Abrams: Star Trek Sequel Will Not Be ‘Remake’ – But Khan Still A Possibility | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Abrams: Star Trek Sequel Will Not Be ‘Remake’ – But Khan Still A Possibility November 2, 2009

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Abrams,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

The Star Trek sequel continues to be in the early stages and according to JJ Abrams, the notion of bringing back Khan is still possible. In a new interview snippet at MTV, the producer and possible director of the sequel talks about the possibility of recasting Trek’s ultimate villain.

 


Khan 2.0?

In an interview with MTV, JJ Abrams noted one of the advantage of the new universe timeline that was set up in the first film, and notes that finding a new Khan is no different than recasting the main crew:

Now that we are in a parallel existence with what fans of the original series love so much, we could introduce any number of characters, settings, references and situations that the original series introduced. Dealing with Khan would certainly be a challenge, but we had an equal challenge in finding our crew of the Enterprise.

It should be noted that Abrams was not saying Khan is in the movie, just pointing out that it is still possible, he went into more detail, saying

While I don’t want to approach the second film as a remake of episodes we’ve seen in the past. I don’t think any of the writers or producers are interested in just rehashing or throwing characters for the sake of it, and Khan is certainly the most obvious one in the history of the series for me, I do think that…nothing is off limits in terms of what we’re discussing. When Bob Orci and the others who know ‘Trek’ so well, when we are discussing stories, the fun of working with them is they know this universe so deeply they’re the ones who are always considering what it means to deal with the stuff in the past, so it’ll be exciting.

Listen to Abrams comments here:

Movie TrailersMovies Blog

 

More from Abrams at MTV

 

 

 

 

Comments

1. I am not Herbert - November 2, 2009

KHAAANNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2. Drew - November 2, 2009

DON’T DO IT

3. I am not Herbert - November 2, 2009

…it’s a no-brainer…

4. Kirk's Revenge - November 2, 2009

“I don’t think any of the writers or producers are interested in just rehashing or throwing characters for the sake of it…”

Really? So you guys are going in a completely different direction with this one. Delta Vega, Spock Prime, or Chekov ring any bells?

5. st381 - November 2, 2009

Don’t do it. Use an original idea and create a story based on someone or something else. Star Trek II is my favorite out of them all, the Shat was awesome and Montalban was spectacular. Don’t try to out do the best movie of the series, create something yourself.

Dammit Jim, I’m a moviemaker – I don’t have original ideas!

6. x - November 2, 2009

How about Mudd’s men instead of Mudd’s women …….. not that there is anything wrong with that

7. trekbill - November 2, 2009

NO! If we’re gonna rehash the series, I’d like to see Harry Mudd or Cyrano Jones create some serious universe threatening problem. Wouldn’t you like to see Harry Mudd unwittingly create a situation that threatens the entire Earth or some other part of the universe?

8. Praetor - November 2, 2009

Worst. Idea. Ever.

No. Khan.

9. Viking - November 2, 2009

Quit trying to go back to the damn well for a bucket o’ hermetically-sealed antagonist so often. Want to ladle out a pop culture reference to the die-hards? Try bringing back Gary Mitchell, only this time without the microwaved giblets and slept-in contact lenses. Make him a classmate of Kirk’s and his weapons chief, who likes to tweak Chekov’s fuzzy widdle cheeks. Don’t be so overt with the tributes and tip o’ the hats. Star Trek hasn’t had a memorable bad guy since the Borg showed up.

C’mon, guys, think: what sort of menace could there possibly be out there that your industry hasn’t milked yet, but would scare the jammies off of people?

10. Dan - November 2, 2009

Very cool. Obviously they are focused on the story and not a character gimmick to drive the next movie.

Bring it on! I’m ready to see what they do.

11. sci-fi bri - November 2, 2009

the bad guy should be playted by Andy Samberg as the guy in Space Olympics

12. Rick - November 2, 2009

Can we stop with the whole “threatens the entire Earth” plot already? Is that all Star Trek has become, a lame wannabe comic book film franchise? “Saving the Earth, Episode 4!”

13. duke - November 2, 2009

Maybe Khan should kill spock prime, then use his shapeshifting ability to take over the jellyfish. Then maybe it could turn into a big pile of poo .

14. P Technobabble - November 2, 2009

I am still holding out that we will not see Khan in the next film. I really don’t see any reason to go down that road, but I accept that my opinion is just that… an opinion. If the guys have come upon some clever way to make Khan work, I’ll go along with it. But since they are still, apparently, in the story-making stage, I’m jumping up and down and waving like a frantic idiot shouting, “We already had Khan, we don’t need him again!!!!!”

Look, I voted to see Gary Mitchell and Christine Chapel in the next film, and, while I could go along with seeing Klingons as the villians, I’d love to see the Gorn, or the Tholians, or one of the more obscure alien species cast as the villian. But I simply have no desire to see Khan.

15. T - November 2, 2009

Khan and lens flares.

16. C.S. Lewis - November 2, 2009

All in all, I’d rather more creativity than re-imagination. Hollywood redoing Hollywood has never been worthwhile. Khan is a boring choice. If one must mine past Star Treks for inspiration, I’d rather they return to the old Enterprise!

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis

17. Chuck Watters - November 2, 2009

Now that the lawsuit is over with Harlan Ellison – Remake ” City on the edge of forever “

18. Allen Williams - November 2, 2009

please don’t do it. It takes them at least 2 years to make a movie and we don’t have any tv shows to hold us over in between. That means the only chance (currently) for new star trek is the movies. So please don’t waste our time with a completely unoriginal movie.

19. Sloan47 - November 2, 2009

I’m definitely open to any of their ideas at this point. They did a phenomenal job with Star Trek and I’ll trust them to do a good job with the new one.

20. jgavin - November 2, 2009

Man, what’s with all the Khan hate? He was a memorable villain and an interesting character. If they handled the character right, I wouldn’t mind seeing new stories with him in it. I DO think that if JJ is going to do Khan, he shouldn’t do it in the sequel. He’s such a memorable bad guy that he should be saved for a few movies down the road (& possible hinted at in the sequel?). Especially when there are so many iconic baddies left to explore, the Klingons being chief among them. Heck, for that matter we haven’t even seen the Romulans (of this time line) yet…

21. Alientraveller - November 2, 2009

The risk in writing Khan back in as a character is that everyone will be comparing the movie to TWOK moreso than usual. If they cast a really good actor though I think a lot of people would be silent on the issue though.

22. Rick Carthew - November 2, 2009

As other fans have suggested and your poll to the right – the addition of a new strong (Hot) female lead character to the Enterprise bridge; to be the new in-house antagonist to Kirk and to be a true rival to Spock, would allow for continued conflict on the bridge and greater exploration of all our human emotions.] > Lieutenant Commander “__?__ ”, a Andorian / Human hybrid > https://market.renderosity.com/mod/gallery/index.php?image_id=1648565&member > graduated second in her class to Spock from Starfleet Academy – current posting, first officer aboard the Andorian Federation Flag Ship – but she has been obsessed with a command post on the Enterprise since her construction began.

So the next time Kirk and Spock leave the bridge for a “landing party” we don’t have to see ever again a 17 year old Chekov in command of the Enterprise!

{Possible Canon – This new character could be the great grand daughter of Commander/ General Thy’lek Shran- http://memory-alpha.org/en/wiki/Thy%27lek_Shran the grand child of his daughter Talla Shran— and her human Star Fleet officer husband?}

Again, just one emample…

23. Seattle Trek Fan - November 2, 2009

There’d be such a flaw with having Khan in the next movie. JJ would have to introduce him, have Kirk royally piss him off, and then vow revenge; all in the span of 2 1/2 hours. To do all that, JJ would need do the first two things within the first 30-45 minutes or so. The next 90-120 minutes would be devoted to the whole revenge deal.

The character of Khan would need a multi-movie arc to portray him as well as Gene Roddenberry and Nicholas Meyer imagined. Those are movies that I don’t think JJ is up for making.

24. Rach - November 2, 2009

I’m so going to copy this:

KHAN!

-zooms out into the vacuum of space, yet is stil audible-
KKKKKHHHHHAAAAANNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!

25. BOOZBA - November 2, 2009

No Khan,no episode remake, please!!!!!
Be original for the love of Trek!!!!!

26. Slade Brunner - November 2, 2009

I say Klingon female villain!

27. Ensign RedShirt - November 2, 2009

Please don’t do it; maybe down the line after this gang has a few movies under their belt, but not now.

28. David P - November 2, 2009

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNN!!!!

29. Eli - November 2, 2009

No Khan!

Do Klingons! You could do Gary Mitchell, he deserves his own movie and he’d be a good match for new Kirk. You could do anything from the Original Series that was a great episode that already has not had a feature length film devoted to it, thus, no more Khan!

And no more talk of old trek series cast tie-ins! This is a new alternate reality! No more gimmicks! Original ideas only!

30. Alex - November 2, 2009

Khan is still one of the best villains of all time, he doesn’t need a reboot!! Besides, nobody could match Ricardo Montalban’s performance. He IS Khan Noonien Singh! In my opinion, Klingons are the way to go!

31. Marvin the Martian - November 2, 2009

Enough with Khan. Been there, done that, and very well, too.

No Borg. Don’t screw up the 23rd century with a 24th century villain.

Best solution?

THE GORN. Lots of them. What makes them tick? Why have they attacked so many Federation outposts?

Maybe you can tie in the creatures of Operation: Annihilate! with the Gorn. They’re overwhelming Gorn homeworlds, they’re pissed, and they’re taking it out on the Federation, because they think it’s their fault. And we can’t seem to communicate with them and convince them otherwise.

I swear, there is SO MUCH MORE to be mined from the original series than Khan again. Please.

32. Mr. Delicious - November 2, 2009

Why explore Classic Khan when there is so much more unexplored Khan territory…like Gengis Khan, Zor Khan, or even the most nefarious of all…The Comic Khan.

33. Author of The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers - November 2, 2009

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

We’ve worked this hard to reboot the franchise, so now we’re gonna rehash Khan?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! Can’t we tell *one* original story? Please? Especially since we’re gonna have to wait three years for it?

34. Mr. Delicious - November 2, 2009

Bring on the Gorn. Call him Gor-Khan.

35. zanzibar (wikiwackywoo on Twitter) - November 2, 2009

Yes we Kahn? I don’t think so.

It always perplexed me that Star Trek [The Tele Vision] which had a virtually open ended galaxy of story line possibilities kept recycling episode plots. Of course I understand re-imagining the crew of the Enterprise for its past and our future (are you with me so far?) but bringing back an epi *and* a movie villain, I’m just saying…

FWIW, I don’t think sneero was such a great villain. But he had a monster truck.

You can get way bad ass out there in the universe so there’s no real need for the snarling boy from the Botany Bay. AND, you can’t use Ricardo Montalban anymore, and he was what made Kahn, not the writing. So if you have to recast it, go the freakin distance and create a worthy, nuanced, invincible foe. And hire a real actor to play her.

36. tribble abassador to ceti alpha 5 - November 2, 2009

no khan please…it would be star trek ripping off star trek

37. JohnD - November 2, 2009

Roberto and Orci are not the brilliant writers that this site keeps shoving down our throats that they are. Get some new guys who can write a story that is fun and exciting, not spock walking away from the bridge in horror after Kirk rips away his command and says his dead mother never loved him… and then become best friends out of that.

Stop exposing trek for your freakin paycheck…stick with transformers… and leave Khan alone.

Thanks. :)

38. G - November 2, 2009

11. sci-fi bri – November 2, 2009

the bad guy should be playted by Andy Samberg as the guy in Space Olympics
———————————————————————————————

Or, better yet.. LASER CATS!!! LOL

39. TD - November 2, 2009

please no.

40. G - November 2, 2009

I agree, no more “threat to Earth” scenarios..

1. No “alien probe” or V’ger-type threat to the Earth
2. No Khan (at least, not yet)
3. No Khan-like/Nero-like/Schinzon-like, single villain vs. the Enterprise
4. No “super alien” Borg-type opponent

Something very, very original.. maybe a threat more “X-Files”-like in nature, more of a paranormal/mystery-type threat or disaster? (Some people may hate that idea. I’m just brainstorming, here)

41. Ran - November 2, 2009

No Khan, no Orci and no Kurtzman.

42. jared - November 2, 2009

do harry mudd!

43. G - November 2, 2009

How about this.. the Enterprise collides with the Allspark in deep space, turning the Enterprise into a Transformer.

44. G - November 2, 2009

Harry Mudd is gay.

45. The Bear - November 2, 2009

#31 “THE GORN. Lots of them. What makes them tick? Why have they attacked so many Federation outposts?”

I agree! The GORN. “Remember Cestus III !”

Hell JJ, you can reflect lens flares off the multi-facetted eyes of the Gorn and I wont even fraking bitch about it. Just DO NOT DO KHAN! There’s just some things that should be considered sacred and should be left alone.

46. Simon - November 2, 2009

#16 – talk about stale (TOS ENT)

I would love to see a new Khan with someone like Javier Bardem, as has been suggested elsewhere. Khan means business and he’s a villain that the audience would take seriously. Throw in some Klingons and we have a helluva film!

47. Slade Brunner - November 2, 2009

yes kurtzman/orci, no khan

48. Matt Wiley - November 2, 2009

People keep forgetting that if they do Khan, it wont be a remake of the “Wrath of Khan” it will be the episode when they introduce Khan

Khan can’t have a Wrath without being introduced now can he?

49. non-belligerency confirmed - November 2, 2009

i would dig some khan flares in a brewery. ilea, or any hot bald indian babe would be sweet, too.
and bring back janice rand! only this time, base her on lee whitney and make her a boozy sex addict. oh yeah.

50. non-belligerency confirmed - November 2, 2009

but in this future, couldn’t khan be like a sweet, eco-friendly guy who runs a little space cafe? with like, batter-fried earslugs on the menu?

51. PJ - November 2, 2009

id be up for klingons with a menacing glimpse of khan ala the ending of batman begins. i think we could get a more commanding version of kahn (with javier playing the character) much the way heath did with his turn as the joker.

52. JKP - November 2, 2009

Be creative. Make new ethos and villains while sprinkling in little references for us die hards. One of the exciting things about this reboot is that while the characters are similar, they are still different. We get to watch them grow and develop. I want that to happen in new directions and with new adversaries.

Khan was great. TWOK is still my favorite movie. But let’s do something different with our new cast. Please.

53. KHAAAAN, the weasel - November 2, 2009

please
no
more
talk
about
bringing
back
KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!

54. Garovorkin - November 2, 2009

Why not? this time though, instead of killing off Khan, Why not have him and his genetic supermen as on going threat to the Federation? That could be interesting.

55. No Khan - November 2, 2009

It just won’t die. If I want Khan i will pop in my Blu-ray. After they do Khan they can cancel the movie series because they have no ideas left.

56. Odkin - November 2, 2009

Well, it’s been months since I said it but it bears repeating:

MIRROR UNIVERSE!

Not a remake of “Mirror, Mirror”, but a whole new adventure using the same concept. Maybe the entire evil Enterprise can cross over into our universe this time. Give the new actors a chance to show their stuff with some scene-chewing villainy!

57. Gracian - November 2, 2009

Well, there are nice thinks to bring back as details, like they did on STXI. I’ve always liked the Mirror Universe a lot, but in this case it would be a mirror universe of a parallel universe. LOL!!!

So, I think Klingons need to be there but with a story with something new.

58. Ampris - November 2, 2009

I’m choosing to believe that all this talk about Khan is simply to screw with our heads a little bit. That would be okay. If they’re seriously considering putting him in the movie –especially prominently– that’s just plain upsetting to think about. No. Let the classics stay classic and allow the new stuff room to grow, and everything will be alright.

59. G - November 2, 2009

That’s right. Think outside the box. Make a new “classic”

60. VZX - November 2, 2009

I say no Khan just yet, save him for the third or fourth one. I’d say this one should be about the Klingons. Also, the main villain should be Kor. Maybe Kor is willing to start an interstellar war while his government is not. It could be like the episode “errand of mercy”, except not take place on Organia and thus not have the Organian interference or peace treaty.

I’d love to see a real scene-chewing, classic, moustache-twirling evil villain in Kor, the kind that it seemed that John Colicos was going for.

61. Odkin - November 2, 2009

I’d also be up for some sort of Gorn onslaught.

Klingons are too mundane. Everyone expects them… they’re just generic bad guy stand-ins for expansionist Commies, which isn’t relevant anymore. God knows no one in Hollywood will have the balls to make an allegory about a savage theocratic caliphate, which is one way that Klingons might work today.

But Gorn do have that visceral lizardy loathsomeness, so swarms of them would be pretty darn menacing.

And if not Mirror Universe, and not Gorn…. then it’s gotta be Harry Mudd!

62. Kirk's Kid - November 2, 2009

We figured the reason for a ‘reboot’ was so they could revisit anything from the original but give it a new twist.

Of course, as I have Kirk Prime telling young Kirk in a story I am writing, “If you see the Botany Bay just blow them out of space.”

That said Javier Bardeem would make a terrific Khan.

63. Screw the New - November 2, 2009

Yaaaah Khan!

Again!

Still!

They could call this one…

Star Trek: To Boldly Go Where We’ve Already Been (Twice)

64. M_E - November 2, 2009

Make the next movie all centered about Khan! :D
Thanks to Nero´s interference on the timeline, the Botany Bay is found by another starship, a science vessel; after taking command of it, he learns of some top secret study/project/whatever… To make it short, in an explosive event Khan is thrown in the Mirror Universe (which is at this point is still running on the Prime Timeline), beats mirror Pike (as he was not murdered by mirror Kirk yet) and takes over the Terran Empire. :D

65. Screw the New - November 2, 2009

Here’s a thought I just had:

When Star Trek first came out, a huge part of its appeal was its new-ness. There hadn’t been anything like it up ’til that point.

You had a new show, in a funny-looking albeit wholly original-looking spaceship going new places every episode.

That’s why people liked it.

But something happened along the way….

Now Star Trek fans seem to HATE new stuff. What they want is more of the same. Over and over and over and over and over again.

I bet if someone completely remade all the original episodes, word-for-word, shot-for-shot, with the exact same set-design and everything, Trekkies would LOVE it….so long as NOTHING was different.

66. SirBroiler - November 2, 2009

I’m a big fan of intrigue and corruption – why not insert a little here. We already know from Enterprise that Section 31 exists by this time – so why not make that the thread. I loved the concept I read months back about the 5-year mission being a cover for some large but secret operation that only Kirk, Spock, maybe McCoy (or even not) know about. I’m all for turning this universe completely on it’s ear as long as it makes for a thought-provoking story with honest characters.

67. Mel - November 2, 2009

Please no Khan, Klingons, Romulans or any races we ONLY know from TNG, VOY, DS9 or ENT.

I want the GORN! ;-)

They at least would be aliens, which don’t look like humans with a little make up in the face. I like exotic aliens! And even better you could advertise them in Asia as a dinosaur/Godzilla/dragon alien race and elsewhere, where Star Trek wasn’t so successful. Jurassic Park, Godzilla and similar movies attracted many viewers world wide.

68. Trekboi - November 2, 2009

no way to recapture the Khan arc of space seed & Star trek II- just do a newstory with some original series elements…

69. xander - November 2, 2009

I’m really surprised that no one has mentioned it yet.
The Doomsday Machine, this would be one kick ass film. Don’t threaten Earth again, been done to death, but threaten Federation worlds, I can just see the effects shots now, whole worlds being devoured, the dead numbering billions, the USS Constellation, or whats left of it.. Their are so many possible story elements, drama, action, adventure, loss, death, destruction.
As much as I love Khan, it would only end up being Space Seed remade, the whole vengeance aspect of the character would not be able to be used, so no remake of Wrath of Khan.

70. EFFeX - November 2, 2009

Eh… I’m still not digging the Khan idea.

I say go with the Klingons, perhaps set up Khan for the third film?

71. pizza - November 2, 2009

NO Khan. Leave this sacred episode + movie alone.

Why the need to have a bad guy at all?

Star Trek IV was such a nice compliment to the Trek Family with no “Bad Guy”. Why not write a movie why the Federation is not allowed to develope cloaking technology? Or why there is Neutral Zone?

How about the cloaking technology in development causes a tear in the galaxy, causes distrust with the Klingons and Romulans. Worlds are destroyed. Federation promisses not to develope the technology.

Come on Mr. Orci, how about something other than Good guy kicks the bad guy’s ass.

72. G - November 2, 2009

@ 69. xander – November 2, 2009

I’m really surprised that no one has mentioned it yet.
The Doomsday Machine, this would be one kick ass film. Don’t threaten Earth again, been done to death, but threaten Federation worlds, I can just see the effects shots now, whole worlds being devoured, the dead numbering billions, the USS Constellation, or whats left of it.. Their are so many possible story elements, drama, action, adventure, loss, death, destruction.
As much as I love Khan, it would only end up being Space Seed remade, the whole vengeance aspect of the character would not be able to be used, so no remake of Wrath of Khan.
___________________________________________________________

One problem.. it’s still like “the probe” scenario, regardless of what planet it is. And, two.. we already know that all it takes to disable it is detonating a starship inside of it.

Too easy.

73. G - November 2, 2009

@ 71. pizza – November 2, 2009

Why the need to have a bad guy at all?

Star Trek IV was such a nice compliment to the Trek Family with no “Bad Guy”. Why not write a movie why the Federation is not allowed to develope cloaking technology? Or why there is Neutral Zone?

How about the cloaking technology in development causes a tear in the galaxy, causes distrust with the Klingons and Romulans. Worlds are destroyed. Federation promisses not to develope the technology.

Come on Mr. Orci, how about something other than Good guy kicks the bad guy’s ass.
————————————————————————————————

I agree! (see my post, #40)

It should be more mission-oriented. Danger, intrigue, mystery. No more “mono y mono” single bad guy vs. Enterprise. Dig deeper. Broader. More complex than a single antagonist villain.

74. Demode - November 2, 2009

Kor, Kang, Koloth, Chang…. lots of good Klingon captains to use in a new film.

As for Khan, … sure… but why not save him for a future film? Using him in Part 2 would really feel like they were rehashing the past.

75. VOODOO - November 2, 2009

Not feeling it… It could be good, but not the direction I would go.

Can it be done better than it was done before?

76. Dennis Bailey - November 2, 2009

These people know what they’re doing. And Abrams is obviously right – if you can recast Kirk and Spock you can certainly recast Khan.

77. Odkin - November 2, 2009

66- SirBroiler
WORST IDEA EVER

Intrigue/corruption is the bane of every cheap drama since the 70’s. It’s all about making authority, the military, or (most often) business out to be evil shadowy power-grubbing bad guys. It’s the most immature and fearful approach to the protagonist/antagonist dillema – creating a shadowy malevolent power structure that betrays it’s own minions. This lazy cliche is on par with the “This ends now!” school of screenwriting.

78. NotTimothyGeithner - November 2, 2009

-Gun running Klingons
-Corrupt Federation colony Governors (Kirk has some experience)
-Kor or whoever and Kirk stop private corporations from setting up their own little empire on pre-warp societies.
-Deal with torture for fun
-Fight with Klingons but learn larger lesson about working together and peace blah blah blah
-Technobabble
-More Orion chicks
-More Uhuru

Bam JJ Trek II!

79. C.S. Lewis - November 2, 2009

The neat thing about the “bad guys” on the best of Star Trek and its spin-offs was that they were merely devices, fakes if you will, to get the audience out of its head for a little while to explore some really cool IDEA.

What happens when the killer pizza is really a mother protecting its young?

Why would a lunatic really be a galaxy-class criminal psychiatrist and why is wiping the mind clean of bad ideas a bad idea?

Is it always a good idea to save a life even if doing so costs millions more in a potential future?

When the brain is removed from Spock’s skull, why do the native lovelies wear really hot miniskirts, have perfect bods and gorgeous faces?

(Alright, I’m kidding there wink wink. But not about the space babes.)

Missing from so many NuTreks is the idea. Plots abound. Character development galore. Lots and lots of technobabble but few ideas.

Paramount Pictures LLP I know this is a difficult request, but How about a really great idea to explore in your new Star Trek franchise. It won’t kill you, you know. The guys that made your company once did it on a regular basis.

Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
TDY the Inner Harbour

80. G - November 2, 2009

@ 61 Odkin
…they’re just generic bad guy stand-ins for expansionist Commies, which isn’t relevant anymore. God knows no one in Hollywood will have the balls to make an allegory about a savage theocratic caliphate, which is one way that Klingons might work today.

@ 77 Odkin
WORST IDEA EVER

Intrigue/corruption is the bane of every cheap drama since the 70’s. It’s all about making authority, the military, or (most often) business out to be evil shadowy power-grubbing bad guys. It’s the most immature and fearful approach to the protagonist/antagonist dillema – creating a shadowy malevolent power structure that betrays it’s own minions. This lazy cliche is on par with the “This ends now!” school of screenwriting.

____________________________________________________________

Dude, you sound like a paranoid FOX “news” watcher (follower), angry-humping Star Trek fans. What’s with all the “fancy” big political words? LOL

Chill

81. Will - November 2, 2009

Is their flailing about, looking for a plot, supposed to be reassuring?

The summer’s other big film (that did worse), Terminator: Salvation, at least had a plan for three films in a trilogy.

Trek’s decision to just fly by the seat of their pants and maybe/maybe-not come up with a good idea for the sequel is shocking.

82. Markus - November 2, 2009

The New Villians in the next film should be the Galactic Empire.

83. Trek Nerd Central - November 2, 2009

Why are some of you folks so opposed to Khan? He’s a fascinating, iconic villain — like the Joker in the Batman universe. Why not revisit him in a new universe? What’s the big deal?

Please explain, somebody.

84. Barking Alien - November 2, 2009

IDIC forbid we should see an original idea or villain.

And I’m sorry #76, Abrams, at least as evidenced by the last film, is not obviously right. While you can indeed recast these characters, the question of whether you should is still debatable.

#75 conveys my feelings accurately. Sure it could work but its not the way I would go. I would tell the audience a story it doesn’t already know, with a villain it doesn’t already love to hate. Take a chance.

85. Trekenstein - November 2, 2009

KHAN TALK = SMOKE & MIRRORS

Then again, it’s easier than coming up with something original.

86. Star Trek XI was GREAT!!!! - November 2, 2009

Khan would fit the Abrams mantra of flashbacks, by showing Khan and friends leaving Earth in the late 90s and all that fun stuff.

87. Chris Doll - November 2, 2009

This is just the worst idea ever.

Revisiting Khan is a cop-out. If I were sitting in a room (face to face) with Abrams, Orci, and Kurtzman I would have no difficulty challenging them to step away from this and take the opportunity to craft a new Star Trek story.

So there you go you guys. I know you read these comments. Consider this my challenge to you.

88. Leonel - November 2, 2009

I can see it now:

They’ll bring back Kahn, show him and the sleepers taken out of stasis, and running around in a new S.S. Botany Bay. Some poor unsuspecting fool will have awakened them, Kahn and Co. will take over their civilization, and use their technology to refit the old sleeper ship.

The writers will take our feedback and do what they wish. Personally, as long as its a good story I don’t care what they do. If they go with Kahn they’re going to have to be very creative to make changes to some details believable.. let’s see what happens!!

89. TrEkLoRd_PCB - November 2, 2009

The biggest question is how the hell is the timeline gonna get fixed? Right now, everything from TOS to VOY is in question.

What about Vulcan and Romulus?

JJ backed himself into a corner here, and the backlash will take out his ideas. I predict that JJ has 1 possibly 2 films before Paramount comes to it senses, or the fans revolt.

Vulcan gone from the Alpha Quadrant… I guess the Andorians are gonna do something drastic. WAIT FOR IT!!!!!

Jeffrey Combs as Admiral Shran!!!! (or his son)

…..

90. Phil - November 2, 2009

I think a lot of people have made good points. I would also be of the school of thought that revisiting Khan would be counter-productive for a whole lot of reasons. Not least because we’ve all, apparently, lived through the Eugenics Wars already….

However, since every movie needs an antagonist and a love interest, even your basic, made-for-TV, sunday afternoon on satellite channel 358, “Who Will Love My Kidneys?” scenario follows this rule of thumb, I think some interesting characters to introduce would be Carol & David Marcus.

It could go a long way to explaining where they came from. Why Kirk is the way he is. It could give Kirk a good reason to have stayed away from David’s upbringing. And it wouldn’t tread on the toes of what’s come before. It’s not a typical antagonist. It’s something that’s familiar without being overly developed – the introduction of those characters, for me, in Star Treks II & III raised as many questions as it answered. It also gives a more human element to the film that I think has been lacking with recent Star Trek offerings (no disrespect meant), and would be a breath of fresh air compared to your usual hyper-antagonist wanting to ruin existence for us all.

And David could be the one to threaten our crew because he’s young, brash, intelligent, confused, and with many points to prove. You could see a little bit of it in the Genesis cave when he hopped on Kirk before even asking who he was.

Ideally, we’d be dealing with a whole new set of characteristics, as, as much as anyone, I would like to see something completely new and original that doesn’t resort to modern big-budget clichés that have become so tired lately. But the fact is that to cater for everyone, you’re going to have to inject some mild form of familiarity without having to rely on the old reliables.

91. braxus - November 2, 2009

Reading these reports is not sitting well with me. I said it before and will again- I get the impression the production team have no idea on what to make a new movie about. Its been 6 months and no progress? That doesn’t sound good to me. There should be a strong movie idea they have in mind to go with by now. Some good ideas have been thrown out there, so what is the delay?

92. Larr - November 2, 2009

I heard that Abrams is not doing Impossible Mission 4, which is bad news since he’ll probably direct the Star Trek sequel.

I wasn’t impressed with his direction in the storyline, lens flares, close-ups, choice of sets, etc. We need a competent guy at the helm.

93. Harry Ballz - November 2, 2009

To go with a Khan storyline would demonstrate TWO-DIMENSIONAL THINKING!

The title? Star Trek: The Rehash Of Khan

Being original is not a crime, you know.

94. Phil - November 2, 2009

92. Have some faith. What goes on here does have some sort of sway with the film-makers it seems. I think that what the fans didn’t like will be addressed (within reason) in the sequel. In saying that, I think the film was, in most cases, faithful. JJ isn’t responsible (in whole) for the art direction or story. And Nick Meyer probably isn’t available….

95. MDSHiPMN - November 2, 2009

Do Kahn.

What if we miss out on the best movie ever?

They can’t mess it up. Right?

96. Star Trek Movie Sequel Idea (NEW) - November 2, 2009

I think Abrams had it right in a previous interview where he stated the next film should be more Roddenbery-esque. The story should have some contemporary allegory…

I’m thinking along the lines of say a 23rd century alQaeda type group who uses terror as a means of destroying the Federation and establishing a new galactic order. It could be an entirely new alien race or an extremist faction of a known Trek race.

The movie would open with a 9/11 type shocker say a suicide bomber destroys a peace conference between the Federation and an enemy race. It is revealed that there are infiltrators within the Federation that are ready to die for the ’cause’ to establish this new galactic order.

There will be a roguish President of the Federation, who goes against the vote of the Council and uses emergency powers to wage a war, along with a ‘coalition of member Federation worlds’ to engage this terrorist group on Planet X, located on the far reaches of the Alpha Quadrant unexplored by the Federation as its system is accessed by transient wormhole.

The President orders the Enterprise to Planet X to attain a peace agreement but is really a pretext to a large scale invasion.

On an off world alien planet, not a member of away from the laws of the Federation, we discover that ‘enemy combatants’ are being ‘interrogated’ 23rd century torture style on information regarding the terrorist group, its members and movements.

As for how the movie will end..it could be one of those episodes that doesn’t really have an ending to mirror the contemporary war on terror. There are many possibilities.

As in our time, there will be criticism, cynicism, questions of what is patriotism, who is the better Federation citizen? Since this is the 23rd century, I’m rather sure we’ll have talking heads in that time and would like to see a futuristic Rush Limbaugh and James Carville go at it…

97. samrock83 - November 2, 2009

Do something original. Please.

98. Lord Ravenwood - November 2, 2009

Ran (Post #41)

“No Khan, no Orci and no Kurtzman.”

Amen brother!

And while we’re at it, NO JJ Abrams either!

99. M-5 Computer - November 2, 2009

What about the M-5 Computer system?

100. Bill Peters - November 2, 2009

I say do something Original but please have a good Villian like the Klingon’s or Gorn or Harry Mudd,Gary Seven or a mix of Enemies . I personally would like to see the Klingon’s in the film even if they are not the main Enemy , I don’t get why people here are so Condesending of people who have basically given Trek a Second Wind and brought it into the Mainstream and to a new Genration. Let them play in there new universe and tell us Roddenberry esque Stories. NO over the top Allegory that would be too obvious but still there!

101. Odkin - November 2, 2009

For God’s sake people… it’s KHAN not KAHN!

How can some fans be so obsessive about every technobabble reference and every forehead-wrinkled fake species and not be able to spell the major villain of the best Trek movie????

I’ve never tried to correlate them – but are the KAHN people also the CANNON people?

102. Bill Peters - November 2, 2009

I would say try not beat people over the heads with the Alagory, Gene never did he did it in a Classy way, I say lets have a little faith in this team and let them wow us again, we have to accept as fans that Trek has to Adapt to new Audicanes every now and again, the next movie needs to have appeal to the General Public as well as Trek fans. They did that very well in this movie the General Public got to see trek in a new light and they put stuff in the movie that only fans would catch without making the public fell left out. like the end scene where Pike was in the wheel chair, I was laughing and my freind who wasn’t into Trek asked me after the Movie why I was laughing at that point and I said because everyone is where they suppoused to be. I had many moments like that that I had to explane to non fans like when Spock said ” Jim I have been and Always will be your friends, even had to ex plane what a Tribble was and where it was in the first scene with Scotty. I like more Charterer development but I also like to see Klingon’s in this Universe and also Gorn and others.

I think they will come up with the right mix and we just have to accept that the new Trek needs to be made for more then just Trek fans. I am one of many people who has watched Trek for most of his 27 years and I want Trek to survive into then next 40 so I must Accept the new fans and new takes on Trek.

Go for it Abrams and Team, I can’t wait to see what you have next!

103. sensor ghost - November 2, 2009

Instead of rehashing established canon with Khan, I really would love to see what they could do with Harry Mudd. They’d have ample room for creativity there.

And I want to see Finnigan from Shore Leave while they’re still in Starfleet Academy. Just as a little easter egg.

104. Balok - November 2, 2009

I would like to see Khan portrayed as a positive role model. A character who could even be a Starfleet Captain. Everyone would look up to him. But he would be like the anti-christ. His sinistor intentions could be fueled by the fore-knowledge that in an alterate universe he was a de-throned prince. Not to mention Captain Kirks mortal enemy.

105. JMAN - November 2, 2009

Please, please, please DON’T use Khan. This is an opportunity to create new Trek, not stomp through territory that has already been done. It would be extremely disappointing to have to watch “The Revised Wrath of Khan.”

106. Gman - November 2, 2009

Why not the mirror-verse – I think having the actors play good and bad woudl be cool – they find a rift in space and the ISS Enterprise and USS Enteroruse crew go at it – the mirror verse crew infiltrates Starfleet and sets up Kirk and Spock as renegade terrorists.
This could be a cool movie dealing with issues of trust of leadership, terrorism
Besides – Qunito doing the Spock beard and scar Checkov were cool in “Mirror Mirror” which I thought was a great TOS episode.

107. mateo - November 2, 2009

Sorry, but I have just about zero faith in Orci & Kurtzman to deliver a quality script. I’ve said it before, and shall again: They were, by far, the worst thing about Star Trek 09. They just don’t have the artistic talent…they have commercial, mass-appeal talent. Hope they prove me wrong.

108. Second Star To The Right - November 2, 2009

Use the First Federation. You’re welcome for the great idea. Cheers.

109. Trekluver - November 2, 2009

Great and wonderful idea Do it JJ! I want Khan in 2 soo bad I can’t see straight! Just don’t cast Antonio Banderas for the role because when I see him now I think Spy Kids and Shrek! Yuck! Find someone who can do the part as well as Riccardo Montalban did and I’ll be fine with that! Oh and make sure you bring The Shat back so he can woop teach Chris Pine how to really knock out a villan! (Oh and don’t make it look like Shat’s not doing anythingcause it looked so stupid in Generations!)

@32

Interesting point. There was a reference to that in “Space Seed” and don’t think its a bad idea to go back and revisit that. They could do some intro scene where it shows the lineage of The Khans and get up to Khan Nonian Sinng and go into a back story plot about his beginnings like are described in the novels which according to Paramount are considered “Canon”. Maybe show a brief scene where he hijacks an experimental spacecraft (S.S. Botany Bay) from Area 51 and see them launch while playing a Michael Giachinno intro to start the movie! Wonderful ideas…

110. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 2, 2009

Theyll do it and release at Xmas so Paramount can make lots of money on their new Xmas decoration, “The Wreath of Khan” composed of genetically altered garlands and a pretty red bow. You scoff now but just you wait and see…..

111. Will_H - November 2, 2009

Please, no Khan or Harry Mudd. I hope they read this stuff and realize that the vast majority (at least from what I’ve read) are against using Khan in another movie.

112. Trekluver - November 2, 2009

@20

If they do revisit the Romulans they better not change the look to much from that of Vulcans as to not disrupt whats already been set up in this and the Prime Timeline. (a.k.a. TOS and ENT episodes?)

113. Scott Gammans - November 2, 2009

noooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo!

Well maybe.

114. entropy - November 2, 2009

The joker was in two movies and it seemed to work out ok for batman

115. Harry Ballz - November 2, 2009

Don’t make the same mistake the Superman movies did…..same villian in every friggin’ film….Lex Luthor, Lex Luthor, Lex Luthor!! BORING!! The next Superman movie should feature Brainiac as the villian…..and the next Trek flick should have ANYBODY but Khan!!

GO DIFFERENT OR GO HOME!!

116. David D. - November 2, 2009

It would be cool to see Khan, but in an entirely different story line.

I see him ‘hidden’ as the C story. The sister ship to the enterprise is the new defiant. The defiant goes missing after a rescue mission during a large Klingon invasion storyline. The A story would be the reality of invading a world to rout the local Klingon forces. The B story would about dealing with the Vulcan survivors and an invitation to return to Romulus with an offer to settle on the newly terra-formed Remus.

117. David D. - November 2, 2009

Funny note – having now read some of this anti JJ, Orci stuff: ST9 made crap-loads of money, made trek cool again, and … dare I say it… raised the bar.

why are you complaining?

118. SpocksinnerConflict - November 2, 2009

Hey “Trekmovie staff” (aka Pascale)

why you all pushing the khan so much?

let it go.

119. jocor - November 3, 2009

Waste of time.

Already seen it.

120. Chasco - November 3, 2009

How many times do these people need to be told that the majority of fans don’t want Khan again? We know Bob Orci looks in here occasionally – does he not actually read anything we say, or does he just prefer to ignore it?

The ENTIRE POINT, we were told, of resetting the timeline was to give the writers new and exciting possibilities in this “anything can happen” universe.
So for goodness sake, guys, seize the opportunity you gave yourselves, and WRITE SOMETHING ORIGINAL!!!!!

121. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - November 3, 2009

I agree with others on this thread: if there are not to be any arbitrary reprises of TOS characters just for the sake of doing so (and bravo to the team for that), then let’s forget about any single villain like Khan.

Mudd’s very appearance would make me ill, because he’s a boring character.

AND NO MORE TIME TRAVEL!

Personally, what I’d like to see more is situations from TOS make a comeback. The Doomsday Machine, The Tholian Web, The Corbomite Maneuver, Operation: Annihilate!, Devil on the Dark,… many great or good episodes introduce not just characters but well developed sketches of what the state of the galaxy and the Federation is like, with all the attendant issues. Let’s not forget that Star Trek is not just about the crew of the Enterprise, but their whole environment.

The reason the Enterprise 2-part episode In a Mirror Darkly is so cool is the way it integrated the Mirror Universe with the Tholian Web episode. That manner of storytelling is something to aspire to.

122. 4 8 15 16 23 42 - November 3, 2009

Oh, yeah, and I also agree with the others who have advocated NO MORE EARTH IS IN DANGER scenarios either.

123. No more Khan !!! - November 3, 2009

Putting Khan in to the sequel would be an easy way out for the writers. I would’t go and see the film if they put him in it.

124. No more Khan !!! - November 3, 2009

I meant: would not go and see the film……

125. Scott Xavier - November 3, 2009

NO MOrE KHAN That would suck, however it is another trek and dont the bad usually follow the good? isnt that an unwritten trek curse?

126. Alex Rosenzweig - November 3, 2009

#46 – Using the most classic and iconic of all the Enterprises–which they should have done in the first place–is stale, but redoing Khan isn’t? I fear that I have missed something important in that logic, ’cause that totally doesn’t follow for me.

Ahh, well…

In any event, I really wish they’d never gone the route of this “alternate universe”, and instead had told the “origin story” of TOS as we knew it. But since they have gone that route, why not give us something new? Take these characters, and the audience, someplace we haven’t been over the last few decades.

OTOH, if they could see their way clear to do a storyline that brings this alternate reality back into synch with Trek as it has existed in the first 5 series and 10 films, I could forgive a bit of going back to the well of known material to accomplish it. I’m just not holding my breath. ;)

127. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

Well at least these movies by JJ Abrams are in a parallel universe. Nothing he does will affect the Trek in the Prime universe which is still happpening.

With comments like these I am getting worried that the next movie is goig to be a rehash of a classic TOS episode or movie.

Khan is a great villain and a classic movie, I do not want to see it remade as too many classic movies are having done to them today. I am still dreading the nightmare on elm street remake.

I am a huge Trekkie and always will be, I wil always go back and watch the series and movies, However, if JJ and these ‘writers’ take the easy way out and redo Khan or rremake a classic episode or makethe film very un Trek then I am afraid JJ will have driven me away from watching Trek under his watch.

I hope this doesn’t happen because I want new Trek as much as the next guy but I have to admit rehashes are not something I want.

“The line must be drawn here. This far no further.”

128. Dan - November 3, 2009

Be original writers, no redo’s!!!

129. Kev - November 3, 2009

some things are sacred and that’s one of them for the love of god dont do that JJ

they badly need to find some new writers in my opinion Orci and Kurtzman are not qualified to do ANY good films judging by there writing on the transformer films and this one.

it was the directing and the cast that made st 09 generic but good, not the writing

with new competent writers and jjs direction its shouldn’t be that hard to do a smart, fun, original and popular star trek film again.

130. Jim Nightshade - November 3, 2009

mirror universe-nooooo-because new spock with a beard would be———Sylar!
Doomsday machine-nah–new voyages first new episode was doomsday machines-also involved the guardian of 4ever and william windom alternate timelines etc-it really was an excellent story-i also dont think khan should re re-done or even rebooted–

131. Mr Lirpa - November 3, 2009

I don’t get all the anti-Khan sentiments. It sounds like an amazing idea to me. this wouldn’t be a remake of STWOK it would be a new look at the first time that Kirk and Khan met. As the Khan character is so fantastic and such a challenge to Kirk i’d love to see that story done on the big screen.

Yes I know that it was done in Space seed but this is a new Universe and to to have the chance to see the two K’s go head to head over a feature length movie would be quite an experience if handled correctly. it think it would be quite cool to have the comparison of how old kirk beat old Khan compared to their younger counterparts do it.

All that said, i’d rather see a seriously bad ass Klingon commander go head to head with James T.

Bring on the Klingons!

132. Balok - November 3, 2009

This is getting old, no Kalhn please.

133. Cheve - November 3, 2009

Boborci, please, If you feel the need to use an old episode, just start the movie with the end of that episode in the way of James Bond’s prologes and then go to something new. Please, don’t remake an episode and don’t erase an old episode from the new timeline by making the movie so that diferent things happen to it’s characters. There is no need to show that the classic episodes don’t happen in this timeline; if you make an original story with new characters, we will asume that the clasic episodes happened and merge both timelines in our minds the best we can..

The relation of the new timeline and the classic one is better left to fan’s imaginations, otherwise, the fans will spend their time pointing at the diferences instead of enjoying the new story.

Unless you want the cast to face the choice of puting themselves in a situation in which they know what willl happen (Because Spock Prime says something) and you want to make that decision part of the plot, playing with classic episodes is completely unneccesary.

134. TheMightyBruce - November 3, 2009

Ignore the fanboys, Mr. Orci and Abrams. Khan is an excellent idea and will make mucho money at the box office.

Go Khan!

135. The Riddler - November 3, 2009

Do it! do it! do it!

136. Xavier - November 3, 2009

@ 37:

Exactly…. I mean those two wrote TRANSFORMERS I and II and they are proud of it… Did anyone watch those movies? They are embarrassing.

Paramount should fire Orci and Kurtzman and hire an author with class to write the next film.

I mean… come on, be honest… except for the great SFX, the good cast… XI was extremely lame. Bad guy with superweapon going for earth… how many times did we have this plot already?

137. toddk - November 3, 2009

Yes KHAN!! Watch the movie “Die-Hard” When the burglers are getting into position in the office tower…now imagine Khan’s minions taking over the enterprise in the same fashion!!!

138. captain_root - November 3, 2009

@137

Cool idea! This way we would avoid the “Earth-in-danger” cliche and still make it exciting, not to mention making the movie a “bottle-show” (and this time save enough money to make “engineering” LOOK like engineering!). We would also get to see more of the Enterprise’s interiors without making it a dull tour. For example: a scene in which the crew cleverly lures some of Khan’s goons into the shuttlebay to get rid of them by opening the airlock. Or a scene in which McCoy uses sickbay’s medical equipment to knock out one or two Augments. Or a clash of wits between Khan’s “hacker” Augment (trying to crack the Enterprise’s security codes) and Spock (countering his opponents attempts from the console located on the secondary/emergency bridge (assuming this Enterprise has one)). See: only one ship (i.e. not counting the Botany Bay) and so many possibilities!

139. Dresden - November 3, 2009

Corrections to no. 138

Kirk should have gone after Nero after killing Ayel.

James Kirk should have had at least one love interest or more just like James Bond which should be done in the sequel. Rachel Nichols as a human would have been perfect in the first film.

140. S. John Ross - November 3, 2009

On the one hand, it might be interesting to see their version of Khan in the next film. On the other hand, they’d have to explain how their version of Khan escaped from the black hole they dropped him into at the end of the last movie.

141. montgomery - November 3, 2009

Leave Khan alone. The Borg, too.

Do Cardassians! Who’s with me! Cardassians! Cardassians! We seriously and desperately need a Cardassian villain cut from Gul Dukat’s threads. You don’t just throw a Cardassian drink onto the menu in the bar in STXI and then completely ignore them as if you did it just to piss people off…. Or did you?

142. Kev - November 3, 2009

Considering bringing Khan into the story at this point doesn’t make any sense at all to begin with.

The characters arent even fully developed yet . I mean kirk is still a generic starship troopers cadett in command of the flagship of the federation, the enterprise.

the next film should focus on how the crew got into an amicaible postion with each other and explain how kirk got to love being in the captians chair of the enterprise and how his love of danger, adventure and flying by the seat of pants became his life long destiny.

not bumping into khan noonian pecks and having a sparing contest for uhura between him and spock

143. El Chup - November 3, 2009

Personally I think any return to the original episodes would show us just how far we’ve fallen from the days of creative writing.

They need to come up with a good, Roddenberry-esque morality play if they are to truly honour TOS.

144. screaming satellite - November 3, 2009

id kind of prefer to see something else take centre stage before Khan – the Klingons?… then maybe introduce the botany bay at the end joker/Batman Begins style – leading to Khan for Trek ‘3’

after all Nero was abit similar to Khan (ok ‘Wrath of Khan’ Khan but still Khan)..and although a freshly revived Khan wouldnt be anything like he was in TWOK, itd still be abit similar to do for a follow up

then if theres to be a forth film i wouldnt mind seeing how Kirk fared against the borg

yeah i know its rehashing old villians but whats wrong with that? its what movie audiences would want to see over some new adversary that might not work..(e.g. the Sona, God)

145. elodie - November 3, 2009

Khan : No.
Spock/Uhura : No, no no no
Scotty/Uhura : Yes (see the final frontier, she has feelings for him and it’s really credible)
McCoy/Spock/Kirk : The best trio ever, bring the dream team back!
Jonathan Archer and Porthos: cameo. I’d like seeing Scott Bakula again in the trek universe (I’m watching season 2 of Enterprise and I really like it!)
Leonard Nimoy : a HUGE YES!
William shatner: a huge NO!
Denise Crosby: yes, as Winona Kirk
Storyline : exploration, Star Trek deals with that, isn’t it?
More McCoy
More Sulu Chekov and Scotty!

if most of this stuff is done, it’ll be a Trek movie!

146. Admiral_BlackCat - November 3, 2009

Yes to Khan!
Give us Khan AND give us a fresh new idea! Take away the vengence and revenge theme from Khan. Get to the core of what makes him tick, what makes him wake up in the morning and why he is the way he is. Khan is such a wonderful character, but there is so much more that can be revealed and exlpored.
Now take that and give us a fresh idea that either revolves around Khan, or Khan is simply caught up in the going ons.
I think some refugee Vulcans can discover the Botany Bay, Khan and crew can “peacefully” intergrate into that society and then manipulate and exploit them to his whim.

The only big problem is the Eugenic Wars that never happened, but just simply ignore and dance around that elephant.

147. Sebi - November 3, 2009

Hm, I’m also kind of against the Khan idea.

But hell, what do I know. I was against recasting the Joker in Batman because I loved Jack Nicholson in Batman The Movie.

Ledger showed us that it recasting Khan could work.

148. david b - November 3, 2009

No Khan, for crying out loud, why rehash the same god damn villain!

I’m hoping that any new future Superman won’t just revolve around Lex Luthor, its gets boring.

If they do Khan they can go to hell, they already destroyed Vulcan this time around, what’s next on the destroy list?

I forget is this Star Battles, Star WARS or Star TREK?

149. CmdrR - November 3, 2009

It’s been DOOOOOOOOOOONE!

150. screaming satellite - November 3, 2009

149 – so had ‘star trek’ but they still did ST09

151. Odradek - November 3, 2009

If they have a good story for Khan they should definitely use it.

152. Gary Evans - November 3, 2009

Well, I would think the writers and director COULD come up with a better story than a rehash of an old villain character!
It could be new, heretofore unknown races.
It could be a forceful, devious villainous.
It could be about treachery among Romulans, Andorians, Gorn, Klingon or many other alien species.
It could be about new species that are NOT obvious primates.
It could be about two Federation spaceships that are damaged by a cataclysmic cosmic event and deal with their reactions, efforts and difficulty of survival and return to a STarbase or Federation planet.
It could be about the human condition of mental disease utilizing Kirk, Enterprise, the crew and Garth of Izar, a character with much potential that was little explored in the ‘Prime series!”
So much real potential out there YET these Noobs want to work with Khan?!?
IMO, that is just laziness and a sycophantic nod to fans who were upset with ST: XI!!!
Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman and Paramount have struck out in a bit of a new direction. WHY not develop that and see where it leads?
Stretch the envelope here, NOT revert to what was KNOWN in the Trek Primeverse!
BUT, WHATEVER, GET RID OF THE G.D. light flares! Beyond annoying, it is a downright turnoff when it comes to watching any future Star Trek movie.

153. Michael - November 3, 2009

To appeal to fans and teens:
Kirk Bops Janice Rand. Spock Pon Fars with Uhuru. Chekov bags green girl. Sulu bags several red shirt secuirty guys. McCoy does Chapel in sickbay. But to address this tastefully, product placement from Trojan is snuck in to show responsibility towards safe sex.
Maybe a Federation condom dispensor in the rec room.
And Jim Carey as Trelane as the antagonist.

154. Buzz Cagney - November 3, 2009

I’d be very cautious about including Khan, but…… the possibilities are nevertheless very interesting if done in a new, original way. Certainly one to get the writers creative juices going i’d have thought.

155. Barney Ross - November 3, 2009

I was just listening to the soundtrack for Inusurection and Children’s Story and End Credits were beautiful. I didn’t appreciate the soundtrack until now. Shame about the soundtrack for ST09.

By the way, 138/140, well-said.

156. Guy from Germany - November 3, 2009

No Kahn – no human villian, please. make a new adventure in space or on exotic planets – go where no man has gone before – PLEASE !!!

157. ALPA CHINO - November 3, 2009

DRESDEN YOU THE MAN!!!

158. CAPT KRUNCH - November 3, 2009

I ve said it before, but have Klingons and the Feds in search of Khan..a race to find him, in hopes of capturing his DNA for super soldiers…blah blah blah….I thought a Joker remake would suck as well but it turned out pretty good…if he’s evil enough…don’t tone hime down for the kiddies…like Lucas did on Anakin(omg a Star Wars and Batman reference) I know we only speak TREK!….
Doesn’t matter if it’s a good story with good characters and enough fx.
And don’t forget Shat somewhere……..

159. Jeyl - November 3, 2009

Star Trek 12 crew, do what ever the heck you want, just make it work. And on a personnel level, don’t use Star Trek 09 as a basis for what makes Star Trek work.

160. Lee Christmas - November 3, 2009

There is now the same formula with a starship crew on a mission which has been done to death and has become repetitive and monotonous. The sequel(s) needs a new and original story. A premise similar to the approach that 24 uses can be adopted in which the story becomes continuously larger and more complex with many storylines, key characters and several villains. Starfleet Intelligence always seemed to me to be an good idea which could have been utilised. It isn’t worth recycling old stories or old villains, no matter how good they were before.

161. Weerd1 - November 3, 2009

I think this gang could make an entertaining Khan film, but I would prefer they didn’t. Again, the point was to be able to go new places, try new things. A story wrapped around settling the new Vulcan colony could be interesting (and an opportunity to pay homage to TOS with Jolene Blalock as T’Pring), or perhaps the fall out with the Romulan Government post Nero. Think- they won’t have their cloaking device quite ready yet, but will be hungry to learn teh secrets of the supposedly Romulan ship from the future. A false diplomatic mission perhaps? Captained by the character from Balance of Terror, who DOES see an opportunity for peace, but is used by his government to try and capture Enterprise or her computer records. Hmmm. Ways to acknowledge TOS without remaking. I like it.

162. New Horizon - November 3, 2009

PLEASE, NO KHAN!

163. Horatio - November 3, 2009

NO KHAN!

164. Redshirt 5 - November 3, 2009

It’s nice to see so many of you skim through the quotes without paying a whit of attention to context, even the article goes so far as to say Abrams was NOT saying Khan is in the next film.

He was simply illustrating that in this new universe anything is possible, and that any character from the old series could potentially be brought back, recast, and put in a different set of circumstances. He only used the character of “Khan” to illustrate this point.

That’s it.

Of course, those of you preparing your “Anti-Khan” smear campaigns probably didn’t get past the first sentence in my post either.

165. Chris Roberts - November 3, 2009

The bigger problem for using Khan Is his backstory.The great danger
Is them trying to rewrite Khan’s history by removing the eugenics wars or
moving Khan’s time to mid or late 21st century.I can imagne J.J. Abrams
saying well referencing a fictional 1990’s conflict would be confusing to
General audences.

The references to classic Trek Canon were because of alex Kurtman,Robert
Orci,and damon Lindelloff.They were the ones who know Star Trek.In my oporion those are the members of the Superme Court I want to remian part of
the franchise.I might change my mind after I get the DVD and hear Abrams In
commantary.

166. frederick von fronkensteen - November 3, 2009

No Khan, no retreads. Let’s see some new adventures!

167. Gunnar Jensen - November 3, 2009

The sequel needs to have a larger all-star cast with many recognisable Hollywood actors making cameo appearances. It would only benefit to have anyone from the main casts of any previous Star Trek television series appearing as well or a memorable guest star. Janice Rand should have been included as well as the other obvious characters from the original series that were excluded in ST09.

168. Lore - November 3, 2009

Regardless of the plot of the new movie, the new timeline began after Khan’s time. That means the Botany Bay is still out there and will need to be dealt with. Spock prime would be remiss if he didn’t warn Starfleet about the threat.

169. Tollroad - November 3, 2009

It was reported that there would be Tribbles in the film. Apparently they were in Simon Pegg’s first scene, not that 99 per cent of audiences noticed.

170. Monroe - November 3, 2009

I hope the sequel will feature every Star Trek character ever and that Paramount in now in contact with every living actor for the sequel.

171. starshipcaptain - November 3, 2009

We need a good old fashion Klingon Battle!!!! Seeings how a ton of their ships were destroyed by Nero, they could have studied the technology on his ship, when they had it captured, and built a more advanced fleet to try and take over Starfleet. Get General Chang as the villain and make it a mystery!

172. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

Khan in movie = I don’t go to the movie = -$20 box office

Have to put it in a way they understand folks :)

173. Dan Paine - November 3, 2009

If they want to fix the timeline in the sequel, all there needs to be is someone travelling through time back to when the Narada first appeared through the hole/vortex and eliminate it before it attacked the Kelvin.

174. John - November 3, 2009

@37, its roberto orci and alex Kurtzman, not roberto and orci….

175. Matthew McColl - November 3, 2009

Garth of Izar, now that is a villain for you to consider Mr Abrams.

176. John - November 3, 2009

@89 there is nothign to fix. these are two seperate time lines.

177. opcode - November 3, 2009

@ 96. Star Trek Movie Sequel Idea (NEW)
“I’m thinking along the lines of say a 23rd century alQaeda type group who uses terror as a means of destroying the Federation and establishing a new galactic order. It could be an entirely new alien race or an extremist faction of a known Trek race.
The movie would open with a 9/11 type shocker say a suicide bomber destroys a peace conference between the Federation and an enemy race. It is revealed that there are infiltrators within the Federation that are ready to die for the ’cause’ to establish this new galactic order.”

First I fail to see how it can be more interesting than reusing Khan (which doesn’t mean that Khan is the best possible story).
Second, I really hope we don’t need to watch this kind of USA propaganda…

178. General Garza - November 3, 2009

Finally, the Jerry Goldsmith theme music from the Star Trek Insurrection end credits should have been used at the end. Even Russell Watson’s ‘Where My Heart Will Take Me’ (the album version which is one of the greatest most inspirational and underrated songs of all time) should have been included in the film. The Original Series theme music and new theme music in the movie was unnecessary. The soundtrack was disappointing overall. ‘Labour of Love’ was the best part of it.

179. Harsh - November 3, 2009

#3: “…it’s a no-brainer…”

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

From a writing perspective there’s certainly a couple ways of interpreting that statement.

180. Imrahil - November 3, 2009

Ugh. No.

181. Harsh - November 3, 2009

#168: “Regardless of the plot of the new movie, the new timeline began after Khan’s time. That means the Botany Bay is still out there and will need to be dealt with. Spock prime would be remiss if he didn’t warn Starfleet about the threat.”

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

And if that happens the Probe from ST: IV destroys the Earth.

No Space Seed, no ST: II, = No Planet Earth.

182. Hale Caesar - November 3, 2009

The Spock/Nyota Uhura romance was unnecessary but it was a relief that it wasn’t Kirk and Uhura.

183. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

#115 “Don’t make the same mistake the Superman movies did…..same villian in every friggin’ film”

Harry, Khan was last seen 27 years and 9 films ago. How is that “every friggin’ film?” Fans crying for no Khan have a more limited vision than the writers they’re criticizing. Khan in a NEW story could work just wonderfully.

But I still think they’re going to introduce him in XII and then make him the main baddie in XIII.

184. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

And I’ve seen several fans asking for a Gorn. No thanks. A Gorn in a small role, sure. They look cool. But give me a GREAT ACTOR giving a worthy performance as the super intelligent Khan over giant lizard men any day! The right actor will make all the difference for Khan, and considering how good the casting was for XI, I know they’ll find the right guy.

185. Alec - November 3, 2009

I’m really surprised by all the negativity with regards to Khan and the trek team. I’ll just make a few points.

1) To those who say that Khan is sacred, he’s not. I dare say that the only sacred thing in Star Trek is the Star Trek itself. By which I mean the essence of the show and its ideals. So, if Khan can be done well, i.e., up to or even better than Space Speed and TWOK, then use him. Telling a good story well should be the only real requirement set by the fans.
2) To those who say that a Khan story would be a rehash of old material, it wouldn’t. This would be a new story, just with familiar characters, just like Star Trek 2009. Besides, there’s a huge amount of overlap in Trek, anyway.
3) To those who say that Khan is overused, he’s not. Khan has made two appearances. How many appearances have the Klingons made? Hundreds? And yet, apparently, they’d made great villains! It’s the same with the Borg, the Romulans, the Cardasians, etc. In fact, using Khan would breathe a breath of fresh air villains-wise. Moreover, Khan is, unquestionably, the best villain; and he could even be updated and improved. For instance, we saw very little of the results of Khan’s genetic engineering. He should show off his intellect and strength more in a sequel. (And not mention the Eugenics wars of the late 1990s!)
4) To those who are dismissive of the Trek team, don’t be. They gave us a very good film which has re-implanted Star Trek’s Katra, saving it from certain death. If you don’t want Abrams and Co, recall what Star Trek was like a few years ago without them.

In summary, if Khan can be done well, let’s have him. But others can be done well too. A story about Section 31 intrigue; The Borg invasion (perhaps for a later film?); The Klingons; etc. The Trek universe is completely open and waiting to be explored. Perhaps one of the problems facing the team is precisely what story to tell, when there are so many very good ones available. I do, though, think that we need a traditional villain in a big special effects budget to bring in the mainstream, and a character-driven emotional, sophisticated plot to keep them, and everyone else, happy.

I can’t wait for the equivalent, hopefully, of Trek’s Empire Strikes Back. (No pressure, guys!)

186. Mr. Church - November 3, 2009

Why were there were only three planets shown in the film (Earth, Vulcan and Delta Vega)?

187. cw - November 3, 2009

I see the altered timeline having the Klingons patrolling areas of Fed space they wouldn’t have in the prime timeline. One of the Birds of Prey, in a complete state of boredom, stumbles upon an old D-100 class frieghter that is moving at sublight, a gazillion miles from anywhere and……………uses it for target practice to liven things up like that weirdo Klingon guy did in the God star trek movie. End of the Khan storyline. THEN, Kirk and company stumble upon the planet killer just as its entering our space and Kirk remembers how he dealt with it in the prime timeline from the meld he and old guy Spock did, and he send a shuttle with a huge antimatter bomb Shaun, I mean Scott, made and blows the crap out of it. End that storyline too, all before the opening credits roll. It would be like the beginnings of a James Bond movie.

188. Bao Thao - November 3, 2009

The Enterprise and the Narada barely fought each other in the film. The climactic battle between the Enterprise and the Scimitar was a lot more satisfying.

189. Krazy Joe - November 3, 2009

The fans keep saying over and over, “We don’t want Khan, we don’t want Khan, no Khan, forget Khan, etc”, and yet Khan keeps being brought up in interviews.

Does anyone actually think that’s a good idea?

190. blah - November 3, 2009

The sequel needs to have a larger all-star cast with many recognisable Hollywood actors making cameo appearances.
——————–
Why? Is that supposed to make the film better or something? The current film didn’t have many big named and look how awesome it was! Why are people under the delusion that big names= better movie. I can think of several current A-list actors that can’t act their way out of a wet paper bag. I would rather they cast unknowns fof the remaining parts and let the new crew spread their wings a little, cameo’s only weigh the movie down.

191. Tool - November 3, 2009

James Kirk should have had at least one or two love interests like James Bond which should be done in the sequel. Rachel Nichols as a human would have been perfect in the first film.

192. Gunnar Jensen - November 3, 2009

190

ST09 had nearly 20 big name actors and we saw how that turned out. The Dark Knight (2008) had 13 and that was the greatest film of all time.
I think one cameo per scene. For example, in TDK, William Fichtner was inthe opening scene, then Cillian Murphy had one scene then Michael Jai white had one. Abrams should use The Player (1992) for inspiration, however, as that film had 60 cameos!

193. Gunnar Jensen - November 3, 2009

Also I think it will prove once and for all that Star Trek is better than Star Wars just by comparing the calibre of the casts of those two franchises.

194. Oz - November 3, 2009

I too would prefer to see something new. A ‘strange new worlds’ driven plot. Something along the lines of the ST novel “Chain of Attack” for inspiration Bob and Alex.

Also
More Bones.
More Kirk/Spock/Bones together.
The genesis of the Spock/Bones verbal “feuding”.
Kirk and Spock playing chess.

195. The Brit - November 3, 2009

Whether they admit it or not, when J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman came up with the alternative reality idea, they automatically came up with a way to include William Shatner in the film series. As this is an alternative reality, this new James Kirk can go on to live a long, full, rich and happy life, get married and have a family. A flashforward of an old James Kirk played by William Shatner would suffice just like when Harrison Ford made a special guest appearance on The Indiana Jones Chronicles television series.

196. Trench - November 3, 2009

Four stunningly beautiful and talented actresses were wasted in ST09 and should have had more screentime. Jennifer Morrison only appeared at the beginning and we don’t find out what happened to her, Rachel Nichols was only in it for three minutes and we don’t find out what happened to her, Winona Ryder was in it for nearly ten minutes and was needlessly killed off and Diora Baird was nowhere to be found (except in a brief cut scene).

197. st-midway - November 3, 2009

to put what JJ said in other words: the possibilities are endless!

198. Bretton James - November 3, 2009

James Kirk loses nearly every fight. He should have been a hardcore badass like Christian Bale in Batman Begins and particularly in The Dark Knight, Daniel Craig in Casino Royale and Quantum of Solace, Matt Damon in the Bourne trilogy and Liam Neeson in Taken. He should have won the fights against the Starfleet officers, Spock and Nero. The fight between Kirk and Nero was pointless and anticlimactic. A wasted opportunity for an amazing and action-packed fight which would have made Kirk’s triumph at the end all the more emotional and uplifting. He didn’t seem to care about avenging his father. He should have gone after Nero after shooting Ayel. The fight between Jean–Luc Picard and Shinzon at the climax of Star Trek: Nemesis (2002) was more satisfying and even the William Riker and Reman Viceroy showdown.

199. frederick von fronkensteen - November 3, 2009

I’ve said it before here, and I’ll keep saying it… show us new stories that take place inbetween the original episodes. Kick off the new stories by showing us the conclusion of a slambang show, like “The Doomsday Machine” with new effects, for a big action-filled, yet familiar opening scene. Then launch into a new adventure.

That way, we get to see a little of an old episode done up big, and it lets us know that happened as we remember it, but then show us the new adventures that “we didn’t see before” between episodes.

That’s how I’d do it.

200. P Technobabble - November 3, 2009

I doubt there’s any hate for the character Khan in this room, but I think the majority of people do not want to see Khan again for specific reasons. First, and foremost, how do you top TWOK… which you would absolutely HAVE to do.

And, again, why would the writers go to such great lenghts to chart a new “playground” for the crew of the Enterprise, and then rely on specifics of the past? I haven’t said Khan, or Klingons, or any of this couldn’t be done, but I believe it shouldn’t be done… at least not to the point where Khan is the antagonist again.

The time-line has been altered. The known universe has become the twisted universe. It should be reminding us of the TNG episode “Yesterday’s Enterprise.” Only this time, it can’t be reset. There’s no (TECH) vortex. The crew of the Enterprise obviously have no reference to the original time-line… this is all completely natural to them. (It is certainly noticable to Spock Prime, however, which could open up many possible storylines, but that’s just speculating).

There are many possible directions for the new Star Trek to go, without any need to revisit what has come before…

201. Gordon Gekko - November 3, 2009

All of the cut scenes should have been included in the final film. J.J. Abrams made a bad call removing the Rura Penthe scenes. He said that the test audiences were confused by those scenes in particular. I am at a loss as to what was so confusing about the inclusion of the Klingons in the film. I am stunned that yet another recognisable actor (Victor Garber) was in the film (making it nearly 20) and not only was it not announced but cut out. It was absolutely shocking to leave such a huge plot hole regarding where the villains were for 25 years. It makes them look lazy and stupid on top of the fact that they were superficial. Nero and Ayel would have had more depth at least as well. The scenes with the Kirk family and Spock’s birth should have been included as well.

202. Author of The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers - November 3, 2009

>2) To those who say that a Khan story would be a rehash of old material, it wouldn’t. This would be a new story, just with familiar characters, just like Star Trek 2009. Besides, there’s a huge amount of overlap in Trek, anyway.

The *moment* you say Khan, you’re rehashing. Its one thing to reboot the franchise, and to come up with all manner of Trekkian doublespeak to rationalize the alternate timeline, but its creative bankruptcy to reject *all other possible stories* in favor of one about a character that already has an established backstory. That’s rehashing, no matter how much treknobabble you try to wrap around it.

New team + new stories + new era = NO KHAN.

Leave the classic as a classic.

Maybe the new Trek movie can tell a story about how to fix the Engineering section of the Enterprise :-)

The fact that its apparently going to be *three freaking years* before we get a new movie tell me that it is all the more critical to come up with a vibrant *new* story, not drag out Khan like a dusty prop.

203. Andrew Scott - November 3, 2009

Tell me something, why was it announced that Clifton Collins Jr was playing a General? In addition, he was wasted in the film.

204. capnjake - November 3, 2009

I think we wont be seeing kahn in the new movie, I think the writers and J.J. both realize that there is danger in redoing the kahn story(especially as a second movie) in that it would be quite hard to live up to star trek II.
on a side note they could now fix the fact that chekov never met kahn in space seed like Kahn had rememberd in TWOK
lol
also why do people keep insisting on Javier Bardem for a possible kahn, you people do realize the character is from the middle east right? just cause RIcardo Montalban played him(brillantly at that) doesnt mean if they recast him that it should be another hispanic actor.
things are quite a bit differnt know from the days of casting charleton heston as a mexican or and spanish actor as any number of middle eastern or other ethnicities.
there are many many middle eastern actors who could brilliantly play kahn. heck they could cast Alexander Sidig as Kahn
actually that would be a pretty friggin cool idea if they go the kahn route.
Iam sure he could bulk up and get his body to the shape it needs to be in.

anyways hopefully they give us an original villian and not a retread of kahn , or harry mudd( iam sorry but rewatching classic tos on bluray, the mudd character would be a rather boreing movie antagonist) if they want to retread a villian give us Koloth or Kang otherwise go original

205. Star Trek aficionado - November 3, 2009

George Kirk’s death was very sad to watch but he should have not been killed off. Chris Hemsworth should have had a larger role with some flashback scenes with Jennifer Morrison and the Kirk family.

I hope J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman aspire to make a film like The Dark Knight (2008) with the sequel(s) as they evidently didn’t with ST09.

206. Bana fan no more - November 3, 2009

205

You’re telling me. I was telling everybody that Bana would win an oscar for his role as Nero like Ledger did for playing Joker after they revealed how he looked in Star Trek 11. I am such an idiot.

207. Daoud - November 3, 2009

#152 and 175 are the only ones to identify THE character…

that can be recast with NO complaints…

who’s appropriate to the time period… (we’re at least *8 years* ahead in timeline from when the Botany Bay gets noticed!!)

and that is FLEET CAPTAIN GARTH!

I want to know what led him to go bad!!!

Was he gathering the fleet at the Laurentian System for some reason, as opposed to the vessels that went to Vulcan purportedly under Fleet Captain Pike??

Were the Klingons pissed because Nero wrecked their pretty little ships? (I think so!) Are young Kor, Koloth’n’Korax, Chang, Kang (but no Kodos!) part of a Klingon Armada under Admiral Krenn planning to invade the Federation to take out Nero if the Feds don’t?

This all completely builds on the Star Trek 2009 movie, and answers the very questions I’m left with. What the heck was going to be happening, and will it still happen?

Will there still be a mission to Axanar under Fleet Captain Garth, with Kirk leading the Enterprise going along?

Are the Klingons gathering at Axanar?

Why will Garth go insane? Will the Klingons join against this mad common enemy? Will a young Romulan Commander get drafted into this mission (think Good, Bad & Ugly: Kirk, Commander & Kor) have to go up against Mad Garth in the pivotal battle? I’d love to see!

So, please, please, please, JJ & K/O/L… give us WRATH OF GARTH!

208. Mr. Delicious - November 3, 2009

Let’s reboot the franchise.

209. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

#205 “I hope J.J. Abrams, Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman aspire to make a film like The Dark Knight (2008) with the sequel(s) as they evidently didn’t with ST09.”

What? Star Trek is NOT Batman. Batman (in the current film series) is a dark and serious urban crime story. Star Trek is an optimistic and fun space opera. It’s silly to compare the two.

210. Seany-Wan - November 3, 2009

Have the Botany Bay be intercepted by the Borg, they assimilate the crew and let them lose on the Galaxy. Kahn would truly be superhuman!

211. boborci - November 3, 2009

199. frederick von fronkensteen – November 3, 2009

Whatever we do, it will be a new story. No matter who is in it.

212. Jeyl - November 3, 2009

@202: “The *moment* you say Khan, you’re rehashing.”

Gee, rehashing? This new movie rehashes Kirk, Spock, Uhura, McCoy, The Enterprise ect, ect. They’re doing nothing but rehashing and now you’re telling them you don’t want Khan because it will be a rehash? Quite contradicting.

213. boborci - November 3, 2009

189. Krazy Joe – November 3, 2009

Did anyone think a reboot was a good idea?

214. boborci - November 3, 2009

Doctors make the worst patients.

215. boborci - November 3, 2009

186. Mr. Church – November 3, 2009
You also saw Romulus.

216. Scott - November 3, 2009

I think the Gorn or some other under-used bad guys would be great. I’m still sick of Klingons and Romulans and Borg. Let’s get something entirely new, or a reboot of an old obscure TOS bad guy.

217. boborci - November 3, 2009

177. opcode – November 3, 2009

do you mean Al-CIADA?

218. boborci - November 3, 2009

172. ensign joe – November 3, 2009

Who are you kidding. You are coming either way.

219. Lore - November 3, 2009

#181 Spock Prime could warn them about that threat as well. They could procure whales well in advance and avert the disaster before it begins. DUH

220. Lore - November 3, 2009

#210 Let them LOSE on the galaxy? You mean LOOSE?

221. Stuck In Afghan Ville - November 3, 2009

Seems like most everybody wants an original thought. I liked the originals and I can whatch them any time I want. I think the idea behind ST09 version was to produce original style. Good job. Now lets get to it. Or atleast create a series thats new. They sent Voyager home “Thank God”. Destroyed the STNG “with a Joystick for manual LOL” Now we gotta get back up and make somthing! Im in Asscrackastan with nothing to watch! Throw me a frikin bone here!

BTW Say No To tribbles! and Leave Khan where he is.

222. MC1 Doug - November 3, 2009

#81: “Is their flailing about, looking for a plot, supposed to be reassuring?”

More than 700 hours of TREK have been filmed. As a writer, I would find it daunting to come up with an entirely new storyline. Sure, you could say that with timeline disrupted, none of those 700 hours are in place now, but any writer worth their salt wants to put their stamp on a project, and taking an old storyline is not the way to do that.

#83: ” Why are some of you folks so opposed to Khan? He’s a fascinating, iconic villain — like the Joker in the Batman universe. Why not revisit him in a new universe? What’s the big deal?”

Because it’s been done before. That’s why.

223. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#218

Nope. I stand by my words boborci. It means that much to me to see something original. I want this trek to stand alone without rehashing old ideas.

224. boborci - November 3, 2009

223.

Old ideas like Kirk and Spock and the Enterprise?

225. MC1 Doug - November 3, 2009

#96: “The movie would open with a 9/11 type shocker say a suicide bomber destroys a peace conference between the Federation and an enemy race.”

The problem with this… and I am not saying it is a bad idea, but how more 9/11-esque can you be than with the utter destruction of Vulcan?

226. Harry Ballz - November 3, 2009

How about a cross between Captain Garth and Darth Vader?

Hey, I’ve got it…….GARTH VADER!!

(ooooooh, scary!!!)

227. Rocky - November 3, 2009

KEVIN SORBO = KHAN!!!

228. boborci - November 3, 2009

225. MC1 Doug – November 3, 2009

And yet we are accused by some of not being relevant because the parallel was not obvious enough.

229. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#224

You know what I mean. Kirk Spock and the Enterprise are the heroes I want to see on screen in big ways doing great things of course! But to me the easy road for you guys at the moment, since you’ve broken the timeline, is to take something existing and do a what-if story.. like in the comics right?

But it’s tired boborci.. take the high road and do something new and innovative that can stand alone!

230. Harsh - November 3, 2009

#219: “#181 Spock Prime could warn them about that threat as well. They could procure whales well in advance and avert the disaster before it begins. DUH”

:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::

Yep. By that logic, Spock Prime could warn them about each and every threat that comes their way. “DUH” How exciting.

231. JessIAm - November 3, 2009

If they came across Khan by finding a sparsely populated planet he and his “super people” controlled, that could be cool. A new spin on the Khan from TOS/TMP. Other than that, though, I’m not sure I’d want to see him.

232. Mr. Church - November 3, 2009

Mr. Orci, thank you for your reply. I was referring to the planets that the surface of which were shown in the film.

Kind regards

233. Harry Ballz - November 3, 2009

The Khan debate?

Remember Senator Vreenak on ST:DS9 declaring, “IT’S A FAKE!!”?

Regarding Khan, in the same hissing-accusatory tone we should be chanting, “IT’S BEEN DONE!!”

Surely coming up with something fresh AND original can’t be THAT difficult, can it?

234. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#233

I think the problem, Harry Ballz, is not so much that its difficult but that its not marketable.

235. The Reader - November 3, 2009

I must say this has been a fascinating discussion that I have followed today my friends even though I did not participate. It would be interesting to read your views on the following intriguing posts which broadened the subject of this discussion and added an extra dimension – 155, 160, 167, 169, 170, 173, 178, 182, 188, 191, 195, 196, 198, 201, 203. 205.

236. MC1 Doug - November 3, 2009

Bob: I have confidence you guys will come up with something exciting AND relevent! …. and if I may put in my vote: something original!

Have fun! I know we will.

237. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

#233 “Surely coming up with something fresh AND original can’t be THAT difficult, can it?”

It depends on how you look at it, Harry. There have been over 700 televised hours of Trek and 11 movies. I personally do not feel that bringing Khan back for his 3rd appearance in the history of the franchise would be overkill. Entirely new and “fresh” plot elements and characters could still be present.

238. DATA476 - November 3, 2009

I would like the next star trek movie to be … scarier … edgier ….

Come on guys – has there really been a really serious edgy trek movie. I’d say none, not even first contact with the Borg is THAT frightning unless your probably under about 7 years old…

I think being in the 23rd Century, in an alternate reality is the perfect setting for an edgier trek movie along the lines of X Files spooky…

I don’t think it’ll happen bu I do think J.J. can pull off a successful sequel.

But I would be surprised and happy if the next trek movie is given an edgy, smoggier darker feel, I think that would be great… It might perhaps attract more adults as well – maybe the only down-side is that kids would be lost to a trek film probably pushed up to a 15CERT but hey, you cant have the best of both worlds all the time can you…

239. Aragorn189 - November 3, 2009

Hey,
I found the deleted scenes from the new movie on youtube

Here’s the link.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UcK9OBKZme4

240. Harry Ballz - November 3, 2009

“you can’t have the best of both worlds”

Tell that to Picard!

241. Jorg Sacul - November 3, 2009

the USS Constellation finds Khan. Doomsday machine finds them. Khan takes over ship with help of Marla MacGivers, she dies in attack by DDM, Khan ends up last survivor. Kirk finds Constellation w/Khan. Khan tries to take Enterprise, pursuing his Moby Dick fate of vengeance, escapes back to Constellation, finally ramming the wreck of the Connie down the DDM’s throat, saving Federation worlds.

FOOM. Khan dies a hero, spouting “From hell’s heart, yadda yadda yadda”.

No sequels for Khan to be wrathful in.
No Search for Spock.
No Voyage Home.
No saving Earth from Whale Probe… ooops!!

242. Aragorn189 - November 3, 2009

An addendum to my post on 239.

The video includes all the deleted scenes except the orginal Kobayashi Maru sequence. Hope you all enjoy.

243. rogue_alice - November 3, 2009

Bring back Zarabeth from the frozen past. And Mr. Atos.

244. Wayne Hope - November 3, 2009

Do a Gorn invasion of the Federation based on a misunderstanding or a dispute over territory,traditional differences and years of misinformation,rumours and basic ignorance of each other.
Now that would be a REAL Trek based on Gene’s little green men and the censors wont get it philosphy.
It would certainly be relevant to a lot of whats going in today in the lives of so many people today in our world.

245. Jeyl - November 3, 2009

I just hope we don’t get to hear something like this again.

“We moved the planet to suit our purposes. The familiarity of the name seemed more important as an Easter egg, than a new name with no importance.”

You want to convince me you’re going to respect and honor Star Trek, you gotta try a ‘little’ harder. I don’t think Star Wars fans are going think I’m serious about honoring Star Wars if I make an ice planet and called it “Tatooine” and say that the desert part is seasonal.

246. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

223: “It means that much to me to see something original. I want this trek to stand alone without rehashing old ideas.”

229: “You know what I mean. Kirk Spock and the Enterprise are the heroes I want to see on screen in big ways doing great things of course!”

Yes, I think I know what you mean. You want some old ideas rehashed but not others, while preserving the capacity to complain that the sequel is unoriginal if they don’t rehash the ideas you want rehashed.

The sequel could be about Starfleet cops writing an excess of starship moving violation tickets to keep their departments afloat during a Federation wide economic downturn, for all I care. Just make it good.

247. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#246: “The sequel could be about Starfleet cops writing an excess of starship moving violation tickets to keep their departments afloat during a Federation wide economic downturn, for all I care.”

Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no man has gone before.

248. garen - November 3, 2009

Something tells me that wasnt actually Mr Orci in those posts above…

249. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

247: “Space: the final frontier. These are the voyages of the starship Enterprise. Its five-year mission: to explore strange new worlds, to seek out new life and new civilizations; to boldly go where no man has gone before.”

THAT is what you want to see? SOOO unoriginal.

250. Admiral Crane - November 3, 2009

You could bring back Khan AND have an original story. Perhaps in this universe, Kirk and Company DON’T get to Khan in time before he lands somewhere. Perhaps this time Khan has already seized control of a planet and has an entire fleet at his disposal.

If I were going to reintroduce Khan, that is how I would do it. I wouldn’t even reveal him to be the enemy right off, I would keep the identity of the person at the center of the enemy’s operations shrouded until near the end. I might have the Gorn or even a completely unknown species attack the federation, and only reveal toward the end that Khan was behind it all.

251. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

Yeah Bob, I don’t think you guys should “rehash” that five year mission thing.

252. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#251

Don’t be dense dmduncan. Do the five year mission thing and show us a mission that hasn’t already been done. See? Easy like sunday morning..

253. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

252: I’m not being dense. You are. You don’t have a problem with SOME characters from a mid 1960’s TV program showing up in a reboot, but you DO have a problem with OTHER characters from the same series showing up. It’s a totally arbitrary subjective preference on your part.

Me? I don’t care. Who shows up is less important than how cool what he causes is once he gets there.

254. Lore - November 3, 2009

Any of you Trekkies have some of the Star Trek PHOTO-NOVELS? Someone above mentioned Mr Atoz. I have the “Photo-Novel” for that episode.

255. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

And by the way, Bob has already said numerous times that whatever story they did would be NEW, not a remake of an episode, so it’s a straw man to say “NO KHAN” as if that means we are going to see Space Seed redone. It IS going to be new, using an old character. Precisely what they did with Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Uhura, Scotty, Sulu, and Chekov the first go around.

256. Fizzben - November 3, 2009

I think Ricardo Mantalban made Khan who he is. I can’t think of a single actor that could pull it off. I’d much rather see some major Klingon action and in all their ridge headed glory. I think at this time the Klingons and the Romulans have a tentative alliance and are sharing technology, ie the cloaking device. Maybe there’s a new wmd they could be working on and we need Kirk and crew to save the galaxy.

257. Daniel Broadway - November 3, 2009

The way I look at Khan is this. You can still have a completely original movie, and use the same villain twice.

Batman ’89 and The Dark Knight both had The Joker, but those movies were vastly different, and definitely not a rehash.

It can work, it just has to be done right.

258. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#253 It’s a totally arbitrary subjective preference on your part.

I agree. It may feel tired to me but not to you. Granted. But I will still voice my opinion as to how it affects me.

Your density comes from taking the notion that to do something new explicitly requires the lack of anything old, which, in the grand scheme of things, is implicitly false. i.e. All things are in a state of transition.

259. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

So it’s inconsistent to say yeah, I like this new cast and the reboot, but I don’t want Khan or this or that old TOS character showing up. Sorry, you already signed the contract. The deal is done. What is old is new again.

Because if it’s a really kick ass movie about Khan, who that is complaining “NO KHAN” will be complaining then?

Actually, I shouldn’t say that; to paraphrase Dr. Malcolm from Jurassic Park regarding the dinosaurs’ ability to find a path around the limits that were supposed to keep their reproduction under control, and which didn’t:

“Trekkies will find a way.”

260. H'yorD - November 3, 2009

I didn’t much care for Star Trek XI, but I’m still very excited to see what they can accomplish now that they’ve introduced the crew and this new universe to the audience. However, I really hope they take this opportunity to do something fresh, and while I’m not saying that that can’t be done with Khan getting involved, but it would send out all the wrong signals, as far as I’m concerned. What’s more, it would ensure that people would judge STXII based on how it measures up to STII, and I honestly doubt that they have it in them to produce a film that good.

261. Chris Doohan - November 3, 2009

I have the utmost confidence that whatever the writers come up with will be pure gold. However, I do think they should bring back that transporter guy. His name escapes me at this time.

262. garen - November 3, 2009

Hi Chris!

263. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

258: “Your density comes from taking the notion that to do something new explicitly requires the lack of anything old, which, in the grand scheme of things, is implicitly false.”

Lol. Dude, you don’t know me very well. Don’t make any suppositions about what I think unless I explicitly state them as my beliefs. Your complaint about ME actually fits what you are doing much better.

I’m not the one complaining that a Khan story would be unoriginal, a rehash of old ideas; Bob posted on this very thread that whatever they did would be a new story, not an old one, regardless of who is in it.

264. Captain Otter - November 3, 2009

I’ll watch anything the put up there. The re-boot was good enough to buy JJ and co enough cred to experiment with some new idea or revisit one of the “sacred cows” of Trekdom.

Sooner or later, I think they have to involve the Klingons in a meaningful way- they are just too central to Trek lore.

As far as Khan goes, I think there are some great possibilities there. The premise of Space Seed with a big budget, quality effects, in a feature length is darn enticing. I can’t see being against it. I don’t understand the general tone of the thread.

I have noticed that many in the “No Khan” camp in this thread hated JJ’s take on Trek anyway. I can’t imagine you guys will be happy no matter what he does next.

Oh, and “Mirror Universe” fans- the JJ-verse IS a mirror universe. I’m not sure how you right about an alternative timeline crew crossing into yet another timeline and interacting with yet another crew.

As cool of evil Spock and his chin-fro of doom are, JJ&co can’t go there. They would be re-hashing the time-line bending elements of the last film.

265. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

#263

When another band covers another band’s song it is both new and old.

If there is going to be a new Beatles.. let them play new songs, not takes on old classics.

Understand?

266. Alex Rosenzweig - November 3, 2009

#146 – “The only big problem is the Eugenic Wars that never happened, but just simply ignore and dance around that elephant.”

The Eugenics Wars happened in the Trek Universe(s). That they didn’t occur in our reality is irrelevant.

Bob Orci:

#213 – “Did anyone think a reboot was a good idea?”

All I can speak for is myself, and for me, the answer was, is, and will continue to be a resounding, “NO!”

#218 – “Who are you kidding. You are coming either way.”

I’d go once to give the film a shot, but I have no problems with not super-supporting it if I don’t like where it goes or what it does. I kept my promise from the beginning of the year, BTW. I paid to see ST09 *once*, and with the money I’d have given to the film had it been a true TOS prequel, I went to Shore Leave instead.

Obviously it didn’t *need* my money, but even still. :)

267. Dan - November 3, 2009

@ 211. boborci – November 3, 2009

That makes me happy! This all makes me feel like I did in 1985/86 reading about STIV coming out. Haven’t felt that way about the movies in a long time.

Looking forward to it!

268. THX-1138 - November 3, 2009

I think the next movie should have the crew of the Enterprise encountering a machine race that is at war with itself over control of an unimaginable power source. The kicker is that it was hidden on earth in the past and that the sentient machine life forms can trans….mogrify their shapes and appearance into different objects. After a lengthy battle between good and evil, and with the help of our steadfast Enterprise crew, the Trans….mogrifying sentient machine lifeforms decide to join their entire mass together and trans….mogrify their shape into that of a new world.

Thusly it is that Vulcan is reborn.
Gold.

269. TribbleStew - November 3, 2009

A new Star Trek should mean new plot lines. Please no Khan or other characters of the old shows.

Be inventive!

270. Dalek - November 3, 2009

There’s two things, an idea (Introducing Khan), and an execution of an idea (the story and script).

Since the real meat is in the execution, whatever ideas they come up can not be shot down until someone’s actually read the story or the script.

Saying Khan is a bad idea is like saying it’s a really bad idea to use chicken in a recipe you haven’t even tasted, because you once ate another meal in which the chicken was delicious.

Excuse me, but i want MORE of that delicious meal I once tasted, not less! And if i don’t like the new meal I can always go back to the old recipe and enjoy that again, but I’m at least willing to taste it first before I condemn it!

271. Dalek - November 3, 2009

#270 That’s made me hungry. If anyone wants me I’ll be at the KFC!

272. Buzz Cagney - November 3, 2009

#261 Chris Doohan- I really loved the little laugh you gave in response to ‘Pegg’ boasting about his Transporting skills in Trek ’09. It made me smile. Hope to see a similar scene in the next one. ;-)

273. Cobalt 1365 - November 3, 2009

Haven’t read through all the comments, but I believe that Kahn was to Star Trek 2 like the Joker was for The Dark Knight. It’s been done, and done well, no one will ever top that performance. Any attempt to recreate that feeling would only draw undue comparisons to the old version, and take away from the movie’s own merits.

That said, I do believe Kirk should have a nemesis that requires him to use all his cunning and “cheating” to defeat, but let’s use some creativity and originality. I challenge the writers to create a new arch rival for Kirk.

274. Gigastazio - November 3, 2009

Khan and the augments both from TOS and ENT were all disposable villains, not much good beyond the very limited story arcs (albeit very good ones) in which they were featured. Sure, brig them back, but make them more formidable and harder to shrug off, and maybe even bring the Soong bloodline into the mix. It’s the enemies that constantly stick in our craw that I think make for interesting storytelling.

275. Bill Peters - November 3, 2009

Mr. Orci,

I think whatever you do will be cool, I don’t know why fans are so mean to you, You guys have reinvigorated Trek. I’d like to see more Character Moments, I love the little things you put in the movie that Fans would get but most General Public would over look, I’d Might like to see more Gorn or Klingon’s or any TOS Species or Harry Mudd.

What ever you do I think it will be great, Just do what your going to do because I know your guys can make a Rock Awesome Sequel

276. Mazzer - November 3, 2009

Now that the film franchise has clearly dropped into popcorn flick mode, and which will remain in the hands of JJ’s little brat pack, my only remaining hope for Star Trek is that someone like Ron Moore will write a new Trek TV series FOR ADULTS. Besides that glimmer of hope, my faith in the future of ST has pretty much gone.

277. Kirokwannabe - November 3, 2009

I have to say I would prefer a new story and a new villian.

Though, I have confidence that if it is a Khan story, that they will give us a great script with incredible casting.

Looking incredibly forward to the sequel!

278. Bill Peters - November 3, 2009

I also don’t think you can make Star Trek too dark, a little dark is fun but Star Trek is supposed to be Optimistic and Hopeful Deep Space Nine was Dark but I think that is about the limit you can go with Darkness in Trek. I think we will be happy with A Sequel that Gives us more hope and also show us what the Crew of Enterprise can do.

279. Daoud - November 3, 2009

#276 The rise and fall of Garth via the eyes of the Enterprise crew would be a great popcorn flick *and* a great story for adults…

Garth is the opposite of Pike. Pike = ‘what to do’. Garth = ‘what not to do’. What made Empire Strikes Back work so well was the darker story. We already know Garth goes bad… we just didn’t get to see ever it in TOS. We only got a post-Antosian surgery Garth gone mad. Watching “Dagger of the Mind” and “Whom Gods Destroy” create the perfect tableau for a sequel movie.

Since Pike can’t (erm) stand up to Garth now, Kirk must be the captain willing to lead the mission to bring ‘em back.

Axanar’s the setup, just like the Kelvin incident was for ST09. What happens post-Axanar is the gravy… and it can involve names like Marcus, Mitchell, Shaw, Janet later-Wallace, Ruth, T’Pol, Finnegan, Decker, etc. and could be story-universe-building. A shame to not use any of the rich background of TOS.

Assuming anyone wants to write a story that actually uses the Star Trek universe. I’m seeing absolutely no sign of that.

280. Buzz Cagney - November 3, 2009

#275 Don’t worry about Bob- he gets the last laugh watching the doubters eating their words. lol I had to eat a slab of humble pie after seeing what a fine movie they had made. And i was happy to do so.

281. TJ Trek - November 3, 2009

#5

NICE!

That’s all I have to say on that one

282. star trackie - November 3, 2009

I don’t think the character of Khan needs to be explored any further, but having said that, I don’t have any fears about the character being in the sequel. If they craft a fun, imaginative movie full of the wonder and awe of the unknown, and Khan happens to be part of the equation, I’ll still be first in line for tickets. I was apprehensive at first, but they pulled off, what I felt was practically impossible. They recast the triad and they did it RIGHT. And it worked!! No worries.

283. screaming satellite - November 3, 2009

have Khan team up with Sybok in the sequel like the joker did with Two Face…

284. blah - November 3, 2009

ST09 had nearly 20 big name actors and we saw how that turned out.
———————
Really? Name all 20 than..

285. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - November 3, 2009

LAME

Unless its just a teaser of the sleepership floating in uncharted space over the end credits

otherwise LAME

286. Author of The Vulcan Neck Pinch for Fathers - November 3, 2009

@212. Jeyl – November 3, 2009

>Re comments that Khan is rehashing, but then implying the new crew isn’t: “Quite contradicting.”

No, it isn’t. If you’ll take my entire post in context, not selectively snip words from it, I specifically noted that it is one thing entirely to reboot the franchise. If you don’t reboot the franchise, you have no movie, and we’re not having this discussion. Dragging out an existing character into this new timeline is, IMHO, a cheat. Its an admission that we’d rather write some story that inevitably casts knowing glances at what’s already been told in preference to the unlimited number of new stories that are available to be told.

My point is very simple: It is, in my worthless, humble opinion, a vain effort to have worked so hard to construct the alternate timeline rationale for the series reboot, and create for yourself an *entirely blank slate of stories from which to draw*, and then do nothing more for a sequel than pull Khan and recapitulate some story that inevtiably carries with it the resonances of the established backstory for one of Trek’s iconic villians.

Do something new. Don’t know if boborci is still lurking about, but I’d sure offer as stridently as I could that there exists a great opportunity to tell a new story, and to do so without Khan.

287. Captain Rickover - November 3, 2009

I think why Khan is not so a good idea, is because his character is very limited.

1.) If he will wake up from hybernation again, his goal is clear: Regain power. You could twist the story as you want, Khan’s character is wanting power over earth back. If you changed his goals, you would change his character. He would be no longer the Khan of Star Trek but a new Khan. Then you could name him King and Khan is no longer needed. So or so, every story about Khan would be a remake of Space Seed – even if you involed the Klingons

…but maybe an alliance between Kor and Khan would be interesting. Both powerfull characters, both wanting power and certainly both try to trick the other part at the end. Such an idea could be interesting, but I don’t know if Khan could shine as a character within that kind of alliance.Khan is a guy who wants to dominate and Kor is a guy who would never tolarte another dominate guy around him. So, the writers would have to change his character – what would destroy Khan as an iconic villain (Hmm… I fear this would happen, because I have the feeling Mr. O. and Mr. K. like it to destroy iconic things, like the size and shape of the Enterprise, Vulcan, Romulus, Amanda Grayson, the Star Trek lore, canon, logic, etc. :)

288. shadow - November 3, 2009

wow this seems a bit late but:
@71 pizza – Couldn’t you argue that the villains of Star Trek IV were human beings? I mean we were the ones the killed the whales off well before the 23rd Century when the probe came around.

@283 – Haha nice.

289. Vulcan Fury - November 3, 2009

Here’s an idea, hire a great writer, Harlan Ellison, to write the next movie. He knows the series, wrote what most feel was the best Star Trek episode, and hasn’t written any bad Transformers movie scripts. Of course he and Paramount would have to bury the hatchet.

290. Captain Rickover - November 3, 2009

I read here many times about Khan and the comparsion to the Joker. But there are several differences between them.

1.) The Joker is a regular villain for Batman; the main villain of course. Khan on the other side was just the villain from one Episode. He only was credited with a movie becaus of Harve Bennett. That created his iconic status as villain. Star Trek had no main villain – except the Klingons in general.

2.) The character of Joker is never constantly. He is different in every comic, tv show or movie. So, it’s no problem to use him for several times. He is Batman’s nemesis. Khan is not Kirk’s nemesis. His nemesis are the Klingons.

3.) The Dark Knight has nothing to do with the older Batman movie-series. It is an entire new universe with an entire new background. Star Trek (09) has no entire new canon, it’s based on the original canon, just placed in in an altered universe, beginning with the year 2233. Khan is already in hypersleep in this year. If he’ll wake up, his character has to be the same as in TOS.

4.) Every new Khan-story will be compared with TWOK. If you use Khan the word “remake” or “reboot” will be allways in the air – even if the story is different. Khan is TWOK and TWOK is Khan.

291. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

@175 Great minds think alike. I think Garth of Izar had a HUGE backstory that would be incredibly interesting to look in to. We know he was the prime example of everything a starship captain should be then became the prime example of everything they SHOULDNT be. Orci and Kurtzman would not be tied down to any preconceived notions either. It would be a cool story. Young star on the rise Kirk having to square off against the legendary Captain who has gone nuts and started using decidedly Machiavelian tactics to impose his vision of security in the galaxy.
I think Garth would be a GREAT villain and if done right could put him right up there WITH Khan instead of trying to reboot Khan. Listen up Roberto and Alex, you have a chance to take an overlooked character with TONS of potential and reinvent him as one of the greatest Trek villains ever as opposed to trying to mess with a character that cant be topped. You could even have Garth deciding that the Klingon threat cant be handled diplomatically and have him being the agressor towards the Klingons. Garth, Klingons, a Section 31 Federation spy working the Klingon border named Cyrano Jones….now tell me THAT doesnt sound like I just handed you the great basis for a great story with action, a great villain and a different perspective on Cyrano Jones as well (and a great way to interject your comedy relief). You can thank me later :)

292. Closettrekker - November 3, 2009

#7—“Wouldn’t you like to see Harry Mudd unwittingly create a situation that threatens the entire Earth or some other part of the universe?”

Not particularly.

#218—boborci – November 3, 2009

“Who are you kidding. You are coming either way.”

Lmao! Best post ever.

In “Space Seed”, the SS Botany Bay had been adrift since the end of the Eugenics Wars, yet in all that time, no vessel had encountered it until the Enterprise did so in 2267 (Prime, of course). Any reimagining of that story could go in any number of directions, so long as it ends up with Kirk dueling it out with one of the most colorful villains in Star Trek history.

The Enterprise does not have to be the vessel which happens upon the cryogenically frozen Khan Noonien Singh and his followers. He could be discovered by another starship, or by another sovereign power outside of the Federation—–so long as he is ultimately dealt with by our heroes.

One thing is for certain. It can’t just be about a bad guy doing bad things and being defeated by Captain Kirk….and presenting the story as a cautionary tale about human tampering with natural evolution of the species might be a bit played out. So, the trick would obviously be involving the villainous Khan but still meeting the goal of telling a “meaningful story”.

I’m not opposed to it at all, but I’m not clamouring for it either.

293. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

I mean I personally think it would be awesome to find out that Cyrano Jones showing up on K7 when he did wasnt an ‘accident’….he was a Fed spy working for Section 31 sent to expose possible Klingon sleeper agents with his portable furry ‘klingon detectors’…what if Cyrano wa behind teh Tribble infestations that plagued fledgling Klingon colonies as well in attempts to destabilize Klingon colonial expansion on to underdeveloped worlds along the border?
Tell JJ we’ll do lunch…lol

294. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

#289 … “Here’s an idea, hire a great writer, Harlan Ellison, to write the next movie.”

Um, no. Ellison could hardly be relied upon to write a marketable blockbuster film in 2012. And no one would want to work with him anyway.

295. Nivenus - November 3, 2009

Khan could be done well in theory and without being a remake of Wrath. Just like The Dark Knight was anything but a remake of Burton’s Batman.

The same character does not mean the same movie. In fact, in Khan’s case it would mean ANYTHING but the same movie. Khan has nothing to be really POed about this time round.

296. Captain Rickover - November 3, 2009

# 291

I agree completly! Captain Garth has every potential to become a new Joker.
And he is surounded by nice Orion girls ;)

297. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

…AND…Section 31 is acting independently from Starfleet and tacitly supporting both Garths agression toward the Klingons and stirring the pot with Cyrano Jones, their spy’saboteur. The idealistic crew of the Enterprise doesnt realize that they are actually fighting elements of their own government acting without sanction from Starfleet. Kirk actually ends up working alongside the Klingon Empires rising star, the young Captain Koloth….
I want royalties…and a chair with my name on it….

298. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

…and at one point the Klingons send in their OWN battle fleet with Commanders Kor and Kang and both Kirk and Koloth have to convince their respective sides to stand down…that this isnt the time for full scale war…yet. Enterprise engages Garth’s ship(s) and is almost defeated but for the intervention of Koloth, Kang and Kor. Garth tries to self destruct instead of being taken prisoner (which the Klingons note is very admirable) but Spock foils the self destruct sequence. We also find that many of Garth’s fanatic crew are actually shapeshifters (explaining where Garth learned this trick and explaining how so many loyal Starfleet officers would betray their oath…they werent loyal Starfleet Officers after all but a new race with their won agenda. And maybe Garth isnt really Garth anymore either,but a shapeshifting doppleganger imprinted with Garths personality and skills to th epoint wherein he believes he IS Garth. After all, how would you TEACH somebody to be a shapeshifter (one of those TOS flaws).

299. Jeyl - November 3, 2009

@286: “Do something new ”

They didn’t. They went with Kirk and the gang and they kept them all the same. You want new, go support Star Trek Final Frontier. That has a whole slew of new characters, situations, revelations AND it takes place hundreds of years post Nemesis. How newer can you get compared to Trek09?

300. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

This could also be an early incursion by Species 8472 (?) from Voyager in an attempt to destabilize our universe OR they could be Chameloids (like Marta from TUC). Its an interesting idea because everybody would think they were the ones running the show and even Section 31 would be like ‘WTF?’ even WE were getting played.

301. David Stoeckel - November 3, 2009

IS JJ ABRAMS NUTS!! Ricardo Montalban is/was/always shall be the Best (and only actor to play Khan). To have someone else do it wouldn’t be a good idea. It would a be a Khan-job to fans(Sorry,bad joke I know).

302. somethoughts - November 3, 2009

How about a movie inspired by Khan and this?

http://www.subversiveelement.com/Dulce_Index.html

303. Syn4Ever - November 3, 2009

I don’t think its a bad idea to bring Khan back…. Khan is iconic and I think it’s logical that they would somehow run into him in this parallel universe because his appearance in the original series and Star Trek II were huge! Maybe at the end of this new movie they’ll find out that the big person behind whatever happened is Khan and looking for him to stop him would be the tie-in to the next movie.

Just a thought

304. somethoughts - November 3, 2009

#301

The same argument could have been made about Shatner and Nimoy etc.

Sometimes we do not know what we like until we have tasted it.

305. somethoughts - November 3, 2009

Star Trek: Rise of the Empire

Klingons lead by Khan
Can the UFP Kirk and crew stop the galactic threat?

Tune in next time, same trek channel, same trek time…que end credits music.

306. Trekluver - November 3, 2009

I still only think it should be done if Khan is done right. The JJ-verse is off to a great start and should continue that way. If it’s done I make these suggestions: 1 – Do Khan right, 2 – Go into Khan’s back story, 3 – Make an original story. Don’t do a “Space Seed 2″ or a ST:II reboot! Make it diffrent and expose the new Kirk as a sceptic fighter rather than a kick – @$$ action hero. (that’s backwards?) and last but not least 4 – Make Khan like he was in “Space Seed” rather that ST:II because in ST:II he wanted revenge and now he only wants conquest. Give him an opportunity to actually take over somewhat even if it takes 3 hours to tell the story.

307. somethoughts - November 3, 2009

Khan built here? Allegory!

http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/offlimits/offlimits_dulce01.htm

308. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

@265: Don’t complain that a story which hasn’t been done before would be an unoriginal rehash. Would the mere presence of Khan make it so? If that’s the case, then the mere presence of Kirk and Spock would have to be a rehash by the same measure. But you aren’t complaining about those. Give Khan the same respect. He’s a great character. So is Harry Mudd.

309. peter - November 3, 2009

it will be whatever will appeal to the masses and make the most money for the studio.

It’s not to appeal to geeks/trekkies/virgins/science nerds but all those people out there that helped the movie earn 260 million.

Look for a Huge Kilngon war movie with Khan introduced in the background in order to set up the next film.

310. Bill Peters - November 3, 2009

I’d say a Klingon and Gorn alliance lead by someone would be cool Kor, Koloth! Also maybe put a Few Andorrans in the film and also Bring in Nurse Chapel. I think that Bob Orci and the rest will do a great job! Also like the Garth Idea too, Rouge Star fleet Capetian would be fun! I wouldn’t mind seeing some of Harry Mudd eater hey Could be selling Weapons or something to the Goren or Klingon’s! Maybe also introduce a young Curzon Dax!

311. Closettrekker - November 3, 2009

If there is a recurring nemesis for Kirk throughout TOS and the original films, it could only be the various representatives of the Klingon Empire—-Kor, Koloth, Kras, Kang, Arne Darvin, etc.

If Bob, Alex, and Damon are looking for a Joker-like character to be a thorn in the side of Jim Kirk—-he should be a Klingon—-and not necessarily an established one (although that is definitely an option).

My hope in that regard is that he would be much more like Gene Coon’s Klingons than Ron Moore’s, and I don’t mean in physical appearance. I mean that he should be as smooth, slick, intelligent, well-spoken, and cunning as he is vicious and brutal.

As for Khan, the long-running “feud” between them was never really between them at all. It was always one-sided. Kirk defeated Khan, showed him mercy and leniency. Khan spent 15 years thinking about Jim Kirk. I doubt Jim Kirk wasted more than a passing thought about him.

On the other hand, Kirk never hid his disdain for the Klingon Empire…They always seemed to rub him the wrong way, even long before his son was murdered.

312. AC - November 3, 2009

uhg. Why not just do this Khan movie? After that do a movie about searching for spock’s dead body. After that do a movie about whales. After that do a movie about looking for Jesus at the center of the galaxy. After that do something klingonish….

313. steve - November 3, 2009

I love the people that write,

“why can’t they make the next film without a bad guy and make it about science and about some really obscure thing that only a hardcore fan would give a **** about).

Listen to these words. There will NO heavy science (thank god), no non linear bad guys (i.e haryy mudds/blobs of jelly or higher beings of extreme intelligence), no really trekkie stuff (Thank god).

It will be a huge, action EPIC designed to appeal to joe six pack and people that want a great time at the mvovies. DO YOU GUYS GET THIS. It will NOT be about science or be a 2001 (Thank god).

314. Balok - November 3, 2009

Hey 104, you’re using my handle…

315. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

#309 “It’s not to appeal to geeks/trekkies/virgins/science nerds but all those people out there that helped the movie earn 260 million. Look for a Huge Kilngon war movie with Khan introduced in the background in order to set up the next film.”

Agreed. I’ve been saying so all along.

316. Closettrekker - November 3, 2009

#314—You should definitely sue.

317. Closettrekker - November 3, 2009

#309—“Look for a Huge Kilngon war movie with Khan introduced in the background in order to set up the next film.”

I don’t know about the “huge Klingon war” part of it, but I certainly could live with a colorful Klingon antagonist.

#315—I always liked your idea about the end of the film slipping in a Botany Bay sighting. I’d like to see it left somewhat open-ended with a Starfleet ship approaching, and its captain curious about what he/she had stumbled upon. Roll credits.

Is it a bit like the Joker card at the end of ‘Batman Begins’? Yeah….am I bothered by that? No.

I would be much more enthusiastic about Khan in the third movie than in the upcoming sequel. If the latter happens, all we’ll hear about as soon as it becomes clear is that the writers couldn’t come up with anything that wasn’t already done (even though that might be an unfair assumption).

318. dmduncan - November 3, 2009

All this talk about rehashing has not only made me hungry for twice cooked hash—it’s also given me some ideas about the future.

It’s no longer enough to do straight up reboots of simple old TV shows. We’re more sophisticated now. Maybe combining several shows into one new show is the approach.

So instead of a rebooted “Mr. Ed” or “My Favorite Martian,” we get something like: “Mr. Ed, My Favorite Martian Horse.”

Or—OOOR—just a radical theme change: Instead of an average guy married to a sexy witch, as in “Bewitched!,” you do an average guy married to a sexy bitch in “Bebitched!”

Yes? No? Discuss.

319. Gunnar Jensen - November 3, 2009

284. blah – November 3, 2009
ST09 had nearly 20 big name actors and we saw how that turned out.
———————
Really? Name all 20 than.
———————

1. Chris Pine
2. Zachary Quinto
3. Karl Urban
4. Simon Pegg
5. John Cho
6. Anton Yelchin
7. Zoe Saldana
8. Eric Bana
9. Clifton Collins Jr
10. Leonard Nimoy
11. Bruce Greenwood
12. Ben Cross
13. Winona Ryder
14. Jennifer Morrison
15. Chris Hemsworth
16. Rachel Nichols
17. Tyler Perry
18. Greg Grunberg
19. Amanda Foreman
20. Victor Garber

I’m sure 1 – 7 and 11 and 12 will return for the sequel but there will need to be other key characters as well so it will most likely end up having a larger all-star cast. In addition, most of Hollywood will want to be in it after the success of ST09. I wouldn’t be surprised if there are celebrities who are not actors making cameo appearances as well. For example, I’m sure Lady Gaga will be asked to make a cameo appearance due to her futuristic music and style.

320. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

That’s kindof funny there.. maybe its the puppet Balok.. heheheh

321. Closettrekker - November 3, 2009

#319—-Of those 20 actors/actresses you named, I’d only heard of Nimoy, Ryder and Bana prior to learning about the film. Once I found out who Perry and Greenwood were, I recognized them….But it’s a stretch to call any of them (except Nimoy and Ryder) “big name actors”. They are much more like people whose faces you might recognize in some cases….but not so much by name.

322. I, Mugsy - November 3, 2009

For God’s sake DO NOT put Khan in this. If you do why not just call the whole thing a remake rather than reboot, and have an existing character from the original series appear in each film and kiss any originality goodbye!

We need a totally NEW Trek not yet another clone of something that’s already been done – Hollywood desperately needs an injection of originality and is currently drowning in a sea of lame remakes/re-imaginings. Lazy.

In another note, could we please make THIS film proper Star Trek. Whilst I enjoyed the new movie at the cinema, watching it again at home this week I was struck by how violent (for Star Trek) many parts of this film were, and how flippant it was in regards to the destruction of both Romulus and Vulcan. They come across as minor plot points to get the crew in place – it feels rushed and insincere, and pretty dark. Where’s the optimism you guys hinted at??!? I don’t think Gene Roddenberry would have been entirely happy with what’s been done do his baby… I lost track of the amount of fist fights and OTT ‘Raiders of the Lost Ark’ style punch up sound FX.

I fear Trek is going to be turned into Star Wars style action movies from here on in, and that’s NOT what turned us onto the program originally. Star Trek isn’t (or shouldn’t be) mere popcorn entertainment, but something that makes you think. The Devil in the Dark; City on the Edge of Forever; Let this be your last battlefield; Metamorphosis; Star Trek IV even etc etc etc all examples of episodes that make you think. Yeah we had some Harry Mudd and Spock’s Brain crappiness from time to time but the focus was on intellectual story-telling for the most part. Lets try and bring more of that back with this sequel, now all the pieces are in place.

If I hear Khan is in this I think I’ll kiss any respect I have goodbye for future Trek adventures, and realise it’s yet something else that has been dumbed down for the masses….

323. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

What??? No positive feedback? cmon…I wrote out, just off the top of my head, a better thought out reinvention of a Trek character with ample and equally well thought out plot points in 5 minutes then all of Trek 09! Wheres my check, JJ? Ur all just haters…thats it…..haters…. :)

324. I, Mugsy - November 3, 2009

Steve (313) – Amazing post… it’s pretty evident you haven’t got A CLUE what Star Trek is all about and what it represents.

Stick to your popcorn fodder and leave Trek to those that aren’t afraid to be challenged and to think when watching something…

Sheeesh :/

325. The Angry Klingon Balok (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

I feel left out…Im changing my name….

326. boborci - November 3, 2009

261. Chris Doohan – November 3, 2009

Chris!

Hugs.

327. boborci - November 3, 2009

266. Alex Rosenzweig – November 3, 2009

Of course we needed your vote. Every vote counts!

328. boborci - November 3, 2009

275. Bill Peters – November 3, 2009

Kind words. Thanks!

Yelling at us is part of the fun, so no worries.

329. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 3, 2009

#317 … You’re right, Closet. The “huge Klingon war” part may not be accurate, but I’d be surprised if the Klingons weren’t given a big role next time out, after being left out of the final cut of ST 09. That was the first thing my brother, a casual fan rather than a Trekkie, said after we saw the movie: “I want to see some Klingons next time.”

And speaking of the all-important mainstream, I believe (as #309 pointed out) that Khan’s popularity with them is going to lead to his eventual reappearance. WE know his story backwards and forwards, but general audiences mostly just remember that he was the center of ‘a good Star Trek movie.’ And, of course, everyone knows THE Khan scream. Khan is a minor pop culture icon. He’ll be back.

330. Locke for President - November 3, 2009

The only way Kahn works is if he was found by another ship and crew sometime prior to the movie. Say ten years prior to the timeframe of the movie. In the backstory, he gets control of a planet and its inhabitants and spends a decade or so building his armada and scheming his plan to retake the Earth.

Kirk and crew then face Kahn and thwart his plans.

You can’t go back to the well of Kirk finding Kahn’s ship, Kahn takes over the ship, and Kirk stops Kahn. That would be a remake.

But it just might be cool to see Kahn in all his glory, the leader of his own planet and armada. Totally trashing the Federation and its fleet with his superior intellect.

Maybe even invading Earth and occupying it. Hey, we’ve never really seen that story in Star Trek history, have we? How about a major invasion story of Earth, with troops landing and bombs blowing up futuristic cities.

In other words, lead into the movie with Kahn already with all of the pieces on the chessboard ready to checkmate the Federation. The first half of the movie, watch this unstoppable force bring the Federation to its knees.

But in the end, only James Kirk and crew are smart enough to figure out a way to stop him.

You can’t redo the revenge slant with Kirk and Kahn. You can’t make it personal, like it was the first time. It was only personal because Kirk had banished Kahn (and indirectly being responsible for the death of his wife). So the new movie would have to have a totally different dynamic. Kahn and Kirk would be in different places, with different motivations and back stories.

331. THX-1138 - November 3, 2009

No Khan do.

332. Dalek - November 3, 2009

330 There is not only one way the character of Khan can work again. You are obviously not a writer or storyteller if you believe there is only one way, and that it happens to be the idea you like the most.

Trek 2 was partly a revenge movie, but the dynamic between protagonist and antagonist in any drama is not limited to one or two possibilities.

And it’s KHAN, please repeat after me KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN! Not Kahn!

333. ensign joe - November 3, 2009

# 332 “You are obviously not a writer or storyteller if you believe there is only one way, and that it happens to be the idea you like the most.”

I dunno.. that might actually prove he is a writer :P

334. Dalek - November 3, 2009

#333 lmao!

335. Harry Ballz - November 3, 2009

It seems silly when people say the writers can still crank out a good script even if they use Khan. It’s like bragging that you can still do something even though hampered by a limitation/restriction.

Just imagine what heights the next script could reach if there was NO limitation in the way!

M’yeah!

336. Dalek - November 3, 2009

#335 they have no limitations. It’s a brand new timeline and nothing they do is limited. What you may see as a limitation, a storyteller can see a multitude of different story possibilities. The only limitation is the imagination, and if you think that, it’s your imagination that may be limited not the writers.

337. AJ - November 3, 2009

I, Mugsy:

Star Trek, to many of us, represents a good rip-roaring space adventure with torn shirts, drop kicks, karate chops, beautiful women, good yarns and a great group of characters keeping it all together.

I don’t think it was ever meant to be as high-minded as some make it out to be. For an ironic twist, go watch Voyager’s “Flashback” where Janeway romanticizes about how different things were back in Sulu’s time. Many of us who grew up with TOS feel the same way, and at least I think (and Closettrekker will second) that Trek lost much of the its sheer fun in the later incarnations.

Some still look for ‘the message’ of JJ’s Star Trek. For me, it’s about growing up and learning to trust others…And not only finding the good in others, but learning to depend on it as they depend on yours. Kirk and Spock are shown as the most unlikely pair in the Galaxy, but they will discover that while each is formidable individually, together, they are unstoppable. Hopefully, next time McCoy will be in there as well.

338. Dom - November 3, 2009

I’d like to see Khan and his genetically-engineered army act like a genetically engineered army under the auspices of a warlord.

But make a sequel that can stand alone and be the sort of story that could have appeared as easily in TOS if it had an unlimited budget, then bring Khan in for the third film. For the first ‘neo-Trek’ sequel, I’d like it to prove it can exist away from all the cosily familiar ‘villains’, Starfleet and so on!

339. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

guess I am one of the few who does not have faith in these writers

340. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

I hope they prove me wrong and make a great film but I am not keen on Khan being re done.

I believe it will cause more hard core fans to walk away due to the number of Trek fans who are not happy with this idea.

Orci give me faith in you.

341. RaymondJ - November 3, 2009

With over 300 messages here, the overwhelming feeling seems to be no Khan. I am very glad Bob Orci is along for the ride if for nothing else but to get a general idea of what the fans are thinking and feeling. Bob, I know you said here earlier that a lot of fans were against the reboot, but I think it was only a disproportionate vocal few who were against it. Many of us were nervous yet hopeful, and you sure did come through for the majority of us. Box office doesn’t lie!

There is nothing wrong with thinking out loud with regards to the next movie. I think it generates all sorts of ideas and feedback and I hope there has been enough constructive feedback here for you to find a few contributing gems for the next film. Like others, I wonder out loud about Khan, and why try to remake one of the best Trek movies of all time. I believe enough in your writing talent and the clever way you portrayed our Trek characters that you can and will bring us something new and exciting. The world of Trek is so vast that it seems the sky is the limit.

I agree with one of your earlier interviews where you said now that we’ve been introduced to the cast its time for the 2nd movie to address some current social issues. I look forward to what that might entail.

Hopefully you can work in some other original characters, such as Nurse Chapel, Lt. Kyle, or Gary Mitchell. They don’t have to be major roles, but a few lines from one or two of them would be another wonderful wink and nod to those of us who have been with Trek since 1966.

Bottom line, Khan was already done well once, we don’t need him done again even though I’m sure your take would also be a good one. Consult with some highly-regarded science fiction authors as did TOS for a few ideas and see where it takes you. -Raymond

342. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

I will always be a Trek fan

but JJ Abrams is testing whether I will stay with new Trek stuff under his watch, I hope I am proven wrong about Abrams

but I am fed up with the new Trek getting so much praise and the rest of Trek being shitted on in this site.

I love the new movie ( not as canon but still great fun movie) but please the bitching of the past has to stop, cant we love it all?

343. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 3, 2009

#289.,

Much as I’d like to see Ellison get his shot, I think having two WGA winners on the team would be crowding the field.

Now, if they wanted to get my interest in the sequel, they’d let their guy take point.

344. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

Orci I fear a lot more Trek fans will be lost if Khan is redone.

Well they wont be lost but they will probably not watch any more Trek under Team Abrams.

I hope you make a great Trek XII, I am a Trek fan and want new Trek. But to me Trek XI was a fun movie but to me it was far from being the best Trek movie.

I dont want to be lost from the party if Khan is redone.

345. Spocko - November 3, 2009

I want a new villain, not a remake of a classic one.

346. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

345 – agreed

I feel that if Khan is done a lot more fans could walk out from Trek under these guys.

I hope not to be one of them.

347. Lt. Bailey - November 3, 2009

There has been and only will be one Khan. They should let that idea die away. It is not hate for Khan, far from it. It is love for Kahn and what Ricardo did that needs to kept that way, in that (TOS) Star Trek universe or time line or what ever you want to call it and not use it for this new movie franchaise.

My take on this Kahn talk is just misdirection to keep us off balance until they come up with some thing for the next film.

348. captain_neill - November 3, 2009

347

agreed

I have too much love for Khan and the movie that I dont want these writers to cheapen one of the greatest sci fi movies like Hollywood is doing with every single film these days.

I am dreading the remake of Nightmare on Elm Street.

So please forgive me if I feel betrayed by these writers if they redo Khan

349. Eric Holloway - November 3, 2009

And in your hour darkness
There are so many things we haven’t seen
This must be your answer
Let Khan be, let Khan be
Let Khan be, let Khan be
Whisper words of wisom
Let Khan be, let Khan be

And when the brokenhearted people
leaving from the movie agree
There will be a sequel
Star Trek One Three, Star Trek One Three

350. What is it with you? - November 3, 2009

337…

Well said. You captured my thoughts exactly.

To me, Trek is Gorn and hot babes in spandex . It is a swashbuckling naval battle set in space, where iconic, larger than life, archetypes battle to the death with the fate of the universe at stake.

It is Seven of Nine and Urhura slinking around half undressed, flicking buttons, while Kirk bitch-slaps the Klingons. It is a Scotty drinking hard while the doctor cusses out the nerd with the pointy ears.

I

351. What is it with you? - November 3, 2009

And yes …. Give me Khan!!!!! With a man-chest hanging out and rage in his eyes!

352. Chris Doohan - November 3, 2009

326

Right back at ya!!

353. Pete359 - November 3, 2009

Personally I don’t think they should include Khan in Film 2, maybe if they get to five films when Kirk is more developed and the crew is fleshed out it’ll work. But if they do they should really twist him around, remember it’s Space Seed Khan they’ll encounter.

I’ve read a lot of comments here referencing the Joker from the Dark Knight. While he was an incredible villain he was evil from start to finish. I think they should make a new Khan more like Hervey Dent (and eventually Two Face) give him an arch to grow over.

Imagine if they find Khan and he and Kirk are friendly and things start off more amicably then before. Then over the course of the movie something tragic happens to Khan and he blames Kirk.

Now, this really is already what’s happened but I just hope they actually SHOW these developments.

It’s far more interesting that way.

354. TREKWEBMASTER - November 3, 2009

HERE WE GO AGAIN… WARP NINE in a circle…

Gettin’ nowhere mighty fast….

Go ahead and make us a great film, J.J.! Whomever you want to include or exclude is fine with me as long as it “follows,” and it’s not “cliche,” I am up for a great story in the “Trek Universe.”

355. MC1 Doug - November 3, 2009

#349: better be careful, Eric.. you never know, you might have pissed off Paul McCartney there… :-)) LOL

356. tman - November 3, 2009

I think whether Khan is there or not is more a question of how you are trying to reboot the franchise. If you go the route of Batman Begins and Dark Knight, you are retelling the classic heros of the comic book mythos and trying to present the characters in a new way — where the villains themselves have so much backstory that introducing them really gives alot of stuff to work with (in some cases multiple origin stories) and you don’t have to waste screen time explaining them. I think you can contrast that with a TV series where you didn’t have much in terms of continuing story lines from one week to the next. I don’t think Khan has much of a backstory to work with and I think revisiting the same characters so early runs the risk of shrinking the universe. As I’ve said before I’d like to see a Khan story for a 4th film or later when you are looking for some buzz to re-energize interest in the franchise. My concern is that to dwell on the mythos of Star Trek rather than creating something new is part of why it lost it’s relevance to mainstream audiences to begin with. And too much cutsie pulling old stuff out and spit polishing it for the sake of a quick joke or a knowing bit for the fans distracts from having a tight, compeling and original story. For a mass market entertainment like Transformers I think that can work, but that’s a light franchise to begin with with not much presence to begin with so they can take risks plus, you had continuous warfare between essentially the same growing set of foes in the comics or the toy aisles of Target. In the case of Khan he was used in one episode and again same actor came back to play a villain who wants Kirk dead. Because they have the back story of space seed to work with they don’t waste much screen time on backstory so Khan as the out for revenge villain works beautifully. However, this is a reboot, so I don’t think you save much screen time to use the same character this time around. I would contrast that with Klingons where we think we know what Klingons are about or Romulans and the D7 and Bird of Prey are iconic.

357. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 3, 2009

@Bob Orci…you didnt comment on my ideas which means theyre stupendous and youre thinking them over completely disregarding all of your previous sequel ideas….I have my eye on you, Orci!
Garth and Koloth in 2012!
(Im not sure which party that is but who cares)
=)

358. S. John Ross - November 3, 2009

#337: “Star Trek, to many of us, represents a good rip-roaring space adventure with torn shirts, drop kicks, karate chops, beautiful women, good yarns and a great group of characters keeping it all together.”

Exactly, which is why the new film was such a disappointment on those levels. It had humor and action, but not Star Trek humor and action. It had a sexy actress, but the film itself was about as sexy as moldy bread. It had no “yarn” to speak of, and the main characters were tepid, whiny half-assed antiheroes without any sense of connection to keep anything together.

That said, I liked it for what it was. I just mourn what it was not.

359. VZX - November 3, 2009

Why not the Klingons?

I mean, even though this is a new universe, the Klingons are still the main threat during this time period. I don’t understand the argument or logic of people who say not to do the Klingons simply because they are over-done. It’s like not having the Nazis as the main threat in movies that take place in Europe in the early 1940s simply because they are over-used.

BTW: I wonder what Bob Orci thinks of that fan-made Klingon propaganda video. That’s how I want the Klingons to be…

360. Locke for President - November 3, 2009

332. Dalek,

You are obviously not a person who is easy to get along with, to have to attack someone who happens to have an opinion different than your own. Do you find it difficult making and keeping friends?

Also people who nitpick other people because of their spelling are equally anal. You have no clue the background of the person who is writing the piece, their native language, or even the circumstances and place they are writing their comments.

My first sentence, by the way Mr. Know It All, was suggesting that the viable way I saw the scenario working of bringing a character back was to change the dynamics of how the characters ended up meeting. Then the second sentence onward was just a suggestion of one way of going about it.

None of this required your ridicule and insults. So OK, you won, I won’t post here anymore because I just am not up to your intellectual standards. So you can sit alone at your computer, all by yourself, and keep right on insulting people and their opinions.

Let’s see how that works for ‘ya, stud.

361. Gene L. Coon was a U. S. Marine. Stand at ease. - November 3, 2009

Wow. You miss a day around here and there are 358 posts up…

311 Closettrekker with another Gene Coon reference. i, of course, couldn’t agree more. I cannot improve upon your description, and it bears repeating, “My hope in that regard is that he would be much more like Gene Coon’s Klingons than Ron Moore’s, and I don’t mean in physical appearance. I mean that he should be as smooth, slick, intelligent, well-spoken, and cunning as he is vicious and brutal.”

Coon was pressing the Soviet allegory, and there is rich opportunity to write a great screenplay that updates this reality. A Putin-esque triangulating Klingon, maybe? A chess game match of wits between Kirk and a Klingon…?

That said, it must be subtle. TUC was too heavy handed and obvious.

I am beginning to think that the poor foreign box office is the most important issue that must be addressed for the sequel. That is probably most easily solved by a bankable guest star, and a mainstream story.

362. S. John Ross - November 3, 2009

#359: “I mean, even though this is a new universe, the Klingons are still the main threat during this time period.”

If Pike it to be believed (and thanks to a strong performance, I’m inclined to believe him, even if he does feel that the Kirk bloodline is rich in midichlorians) the main threat during this time period is how lame Starfleet has been.

That said, yeah, Klingons would be groovy if done well and integrated into a story with some oomph. Or, barring that, at least integrated into a story.

363. Captain Dunsel - November 3, 2009

This entire debate is nothing but a Khan-job…

364. Daoud - November 3, 2009

@367 Everybody wants to enter the “Khan test”!!

@357 Yes, GARTH LIVES!! Garth works better as a ST6 Martia-like chameloid. We don’t know what Antosians are, so chameloids “fit”.

We need context for Garth that gives a window to young JTK. There’s the perfect avenue for Gary Mitchell. He could be Garth’s young first officer, and in this parallel, a friend of Kirk’s. Gary is thus the conduit by which Kirk is emotionally invested in what is going on. Garth’s descent to madness jeopardizes Gary’s life and that of the crew of the USS Republic.

365. Nivenus - November 3, 2009

Hmmm… I forgot about Garth. That actually does sound like an interesting story idea.

366. Harry Ballz - November 3, 2009

Tom Hanks for Captain Garth?

367. screaming satellite - November 3, 2009

if we do get the Klingons for Trek ‘2’ – id kinda like to see KRUGE make an appearance. maybe not as the main whatever but a cameo for the vicious bastard…maybe Kirk could drop kick him into a vat of molten liquid or something as a nod to his fate in the prime timeline

guess the same could be said of TOS klingons Kang, Kor etc – and even Worfs grandfather….no need to have them as the main adversaries but cameos, name checks what you will

368. screaming satellite - November 3, 2009

@366

Harrison Ford – Admiral April

Megan Fox – Number 1

George Takei – Admiral Nogora (sic)

cameos of course…

369. Harry Ballz - November 3, 2009

368

Only if Takei refrains from running onto the bridge shouting, “hellooooo!”

370. Alex Rosenzweig - November 3, 2009

#327 – ” 266. Alex Rosenzweig – November 3, 2009

Of course we needed your vote. Every vote counts!”

Aww, thanks, Bob. :)

Then my vote is as it was, to not run away from the continuity of Trek’s 5 TV series and first ten films.

And to back up my vote, I’ll say it here first: You create a storyline that re-merges your Trek back into Trek’s Prime Universe, as that universe has been portrayed through those TV series and films, and without changing that universe into something different or doing things like blowing up planets known to be alive and well in that universe ;) , and I’ll be in the theaters 30 times minimum, paid every single time.

That’s how important Star Trek’s universe is to me.

But even if you don’t, yeah, I’ll still give the next movie a look anyway, I just won’t commit to contributing several C-notes to the take. :)

371. Boborci - November 4, 2009

363

love puns. Nice.

372. Iowagirl - November 4, 2009

Khan doesn’t need any add-on.

373. Neal - November 4, 2009

The one thing that I have always like about Star Trek is how most of the movies that were made, were original ideas. I know that without Khan there would not be the franchise that we have here today but Khan needs to stay where he is. No one can replicate, commemorate, or imitate Ricardo Montalban’s performances.

With that said, the new movie has proven that there are actor’s can step up to fill the big shoes of the actors that have come before them. I never thought that Chris Pine could do it. He proved me wrong.

My point is this. They came out with a terrific movie this last summer and I believe that as fun as it would be to rehash those adventures, I think it is time to send this interpretation on its own direction with stories that continue to build on the traditions of Star Trek and the continue growth and rejuvenation of these characters. The actors that were chosen have proven what they can do. Now let them build on the foundation that has been laid out for them, so that they can go on there own journey with new stories that are just as exciting as the originals

374. captain_neill - November 4, 2009

I want to like the new film and I probably will but I am very against the idea of Khan being redone.

I am passionate about my Trek.

375. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

Bob,

the reason some of us are pushing this hard against the Khan idea is because once “you guys” take a position on it, we’ll never change your mind at that point. Hopefully our pleas are not falling on deaf ears.

376. Buzz Cagney - November 4, 2009

I’m confused as to why people don’t want any more Khan, but would be happy with yet more Klingon. Klingons were hashed back and forth in TNG in particular. I got to the point where I groaned when I saw a Klingon. I can usually watch any Trek should it come on TV but an episode that cover the Ridged one’s get’s turned straight off.

377. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

No, no Klingons either!

Something NEW and ORIGINAL!

Old names and places provide the spice, not the meat!

378. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - November 4, 2009

THE NEW CREW MUST BLAZE THERE OWN TRAIL!!!

END TRANSMISSION

379. daystrom - November 4, 2009

I say remake space seed and use that killer from no country for old men

380. Admiral Shatner - November 4, 2009

I will not come to see Star Trek 12 if they recast Khan!! I might not come anyway, unless its got the real Kirk.

381. Star Trek aficionado - November 4, 2009

319. Gunnar Jensen – November 3, 2009

If Lady Gaga is in the next Star Trek film instead of William Shatner, I’m boycotting!

382. Engon - November 4, 2009

William Shatner…is…KHAN NOONIEN SIGNH!

Oh, to get to hear him say, “Captain, although your abilities intrigue me, you are quite honestly inferior.”

383. Engon - November 4, 2009

Signh, Singh…whatever. It’s an alternate universe, after all.

384. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

382

Knowing the Shat, he would probably tag on the ad lib, “except the hair. Kudos on the hair!”

385. star trackie - November 4, 2009

The training cruise is over. These guys are proven, they’re good and they “get” TOS.

If they want Khan, let there be Khan!

386. captain_neill - November 4, 2009

NO KHAN. PERIOD.

387. Larry - November 4, 2009

319 Gunnar Jensen – November 3, 2009

Actually, Taylor Swift will probably have a cameo since she wanted to be in the first one so badly.

388. Bud - November 4, 2009

387. Larry – November 4, 2009

I’d rather have Katy Perry in the film. Russell Brand can be in it too, with his appearance, he’d fit right in.

389. Capt Mike of the Terran Empire - November 4, 2009

Ok. Land the crew on a Planet that is the real home of the Cloverfield Monster and lets see what happens. KHANNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

390. Daoud - November 4, 2009

@386 and @boborci.. well, that’s just why…

But I Can’t Go For That…. mmmmm
(No Khan Do)

But I Can’t Go For That…. mmmmm
(No Khan Do)

When does it stop, where do you dare me to draw the line?
(As Picard once said… “the line is drawn here”)

I can’t go for just repeating the same old lines…
(So, don’t do it! Don’t rewrite Khan! Use Garth instead!)

Apologies to Hall et Oates.

391. Senator Vreenak Will Never Die!!!!!!!!!!!! - November 4, 2009

Rich Corinthian Leather!

Do you hear me? Since they are bringing back the Shat, they have to bring back the Khanster!

392. Shatterhand - November 4, 2009

Maybe it’s just the cynic in me, but it seems like whenever Abrams (or any movie/television exec, for that matter) talks this way, you feel like they’re just using public relations ju-jitsu on you and that if you used your PR bullsh*t decoder ring on it, the rhetoric would translate as : “Yeah, we’re going to use Khan because the media will be all over it, and don’t worry, we’ll make it cool so you’ll feel stupid for complaining about it, and even if you don’t, too bad, cuz it’ll make money, so screw you!” I’d almost prefer to hear the brutal truth instead of the doubletalk.

393. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 4, 2009

Khan has been made into various action figures, he’s been paid tribute to and parodied in everything from Saturday Night Live to Robot Chicken to Seinfeld, “KHAAANNN!!!!!!” t-shirts have been made, and movie theaters that show TWOK at retro screenings have Khan scream contests (I won one!).

As I said, Khan is a minor pop culture icon. Not to the extent of the TOS crew themselves, but an icon nonetheless. The general public remembers him fondly. JJ & crew have already ably demonstrated that they know what the majority want in a Star Trek adventure. Khan WILL be back. And it will be done so well, everyone here who’s crying about it now will go see it twice.

394. Closettrekker - November 4, 2009

#358—-“….which is why the new film was such a disappointment on those levels. It had humor and action, but not Star Trek humor and action. It had a sexy actress, but the film itself was about as sexy as moldy bread. It had no “yarn” to speak of, and the main characters were tepid, whiny half-assed antiheroes without any sense of connection to keep anything together.”

I couldn’t disagree more with that.

If ST09 was “as sexy as moldy bread”, then I’ll have some more moldy bread please.

And no “Star Trek humor and action”? Now what is that exactly?

If you mean that there were not any actual drop kicks, double-fist punches, or corny karate chops to the back of the neck….then yeah….I’d have to say that the action was constructed much more contemporarily than that (not that I do not absolutely adore TOS action in all its corniness).

Same with the humor, which was directed at young people in 2009—-much like the way in which TOS humor was directed at young people in the mid-late 1960’s.

This movie was fun—-the way that TOS was fun….only in a more contemporary way.

I expect more of the same from its sequel, although I welcome the addition of something more “meaningful”—-as indicated by JJ Abrams.

And given its primary goal of being a reintroduction/origin tale, I think its message on the importance of paternal relationships in the development of young men is adequate—–and its example of people coming together, despite their obvious differences, to overcome what appears to be an unstoppable force/insurmountable obstacle can never be overdone in a society which still struggles to move beyond such differences.

Was it “deep” ? No, but I’m not sure that Star Trek has ever really been down that road—certainly not often, and *never* in a feature film—despite what some of the more pretentious (and revisionist) fans would have us believe more than forty years into it. While there are examples (restricted to the television series) where it has indeed been poignant, it has never lived up to this imaginary standard that some criticize ST09 for failing to live up to.

The goal of any Star Trek film is to entertain, and even most of its harshest critics around here will admit being entertained. My feeling is that those who were not are simply those who chose not to allow themselves the pleasure—-having already made up their minds to reject anything departed from their comfort zones before even putting their butts in the theater seats.

As for me, I applaud ST09, and anxiously await its sequel.

395. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

394

Everybody got that??!!

396. Daoud - November 4, 2009

Ummm, no, what did he say?

397. S. John Ross - November 4, 2009

#394: “I couldn’t disagree more with that.”

Pah. You’re just not trying hard enough. I bet you could :)

398. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

Closettrekker, when you crank it up like that, I feel like maybe YOU should be writing some of the reviews for Anthony on this site!

Years ago I used to write like that, before I got burned out, tired and lazy! :>)

399. Richie - November 4, 2009

387 and 388

Do you want the sequel to do for Star Trek what Batman and Robin and Spider-Man 3 did to those franchises?

400. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

400 posts about Khan!

How far Khan it go?

401. Buzz Cagney - November 4, 2009

I’m guessing at least 401 Harry. ;-)

402. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 4, 2009

#394 “The goal of any Star Trek film is to entertain, and even most of its harshest critics around here will admit being entertained. My feeling is that those who were not are simply those who chose not to allow themselves the pleasure—-having already made up their minds to reject anything departed from their comfort zones”

Right on, my friend. And as JTK himself said, “People can be very frigthened of change.” But change is necessary in order to stave off stagnation and death. This franchise reboot worked out about as well as could be expected. It could have been truly awful in the hands of a hack director and stupid actors. Instead, whaddya know, we ended up with thoughtful, respectful actors and a production team that actually realizes how important Star Trek is and cares. These guys earned my trust. Khan or no Khan (and I think there will be Khan, even if not until “part 3″), things are going to work out fine.

Star Trek not only returned, it actually moved up from B-level cinema to tentpole franchise status, like Harry Potter, Bond, Batman, or any of those big money makers. And it isn’t going back down anytime soon!

403. Buzz Cagney - November 4, 2009

See I was right! doh!

404. nuSpock - November 4, 2009

As great as redoing Khan might be… the next film should be both old and new… not original series villian, but a next gen and later villian or situation in TOS era… (and NOT the Borg)…perhaps The Breen or an early beginning to the Occupation of Bajor by the Cardassians and Kirk and crew, in the style of a TOS episode mixed with an action/psychological thriller of today, must overthrow the Cardassians while battling the Prime Directive…

405. John from Cincinnati - November 4, 2009

I would still love for the new movies to touch on…

1) Rejzak from ‘Wolf in the Fold”

2) Tarsus IV

3) Talos IV

4) The biological warfare experiment gone awry in “Miri”

5) Klingons and Tholians and GORN, oh my!

6) The Doomsday Machine

406. Jackson Evans - November 4, 2009

I would like Kirk to give a similar speech publicly to the one that Rocky Balboa did at the end of Rocky IV when he finally becomes the Kirk we all know and love after all that he’s been through.
“During this fight, I’ve seen a lot of changing, in the way you feel about me, and in the way I feel about you. In here, there were two guys killing each other, but I guess that’s better than twenty million. I guess what I’m trying to say, is that if I can change, and you can change, everybody can change!”

407. John from Cincinnati - November 4, 2009

Why did they go through the trouble of making Star Trek 09, to bring the original crew back together, if they aren’t going to at least touch on elemtents of the original series? If they wanted all new stories with all new characters they should’ve just reimagined it with a new crew.

408. John from Cincinnati - November 4, 2009

Taran Fahir as Khan!

409. nuSpock - November 4, 2009

Since JJ plans to bring back Shatner…what if in doing so he could be planning to do a Terran Empire bit where the Mirror Kirk from the Prime Mirror Universe (approximately equivalent year to Star Trek VI had it been in Prime Good Universe) invades the new timeline to try to conquer the Federation, and Mirror Kirk, played by Shatner, allies with the Khan of this universe and they go on a rampage to capitalize upon the vulnerability of the Federation after losing Vulcan to Nero…????

410. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

Going to an Alternate Universe after conquering your own? Now that’s just plain greedy!

411. Sheldon - November 4, 2009

406. Jackson Evans – November 4, 2009
I would like Kirk to give a similar speech publicly to the one that Rocky Balboa did at the end of Rocky IV when he finally becomes the Kirk we all know and love after all that he’s been through.
“During this fight, I’ve seen a lot of changing, in the way you feel about me, and in the way I feel about you. In here, there were two guys killing each other, but I guess that’s better than twenty million. I guess what I’m trying to say, is that if I can change, and you can change, everybody can change!”

———

I don’t know what the hell you’re talking about.

412. AdamTrek - November 4, 2009

#408

Antonio Banderas or I don’t want it.

=A=

413. Daoud - November 4, 2009

#408 Well, Faran works as another character: let’s say in this parallel, they don’t open Khan’s cell first, but a more scholarly Augment who was hoping to off Khan. So Khan’s chamber “fails”. But this guy, call him “Ricardo” turns out to be worse. (See, if you have a Hispanic portray a South Asian in the original, you have a South Asian portray a Hispanic now.. .it’s karma!)

Note in Space Seed that some of the Augments don’t survive, their chambers as McCoy says “fail”. Hmmm, methinks there must be a story behind that.

I just want something different from elements from the original series. No retreads! Some other Eugenic War exile please. Or Garth… or else, I’ll keep singing…

(No Khan Do!) (No Khan Do!) (I Khan’t Go For That!)

414. Alec - November 4, 2009

380. Admiral Shatner – November 4, 2009:

‘I will not come to see Star Trek 12 if they recast Khan!! I might not come anyway, unless its got the real Kirk’.

Hi Bill, can I please have your autograph?

415. Alec - November 4, 2009

266. Alex Rosenzweig – November 3, 2009:

‘I’d go once to give the film a shot, but I have no problems with not super-supporting it if I don’t like where it goes or what it does’.

This is why [existing] Trek fans are so important to the future of Trek. The new film was aimed, primarily, at the mainstream audience. If a mainstream movie-goer gives the Trek film a chance or even likes it, they’re unlikely to see it multiple times. A Trek fan, however, who likes the film, will very likely see it multiple times. In fact, I recall many people on this site saying that they saw Trek 2009 as many as 10 times! And it’s not as if there aren’t many Trekkies: there are millions all around the world.

‘Do not underestimate the power of the [Trekkies].’

416. VZX - November 4, 2009

How’s this for an opener:

EXT. SPACE – Close in on ship, name of ship comes into frame: BOTANY BAY. Ship passes by camera. Suddenly, a laser BLAST fires across the screen and hits the Botany Bay. Large EXPLOSION. We then see the source of the blast: a Klingon ship enters frame from above. It continues to fires until there is nothing left of the sleeper ship.

Title fades in: STAR TREK: With Klingons, not Khan!

417. richpit - November 4, 2009

Please, NO KHAN!

Oh, and PLEASE, don’t rehash any of the old series episodes!! Now’s the time to be totally creative with the new universe.

418. Alec - November 4, 2009

266. Alex Rosenzweig – November 3, 2009:

‘#146 – “The only big problem is the Eugenic Wars that never happened, but just simply ignore and dance around that elephant.”

The Eugenics Wars happened in the Trek Universe(s). That they didn’t occur in our reality is irrelevant’.

Here’s an interesting thought about Trek 2009 – I hope! We all know that Star Trek is supposed to be ‘our’ future, not something that happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, for instance. Now, perhaps we do indeed belong to the same universe as Trek 2009, and not the universe(s) in which the previous forty years of Trek [are said to have] occurred. Perhaps this is why we never endured the Eugenics Wars of the late 1990s: they happened in a different universe, a different time-line. This would turn things on their head. The most recent film, which sets up a whole new time-line with different actors and characters, has the potential to be more significant to us than the previous time-line, which so many Trekkies hold in great reverence. So perhaps the Eugenics wars never occurred in the new time-line or, at the very least, they occurred in a very different time, place or other fashion. Nero’s temporal shenanigans might not only have changed the future, but also the past. This is, after all, just one of, perhaps, infinite possible universes. Base continuity need only be kept to please the fans. So the writers need not mention the Eugenics wars – of the late 1990s. They’re not bound to that history. And that’s fortunate, because ‘that’ line is very silly, now, in our day-and-age; and it makes me cringe every time I hear it in TWOK. (If the writers are reading, please be vague on details of our ‘history’, especially with dates; otherwise, your films age, very quickly.)

Trekkies, everywhere, don’t dismiss a new Khan epic. It has the potential for greatness. There are things that could be improved upon in TWOK and Space Seed (not many, though, I admit). For example, we never really saw Khan demonstrate his full mental and physical…‘superiority’.

419. AJ - November 4, 2009

418:

Alec:

It looks as if Khan’s story in this universe has already been alluded two in the ‘augments’ story arc from ENT, which exists fully intact as a part of TREK09’s past.

It’s been a while since I saw it, but I think it’s left vague enough to allow Khan’s life to be re-inserted into the timeline at a later date.

Perhaps the writers could re-interpret the 8 years of “W” Bush as the Eugenics War and have Dick Cheney show up as the leader instead of Khan.

420. VOODOO - November 4, 2009

402 Shatner_Fan_Prime

“Star Trek not only returned, it actually moved up from B-level cinema to tentpole franchise status, like Harry Potter, Bond, Batman, or any of those big money makers. And it isn’t going back down anytime soon!”

I disagee with this point about ST being B- level cinema. The original films were as big as the ST 09. TMP actually made more money worldwide that ST 09 did.

Star Trek 09 re-established the franchise as an X-Men like tent pole franchise. A new ST film back in the day was a very big deal. The series grew tired as it moved away from it’s original characters.

421. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 4, 2009

“I disagee with this point about ST being B- level cinema. The original films were as big as the ST 09.”

I think only TMP came close to ST 09, VOODOO. You know me, I love ST I-VI. But they were never big budget, A level productions. After the first one, Paramount made them as cheaply as possible.

Closettrekker will explain the whole A level, B level thing. It’s one of his specialties. :-)

422. screaming satellite - November 4, 2009

how about they dont recast Khan at all?

At some point in the film (e.g. the opening) have another Fed ship find the Bontany Bay – away team beams aboard and finds Richardo Montoban as Khan in the sleep chamber…(vis Space Seed footage agumented with CG so as to interact with the new actors)

then the klingons attack and blow up the botany bay killing the away team , Khan and all the supermen…then the rest of the film is about the Federation vs the klingons

so everyone would be like ‘Oh the movies gonna be about Khan’…then ‘hold on isnt that the REAL Khan?!’…then…’oh my god they killed Khan!!’

so Khan would be in the movie…..just not for very long!! :)

423. Dark_Lord_Prime - November 4, 2009

If they go with Khan, then they should go after Naveen Andrews to play him.

424. Captain Dunsel - November 4, 2009

#418 Alec “The Eugenics Wars happened in the Trek Universe(s). That they didn’t occur in our reality is irrelevant’.”

If you haven’t done so, go ron’t be so sure of that. Read “The Eugencis Wars” by Greg Cox.

http://www.amazon.com/Eugenics-Wars-Vol-Noonien-Singh/dp/0743406427/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1257367905&sr=1-2

425. Captain Dunsel - November 4, 2009

Dang! I have NO idea what happened there. That should have read:

“Don’t be so sure of that. If you haven’t done so, go read…” etc.

426. John from Cincinnati - November 4, 2009

Yes, let’s be totally creative in this new universe with the…. old crew. Err, uh, mmm. Doesn’t jive. Again, want something totally new and unexpected, then they should’ve made it with a completely new crew. They can still make new stories, but elements of the TOS universe should be there. How else do you explain there is still an NCC 1701, Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty etc? So what you’re saying is by going through the black hole and creating this “parallel” universe, everything but the ship and crew changed? How did that happen exactly? Did everyone in the crew get protected by some temporal bubble but everyone else (Trelane, Klingons, Romulans, Miri) disappeared? Like Prime Spock said once in ‘City on the Edge of Forever’, time is like a current, it brings the same people to the same events.

427. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

Yikes!! I just realized the title of the next movie:

STAR TREK: FIRST KHAN-TACT

(runs and hides)

428. Alec - November 4, 2009

419. AJ – November 4, 2009:

‘418:
Alec:
It looks as if Khan’s story in this universe has already been alluded two in the ‘augments’ story arc from ENT, which exists fully intact as a part of TREK09’s past.
It’s been a while since I saw it, but I think it’s left vague enough to allow Khan’s life to be re-inserted into the timeline at a later date’.

Why does ENT have to exist as necessary part of Trek 09’s past? The writers have created a new timeline having recourse to the view that there are infinite possible time-lines that are constantly played out. They can pick any one they like. There isn’t just one universe; so it’s not the case that any new time-line, all the more so the particular time-line in which Trek exists now, must be identical for a certain amount of definite time with this, or a prior time-line; and then there’s divergence. On the contrary, the time-lines could be drastically different. The only reason that the new time-line looks similar, i.e., the characters are recognizable as are the ships and the places etc, is to keep a sense of continuity with what has come before. But this is only to keep the spirit of Trek. Again, why does ‘Kirk’ have to be the same in each and every time-line: bold, intellectual, emotional, etc. He doesn’t, metaphysically speaking. The only reason Pine’s Kirk is similar to Shatner’s kirk is to keep a sense of continuity and to capture the ‘Star Trek’ that Gene Roddenberry created without writing over it. Metaphysically speaking, these many Kirk’s could be completely different (they would have had completely different lives, after all); or not at all. This is why Delta Vega can be in a different location in Trek 09. No issue with canon there.

Now, I’m not suggesting that Trek 09 isn’t canon. I argue that it is, simply because it follows, necessarily, from all the events in Trek’s 40 year history that preceded it. But I argue that there’s an asymmetry in that the events PRIOR to the divergence don’t have to be the same as in a prior time-line. Because that was a DIFFERENT time-line. So the Eugenics wars needn’t occur. Remember: there are an infinite number of possible time-lines. The writers, rather conveniently, can pick any time-line they like. If they want possible event X to occur or to have occurred, all the need do is attribute it to their time-line. So the Eugenics wars needn’t occur in the late 1990s. And, I’m pleased to say, I see no reason to have ENT as a necessary pre-condition for Trek 09.

We have a black slate that is gradually being filled-in with the events of the new crew.

429. Vulcan Fury - November 4, 2009

How about Bruce Campbell as Khan???

430. Vulcan Fury - November 4, 2009

Or maybe Bruce Campbell as Harry Mudd???

431. Daoud - November 4, 2009

@427 Only if the USS Khan-stellation with Matt Decker, and the USS Khan-stitution with Bob April are involved!

@430 How about Bruce Campbell as Koloth? Keep it in the Campbells, yanno.

432. Vulcan Fury - November 4, 2009

How about Ian Mcshane as a Klingon?

433. screaming satellite - November 4, 2009

428 – “Why does ENT have to exist as necessary part of Trek 09’s past?”…..” I see no reason to have ENT as a necessary pre-condition for Trek 09.”

er….Admiral Archer??

c’mon man Enterprise is canon in Trek 09s universe…in fact its the only part of Trek that ‘exists’ in the current universe…..no doubt one of the reasons why they referenced Archer…

if Khan does appear i dunno what they should do about the Eugenic Wars of the late 90s…just go with it i guess – no need to mention when they happened – just at some vauge point in earths past – could be the 1990s…could be somepoint during the 21st century (cant remember if Enterprise mentioned they were in the 90s or not) ….then if movie goers wanna know all the details they can check out Space Seed…

434. The Angry Klingon (without a trenchcoat) - November 4, 2009

432.
I LIKE that! McShane is da man! McShane is the master of menace! But …McShane as Garth of Izar!!!!!!!!!! Im not dropping this Garth thing, Orci…dont think that I will…

435. screaming satellite - November 4, 2009

“in fact its the only part of Trek that ‘exists’ in the current universe…..no doubt one of the reasons why they referenced Archer… ”

obviously all the other stuff has happened too (Spock Prime) – but ENT is the only one thats happened ‘so far’

436. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 4, 2009

Ian Mcshane = Kang
Bruce Campbell = Koloth
Victor Garber = Kor

I LIKE it! ;-)

437. screaming satellite - November 4, 2009

and maybe Arnie will finish his Culifornia duties to have a comeback as a Klingon Emperor

438. VOODOO - November 4, 2009

Closettrekker #394

Well said.

439. steve - November 4, 2009

I, MUGSY.

Yes, that’s right, the $260 million would have been easily made if they had made a hard science sci-fi movie made exclusively for science geeks. Lol.

Yep, and when you come back from fantasy land and realize TREK will only survive if it appeals to the masses and gives them a popcorn movie good time. That’s it, no if’s ands or buts.

The movie you no doubt want wouldtank hugely at the box office and STA TREK would be buried forever (tight where TNG left it).

440. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

STAR TREK: FIRST KHAN-TACT

Khan, awoken from his long slumber, must use all of his diplomatic skills in teaching the young Captain Kirk how to be more tactful in dealing with first alien contact.

I smell epic!

441. Engon - November 4, 2009

The solution is simple. After discovering the “Botany Bay,” McCoy is unable to revive Khan. Instead, he revives Khan’s ruthless henchman, Joaquin.

Kirk soon realizes the he has met his ultimate nemesis when Joaquin utters his terrifying signature line, “How do I regain picture?”

442. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 4, 2009

#289.,

There is another possibility, Ellison supposedly submitted a script to Paramount for the TREK film production that eventually became TMP. They didn’t use it but presumably Paramount’s smarter than Desilu and has some options on it?

#294.,

I’d think his 4 WGAs would tend to counter any contention that he couldn’t write a script and the notion that he can’t work with film people is probably best countered by the fact that Paramount asked him to submit a script for the ST restart that became TMP.

Also the most consistent ding against Ellison’s scripts that I’ve heard is that they couldn’t be filmed on a TV budget. Apparently, the budgets are now large enough to accommodate him this?

http://books.google.com/books?id=HUZycj9CcEsC&pg=RA1-PA199&lpg=RA1-PA199&dq=&source=bl&ots=PqwZLoqeFY&sig=Y0bgs2ODM-NY-Lxi3I0tEM4oPSQ&hl=en&ei=VQzySqiINIzuswPz_uAY#v=onepage&q=&f=false

443. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 4, 2009

#439.

Paramount’s 3Q report is in and it is reported that they saw a $69 million profit built on the box office performance of GI JOE, ROTF and ST combined.

Now compare that with the current performance of PARANORMAL ACTIVITY using the old school method of calculating profits by subtracting 3 times its budget ($15,000 x 3 = $45,000) from its box office. That one picture has generated $85 million (and still growing) in profits besting the “HUGE” box office profits of all 3 Paramount blockbusters with their much longer runs combined.

And the big P’s greenlit a PA sequel too.

444. tman - November 4, 2009

421-

I don’t think it’s fair to characterize it as a B-film. I think they were ingenious to create a viable sci-fi film with alot of scrounging, reuse, but I don’t think $11 million of costs (not including the reuse) in the 1980’s was B-grade It certainly wasn’t fourty-five-f###ing million dollars and the special effects were weak, but it was an effective film from a studio with a reasonable amount of expectation, scrutiny, and testing.

445. dmduncan - November 4, 2009

442: “There is another possibility, Ellison supposedly submitted a script to Paramount for the TREK film production that eventually became TMP”

Where did you read that? Ellison, according to his own words, delivered a pitch to Paramount exec Barry Trabulus, with Roddenberry in the room, but he hadn’t written anything down because Writer’s Guild rules did not allow for spec writing, and Harlan very much respected those rules.

That’s the pitch where Trabulus wanted Harlan to somehow insert Mayans into the script because Trabulus liked Mayans, and Harlan told him how stupid the idea was and walked out, having no more to do with TMP. Although he was, by his own words, also asked to write ST 2, 4, and 5.

TMP was lifted from John Meredyth Lucas’s Changeling episode of TOS, to be a story for Star Trek PHASE II called In Thy Image, written as a teleplay by Alan Dean Foster. Gene Roddenberry didn’t credit either Lucas’s original material or Foster’s teleplay, but he did get Livingston to turn it into a movie script.

446. dmduncan - November 4, 2009

“B” movie is pretty much a purely emotive term these days. It came from the days when double features were the norm and there was an “A” movie with your top stars and budgets, and a less interesting “B” movie which did not have those things. Those days are gone, but the term is still here. I guess independent features would be the closest living relative to the “B” movie.

447. Dunsel Report - November 4, 2009

I suggest Tommy Wiseau (of midnight movie “The Room”) as Khan.

448. S. John Ross - November 4, 2009

#399: “Do you want the sequel to do for Star Trek what Batman and Robin and Spider-Man 3 did to those franchises?”

You’ve summarized my concerns with Orci & Kurtzman’s work brilliantly, sir.

449. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 4, 2009

#445. ,

I used the word “supposedly” because I haven’t found anything to substantiate it more than a rumor. But FWIW from Wiki:

“The film was postponed until spring 1975 while Paramount fielded new scripts for Star Trek II (the working title) from acclaimed writers such as Ray Bradbury, Theodore Sturgeon and Harlan Ellison. ”

I was referring to the 1975 “film production” eventually becoming TMP not that his script did.

450. dmduncan - November 4, 2009

449: Yeah, it was the same production, and according to Ellison the story was all in his head, and after Trabulus pissed him off he was done with the project that would become TMP. I was wondering whether he had written that story down too, recently, but apparently he hadn’t, at least not for public consumption.

I’d sure like to have heard that pitch, though. It sounded like a wild story.

Roddenberry also tried to get Star Trek in the movies in 72-73 with Solow coming back to produce a Roddenberry story called The Cattlemen. It never got rolling and probably a good thing. Sounds like it would’ve been a steaming pile of cowshit.

451. Dunsel Report - November 4, 2009

I’d love to see the new movie open “in media res” with Kirk and crew coming back from some underexplained and tantalizing mission. Sort of like the beginning of “The Cage,” where Pike lost crewmembers fighting some kind of medieval barbarian under an alien moon, but we never find out why, or like the side stories Sherlock Holmes used to allude to.

452. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 4, 2009

#450.,

I seem to recall more than once Ellison did on the spot writing stunts to support various causes.

I think he did some 24-hour-in-the-shop-window thing for a favorite bookstore of his, DANGEROUS VISIONS? My fuzzy recall is that he wrote something on the order of a small novella and anyone buying a book could give a word or phrase that he somehow incorporated into what he was typing, and I believe it was an actual typewriter that he used.

My point is I would not be surprised if he had done a script – not that I mean to intimate that he’s never had trouble meeting deadlines or that he would have thought of it as a finished product.

453. Trekenstein - November 4, 2009

#426. – “Yes, let’s be totally creative in this new universe with the…. old crew. Err, uh, mmm. Doesn’t jive. Again, want something totally new and unexpected, then they should’ve made it with a completely new crew. They can still make new stories, but elements of the TOS universe should be there.”

Seriously? That is totally spurious reasoning. TOS ran for 3 seasons and 79 episodes without ever repeating a main story or central character, except for Harry Mudd, who BTW was essentially a completely different character in I, Mudd, than in Mudd’s Women (and not for the better).

Somehow they managed to come up with 79 new and original ideas using the same old cast. How ever did they do that without replacing the old crew with a completely new crew every episode?

Of course elements of TOS universe should still be there. But that does not mean they should re-visit Khan anymore than they should re-visit City On The Edge of Forever.

Khan was a strong character, but honestly, had Harve Bennett not dug up and dusted off the character for ST II, would the character currently be enjoying the position in the Trek legacy that he does?

Let Abrams’s & Co. do their own heavy lifting and discover their own obscure kernel of TOS’s past which they can develop into an equally exciting idea as Bennett and Meyer brought to life with Khan. That’s all the fans are asking for when they say something new and original.

I am constantly astounded on this site by those whose seemingly blind love for the new film appears to result in an obtuse interpretation and gratuitous attack of any potentially dissenting comment.

454. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 4, 2009

#442 “I’d think his 4 WGAs would tend to counter any contention that he couldn’t write a script and the notion that he can’t work with film people is probably best countered by the fact that Paramount asked him to submit a script for the ST restart that became TMP.”

I didn’t say he couldn’t write a script. I said he couldn’t write a marketable blockbuster in 2012. Writing a tv script in the 60’s versus writing a $150 million dollar tentpole franchise movie over four decades later are entirely different animals. The audience expectations are entirely different.

It is illogical to assume Paramount would go to 70-something year old Ellison to write the next installment of this now reinvigorated franchise. According to IMDB, he last consulted on some tv scripts about a decade ago, and has remained out of the business since. Star Trek needs, and has received, new blood and a fresh take. No one is going to look to its long ago past for writers now.

455. Harry Ballz - November 4, 2009

Funny, for a minute there I thought your last line was going to be, “No one is going to look to its long ago past for ACTORS now”

Silly me!

456. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 5, 2009

#454., Shatner_Fan_Prime once observed “Writing a tv script in the 60’s versus writing a $150 million dollar tentpole franchise movie over four decades later are entirely different animals. The audience expectations are entirely different.”

Where’s the logic in your ageism?

You’ve got to be kidding – if not me, then yourself.

When Paramount approached the current writing duo in 2006 they had absolutely zero tentpole cred.

And so far the only track record they’ve developed tp-wise is TRANSFORMERS 2 – the writing of which Ellison could easily match while using the other meaning of that abbreviation.

457. Richie - November 5, 2009

448. S. John Ross – November 4, 2009

Thanks.

458. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 5, 2009

#456 “You’ve got to be kidding”

Not at all. Your failure to understand why Paramount wouldn’t approach Ellison to write Star Trek XII pretty much demonstrates a failure to understand how the Hollywood system works. Whether you like their products or not, Orci and Kurtzman are about as hot as properties get right now where writers and producers are concerned. They are relatively young and they seem to have a good understanding of what current movie audiences want to see.

As I pointed out, Ellison hasn’t written anything for a visual medium in a long time, and I don’t know that he’s ever written a blockbuster film. He had famous battles with Roddenberry and Paramount over COTEOF (let’s not forget that the story that eventually came to the tv screen in the 60’s had been changed, much to his displeasure), and no one is going to ask him back now. You’re silly if you think that’s even a possibility.

459. Closettrekker - November 5, 2009

#411—“I would still love for the new movies to touch on…

1) Rejzak from ‘Wolf in the Fold”

2) Tarsus IV

3) Talos IV

4) The biological warfare experiment gone awry in “Miri”

5) Klingons and Tholians and GORN, oh my!

6) The Doomsday Machine”

#426—“Again, want something totally new and unexpected, then they should’ve made it with a completely new crew. They can still make new stories, but elements of the TOS universe should be there. ”

My opinion on this is that—-yes—I would love to see and hear subtle references that serve as easter eggs for fans familiar with the original series….but that’s about it.

I don’t want to see a feature film about Redjac, whom we already saw dealt with in “Wolf In The Fold”…not to mention I happen to believe that episode to be one of the weaker Star Trek stories to begin with. What would be the point?

The incident on Tarsus IV would have taken place (if it even did in the altered timeline) 12 years prior to the point in which ST09 leaves its audience. It might be fun to hear a random reference to Governor Kodos (suggesting that, in the altered timeline, the incident never happened)—but that would suggest that colonial governors in the 23rd Century UFP have no term limits! I suppose the reference could be made to “Former Governor Kodos Of Tarsus IV”.

Talos IV is interesting, as the ship which carried Vina there would still have crashed there prior to the timeline incursion. However, it doesn’t look likely that Pike would have discovered her there. It seems reasonable to conclude that the Federation has not made any contact with the Talosians, and they very well may be continuing to look for another “specimen”. Still, that kind of story might be best suited for television. I’m not sure that it would suffice for a widely marketable feature film.

As for “Miri”, I think the whole “exact duplicate of Earth” thing is best left to rest. The name of the planet is never mentioned in the episode (yet another I wouldn’t exactly put in a time capsule)—-so it’s hard for any reference to the disease or incident to be utilized as fun throwaway dialogue. And this is one of those cases where the distress signal is not supposed to be heard for nearly a decade after 2258 (assuming that’s where the sequel picks up—not that it has to). Any mention of this suggests that it was retrieved many years earlier, and that the disease would have been therefore dealt with at a far earlier stage of progression.

Re: Klingons, Tholians, and Gorn—–It’s difficult for me to imagine another Star Trek movie without a Klingon presence. I just hope their behavior more closely resembles Gene Coon’s Klingons than Ron Moore’s.

I think that is a far more likely scenario than seeing either the Tholians or Gorn (both of which are unknown to the Federation as far as we know at this point, and we’ve already seen first contact with each of them depicted in TOS).

Love the DM. However, I don’t know that there is much else to do with that story—especially in a two-hour movie. To start with, the “Doomsday Machine” will not appraoch systems L-370 and L-374 for quite some time, so unless it is somehow encountered earlier—-I’m not sure where you go with that. Beyond that obvious obstacle, the most important thing seems to be that the solution to that problem is already out there. Do you really want to spend two hours waiting for the crew to figure out a solution you already know?
Still, I don’t see any problem with the young James Kirk being introduced to a minor character by the name of Matt Decker. I just wouldn’t go any further with it than that.

460. Trek Nerd Central - November 5, 2009

#418. Alec, that is flippin’ brilliant.
#432. Harry, that is flippin’ painful.

As for this Khan/No Khan, redo/no-redo, politics/no-politics debate, you know what I really want from this movie? I’ve thought long and hard about it, and I want four things:

1. For someone in heinous pancake make-up to smile weirdly in close-up and say, “Better hurry — it’s the RED HOUR.”

2. For someone to wear a ridiculously elaborate beehive hairdo.

3. For Kirk to attack someone with a FLYING LEG KICK.

4. For George Clooney to appear. Somewhere. Anywhere. For just a second or two. I don’t care. I just want to see him in a “Star Trek” movie.

That just about does it!

461. The Invader (In Color!) - November 5, 2009

I think there’s a real KHAN-spiracy to have Khan in this next movie…

462. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 5, 2009

@458., Shatner_Fan_Prime blurted “Your failure to understand why Paramount wouldn’t approach Ellison to write Star Trek XII pretty much demonstrates a failure to understand how the Hollywood system works.”

And you apparently have zero knowledge of Hollywood history. There’s no such thing as a “hot” lock in Hollywood. There are those who would have agreed with your thinking in 1975 and yet Paramount went to him and asked for a script.

The only constant in Hollywood is things change especially when you give it added time. Executives leave, executives get fired, corporations get bought out, etc.

You are the silly one if the fact that O/K are not on TRANSFORMERS 3 “surprises” you because it doesn’t work under your “logical” understanding of the Hollywood system.

Using your “hot” logic the next ST sequel’s budget is going to be in the neighborhood of $15,000 to $300,000 and set entirely in Kirk’s quarters.

This is a creative ART and this IS Hollywood, in three years, anything can happen.

463. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 5, 2009

#460 “in 1975 and yet Paramount went to him and asked for a script”

LOL. Yes, in 1975. Check your calendar. It’s 2010. Even in 1975, no script of his was produced! Has he written any Star Trek which was produced after 1967? And you must have missed my point that he last “consulted” on Babylon 5 (a weak series, IMO) ten years ago, and dosen’t seem to have done any Hollywood work since. I’m not trying to take anything away from Ellison as a writer. But writing novels and short stories and writing major Hollywood blockbusters are, as I said already, entirely different. And I was totally right about O & K being hot right now; in addition to Star Trek, Transformers, and Fringe, they are connected to all sorts of other big projects.

“in three years, anything can happen”

Hey, if you choose to believe a Paramount exec is suddenly going to decide, ‘You remember that angry old guy who gave us all that hell and sued us over a Star Trek episode he wrote in the 60’s? Let’s get HIM to write the next movie! And give me my raise now for the genius suggestion! ‘…… more power to you. But that’s ridiculous.

464. Closettrekker - November 5, 2009

#460—“There are those who would have agreed with your thinking in 1975 and yet Paramount went to him and asked for a script.”

And 1975 Hollywood was also full of would-be directors right out of film school who were getting hundreds of thousands of dollars shelled out to them left and right to make movies without much thought at all given to it by studio execs because that was the trend at the time…the point being that comparing 1970’s Hollywood to today *has* no point. It’s apples and oranges.

“You are the silly one if the fact that O/K are not on TRANSFORMERS 3 “surprises” you because it doesn’t work under your “logical” understanding of the Hollywood system.”

Actually, the fact that Bob and Alex are not on that project shouldn’t surprise anyone—-and the reason for it is perfectly logical. They didn’t want the job! In fact, they had to be “convinced” (which most likely means paid handsomely) to work on ROTF. That had absolutely nothing to do with “the Hollywood system” or who’s got a hot name in the business right now…Paramount could also desire Spielberg to direct the sequel, but that doesn’t mean it’s on his list of things to do.

The notion of Harlan Ellison being tapped for a Star Trek script right now is cute and all, but completely unrealistic. I have to agree with Shatner Fan Prime.

465. The Invader (In Color!) - November 5, 2009

We are now at the time of the day when I say…

…NO KHAN!!!

466. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 5, 2009

#463. & #464.

I’m not the one arguing there’s a lock. I’m arguing there’s no certainty in Hollywood precluding the possibility of Ellison or anyone else ending up penning the script.

One thing’s pretty much a constant in the executive suites of the studios and it’s the reason that the WGA exists: writers are considered as disposable as tissue paper.

Example, IRON MAN/IRON MAN 2 share no common scriptwriters.

That’s why O/K are smart and wear more than one hat.

Do you even recognize the irony of your arguing that a ST09 sequel script approval can only unfold one solitary way in the ensuing 3 years?

I mean, how can you be so certain that we’re not in the alternate universe where in 12mos Bad Grey discovers Bob Orci is his (pronoun purposely placed) wife’s Latin love god?

467. Daoud - November 5, 2009

@460 George Clooney as… Fleet Captain Garth… excellent idea.

With Bruce back as Fleet Captain Pike, it’s perfect.

468. dmduncan - November 5, 2009

452: “I think he did some 24-hour-in-the-shop-window thing for a favorite bookstore of his, DANGEROUS VISIONS?”

Yes, he did do that. But the rules stipulating Harlan could not write anything on spec would have come from the WGAw, which is a union for cinematic and television writing, and some other new stuff—but not publishing.

I’ve never “pitched” an idea, and I’m not a WGAw member, but from what I understand, that is the reason why pitches are verbal.

I don’t think Harlan is on the movie industry’s radar anymore. It would be like the Lakers trying to get Magic Johnson back in the game when there’s already enough young talent trying to get out there and play.

So, we got a new team. Personally, I don’t think like that, but those who decide probably do.

To me, Harlan’s age isn’t as important as his passion, because that is where the good stuff comes from. I mean, sure, his age would be important if he couldn’t function, but Harlan seems to be as funny, sharp, and irreverent today as he ever was. And the kind of talent he has doesn’t grow like weeds.

469. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 5, 2009

#468. ,

Old and new Paramount definitely have a history of uninspired safe think.

I just think it’s sad that his first Trek script got so much grief because the budget couldn’t accommodate it and he stretched the characters too far for episodic TV. Now they’ve got a budget and a new blank Trek universe where those stretches could be easily absorbed as the “this character wouldn’t do that” roadblocks aren’t up yet. And it’s not as if it had to be locked to the first draft either. He did rewrites.

Yeah, I know O/K can’t figure out how to make the Guardian fit in their philosophy. Still, more’s the pity.

470. Hat Rick - November 5, 2009

I think, honestly, folks, O & K will be looking as much at Hollywood’s most successful movies as much as Trek itself for story structure inspiration. It’s not just going to be what Trek has offered over the years — if you want a mega-blockbuster, you have to look at what the whole movie-making industry has offered.

You have to think epic. Gargantuan. Emotionally devastating. Movies.

Something that — POW!!!! — hits you in the gut, the way that the first scenes in ST2009 did. A combo of great cinematography, dialogue, and — yes — even lack of dialogue — as well as plot and telegenesis that helps make a movie more than a movie — but rather something for the ages.

If, kind monsieurs and mesdames, you will remember, it was precisely a one-two punch administered when George Kirk lost his life that pulled the audience in in ST2009. That scene was superbly executed by a master at execution. That was the first scene that got you and others by the gut and kept its iron grip firmly there until you couldn’t stop thinking about the movie, the adventure, the franchise.

O & K need to think not just Trek big, but Hollywood big. Gone With the Wind big. Citizen Kane big.

O & K will do, indubitably, go big. Or go home.

471. dmduncan - November 5, 2009

Clearly, the sequel ought to have emotional kick. And they’ve already given these characters a depth we’ve never seen in them before. Kirk as a smartass delinquent? Spock as Clint Eastwood? Who knew? More than anything else, it’s the emotional paydirt struck through character action that will make or break the sequel for THIS franchise.

And nothing pierces the heart like loss.

They may have to kill somebody. Important.

Spock already died once. He’s safe.

But this delinquent Kirk has to take the Hero’s Journey. His old self has to die so that the Great Captain can be born. And he needs to be initiated into his new life by a father figure. “Oh, who could that be,” the Church Lady asks. “Who could this father figure be? Maybe could it be WILLIAM SHATNER?”

472. Harry Ballz - November 5, 2009

Nah, Shatner doesn’t have the acting chops anymore! The audience would giggle at his efforts.

473. dmduncan - November 5, 2009

I’d say that ST.09 left off at the beginning of the initiation stage of the Hero’s Journey for Kirk, where he has successfully completed the first of several trials. The best should be yet to come.

Bob, Alex, JJ: Finish whatcha stahted.

474. Yalana - November 5, 2009

A-A-A-A-A-A-B-B-R-A-M-S!!!!!!!!!!!!!

No Khan. Stupid idea. Forget it.

475. Shatner_Fan_Prime - November 6, 2009

#469 “Now they’ve got a budget and a new blank Trek universe where those stretches could be easily absorbed as the ‘this character wouldn’t do that’ roadblocks aren’t up yet.”

It’s 40 years later. He’s written no Trek since 1967. And no blockbuster movies ever. And no Hollywood work period in 10 years. Like Closet said, cute fantasy, but … let it go. Next topic, please.

#472 “Shatner doesn’t have the acting chops anymore!”

I don’t think you’ll find one person who agrees with that, Harry. He simply plays different roles now. And wins Emmy for them.

476. captain_neill - November 6, 2009

If Khan is in sequel then my thrill for the sequel will be lost.
Cause it means that Trek has become like every other film Holly wood is ruining. It will just be an inferior remake of a classic.

I will lose interest if these ‘writers’ can only hack off from one of the greatest Trek movies instead of doing an original story.

477. Closettrekker - November 6, 2009

#476—-“It will just be an inferior remake of a classic…I will lose interest if these ‘writers’ can only hack off from one of the greatest Trek movies instead of doing an original story.”

In all fairness, portraying the discovery of Khan and his followers adrift aboard the Botany Bay in an altered timeline (and therefore under entirely different circumstances) wouldn’t be a “remake” at all. It would be the telling of a completely different tale involving a familiar character. In fact, such a script wouldn’t have anything at all to do with TWOK. It would be a reimagining of “Space Seed”.

For example…In this altered timeline, the Botany Bay could be picked up by a starship other than Enterprise, or even by an alien race. If that’s the case, Khan’s story could potentially go in a hundred different directions.

As far as being “original”—-how would this be any different from Harve Bennett choosing not to come up with his own “original” character for the sequel to TMP, and instead going with a character created by another artist 15 years earlier? I don’t see how this (should they even choose to go down that road) would be any less “original”. Bennett chose to tell a different story with an already established character. The only thing different about this would be the fact that Lindelof, Orci, and Kurtzman have an alternate timeline at their disposal—-allowing them to basically start with the Botany Bay adrift in space, but otherwise from scratch with their own story.

Now, I’m not necessarily advocating that the sequel be about Khan and the Botany Bay (which, in the Prime timeline, wasn’t discovered until 9 years after the point at which ST09 leaves off)—–but dismissing it altogether as a viable option doesn’t make any sense to me. Theoretically, Khan’s ship could be spotted and investigated at any time, given the alternate timeline’s premise that, due to a ‘chain-reaction’ of events, different people (and ships for that matter) will be in different places at different times for different reasons.

Bob, Alex, and Damon could tell a story involving just about anything possible in the Star Trek Universe—-and that includes a reimagining of “Space Seed”. If they chose to do so, then I’m sure it will be a fun ride, complete with Lindelof’s particular penchant for unexpected twists and turns along the way.

478. Trekenstein - November 6, 2009

#477 – “how would this be any different from Harve Bennett choosing not to come up with his own “original” character”

I think it is worlds different and would be the easy way out for Abrams & Co.

Khan was a strong character, but honestly, had Harve Bennett not dug up and dusted off the character for ST II, would the character currently be enjoying the position in the Trek legacy that he does?

Let Abrams’s & Co. do their own heavy lifting and discover their own obscure kernel of TOS’s past which they can develop into an equally exciting idea as Bennett and Meyer brought to life with Khan. Or develop something completely new based on general elements, races and cultures defined in the ST universe.

I won’t have any problems if they do Khan, but honestly, it’s taking the low road in terms of making their own mark. They would be going with a known money maker rather than an ORIGINAL risk, as Bennett took. If Khan had tanked, so too would ST. Aside from Harry Mudd, Khan is the only central character repeated in TOS era cast, and the only one to cross over to films. Why revisit the character at all? What more is there to tell? And if there’s no new way to view Khan, then it basically is a remake.

I would simply vote for something I’ve never seen explored before – even if it is an character derived from an episode of TOS which I never gave further consideration.

479. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 6, 2009

#475.,

Speaking of fantasies,

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/the_big_picture/2009/11/is-hollywood-always-in-panic-mode-ari-emanuels-history-lesson.html

“Studios always think they can make the movie business into a more rational enterprise, but that’s a bean-counter fantasy. Making movies will always require a leap of faith.

If Ari really wants to buck up his troops, he should have Zanuck stop by the agency and tell some more “MASH” stories, which only serve to remind us that hit movies don’t come off a sequel assembly line. Hit movies are born out of ingenuity and raw creativity.
,,,” – Patrick Goldstein, on his LA TIMES blog THE BIG PICTURE article, IS HOLLYWOOD ALWAYS IN PANIC MODE? ARI EMANUEL’S HISTORY LESSON, November 2, 2009

“”Musicals were the tentpole movies of their day and everyone thought that if one was a hit that you could just churn out more of them and rake in the money.” – Dick Zanuck, Producer

480. Trekenstein - November 6, 2009

#475.– “#472 “Shatner doesn’t have the acting chops anymore!”
I don’t think you’ll find one person who agrees with that, Harry. He simply plays different roles now. And wins Emmy for them.”

EXACTLY. I love WIlliam Shatner and was a die hard Boston Legal fan. However, in Harry’s defense, I think the bigger problem is not that he can no longer act the role of Kirk in Trek (though his efforts in the past – from ST V on – have been less effective as his earlier work in ST), BUT that he no longer really looks the part, or will be taken seriously as Pine’s older self, if for no other reason that the audience associates him with BL, or “The Shat”. There was no such problem with Nimoy who looked a lot like Quinto and was virtually unknown to new audiences unfamiliar with Trek. But Shatner is widely known to those who know nothing about Trek. It would rather be like watching Leslie Nielsen play a serious role again after the AIrplane! era movies. In fact, whenever I see him as the captain of the Poseidon, it’s hard not to laugh. The same is true for what is an otherwise terrific performance in Forbidden Planet.

481. I am not Herbert - November 6, 2009

476. captain_neill: “If Khan is in sequel then my thrill for the sequel will be lost….It will just be an inferior remake of a classic.”

Not unlike ST09?

remake ST: OK

remake Khan: Not OK?

482. Harry Ballz - November 6, 2009

480

Trekenstein, thank you, that’s basically what I meant. In months gone by, I’ve described the same feelings and thoughts, I just gave a shorter “punchline” post this time.

483. Closettrekker - November 6, 2009

#478—-“I think it is worlds different…”

Drawing on an existing character in order to tell a different story in which he is involved? How is that different?

“Aside from Harry Mudd, Khan is the only central character repeated in TOS era cast, and the only one to cross over to films.”

Actually, both Kor and Koloth made appearances in TAS, before also appearing in DS9…but no…neither crossed over into films. Still, Kor appears in 1 episode of TOS, 1 episode of TAS, and 2 episodes of DS9. Koloth appears in 1 episode of TOS, 1 episode of TAS, and 1 episode of DS9 (2 if you count “Trials And Tribblations”). Kang appears in an episode each of TOS and DS9.

“Let Abrams’s & Co. do their own heavy lifting and discover their own obscure kernel of TOS’s past which they can develop into an equally exciting idea as Bennett and Meyer brought to life with Khan. Or develop something completely new based on general elements, races and cultures defined in the ST universe.”

I would welcome them exploring either of those options.

But I wouldn’t dismiss a reimagining of “Space Seed”. Why be so restrictive as to put that potential story in the category of “off-limits”? Telling a new Khan story wouldn’t guarantee a good story or a successful feature, nor would it preclude the same.Ultimately, it comes down to whether or not they can tell us a good story. I think they can. They still have to tell that good story, whether it is perceived by some fans right now as “the easy way out” or not.

I recall hearings things much along the same lines when it was first announced that they would be revisiting the TOS-era characters.

Personally, I wouldn’t revisit Khan right now, but not because I don’t think an entertaining story about an alternate discovery of the Botany Bay could be worthy of a feature film. Ultimately, if they choose to go to the Khan well, I think it will be because they believe they have a good story to tell—-which should always be the criteria anyway—–certainly not whether people will think that they (as writers) took the easy way out. I don’t care whether it’s easy or not. Why does it matter? Just tell me a good story.

484. captain_neill - November 6, 2009

Look I like the new film but I don’t see it a great Star Trek film, JJ Abrams brought the fun back and it’s better than some past movies.

JJ made changes that I was not happy with but because the new movie is in an alternate universe I am not worried about canon as I know the universe I love is still intact and parallel.

My feelings about Khan being considered as the next villain would just be to serve a what if? story for a villain that is very popular. However, as much as I love Khan, there is so much more to Trek than Khan and the Borg. I personally wan this new alt universe Trek to find its own niche yet still fit into the Trek we fans love.

My dislike of reusing Khan also stems from my dislike at Hollywood at the moment, a dislike brought on by Holywood rehashing all its great films into inferior remakes of original films. I love Nightmare on Elm Street and I am dreading the remake of it.

so I would be more in favour of something original but then again originality in Hollywood is almost non existant these days.

485. captain_neill - November 6, 2009

the writers might be hot but after Transformers 2 I have lost faith in them in delivering a smart script. They seem better at writing popcorn movies.

486. Captain crunch - November 8, 2009

No Kahn please, they did that already years ago. I would like to see Shatner somehow. How about Star Trek finds the Robinson family from Lost in Space, and finally brings them home to earth?

The first movie was so good, that I trust the writers and Abrams to bring us something enjoyable.

487. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 8, 2009

So I think we can summarize the positions thusly:

Don’t Khan yourselves.

This must Khan tink new.

And everyone’s praying that Universal doesn’t buy out Paramount because they’ll cross Khan with Buck Rogers and we’ll end up with the adventures of the Khan Twiki.

488. captain_neill - November 8, 2009

I dont trust the writers to be original in the way that would be desirable, they will deliver a story for the mainstream more sore than the Trek fans

The mainstream wants Khan so they will give us a rehash of Khan, it doesn’t matter how much Trek fans are against it.

As much as I like the new movie Trekkies and Trekkers have now been sidelined for the mainstream.

489. tom vinelli - November 8, 2009

im one of those people who liked the movie generations but didn’t like killing off kirk. maybe they could as a sub plot, have old spock have the enterprize return to the nexus ,return to the planet at the point where kirk is still alive and have spock save is old friend. at least you could get nimoy and the shat together again in one film. maybe it sounds lame,but thats something i like to see in the next film.

490. Trekenstein - November 9, 2009

#488. – With all due respect, that doesn’t make any sense. I seriously doubt if you polled all the people who saw Trek for the first time this Summer and loved the movie enough to want to see more, that they would have any idea who Khan was, much less “want” a story about him.

The point about the mainstream is that they don’t care. Movies aimed at the mainstream audience ignore any of the overly-detailed plotlines and story structure Trek fans have come to expect. They tend to focus on “big picture” concepts, generic action and other global attributes which anyone can embrace.

If Abrams decides to do a movie about Khan, it won’t be because the mainstream is clamoring for it. It will be because Khan is a proven success at the box-office and has a strong story to tell, even if it has already been told twice. For a mainstream audience it will be as if the first time, but the risk is far less than creating a brand new concept or choosing an untried one from the compendium.

491. Son of a Maui Portagee - November 10, 2009

Examples of late creativity to counter the notion that the good only create when young:

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/10/20/081020fa_fact_gladwell?printable=true

492. Joe - November 12, 2009

Okay…Hear me out and let me know what you think. So lately ive been thinking about Spock Prime and his possible role in st XII or XIII. Spock Prime does not belong in this new universe, no more than Nero did. Spock Prime was sent into the alternate universe to prevent any damage Nero intended to cause to this new timeline. Spock Prime is one of the most influential characters in the prime universe, and being the logical vulcan that he is, even he would argue that balance must be restored and he must be returned to his own universe. He doesn’t belong in this past. He knows too much of potential events to come. Also, I can’t imagine that Starfleet/Vulcan wouldn’t exhaust every effort they had to mount a monumental away misson to try and retrieve one of historys greatest figures, Spock Prime, to his original timeline, where he belongs. You’ve gotta admit there would have to be attempts to bring him back. I’m sure the temporal distortion could be re-created…somehow. I mean this is star trek. They do whatever they want. I’m not suggesting that this be the A story here,or even the B story, but I think there are some good possiblities here, and its a good way to introduce characters from the prime universe into the new abramsverse. Also, nobody has really suggested the technological impact of Spock Prime and Nero’s trip to the 23rd century. The Narada and the Jellyfish would have to had to been so technogically advanced to anything in the 23rd century, that it MUST have had an impact on starship design, weapons, propulsion, etc. Perhaps some dangerous technology is developed far earlier than is should be now, as a result of Spocks trip back in time, creating a giant catch 22 situation.

493. tucker - November 12, 2009

i think it would make a great movie if done right. star trek 2 is the best out there so why not do it again in a different time line, i love what jj did for star trek only for jj it would be dead….. behind what ever he does.
P.S stay a way from 3d please its shit filming making at its best

494. Rico - May 21, 2010

Spock Prime is still alive, so he has had pleny of time to warn the Federation that Khan is in suspended animation on a sleeper ship somewhere, that nomad can be defeated by a logic trick, that they have about 20 years to find a humpback whale, and, oh yeah, V’ger is coming wants to merge with one of it’s creators. None of the old threats should be unexpected at this point.

495. Trojan - July 27, 2010

There should be no Khan but there could always be Mirror Captain James T. Kirk of the ISS Enteprise in Star Trek The Orginal Series episode 33 Mirror Mirror.

496. M. diver - June 11, 2011

wouldn’t Nick Frost make an awesome harry mudd?

497. ensign joe - June 12, 2011

Meh.. Can’t put Frost and Pegg in without it coming off camp..

498. ensign joe - June 12, 2011

But yes, he would

499. Ty - December 26, 2011

Just making the last Trek Movie was a major SCREW UP! It sucked! And now you want to mess with even more of what was set down? Man, you can take your ‘new time line universe Star Trek” and suck it.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.