him and his crew, use one of his lieutenants as a lackey, and then kill him.

Alas, they couldn't stop themselves from pulling the trigger on Khan like it was a weight they had to get off their backs. The character deserved better.

I couldn't disagree more. I loved the movie and I love Cumberbatch as Khan so I wouldn't want another Khan or a revisit.

 

[Vger23]

I still firmly think this film would have been infinitely better if John Harrison was John Harrison and one of Khan's lieutenants, but we wouldn't know that. The movie would have shown him as a genetic enhanced. Could have had almost the same exact movie, except that in the final scene where we see the frozen tubes, we see one that has Khan's name on it. Thereby, giving him a reason to have Wrath (because of what happened to Harrison), and setting up a possible sequel down the line.

The film would have been "infinitely better" if one character's name was changed?

 

[Capt. Ben Sisko]

I still firmly think this film would have been infinitely better if John Harrison was John Harrison and one of Khan's lieutenants, but we wouldn't know that. The movie would have shown him as a genetic enhanced. Could have had almost the same exact movie, except that in the final scene where we see the frozen tubes, we see one that has Khan's name on it. Thereby, giving him a reason to have Wrath (because of what happened to Harrison), and setting up a possible sequel down the line.

The film would have been "infinitely better" if one character's name was changed?

Yep.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

And it's about this time when we usually point out that Cumby was no more "whitewashed" a Khan than Montalban was. Khan was as white in ST2 as he was in STID.

 

[F. King Daniel]

Obligatory Khanparison

 

[Grendelsbayne]

I still firmly think this film would have been infinitely better if John Harrison was John Harrison and one of Khan's lieutenants, but we wouldn't know that. The movie would have shown him as a genetic enhanced. Could have had almost the same exact movie, except that in the final scene where we see the frozen tubes, we see one that has Khan's name on it. Thereby, giving him a reason to have Wrath (because of what happened to Harrison), and setting up a possible sequel down the line.

You couldn't BE more right and your idea is great.

I'd add to that, Harrison could've then died instead of being captured at the end. When Khan awoke, he would have plenty of reason to be pissed because Starfleet dared to capture him and his crew, use one of his lieutenants as a lackey, and then kill him.

Alas, they couldn't stop themselves from pulling the trigger on Khan like it was a weight they had to get off their backs. The character deserved better.

So that the new series could then have 2 different movies that were essentially rehashing TWOK? No thanks. ID was fine with Cumberbatch as Khan - the only thing that would've made it infinitely better would've been if Khan's and Marcus's schemes actually made sense (and the completely pointless nabiri or whatever that planet was called arc had been removed).


Even if both the movies postulated here turned out to be great, that would still be far too much time devoted to one single story type. Star Trek works much better when it tries to tell different stories, not the same one again and again.

Obligatory Khanparison

The really funny thing there is Khan number 1 just came out of hundreds of years of stasis, while Khan number 2 has been living in very open, very harsh and bright environmental conditions for years. They put the tan on the wrong version...

 

[mos6507]

Explanation: Those stasis tubes were originally used in a tanning salon.

 

[Dukhat]

I still firmly think this film would have been infinitely better if John Harrison was John Harrison and one of Khan's lieutenants, but we wouldn't know that. The movie would have shown him as a genetic enhanced. Could have had almost the same exact movie, except that in the final scene where we see the frozen tubes, we see one that has Khan's name on it. Thereby, giving him a reason to have Wrath (because of what happened to Harrison), and setting up a possible sequel down the line.

The film would have been "infinitely better" if one character's name was changed?

Yep.

He means that it would be infinitely better for him personally, not for the millions of other moviegoers who wouldn't give a crap.

As a Star Trek fan, if they'd have done what you describe, I would have walked out of that theater scratching my head and wondering why they focused on some lieutenant instead of the actual main bad guy.

 

[fireproof78]

I still firmly think this film would have been infinitely better if John Harrison was John Harrison and one of Khan's lieutenants, but we wouldn't know that. The movie would have shown him as a genetic enhanced. Could have had almost the same exact movie, except that in the final scene where we see the frozen tubes, we see one that has Khan's name on it. Thereby, giving him a reason to have Wrath (because of what happened to Harrison), and setting up a possible sequel down the line.

You couldn't BE more right and your idea is great.

I'd add to that, Harrison could've then died instead of being captured at the end. When Khan awoke, he would have plenty of reason to be pissed because Starfleet dared to capture him and his crew, use one of his lieutenants as a lackey, and then kill him.

Alas, they couldn't stop themselves from pulling the trigger on Khan like it was a weight they had to get off their backs. The character deserved better.

So that the new series could then have 2 different movies that were essentially rehashing TWOK? No thanks. ID was fine with Cumberbatch as Khan - the only thing that would've made it infinitely better would've been if Khan's and Marcus's schemes actually made sense (and the completely pointless nabiri or whatever that planet was called arc had been removed).


Even if both the movies postulated here turned out to be great, that would still be far too much time devoted to one single story type. Star Trek works much better when it tries to tell different stories, not the same one again and again.

In my opinion, Nibiru was a great opening to the film because it establishes both Kirk and Spock's arc. There might be a better introduction to the film, but I thoroughly enjoy the first 20 minutes of ID, and could even see it as a stand alone TOS episode (with some minor tweaking).

I go back and forth on thinking Khan should have stayed as Harrison. On the one hand, the inevitable introduction of Khan is inevitable, because the character is among the most popular Trek villains, and his film is consider Trek's most successful.

I'm glad they got Khan out of the way, and I like the fact that they started out as working together only to turn on each other. Marcus was a fantastic villain as well.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Alright, let's not do that, please.

Also, as much as I enjoyed Cumberbatch as Khan, it's not a fair comparison anyway. Khan is an iconic, if not the most iconic, Trek villain. Reusing him does not in any way compare to reusing a minor background character from TOS that few Trekkies even know, much less the general audience. Which is precisely why it would be silly to reuse the Harrison character at all instead of just coming up with a new one, but that's another debate.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

So that the new series could then have 2 different movies that were essentially rehashing TWOK? No thanks. ID was fine with Cumberbatch as Khan - the only thing that would've made it infinitely better would've been if Khan's and Marcus's schemes actually made sense (and the completely pointless nabiri or whatever that planet was called arc had been removed).


Even if both the movies postulated here turned out to be great, that would still be far too much time devoted to one single story type. Star Trek works much better when it tries to tell different stories, not the same one again and again.

In my opinion, Nibiru was a great opening to the film because it establishes both Kirk and Spock's arc. There might be a better introduction to the film, but I thoroughly enjoy the first 20 minutes of ID, and could even see it as a stand alone TOS episode (with some minor tweaking).

I go back and forth on thinking Khan should have stayed as Harrison. On the one hand, the inevitable introduction of Khan is inevitable, because the character is among the most popular Trek villains, and his film is consider Trek's most successful.

I'm glad they got Khan out of the way, and I like the fact that they started out as working together only to turn on each other. Marcus was a fantastic villain as well.

It establishes Spock's arc, but any life threatening situation could've done that. And plenty of non-life threatening situations, as well. It pretends to establish an arc for Kirk, but that doesn't actually matter because once Admiral Pike dies, Kirk's arc is almost entirely ignored by the film.

I disagree that Khan was somehow inevitable - prior to this film he had exactly two appearances. Yes, the film appearance especially made him one of the most popular villains in the franchise's past, but there's no reason they couldn't have just left him in the past and come up with an original villain. Well, except that the Star Trek films are often very bad at creating good villains, but then, I would've preferred a movie without any villain anyway.

Still, Cumberbatch's Khan was decent, Marcus was certainly one of the better evil admirals in Trek history and, the gordian knot of Khan's and Marcus's exact plans aside, it was a reasonably fun movie. Much better than 09.

 

[fireproof78]

So that the new series could then have 2 different movies that were essentially rehashing TWOK? No thanks. ID was fine with Cumberbatch as Khan - the only thing that would've made it infinitely better would've been if Khan's and Marcus's schemes actually made sense (and the completely pointless nabiri or whatever that planet was called arc had been removed).


Even if both the movies postulated here turned out to be great, that would still be far too much time devoted to one single story type. Star Trek works much better when it tries to tell different stories, not the same one again and again.

In my opinion, Nibiru was a great opening to the film because it establishes both Kirk and Spock's arc. There might be a better introduction to the film, but I thoroughly enjoy the first 20 minutes of ID, and could even see it as a stand alone TOS episode (with some minor tweaking).

I go back and forth on thinking Khan should have stayed as Harrison. On the one hand, the inevitable introduction of Khan is inevitable, because the character is among the most popular Trek villains, and his film is consider Trek's most successful.

I'm glad they got Khan out of the way, and I like the fact that they started out as working together only to turn on each other. Marcus was a fantastic villain as well.

It establishes Spock's arc, but any life threatening situation could've done that. And plenty of non-life threatening situations, as well. It pretends to establish an arc for Kirk, but that doesn't actually matter because once Admiral Pike dies, Kirk's arc is almost entirely ignored by the film.

I disagree that Khan was somehow inevitable - prior to this film he had exactly two appearances. Yes, the film appearance especially made him one of the most popular villains in the franchise's past, but there's no reason they couldn't have just left him in the past and come up with an original villain. Well, except that the Star Trek films are often very bad at creating good villains, but then, I would've preferred a movie without any villain anyway.

Still, Cumberbatch's Khan was decent, Marcus was certainly one of the better evil admirals in Trek history and, the gordian knot of Khan's and Marcus's exact plans aside, it was a reasonably fun movie. Much better than 09.

The only reason why I think Khan is inevitable is because TWOK is held up as the greatest film ever and Khan the greatest villain (YMMV and Trademark pending).

I don't hold that opinion and think that TWOK, while a beautifully assembled film, is not the best. But, Trek films have lived in the shadow of TWOk ever since and have tried to emulate that film, with different degrees of success.

I personally think ID could have been stronger with Marcus as the main villain and remaining the main villain, because he has a point, if a bit of a paranoid, hawkish, point. It is one of the reasons why I think the character of John Harrison, as an original character, would be interesting, if used as a fall guy to start a war, either by infiltrating Kronos, or through a long range assault with the torpedoes.

Having Harrison turn against Marcus because he is impatient to start the war, and is thinking short term rather than planning everything out. I would keep him genetically engineered to be the perfect soldier, but impatient and basically fighting against Marcus.

I like Marcus' take on evil Starfleet admiral, even if it has been done before. I thought Nero in 09 was an interesting villain too. So, I can't really say one was better than the other.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

In my opinion, Nibiru was a great opening to the film because it establishes both Kirk and Spock's arc. There might be a better introduction to the film, but I thoroughly enjoy the first 20 minutes of ID, and could even see it as a stand alone TOS episode (with some minor tweaking).

I go back and forth on thinking Khan should have stayed as Harrison. On the one hand, the inevitable introduction of Khan is inevitable, because the character is among the most popular Trek villains, and his film is consider Trek's most successful.

I'm glad they got Khan out of the way, and I like the fact that they started out as working together only to turn on each other. Marcus was a fantastic villain as well.

It establishes Spock's arc, but any life threatening situation could've done that. And plenty of non-life threatening situations, as well. It pretends to establish an arc for Kirk, but that doesn't actually matter because once Admiral Pike dies, Kirk's arc is almost entirely ignored by the film.

I disagree that Khan was somehow inevitable - prior to this film he had exactly two appearances. Yes, the film appearance especially made him one of the most popular villains in the franchise's past, but there's no reason they couldn't have just left him in the past and come up with an original villain. Well, except that the Star Trek films are often very bad at creating good villains, but then, I would've preferred a movie without any villain anyway.

Still, Cumberbatch's Khan was decent, Marcus was certainly one of the better evil admirals in Trek history and, the gordian knot of Khan's and Marcus's exact plans aside, it was a reasonably fun movie. Much better than 09.

The only reason why I think Khan is inevitable is because TWOK is held up as the greatest film ever and Khan the greatest villain (YMMV and Trademark pending).

I don't hold that opinion and think that TWOK, while a beautifully assembled film, is not the best. But, Trek films have lived in the shadow of TWOk ever since and have tried to emulate that film, with different degrees of success.

I personally think ID could have been stronger with Marcus as the main villain and remaining the main villain, because he has a point, if a bit of a paranoid, hawkish, point. It is one of the reasons why I think the character of John Harrison, as an original character, would be interesting, if used as a fall guy to start a war, either by infiltrating Kronos, or through a long range assault with the torpedoes.

Having Harrison turn against Marcus because he is impatient to start the war, and is thinking short term rather than planning everything out. I would keep him genetically engineered to be the perfect soldier, but impatient and basically fighting against Marcus.

I like Marcus' take on evil Starfleet admiral, even if it has been done before. I thought Nero in 09 was an interesting villain too. So, I can't really say one was better than the other.

That sounds like a better story than bringing in Khan. It would certainly solve all the logic issues in trying to reconcile Khan's plan with Marcus's plan.

I don't think Nero was the worst villain in trek history, but he wasn't particularly good, imo. He had the advantage of having a real sense of humor, which is something that has been somewhat lacking in a lot of trek villains (humor in general is one of the things the new movies have absolutely done right in comparison to the old ones). But his personality was shallow, his actions were senseless and his motivations were generic and repetitive.

But my main reason for preferring ID to 09 is that (kirk's arc aside) it does a much better job of telling a complete, interesting and believable story. 09 is seriously dragged down by its endless insistence on how special everyone is, even though the only person who ever actually demonstrates their extraordinary capabilities is Uhura.

 

[fireproof78]

It establishes Spock's arc, but any life threatening situation could've done that. And plenty of non-life threatening situations, as well. It pretends to establish an arc for Kirk, but that doesn't actually matter because once Admiral Pike dies, Kirk's arc is almost entirely ignored by the film.

I disagree that Khan was somehow inevitable - prior to this film he had exactly two appearances. Yes, the film appearance especially made him one of the most popular villains in the franchise's past, but there's no reason they couldn't have just left him in the past and come up with an original villain. Well, except that the Star Trek films are often very bad at creating good villains, but then, I would've preferred a movie without any villain anyway.

Still, Cumberbatch's Khan was decent, Marcus was certainly one of the better evil admirals in Trek history and, the gordian knot of Khan's and Marcus's exact plans aside, it was a reasonably fun movie. Much better than 09.

The only reason why I think Khan is inevitable is because TWOK is held up as the greatest film ever and Khan the greatest villain (YMMV and Trademark pending).

I don't hold that opinion and think that TWOK, while a beautifully assembled film, is not the best. But, Trek films have lived in the shadow of TWOk ever since and have tried to emulate that film, with different degrees of success.

I personally think ID could have been stronger with Marcus as the main villain and remaining the main villain, because he has a point, if a bit of a paranoid, hawkish, point. It is one of the reasons why I think the character of John Harrison, as an original character, would be interesting, if used as a fall guy to start a war, either by infiltrating Kronos, or through a long range assault with the torpedoes.

Having Harrison turn against Marcus because he is impatient to start the war, and is thinking short term rather than planning everything out. I would keep him genetically engineered to be the perfect soldier, but impatient and basically fighting against Marcus.

I like Marcus' take on evil Starfleet admiral, even if it has been done before. I thought Nero in 09 was an interesting villain too. So, I can't really say one was better than the other.

That sounds like a better story than bringing in Khan. It would certainly solve all the logic issues in trying to reconcile Khan's plan with Marcus's plan.

I don't think Nero was the worst villain in trek history, but he wasn't particularly good, imo. He had the advantage of having a real sense of humor, which is something that has been somewhat lacking in a lot of trek villains (humor in general is one of the things the new movies have absolutely done right in comparison to the old ones). But his personality was shallow, his actions were senseless and his motivations were generic and repetitive.

But my main reason for preferring ID to 09 is that (kirk's arc aside) it does a much better job of telling a complete, interesting and believable story. 09 is seriously dragged down by its endless insistence on how special everyone is, even though the only person who ever actually demonstrates their extraordinary capabilities is Uhura.

All fair points, though I'll respectfully disagree

The only character I found annoying as being "special" was Chekov. I think that Scotty should have been introduced sooner to do the whole transporter thing, and perhaps leave Chekov for later. I think Scotty could have started out as just a transporter chief, and when Olsen dies on the mission, gets promoted, a la Dr. McCoy.

As for Nero, I found him to be the most interesting and unique of all Trek villains, His background is more simplified, he is truly psychotic, and has broken with reality, as I would expect with the events that he has experienced. I do like his sense of humor, and I like the tragic nature of his arc. It's more clever than I think it gets credit for.

 

[Smellmet]

Re-doing any Khan story was low hanging fruit for the makers of these new movies. People would've complained if he'd have not been used.