Star Trek Casting Has Cumberbatch “Over The Moon” + Internet Villain Speculations |
jump to navigation

Star Trek Casting Has Cumberbatch “Over The Moon” + Internet Villain Speculations January 5, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Star Trek Into Darkness,Web , trackback

Yesterday the news Benedict Cumberbatch was playing the villain in the 2013 Star Trek sequel took the Internet by storm. Today the actor was doing press for Sherlock and he talked about the casting. Details below, plus some of the Internet speculation (and Photoshopping) for possible Star Trek roles the actor may be playing.


Cumberbatch "over the moon" over Star Trek casting 

Today Benedict Cumberbatch, newly announced villain for the Star Trek sequel, participated in a TCA event promoting the second season of Sherlock coming to PBS in May. Cumberbatch was beaming in from the UK via satellite. While the focus was on Sherlock, he did get a question about Star Trek, saying (via Zap2It):

"There’s a lawyer standing here saying that I can’t say anything," says the actor. "I’m hugely, hugely excited and I’m very, very flattered. I’m very, very excited, but obviously I’m not here to talk about that. I will, in the future, I’m sure. I’m just getting my head around the fact that it’s happened. If you’ll forgive me, I’ll pass on that. But, my headline is that I’m over the moon."

Benedict Cumberbatch (via satelite) talks Star Trek
at PBS TCA event in Pasadena, CA – Jan. 5

Internet Star Trek speculation in overdrive

The casting of Benedict Cumberbatch as the villain in the Star Trek sequel has been huge news across the net in the last day, especially on the nerdier websites. The hot new actor is being welcomed by almost all commentators, moving on to speculation as to the specific role he will be playing. Previous speculation and rumor has focused on JJ Abrams and team bringing back Khan Noonien Singh, and in fact the guys at the MTV still think this is the case, even providing a Cumber-Khan Photoshop image.

MTV envision Cumberbatch as Khan

However, Cumberbatch’s extreme English-ness (and pallor) has led many other speculators to move away from Khan, although some commenters here at have suggested maybe he could be playing another frozen superman from the Botany Bay. UPDATE: TrekMovie reader Justin Olsen took to Photoshop to envision Cumberbatch as Star Trek II’s Khan henchman Juaquim.

Cumberbatch as Juaquim – complete with lens flare (Justin Olsen)

While there is no confirmation that the villain will even be from Star Trek’s past canon, most of the speculation tends to be searching Trek history for a possible match. The guys at Aint It Cool are asking the question "Is TV’s Sherlock playing Harry Mudd?" but they seem to be kidding around on that one. In fact Star Trek sequel co-writer/producer Bob Orci joked along with them with a comment here at earlier today saying “I just want to know how aicn figured out who he was playing.” Then again, maybe Bob is trying some kind of crafty misdirection by making a joke out of it (how is that for a conspiracy?). Moving on, the Star Trek collecting site 8of5 Guide to the Collective "cobbled together" this image speculating Cumberbatch as a Talosian, a Klingon or possibly even Trelane.

More Cumberbatch Star Trek villain possibilities (8of5)

Other possible suggestions from commenters here at TrekMovie include Garth of Izar, Sybok, Lazarus, the Romulan Commander from "Balance of Terror," Gary Seven, Gary Mitchell, and even Q. These of course vary in likelyhood. For example, the new Star Trek comics already dealth with Gary Mitchell, so he seems an unlikely candidate. And of course Harry Mudd isn’t exactly a sinister character. Plus would they go with Romulans again? Gary Seven and Garth of Izar on the other hand are interesting possibilities.

…and even more Star Trek villain speculations

POLL: Who do you think it is?

Guess what role Benedict Cumberbatch is playing

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...



1. Harry Ballz - January 5, 2012

Cumberbatch is a superb actor. This is great news!

2. Adolescent Nightmare - January 5, 2012

The only one that looks ridiculous is the Klingon. The other pics all look acceptable.

3. NCM - January 5, 2012

He looks the Talosian part, but I vote ‘new alien villain.’

4. combatkarl - January 5, 2012

Too old for Charlie X?

5. Magenta - January 5, 2012

Trelane and Khan both intriguing, but I hope it’s someone new. And Benedict Cumberbatch is just too pretty to hide under too much make-up, so I’m also hoping human. :)

And Q would be just wrong. I mean, I know it’s a reboot and all, but still. That’s not the right fit for the original series stuff.

6. Vultan - January 5, 2012

Kodos? Or… is he too young?

7. Davidj - January 5, 2012

I actually think he’d make a great Romulan. Of course they were just used in the last movie so that’s out.

8. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - January 5, 2012

MTV needs to move on from Khan, He is not Khan. My money is on him being A Gary 7, B Kang or C a brand new character.
Though I could easily picture him as a Trelane/Q type character as well.

9. 750 Mang - January 5, 2012

Gorn Captain all the way.

10. Randomosity - January 5, 2012

LOL at Cumber-Khan!! I’m thinking its going to be a human villian or an alien that looks human (this is Star Trek after all.) Pretty faces sell and I dunno if they are gonna want to cover his up. As petty as this sounds, I think they know hot villian’s are far more popular among female movie-goers.

11. Dilithium doublebock - January 5, 2012

Not Khan. Mudd could be rewritten into something more on the evil side, but still wouldn’t be a good match against Kirk n crew. My guess is Garth.

12. Adam E - January 5, 2012

Remember, is has to be a role that Benicio Del Toro would’ve fit too.

13. changs Gang - January 5, 2012

He’s Cyrano Jones…

14. Buzz Cagney - January 5, 2012

He would definitely make a great Talosian. Good call on that one yesterday, Harry.
But I reckon Sybok is about to be brought in from the cold. :-D
I think he’d look very convincing with the ears and brows….

15. MartianRogue - January 6, 2012

I wouldnt mind a new interpretation of Sybok, could be interesting. But my bet is either a new human villain or a new alien villain that plays off of something we’ve already seen.

16. njdss4 - January 6, 2012

If this were casting for an episode of a new Trek TV series, I would think Cumberbatch would make a great Lazarus. Unfortunately, I can’t come up with a scenario that lets the Lazarus storyline fit in a movie.

Please just don’t let it be Harry Mudd or Q. As much as Montalban was Khan, de Lancie is Q.

17. Dilithium doublebock - January 6, 2012

#12. A role one good actor or another good actor could play? That’s a tough one. True, one is Spanish, but then again, they’ve got a man of Korean decent playing a part that was portrayed by a Japanese American. They’re not exactly the same. Cumberbatch could be anybody (just not Khan).

18. Andrestheman - January 6, 2012

That Sherlock show that Benedict Cumberbatch is in has gay undertones between him and Watson.

JJ Abrams said a few months back that Star Trek never mentioned gay people, and that he’d like to work it into the sequel. Elementary my dear!

19. MJ - January 6, 2012

Could there be a hidden Trek 2012 character clue in the “I’m over the moon” comment?

20. Andy Patterson - January 6, 2012

Uh, why would Gary Seven be a villain? I guess in this JJ version he might do a misguided and ill-suited thing like that.

Somebody do a photo shop of him as an Andorian.

21. tok - January 6, 2012

I don’t get it… what is all this speculation based on? We don’t even know if it’s going to be a known character or a completely new one.

Is anyone else a little tired of all the speculation based on little more than what the actor looks like and what classic villain we could picture him playing?

Real information will spill soon enough.

22. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - January 6, 2012

21 thats the thing enough with this secret casting bs. they need to start saying who is playing what. Didnt JJ say once the villian was cast he would reveal who the villian was?

23. Odkin - January 6, 2012

Too bad Spock is already cast. He has the requisite deep voice and facial structure, and can act.

Gary Seven, and Gary Mitchell were both one-off characters and I found neither of them interesting. Don’t see why fans want to see either of them again.

Mudd or Trelane would be OK but I imagine he was cast in part for the “alien-ness” of his face, so I assume we can count on a Klingon, Vulcan or Romulan.

24. Dilithium doublebock - January 6, 2012

With Trek ’09 taking place several years before TOS events, Garth fits. We could see him in fresh insanity with Kirk going after him a la heart of darkness/apocalypse now. Experienced mad man vs young and bold Kirk.
Fun to think about.
Also, they might be keeping silent about chars until the new game comes out. It’s supposed to tie in somehow, isn’t it?

25. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - January 6, 2012

I think we’ve been given enough information to ascertain that the villain will be a new character, that may have roots to a familiar character. I keep trying to wrap my mind around the idea that Vulcan has been destroyed, and what the possible ramifications that I may have taken for granted. Perhaps Nero was only a puppet, and the destruction of Vulcan, and thereby the domino ramification were simply the motivations of an even bigger enemy. The attack on Vulcan may have merely been a stepping stone to the ultimate destruction of the Federation itself…

26. ety3 - January 6, 2012

While I find a lot of this guessing game almost silly, his extreme Britishness did make my mind leap to Chang.

But still … I’m not seriously suggesting that nor do I think he will be playing an established character. I’m content to wait until an announcement is made or a more substantive clue is given.

27. Andy Patterson - January 6, 2012

And anyway, on the subject of who’d play Gary Seven,…after watching The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo and watching Daniel Craig’s interaction with the cat through the movie it suddenly dawned on me that he’d be a good Gary Seven. The relationship between Seven and the cat is what it was all about. Craig seemed to act and react to the cat the way Lansing did in the Assignment: Earth episode. There was a relationship there and both men seemed to get cats. My two cents if they ever make the show of it. Just saying.

28. Jannek - January 6, 2012

Don’t forget they’ve been searching especially for latin actors to cast this role before.

I’m sure it’s a character with somehow a latin touch. Certainly Cumberbatch as Not-Latin got this role because of his outstanding casting performance.

29. scififan - January 6, 2012

Craig would be way too old for Gary Seven.

Cumberbatch is such a brilliant actor that I think he may overshadow the rest of the cast. He’s in a different league to the others. If the script writes a good villain (which I’m not sure it will based on film 1) then he’ll blow everyone away.

30. scififan - January 6, 2012

Check out all his work on Virtually all hsi work is on there and some great interviews. He’s a wonderful mimic and good fun. He is outsanding as Stephen Hawking and as Van Gogh.

31. dorian - January 6, 2012

He was great as stephan hawking, he also did the narration for into the universe with stephan hawking, tinker tailor solder spy,

32. cloudynow - January 6, 2012

i want garth of izar, but although the context would be different (conquering the universe instead of simple revenge) i also think they won’t go for a mad man again. Kodos and gary Seven sound interesting too but with Cumberbatch, i think Trelane or Q seem more suitable roles. Anyway, i am happy with the casting, he is a brilliant actor.

33. Anthony Thompson - January 6, 2012


People. Get it through your thick skulls: It’s been stated several times by several members of the production that they are going in a new, O-R-I-G-I-N-A-L dircection with the sequel. That means no Khan, no Terlane, no Harry Mudd and probably no Klingons. That’s a good thing!

34. Anthony Thompson - January 6, 2012

Trelane. Wish these posts could be edited. : )

35. Cervantes - January 6, 2012

@ 18 Andrestheman

Those so-called ‘gay undertones’ you refer to in ‘Sherlock’ are actually merely a running joke through some of the episodes, and nothing more.

Circumstances caused these two guys to end up sharing premises together, and Watson (who is absolutely heterosexual) ends up having to point out this fact to certain people along the way who MISTAKENLY assume that they are a ‘couple’! His protestations humourously leave him kind of exasperated. ‘Sherlock’ himself has been left a little more vague along the way, but judging by the first episode of the new series, his interest certainly seems to veer towards the ladies.

Just sayin’, in case anyone who hasn’t caught this ‘modern day’ take on the characters yet get the wrong idea about it, lol.

36. captain_neill - January 6, 2012

My faith in the next movie will be restored if they do a new villain.

They hould really drop the Khan thing as no matter what, JJ Abrams take on Khan will be inferior to what has already been done so that’s go to something new.

37. Geek_Girl - January 6, 2012

@6. I’ve been kind of hoping that they would have Kodos as the villain. But with Nero in the last movie I don’t think they’ll be basing the movie around another genocidal maniac.

38. NCC-73515 - January 6, 2012

Guess he’s a Vulcan who wants radical responses to Vulcan’s destruction…?

39. Jackson Roykirk - January 6, 2012

He’ll play Finnegan, from the TOS episode “Shore Leave.” Finnegan will have gone insane, commandeered a starship, and threatened galactic peace. Kirk will then beat him up in an elaborately staged fist fight scene.

40. Trekker5 - January 6, 2012

I voted Q because I think he could do it. Not saying I think there will be a Q in the new movie;I really don’t know what will play out! Very excited to find out though!! :D

41. Trekker5 - January 6, 2012

#39,Jackson Roykirk,that sounds good!! I could see that going down! :)

42. Cervantes - January 6, 2012

@ 36 captain_neill

They did a ‘new’ villain in the first reboot too. It’s no guarantee of quality…

I agree that ‘Khan’ has been done terrifically already however, and there’s other decent ‘TOS’ villains that I’d prefer to see ‘re-imagined’, if they don’t go with something completely new again.

43. Cervantes - January 6, 2012

@ 38 NCC-73515

*If* he turns out to be a ‘Vulcan’ in that type of storyline, then I hope that it’s a ‘re-imagining’ of nu-‘Spock’s’ half-Vulcan brother ‘SYBOK’…because if the sequel’s a hit, then it might just interest the studio in doing an improved, enhanced cut of the ‘Final Frontier’ after all, lol!

44. Daniel - January 6, 2012

Gary Seven isn’t “evil.”

I accidentally voted for “a new human villian” when I meant “a new alien villain.” Maybe many others made the same mistake.

45. captain_neill - January 6, 2012

I also think a villain out for revenge or has genocidial plans on planets should be avoided in the next movie as I feel the last three Trek movies had had a villain with these goals.

46. Daniel - January 6, 2012

The TOS episode featuring Garth was a poor re-make of the classic season 1 episode “Dagger of the Mind.” I don’t think it will be Garth, but if so the previous post #24 does sound like a fun plot.

47. Jackson Roykirk - January 6, 2012

How about Roger Korby, Nurse Chapel’s robotized fiancé from TOS “What Are Little GIrls Made Of?” With Ashley Greene or Amber Heard as Andrea. (“To kiss you… To love you…” Zap!)

48. Royal Canadian Institute for the Mentally Insane - January 6, 2012

My first thought was the Romulan Commander from “Balance of Terror”; he looks it. As has been said, he’d make a great Romulan. And don’t say “that’s out” because of what Abrams said before; he also said not long ago “everything’s on the table”.

I can also see the Talosian; Cumberbatch has a good otherworldly look for that.

I’d say Gary Mitchell but the IDW comics — already discussed as canon by Orci & Co. — killed him off in the first couple of issues.

He does have the look for Gary Seven, though Seven seemed to be older. Then again, Alice Eve could be Teri Garr’s character, couldn’t she?

49. Jackson Roykirk - January 6, 2012

@Trekker5 “Have ya had enough, Jimmy-boy?”

But seriously. I’m hoping that the 2nd JJ Abrams Star Trek movie will be “The Klingon Movie” of the series. Klingons were cut from the 2009 film, they deserve a full-scale re-imagining, and that means world-class actors such as Cumberbatch.

The problem with that idea is that 47 Klingon ships were destroyed by Nero and the Narada. Who’s left to battle Kirk and the Enterprise? Maybe Cumberbatch can play a rogue Klingon, like Sean Connery’s Marko Ramius in The Hunt For Red October. Is he defecting and bringing a flagship vessel with him? Or is he insane and intent on starting an all-out war? Hmmm…

50. Gary Neumann - January 6, 2012

Either Gary or Klingon!

51. Adama - January 6, 2012

Great, great news… way better than Del Toro, Cumberbatch its a great actor… I think he would play a wonderful vulcan, he has the looks and the manners…

52. jas_montreal - January 6, 2012

Nice photoshop work anthony , Lol.

53. CmdrR - January 6, 2012

Janice Lester.
No. Wait. Well, actually…

54. VZX - January 6, 2012

I am also hoping for an original character for the villain, but it would be kinda neat to see at least some cameos of characters from TOS.

55. ripleyaeryn - January 6, 2012

Don’t think Benedict will be Khan : 1.very obvious and 2. other villain than Khan would be the perfect match.

Just hope Benedict character won’t be ruined just like Eric Bana with Nero.

56. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - January 6, 2012

Ok. let’s all find Bob Orci and corner him and tickle him till he talks. Lol.
There are so many good choices. From lazerous to Gorn to Klingon. Hey. He can even be a Salt creature. Or Baloks dad. lol.

57. Craiger - January 6, 2012

Redoing Balance of Terror would be cool. They could update Spock’s speech about the Romulan War so the Enterprise TV series fits rit into the Trek Universe.

58. Alex - January 6, 2012

I would love to see them revisit the Kodos story, even though it would have to be somewhat altered to take into account the developments in ST’09. New Kirk couldn’t possibly be a survivor now. The Garth of Izar story (or another of the crazy Starfleet captain variety) would be cool since Michael Piller wanted to do the “Heart of Darkness”-thing with Star Trek IX, before it became some lightweight comedy-adventure. But from his looks, I would go for Trelane, if I had to choose.

59. Dee - lvs moon' surface - January 6, 2012

my guess “A new alien villain”………. but ??????????…… :-) :-)

60. rm10019 - January 6, 2012

I say, what’s the point of ingeniously freeing yourself from canon in the first film, only to revisit a major baddie. I’ll vote new alien villain.

I would love to see a teaser that references an old episode, then a brand new adventure for the other 98% of the film.

61. Romulus - January 6, 2012

Why can’t he be a new character?

62. Weerd1 - January 6, 2012

Kevin Riley. GONE BAD!!!!

63. N - January 6, 2012

I’d like to see a new alien villain, not cgi but so…alien (for lack of a better term) you can hardly tell there’s a person underneath.

64. Nony - January 6, 2012

I bet he plays a giant tribble. The most massive tribble of them all, the tribble from whence the species came, gathering his (her? Its?) furry myriad to him in the Home Tribble Hive in preparation for a deadly strike against all the idiotic beings throughout the galaxy who cannot speak their language and do not realize that “coooooo” means not “aww, it’s purring!” but rather “winter is coming, humans, and though you do not realize it, we will soon wear your children’s skins as jaunty hats.”

65. somethoughts - January 6, 2012


New characters been done to death ;) Nero, Shinzon, Ruafo, Borg Queen, Soran.

Give us existing character and give it the $250 million dollar treatment!

66. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012

Ok…I have come to the conclusion he’s playing Yarnek the claw-pincered rock monster from The Savage Curtain.

He just has that look.

67. TrekkerChick - January 6, 2012

“In fact Star Trek sequel co-writer/producer Bob Orci joked along with them with a comment here at earlier today saying “I just want to know how aicn figured out who he was playing.” Then again, maybe Bob is trying some kind of crafty misdirection by making a joke out of it (how is that for a conspiracy?).”

But Bob would know that we would think of it as a possible crafty misdirection, so it would be false. But then again, knowing THAT he would assume that we would…
/Vizzini, The Princess Bride

That rabbit hole is REALLY deep!

I’ve got it! Bob’s clue is obvious. BC’s character is the Dread Space Pirate Roberts!

68. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012

#64 — HAHAHA!!! You win the Trekmovie comedic post of the year award (yes, even though the year just started)!!! LOL!!! I don’t care who ya are, that there’s some funny stuff!! :-) Probably will be lost on the humorless little basement-dwelling geeks here though. LOL!!

69. Aurore - January 6, 2012

“New characters been done to death ;) Nero, Shinzon, Ruafo, Borg Queen, Soran.”

I agree.

Give us very well written new characters and give them the $ 250 million dollar treatment they so much deserve.

70. Phil - January 6, 2012

It’s ironic that the people asking for, no, demanding, to be given an existing character will be the same ones screaming if that character does something….uncharacteristic. Proof, you ask you? Look at the flap over Spock/Uhura. I really do hope we see a bunch of little Spoura’s running around the next movie….

71. reillyhawk - January 6, 2012

He won’t be Gary Mitchell.

IDW is releasing a set of Star Trek comics that fill in the gap between 2009 movie and the upcoming one. The first story the movie and comic writers worked on was Gary Mitchell.

72. Hugh Hoyland - January 6, 2012

So it is official, he is in fact being cast as THE villain in the sequel?

Not that he would be a bad choice by a long shot, but hes a bit of a switch from Del Torro and the two others that were reported to have been considered.

73. Ensign Ricky - January 6, 2012

I am all for the giant tribble character. That would be awesome.

74. Bruce Banner - January 6, 2012

Maybe he’s playing a new love interest for Spock.

75. DIGINON - January 6, 2012

I really wonder whether boborci takes part in any of these polls. Would be kinda cool. Well, unless Anthony can track specific votes, then Bob would be in trouble :-)

76. spocker - January 6, 2012

he looks like he could have made a great spock

77. rebecca - January 6, 2012

Having seen Cumberbatch in other roles (unlike, I gather, some of the commenters here) I can’t help but feel that he would be an odd choice for Khan. This is making me feel like Khan probably is not the villain (whew). Then again, maybe I shouldn’t mentally typecast Cumberbatch – he is AMAZING and the news that he’s going to be in Star Trek has me “over the moon” as well!

78. Bmisu - January 6, 2012

Charlie X

79. Dave1119 - January 6, 2012

I think he will be a known character. If you watch Fringe then you know these guys love to explore how the same people are different under different circumstances. My money is still on Khan. He is the most compelling and well-developed villain in the star trek universe. We know him very well. Now, what will he be like under totally different circumstances? If it is Khan, you can bet it will not be a rehash of Space Seed in any away. It will be something completely different and we will see Khan in a totally different way.

If it is not Khan, then I have been intrigued for a long time with the idea it could be Garth of Izar. Next to Khan, he would seem to have the most potential to be a great opponent for Kirk. But it is hard to see the other actors that were considered playing Garth.

80. Chain of Command - January 6, 2012

How was Gary Seven a villain?

It’s kind of a shame they went with the villain angle again. I’m sure it will be a good action adventure movie but I’m still hoping for something a little more cerebral. Also, unlike most on here, I don’t want to see Klingons. They’ve been overdone. They were villians in 3 of the TOS films and of course TNG and DS9 used the heck out of them too. I think it’s time for something new.

Something like the Talosians…With today’s effects and a film budget…. Now that could be cool.

81. reillyhawk - January 6, 2012

Long shot… maybe they’ll redo Space Seed but have Khan die in the cryogenic chamber and have Joachim played by Benedict take charge. Not sure I want to see that but could be interesting.

82. Cousin Itt - January 6, 2012

It’s nice to see other recognizing how great Cumberbatch would have been as
Spock. I have nothing against Zachary Quinto, but Cumberbatch has the look, the voice, and that whole ‘I’m smarter than the rest of you’ quality that Leonard Nimoy projected so well.

I’d say he’d have to be playing a Romulan or another Vulcan. Of course, Romulans were done the last time (a violation of canon that no one ever mentions…when the Kelvin encounters Nero, the should have never seen a Romulan before…)

83. Anthony Thompson - January 6, 2012

71. reillyhawk

Where have you been, son? There have been numerous articles, reviews and discussions here about the IDW series.

84. Marshall McMellon - January 6, 2012

Oh, I’m thinking Balok from The Corbomite Maneuver. Yeah definitely Balok.

85. reillyhawk - January 6, 2012

83. Anthony Thompson

I’ve seen them. My link to remind others a re-imagined Gary Mitchell been done in the new continuity. So it wouldn’t make sense to include him in the speculation for the new villain.

If I thought the comics were new to everyone, I’d have posted “zomg guys, there are comics! look over here” ;-)

86. N - January 6, 2012

Nah, imo Zachary Quinto is the perfect Spock just as Chris Pine is the perfect Kirk, everyone else was good (Chekov was iffy) but they could probably be swapped out.

Hopefully XII is well written so they can all grow into the roles.

87. Trekker5 - January 6, 2012

#49,Jackson Roykirk,I could also see that going down;would like to know if JJ would change the Klingons at all,but I’m also in favor of the Gorn taking a stand as well.

88. Aurore - January 6, 2012

“I really do hope we see a bunch of little Spoura’s running around the next movie….”


Friendly advice; should this happen, make sure not to be anywhere within a 15 foot long 30 degree arc in front of dmduncan, when the movie premieres.


89. Caesar - January 6, 2012

I dunno about Trek, but he looks like the lead singer from “A-Ha” in the uppermost video. What’s with the blond, Benny? What happened to the Sherlock curls?

90. Dave in RI - January 6, 2012

I’m tired of yet another “villian” driven movie, but I suppose those are the easiest movies people can relate to. If there has to be a villian, I do hope it’s not a 1 dimesional bad guy as I find those boring.
I like the ones that seem bad at first, until you find out why they behave in that manner, and you end up sort of seeing their point of view and maybe agreeing–or at least sympathizing.

I think “Devil in the Dark” and “Arena” are two excellent examples.

91. Cap'n Calhoun - January 6, 2012

No Vulcan option on the poll?

Given the actor’s current well-known role, the plot of the previous film, and Orci’s oversight of “The Vendetta Conspiracy”, this would seem to be a logical possibility.

92. Edgar Pegg - January 6, 2012

I think he is playing Nurse Chapel

93. N - January 6, 2012

I’d like to see a morally grey film, you’ve got your atagonist to the heroes but whether they’re evil is questionable, or maybe even whether the antagonist is good and it’s actually the hero characters that are the bad guys.
But judging by the other films the writers have done I won’t hold my breath. Though my guess is some of those were just ruined by Spielberg.

94. Commodore Adams - January 6, 2012

Well….we did have some speculation by JJ and or Orci that the character Cumberbatch is playing is indeed from the original series. Whether it was said to throw us of track it has been said by a member or members of the new trek supreme court.

95. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012

#81 — Interesting idea!!! You may be onto something.
I definitely think he looks like Joachim…

96. Marshall McMellon - January 6, 2012

I’m thinking the Prime Villain will have a TOS connection, but be totally unexpected.

97. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012

#92 — HAHAHA!!! “Runner Up Winner — Best Comedic Trekmovie Post of 2012″

98. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012

We need a photo-manip of this guy on Chapel’s body…HAHA!!

99. Factchecker - January 6, 2012

Baby Balok. Oh wait, Clint Howard can still play that part.

My money is on a space hippie, Alexander, or the talking white rabbit.

100. redhawk23 - January 6, 2012

Pfft This is wrong. Obviously this is going to be a remake of Wolf in the Fold where Jack the Ripper is actually a shape shifting space vampire/cloud. The Enterprise Crew uses a primitive Holodeck to communicate with an artificially resurrected Sherlock Holmes to help solve the case of the current rash of space port murders.

101. Nony - January 6, 2012

@ SciFiGuy – lol, thanks bro, I try.

Anyway, Cumberbatch has a detached, intellectual, Vulcanish look to him, and he doesn’t look unlike Ben Cross… I do think a different take on Sybok would be interesting, if they were going an old-villain route. But I feel like newer fans/casual moviegoers might think it was weird or get confused if Spock suddenly had a half-brother who wasn’t even alluded to in the previous film. (Unless Spock didn’t know about him, either. Even more things for the poor guy to be upset about.)

I think it would be best if he were a new or little-known character. Not necessarily a new species, but a new character.

102. Jay - January 6, 2012

He won’t be playing any of the characters mentioned. They have said repeatedly this movie will be original and the villain will not be from a previous movie or episode of Star Trek.

Why is that so hard for so many here to accept?

103. Jay - January 6, 2012

Anyone remember at what point in the production of 2009 Trek that they revvealed that the bad guys were Romulans?

I would expect we will find out something about the villain of the new movie around the same time.

104. Buzz Cagney - January 6, 2012

#99 lol. Did you see Clint Howard, er, reprise (is that the right word?) his Balok role on The Shatner Roast? Very funny.

105. Marshall McMellon - January 6, 2012

Because, “… I- Neeeeeeeed- my- Paaaaaain.”

106. Danpaine - January 6, 2012

I can think of very little that would be more boring than Gary Seven returning, in any incarnation. I mean, the episode was ‘fine,’ but there was the proposed spinoff never happened (yawn).

Moving right along….

107. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012

#73, 101 — Yes and that tribble’s name should be Bjo…as in Bjo Tribble.

HAHAHA!!! Can you tell i’m having fun with this? HA!!!

108. Dunsel Report - January 6, 2012

Surprised no one has speculated that Cumberbatch will play the dude who turns Enterprise crewmembers into 20-sided shapes and then crushes them into powder.

109. Jay - January 6, 2012

Kind of off the subject, but the other Sherlock actor, Noel somebody. I find it odd that they described his character as a “family guy”. Why would they create a new character as specifically a family guy?

The only thing I can think of is that it hints at a plot point. That this family guy is killed, or his family is killed, by the villain at some point to create audience hatred and loathing of the villain.

I just see no other reason to point out that “hey, this new guy has a family”

110. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

It seems that the parameters have been altered. I thought that this character was definitely going to be a villain from the Star Trek TOS series, but now that is in question.

It was easier to see who Benecio Del Toro would most likely play, but this new actor widens the field somewhat. Of course, the whole scenario with casting around for Latino actors may have just been a red herring, sending us on a “wild goose chase” as it were, while they worked on nabbing the real person they wanted for the part all along.

There is never a “Can’t Decide” box on these polls, because that is where my vote would go at this time. I think Cumberbatch could play anyone with a little make up. After all, if they are using the same make up team they used for the last movie, these people are Oscar winners. Anything is possible…

111. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

Noel Clarke was never in the Sherlock TV series, was he? I know him from Dr Who.

112. Odkin - January 6, 2012

@106 Danpaine

I agree about Gary Seven. Just a failed “Doctor Who” ripoff pilot, with some Trek actors spliced in.

We get 2 hours of time with the classic crew every four years. I’d say overall there is NO ROOM for any new characters unless they are the antagonist.

113. Jay - January 6, 2012

No one from the production team ever said this movie, or its villain would be from the TOS series. That was purely speculation created by people posting on this site.

In fact, everything that has been said by people involved in the production points to a villain that is not based on any character we already know.

114. Dilithium doublebock - January 6, 2012

Re: 24. Dang!
Does anyone else feel, after posting a guess as to plot or character, that Mr. Orci himself should immediately post a reply cussing him out for guessing right and than offering him a job writing for the third movie? Don’t you feel let down when it doesn’t happen? Is there any treatment for Post Plot Speculation Depression?

115. Jay - January 6, 2012

#111 Maybe it was Dr. Who. I just know he was in some BBC series that was popular.

116. PEB - January 6, 2012

i’ll bet the defiant that he’s playing a klingon. the voice we got from victor garber(sp) was refined and sinister. this wouldnt necessarily be…say…trek 3, trek 7, etc klingons, which would be refreshing. actually, the klingons we saw in trek 6 are closer in manner to the klingons we saw in the extra footage.

117. KN - January 6, 2012

I wonder what branch they’re going to go with this.. Maybe a faction who wants to do terrorism? Kinda related to current events.

118. Red Dead Ryan - January 6, 2012


They never said the villain won’t be from a previous movie or episode.

I still think its going to be Khan. The character has been like the elephant in the room for these guys.

119. Jay - January 6, 2012

#117 Yes they have. JJ or Bob, can’t remember which, said this will be an original story.

Makes no sense at all to go to the trouble of creating a new timeline free from canon in order to create NEW stories, only to then make a movie based on an old TOS episode.

I guarantee he won’t be Khan or any other TOS character.

120. PEB - January 6, 2012

what if he’s a new character from a previously seen race? would that help? totally new can work, but in the great collection of trek, its easier to introduce new races on television than film. the fans didnt latch on to the new ones like they did otheres (in the films). basically, the movies is are awesome but we need tv trek too!

121. Shannon Nutt - January 6, 2012

I think he’s going to play “Charlie X”.

Oh god, wouldn’t that be AWFUL. :)

122. Jay - January 6, 2012

#120 Yes, I would not be at all surprised if he is a Klingon, or some other known race in Trek canon. Just not a character we already know.

I just think it is very simplistic, and it gives Orci and the other writers absolutly no credit for being original and creative, to expect this movie to be a remake of a TOS episode or for the villain to be a known TOS character.

123. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

@102 Jay

Actually, Bob (or Damon) did say last year that we would see a villain from the TOS series. They pointed out that it would be “one of the ones mentioned”.

The ones mentioned were: Gary Mitchell, Horta, Talosians, Mudd, Trelane. (I think I got that right)

So, because they said in the interview that it was one of these, I suspect we will see one of these.

The questions we should be asking are:

Will one of these be the main villain?
Or will one of these be a villain playing off of a completely new villain?

We will have to see.

(But I like the Garth of Izar idea. That would make an interesting film. That or Talosians.)

124. Jay - January 6, 2012

I would expect this new movie to continue the very realistic and epic feel of the 2009 Trek movie. That movie really gave Trek a much larger epic feel, the feeling of a real and expansive universe.

In that vain, I would expect a deeper and more complicated plot than what many here are suggesting with remakes of TOS episode. Something along the lines of what I’ve mentioned before with say the Klingon empire going from pretty much coexisting with the Federation, to an all out attempt to take over the galaxy. Led by a young charasmatic new emperor in the mold of Hitler, bent on making the Klingon race the one pure race in the galaxy, superior to all others, and on dominating the galaxy.

I think that would lend itself to all kinds of interesting sub plots and back story elements. You could even explore internal conflict within the Klingon empire over whether or not to pursue this course, and follow the emperor’s rise to power and his Nazi like mentality.

125. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

Why would using a character from TOS mean rehashing an episode as a film? It doesn’t mean that at all.

These other characters are still in this new timeline, doing new things, no doubt (post Nero incursion).

You can have a totally original film. The crew could meet one of these in a new and unexpected way–and deal with it in a new way.

That goes even if they did use Khan. Although I do not want Khan because he is obvious as an enemy and is an icon. I don’t want him touched.

(However, if Khan died in hybernation, as suggested above, that might be interesting. But still, I don’t want Khan or his people in this film. )

126. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - January 6, 2012

Still hopeful that Peter Weller is connected in someway to his Paxton character from Terra Prime.

127. Jay - January 6, 2012

#123 To say we would see one of those characters in the movie is completely different than saying that one of those would be the villain of the movie.

It could be a very small, cameo type appearance by one of those characters as just a sort of gift to Trekkies and not an important part of the plot of the movie.

Much like cameos by other famous actors.

128. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

I suspect, Jay, that there will be a TOS villain playing off a bigger villain with a bigger role. Bob and Damon also threw out the idea that there would be two villains in the film, so I’ll go with that.

But again, having a TOS villain as the main villain does not mean it would be a remake of an episode. You can do totally new things with the characters, as they did new things with Kirk and crew in this new universe.

129. Jay - January 6, 2012

Considering JJ’s affinity for “jumping right into the action” at the begining of his movies, I could see where the movie begins with our heros in the middle of dealing with someone like Harry Mudd for example, and basically in the first 10 minutes of the film as they deal with this TOS villain/character, the real threat and major plot line of the movie is revealed. And from that point on, Harry Mudd, or whoever the TOS character is, is pretty much done.

It just makes no sense to do with JJ and his crew have done with the Trek franchise, and then turn around and bring back a TOS character to build a movie around. Just seems way below their talent levels and selling themselves short.

130. Jay - January 6, 2012

#128 I would not expect that at all. There may be a TOS character or villain, but he will not be the main villain or plot point of the movie.

Again, it makes no sense to do that. JJ, Orci and crew have stated repeatedly that they wanted to do “their” Star Trek. When they started the 2009 film, they stressed wanting to do new stories, their stories of what they wanted to see in Star Trek. They painstakingly created the whole new time line so they would be able to start fresh with a clean slate and do anything they wanted with these characters.

To do that, and then turn around and use a TOS villain as your main villain and center your plot around him is pure and simply boring, predictable and unimaginative. I just can’t see them doing that.

Using a TOS character in a minor subplot as a gift to Trekkies… that I can see.

131. Bill Murray - January 6, 2012

So Cumberbach is “over the moon”? And Peter Weller’s character on Enterprise was administrator of a mining colony where? THE MOON!! Oh yeah, that’s what’s up!!

132. John from Cincinnati - January 6, 2012

Boy the alternate universe really must have changed things…

Gary Seven was never a villain

133. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

I agree. We will probably see the TOS character in the first 10 minutes or so.

But to say that using a TOS character for the whole film is a waste of talent is not true. They would be able to create entire backgrounds and motivations for characters that would not really evident in the one-hour episode the character came from.

In short, they could “re-invent” a TOS villain just as they “re-invented” the TOS crew. As a professional writer myself, I can tell you it is just as difficult to create a larger, film background and culture for a new character as it would for an existing character that we only saw once in a 60 minute show.

These other characters are still out there in this new universe. And since it is a new universe, the possibilities are exciting, whatever villain they give us.

I’d like to know more about the Talosians, see their new motivations in this new timeline. Or Garth of Izar. How would he play out in this new universe? What is his motivation? Background?

And importantly, HOW do they go about causing trouble? And with what methods? Could the Talosians gotten off their world? Have they inflitrated Federation worlds? Or the Federation itself? Could be interesting..

Just saying…

134. Jay - January 6, 2012

I think it is a complete waste of talent. There is no reason to do that other than to appease a small percentage of Trekkies.

You have to realize that the vast majority of those going to this movie are not Trekkies and will not know anything about that TOS character. So to them it will be a new character.

From a writer/production standpoint, what is the purpose of doing that if most of the audience doesn’t get that it is an old character?

There is no point. You would just make a new character.

The only reason for bringing back a TOS villain is as a gift, or easter egg, for Trekkies.

There is no point to “re-invent” a TOS character or villain if most of the audience doesnt get that that is what you are doing. Just “invent” a new villain in the first place.

135. John from Cincinnati - January 6, 2012

What would be boring and unimaginative would be to go back and use the original characters again.

Oh wait a minute….

136. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

You said it yourself, since it would be a “re-invention” of a character/villain, it matters not if non-Trek fans have never seen TOS before, just as it did not matter that non-Trek fans saw Star Trek 2009 and loved it, not having seen TOS.

So if non-Trek fans can see Trek 2009 and love it, it wouldn’t do any harm to explore in more depth a TOS villain non-TOS fans have never seen before.

But if you want a totally new villain, that’s cool.

137. John from Cincinnati - January 6, 2012

What stupifies me is there are those that are adament there can’t be old villains in the new movie, yet who are Kirk, SPock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, Chekov, Pike, Sarek?

So, only the good guys can be brought back, but only the villains can be new. That makes no sense, and defies all conventional credibility in the new universe. Logically, you can’t have Kirk, Spock and McCoy and then totally ignore all the old villains. How did Nero’s blast on the Kelvin wipe out Trelane, Kor, Koloth, Harry Mudd, Talosians, Khan, Gorn, Lazarus, Garth of Izar? Again, that would defy credibility. You can have new characters with new stories sure, but you can’t go forward acting like the the old ones never existed. Remember most of them were already born by the time Nero fired on the Kelvin so they’re still around.

138. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

That’ what I mean, too, John.
If they wanted to break from canon, then they could easily have had Kirk killed as a young boy, Spock go to the Science Academy, etc., and put a totally new crew on the Enterprise.

Anyway, it is like the mirror universe–we get to see things from a totally different angle. And as a writer, I can tell you that writing existing characters from a totally new angle just as challenging.

139. Jay - January 6, 2012

#135 Actually that was the most creative decision. To use the original characters but devise a way to tell original stories with them, without the audience knowing what was going to happen or what their eventual fate was.

#136 It just makes no sense from the standpoint of a writer. They are writing this movie, just like the last, with the non-Trekkie in mind. They have repeatedly said that. As a writer, you take pride in coming up with original and creative stories. They said many times that even casual sci-fi fans know who Kirk and Spock are. They are at least vaguely aware of those characters and the Star Trek world. But not to the point of knowing any of the characters that appeared in one or two episodes of TOS.

These are the people that the writers have in mind the most. The general movie going public. It is pointless to write a movie plot centered around an old TOS villain, when you have gone through so much trouble to create your own Star Trek universe to play in as a writer/producer. They will want to create a new villain. They will want to put their stamp on the franchise so to speak.

Like I said before, I would not be surprised to see a TOS character/villain in a sub plot role as a gift to Trekkies. But I would put the odds at the main villain of this movie being a TOS villain at about 1% out of 100.

140. Ted C - January 6, 2012

Here’s a thought…let’s wait for the movie to come out.

BTW, he makes one weird looking Khan.

141. Jay - January 6, 2012

#137 completely not true.

The point to rebooting Star Trek, from the writers’ point of view, was to use the original characters (because they believed those were the best) and put them in a new universe where they could tell completely new stories with them without the audience knowing their eventual fate.

Bob even said in an interview, the whole point was to be able to tell stories with drama and suspense and if you knew Kirk or Spock etc, weren’t going to die, because you knew their fate, then it would never work. You had to create a new universe/timeline.

So yes, you have the main characters, but they are following a new path and the writers want to tell new stories. Not old ones.

142. Red Dead Ryan - January 6, 2012

A new story can be told with an old villain. Example: “The Dark Knight” with the Joker.

143. Red Dead Ryan - January 6, 2012

Also, most people who are going to see the sequel are Trekkies. Trekkies will always make up a majority of the audiences. Although the J.J Abrams movies are bringing in a more mainstream crowd.

144. Jay - January 6, 2012

#138 They did want to break from canon. They have said that many times.

Killing off the main characters as you suggest would again be pointless. Why create Star Trek using the original characters only to kill them off and put a new crew on the ship?

It seems people here are missing the whole point of what JJ and crew set out to do when they took on the project of rebooting Star Trek.

They wanted to use the original characters, but write completely new stories and adventures without the audience, Trekkie or not, knowing what their eventual fates were.

145. Jay - January 6, 2012

#141 The Batman comparison doesn’t work because the Batman villains are as iconic as Batman himself. Star Trek villains are not like that.

Ask any casual sci fi fan who Harry Mud is, or any of the others mentioned in this thread and the vast majority will have no clue. Ask them who the Joker is, or the Riddler and you get a different answer.

Not at all the same thing.

146. Jay - January 6, 2012

#142 Again simply not true. There aren’t that many Trekkies out there.

That was the whole point to making Star Trek more appealing to the general public. The other Trek films failed so miserably because they were mainly made for Trekkies. That is a very small audience.

The problem is that alot of people posting on this board don’t realize that. We on this board make up a fraction of 1 percent of the audience that will go to this movie.

Every time I went to see 2009 Trek, the audience was filled with people that were clearly NOT Trekkies. At least have the audience was teenagers and young adults. The sheer numbers of people that went to the movie proves that the audiences were not made up mostly of Trekkies.

147. Red Dead Ryan - January 6, 2012


Khan is iconic. The majority of casual fans know who Khan is. Khan has been parodied on shows such as “Seinfeld”, with George yelling out in an episode, “KKKKHHAAANNNN!!!!”.

148. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

Jay said:
“Actually that was the most creative decision. To use the original characters but devise a way to tell original stories with them, without the audience knowing what was going to happen or what their eventual fate was.”

Yes, You are correct, Jay.
But why can’t they do the same thing with TOS villains?

The answer is–they can.

149. Jeffrey S. Nelson - January 6, 2012

Gotta believe they’re casting him as a new character, but I can him as Trelayne or Gary Seven…

150. Red Dead Ryan - January 6, 2012


You are ignoring the facts. Trekkies made up way more than 1% of the audience. The polls on this site seem to suggest that many Trekkies went to see the last film multiple times. I, myself, paid for a ticket five times. A lot of fans who skipped out on previous Trek films went to see this one.

A large chunk of the overall gross came from Trekkies who went multiple times to see the movie.

Now, I grant you that the mainstream made up a bigger percentage of the gross compared to the previous films, but had Trekkies stayed home, it would have flopped. The overseas numbers prove my point.

151. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

TOS villains can have new stories.

152. VZX - January 6, 2012

146: Well, Khan is iconic for Star Trek, but not so much in popular culture. Ask an average person who Khan is, and they will not know.

Using that argument, Klingons are more “iconic” than Khan simply because Joe Public has familiarity with them.

153. Jay - January 6, 2012

#146 Khan is the only villain that is remotely iconic.

He is the only one that casual fans would even remotely be aware of, even then i bet the number is around 50% of the general movie going public would even recognize the name.

I can tell you from personal experience that alot of people only know that Khan was a bad guy in Star Trek, nothing more.

154. Jay - January 6, 2012

#147 They can, but why would they? No reason to.

155. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

Okay, Jay, you want a new villain. That’s cool.

But thank you for admitting that they can write new stories for villains just as much as they can write new stories for the good guys.

156. Jay - January 6, 2012

#148 Lol… i’m sorry but I’m not the one ignoring facts. I didn’t say 1% of trekkies went to see the movies, I said that we on this site make up less than 1% of the people that will go to see the movie.

Trekkies did not make up the majority of the audience for 2009 Trek.

This is the problem with alot of Trekkies. They have delusions of granduer. They think they are bigger than they are.

I went multiple times too, and every single time the audience was at least half non-trekkies.

Most of my friends thought Star Trek was the stupidest thing they had ever seen before the 2009 movie came out. They all went and saw it and they all thought it was a good or great movie. Completely different than what they though Star Trek was.

This is was a common story for the movie. Most of the audience was not Trekkies.

Also, most of those friends of mine that are not Trekkies wouldn’t have a clue who Khan was, much less any of the other characters you mentioned.

I think people here need a little dose of reality. The vast majority of the movie going public, even those that like sci fi or action, have very little to any knowledge of Star Trek beyond the 2009 film.

157. Jay - January 6, 2012

#150 Thank you. Exactly my point. Unfortunately some people think everyone knows how Khan is, and everyone loves Star Trek.

158. Jay - January 6, 2012

#153 I never said they couldn’t, but I just give Bob, JJ and crew more credit for being original and creative than that.

159. SirBroiler - January 6, 2012

I mentioned this in the talkback for the previous article – but I don’t see anywhere in any news article from yesterday that confidently states that Cumberbatch is the ‘main’ villain or the ‘only’ villain in the movie.

Clifton Collins Jr. was a villain in Star Trek ’09. He sure wasn’t the main villain but he was a key villain nonetheless. You could even consider Jason Matthew Smith (the bar brawler) a villain and his character was a Starfleet Cadet/Security Officer.

I love to read all of the speculation – even thought I’m personally hoping for a new take on Khan with Cumberbatch taking on the role of Joachim. I might even accept the Khan dies and Joachim leads idea.

Also wondering how many of those great Klingon Commanders we all loved from TOS were destroyed during the battle with the Narada. Uhura reports that 47 ships had been destroyed.

160. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

“The vast majority of the movie going public, even those that like sci fi or action, have very little to any knowledge of Star Trek beyond the 2009 film.”

Then it wouldn’t make a difference if they used a TOS villain and told a new story with it.

And it is creative to tell a new story with an old villain, just as it is creative to tell a new story with old good guys.

161. Jay - January 6, 2012

Another illustration on audience for Trek now. I have 2 kids that are in high school. Both laughed when 2009 Trek was coming out. Both swore they would never see it because Star Trek was stupid and only geeks like it.

They also said they didn’t know anyone in their school that liked Star Trek.

Then after the movie came out, I got them to go see it. They liked it. Grudgingly admited that I was right and that it was a good movie. They want to see the sequal and they also tell me alot of their friends also saw it and liked it also.

However, none of them would consider themselvs Trekkies by a long shot. They still laugh at the idea of anyone going to a Star Trek convention and they can’t for the life of them understand why i watch TOS episodes on Netflix.

I also have some friends that grew up watching Star Trek in the 60’s. Have seen most TOS episodes numerous times. Have gong to Star Trek conventions, and none of them had any clue that this website existed.

This is to illustrate the point that we are a small percentage of Trekkies that even come to this website and bother to post comments.

162. Jay - January 6, 2012

#158 It wouldn’t make a difference, but as a writer why would you do that?

I would think that Orci and the other writers would want to create their own villain. Make it their own creation. Put their own stamp on the franchise. Why would they want to simply take a character someone else had written and expand on that when they are already doing that with the main characters?

I never said they couldn’t… .it’s just my opinion that they wouldn’t. I think they would have more pride in writing something new.

163. TB - January 6, 2012

My money’s on Gary Mitchell, but Gary Seven would be interesting since the original episode never really explained enough about his character.

164. Craiger - January 6, 2012

I think we can base who the villian or villians are going to based on what Trek villians the general public knows about. I think the only ones they know about are the Klingons. They geared that last movie with the general public in mind. I know some say well they never knew about Nero but they know about Kirk, Spock and the Enterprise. The general public doesn’t know about Q, Trelane, Charlie X, the Talosians, Gary Mitchell, not sure if they know about the Gorn. They might know the Borg and maybe Kahn.

165. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

Yes, they probably would want to create their own villain. Sure. I would, too.

But the real pride comes in writing a fresh new story that kicks-ass, regardless of the name of any of the characters.

It matters little if the villain is Talosian, Garth of Izar, or someone new, as long as the story is new and works on every level, then that is where the real pride is.

(To be honest, JJ and crew should feel slightly embarrassed that Nero came off so poorly as a villain. He was a villain who needed more depth. No pride there. But everyone makes mistakes. Just mu opinion.)

166. Craiger - January 6, 2012

I thought Nero was good. I though he was funny when he first talked to Pike.

167. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

Jay, your logic is flawed. Look, if they write about a TOS race, like the Andorians, maybe with a twist, since most of the mainstream public probably wouldn’t know what an Andorian was, this race would be new/original to mainstream audiences and to Trekkies a little easter egg. I would think that could be considered a win-win scenario.

It appears that this story that the producers/writers wish to tell very likely has brand new races and characters as well as some already known to the Trekkie community. So what? You can tell new stories using known characters. You can tell an old story and just change names. It is hoped that the writers are doing the former of my two statements.

Freeing themselves from the prime universe canon means that they can introduce new characters, worlds but more importantly, play with existing, known races, characters, worlds in ways that could not be done were they still operating in a TOS prime universe.

However, I think that the main characters – Kirk, Spock, McCoy… should remain as we know them from the original series, with one or two tweaks. NuSpock has been tweaked by giving him a girlfriend, however, given what is already known about Spock’s background (having a human mother etc), this Spock being involved with a human female to the extent that he is able, is not inconceivable. Seeking a human female companion would feel as OK as anything else since that is what his father did…

168. Jay - January 6, 2012

I think Nero was more of a sub plot and took a back seat to the main characters and bringing the original crew together.

The real story of the 2009 movie was bringing Kirk, Spock, McCoy and all together and setting them on the Enterprise and starting them off on their journey in a new time line.

The bad guy was more of a secondary character.

I think this time they will be able to focus more on the bad guy and developing the story around him.

#162 I agree. Klingons are by far the most known bad guys among the general audience from Star Trek. Not that they will be in this movie, but I do agree with that point.

169. Craiger - January 6, 2012

Keachick that is an intersting way of looking at it but could they make TOS villians that the general public has never heard of interesting to them. The general public may find some of the TOS villians that Trek fans like boring and uninteresting. I don’t think the would like the Talosians and Gary Mitchell because they might find playing with a persons mind and ESP too Trekkie and boring and intellectual. The general public wants action not thought proviking stuff like TOS had. Same thing with Charlie X and Trelane. I never liked them anyway or Harry Mudd. Gary Seven might even be the same. I think Abrams even said alot of the time in TOS they just stood around discussing what to do and not actually doing something.

170. Craiger - January 6, 2012

Also not saying the general movie going public is dumb but I think alot of them preceive TOS as too intellectual and boring.

171. Jay - January 6, 2012

#165 How is my logic flawed? You said what I have said.

I said that using a know race, such as Klingons or whatever is not unexpected. I said using a character, like Mudd or whoever is.

You didn’t say anything different.

You only need to understand JJ, Bob and all’s motivation to see how unlikely it is that the main villain will be someone we Trekkies already know.

Having someone like that in the movie at some point as a sub plot is not out of the question. But having him be the main guy to me is highly unlikely.

We will see, but everything I’ve read and seen so far suggests otherwise.

172. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

Talosians as a villain need not be cerebrial. You could do lots of action–not to mention mind-bending stuff– with them. Something like “Inception”.

173. Techtrekker - January 6, 2012

I think he’ll be an Organian. :-)

174. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

He’s a tribble! :-)

175. Vultan - January 6, 2012

Okay, just taking stock here:

–Talosians are too cerebral to use.
–Khan is good because he’s popular with the general public.
–Star Trek should look to Batman for inspiration.
–The Abrams-verse is great because Spock has a girlfriend.

If it were a man, this franchise would be running for public office.
Well done!

176. Dave1119 - January 6, 2012

Look at Fringe… Same creative team, and it also involves an alternate universe. They love to show how the same people are different because their circumstances are different. They are doing the same thing in Star Trek. Kirk is different because he never knew his father. Spock is going to be different because he lost his mother (and his whole planet for that matter). So if they go with a known antagonist, it will be to explore that character from a different angle. You can be sure that the movie will not be a rehash of an old episode in any way, but I think there is a better than %50 chance it will be a known antagonist under much different circumstances then we saw him originally.

177. Mirror Jordan - January 6, 2012

I’d love to see a new interpretation of Sybok at some point in this new timeline, but I doubt he’ll be the main villain should they use him. Heck, he could be a good guy in the Abramsverse.

178. Royal Canadian Institute for the Mentally Insane - January 6, 2012

“over the moon” + “moonshot” = the Gary Seven episode

It’s a stretch, but speculation will be fun.

179. Decker - January 6, 2012

Cumberbatch will be the Salt Vampire.

Or Janice Lester, that psycho bitch.

180. VZX - January 6, 2012

175: Would Sybok even exist anymore in this new timeline? Was Spock older or younger than Sybok? If it was the former, than maybe Sarek didn’t commit adultery yet. Or, if Sybok does exist, maybe he was on Vulcan when it blew up.

Well, I never liked the concept of the Sybok character, so I kinda hope they don’t use him. Also, I doubt the powers that be would want to have any connection to Star Trek V.

181. Decker - January 6, 2012

Not just any tribble, but a Borgified tribble.

182. SciFiGuy - January 6, 2012


183. Matthew M - January 6, 2012

So many of you clowns are idiots!
First of all Gary Seven was not a villan.
Garth of Izar was a Starfleet hero with brain damage.
The rest are just ridiculous.
BC’s physic would fit an Andorian perhaps but I think it will be an unknown villan, human or unknown alien species.

Why do you so-called ‘fans’ want to repeat and rehash old characters? Are you all that unimaginative?

184. T'Cal - January 6, 2012

New villian! And not another “I’ll eliminate the Federation because they wronged me!” cookie-cutter bad guy. That’s been done again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, and again, etc.

185. NCM - January 6, 2012

@184… That’s a little overkill, don’t you think?

186. Bob Johnson - January 6, 2012

No, guys he would be a great Luke Skywalker, just imagine him kicking Kirks ass.

187. Phil - January 6, 2012

@183. I’m firmly in the “new characters” column here….having said that, the only people who count are the production team, and they seem to understand that they can’t create an expanded version of a TOS episode if they want to sell more then ten tickets. Kirk and Spock are iconic, people who don’t know Trek know the characters. Darth Vader is iconic, for the same reason. No Trek villian meets the standard, so it makes no sense to build a movie around an old “one off” character.
Lighten up on the posters here – it’s a fan page, and as such are free to comment on what they would like to see. It doesn’t mean they are “so-called” fans, they just prefer to stay with what they know. No harm in that.

188. NCM - January 6, 2012

What did you know and when did you know it? For those of you who discovered TM before 2009, what did you know about the the film going into the theater?

189. Tony Todd's Tears - January 6, 2012

Bob, Your comment makes me want to cry.

My dishonor as a Klingon is complete

190. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

#180 – Sybok was a lot older than Spock. He was the son of Sarek and a Vulcan princess. Amanda was Sarek’s second wife. Curiously, unlike Spock, he was full Vulcan but decided to abandon the ways of Surak (Kolinahr rituals etc) and go down the path of exploring and using emotions. He became an outcast within Vulcan society as a result. Therefore Sybok may not have been on Vulcan when it was destroyed.

#183 I don’t want the makers of the film to necessarily rehash old characters. The problem is that I am positive that I read in earlier threads to do with the possible casting of BDT that a villain would be a race/someone from the Star Trek TOS series, therefore there was/is speculation on people’s part on who that might be. I have since gone back through the threads here and find no mention of this. I do not believe I imagined what I read.

There is another possibility and that is that one of the editors/writers of have altered the script of the relevant article. Come on, be honest, Anthony? and co, one of the articles did state that the villain that the actor now selected (BC) would be play a Star Trek TOS villain, did it not? It is OK that things get changed/deleted. I just hope I didn’t imagine reading it, because it seems that a lot of other people “imagined” it as well.

Alice Eve was said to be playing a new character right from the start, so why people kept thinking she could be Nurse Chapel, Carol Marcus, Janice Rand etc, I have no idea.

191. Bob Johnson - January 6, 2012

Luke would make as much sense as the last Trek Movie did!

192. Anthony Pascale - January 6, 2012

Matthew M
Warning for trolling/flaming

find a way to discuss without insulting people

193. Jef Leppard - January 6, 2012

I kind of just wish they’d invent a new villain instead of recreating an old one… although I suppose since that’s what they did with the 2009 film, maybe this is the time to go familiar. Who knows. I just don’t want to be disappointed with the next after the first turned out so good.

194. Jef Leppard - January 6, 2012

Actually, the more I think about it, the more I bet we’ll have Kilingons in the next one. They were such a prominent villain in the original series, it seems like you would want to explore what they are like in this new timeline right away. Since there were supposed to be Klingons in the 2009 film and that got scrapped, there would have been some design for costumes, ships, tech etc. that they could now put to use. Betcha it’s Klingons.

195. Anthony Pascale - January 6, 2012

Check out the article for a new Photoshop of Cumberbatch as Juaquim, courtesy of a TrekMovie reader

196. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

Matthew said: “Why do you so-called ‘fans’ want to repeat and rehash old characters? Are you all that unimaginative?”

Read the former posts, Matthew, before spewing. We’ve been threw this one.

Kirk and Spock are old characters. But done originally.

If they can do that with the old characters of TOS (the good guys), they can do it with old villians from TOS.

To repost what Dave1119 said: “Kirk is different because he never knew his father. Spock is going to be different because he lost his mother (and his whole planet for that matter). So if they go with a known antagonist, it will be to explore that character from a different angle. You can be sure that the movie will not be a rehash of an old episode in any way”.

Now that we’ve cleared that up again, can we move on?

197. Tiberius Subprime - January 6, 2012

@194 Jeff

Even though they are done a lot in Trek, I can deal with Klingons, as long as they story is kick-ass.

It’s the story that counts. If the story works on every level, then it matters not if the villains are Klingons or Trelane.

But I do hope, if they are going with a TOS villain, then it is a character that does not have as much history as the Klingons do (ie: Trelane, Talosians, Andorians, Garth, Kodos, etc)

But new villain would be equally cool.

198. Rico - January 6, 2012

I’d guess someone new – probably an alien – maybe a Klingon.

199. Craiger - January 6, 2012

Anthony just wondering why did he do one as Juaquim when Cumberbatch will be the main villian? Juaquim, was Khan’s second in command.

200. Phil - January 6, 2012

@199. Given enough time, he will probably be photoshopped into an image of every Trek buy guy, buy guy side kick, evil android, mad scientist, buearucrat, grouch, or anyone who was just plain grumpy…..

201. Phil - January 6, 2012

oops….bad guy, bad guy side kick…..

202. N - January 6, 2012

Any real good actor could play Khan. I just hope Khan isn’t even in this movie.

203. Ama - January 6, 2012

I have many thoughts on the development of the reboot verse in the long-term, but he might make a good Cardassian…

204. Adolescent Nightmare - January 6, 2012

He’s the genetic scientist that creates the flesh eating tribbles for the evil CEO.

205. cugel the clever - January 6, 2012

I certainly hope he’s not Garth of Izar. That was one of the worst of TOS eps and I don’t think there’s a good enough story there to do a variaiton in the new timeline. The only way it could be Garth is if the story involves is victory at the battle of Axanar.

I voted that he’s a Klingon because I think it’s likely the Klingons play a major role in the new film.

206. captain_neill - January 6, 2012

I wish to God they stop with the Khan thing, any redo of Khan will be inferior. You can guarantee that.

And why Joachim if not Khan, we defintely need to get away from the Botany Bay. Khan is one of my fav villains but Ricardo Montalban cannot be bettered and to me any new take on Khan is just going to smell of lazy writing.

A new villain in a new story, as fresh as you can get for a tentpole summer movie, but at least remember what Trek is about. Remember Abrams, its Star Trek you are directing, not Star Wars.

Anywho the casting choices has restored some of my faith after all this Khan rumour business.

207. Craiger - January 6, 2012

I think Abrams hinted in the last movie who will be the bad guys in the sequel. It will be the Klingon’s because those scenes got deleted. Cumberbatch will probably be Kor, Kang or Koloth.

208. John from Cincinnati - January 6, 2012


Nero was a new villain and was about as bland and as cookie cutter as they get. If he is the standard for the alternate universe villains then PLEASE go back to the originals!

209. John from Cincinnati - January 6, 2012

Actually, I didnt see much of a difference between Nero and the villain from Nemesis. Two Romulan terrorists hell bent on destroying the Federation. Puuhleaase.

210. Craiger - January 6, 2012

Also with the Klingon’s their could be space battles and we could see Kirk come up with some of his classic battle moves. Maybe even use that one Riker mentioned in Nemesis.

211. pacimage - January 6, 2012

Not Khan, but Cane (or insert a British name of your choice)

With the alternate timeline, how about a different genetically manipulated superhuman who escaped the Earth in 1996? Maybe an English/European tyrant, this time… who ruled THAT region of the world, with all his English henchmen (ie. Noel Clarke) and women (ie. Alice Eve).

Similar, but different.

Just a thought!

212. John from Cincinnati - January 6, 2012


Can’t happen. The timeline didn’t diverge until Nero went throught the blackhole and fired on the Kelvin, at that point it diverges. So Khan and all that happened with him escaping still happens. The Botany Bay is still out there in space waiting to be recovered.

213. Vultan - January 6, 2012


I agree that Nero was a bland cookie cutter bad guy.

Which is why I think some more imaginative writers might be order. Sure, they may turn out a great, original baddie or a refreshing take on an original series baddie. I hope for that.

But I expect more cookie cutters.

214. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

I could see Ben (Benedict Cumberbatch – is that his nickname I wonder?) playing a Romulan trying to take advantage of the surviving Vulcans’ precarious situation. I know others have mentioned same sort of story line, but it does seem as feasible a story as anything else. They could make his character and story interesting and exciting, or not.

Is not the character BC is playing meant to be mentored by the older Peter Weller character? Hmmm…

215. NuFan - January 6, 2012


That actually sounds possible with what is known!

216. VZX - January 6, 2012

I think I’m going to put my money on klingons as the villain. I’m not 100% sure, but I have a strong feeling.

If Benicio del Toro was up for the same role that this Cumberbatch got, then I don’t think it’s Khan. del Toro would make a good Khan, but not Cumberbatch. BUT either would make a great Klingon, del Toro looks like the hairy devils and Cumberbatch has that distinctive voice, not to mention acting prowess.

Also, Abrams always goes for that iconic imagery (black holes, Saturn, catchphrases, etc.). Klingons are the classic Trek antagonists.

While its true that it could just be something 100% original, I’m still thinking the Klingons will play a major part in the story. Only time will tell….

217. captain_neill - January 6, 2012

Thing is Abrams is good at taking something that has been done before twist it around a little and pass it on as something fresh.

To me Super 8 was him trying to be Spielberg.

But he seems to know what the mainstream wants

218. captain_neill - January 6, 2012

Well Star Trek the way I like it has gone but I would love to see the Tholians as the villains

219. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

Star Trek is about the crew of a Starfleet vessel, USS Enterprise, which is part of the United Federation of Planets and in particular about its captain and first officer, along with the captain’s long time friend and personal physician. They are meant to be the most developed, interesting and likeable of characters.

Their various adversaries, villains can be disgusting, boring, bland, dumb, desperate, defensive, intelligent, smarmy, duplicitous – some and/or all of the above. I really don’t care much, because it is not really about them. It is about Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Scotty, Uhura, Sulu and Chekov.

Nero was fine as a second tier character and adversary. He worked. He got Kirk, Spock et al started at “doing their thing”. The focus needs to be on those seven characters, but especially on Kirk and Spock.

220. dmduncan - January 6, 2012

88. Aurore – January 6, 2012

Affirmative! ;-)

221. VZX - January 6, 2012

219: YES! It needs to stay focused on the family! Once it gets too much on the villains or other characters, it becomes Star Trek: Nemesis.

222. Daoud - January 6, 2012

Koloth. Koloth was designed to be Kirk’s regular Klingon adversary, as is well detailed in David Gerrold’s book on the making of The Trouble with Tribbles. And what was the other book, The World of Star Trek?
Cumberbatch definitely could channel that William Campbell foppishness that he brought to both Trelane and Koloth. Plus, how about Cumberbatch portraying both Trelane AND Koloth. That would be a marvelous tie-in, and of all the things I remember wishing that had been used later on… that was one of them. That Trelane toyed with Koloth first explains so much. Perhaps to Koloth, Trelane will appear as Kirk and be portrayed by Pine. Sort of a “Tale of Two Captains” story.

223. captain_neill - January 6, 2012


Nero worked in the context of the plot int the last movie, which was a thin one but worked to get the crew in the alternate universe created together. But outside of being a plot device I actually found Nero to be one of the weakest villains in the Trek movies.

He was well played by Bana but looking back on the movies I have to say that Shinzon was a better villain in my eyes.

224. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

I don’t know what “mainstream” means in this context. Does it mean what is most popular, that a great many happen to like? Somehow when people refer to “mainstream”, it always comes across to me as a putdown and the person seems to come across as thinking that somehow they are superior, more discerning, intelligent etc etc. It comes across as being very snobby and no, you don’t have to have a “posh” English accent to be a snob. More often than not, I have found the reverse to be the case.

(I am referring to someone on the IMDb message board who referred to Benedict Cumberbatch as being snooty because of his “posh” or “posher” English accent – The only snoot I became aware of was that poster. I have no idea what BC is like…)

People can’t just seem to like something without often feeling the need to put down other franchises etc that they don’t like. If you have to put down something else in order to prove your own preference to be better then you have already lost.

My mother has put down other forms of Christianity in order to prove, win me over to her form. It hasn’t worked.

225. Phil - January 6, 2012

@222. Yeah, but what you describe is for episode television. Unless you are planning a story arc you need to either establish the bad guy as iconic (Darth Vader) or on some sort of planned reveal (Voldormort) otherwise you run a huge risk of creating just another two parter for movie of the week….and a box office failure. Klingons are part of the exstablished lore, but the first time Koloth makes his appearance it doesn’t mean anything unless the filmmakers have done something to cause the audience to either love or hate the guy. Simply having Kirk stomping around the bride fuming that Koloth (or anyone else) has been naughty again is just pandering to the hardcore fans in the audience, while leave the rest of them wondering. Trek has done this plenty of times, the critics always catch it, and that cemented the reputation of Trek movies being for the geeks who got the inside connections. Abrams rightfully recognized that mold needed to be broken, so its implausable he’s going to just drop this production back into the old Trek mold….

226. Dr. Cheis - January 6, 2012

Why did they pick old Khan for the photoshop image, I wonder?

227. dmduncan - January 6, 2012

He makes a great Talosian!

228. dmduncan - January 6, 2012

I don’t know the name of the character this dude will be playing in the movie, but no way it’ll outdo Cumberbatch!

229. dmduncan - January 6, 2012

Bob, so, uh, if it looks like the world’ll end on 21 December 2012 AND we all still have internet running…

…will you release the script online so we can all go out smiling?

230. jas_montreal - January 6, 2012

Boborci should play a red shirt in the trek sequel :). Thats a great casting for sure !

231. LodownX - January 6, 2012

I’ve said it once… I’ll say it again. Garth of Izar’s story would be epic on the screen…
a fellow Captain and Commander of (what’s left of) the Fleet… gone insane and driven to madness. Kirk at odds with stopping a friend and potentially a very dangerous enemy from committing genocide AND destroying Starfleet’s influence in the JJverse.

232. VZX - January 6, 2012

230: HAHAHA! That’d be awesome

233. CarlG - January 6, 2012

I hope this means the villain will be a more thoughtful, cerebral enemy this time around. I can’t really see Cumberbatch as a rampaging psycho like Nero, but he’d be great as a devious, string-pulling evil mastermind type.

234. Khan was Framed! - January 6, 2012

I am thinking more & more that the Benicio Del Toro thing was designed to mislead everyone into thinking the bad guy will be Khan.

It gave the team a duck blind to work from while they did the real casting.

I mean who would see them casting latinos & not assume it’s for the role of Khan?

Meanwhile they are able to audition & cast other actors freely, without fans speculating on who the real bad guy is.

It may have also been a negotiating tactic, directors & casting agents do that all the time. They get a crop of guys like Cumberbatch on the hook & then start talking to a big name, very publicly.
All of a sudden, the guys like Cumberbatch, who they are actually after, start to lower their price or become willing to do their own stunts, etc.

235. Red Dead Ryan - January 6, 2012

“Garth Of Izar”, while an interesting concept, just didn’t work as a TOS episode.

With the right writers, Garth could be interesting…… a television episode.

Not movie material though.

236. Khan was Framed! - January 6, 2012

I hope it’s a return of a classic TOS bad guy; they did the “new” one in the last movie & it wasn’t that new: a bald guy commanding a huge Romulan ship?

Where have I seen that before?

Regardless, I don’t even care which one, as long as it’s from TOS & honors the source material more than ST’09 did.

237. NDP - January 6, 2012

He’s playing a cucumber!….Heard it from JJ!

238. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 6, 2012

On the other Benedict Cumberbatch thread, it was mentioned that a Nazneen Contractor has been cast for the Star Trek movie, playing “Noel Clarke’s” wife. She was born in India and “into the ancient religion of Zoroastrianism. She is one of the 150,000 Parsis in the world.” She is exactly two years younger than Chris Pine – b. 26 August 1982 (CP’s is 26/8/80) and she is VERY pretty.

239. MartianRogue - January 6, 2012

very, very, pretty. and i’m sure a fantastic actor.

240. Harry Ballz - January 6, 2012

Bob Orci

I have an interesting question that won’t give anything away about the sequel:

Hollywood executives are describing Benedict Cumberbatch as “insanely talented”.

Were you personally in the room when he auditioned for the role in the sequel and, if yes, just how good was he?

241. rly - January 7, 2012

Cumberbatch would have been an incredible Spock But I like Quinto so its all good.

Cumberbatch is such a brilliant actor. I do hope this leads to him being cast as Dr Strange as its perfect for him. There is no better actor than he

Cumberbatch and Tom Hardy are very cute together in this interview

242. china - January 7, 2012

I’m suspicious that JJ wanted Cumberbatch all along and that when he suddenly became available (due to a delay in one of his other films) they snapped him up immediately.

243. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012


Yeah, that’s quite a scheme….the best actor suddenly becomes available and the director decides to go with him.

Oooooooh, alert the media!

244. Herb Finn - January 7, 2012

He strikes me as the Romulan type,actually.

245. captainkirk - January 7, 2012

Here’s my image of him as a Klingon:

246. china - January 7, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch, who will have to beam his way from London to Los Angeles, and then on to Wellington, New Zealand — and back to LA again — when he stars as the number one villain in Star Trek 2.
Cumberbatch will travel to LA next week after attending the War Horse royal gala on Sunday. The movie is turning into a big hit for Steven Spielberg and is bound to be Oscar nominated.
By the way, I understand it was Spielberg who recommended Cumberbatch to his colleague JJ Abrams, who will direct Star Trek 2. Cumberbatch, one of the best actors of his generation, has been given special dispensation to shoot Star Trek 2 while he’s contracted to the Hobbit film, which is shooting in NZ.
He will travel backwards and forwards over the next few months, working for a few days at a time on each project.

Read more:

247. Sebastian S. - January 7, 2012

He’d make an ideal Romulan or Vulcan; perhaps a Vulcan seeking revenge against the destruction of his homeworld? Surely a logical consequence of the new timeline…

Personally, as long as it’s a new character? I’m all for it. Cumberbatch is an amazing actor; his turns as Hawking and BBC’s Sherlock were incredible. He has been the best incarnation of Holmes since the late Jeremy Brett (and I don’t say that lightly; I’m a huge Holmes nerd!). I’ve no doubt he’ll be very interesting in whatever role he’s given…

Hearing of his involvement (as well as Doctor Who’s Noel Clarke) is really good news!

248. Drew - January 7, 2012

241 Thanks for the Cumberbatch as van Gogh link

Anyone doubting he could drastically alter his unique appearance should give it a look. I have no trouble imagining him in a wide variety of roles now… Klingon, Khan, etc…

249. Planet Pandro - January 7, 2012


I’ve been thinking along these lines as well…That possibly the Benicio Del Toro stuff was all smokescreen to keep us from knowing what they were really up to. They really did trick us in to thinking they were recasting Khan when all along the situation could be quite different.
Only time will tel I suppose…

250. dmduncan - January 7, 2012

Uh…don’t really think these guys sit around a table plotting like the CIA on how to throw Trekkies off their trail.

251. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 7, 2012

Re quote from my post #110 – “It was easier to see who Benecio Del Toro would most likely play, but this new actor widens the field somewhat. Of course, the whole scenario with casting around for Latino actors may have just been a red herring, sending us on a “wild goose chase” as it were, while they worked on nabbing the real person they wanted for the part all along.”

@#234 and #249 – I already said that – first!

#250 No, Bob and co. might not, but the studio’s publicity department might, just to keep papz and fans off their backs and *happy*…

252. Phil - January 7, 2012

Lets see, all kinds of suggestions for various characters seeking revenge for various slights, real or imagined. Filming in Hawaii. Select a supreme being (there are plenty in the ST universe) to bring them all together, and you have…..

Star Trek : Rumble in the Jungle

Throw in the cute little Tribbles, and it’s box office gold.

253. dmduncan - January 7, 2012

251: “#250 No, Bob and co. might not, but the studio’s publicity department might, just to keep papz and fans off their backs and *happy*…”

JJ is the one who wanted Benicio, not the publicity department. He got offered the part, remember?

254. Bruce Banner - January 7, 2012

Perhaps he is Q

255. Aurore - January 7, 2012

“Uh…don’t really think these guys sit around a table plotting like the CIA on how to throw Trekkies off their trail.”

I dunno…

I, personally, can imagine Toto plotting…stuff… like the prolific Star Trek fan fiction writer that he is… and the…cOnspiracy lover that he appears to be…


256. the Quickening - January 7, 2012


… Most of my friends thought Star Trek was the stupidest thing they had ever seen before the 2009 movie came out. They all went and saw it and they all thought it was a good or great movie. Completely different than what they though Star Trek was…

It’s no surprise to me that the two highest grossing TREK movies, were the two that Paramount actually spent money on–TMP and ST’09. Past TREK films were talky ’cause that’s all they could afford. The visual look of movies cost–that’s what filmgoers expect from genre movies, and that was the only thing I got out of ST’09: application of production over content. Quality, substance, adult sensibility rarely enters the picture in these movies. ST’09 was certainly in line with these kinds of films. Probably why your friends loved it.

257. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 7, 2012

Bob’s credibility has increased for me since he noted that all his movies are fan fiction, including what he is writing for Star Trek. He writes fictional stories, that tend to get turned into movies and he is also a fan of, in this case, Star Trek, therefore fan fiction. Works for me!

Oh, and I know what Nazneen’s character’s name is – Mary Sue, since she’s the wife of someone. I mean, what else could it be?

258. dmduncan - January 7, 2012

255. Aurore – January 7, 2012

What is the meaning of that capitalized “O,” and do not insult my intelligence by pretending it was a typo!

259. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 7, 2012

#256 Oh, stop being a snot. You have no idea why “these friends” liked it.

However, I do find it hard to understand why people would think Star Trek per se was the stupidest show they’ve seen, before Star Trek 09. Sure, all of Star Trek’s incarnations (movies and series) had their stupid moments, however they all had their intelligent, poignant and humourous times as well. I mean, there is a lot to chose from…Perhaps it is some of the snotty Trekkers who put others off from (properly) checking out that franchise called Star Trek.

260. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 7, 2012

That’s right, Aurore. Bob Orci got to have that one typo. That particular typo has been taken…:)

261. Aurore - January 7, 2012

Oh, and I know what Nazneen’s character’s name is – Mary Sue, since she’s the wife of someone. I mean, what else could it be?



262. Phil - January 7, 2012

@257. Not too sure why you are opening that can of worms again….

263. Aurore - January 7, 2012

“…and do not insult my intelligence by pretending it was a typo!”

….OoooOOoo….I’m soooo scared!

If I were to insult your intelligence, my fellow Trekker, what would you do………vomit?


264. Aurore - January 7, 2012

Correction 263.
vomit = vOmit

265. gir6 - January 7, 2012

The Romulan Commander is not a villain, damn it!

Also, Benedict Slaptyback would make a most excellent Trelane. Or Salt Vampire.

266. dmduncan - January 7, 2012

263. Aurore – January 7, 2012

Aha! This time, the joke is on YOU my arch-nemesisette!

Remember when I did that “random” capitalization thing in that post way back when?

Yes! Do not deny it! You have it on TAPE! I am SURE of it!

Well, I actually WAS sending a message! Those caps were not random at all!

267. Icky - January 7, 2012

43: Sybok isn’t half-human. Spock is. Sybok is full-Vulcan.

268. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 7, 2012

#261 – “Chastity”? Now, with a name like that, it does not bode well for their marital relations, let alone being able to produce said daughter. If she is Mary Sue, she can do anything or so the rumours go…

Please, nobody go down the route of talking artificial means of reproduction. In the long term, it won’t be a big winner… Generally, there really is no better way of getting the child you want than doing an activity known as heterosexual f*cking and a lot of it! Got this odd notion that it is also very pleasurable for most of those engaging in such activities…:)

#262 I see no can of worms, other than the can you brought here. Feeling hungry, are we?

269. AJ - January 7, 2012

Benedict Cumberpatch is brilliant as Sherlock Holmes (with Martin Freeman as Watson, no less) on the BBC in his current series.

Let’s hope he is used to maximum advantage in the new film. He’s like a young Alan Rickman after a triple espresso, but much more fun to watch.

270. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012

255, 258, 261+263.

I, personally, suspect Aurore had a big “O” over her excitement about the new movie!

271. Aurore - January 7, 2012

“Chastity refers to the sexual behavior of a man or woman acceptable to the moral standards and guidelines of a culture, civilization, or religion.
In the western world, the term has become closely associated (and is often used interchangeably) with sexual abstinence, especially before marriage.[1] However, the term remains applicable to persons in all states, single or married, clerical or lay, and has implications beyond sexual temperance.”

“…. It also means complete fidelity to husband or wife during marriage.”

(According to Wikipedia).

Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, I give yoooooooooooou….Chastity Maria Suzanne M’Benga. She studied medicine in Bordeaux.

What a coincidence; so did T’Pring…


272. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012

I thought naming her Chastity simply meant she was descended from Sonny and Cher!

273. dmduncan - January 7, 2012

I just hope this Counterspatch guy is all he’s cracked up to be.

274. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012

No worries, dmduncan. He’s a superb actor!

(and, remember, I AM the pickiest SOB on Earth)

275. Aurore - January 7, 2012

“Aha! This time, the joke is on YOU my arch-nemesisette!”


Why so formal?

You know, my attempting to insult your intelligence does give you some privileges ; you may call me ” Arch “.

Be sure to do so only in private, though. Otherwise, people might talk.

You are right. The joke is on me.
Don’t be surprised by my admission. Not to contradict posters typing the following kind of statement ; “Do not deny it! You have it on TAPE! I am SURE of it!” , was one of my New Year’s resolutions.

Seriously. Stop tits….
I have absolutely no idea what you’re talking about.

I’m cOnfused.

276. Aurore - January 7, 2012

Correction. 275.

Stop tits = Stop this.

277. dmduncan - January 7, 2012

275. Aurore – January 7, 2012


278. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012

Stop tits?

Well, I……nah, too easy! :>)

279. Red Dead Ryan - January 7, 2012

“Stop tits…”

Sorry, but “tits” not over til “tits” over!


280. Craiger - January 7, 2012

Harry, what if Erica Durance was Cumberbatch’s love interest in the film?

281. Leviathan99 - January 7, 2012

I think a Cardassian in TOS era would be untapped and catch a wider Trek demographic while leaving the makeup artist more free to reinvent the style a bit.

They’re supposed to have more tech in the JJ-verse so dealing with the Bajoran occupation head-on would be interesting and could be handled in a politically relevant **cough**gitmo**cough way.

Imagine the Bajorans as the detainees, maybe with Terok Nor positioned as a kind of Guantanamo Bay for Bajoran “terrorists.”

282. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012


Craiger, I don’t think an actor with Cumberbatch’s reputation would do a movie involving beastiality!

283. Red Dead Ryan - January 7, 2012


The Cardassians didn’t occupy Bajor until the early half of the twenty-fourth century.

Secondly, the writers have said no to using non-TOS races and characters for the sequel.

Thirdly, TOS purists would freak at the prospect of a TNG race appearing in a TOS reboot movie.

284. the Quickening - January 7, 2012

#256 Oh, stop being a snot. You have no idea why “these friends” liked it.

Perhaps you you can’t read and don’t know the meaning of the word probably.

285. Cervantes - January 7, 2012

@ 267 Icky

Indeed, and I only remembered that after I’d posted, lol.

But although I reckon Cumberbatch would make for a great ‘villainous’ Vulcan for the nu-crew to deal with, I’m beginning to wonder if it would be better if this sequel didn’t have another ‘pointy-eared’ adversary, after all…

286. Dave - January 7, 2012

I hope lots of makeup ugly bugger

287. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 7, 2012

#256 – “Quality, substance, adult sensibility rarely enters the picture in these movies. ST’09 was certainly in line with these kinds of films. Probably why your friends loved it.”

It was this comment that caused me to think that you are a “snot” – another slang word for somebody who is being imptertinent, presumptuous. It was a derogatory comment made against someone’s friends. These kinds of comments are everywhere by people who tend to indirectly judge often in a negative and sometimes rude manner the judgment, intellect, maturity and sensibilities of those who like a film that they did not. I guess I’ve become a little sick of reading these sorts of comments.

“Slang A person regarded as annoying, arrogant, or impertinent. [Middle English, from Old English gesnot.] snot [snɒt]. n (usually considered vulgar).”

288. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012

Gee, and all these years I thought snot was something that came out of one’s nose!

289. Harry Ballz - January 7, 2012

“It’s green!”

290. Bucky - January 7, 2012

Klingon or Talosian. I’m leaning towards Klingons.

291. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 8, 2012

It’s that as well. Perhaps the slang word is more commonly used here than up your way. “Snotty”, “snooty” and “snobby” are synonyms, more or less.

292. Jack - January 8, 2012

We’ve got to get over this idea that liking Star Trek has some connection to being smarter than everyone else.

I still think Trek’s most powerful ideas are it’s more covert ones — just showing a future where folks generally get along and where science and discovery is a priority and profit’s rarely mentioned is kind of a big deal. I guess they”re not exactly covert, but they’re not hammered home — like some of the clunky allegories/message shows etc. that people seem to think Trek did far more of than it actually did.

What always brought me back was that familiarity with the characters. Yes, there were episodes with interesting ideas — but it wasn’t Faulkner, for Pete’s sake.

293. Jack - January 8, 2012

PS. Totally possible to give us an interesting, new take on a known character to make them different people. Either literally (new people), like BSG. Or, heck — Fringe has done it at least three times now with its main characters. Hell, Trek II did this with all of its mains. And, yeah, Nolan’s Batman movies have done it too, although I”m still worried about this next one.

I’m still hoping for new, though. New doesn’t have to mean Shinzon, Soran or Ru’afo.

294. Cervantes - January 8, 2012

@ 286 Dave

In that case I’d sure prefer a ‘nu-Talosian’ storyline rather than a ‘nu-Klingon’ storyline at this point in ‘nu-TREK’s progress! I want the other buggers out doing some real exploring, and encountering some really strange stuff…

295. I hAte TReK mOvIE - January 8, 2012

Hey Anthony, you suck….I love paperclips…GO MICRO SNAILS

296. Jai - January 8, 2012

Re: #214:

“Is not the character BC is playing meant to be mentored by the older Peter Weller character?”

Hmm. So the Benedict Cumberbatch character is “Darth Vader” to the Peter Weller character’s “Emperor Palpatine”…

JJ & co really weren’t joking about Star Warsifying Star Trek, were they ?

Relax, I’m just kidding and being mischievous ;)

297. VZX - January 8, 2012

283: Not for nothing: but the Cardassians were referenced in Trek 09: Uhura ordered a drink called a “Cardassian” something in the bar. So, it stands to reason that humans were aware of the Cardassians in at that time in the new timeline.

But, yeah, I don’t think the Cardassians will be used at all in these movies. They would be smart to stick to TOS ones only (Klingons, Vulcans, Romulans, Andorians, etc.)

298. Craiger - January 8, 2012

Breaking News!!! Sequel starts shooting this Thursday and will last four months. Abrams also says Cumberbatch isn’t the villian, unless he was just joking?

299. Craiger - January 8, 2012

Sorry I misspelled villain.

300. Basement Blogger - January 8, 2012


Thanks Craiger. It helped clarify why Abrams wants to convert 2D to 3-D rather than shoot in 3-D. I worry for those poor people who will pay a premium for a converted 3-D film.

301. jeannieSpock - January 8, 2012

Someone is playing games with us. Cumberbatch at War Horse premier sworn to secrecy. Hey! I just watched tonight’s ‘Sherlock’ with Benedict Cumberbatch ‘The Hound of the Baskervilles”. Bloody brilliant!!! but did anyone notice the Star Trek references – the lens flares in the laboratory scene – the ‘brewery’ just like the engine room in last ST movie – Watson even referred to Holmes as ‘Spock’ in one scene. I KNOW WHICH VILLAIN CUMBERBATCH WILL BE PLAYING – Who else but ‘Evil Spock’ (from Mirror Mirror). Bet you anything I am right.

302. Harry Ballz - January 8, 2012

Haven’t we had enough alternate timeline/realities for a while?

Now that we’ve established an alternate Trek timeline, one that allows us the pleasure of watching new adventures of TOS, can’t we just enjoy a rip-roaring adventure that actually takes place in THEIR own reality/timeline? It would make for a refreshing change!

303. Bob Tompkins - January 9, 2012

Cumberbatch is certainly not going to be a physical villain, much too foppish. Ergo, we probably won’t see Pine’s Kirk taking an ass- kicking from the villain this time around.
They sure came full circle on Kirk between his last appearance, wherein Soran never once got in a blow to the pitiful fighter he turned into in 2009.

304. Aurore - January 9, 2012

278. Harry Ballz – January 7, 2012
Stop tits?

Well, I……nah, too easy! :>)


….Did you notice how tits…typo of mine was practically INVITING easy jokes? Tits is… “interesting”, wouldn’t you say?Refraining from commenting must have been quite an ordeal for you.

Thank you for sparing me, sir.


Mr. Ballz, I may be mistaken, but, sometimes, it seems to me that you wonder whether people get your meaning. Therefore, regarding your “Chastity remark”, earlier on this thread, I thought I should probably inform you that; I GOT you, BABE!

305. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 11, 2012

Sonny and Cher’s Chastity is no longer Chastity. HE is now CHAZ Salvatore Bono legally, as of 7 May 2010. She/he went through with gender reassignment surgery. There is a documentary about it next week on television here in NZ. Just thought you would like to know…

306. Aurore - January 11, 2012

“Just thought you would like to know…”

Mr. Ballz and I were joking.

Correct me if I’m wrong but I think Bono’s gender transition started several years ago. So, I think many people already knew…


307. Phil - January 11, 2012

@306. Not only is that old news, it’s really, really, really old news.

308. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 11, 2012

So why are you referring to HIM as Chastity? I, for one, had no idea until I read the latest NZ TV guide two days ago. I guess I don’t keep up that much with all the Hollywood/celebrity gossip and gender reassignments.

309. Harry Ballz - January 11, 2012


Aurore, I know you always have my back…..and my front and my behind! :>)

310. Aurore - January 11, 2012

“So why are you referring to HIM as Chastity?”

Within the context of the joke, resorting to the word “Chastity” made sense.
We never referred to anyone specifically as Chastity.

…Except when it came to “my ” character; Chastity M’Benga.

Again, Mr. Ballz and I were joking.

311. Aurore - January 11, 2012

“Aurore, I know you always have my back…..and my front and my behind! :>)”

Hi, Mr. Ballz!
What are you doing here?! GO TO BED!!!!!!!!


(Obviously, I was typing 310, while you were posting!)

312. Harry Ballz - January 12, 2012


Aurore, you’re asking me to GO TO BED??!!

The mind reels!

313. Keachick - rose pinenut - January 12, 2012

Harry, you sure took your time responding…:)

314. Aurore - January 12, 2012

“Aurore, you’re asking me to GO TO BED??!!
The mind reels!”

( Damn! On some matters, always quick on the uptake!!!… Or… was I that obvious???)

Busted! YOU got ME, BABE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


315. Harry Ballz - January 13, 2012


Keachick, I had to consider all of the repercussions to such a cosmic event!


Aurore, I certainly HOPE so! :>)

316. Aurore - January 13, 2012

“Or… was I that obvious???”

I’d say you were… as subtle as a chastity ring. As usual…


317. duke nukem - January 14, 2012

@anthony thomson no klingons there a core race of trek folklore thats like the simsons without homer jay Simpson

318. Jr - January 16, 2012

Are there any French villains in the canon he can play?

319. Aurore - January 16, 2012

A (*NEW*) French *villainess* named “Horror” could be created….
….I could play the part.

I KNOW I could !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


320. Stepanie Lamadrid - June 1, 2012

I needed to create you a little bit of remark to help thank you so much over again with the great pointers you’ve documented on this page. This is really strangely generous of you to give unhampered what exactly a few individuals could possibly have advertised as an e-book to help make some dough for themselves, most importantly given that you could possibly have tried it if you ever decided. These secrets additionally served as the fantastic way to understand that other individuals have a similar zeal the same as my personal own to figure out much more around this issue. I am certain there are lots of more pleasurable situations up front for those who read your website. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.