Who is John Harrison (Possible SPOILERS or Insane Babbling)

[The Green Mushroom]

So, who is John Harrison?

Personally I think he is a character we have met before we has assumed a new identity for some reason or another. It could be that the new timeline has set his life in the direction where he ends up in Section 31 as Starfleet's version of James Bond. Or he could be listed as dead and works under an assumed name for one reason or another.

I'm still leaning towards the presumed dead Gary Mitchell--who may have had a long connection with Carol Marcus.

I do not however think it is Khan or any of his men. It would strain things for Khan to be found by someone else and then fake an identity to gain vengeance for something.

 

[Bishop76]

I think he's a new character. It would be the most interesting option to me. I've said it before, I'll say it again - why would I want to see a story I've seen before retold with different actors? Why would they go to the trouble of rebooting an entire universe to retell a story that's already been told?

 

[Christopher]

I think he's a new character. It would be the most interesting option to me. I've said it before, I'll say it again - why would I want to see a story I've seen before retold with different actors? Why would they go to the trouble of rebooting an entire universe to retell a story that's already been told?

Bringing back a character doesn't mean retelling the same story that featured him. The Wrath of Khan was a completely different story from "Space Seed." The 2009 movie had Pike, but it was completely unlike "The Cage." It also had Sarek and Amanda but was completely unlike "Journey to Babel" (though parts of it were very close to scenes from "Yesteryear").

 

[Tom Riker]

 

[Bishop76]

I think he's a new character. It would be the most interesting option to me. I've said it before, I'll say it again - why would I want to see a story I've seen before retold with different actors? Why would they go to the trouble of rebooting an entire universe to retell a story that's already been told?

Bringing back a character doesn't mean retelling the same story that featured him. The Wrath of Khan was a completely different story from "Space Seed." The 2009 movie had Pike, but it was completely unlike "The Cage." It also had Sarek and Amanda but was completely unlike "Journey to Babel" (though parts of it were very close to scenes from "Yesteryear").

But none of those characters were really the focus of the story. They were there as familiar parts of the setting to establish that the universe is similar and familiar and then they blew up Vulcan to show it was very different and the focus of the movie was getting the crew together. The origin story.

Now, you're not wrong - they could bring in Khan and do a different story with him. Or Mitchell. The problem is, Space Seed and WNMHGB were stellar, memorable episodes and TWOK is still a perfect movie. It doesn't make sense to compete with those - and make no mistake, they will be compared if that is the case.

I prefer to see the Star Trek mythos expanded upon. I'd rather have a new villain to hate than a different reason to hate Khan.

 

[The Green Mushroom]

The problem is, Space Seed and WNMHGB were stellar, memorable episodes and TWOK is still a perfect movie. It doesn't make sense to compete with those - and make no mistake, they will be compared if that is the case.

I prefer to see the Star Trek mythos expanded upon. I'd rather have a new villain to hate than a different reason to hate Khan.

By that logic should the Dark Knight have not used the Joker since Batman '89 was the only good Burton film?

Should TUC not have had Klingons since they had been used in many episodes and movies beforehand.

Now I personally don't think that Khan shows up in the movie. And if he did I wouldn't want him wandering around under an assumed identity without a really good reason, but I would have no problems at all if Khan did show up in the new timeline.

 

[Rhaven]

I think this is a new character and we'll just have to wait for some more info to see if that's true.

 

[Bishop76]

By that logic should the Dark Knight have not used the Joker since Batman '89 was the only good Burton film?

Should TUC not have had Klingons since they had been used in many episodes and movies beforehand.

The Klingon argument is nonsense. By that logic I would never want to see a human in a sequel because there were humans in the previous one. They didn't reuse Kruge or Klaa for TUC. They had new (and great) characters in Chang and Gorkon.

As for Joker reuse, I think that's more acceptable because comic storytelling always has that. The villains always turn back up over and over again with some crazy new plan. Each hero has their rogues gallery that they pull from time and again.

Trek literally has a galaxy filled with characters that haven't had their story told yet - why continue to play in the shallow waters of Trek past?

 

[Hythlodeus]

Kirk's Iowa childhood friend Johnny. Wanting vengeance because he was left behind on earth and had to move to London, England where constant rain made him suffer severe colds

 

[Chaos Descending]

What is that thing on Cumberbatch's right forearm?

Reflection on the glass door?

 

[Tom Riker]

What is that thing on Cumberbatch's right forearm?

Reflection on the glass door?

it's where he keeps his Ceti Eel

 

[Agent Richard07]

So far, it looks like he's either Khan or a follower of Khan.

 

[Wynterhawk]

Has anyone tried to anagram his name?

 

[RyanKCR]

I think he's a new character. It would be the most interesting option to me. I've said it before, I'll say it again - why would I want to see a story I've seen before retold with different actors? Why would they go to the trouble of rebooting an entire universe to retell a story that's already been told?

I have no problem with revisiting people, places, things seen before. Think about it. With the new timeline we still have V-ger, the giant omeba, the whale probe, the doomsday maching, Nomad, etch are now out there again to be run into. I would find it fascinating to see them encountered again by this crew. They are the same people as the prime ones but with a different back story and so they may approach it differently.

What I would really like is to not completely ignore them. Those things are out there and some are on their way to Earth. What about a passing reference in communications traffic about an encounter by another starship. I didn't like TNG trying to ignore most of TOS and I think have some nods or new takes on events seen before done.

 

[Drago-Kazov]

By that logic should the Dark Knight have not used the Joker since Batman '89 was the only good Burton film?

Should TUC not have had Klingons since they had been used in many episodes and movies beforehand.

The Klingon argument is nonsense. By that logic I would never want to see a human in a sequel because there were humans in the previous one. They didn't reuse Kruge or Klaa for TUC. They had new (and great) characters in Chang and Gorkon.

As for Joker reuse, I think that's more acceptable because comic storytelling always has that. The villains always turn back up over and over again with some crazy new plan. Each hero has their rogues gallery that they pull from time and again.

Trek literally has a galaxy filled with characters that haven't had their story told yet - why continue to play in the shallow waters of Trek past?

If Konom would ever show up in a movie i would have a huge nerdgasm.

 

[M'Sharak]

Has anyone tried to anagram his name?

"Ninja Rho Rhos"?

 

[Bishop76]

Has anyone tried to anagram his name?

"Ninja Rho Rhos"?

OH MY GOD! It's a ninja Scooby Doo!

 

[Hythlodeus]

Has anyone tried to anagram his name?

"Ninja Rho Rhos"?

Shora On Nahjir?

 

[SalvorHardin]

Has anyone tried to anagram his name?

"Ninja Rho Rhos"?

"Iran Josh Horn" sounds more possible. It means STID will deal with modern day issues like Iran, nukes etc

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

I love that the Gary Mitchell people won't give up.