Major Star Trek Sequel Spoilers | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Major Star Trek Sequel Spoilers April 30, 2012

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

There have been a lot of rumors and spoilers floating around the web in the last few months, including some new ones today. So TrekMovie has checked with sources and can confirm some of these reports as well as adding some new info into the mix. See below for 3 spoilers about the Star Trek sequel but do not click below if you don’t want to spoil the fun (seriously don’t…just for Spoiler-fans). 

 

Star Trek Sequel SPOILERS

Before we start it is important to note that it is still the case that no plot or character information for the Star Trek sequel has been officially confirmed by Paramount or anyone associated with the movie. The following based on reports from other outlets and/or TrekMovie sources. As always, Paramount’s policy is to not comment on what they consider rumors.

 

 

 

 

you have been warned

 

 

 

 

Spoiler 1: Leonard Nimoy returns as Spock Prime

The first spoiler was actually let out of the bag by the actor himself when talking to CNN last week (see video), and now AICN is reporting that Nimoy returning for the sequel. TrekMovie sources have confirmed that Nimoy indeed is back as Spock Prime and he has already completed his work for the film. Spock Prime was last seen at the end of the 2009 movie sending off the new crew of the USS Enterprise, leaving him to help the Vulcans who survived Nero’s destruction of their home planet.

This spoiler comes as somewhat of a surprise, as Nimoy himself had previously indicated that he was happy to let the new cast take the reigns of the franchise forward. But apparently JJ Abrams and crew were able to convince the actor and Star Trek legend to come out of retirement one last time to play Spock. On a historic note, this would be Nimoy’s eighth  appearance in a Star Trek feature film, which will be a record (he and Shatner are now tied with seven movies each).


Leonard Nimoy in the 2009 "Star Trek" – returns for the sequel

UPDATE: Nimoy tweets about talking to JJ

Leonard doesn’t even seem to be trying to keep this one a secret. Here is a tweet he sent out this morning:

 

 

 

 

 

Want more?

 

 

 

 

keep scrolling

 

 

 

 

 

Spoiler 2: Cumberbatch is playing Khan

TrekMovie was first in reporting that Benedict Cumberbatch had joined the Star Trek sequel cast, to play a villain (originally a role offered to Benecio del Toro). A few outlets have also reported (including today’s AICN) that this villain was Trek’s most famous bad guy – the exiled Eugenics War leader Khan Noonien Singh (originally played by Ricardo Montalban). TrekMovie has also confirmed this with a number of sources so we no longer consider it to be a rumor. Khan is back in 2013, however sources indicate that the film is not a rehash of "Space Seed," the original Star Trek episode where Kirk and crew first encounter the genetic superman from the past.

While big news, this is actually not a huge surprise. Trek’s new filmmakers have often cited the Christopher Nolan’s Batman series as their model, with the second film The Dark Knight successfully brining back the Joker and Khan is the closest to Trek gets to Batman’s Joker. And again the team kind of already let the cat out of the bag on this one when they recorded the DVD commentary back in 2009 and said they had considered a post-credits sceene showing the Botany Bay, Khan’s sleeper ship. Then of course there is Abrams widely reported casting process which began with Benecio del Toro and went through a number other prominent Latino (like Montalban) actors before he ended up picking Cumberbatch, after what has been said to be a very powerful audition.


Spy photo of Zachary Quinto as Spock fighting Cumberbatch’s villain – now known to be playing Khan

 

 

 

 

Want more?

 

 

 

 

keep scrolling

 

 

Spoiler 3: Klingons featured in Star Trek sequel

This third spoiler is not something from the new AICN report, but multiple TrekMovie sources have confirmed that the Klingons will be featured in the Star Trek sequel. Of course Klingons were were originally going to be part of the 2009 movie as well – in a subplot where they had captured Nero and his crew after the destruction of the USS Kelvin, however those scenes were cut from the final release (but did appear on the DVD/Blu-ray). TrekMovie sources indicate that this time the Klingons are not a sub-plot that could be easily cut out of the film, so we will finally see the JJ-verse version of Klingons on the big screen.

This spoiler seems to be a no brainer. The Klingons are likely Star Trek’s best known adversary aliens, and they appeared in most of the movies featuring the original cast. The intent was to put them in the last one and fans have been asking for Klingons to make the cut for the sequel.  


Klingons in deleted scene from the 2009 "Star Trek" movie – but they should make the final cut of the 2013 sequel

Sequel production enters final stretch

TrekMovie has also confirmed that the Star Trek sequel has wrapped up shooting on stages and on location in southern califormia. The film remains on schedule with a couple more weeks of shooting on  on location in northern California. 

That’s it for now, stay tuned to TrekMovie for all your Star Trek sequel news.

 

POLL: Spoiler thoughts?

So now that you have been spoiled – what are you thinking? Weigh in below and vote in the poll.

Expect new crew to return for fourth Star Trek film?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

 

Comments

1. Elias Javalis - April 30, 2012

Here we go fellow trekkies!!

Darn, i am excited!!!

2. RedShirtWalking - April 30, 2012

Khan? Seriously?!

*sigh*

3. StephenH - April 30, 2012

1) A little dissappointed they’ve gone for Khan and not an original villan, but still excited to see how Cumberbach is going to re-interpret the character.

2) Great to see Leonard Nimoy back, clearly he’s going to be a wise old master as is were to guide the new crew, but.

3) Klingons back is always great … are they going to be in league with Khan ??

4) When do we get the first teaser.

4. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

are his pecs big enough for Khan?

5. Jimbro - April 30, 2012

Holy crapalapadingdong. Considering we knew basically nothing yesterday, these are some pretty big knowledge bombs!

6. Gabriel Koerner - April 30, 2012

I’d have much preferred if Khan was left alone and they decided to cover new ground.

7. Craig - April 30, 2012

Oh boy… going to be a lot of fans upset over this one! I wonder what Bob was thinking reading all the negative comments about it being a dumb idea if Kahn was in the movie….

8. Quebec - April 30, 2012

holy sh***.

9. crazydaystrom - April 30, 2012

Khan.

Must say I’m disappointed. I still think (hope…pray) it will be a good movie, but for me this is disappointing news.

signed,

One crestfallen crazydaystrom

p.s. – MJ was so right!

10. RedShirtWalking - April 30, 2012

If it’s true and that’s who Cumberbatch is playing, I’d love to see how they get around the whole “Khan is supposed to be a Sikh” thing in the JJ-verse.

11. Craiger - April 30, 2012

I wonder if the Klingons find Khan and the Botany Bay first revive him and his crew. They convience Khan and his crew to help the wage war against the Federation?

12. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

HA HA HA HA HA HA!

OOOOOOHHHHHH………This is so good!

Now. let’s see here, who was right about Khan?

Yours truly, Red Dead Ryan
MJ
Basement Blogger
HatRick

There could be others that I forgot. But it is a small, exclusive club!

Now onto the folks who got it wrong:

Jay
Phil
dmduncan
Captain Neill
Aurore
The Last Vulcan
Sebastien S.

And especially, last but not least, Keachick!

I wonder what she has to say? How’s the crow going to taste now?

MMMMWWWAAAAHHHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

YEEESSSSSSS!

I TOLD YOU SO!

13. Jimbro - April 30, 2012

Also, I wonder if these leaves any room for Brent Spiner as an aging Arik Soong ?

14. The Snob - April 30, 2012

This is the last time I’ll post this image (promise), but this report is really just begging for it..:

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/s320x320/535141_3835491254736_1501602614_3387465_1923117230_n.jpg

15. VZX - April 30, 2012

Can I get my props? I called it months ago. I knew it was Khan.

16. VZX - April 30, 2012

12.: Red Dead Ryan: put VZX on the “right list”

17. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

Klingon finding Khan first would be similar to them finding Nero first in the deleted scenes…

Big news here!!

18. Bill Peters - April 30, 2012

I hope that maybe Khan being woken up has eather something to do with the Vulcans or the Klingons, The Cool News out of this is that Spock Prime is back!

19. WillH85 - April 30, 2012

I’m very disappointed in the writers. Instead of using their imaginations they just reuse an old villain. Shows that, at the end of the day, they’re doing this just for the money and don’t seem to care much what us Trekkies think. First brewery engineering, now this. I guess it’s cool that Nimoy’s coming back, but part of me thinks it’ll lesson the impact of his role in 09. Guess we’ll just have to wait and see. Disappointing, though.

20. The Snob - April 30, 2012

Sorry, this one is bigger… (starting to act and sound like a troll, but I assure you I’m not….)

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/535141_3835491254736_1501602614_3387465_1923117230_n.jpg

21. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

This film is going to be epic!

I’ve been right about a few things.

Such as Khan, summer 2013 release, post-production 3-D conversion.

Of course, I didn’t expect Leonard Nimoy back, but I suspect, neither did the writers and Nimoy himself until the last second!

But, all in all, a pretty good day! Vindication and victory! At last!

22. Dr. Cheis - April 30, 2012

Whew! I was worried I had ruined something for myself when I clicked the article, but this all sounds like info that might be expected to be considered common knowledge by the time the movie is a few weeks from release.

[I wonder what the Klingons will look like...]

23. Scooter - April 30, 2012

Major, major let down. Doubt I will continue keeping up with production news. Might wait and see it on DVD. Seriously disappointed if all this is true.

24. VZX - April 30, 2012

19: I’m disappointed as well, but I will still have an open mind. If it looks cool, I’ll see it. If not, I won’t. I won’t watch it just cuz it’s Star Trek.

OK, now that the Khan topic is settled, how about the title? Can we get confirmation on that?

25. Dr. Cheis - April 30, 2012

I feel like there are probably just as many people excited about the return of Khan as there are people disappointed in it. The complainers will always post with greater frequency.

26. Hankster - April 30, 2012

JJ must be blowing a gasket today. Oh well, it’s hard to keep things secret in this day of the interwebs.

27. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

VXZ, you’re part of the championship club! Congratulations! We’ve earned it!

There are others I am sure, who deserve the props, just as there are others who got it all wrong, but unfortunately, I kind of forgot most of the names in the jubilation of it all!

28. Planet Pandro - April 30, 2012

Khan, Klingons, whatever. Just make it GOOD. It’s not a lack of imagination if they come at this from a totally different angle. I trust that they’ll do something unique w/ the character (and if anyone can pull this off, Benedict Cumberbatch is the guy!!!) and I’ll only be disappointed if it is warmed up space seed leftovers. Looking forward to a new take on Khan!!!!

29. Scooter - April 30, 2012

@24 VZX Title suggestion: Star Trek: The Rehash

30. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

(sings to the tune of “Can You Feel The Love Tonight?”)

“Khan you feel the love tonight?…..It is where we are!”

VXZ=VZX

Sorry about the typo!

31. Martin - April 30, 2012

Perhaps Spock Prime suggests the crew be on the look out for Kahn, in the hopes of capturing him before the Genesis project could get hijacked.

Perhaps Genesis is to be used to terraform a planet for the Vulcan survivors.

The Klingons wanted Genesis before, makes sense they would want it again.

32. Montreal_Paul - April 30, 2012

Extremely disappointed with spoiler #2. I had such high hopes that this team would come up with an original story. It’s now going to be a disappointing rehash story. No matter how good the movie may be shot and written – it will only be seen as a rehash now. I don’t have to see it (but I will see it because I am a Trek fan) to know that it won’t even be in my top 5 Trek movies. Sorry Bob Orci & Trek team… I am disappointed that you could not come up with an original story.

33. Vultan - April 30, 2012

#12

Hey, don’t forget your friend Vultan! I was wrong too!

34. VZX - April 30, 2012

RDR: Thanks, man. While I do not share your enthusiasm over being right, I am glad it is settled. I kinda got tired of debating the Khan topic on here. It is Khan. I don’t like it, but there it is.

BUT: I am excited over the Klingons. I just hope the JJ Klingons are different from the KISS band-like versions from TNG and more like the mustache-twirling versions from TOS.

35. Bobby - April 30, 2012

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

36. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

Khan you dig it?

37. Bill Peters - April 30, 2012

While Khan is kind Disappointing, having Spock Prime and Klingon’s make’s it cooler and I want to know is Richard Daystrom in this next Flim ?

38. cmdrRR - April 30, 2012

Khan. Whatever. I have no idea how many villains there are. There tend to be three when TPTB reallu blow things up. So, I’m still hoping for a chick who’ll scr@w Kirk in more ways than fun.

39. tman - April 30, 2012

Let’s face it, the Klingons were DEFINATELY going to be in this film. There was NO question about it. Burger King ads for the 1st movie even had Klingons in it… If the movies are spaced apart so far HEY, you need to pull in the good baddies.

Regarding Khan, I don’t feel bad about the spoiler — I KNOW after the 1st showing it would be broadcast in bold face type across the world “KHAAAAANNNNNNNNNN” so without digging a hole to live in until my movie seat is available, Idon’t think I could have avoided it.

I think the obvious things in my head would be:
Peter Weller IS a Klingon Captain
and therefore Klingons HAVE the forehead ridges.

40. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

Vultan, no problem!

Oh, yeah, I forgot about Montreal_Paul as well. He was wrong too.

41. Vultan - April 30, 2012

So anyway, let’s see, we got:

Khan: check
Klingons: check
Leonard Nimoy: check

Okay, so it’s “Star Trek’s Greatest Hits: Volume 3″ (Nemesis and Trek ’09 being the first two volumes).

Sad… but can’t say I’m really all that surprised.

42. Dee - lvs moon' surface - April 30, 2012

I voted 10 (Great) … whatever it’s I’m curious to see the version of JJAbrams to Khan and Klingons … although we have seen how will look like Khan/Cumberbatch …

……………All right then… these spoilers did not kill me… I can’t wait to see Star Trek 2 …. or whatever…

………………………..Where’s boborci???…. Hellooo Mr. Orci… are you there?…

;-) :-)

43. windelkin - April 30, 2012

This makes me sad. I put up with the last one botching the timeline, hoping it was just a stunt to get attention, but this is going to far. I guess they are calling it Star Trek 2 as well. I guess nothing is sacred anymore. Maybe Spock can die at the end again too. That’ll be original!

44. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

Wow, where is that rolleyes icon I dropped somewhere. The internet makes disfunctional people, happy in ways Al Gore could never have dreamed of.

45. James Cannon - Runcorn Trekkie UK - April 30, 2012

Khan!? Seriously? I feel like Bob Orci and JJ Abrams have shit all over me…

Thanks a lot.

46. No Khan - April 30, 2012

What Dweebs they are going with Khan! This really really sux! I don’t care what SPIN they put on it. I can’t believe they are rehashing in the second movie already. I guess if its a hit we will have Khan in ST 3 as well. I’m feeling a skip this! They knew they would get extra press if they went for the Media trendy Khan. The real fans don’t want Khan the Media did! Thats all they ever asked about Khan Khan Khan!

47. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - April 30, 2012

Where are all the baboons swearing up and down how dumb we were for saying it would be Khan??

Dopes LOL

48. Bill Peters - April 30, 2012

I have to say none of these Spoilers makes the film a bust, I am going to be seeing it on Opening Night no matter who the Villain is and you know most of you will :)

I want to see JJ take on all this stuff so we can nitpick it after it comes out but don’t judge the film almost a Year before you see it!

49. Vultan - April 30, 2012

The Abrams-verse!
Old action figures, new sandbox.

50. Just Sayin' - April 30, 2012

All the naysayers need to chill…SERIOUSLY. JJ, Bob, the writers and crew did a phenomenal job on the last film. KHAN was/is the villain of all villains. If the above is true, get behind it if you are serious Star Trek fans. It will be good, I am sure. This will not be a reboot of Space Seed, but rather a well-written, action-packed film with a superb cast and the best director and crew. CAN’T WAIT to see it. The folks complaining on this site were not complaining when the original series crew was brought back for the last film, so please don’t complain now.

51. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

Hmmm.

I really wanted to give this team of writers/ directors/ producers the benefit of the doubt. Wasn’t crazy about the story in Trek ’09 – but at least it re-launched franchise – albeit in abrupt and rather ‘convenient’ manner.

But now, we are going to rehash Khan? Unless they changed the story up completely I don’t see how it can work. If they change it up, why bother with Khan at all? why not a new character?

Wasn’t Khan’s revenge fueled by Kirk being responsible for his wife’s death?

Wasn’t the same formula used in Trek ’09 – insert Nero and Spock for Khan and Kirk??

Just not seeing much originality from new team. Which means they may lose the trust of some longtime fans. At least that may be the case with this one. :(

52. Bill Murray - April 30, 2012

Here’s a novel concept dorks. Wait until you see the movie before declaring it to be unoriginal crap. What a bunch of whiny bitches!! If you’re not interested in the movie now then please go cry on another site. This one is called Trek Movie. Hence, we will be looking forward to and discussing the LATEST TREK MOVIE. Meanwhile, you can go watch Spock’s Brain in your mother’s basement for the 8000th time.

53. Montreal_Paul - April 30, 2012

39. Red Dead Ryan

Yes, I was wrong. I had more faith that this team could come up with something a little more original. I can only hope that it is written well and the effects are good. I’m disappointed and am now not looking forward to the movie as much as I was. Oh well. Maybe there will be more hope for the third movie in the series.

54. rogue_alice - April 30, 2012

Yes, excited to see the film. A bit disappointed that Khan is back.

55. Jenna - April 30, 2012

Those of you bummed about Khan, I get it, but, believe me, Cumberbatch can do A N Y T H I N G and be blow your mind awesome so it’ll still be amazing. He is so so good. Did I say he was good?

56. Dee - lvs moon' surface - April 30, 2012

OK… I’m excited…. LOL

I want to see… ” a “deep space” smackdown between Kirk and Khan in space suits”… … WOW I WANT…..

;-) :-)

57. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

For all you naysayers out there, this is really no different than all of the other tent-pole films out there, especially superhero movies. I mean, nobody is complaining about Catwoman being brought back for “The Dark Knight Rises”. In fact, Christopher Nolan has reused all of the villains for his “Batman” movies He just made them fresh, and updated for the current generation. Something that J.J Abrams are going to do with Khan and the Klingons.

Sure, I would have preferred something new, or at least some rarely seen characters, like the Gorn or Tholians, but the writers have to go with what will work on screen, and what will bring in more of the mainstream crowd. Klingons and Khan are highly well known to those who’ve only seen a couple of episodes and movies.

58. Bill Peters - April 30, 2012

I don’t know why fans hate the Idea of a New take on anything in the New Universe, it is not the Original Time line and you do have to say Villains have been used over and over again Successfully and not been Rehashes of old Ideas.

I doubt this is ether a Re-do of Space Seed or at all like Wrath of Khan, Mind you the NEW Batman Series only use 1 Original Character in the hole Series
the Villains in this years have been done before, Catwoman and Bane, they are different takes but the same Characters.

I think they can pull this one off.

59. James Cannon - Runcorn Trekkie UK - April 30, 2012

Major, ,,, Massive DISAPPOINTMENT.

No originality in Hollywood… They created an alternative timeline so they could use the same stories….

Never have I been so angry in all my 30 years of watching Trek.

The Popcorn Brigade have won. As long as it rakes in money, WE dont care about YOU the fans.

I only hope that the PRIME Universe comes back on TV at some point.

Bob Orci… You better hide!!!

60. Horatio - April 30, 2012

All I can say is that if Bob Orci and company F this up they will never live it down.

Ever.

Just ask Rick Berman and Brannon Braga.

61. Yob Benami - April 30, 2012

Sad that they couldn’t come up with an original alien for our crew to deal with. Rehashing old characters is NOT very creative. Makes me worry for the future of Star Trek.

62. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

49-

c’mon man – you can’t lump the two together like that. There are planty of stories to tell with the TOS crew. The Khan story has run it’s course.

Apples and Oranges…

63. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

*plenty

64. Gracian - April 30, 2012

Khan?

*sighs*

Why haven’t they just worked on a new idea? I know bringing one character doesn’t mean doing the same plot again, but COME ON, JJ & CIA!!! I hoped you were a little more, I don’t know, imaginative…

65. La Reyne d'Epee - April 30, 2012

Oh no. Not Khan. I’m bored already.

66. Frederick - April 30, 2012

Guess we’re in for a remake of “Space Seed,” then.

67. mr. trek77 - April 30, 2012

then you could wonder what role our (very ) hot miss eve is going to be???

Either carol or a ´´miss khan´´ ????

I hope that the klingons will good guys and not the predictable bad guys…., but a kind of good and bad guys…..

But i look forward to it, very much .

68. La Reyne d'Epee - April 30, 2012

The only mitigating thing is Cumberbatch.

69. Magic_Al - April 30, 2012

With Spock Prime in, obviously his foreknowledge of the intentions and capabilities of the Botany Bay sleepers must be dealt with in a logical way. A Temporal Prime Directive shouldn’t keep him quiet because this timeline is already far too different for silence to have a predictable (and therefore logically defensible) outcome. Spock Prime’s knowledge would prevent a repeat of Space Seed because he can preempt any mystery about Khan’s identity and recommend adequate security precautions. Perhaps when the movie opens we’ll learn that Khan was already intercepted and incarcerated because of Spock Prime, between movies, giving Starfleet a memoir of hazards that took his Enterprise by surprise over the years. Spock Prime cannot restore the original timeline, but doing what he can to make sure this timeline’s Enterprise and crew are not destroyed by things that otherwise would not have destroyed them would, logically, be the best he could do.

70. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

We know that the sequel can’t be a remake of “The Wrath Of Khan”, since Kirk and Khan are only meeting for the first time in the sequel and Kirk hasn’t dealt with him yet. The article states that it isn’t a remake of “Space Seed” either, well possibly except for the part when the Enterprise first encounters Khan. Even then, Khan might be discovered by the Klingons first.

So it appears to be an original story featuring classic villains. Can’t wait.

I just wish some of the naysayers would be more open-minded.

Man, May 2013 just can’t come soon enough!

71. No Khan - April 30, 2012

Red Dead Ryan it didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out if they were going with Del Toro then they were going Khan! Some of us where hoping we would be heard loud enough that they would decide on some other storyline! I guess they are not here for the fans they are making this film for themselves. I bet they all bail after this movie hit or not. JJ will not direct another one Khan is why he came back!

72. DeBeckster - April 30, 2012

Slightly bummed about the Khan news, but my curiosity about how Cumberbatch plays it overrides the bummerness. . .

73. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

Yes, Red Dead Ryan (@12) and MJ. We were right. We concluded that Cumberbatch is Khan. We would continually present the evidence such as the search for a Hispanic actor, Cumberbatch was a superhuman, black hair, Cumberbatch had to work out, etc. and some of you Trkekkers gave us a hard time .

If you read the threads on this site, RDR, MJ and myself don’t agree on some things. But on this issue, we reached the same conclusion. Just goes to show you, look at the evidence logically and different people can come to one conclusion.

74. VOODOO - April 30, 2012

Isn’t this in a sense a no win scenario?

Why would they want to go into direct competition with the memory of the best Star Trek film TWOK? Can they do Khan better than Space Seed and TWOK?

I’m sure they will do a good job, but I for one didn’t want to see Khan…That said a flashback to Khan in his prime and an in depth presentation of the eugenics war could be interesting.

On a more positive note, I am thrilled Leonard Nimoy is back. I hope they can find a way to sneak Shatner into this one.

75. crazydaystrom - April 30, 2012

It is possible that after these forty-plus years Star Trek may have lost me. ‘Going where several have gone before…’, rather bold of them, wouldn’t you say? :-(

The movie COULD very well be fine Trek but as it is right now I feel let down.

76. ST:EXP - April 30, 2012

Wow. These kind of comments make me happy and sad simultaneously that social media online exists.

Great that it allows for self expression. Great that it helps point out what uninsightful douchebags forum posters can be.

And sad for the same reasons.

You know the goddamned movie is going to be good.

Khan appeared in a single movie from THIRTY YEARS ago.

He was a great character. So why wouldn’t they explore a different variation of the character.

The loud-mouths here who are personally attacking the producer’s creativity then by their logic should also be upset that any of the cast are also in this movie.

I mean, why use Captain Kirk? He was already in a whole bunch of movies, right?

In fact, why make another Star Trek movie. There have already been a bunch, right?

Great logic.

Khan was a character in a massively successful sci-fi film from a VERY long time ago.

It would seem to me that it would make great sense to re-introduce the proven character to a new generation of movie-goers as well as re-invigorate the story for the existing overweight fanbase.

I almost wish all these spoilers will turn out to be totally fake as a complete misdirection.

In fact, there’s a good chance it is.

77. boborci - April 30, 2012

Can confirm or deny nothing.

78. Brevard - April 30, 2012

Well, I will say that the movie makers have lost their minds. I was a huge fan of ST 2009, but sheesh, if this Kahn thing is really true, then I am beyond disappointed. What a joke. Probably won’t see this one, afterall and I was looking forward to it.

79. Roobydoo - April 30, 2012

I’m genuinely curious — how did fans react when they first heard that Nolan was resurrecting The Joker for The Dark Knight? That one turned out fairly well.

80. pris - April 30, 2012

YES!!! KHHHAAAAAAAAAAANNNNN!!!!

God, how the hell am I ever going to wait until next year for this?

81. Tombo1984 - April 30, 2012

Craiger i’d prefer it if they found Khan in a Klingon Battlecruiser or beefy bird of prey.

Khan is looking for something unbelievably destructive to try and conquer Earth or destroy a colony and Kirk is instructed to get him.

One thing has to be for sure though. They can’t kill Khan and all his followers at the end…

82. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

51-

dude chill.

we can have an opinion. just like you can – even if it is wrong. ;)

we can speak our mind as we wish. this is a great medium to do that. don’t be so draconian.

to quote your buddy Chevy,

“This isn’t Russia. Is this Russia? This isn’t Russia.”

83. VZX - April 30, 2012

Bob, how about a title?

84. La Reyne d'Epee - April 30, 2012

76. Better not be Khan then…

85. Gracian - April 30, 2012

Well, then I know what will happen!!!

Star Trek 13: the crew journey will be to ressurect Spock!Quinto who will logically die to save the crew at the end of Star Trek 12.

Star Trek 14: the crew will have to go back in time to rescue two extinct cowfish and save the day.

Star Trek 15: Captain Kirk is climbing a mountain. Why is he climbing a mountain?

Boring.

86. Josh - April 30, 2012

darn. I was hoping they wouldn’t go for something as easy as Khan. I assume Spock is going to tell them NOT to leave him on Citi Alpha V this time…

87. VZX - April 30, 2012

BTW: I just realized Man of Steel features a re-hash of General Zod from the 1980 Superman II. Now, this Star Trek 2(12) has Khan like the 1982 ST:Wrath of Khan.

Man of Steel comes out June 14, 2013 while ST 2(12) comes out May 17, 2013. Looks like next year will be the Return of the 80s Villains.

88. noleknight - April 30, 2012

We need to call some of you a waaaaaaaambulance! Seriously, you’re shitting all over the story before you even know it. And for those of you who say it’s not going to be original…that’s just asinine. It will be an original story…it’s just putting a new twist in the new universe. I predict y’all are going to eat some crow when this movie ends up being much better than the last one.

89. cmdrRR - April 30, 2012

Bob Orci, feeling good about the shoot?

Also… can you at least tell us when we might get a title?

90. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

86-

80s villains? sweet.

gimme Lo Pan!

91. Jason Spriggs - April 30, 2012

So Spock prime is to become the Obi Wan Kenobi of the ‘Trek Wars JJverse” perhaps…

92. Tombo1984 - April 30, 2012

Sorry forgot to mention. Khan needs to kill the Klingon crew and capture the ship.

Klingon ship vs Enterprise…

93. denny cranium - April 30, 2012

Anyone reading the comic books shouldn’t be surprised by this Khan reboot.
They are retelling classic eps with different twists to them.
This is the alternate universe and it makes sense that Khan is out there on Botany Bay.
I’m personally excited about this. I’ve posted several times here I’ve wanted to see a human villain (albeit engineeered) to test Kirk and crew. Hopefully they take the theme of TWOK and test the crew past their limits they will hit the mark once again.
It does look like Khan is testing Spock in the leaked pics and I hope Kirk comes to his rescue. We do not need to see Spock die again. Quinto or Nimoy. Now that the cat is out of the bag please give us some real shots from the production.

94. Bill Murray - April 30, 2012

Why is it that so many Trekkies cannot spell Khan correctly? K-H-A-N!!!!

95. Planet Pandro - April 30, 2012

It will be interesting to see how they will approach the Khan backstory…anything pre-Nero’s incursion is still unaltered, unfiltered prime timeline, so Khan’s backstory should remain intact: his rise to power in the 1990′s, the launch of the Botany Bay, the gold mesh sleeper suits, etc. Heck, the LOOK of the B.B. (in and out) by these standards CAN’T BE CHANGED. Will these issues be dealt with in a credible manner?

#69: “Original story with classic villains”

EXACTLY!

96. robnhud - April 30, 2012

@ boborci ::ShakesFist:: damn you! LOL

97. La Reyne d'Epee - April 30, 2012

87. *wails* But I want new stuff! *whimper*

98. VZX - April 30, 2012

89: I just hope that Spock Prime does not die onscreen. I would not ever want to see that, no matter how epic they make it look.

99. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

I like the Trek Ongoing series of comics, but I think that’s where a major classic villain should be re-examined. Wouldn’t mind if Khan was just the teaser of this film though.

100. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#72.

Agreed!

#70.

No Khan. Time for a new name. And yeah, I’m kind of glad they aren’t making these movies strictly for the fans, because I’ve seen a lot of closed-mindedness here. I mean, for frak’s sakes, Khan had only been seen TWICE before, yet the same people who are against Khan were hoping for the Klingons, who have been seen countless times in every series and most of the movies. Those people should be at least half-happy about the sequel. They may not have wanted Khan, but at least they got Klingons.

#76.

We don’t need you to. I (and a few others here) had figured it was Khan for a long time now. I mean, you guys couldn’t stop talking about him whenever someone asked you all about Trek. Some of us were too smart. Kind of like Khan himself! :-D

101. Tombo1984 - April 30, 2012

Makes sense to have Spock Prime in this as he knows what Khan is trully about…

102. Jonathan - April 30, 2012

I’m looking forward to Spock prime seeing Khan again; it was Khan’s actions that resulted in Spock’s death! (Before being brought back to life)

103. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

@ 76

Bob Orci, that comment would make you a great politician. :-) Good to hear from you and hope everything is well.

104. VZX - April 30, 2012

98. Heh. Yours is the superiour intellect.

105. Bart - April 30, 2012

So disappointed… what happened to ‘explore strange new worlds, to seek out new lifeforms and new civilizations, to boldly go where no one has gone before?

This sounds more like to explore know old movies, to seek out the same villains, to go where everyone has gone before…

106. VZX - April 30, 2012

@96 (yes, myself)

I mean I would not ever want to see that “again.”

107. Judy R - April 30, 2012

Honestly, as far as I’m concerned Benedict Cumberbatch can do no wrong. I know he’s a villain but I loved Khan in the original ‘space seed’ and can’t wait to see Ben’s interpretation of him. I’m also thrilled that Spock will be back and played by Leonard Nimoy. As for the Klingon’s…what Star Trek without them.

108. Endeavour Crew - April 30, 2012

76. Of course you can’t.

It’s interesting- a while back a poster who claimed to be part of the production crew swore up and down that villain #1 would be played by Kahn AND that Alice Eve would be the Borg Queen.

Of course everyone denounced him saying he was a sham and teasing us etc,etc,etc…..

Now that the first part of his claim appears to be true I wonder about the second part?

Thoughts everyone?

Do you want to see the Borg in a non-prime TOS universe?

I for one think it would be exciting- as long as it’s done “right”. And isn’t that always the case- as long as it’s done “right’?

109. naseweis - April 30, 2012

I’m disappointed about Khan.
Come on, show some imagination! This is just wasting a great opportunity to explore things the original movies couldn’t.
You blew up Vulcan and NOW you go for fan favourites (Nimoy, Khan, Klingons)?
This is becoming a comparison disaster.
I can only hope the third part doesn’t have whales or Praxis blowing up…

110. Bart - April 30, 2012

PS even Voyager had more original stories than this no-brainer…

111. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

98-

please make sure to point out in every post that you already knew it was Khan.

k? thx.

112. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 30, 2012

OK. So sorry I spoiled all of this “News” in 2010 when it occurred to me what Star Fleet would do with all of the Future knowledge Spock Prime would bring on board the E.

I predict this will be a very fast Trek with many, many of the original TOS characters. If I am correct, then the writers have penned a movie that will be a joy to all TOS fanatics with a favorite episode or character in any of the three TOS seasons.

Confidence is high!

113. DeflectorDishGuy - April 30, 2012

*sigh*

Star Trek used to be a beacon of adventure and originality…

now, the best we can hope for is to copy off Batman?

114. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

Also, I don’t know how crow tastes, but judging by some of the asinine comments on this thread, it can’t be very good. I just hope none of you have come down with a case of bird flu. :-)

I’m also still waiting for Keachick’s comments/apology……

115. Roobydoo - April 30, 2012

There be wails here!

116. WillH85 - April 30, 2012

#93.

I don’t think that anything pre-Nero has to be exactly the same. There’s so much that doesn’t match in the last movie with the normal time line that it would be feasible that Nero not only went back in time but also into a different reality as well. If they went with this idea they could make some changes to it.

117. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

109. thank you. Maturity, it is a difficult concept.

118. DeflectorDishGuy - April 30, 2012

@107

Agreed. Wouldn’t be surprised if the whales are needed to defeat Locutus and the Borg while Janeway comes riding in on horseback from Veridian 3 with Species 8472 to save us all while the Prophets sit back and watch…

Its official, Star Trek: The Rehash is in full effect…

Next.

119. Matt Wright - April 30, 2012

Khan’s legacy has already intertwined in an indirect way with the Klingons in the ENT arc of the Augment genetics mutating Klingon foreheads into smooth ones. I wonder if any of what happened in ENT with the Augments and/or the Klingons will be mentioned?

Also while Khan was the predictable bad guy, I’m interested to see Cumberbatch’s take on it.

I’m also very happy that we get to see the new version of the Klingons, I really liked what I saw in the deleted scenes from ST 2009.

Not sure how Spock Prime really fits in now that we’ve gotten the plot device(s) of ST 2009 to get all the characters in place on the Enterprise over with, hopefully it’s just a cameo showing his efforts to rebuild the Vulcan race.

120. LodownX - April 30, 2012

Khan? ughh. oh well… they got my money anyway…. might as well re-hash that and take the easy path… maybe in III we can search for spock again Too. hoo ray.

121. Tombo1984 - April 30, 2012

boborci… ‘If’ you are going to have Khan in this movie please can you have a remix of the James Horner Star Trek from The Wrath of Khan?

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE!!!!

122. samesq - April 30, 2012

Son of a . . . .

123. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

I hope 112 is like 10 years old, otherwise I am just embarrassed for him/her.

124. Josh - April 30, 2012

#108 – I’ve been hoping that a possible 3rd movie would be Kirk vs. the Borg. I’ve always wanted to see that

125. Boozba - April 30, 2012

i call bullshit on khan! it may be can related (joachim)but no khan in the movie.i think orci-abrams-lindelof aren’t that dumb!!!

126. RenderedToast - April 30, 2012

I’m pretty surprised by the first two points, entirely unsurprised by the third.

Bringing back Spock Prime makes perfect sense but, again, is surprising just based on what Nimoy has said since the last one came out, and I too hope we don’t have to watch him die, unless it’s simply of old age. I hope Nimoy genuinely retires after this one though – his last performance should always have been as Spock and the more he fake-retires the more likely it becomes that his final work is in some crappy sitcom or X-Files wannabe.

I had hoped Khan would be left alone, mostly because his back-story doesn’t make sense anymore, and without some time shenanigans to explain how vast swathes of the Earth had this single ruler in the 1990s without anyone knowing about it (isn’t Khan supposed to have ruled about 1/3rd of the globe according to canon?) its just going to sound stupid… but you also can’t contradict it because there’s no reason for that back-story to have changed.

The first film did such a good job of just cutting away the stuff that doesn’t work from the old franchise by simply skipping over it – seems a shame to dive head first back into old canon immediately.

127. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

125 – matter has anti-matter, are you proposing anti-spoilers! I like it.

128. Crusade2267 - April 30, 2012

Deep down, I knew it was Khan, despite trying to convince myself otherwise. I’m just really disappointed they chose to go that way. Because Khan as he was is perfect, and there are so many other Classic Trek villains that could use some fleshing out and could develop into a fantastic film villain.

As much as I love Leonard Nimoy, this tidbit actually worries me for two reasons. 1: Having Nimoy in the 2009 film made it very obvious to me that Zachary Quinto is not the original Spock. None of the other actors are their originals either, but I didn’t find myself comparing nearly as much, and I didn’t really like the comparison, because it left me thinking that Nimoy was Spock and Quinto was trying to be Spock. Quinto needs his space to grow into Spock without the constant comparison to how Nimoy would have done it. 2: The whole cast needs an opportunity to make Star Trek their own. Cameos from past Treks are a staple of launching a new Trek, but once the first installment is done, the new crew needs to stand on its own.

What gives me the most hope is that there is a significant role for the Klingons, who did not appear in Space Seed. That to me is a certainty that the story will be new.

129. Matt Wright - April 30, 2012

@113 and 118 — DeflectorDishGuy yeah I agree with ya.

I was cautiously optimistic for ST ’09 and got a bit burnt from it. But somehow I just keep putting my self back out there for more… I’m back to being cautiously optimistic that the sequel will do better…. We’ll see. But one thing is for sure, the ST we grew up with is a very different beast than what’s developing now :-/

130. Nick Cook - April 30, 2012

To be honest, I’m kinda disappointed to hear Khan is in it. Ah well, wait and see I guess.

131. drumvan - April 30, 2012

here’s my guess on the plot, kahn somehow infiltrates star fleet and is seen as a “good guy” by the current crew, especially spock quinto. an allie. maybe even a fellow officer. he’s eventually discovered by spock prime as a future enemy. inner conflict ensues between spock prime and young spock pitting the 2 against each other.

on a lighter note, maybe nimoy gets to utter the line “i avenge thee” for the death of, well himself.

132. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

Showing imagination isn’t just about coming up with a wholly new idea (which, if you think about it, is nearly impossible since new ideas often include older ideas, whether intentional or not) but also being able to take an existing idea and putting a unique spin on it, either to modernize it, or to add new perspective. For example, the makers of the iPad were clearly inspired by Trek’s PADD, but they needed their imaginations to create it, to make it possible, to make it function. They needed a plan, a vision, even though the device existed in the fictional future. Imagination is the bridge between reality and fiction. Imagination is also a ladder, a way for creative minds to step upward and reach for the sky, metaphorically speaking.

Conversely, just pulling something out of thin air isn’t necessarily proof of imagination. I could come up with a square wheel, but really, what is the point of that, other than to prove to people I can come up with something?

133. FrustratedTrekkie - April 30, 2012

The idea of creating an alternate universe was to allow the franchise to present new stories and situations that hadn’t been encountered before. Instead of something new in the next movie we’re instead getting a new take on a villain established in TOS and used to perfection in Star Trek II.

Disappointing. I really wanted a new standalone Star Trek story.

134. Michelle - April 30, 2012

Deeply disappointed

135. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

I am disappointed that Khan is appearing again or so we are told. I note that Bob Orci says he “can confirm or deny nothing”. It is really a matter of odds – there was always a chance that the writers might include Khan in the sequel just as there was always a chance that they might include any other bad boy character from the TOS series in this and the next movie.

Why don’t we get photos of any of the other cast, only ones of Quinto/Spock? What about Pine/Kirk, Urban/McCoy and/or anyone else? Anyone would think that the movie will totally revolve around the two Spocks, now that it seems that Leonard Nimoy will make a second appearance in this movie series… I am so khanned/spocked out. Give ‘em a rest. Show us someone else, anybody else, for goodness sake.

136. Jamziz - April 30, 2012

Zero surprises here.

The Khan angle was virtually confirmed with the casting news that was making it rounds around the internet – del toro, etc. The leaked set photos of a “failed vulcan neck pinch” cemented those rumours regarding the character.

All the major studios have taken some serious notes in light of the successes enjoyed by the Batman Reboots – Paramount is no different. Given the formula used by JJ and crowd to piece together “new” story, its no surprise that Khan (the most iconic villain in Trek history aka greatest marketing potential) was chosen.

Problem for me though is the fact that Eric Bana’s Nero was so heavily based off Khan this may seem redundant. I know regardless of the quality of the writing, Cumberbatch is going to bring that character to life, he’s a phenomenal actor. Bana’s character was too one dimensional, not enough for him to work with as an actor – all he could do was “emulate” that Khan feel.

I don’t know what JJ and crowds contractual obligations were like, but I wish Paramount took a hint from from the performance of MI4 vs MI3 and brought on a new creative team to tackle this project, let JJ rest comfortably in the producers chair. MI4′s 93% RT score and far superior box office returns vs MI3′s soft 70% RT score and significantly lower than expected box office returns should have been evidence enough. Wouldn’t mind seeing Brad Bird helm this franchise…

137. Sybok'sSecretBrother - April 30, 2012

I thought Crumberbatch was playing Sybok…

I am so disappointed…

;p

138. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

If Spock Prime saves the day, or his presence in the film is supposed to come as a dramatic surprise, this spoiler could be VERY spoilery.

139. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - April 30, 2012

Spock Prime is back!!! Yeaaaah!

I’m so excited, and I just can’t hide it… *taps foot*

BUT, I had to select “cautiously optimistic” because there was no mention of what’s happening with my favorites – Spock and Uhura. Are they making it? Will there at least be an engagement announcement or acknowledgement? An inquiring mind would like to know, but on to the recent news:

1. Did I say YEAAAAH!!! Mr. Nimoy’s Spock Prime is back. I’m so happy. I don’t think he’ll impose much on the film or the new cast if anybody’s worried. These are their journeys and I’m sure that Spock Prime will likely just be there for a follow-up on the Vulcan Colony building for the most part. I’m just so happy. Thanks to all that were able to make this happen. THANK YOU! :-)

2. Okay, well, I would have preferred that he play an original villain, but I’m not complaining. As Meatloat would say, “Two out of three ain’t baaaad…” For some reason I’ve got a bunch of songs on my mind. Anyway, this might work out well, so I’ll just wait and see.

3. Aaaand another YEAAAAAH!!!! I love Klingons, and I hope we find out something about how they end up looking like Worf and Martok instead of how they started out looking when Kirk and crew first encountered them. Even if we don’t, I’m still happy about having the Klingons.

So right now, I’m just worried about what’s going on with my favorite Star Trek couple. Oh, wouldn’t it be lovely if they got a love scene where Spock could have his shirt of – or he could just have his shirt off without it being a love scene for some reason… Since wishes have lately been coming true, I hope the Star Trek fairy grants this one. Please, please give a girl some eye-candy to go along with her popcorn in the theater. One can only hope…

But still, Spock and Spock. I’m so happy. *starts to tap foot again”

Star trekkin’ with my two favorite allies. Fully loaded we’ve got snacks and supplies…

:-) :-) :-)

140. La Reyne d'Epee - April 30, 2012

I’m going to adopt the Orci “it’s all a conspiracy” tack and assume that everything we’ve seen so far has been faked up and fed to us to send us all off the scent.

*in denial*

141. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

On the topic of the Eugenics Wars, it really gets to me how some people claim it can’t be canon because it didn’t happen in real life, or that they can’t use Khan because it didn’t happen and canon would have to be changed.

Nobody is crying about the fact that Edith Keeler didn’t actually exist in the 1930′s. We know she didn’t. The Trek universe is NOT our own. It is fictional.

And oh, yeah,

danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow was also wrong about Khan.

142. Bearded Riker - April 30, 2012

Thoughts on the news.

1) Nimoy being in the sequel: This is fine for me. Nimoy said that he was retiring from acting, at least for major commitments like movies, after 2009′s Star Trek and I think he thought the movie was going to be his final Star Trek appearance. If you see the video of him saying goodbye to the crew then you can clearly see him not be able to keep his emotions in check. However, I’m sure that with the movie’s massive success and with the crew imploring him to return, he felt it’d be great to do another movie. I’m thinking his role will most likely be much less involved than in the first movie. Just please have him in a meaningful role.

2) Benedict Cumberbatch as Khan: I’m very hesitant about this, mostly because Khan is such a legendary figure for the franchise and in pop culture in general. The fact that Khan will be in the sequel means that it has to live up to what the original one was. It also brings up the possibility that Khan’s character could be changed and therefore ruined. Ricardo Montalban’s performance has him considered as one of the greatest movie villains of all time and obviously the best Star Trek villain. This means Cumberbatch, the writers, and Abrams have a lot to prove in including Khan, not to mention having the same villain as what is considered by most to be the best Star Trek movie. I honestly hope they do a great job and live up to the growing and astronomical height that will be coming. I guess I’m a bit disappointed that they decided to go with Khan instead of trying something new, but if they do a good job then it might be worth it.

At least Khan will be an obviously better villain than Nero was. I never bought into Nero’s character.

3) Klingons! This is only good news to me.

143. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

135, there are Pine photos as of yesterday take a look!

http://www.x17online.com/gallery/view_gallery.php?gallery=2012/04/ZacharyQuintoST042712_X17

144. La Reyne d'Epee - April 30, 2012

Like a meta form of viral marketing…

145. Bart - April 30, 2012

STAR TREK: THE REHASH. They’ll probably take this as the title since their originality is… ehh… there is none?

146. Lord Garth, Formerly of Izar - April 30, 2012

Wow

You chimps are a sorry lot

Cumberbatch is a fabulous actor. Amazing. His sherlock apes the great Jeremy Brett perfectly , even the voice, with his own manic modern spin on the role. Now for those of you who don’t watch nor read anything non Trek related, Jeremy Brett is regarded as defining the role of Sherlock Holmes. Before his health problems (at a relatively early age) he was Holmes. It was said no one could come close to donning his stalker hat. Well Cumber did and does. That’s why I have every faith in him to pull this off.
He has the build, he has the presence, he has the genius manic charisma

I am more confident he can be Khan that i am still in Pine becomng Kirk and not Han Solo Jr. (as he clearly was in the first film)
We have seen Quinto nail Spock. We have Nimoy. Hopefully Pine will have some more Shatner in him this time out and less Harrison Ford.

I am stoked. A few of us including Bailey called Khan a year ago so we want cookies and milk

Stop your bitching. If it fails we can pile on Orci later. I have faith and am very excited

147. Guiseppi - April 30, 2012

How come nobody complains that Abrams and crew are still using kirk and spock or klingons or the enterprise. All those haters are not true star trek fans. I’m a 40 yr old ST purist and I love the new movie and look forwrd to many more, regardless of whos in it. The eugenics storyline is so essential to ST continuity … U cant throw everything out in the name of a new universe (not to mention everything prior to George Kirks death has remained the same……some of which is continuing on unencumbered somewhere in the universe) …its disrespectful to all thats come before. Keep it guys and look forward to another amazing ride.

148. Andrew - April 30, 2012

So if Nimoy can film a part without anyone knowing, couldn’t Bill Shatner?

Yeah, I said it!

149. Adolescent Nightmare - April 30, 2012

My victory is complete!!!!!!! And so you get yet another

Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaannnnnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!

Do you think future generations will acknowledge my greatness?

150. none - April 30, 2012

LIES

LIES

LIES

I hope its a lie…I dont want KHAN

its like trying to do a new Voldemort or Darth Vader.

This new KHAN will always be veiwed as inferior to the original and this could hurt the film.

THIS IS A HUGE MISTAKE

URGH

151. CJS - April 30, 2012

Don’t buy it. If Cumberbatch is playing Khan, then to paraphrase Comic Book Guy: Worst. Casting. Ever. All of character’s attributes and the movies connection to Khan can be as easily explained by making him another of Khan’s shipmates.

152. Shamelord - April 30, 2012

The director is good. The writers are good. So – as I am a Star Trek kind of optimist – I still hold hope they can make a masterpiece out of these clearly unoriginal ideas.

Yeah… I grind my teeth but I hope it won’t end up a waste of a film…

153. Jeyl - April 30, 2012

See? I’m ok with this. As I said in the past, it doesn’t matter who the villain is even if it did turn out to be Khan. Even if Khan is in this movie, it wouldn’t play out the same as it did in the previous Treks. I hope he’s not just a bad guy who needs to die because you did get a sense from the original Khan that he wasn’t really a bad guy. He just wanted to start his own world away from those who didn’t see things his way. As the conversation went….

Scotty: There were no massacres under his rule.
Spock: And very little freedom.
McCoy: No war until he was attacked.
Spock: Gentlemen….
*All laughing*
Kirk: Mr. Spock, you misunderstand us. We can be against him and admire him all at the same time.
Spock: Illogical.
Kirk: Totally.

No massacres, no war. He just wanted to rule his own. What happened to him in TWOK was just a bad case of living in hell for 15 straight years thanks to Kirk.

154. NuFan - April 30, 2012

148

Uh, any moron had it figured out.

155. Trekmandave - April 30, 2012

Excited and interested in seeing how this turns out, but I want to say

1. Where’s the Shat

2. Khhhhaaaaannnnnn

156. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

153 :) looks like ‘all the’ morons had it figured out

157. Adolescent Nightmare - April 30, 2012

153.

Not these morons.

158. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

I am Very Excited about Nimoy back in as Prime Spock. A Little Disapointed that Khan will be there. But. This could still be a very good thing. Can’t wait till next year.

159. LizardGirl - April 30, 2012

Yesss! Finally some meat to chew on! Wow I was-am stunned. So Ben IS gonna be Khan eh? Will it be a more liberal interpretation? I like how the article compares Khan to Joker and the old the new. Because I’m a fan of the Dark Knight and Heath was amazing as Joker and very different from his predecessor. So maybe this Khan could be something like that? Can’t wait!

And I will love seeing Leonard again!

But what really has my gears turning is the appearance of Klingons in this movie. How will they do that exactly. Which version of this species will they go with? Technically they should go with the Klingons introduced in TOS… I’m so glad a swung by here today! Thank you trekmovie.com I love youuuu!

160. CmdrR - April 30, 2012

Wow. Just look at all the exploded nerd heads in here.

161. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

Boom!

162. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

You people who continue to dismiss the mounting evidence of Benedict Cumberbatch playing Khan remind me of Neville Chamberlain convincing himself that Adolf Hitler wasn’t a bad guy.

163. Ciaran - April 30, 2012

Khan? Ugh. Seriously disappointed in this. Should’ve left Khan well alone and did something a little more original than that. I don’t care about the whole “not a re-envisioning of Space Seed”, they just shouldn’t be using the character at all. He was completely perfect in the other “Star Trek II”. Can’t actually believe I’m going to see a new movie called “Star Trek 2″ and it’s got Khan in it, but not in the good way.

Am I pleased that Leonard Nimoy is in it? Yes and no. Yes, I’m happy to see Spock Prime again because, come on, it’s Leonard Nimoy. But at the same time, I wish the writers and producers would give this new cast the movie they deserve and not to have any ties to the original show in terms of casting or stories. Let them have a movie all by themselves. This is now quite obvious that either the studio or the producers & writers (or both) don’t have enough confidence in the (fantastic) group of actors they have assembled to take on the mantles of the original cast.

If I were to guess that any other TOS actor to grace the cameras of this film, it would’ve been William Shatner himself.

And am I pleased there’s gonna be Klingons in the new film?
HELLS YEAH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

164. govna - April 30, 2012

Even more so than the INCLUSION of Khan. I question the CASTING of Cumberbatch as Khan.

I’ve never seen him act in a lead…but my concern is actually not his acting…but his look. He seems too “geeky” to be Khan. And frankly, he seems to “white” to be Khan.

Isnt Khan supposed to be middle-eastern? Indian? I wonder if they even considered casting a middle-eastern actor for the roll?

Faran Tahir was fantastic as Capt. Robau in 2009.

I hope Cumberbatch delivers big! But, right now, I’m having trouble “suspending my disbelief ” with him filling such an established look and role.

165. Casual fan - April 30, 2012

Man, we Trek fans are so weird. Who could ever imagine Spiderman without the Goblin? Or Batman without the Joker? Or Superman without Luthor? The truth about heroes, is that they are at their best when facing off against their arch enemies. Yet, for some reason, we want to continue a long line of “original villains” in Trek that we always and inevitably compare to Khan.

The reason all other villains have always fallen flat is for this simple reason: each hero really only has two or three stories. Everything else is just filler!

I think Orci, Lindelof, Abrams have chosen very wisely. Smart move! Revisit the biggest story in original series lore. I can’t wait.

166. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

149-

they did do another Vader. it failed miserably. See Ep. 1,2,3…

yes i know it was a younger version. just sayin that tampering with iconic villians is risky.

Nolan and co. pulled off a pretty impressive feat. i liked his joker much better than the ’89 model.

no disrespect but not sure if these guys have the chops to redo Khan.

but i may be leaning toward the conspircay theorists – this could be a front. if so, folks like Right Said Fred Dead Head Ryan might wanna tone it down a bit.

just sayin…

;P

167. VZX - April 30, 2012

159. Pot, meet kettle.

168. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

161 – wow you are a joke.

169. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

Ok. I also thought he might be Khan. I was hoping for someone else but as they say. Cel A Ve.

170. NuFan - April 30, 2012

156

They knew. They were just being trekkies. Denial plays a big role in a trekkie’s life.

171. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

For the Klingon’s I think they will being in Kor, Kang and Koloth. Also would not be surprised to see a Young Col Worf and don’t be surprised to see a Young Kruge and maybe Maltz.

172. Endeavour Crew - April 30, 2012

Excuse me.

I meant 77…..

Of course you cant, Bob.

Am I the only one on here who remembers back last year a poster who claimed to be part of production commenting that Villain #1 would indeed be Kahn and that villain #2 would be……………………

the Borg Queen, played by Alice Eve?

173. Dennis - April 30, 2012

Kh-a-a-a-a-a-a-n!

174. VZX - April 30, 2012

170, So, you think Peter Weller could be Kang?

175. summoner2100 - April 30, 2012

So, Benedict is Kahn? Hmm, for me that was confirmed when the pic was leaked – but nice to have confirmation.

If Kahn is in this one, what’s going to happen in the next? Will they go searching for Spock’s body? :\

But in all seriousness, I only have one question. If they are rehashing Kahn as the bad guy, then WHY THE HELL did the script take so long?! Surely, they knew this to begin with?

176. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

Oh Bob Orci. Come out Come out where ever you are!

177. 221b - April 30, 2012

Wow. I’m pretty disappointed. Why not something completely new?

178. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

Title to the new Movie.
Star Trek. Khan!

179. The Chad - April 30, 2012

As I’ve said before, as movies they are good entertainment, but they ain’t Star Trek to me.

This news has really disappointed me. It’s bad enough that Hollywood survives on about 75% rehash….kinda sucks that it’s happening to my favorite franchise. It will probably make a lot of money, but it just hasn’t been for me. I guess Spock prime will be around to warn the crew of all the impending dangers in their universe. Kinda cheapens it for me.

But I’ll see what the trailer holds and decide if this will entice me into the theater or be a rental.

180. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

I wonder if we will hear Pine Kirk say.KHANnnnnnn!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

181. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

It says a lot about the remaining naysayers and anti-Khan crowd when one of the most vehement anti-J.J people around, Jeyl, states that she is fine with Khan as the villain.

182. CaptainDonovin - April 30, 2012

I’ve been hoping Khan wouldn’t be the baddie & that it would be Kang or Kor. Now that we know please make this a good movie.

183. MartianRogue - April 30, 2012

Nimoy = AWESOME

Klingons = I’m there with bells on.

Khan = I shake my head in frustration, but little surprise.

I would love to know their reasoning for Khan, I suspect they’ll say something along the lines of “iconic” and “general audience”.

184. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

Why would they ‘have’ to dye BC’s hair, if that was going to be the only thing to make him more Khan like? Why not leave it natural, now he won’t look like himself, or Khan. Weird choice.

185. Scottamer - April 30, 2012

Wow! I am unbelievably disappointed by this. Don’t get me wrong. This could still be a great movie. But after all the script delays on this project, we get Khan? The Star Trek universe offers literally any avenue for an original story. It can take place in any time with any kind of planet or aliens. It can recreate or reimagine characters and themes from 79 television episodes. Or it can abandon all of these and do something completely new. It can even explore some new ideas introduced in the previous movie such as a destroyed Vulcan home world or a character that knows many of the key events that could take place in the future.

While I enjoyed The Wrath of Khan when it came out back in 1982, to suggest that Khan is the best villain in Star Trek is ridiculous. Actually, I have always thought that Khan was a rather weak villain. In the TV episode (Space Seed) Khan is really only ever able to achieve any of his goals through deceit of people who trusted him. His supposedly superior strength and intellect were actually no match for the Enterprise crew once they knew that he was deceiving them. In fact, he is outsmarted and beaten in a man-to-man fight by Kirk alone. Not really a very impressive villain. In the movie, he is also easily defeated even when he has the Enterprise at a grave disadvantage. Khan works because of a bravado performance by Ricardo Montalban and that is fine. But to suggest that he is the greatest villain or even a major element in the Star Trek universe is overstated. He is, however, probably the best know Star Trek villain especially among casual fans or non-fans.

I am profoundly disappointed that the best that the JJ Abrams team could come up with was to take a key character from the second Star Trek movie to anchor their own second movie. One would hope that the continuing adventures of the Enterprise crew would takes some themes or lessons from the classic 79 TV episodes instead of the movies which are just alright at best in the grand scheme of Star Trek. This is clearly an appeal to the lowest common denominator of Star Trek fans. I only hope that they can pull this off. Hopefully they will be a little more bold with the third film and not go the route of whales or lightsabers to fill theatre seats.

186. Tony Hardy - April 30, 2012

If these spoilers are correct, then I’m looking forward to it because they’ll do a hell of a job! However……….has anyone considered that these spoilers could be a well established plan of misdirection?

187. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

Star Trek. The Khan Misdirection!.

188. Gonzo - April 30, 2012

Khan is the greatest Trek villain of all time. This is gonna be awesome!!

buried alive….buried alive…..

189. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#165, #167.

Sheesh, I happen to be right and you two start lobbing insults at me. You guys ought to visit the doctor and get a check-up, I think you’ve come down with bird flu from the crow you’ve been eating! :-)

190. Adolescent Nightmare - April 30, 2012

Khaaaaaaaaanfirmed!!!!!!!!!

191. Adolescent Nightmare - April 30, 2012

Khaaaaaaaaanfirmed!!!!!!!!!

192. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

I’m deeply disappointed.

A real failure of imagination from the ‘creative team’ behind the wonderful ST09. It sounds like they couldn’t think of anything new (with a whole new universe!) and just whipped up a $200 million remake of the Khan story with some Search for Spock –style Klingons thrown in. All that setup creating the alternate reality of a new universe just to have a big bloated remake. Wow.

And I’m sorry, but Cumberbatch’s casting as Khan looks like a bad joke to me. And we also have Budgineering back. This just reeks of bad decision making all around. A calculated money maker based solely on past successes with almost NO thought to the possibilities that were opened up with the last film.

And no, I’ll honestly admit; I did NOT think it was going to be Khan because I tried to have faith in the imagination of the creative team. Now, I approach this sequel with more of a sense of apprehension than excitement.

Oh well; at least there’s Ridley Scott’s “Prometheus” to look forward to…..

193. Jenna - April 30, 2012

146. You are 100% right. People need to have faith. And perhaps they need to go watch Cumberbatch in a few things, then they’ll be reassured. I would bet no one here who’s feeling negative (if it’s true) has any clue how phenomenal he is. One of the most versatile, powerful, expressive (and yes, magnetic) actors many of us have ever seen.

194. Gonzo - April 30, 2012

lol @nerd rage over Khan

“Khan?? so disappointed!, no originality, I’m not gonna watch this, is that all they could come up with??? etc…”

Idiot Nerdos! Same ones who were crying over Heath Ledger as the Joker in BTDK “Heath is a fail actor; Brokeback Joker, I’m not watching this crap etc…”

Shaddap and either watch or don’t watch the next Trek film.

Geeks…..

195. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

189 – Copernicus called, the Universe does not revolve around you….

Guessing about something that was really a 50% 50% chance makes you… nothing. You are acting bizarrely immature.

196. Phil - April 30, 2012

Well, it is what it is. And if it’s going to work Benedict Cumberbatch is going to have to channel up his best “Heath Ledger is Joker” performance to pull this off, otherwise this film is going to spiral off into cartoonish parody faster then you can say “Galaxy Quest”….

197. With Fans Like These - April 30, 2012

I KNEW IT!!!!

I KNEW IT ALL ALONG!!!!

“KHAAAAAAAAAN!!!!!!!!!!!”

~Eat it, haters!~

WOOOO HOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

STOKED!!!!

198. Jenna - April 30, 2012

184. He dyes his hair for almost everything he does. Maybe red-haired men aren’t viewed to be as appealing (or scary in this case) as others…?

199. Dom - April 30, 2012

The hardcore might be upset, but, to the mainstream public, ‘alt-universe Star Trek II’ has the most famous Trek villain at his prime up against the TOS characters in their prime. It’s a dead cert draw for the punters. I admit I’m surprised that they’ve gone for Khan so soon: I expected Khan for the third film. Still, STII: TWOK had Khan as a ruined, vengeful man while the new film has Khan at his most arrogant. Can’t wait to see what happens!

200. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

195-

right?

there’s an ancient Vulcan saying…

“Act like you’ve been there before.”

201. Shamelord - April 30, 2012

… which looks like a killer.

202. Guy from Berlin - April 30, 2012

What “creativity” !!! KHAN IS BACK !!! :-(

203. Stuart Baird - April 30, 2012

Star Trek 2: The Rehash of Khan.

And you guys thought my film was bad…..

204. Shamelord - April 30, 2012

192.

205. VZX - April 30, 2012

@196: “Galaxy Quest”. Good point. Well, Pine, Quinto and the rest managed to avoid parody quite well in the 2009 movie. Here’s hoping Cumby does as well.

BTW: Galaxy Quest is my favorite Star Trek movie.

206. Bobby - April 30, 2012

I think its interesting that JJ and company vociferously denied rumors of Khan not so long ago.

Or did I completely dream that?

Didn’t JJ originally say there was going to be a well-known antagonist from the original series in the movie, and that it was NOT going to be Khan? (After which people started guessing things like “Harry Mudd” and “Trelayne.”)

Does anyone else remember this?

207. Beyond Spock - April 30, 2012

Didn’t I say so in January, when the movie started shooting? ;) http://www.flickr.com/photos/beyondspock/6658504073/ or http://www.beyondspock.de/whats_new/whats_new_2012_january.php

208. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

@ 192

We got into a big debate over this. And I used the evidence to show it was Khan. Reading your post, might I say you let your emotions get the best of you. If I might be Vulcan here, if we use logic, all the evidence pointed to Khan ;–) By the way, I’m wasn’t rooting for Khan. I just looked at the search for a Hispanic actor which you dismissed as politically incorrect, the black hair, superhuman strength, etc. and concluded it was Khan.

209. Harry Ballz - April 30, 2012

Abrams seems to suffer from one really bad character flaw…….

when the majority of people say, “don’t do X!” Abrams seems to always take it as a personal challenge, with the response, “HEY! I’M GOING TO DO “X”! AND I’M GOING TO DO IT BETTER THAN YOU COULD EVER IMAGINE!”

Khan? Really??

(yawn)

210. Max - April 30, 2012

I’m good with it. When the reset the original series, they put Khan back in the Botony Bay. They really do have a responsibility to address that. It makes sense.

211. NuFan - April 30, 2012

Jay and Phil are going to be soooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo embarassed.

212. CAPT KRUNCH - April 30, 2012

He is a pasty Khan, isn’t he…..With all the Indian actors out there….????.
You think SHAT is pissed, or really doesn’t care anymore??

213. Thomas - April 30, 2012

Some people may be disappointed with the choice of re-visiting Khan, but the way I see it, is it really any more of a rehash than a theatrical group choosing to perform a pre-existing play rather than writing one of their own? It’s not what material they choose to do, but rather what they do with it. Two different groups could stage the same material and come up with radically different productions, because of different performers/directors and the different creative choices they would make. The single biggest mistake this company could make would be to slavishly remake Space Seed or WOK; that is, take the material and fail to do anything remarkable or new with it.

214. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

ok. i’m going to do it.

i’m going to say it boldly.

It’s NOT Khan!

(do i get to be all giddy and in your face and rub-your-nose-it-in-y when i’m proved right? someone please say yes…)

215. P Technobabble - April 30, 2012

Certainly cool news that Leonard Nimoy is in the next film — who could argue about that one?
Well, I was amongst those who didn’t want to see Khan as the villain, but I also said that if the writers decided to go with Khan I’d go along for the ride. They must have something up their sleeve, don’t ya think? I’m willing to bet they know what they’re doing.

216. Phil - April 30, 2012

@211. Dissapointed, actually.

217. Azrael - April 30, 2012

Personally I am completely unaffected by this news. I am not disappointed or stoked, any more than I already was. Do I think they will do a good job? Yes I do. Do I think they “couldn’t come up with anything else”? No I do not. I also believe that for JJ to even be willing to consider doing a Khan story it has got to be something very different from any other Khan story (including the Eugenics Wars novels). I expect to spend as much time on the edge of my seat as I did at the last one, and I expect to enjoy it just as much.

218. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 185
Scottamer ~

110% agree with you.
I had a similar mini-rant (post # 192). At least “Prometheus” looks promising. But hearing that the ‘new’ ST is falling back on Klingons and Khan is really a sad day for imagination IMO. As I’ve said, I’m now looking to the movie with trepidation rather than excitement. After “Cowboys and Aliens”, I shouldn’t have been surprised. That was one of the worst films I saw last year (next to “Green Lantern”).

# 203

Amen to that; “The Rehash of Khan.” Sad, because it’s probably true….

219. Jenna - April 30, 2012

213. Thomas- Good point, but in this case I think it would be even easier to be original because it doesn’t have to be the “same play”, i.e same story, at all. It can be a completely original story and it could be potentially done amazingly well, we have no idea yet. It just happens to have a character that’s been seen before and whose basic history we know. That’s all.

220. Dilithium_doublebock - April 30, 2012

Krap.
I was wrong.

221. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

210-

the new crew has a responsibilty to find the Botany Bay floating in space and photon torpedo the s**t out of it….

222. Trekfan - April 30, 2012

Interesting, although only half true. Khan is in the movie, but more as a Cameo, nothing big. Cumberbatch is not Khan.

223. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#195.

“Guessing about something that was really a 50% 50% chance makes you…nothing.”

Dude, if you’ve been paying attention (which I highly doubt) then you’d know me, MJ, and Basement Blogger have laid down the facts why the villain is Khan. We were only a few that got it right. For you to suggest that I was merely guessing at a 50% chance of being right when most of everybody else on this site was wrong and try to dismiss my correct theories reeks of denial, and possibly jealousy.

“You are acting bizarrely immature.”

You mean, like you? LOL! Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

224. Johnny - April 30, 2012

You guys should all be ashamed to call yourselves Star Trek fans. What in the world is wrong with Khan being in the movie? These movies are a REBOOT of the Original Series — so naturally you’d want to include the best villain that that era saw. It’s virtually the same thing as The Dark Knight — not only did they include The Joker — but they did it BETTER than any previous incarnation. Why couldn’t this sequel to the same?

I for one, would be disappointed if they went with an “original” villain. Simply because Star Trek is already full of EXCELLENT ones to choose from. Why go with someone new when you KNOW that Khan is floating around in space somewhere? Going with a new character at this point would be silly and generic.

No one has ANY idea what the story will be. Did everyone miss the part of the article that says it’s NOT a “rehash” of “Space Seed”? Give the writers the benefit of the doubt, here. They did a phenomenal job with ST09, so I trust that they’ll do the same with the sequel. No one has a clue how they’ll utilize Khan, or the Klingons, do they? I didn’t think so. Reserve judgment until you SEE THE DAMN MOVIE!!!

Lastly, IF (I repeat “IF” this news is true), I’m extremely disappointed that trekmovie is reporting it. Considering J.J. Abram’s penchant for secrecy… you’re doing him and his film a disservice by reporting on such major spoilers. In this day and age, it’s so refreshing to know SO LITTLE about a movie before going in. Why ruin the fun by spoiling a deliberately secretive movie? Boo.

225. RedShirtWalking - April 30, 2012

Cumberbatch doesn’t even look remotely anything like a Sikh named Khan Noonien Singh.

226. Anthony Lewis - April 30, 2012

LOVE that people think that just because they use a familiar character that it means they can’t do a NEW story with that character.

We should crap on the team for doing this movie with Kirk and Spock as well. We saw them in the last movie, give us a new crew and a new original story every single time.

Same goes for if you guys make a TV, every episode has to be different people, it’s going to get stale if we have the same people all the time.

Granted Khan was only in ONE Tv episode in the 60′s and ONE film in the 80′s but this is way too much exposure for this character, clearly every story that can be told about him have surely already been told in these two appearances spanning all of three hours.

227. The Professor - April 30, 2012

I am curious but skeptical.
I would have preferred something completely original with respect to the villain.

228. Mike Thompson UK - April 30, 2012

Fantastic News about Leonard, well done. Made my day.

229. John Broughton - April 30, 2012

Excited to hear that Leonard Nimoy will reprise his role; however, disappointed to hear about the villian – would have preferred an original, new character.

230. Marc - April 30, 2012

Why can’t they invite Shatner to reprise Kirk if they can convince Nimoy to unretire again?

231. Jenna - April 30, 2012

226. “..clearly every story that can be told about him have surely already been told in these two appearances spanning all of three hours.”

Love it. Well said. Yeah, must be a rehash… Give these writers some credit, people.

232. CraigM - April 30, 2012

Was hoping they’d go with a new villain instead of bringing back an old one, but I’m not really surprised. Hopefully they can make it exciting and interesting.

233. Azrael - April 30, 2012

@225. He doesn’t need to, Khan isn’t genetically an Indian Sihk, it is just a name.

234. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#222.

Did you bother reading the article, or the #2 headline?

“Cumberbatch will be playing Khan”

“TrekMovie has also confirmed this with a number of sources so we no longer consider it to be a rumour.”

There you have it, folks. Done. No more arguing about it. The major piece of evidence has been provided.

235. sunfell - April 30, 2012

Well, that explains Leonard’s longer ‘Spock bangs” he sported at the Enterprise event last week.

I’m chuffed. More Spock!

236. Gary Makin - April 30, 2012

Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Khan Again?

I don’t see how Cumberbatch can be playing Khan. Then again, I just watched Prince of Persia, where Jake Gyllenhaal plays a Persian with a south London accent, so…

237. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

#143 – thanks for those photos. Is that a script in his hands? He looks like he is deep in thought and/or just trying to memorise lines.

So do the Abrams team envision a rather grey 23rd century for this alternate Star Trek universe? I hope not. I like colour… Then again, Chris Pine does make grey and black look good…very nice. I’m getting used to his fairer hair. I wonder if he will keep it fair once he finishes working on the movie. It’s always an option. It does suit him, not that his natural darker hair colour didn’t… I can’t help it. I just love the way Chris looks!

238. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@Anthony Lewis — “We should crap on the team for doing this movie with Kirk and Spock as well. We saw them in the last movie, give us a new crew and a new original story every single time.”

Exactly. This is a REBOOT of an EXISTING FRANCHISE, people. If they were going for “originality” they would have made a sci-fi film not called “Star Trek! It’s the writers JOBS to make Star Trek recognizable… so it is only natural that they’d use characters that exist in the universe that has been established. Creating a new villain results in a character who could be the generic villain in ANY other sci-fi film. We sort of saw this with ST09. As good as Eric Bana was… he really was playing a random generic part. And it fell flat just a *tiny* bit because of this.

Using an established villain will make for a stronger film… trust me.

239. RedShirtWalking - April 30, 2012

@233: He’s identified in “Space Seed” by McGivers as probably being from Northern India and possibly a Sikh. His painting in her quarters tends to lend credence to that, as well.

Cumberbatch doesn’t look like Khan unless they’re reinventing Khan from the ground up.

240. Derf - April 30, 2012

Are we sure they didn’t mean ‘Chaka Khan’? :)

241. El Chup - April 30, 2012

I have very, very mixed feelings and reservation about all this.

I have stated many times that the next sequel should harness the morality play that TOS did so well. I don’t see how Khan is representative of that. Furthermore:-

1) Why does Khan look totally different from Montalban when he orginates from before the timelines split?

2) Why do we need a villan cheaply rehashed? Why could we not have had something new and original?

3) Why is Nimoy returning? Don’t get me wrong, for an old TOS fan, Nimoy will be the only reason I will be going to see the picture, but isn’t it about time that Quinto is allowed to step out of Nimoy’s shadow?

All in all, this sounds like cheap gimmicky writing from hacks. It’s completely going for the easy option and further messing around with pre-Narada canon. But then, what else is to be expected from people who are responsible for efforts like Revenge of the Fallen.

*sigh*. I fear that on the date this picture comes out I will find more enjoyment out of a re-run of some of the classic TOS episodes, rather than this action, wham-bam unoriginal schlock.

I guess my Star Trek is dead.

242. Michael Hall - April 30, 2012

Well, I would have preferred the originality of a franchise tentpole summer blockbuster with no villain at all. . .

243. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

234- has to be true right? otherwise you may look a tad bit foolish no?

231 – give them some credit based on…?

they’re rediculous plot device to thrust Kirk into the chair unbelievably early with the original crew conveniently by his side?

the cinematic genius that is Cowboys vs. Aliens?

Hawaii Five-O?

244. Azrael - April 30, 2012

@239. And that was in the old timeline, which has no validity here. Plus McGivers was a dumba$$ who couldn’t tell a mexican from an Indian, and probably couldn’t have correctly distinguished a North American Indian from either of the other examples.

245. BRT - April 30, 2012

Not interested in Khan again. Bad move. Rebooting was supposed to provide fresh opportunities.

246. VZX - April 30, 2012

I wonder if Cumby will play Khan with a British accent or some other accent.

247. Hat Rick - April 30, 2012

Interesting comment, Red Dead Ryan (12).

I look forward to this movie.

Obviously it’s not going to be a straight rehash of TWOK, since the Klingons are involved. But the fact that Khan is involved will generate a lot of interest in the mainstream press.

It appears that Spock Prime’s role may have been to warn about Khan. Or, at least, that it includes warning about Khan.

248. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@245 — Uh… no… rebooting provides the opportunity to retell previous material from the franchise. Hence the word “reboot”. What are you people expecting. If they were making an “original” movie they wouldn’t have made it with Kirk, Spock, and crew.

This is virtually the same exact scenario as Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies. I don’t see ANYONE complaining that they went with The Joker in the second film. I repeat. How is this ANY different?

249. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#243.

I was predicting Khan LONG before it was confirmed. Sure, I knew there was a chance I could be wrong, but as it turned out, I was right. And Anthony has proven on numerous occasions to do his homework in confirming rumours.

250. pass the Tranya - April 30, 2012

238 – Eric Bana’s shallow character falls directly into the lap of the writers. more reason why i am losing faith. if they are so good, can they not create a new villian with some depth??

251. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

Khan can go either way, up for interpretation. He could very well have been a genetic superman designed after an existing western scientist and then found his way to asia to rule.

Or he could simply have the title as Khan and be one of the original Khan’s followers..who knows….I don’t care as long as the film rocks.

252. Tarkov2000 - April 30, 2012

How long until they use the “Shakespearean characters and plots have been recast and re-imagined for centuries” excuse?

I’d buy that one more than the ridiculous “Khan is Trek’s Joker” argument. As if everything about anything these days boils down to Dark Knight or Star Wars comparisons…

Nothing can live in the shadow of Montalban and that role… mentally, it will be in the front of everyone’s mind while watching this film… even if you have no problem with a re-boot. Why go up against that? Why even dare to tread over the best rather than offering fans something new.

It’s amazing how many of H’wood’s top writers gain so much traction riffing on other people’s original ideas as opposed to dreaming up new ones.

253. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@248 Who, other than fans, have every referred to the alternate reality as a reboot?

As far as I am concerned, we have been told many times by JJ & co that the reason for the alternate timeline was to free them from the constraints of previous characters and stories. With this in mind, to immediately go for Treks most famous, and most well done, solo villan reeks of laziness and lack of imagination.

One thing is for sure, like the new movies are inferior to TOS itself, their Khan won’t be a patch on Montalban’s. You cannot rehash perfection and do better…..and I say that despite the fact that I think Cumberbatch is a very accomplished actor.

Christ, I’d rather have Nero back than have Khan ruined.

254. Azrael - April 30, 2012

For the record RDR, I wasn’t wrong or right, I acknowledged the evidence pointing to Khan but did not believe it was the only possible interpretation. On the other side I was very assertive that Cumberbach’s ethnicity should/would not bar him from playing Khan.

255. TrekTech - April 30, 2012

Meh. completely unenthusiastic. I admire Cumberbatch as an actor but not as Khan…not even remotely. Im also seriously disappointed that the writers and JJ went this route. Its a reboot within a reboot. If youre going to reboot a classic show as dramatically as they did with Trek 09 then REBOOT IT and do something original. This just shows the well is runnning dry. The Khan story was told. Garth of Izar wouldve been a much more interesting choice. A charismatic character with a backstory that couldve been fascinating and still had the impact of a Khan like megalomaniac. Really feel they missed a golden opportunity here and took the lazy way out. The fact that the Bud plant is once again engineering shows to e that in conjunction with the vocal negativity against revamping Khan that they think they know better then we do. I resent that thought process. The lower decks sets were a freaking joke and yet here they are again too. Also, I love Nimoy but this also smacks of pandering and I agree with another poster. If the role is Quintos now why do they feel the need to keep bringing back Nimoy. The two Spocks thing was an awkward contrivance at best to begin with; an excuse to use Nimoy to ‘sell’ the reboot to the classic fans. No Khan do. Meh.

256. Troubled Tribble - April 30, 2012

Lazy – VERY very lazy! So disappointed to read this. What’s the damned point in going to the trouble of rebooting Trek, if you’re re-using old villains?!! I’d hoped this was just a rumour until now. Absolute selling out!

So much for Strange NEW worlds and NEW civisations, to boldly go where no man has gone before…..!

The first film was no masterpiece, but it had set all the pieces up for a potentially great new era of adventures with our original crew. So much for that idea! RIP Nu-Trek…

257. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#248.

“This is virtually the same exact scenario as Christopher Nolan’s Batman movies. I don’t see ANYONE complaining that they went with the Joker in the second film. I repeat. How is this ANY different?”

You and I are on the same page, bro. Other people, unfortunately, have a problem seeing it as it is and try to split hairs to support their own erroneous arguements. They’ll say “Yeah, but the Joker was Batman’s arch nemesis, while Khan was just another villain of the week who only returned in the movies because Nick Meyer was a fan of “Space Seed” “. Nonsense like that unfortunately overrules reasoned thinking.

258. Troubled Tribble - April 30, 2012

P.S. I bet they’ll kill of Spock Prime (again) to mirror what happened in Wrath of Khan… and that’ll be ‘the big scene’…..

259. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Why not offer something new?

BECAUSE THIS IS STAR TREK!

Anything “new” isn’t Star Trek. It’s just generic sci-fi. I don’t care how much depth a “new” villain could have — he would still have less relevance in the Star Trek universe than Khan would.

And yes… the Khan vs. Joker argument is valid. We’re talking about the two highest quality recent film reboots here. If you’re going to bother to “revive” the Batman films… then you’re obviously going to include The Joker. If you’re going to “revive” Star Trek… you’re obviously going to include Klingons and Khan. This is Star Trek, people. You need to use Star Trek elements in a Star Trek movie.

260. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

I bet Bob Orci is sitting in his chair having a good laugh at all of us.

261. boborci - April 30, 2012

260. No,no. I am commiserating.

262. RedShirtWalking - April 30, 2012

It’s just going to look awfully…silly…to have an Anglo playing a character named Khan Noonien Singh. That’s all I’m saying.

He doesn’t *look* the part.

263. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 259

You obviously haven’t got a damned clue what Star Trek is,or what Roddenberry’s humanist ideals were all about.

What don’t you comprehend about “boldly going where no man has gone before”?

264. Orly - April 30, 2012

Cumberbatch is going to incredible. Excited.

265. Guy from Berlin - April 30, 2012

A human/alien villian why at all ?

266. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

Hey, leave off calling people morons etc. Some were right – congratulations! and some of us were wrong. That was always going to be the outcome.

I am cautiously optimistic about the film – I’ve had a nervous excitement right from the start before I even saw the first film in this series.

It comes as no surprise that the Klingons would turn up in the sequel somewhere – no big deal. After all, they were very much part of the TOS universe. This alternate universe is already a bit different, but I doubt there will be a lot of difference in major matters, like who one of the main alien species will be.

267. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 260 Only if he is extremely arrogant should he be. To make such bad decisions as bringing Khan back he’d better hope that his script is a writing masterpiece to overcome the shadow of Montalban.

After the schlock that are his Transformers movies, Cowboys and Aliens and the likes of The Island (average dumb popcorn rubbish at it’s best) I have no faith this this is going to be regarded as equal to or better than TWOK, or, indeed, Space Seed.

268. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

I look forward to next May. If the sequel is a smash success, I’ll be very much coming back on this site and seeing how many people who claimed that the movie was going to suck will either be eating their words or continuing being in denial, trying to justify their dislike of J.J Abrams’ Trek films.

That will be interesting.

269. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@259

“You obviously haven’t got a damned clue what Star Trek is,or what Roddenberry’s humanist ideals were all about. ”

Uh… yes… I do. But this is a rebooted film franchise, remember. It needs to SELL. You need to use familiar elements from the Star Trek brand, for that reason. Because it’s a blockbuster movie… you need to bring out the best you have to offer. The best Star Trek has to offer, is Khan (and Klingons, to a lesser extent).

I’m all for “going where no man has gone before”… but that and all of Roddenberry’s other ideas will work FAR BETTER on TELEVISION. On TV, you can take the story in so many new and different directions… but for movies that come out once every 3-4 years… that’s not what people going to see a Star Trek film want.

270. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 261 That almost sounds as if you were against the decision..

271. Vultan - April 30, 2012

If some insist on comparing Star Trek to Batman and the Joker, then the Klingons were the recurring thorn in Kirk’s side. Khan was a baddie of the week. A good one, yes, who deserved a big screen continuation of his story. And nothing more.

272. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 268 A smash success means nothing.

Many movies are smash box office hits these days, but are forgettable after a year or two. The reason Star Trek has survived so long with a discerning bunch of fans is because it was that little bit different from the rest. Once it becomes mindless popcorn fare it just fades into the mass of everything else.

If the picture is good and carries with it a TOS style message I will give it credit where credit is due. But if it’s just action nonsense with no originality then I don’t care how many mainstream cinema goers like it, many of the long term fans (myself one of 35 years) will be left underwhelmed.

273. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 269

Sorry mate, but I just can’t agree. The most successful box office Trek of the TOS era was The Voyage Home. Guess what that had in it? No bad guy of the week, no rehashed stories from TOS and a morality story. Hell, even TWOK contained morality play issues. Trek 09 didn’t at all, and that’s why I am still luke warm on it.

It’s nonsense to you can’t tell a true Trek style story on screen. It’s also nonsense to say you can’t have an original villaim or other threat.

274. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Just to defend Bob Orci here… the original “Transformers” film had as strong a script as I would expect for Transformers. Now the second film is not their fault. They went on Writer’s Strike, and Michael Bay entered production with nothing but a 13 page outline. Ehren Kruger is more responsible for the Transformers 1 and 2 scripts than Orci and Kurtzman are.

Furthermore, Cowboys and Aliens simply suffered from “too many cooks in the kitchen.” Orci and Kurtzman were only two out of a large group of writers who worked on that film. The film had no idea what it wanted to be, on any level — producers, writers, director, etc.

Look at the difference between these scripts and the one that Orci and Kurtzman worked on solo: ST09. That film was the perfect “re-introduction” to the Original characters, and balanced the human and action moments perfectly. It’s not often you get to see a sci-fi movie with great action and great humanity these days — but Orci and Kurtzman got it. And now that they’ve re-introduced the universe… they can explore deeper and more meaningful Star Trek themes in the sequel.

275. ST Redux - April 30, 2012

Cumberbatch has dark hair, like Montaban’s Khan.

However, this is NOT Khan.

I’d wager Khan has died in the crash landing of the Botany Bay. This is Joachim, or another survivor, who took charge.

Btw, after Star Trek 2009, I posted my plot ideas. Funny how some of them may be happening. In those same posts, I waivered my rights to them.

Hope the script is awesome regardless of what was theorized/proposed.

276. MJ - April 30, 2012

I AM WAITING FOR THE APOLOGIES TO START ROLLING IN ???

Red Dead Ryan, Basement Blogger and I stood nearly along in this precution.

I told you all it was Khan, based on the evidence and clues, and 90% of you, led by Keachick and many others, lambasted us for that prediction.

YOU STAND CORRECTED!

Heeeeyaaaa! To be proven conclusively right after taking so much fracking abuse on these boards is my personal internet-posting equivlelant of winning the Superbowl!!!

Those of you who lambasted us — time fo face up and admit you are wrong. You all know who you are!

Lesson learned to you doubters — next time I make a major Trek prediction, don’t be so quick to dismiss it. I am extremely good and taking limited information and then making predictions which usually turn out ot be right.

WOW — am I now a Trekmovie.com legend, or what? THIS FEELS GREAT! :-)

277. Vultan - April 30, 2012

#272

Yep. I recall Tranformers 2 making lots and lots of money.
Just saying. Same writers and all….

And then there’s Cowboys and Aliens….

278. RedShirtWalking - April 30, 2012

I thought the first JJ movie was great.

I’ve got reservations about Cumberbatch as Khan if, in fact, he really IS Khan. I understand that Trekmovie has sources they can’t name, but there is no official Studio release yet, nor has anyone else on the Supreme Court been willing to confirm.

It’s either true or it’s misinformation. I’m worried for the former, but I’m hoping for the latter.

279. Johnny - April 30, 2012

*Correction for my above post ^^^ — Ehren Kruger is more responsible for the Transformers 2 and 3 scripts”.*

280. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#272.

A smash success can mean something that is both financially and critically successful. i. e., “The Dark Knight”. Yeah, the crappy “Transformers” movies made a ton of money, but nobody calls them “smash successes”.

281. Troubled Tribble - April 30, 2012

185: “I am profoundly disappointed that the best that the JJ Abrams team could come up with was to take a key character from the second Star Trek movie to anchor their own second movie.”

Beautifully put, and absolutely right. I was looking forward to proper Trek, Roddenberry’s STAR TREK (look up the word Trek, some of you…!). Also disappointed Nimoy is in it again – what about giving the new cast a chance to evolve without references to the past? I love and respect Mr Nimoy more than words can say, but I realy do think this is yet another example of ‘how can we milk this framchise further’ I know Khan and Spock Prime and a few Klingons too! Lazyyyy.

Star Trek The Motion Picture, and Star Trek IV both attempted (and largely succeeded) in steering Trek back towards thought-provoking Science-Fiction stories (not the Science Fantasy/Western of Star Wars). As good as Wrath of Khan was, I feel it created an unnecessary burden on future Treks to all feature some villain that needed conquering, rather than something properly alien and interesting in nature.

I really do think Gene Roddenberry if he were still with us would be appalled by this news about Nu-Trek II. I have no doubts at all about Cumberbatch’s acting (he’s one of the best!) but the should have gone with a different character entirely to create a NEW & memorable guy for this new era of Trek. Too many ties to the past being mined instead…

282. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

Seriously? Thowing fits over this? At least wait until you know what the film is about or see the film on release to throw these sort of uber fan temper tantrums.

Part of the reboot idea is to spin new stories based on old adversaries and ideas. I for one applaud the idea to reimagine a great villian with a new story and a new Trek film that looks great and does not feel half assed, unlike Final Frontier/Generations/Insurrection/Nemesis/Voyager/Enterprise.

Keep in mind that these films have to be made not only for us fans, but for the general movie audience, with the goal of bringing in new fans (and a bit more money)…if the film does well with the public, then we will get more films and possibly another TV show. That means bringing out original series villians that the general audience is familiar with..and Khan is the most famous “individual” badguy well known to even those outside the Trek fandom.

Give it a chance, and hold the horses. Reserve judgement until the film premiers. It’s goofy and lame to whine about such things without knowing the whole story.

283. NuFan - April 30, 2012

276

There were lots of us.

284. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 274 This is the sequel….and you are saying that Khan is top notch and deep and meaningful should be left to the tv shows.

Now you say they can be in the next movie. Which is it to be?

I will be able to just about tolerate Khan if there is a good morality play in the movie. The jury is still out on that one. I just cringe when I see (presumabely young) fans like you declaring that rehashed villians are definition of what a Star Trek story needs to be. It’s just not what Roddenberry set out to do.

Ultimately only time will tell and we shall have to see what we sit down to next year.

285. MJ - April 30, 2012

@189 “Sheesh, I happen to be right and you two start lobbing insults at me. You guys ought to visit the doctor and get a check-up, I think you’ve come down with bird flu from the crow you’ve been eating! :-)”

Red Dead Ryan, don’t let the sour grapes of the people who would not put the clues together here detract you.

We were proven conclusively right, they have been proven conclusively wrong. For myself, there is really no futher need to address them. SCOREBOARD!!! — we were right, they were wrong. There is no grey area here.

I would prefer they just now deal with it, thank us for our foresight, and move along.

286. scotchyscotchscotch - April 30, 2012

I normally really like spoilers, but this time I wish I hadn’t gone past #1…

287. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#276.

Yo, what took you so long? Me, Hat Rick, and Basement Blogger were getting a bit lonely here! Cheers!

#277.

Bob and Alex seem to do their best work with J.J Abrams. “Star Trek” and “Fringe” prove that. Although K/O have a hit on their hands with “Hawaii Five-O”.

288. SkepticalIam - April 30, 2012

Khan? Really? That’s the best they could come up with?
What’s next? The Borg?
Been there…done that…blah blah blah

289. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@277 — I repeat. Orci and Kurtzman DID NOT “write” Transformers 2. Ehren Kruger and Michael Bay did. Orci and Kurtzman came up with some of the story elements, and that’s it. The only Transformers script that they actually wrote was the first one — and then they got the hell out of the film franchise while the going was good.

@280 — No, the Transformers movies were not critical successes, but guess what WAS a MASSIVE SUCCESS, both critically and commercially? Yeah, you guessed it: ST09. Nearly universal critical acclaim, plus a healthy showing at the box office.

290. sean - April 30, 2012

I am totally fine with Khan as Cumberbatch is a great actor. I am a bit disappointed that a South Asian character is being played by a British guy, but maybe there will be an in-universe explanation for this?

291. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 276. Posting an “I got it right” message like that only comes across and looking childish.

Surely you realise that a lot of those who were saying it wouldn’t be Khan were doing so because they thought (and hoped) that the script for the new movie would be entirely original?

292. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

#261 – Actually, the best outcome is that knowing that Khan will be in the film stops all the endless speculation, but not the complaining or the gnashing of teeth though…oh dear. Ah yes, I can see why you might be commiserating.

My advice is for those who are not happy with this news is not to get into the gnashing of teeth. You could end up with severe facial pain – not a good experience.

@ Bob Orci – I just hope that you have been nice to “my captain” – lots of good lines, action and love. Chris Pine looks great – as one of the producers, it is nice to see that you seem to be taking good care of my “fine conifer”!…:)

Now, as for the Australia/NZ release date for People Like Us – what’s the story here? Please?!

293. Mawazi - April 30, 2012

Am I the only one who finds it ironic that so many comments are complaining about a lack of originality due to the recycling of characters? J.J. Abram’s Star Trek franchise *is* a recycling of characters, at its most basic level. This is not an original concept, it is not an original crew, it is basically the same starship (not even close to being as big a change as the Ent-D in TNG). How could anyone possibly be so upset about Khan being used again? Unless you’re upset with the whole new franchise. It completely fits into what this production crew is doing.

I’m not saying that it’s a bad thing. In the end, as far as I’m concerned, it’s all about the execution. They’re going to use Khan in a surprising way, I’m sure. Whether it’s a pleasant surprise or not, that is the question.

294. Troubled Tribble - April 30, 2012

259: you haven’t got A CLUE what Trek was originally about if you’re making statements like that. It WAS original (give or take the odd episode). It broke new ground in making statements about the world we lived in (then – the 60s) whilst wraping it up in science-fiction ‘clothing’. Trek is now mimicking itself, and not doing an entirely successful job. Oh I agree it was a smash hit in 2009, but that doesn’t mean it was a high quality film. It was the spectacle and the usual barrage of explosions and (very) pretty special effects that drew many in, plus the lure of seeing Nimoy in a Trek movie again, plus the curiosity of seeing what they’d do with the original characters etc. It couldn’t have been anything other than a hit! Time/hindsight is always a great test of a decent movie though, and Trek 2009 will not be regarded as a classic in any way/shape/form.

It was a fun & brainless action/popcorn flick, but classic Trek it ain’t, and I seriously doubt Trek II will be either…

295. Paul - April 30, 2012

Khan=Lazy poor decision no way to match the original actor or TWOK

Klingons=Lazy poor decision reused far too often in the 1990s most Trek fans are sick & tired of them. What in 3 years you could not think of something more original!!!

My expectations just went from a 9.5 to a 5 as these decisions do not inspire much confidence in me right now. You spent over $200m setting up a cool alternate timeline now your re-using key elements from the other timeline it really does not sound as though the gap between films was spent wisely on creating some original material to go with your new universe.

Very very let down by this & not happy at all. Sorry this is the worst possible news expect ST fans to give a mixed reception to this news if its all accurate.

296. Tom - April 30, 2012

Psyched about Nimoy!! Really was a great opportunity to do the Shatner hologram scene

297. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

Just because some of us concluded the “villain” was Khan doesn’t mean we all agree to bring back Khan. We’ve been there, done that. And there is no surprise to Khan. He wants to rule the earth. I was hoping they would write an original antagonist Now with Nero and Khan, we’re getting into mustache twirling territory.

That being said, I’m keeping an open mind. The Supreme Court has said continually they want to go deeper. I want to see a deeper Star Trek. And who knows? This film might be great. So if you don’t want to see Khan, let’s not judge this film until we’ve seen it.

298. Aurore - April 30, 2012

It appears that I was wrong.

Benedict Cumberbatch will play Khan Noonien Singh.

I owe no one an apology, though; I never attacked anyone who believed the sequel would feature that character prominently.

They had their opinion, I was entitled to mine…

:)

299. MJ - April 30, 2012

@283. NuFan, yea, you were one of the group as well — congrats! There are others as well, but the vast majority of posters, especially early on, were saying it was not Khan. I think if you go back and look at posts from November to February, espcialy, you will see this. Once we saw the report of BC surviving the nerve pinch, more people started to take our view seriously. The evidence was there if one wanted t see it.

300. AJ - April 30, 2012

The Klingons can’t be that large a presence in the film, as no actor has been announced as ‘Klingon Commander’ or somesuch. Unless it’s all part of the secrecy.

Now the big question: How do we explain that Khan the Sikh is now a pale-skinned white Brit instead of a brawny tanned Mexican?

301. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

I’ve said all along that it would be Khan. That may have gone unnoticed because – unlikely though this may seem – in *this* gang I’m one of the *less noisy* drama queens.

302. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

223 you need real help. You knew nothing and a guess is still a guess. Sorry but thats the facts. The day i am jealous of you is the day you do something outside of cyber gloating over star trek spoilers you had nothing to do with.

303. Flake - April 30, 2012

I have the feeling Khan will kill off Spock prime for good this time!

Cumberbatch will be awesome as khan but he’s not hispanic or Indian which is going to be strange?

304. nerd@gmail.com - April 30, 2012

It is amusing in a sad way how some are rejoicing over guessing correctly. Honestly, no one did anything impressive beyond just stating the obvious.

305. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

@293….that’s the attitude I was looking for. It’s just plain silly to get all upset about originality in a universe that has close to zero original characters.

In truth these new films ARE reboots and Nimoy was only brought in, along with the very lame Alternate universe explaination, to appease the same complaining militant fans that would be in a huge tissy fit if it was labeled a true reboot.

Either way, great and great attitude.

306. MJ - April 30, 2012

@298. Apology accepted, Captain Needa.

;-)

@297 “Just because some of us concluded the “villain” was Khan doesn’t mean we all agree to bring back Khan.”

Agreed. I am conflicted. On the one hand, I feel vindicated that my prediction which was lambasted by so many has been proven right. But on the other hand, I would have prefered and original story.

307. That stinks - April 30, 2012

I would like to congratulate the writers on picking the least creative villain possible–someone with no story to tell. Congratulations on showing a complete misunderstanding of Khan by somehow equating him with The Joker.

Terrible. Absolutely terrible.

308. Bill Peters - April 30, 2012

Anyone see this as a possible Extension of the ARC from Enterprise about that Augments?

309. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 293

So what of the proposition that the who reason for the new timeline and going back to the TOS crew was to to get Trek back to basics and tell fresh new stories without the constraints of the franchise’s past canon? You don’t think that this opens up unlimited possibilities and to not use that chance to create brand new characters is not just totally lazy?

310. Anthony Pascale - April 30, 2012

Guys lets not resort to namecalling and fighting over who guessed what when. Remember to stay respectful of each other.

It’s like the senate. “I must disagree with my distinguished colleague from the great planet of Andoria. I believe Vulcans in fact have a lovely odor…”

311. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#293.

Agreed!

#294.

“It was a fun & brainless action/popcorn flick, but classic Trek it ain’t, and I seriously doubt Trek II will be either…”

These types of comments really show the ignorance of some people. Sure the movie had its silly moments, but no one can argue the emotional resonance of George Kirk’s sacrifice, Kirk meeting Spock Prime in a cave, or even Kirk’s promotion to captain. Also, Trek II came out thirty years ago. The next movie, right now at least, is Trek 2.

312. Battle-scarred Sciatica - April 30, 2012

Star Trek Two: The Search For Originality.

More disappointment.

Even less interested in the next movie now.

313. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

“It broke new ground in making statements about the world we lived in”

I’d have to argue on that point…Star Trek TOS was NOT original in that concept…they just, AT TIMES, refined up one the truely original show that made statements about life and man and the situations we get our selves into, and that show was….

…..THE TWILIGHT ZONE

Rod Serling was MUCH MUCH more of a visionary then Gene was. Gene took his concept and hired writers to flesh it out, unlike Serling, who wrote almost every episode of his show. That was the TRUE statement making show clothed in a SCI-FI setting. Even Serling saw and commented on how Star Trek rode close to the same approach he had in the Zone, yet would deviate too much into a Circus show.

314. Johnny - April 30, 2012

294 — Yes… I do know what I’m talking about. I’m SAYING that there is room for all the classic Trek “originality” that we want on TELEVISION. That is where Star Trek can “break new ground”. But this is a MOVIE. Movies HAVE to follow a traditional formula, otherwise they won’t be successful.

Look at the difference. Was “Star Trek: The Motion Picture” very much like an “original” episode of the TV show? Yes. But it didn’t work as a movie, because “as a film”, it comes across as an ultimate snooze-fest. No villains, no action, etc. Meanwhile, the best two “Original” films were “Wrath of Khan” and “The Undiscovered Country”… which had all of the above. Excellent villains, and plenty of action and special effects. And of course very well-written scripts.

The wild card here is “The Voyage Home” — which wasn’t traditional by any means. No villain (aside from random space probe) — and was essentially a comical “fish-out-of-water” tale. But it’s the exception to the rule. Overall, The Motion Picture, The Final Frontier, and Insurrection don’t work as movies at all. The ideas presented would have been absolutely fine for a TV episode — but not as a major motion picture. Star Trek films work the best when they follow a traditional formula with a strong villain and some action set pieces.

Major motion pictures need to present the best a franchise has to offer. Like I said, this IS a REBOOT. And the best that Star Trek has to offer is Khan. It’s as simple as that.

315. Ensign Chad - April 30, 2012

I actually like the idea of bringing back Khan it gives us a chance to see a completely new and compelling take on a familiar character that we all know and love done in this new alternate timeline. We got an original villain in Nero with the last one so I’m excited to see a fresh take on one of star treks greatest villains done with an original story that is sure to deliver a very exciting adventure.

316. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

@ 276

MJ, I would high five you if I could. The thing that drove me nuts, is that we point out all the evidence and people would ignore it. I mean the facts of the search for Hispanic actors, Cumberbatch’s superhuman strength, black hair etc. etc. And we got killed for it even though that was the only logical conclusion. What I detected was that people wanted to ignore the evidence because their feelings got in the way. They didn’t want Khan. And we we weren’t arguing that Khan should be in the movie. As the Vulcans would say, we were logically putting the facts together to reach a conclusion.

317. MJ - April 30, 2012

@293 “Am I the only one who finds it ironic that so many comments are complaining about a lack of originality due to the recycling of characters? J.J. Abram’s Star Trek franchise *is* a recycling of characters, at its most basic level. This is not an original concept, it is not an original crew, it is basically the same starship (not even close to being as big a change as the Ent-D in TNG). How could anyone possibly be so upset about Khan being used again? Unless you’re upset with the whole new franchise. It completely fits into what this production crew is doing. I’m not saying that it’s a bad thing. In the end, as far as I’m concerned, it’s all about the execution. They’re going to use Khan in a surprising way, I’m sure. Whether it’s a pleasant surprise or not, that is the question.”

Well said!

318. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

Poster “Dennis Bailey” in #301 and poster “Dennis Bailey” in #304 are two different people.

I find this interesting and mildly disturbing.

319. Craiger - April 30, 2012

What if Peter Weller’s character creates a new Khan in the 23rd? He’s supposed to be a CEO of a Corprotation in the new timeline. What if his experiment goes wrong, superiror intellect breads superior ambition. Khan kills Weller’s character and takes his experiement and uses the Klingons to help him create his super race?

320. That stinks - April 30, 2012

Not for nothing, but cynical Star Trek fans are pretty astute.

Usually, when they think in advance something is a bad idea, it is.

When the idea of doing a prequel set 100 years before Kirk came out, most Star Trek fans were cynical because it wasn’t being done by writers with talent. Some said give it a chance. The show stunk.

Nemesis’ plot was spoiled. People said it would stink, others said give it a chance. It stunk.

Since ST11 came out, there has been one constant among die-hards–no Khan.

Khan’s stories were told. Reboot or not, this is a terrible idea. It shows no originality, and worse, there is no Khan story that would be worthy of the first two.

Khan is NOT the Joker. Never was. He is not Kirk’s anti-Kirk. Not his arch enemy.

He was a villain, but not a recurring one. They had a followup because they had a good idea.

But to go here now is just dumb. The whole point of ending the prime universe was to tell original stories. Not retell great ones. The arrogance behind this choice is mindboggling.

321. njdss4 - April 30, 2012

I’m bummed. Rehashing Khan doesn’t seem like a good idea, especially since in the minds of many fans, myself included, Ricardo Montalban is the only Khan. Why not something original? Benedict Cumberbatch is an amazing actor, without question, but I think he’s being asked to fill a role that no one could ever live up to.

I’m just disappointed that they couldn’t come up with something new, and may ruin a classic Trek character because of it.

322. Craiger - April 30, 2012

Sorry I meant to say 23rd Century.

323. Pensive's Wetness - April 30, 2012

Cautiously Optimistic.

At first i said, oh F*&^ no… but imediately i quieted up. Khan, i’m willing to bet, is a means to a end for the Vulcans. Im almost certain the vulcans seek out the Bontany Bay because of what khan & crew can do for repopulating the vulcan race… at least i hope so, for drama sake.

324. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@320 well said

325. MJ - April 30, 2012

@316 “What I detected was that people wanted to ignore the evidence because their feelings got in the way. They didn’t want Khan. And we we weren’t arguing that Khan should be in the movie. As the Vulcans would say, we were logically putting the facts together to reach a conclusion.”

Exactly Basement Blogger! Some of those people didn’t want Khan in the movie, and they let their feelings get in the way of the mounting evidence that it was Khan.

I would second Anthony’s motion — there is not need for any name-calling or mean-spritedness about this discussion. For my part, I am just having fun with it here. I don’t bear anyone ill-will on this topic.

326. Aurore - April 30, 2012

Dennis Bailey – April 30, 2012
I’ve said all along that it would be Khan. That may have gone unnoticed because – unlikely though this may seem – in *this* gang I’m one of the *less noisy* drama queens.
______________

:))

Oh, come on now Dennis! Don’t be modest !
You do know a thing or two about making yourself noticed:

156. Dennis Bailey – April 29, 2012
It is Khan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just plain stupid.

http://trekmovie.com/2012/04/27/did-leonard-nimoy-hint-he-may-appear-in-star-trek-sequel/#comments

327. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#320: “Not for nothing, but cynical Star Trek fans are pretty astute.

Usually, when they think in advance something is a bad idea, it is. ”

Yeah, that’s why when they said that rebooting Trek in 2009 was a bad idea…it became the biggest first-run worldwide hit in franchise history.

In fact, “cynical Star Trek fans” are the opposite of astute – they’re generally resistant to anything that’s not by-the-numbers familiar in tone.

328. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#302.

Then what do you think of all those who said the villain WASN’T Khan? It wasn’t so obvious to those people apparently. So I, and the others who “guessed” correctly do deserve some credit. Heck, even Keachick said so herself.

It wasn’t pure guessing; we put together the few facts we had and came to the conclusion that Khan was the villain. Yeah, there was a chance we could be wrong, but we weren’t, and that is what counts.

You being a sore loser doesn’t change that fact.

#301.

Yup! You’re part of the club! :-)

329. porthoses bitch - April 30, 2012

Eve as marla ???
Thats a miss-khan-ception……
sorry couldnt resist………

330. DonDonP1 - April 30, 2012

One word: Fascinating.

331. sean - April 30, 2012

#318

I say you both post pics so we can see which one has a goatee.

332. That stinks - April 30, 2012

327–Wrong.

The idea of using Kirk and crew was actually very popular among Star Trek fans. What most didn’t like was the complete destruction of the prime universe and the lack of clarity in the actual movie about that.

That was a bad idea. Success of the movie doesn’t mean they did everything right.

But what did do right was choosing Kirk and crew.

333. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@309 —”You don’t think that this opens up unlimited possibilities and to not use that chance to create brand new characters is not just totally lazy?”

No. the “Alternate Reality” idea is not an excuse to “create new characters.” It was merely a way to get rid of the existing canon that says that certain things have to happen at certain points in the timeline. Such as Spock’s death in Wrath of Khan, etc. The future was changed the moment Spock/Nero time-traveled — they interfered with what should have happened. Because of this — there would only be SUBTLE changes to the timeline though — so it is highly logical that now that the crew is on their “ongoing mission”, they’d encounter some familiar characters/villains/whatever. It’s not like they all “disappeared” when the timeline was shifted. They’re all still there.

It WOULD be lazy for the writers to create a new villain, while everyone knows full well that there are plenty of familiar faces out there waiting to be encountered. This is a REBOOT starring the Original characters. With that in mind, I want them to encounter some of the characters seen in the original series and movies.

In the Batman reboots — why would Christopher Nolan create a new villain, when he has a rich selection of established ones to “reboot”? It’s Batman. I want to see The Joker.

334. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#326 Aurore: “Oh, come on now Dennis! Don’t be modest !
You do know a thing or two about making yourself noticed:

156. Dennis Bailey – April 29, 2012
It is Khan. Anyone who thinks otherwise is just plain stupid.”

Thanks for calling my attention to that, Aurore – that’s not me, but my “doppleganger” that I just noticed uptopic.

I suppose maybe I should ask Anthony to look into that.

335. Lords Of Kobol Book - April 30, 2012

Will they address the character’s lack of … Indianness?

And will the Indian community express outrage that they weren’t finally allowed to play this part? I’m thinking Shahrukh Khan would have been good. And aptly named.

Too late for that, though.

336. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

I am LOVING this…

KHAN is the most famous and baddest Trek villain of all time and deserves a 21st century treatment.

THIS MOVIE WILL ROCK!

…and oh by the way…Long live NIMOY!
THANKS FOR BEING THE CLASSIEST TV/Movie Actor of all time…

Now…if only spoiler #4 turns out to be what some may consider MORE SPOILISH than all 3 of the above spoilers combined:
SHATNER BACK AS CAPTAIN KIRK!

337. porthoses bitch - April 30, 2012

Klingons……about time…..
Anyone here a WWE wwf fan….some at WWE is a trek fan check out the helmet that the Kane character has been wearing to the ring…looks like he shopped at jjs yard sale.

338. El Chup - April 30, 2012

You know what really pisses me off about all this the most? That they claimed to have been listening to fan feedback intently, yet fan feedback contained a great many people who said they shouldn’t go anywhere near Khan. Nonetheless they stuck their fingers up at it anyway. No doubt those of us who repeatedly told the likes of Bob Orci that we want a traditional Star Trek style story are in for dissapointment as well if Chris Pines “relentless action” comments are anything to go by.

That’s what hurts the most. That people like Bob Orci claim to care what us long term fans, you know the people who kept the franchise going and enabled them to have these damned jobs in the first place, don’t mean a damn thing. That instead it’s all about how many bucks that can be extracted from the mindless drones of the modern age who just had over their ticket money again and again for rehased CGI unoriginality.

It’s all so very, very sad,

339. Andrews - April 30, 2012

I am so pissed that they whitewashed Khan. Like, livid.

Might as well have had Uhura played by Carey Mulligan and Sulu played by Seth Green. It’s all about ~the best actors~, right?

I can’t believe we actually regressed from the 60′s.

340. Jeyl - April 30, 2012

@181.

I know, it’s strange. But I haven’t seen the film yet, so how am I supposed to know if it will be any better than the previous film? Of course that doesn’t mean I have high hopes for the film. I just don’t know. Maybe my low expectations will be completely unfounded and I will finally see these characters as people I respect and care for. After all, Bob and Alex wasted and killed Arcee in Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen, but made her a series regular in the Transformers Prime TV Show.

341. Zinc Saucier - April 30, 2012

In other news: The sky is falling.

342. John - April 30, 2012

Wow talk about formula, old Spock again and Khan and Klingons, LAME!!! Nothing new to see in this one. Don’t tell me Bob, V’ger will be in this one too?

343. El Chup - April 30, 2012

On a side note, has anyone noticed how those who are for this Khan idea use very “young” decaration of pleasure in their posts like “THIS MOVIE WILL ROCK”.

I think that speaks volumes as to the target audience here.

344. Shannon Nutt - April 30, 2012

Klingons = good idea
Spock Prime = great idea
Khan = horrible idea. I’m reading elsewhere it might be Joachim and not Khan, but that wouldn’t make sense, since Joachim was just a child when the Enterprise first encountered Khan.

The only other way I’d “reboot” Khan would be to make him a good guy the second time around. Otherwise, you’re just re-doing what others have done (and what’s the point of that?). Considering how LONG it took these guys to finish the script (everyone remember?), you’d think they could have come up with something better than Khan – no matter how they’re “reimagining” him. :(

345. Alt-Spock - April 30, 2012

Khan? Not a good feeling about this, not at all. The guy playing Khan looks more like Orson from “Desperate Housewives” than he does an Indian superman. Ricardo Montalban he is not. If he whips out a British accent (which is what I can picture) I’ll puke.

346. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

“No. the “Alternate Reality” idea is not an excuse to “create new characters.” It was merely a way to get rid of the existing canon that says that certain things have to happen at certain points in the timeline.”

Actually, I’d argue that the Alternate Reality idea was created as a way to not alienate trek fans…it made zero sense if you go by ANY time travel movie or show in the past in which the crew was desperate to undo the damage caused in the past….it was simply made to keep the militant nit picker from boycotting the film.

Without this…the only thing that should logically exist from our original universe is Spock. That’s it. Nothing else. The past is changed, the future different and our good old Spock has grown too old to remember the formula for the sling shot manuever to go stop Nero….sad

347. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Where are you people getting that “a majority of fans” don’t want Khan? That’s ridiculous. Everywhere I look… most people are cautiously excited about him. Worst case scenario, the fanbase might be split around 50/50 as far as Khan goes.

@339 — Look… they didn’t “intentionally” whitewash Khan. They were aggressively going after Benicio Del Toro… and then when he fell through, they were still looking for a Latino actor. But with such a short amount of time before the start of production, it seems it was difficult finding an available Indian or Latino actor… and they gave Benedict Cumberbatch the opportunity to audition. Apparently, he blew everyone away.

348. El Chup - April 30, 2012

I am expecting that for Star Trek 3 we will see the introduction of Cadet Picard, who will not doubt stop Q’s destruction of erth’s masses of humpback whales in the 21st Century, all while Kirk is forging peace with the Borg Queen at Camp Khitomer.

Oh, and Spock Prime has a birthday party.

349. Trek Fan Lives - April 30, 2012

Khan??? Really??? What a let down! With a whole TOS universe and soo many classic episodes to re-imagine they go with the character of Khan? Top it off, they have the most WASPy looking actor to play a superman of Indian Punjabi origin! Good grief.

350. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@347

Exactly where are these excited fans? There seem to be a lot of dissapointed people in this thread..

351. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#332: “What most didn’t like was the complete destruction of the prime universe and the lack of clarity in the actual movie about that.

That was a bad idea”

Nope – it was a good idea, which worked – yet another thing that “cynical Star Trek fans” got wrong. Add it to the considerable pile.

352. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

343. El Chup – “On a side note, has anyone noticed how those who are for this Khan idea use very “young” decaration of pleasure in their posts like “THIS MOVIE WILL ROCK”. I think that speaks volumes as to the target audience here.”

I am as old as the franchise…and yes…the response from EVERY Teenager/Young Adult I have spoken with so far, (seven atm), has been: “WOW – THAT IS SOOO COOL!”

(The adults, including my wife, are also responding that way.)

353. Opcode - April 30, 2012

Well, I am 42, fan of TOS since I was 9, and I am excited. I don’t see anything wrong with using Khan. In fact it would be totally unrealistic to expect they would use an unknown or little known villain in a $150 million+ these days. And I always thought it would make more sense to bring Khan now, in the second movie, and have something more epic in the 3rd one.

New material can wait until we have a new series (hopefully a reboot of TOS).

354. porthoses bitch - April 30, 2012

Im jazzed about this… Cumberbatch is awesome as holmes if he doesnt have you hooked about 15 minutes into ‘a study in pink’ you arent watching….his khan will be intellgent and calculating. But who pray tell is Peter Weller ? If the klingons are major players we ‘ve not heard of any casting there so thats a possibility. His recent turn as Jack Bauers mentor on 24 shows that he can definetly play a truly cold menacing type. He’d make a great kor.

355. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Khan? LOL!

The good news is, the shirt and pants are replaceable. And the treadmarks will fade from my skin in a few weeks.

356. Aurore - April 30, 2012

334. Dennis Bailey – April 30, 2012
“Thanks for calling my attention to that, Aurore – that’s not me, but my “doppleganger” that I just noticed uptopic.
___________

Dennis,

When it happened, I was this close to claim that your identity might have been usurped; I am not used to that kind of tone coming from you.

However, I thought that you had probably hid your passion for Khan, all this time.

I was wrong.
You know, I’ve been wrong before…

:)

357. sidewall - April 30, 2012

Seriously Orci!? Seriously? What else is going to be in this”new” movie!? Spock prime going to die in the reactor room a second time? Only way to defeat Khan is to find a pair of humpbacks? Let’s throw the Borg queen and Tom Hardy in there for good measure.

You have no idea what you are doing. Get out of the way so James Cawley can take over. I hope your eyebrows get burned off by one of Abrams stupid lens flares.

358. Peter Loader - April 30, 2012

Give the film a chance folks. I’m sure JJ’s vision will have us wanting more!

359. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

@ 350…I know alot of OLD SCHOOL Trek fans who are cautiously excited about new story being told using Khan (and Klingons)….alot of folks are going into this film with an open mind, which is the way to go. It’s silly to get all worked up about a film that nobody has seen any footage of.

If you don’t like the direction, then don’t watch. The DVD’s of the previous shows are all still available. This sort of temper tantrum “bad,bad,bad” behavior is the exact reason that Trek fans get labeled as nit picky whiners who need to “get a life.”

I’m just glad that there is something new to watch and will enjoy it regardless. It can’t be any worse then Spock’s Brain, TNG Season 1, Voyager, Enterprise, Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection and Nemesis. It will make a couple hundred million, be praised by a large community of trek fans and will spawn a third movie and another TV series, if we are lucky.

360. Ivory - April 30, 2012

How are they going to explain that Khan looks like a British man rather someone who comes from Asia/Middle East?

361. Andrews - April 30, 2012

@347 “But with such a short amount of time before the start of production, it seems it was difficult finding an available Indian or Latino actor”

You’re hilarious. Keep believing that.

362. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#356: “When it happened, I was this close to claim that your identity might have been usurped; I am not used to that kind of tone coming from you.”

Thanks. I think we both know that I’m not above gratuitously insulting someone’s intelligence, though – the Other Dennis Bailey doesn’t really make much of an “evil twin,” just a slightly duller one. LOL

363. NuFan - April 30, 2012

OMG! They spend almost a year yelling at us and insulting us and now they are pretending to be disappointed little bunnies who have not been selfish at all.

364. Aurore - April 30, 2012

Correction. 356.

had hid = had hidden

365. MJ - April 30, 2012

@335. Could have been worse, DM. At least the news wasn’t so shocking that it caused treadmarks on your underwear. :-))

366. sean - April 30, 2012

#347

They chose to cast a non-South Asian actor. What’s unintentional about that?. It’s not the end of the world, but in this day and age this stuff shouldn’t be happening.

Of course, if there’s some in-universe explanation as to why he’s suddenly a white British guy, no problem.

367. Tom - April 30, 2012

I am ok with the Khan choice. The thing that would do it for me would be Shatner. Wonder if they ever contacted him. Just seems like the team has a better rapport with Leonard Nimoy.Also wonder if Leonard Nimoy would lobby for a role for Bill if he really wanted to work with him again on Star Trek.I just cant believe the could not write something that works.

Unless that is the next spoiler !!
Or maybe something that does remain under wraps
I just think the buzz and excitement would really be amazing if he was included as well

368. kjseek - April 30, 2012

Wow, Khan, i hope they know what they are doing….

To be fair I thought I would never like anyone else playing the joker other than the immortal Nicholson. But i was very pleasantly (horrifyingly?) surprised with how good Heath Ledger was. so heres hoping that the Abramsverse follows the christopher nolan lead and blows us all away!

But im still skeptical…….

369. DeflectorDishGuy - April 30, 2012

@ 351

Nope, you are wrong again. It’s almost laughable how condescending and incorrect you can be.

370. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

367. Tom – “I just think the buzz and excitement would really be amazing if he (Shatner) was included as well”

AGREED!

371. boborci - April 30, 2012

357. Movie’s gonna be a face melter…

372. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

371. boborci – “Movie’s gonna be a face melter…”

Like an “Indiana Jones” face melter?? …as long as it’s a bad guy, eh?

373. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

#371 – Translation please…:)

#357 – Now there’s an idea – bring in Tom Hardy, tatts and all! Yum…

374. Not convinced - April 30, 2012

I have faith in the actors, and there will be so much lens flare that I won’t notice anything but fight scenes and explosions until the end credits roll.

But the writers seem to forget that the original characters had HISTORY–they seem to be trying to speed through things that the show took years to build. (Whether you like that slow build or not is your own affair, but still, there were actions and consequences and not This Is Your Destiny So Get On With It.) What’s the point of Khan without Space Seed? How could a Wrath of Khan-like story POSSIBLY work without the strength of the relationships in the crew, when these new guys are just starting out?

Oh well. They’re all pretty to look at, and the new Enterprise is shiny.

375. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 359

That kind of nonsense has been peddled for ages. I find these “go and watch the old DVDs if you don’t like it” comments to be extremely rude.

Basically what you are saying is that a fan doesn’t have the right to hope for a new Star Trek to be the kind of Star Trek he became a fan of….and that if the omens suggest that it’s going to be the opposite that it’s a crime to express disspointment.

Some of us like Star Trek for different reasons. Some of us like the intelligent stories of TOS, TNG and DS9. Some of us like the idea of hope or ethnic diversity. Some of us simply like cool space battles. We are all different. SOme will se what they want to see in this, others won’t. To lambast someone for expressing disspointment with the way they see things turning out seems to me to only come from the sort of fan who thinks “my way is the only way to be a fan and everyone else should either just lap it up or bugger off”.

376. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#371.

“Movie’s gonna be a face melter…”

Is that a “Raiders Of The Lost Ark” reference? :-)

377. The Art of Film is Dead. - April 30, 2012

#26

Forget JJ being disappointment about the leaks- he deserves it anyway. It’s Shatner who is going to blow his top. Unless he gets a cameo in this movie, that 2 Abrams films Nimoy will be in and zero for him. Lol!!!

378. Ivory - April 30, 2012

As much as I don’t love the idea of bringing Khan back (been there done that) I am excited to see Leonard Nimoy back in action.

I wonder what direction they are going with Spock Prime? With Khan and Klingons involved I doubt the film will center on re-building the Vulcan race. Will he be returned to the prime universe? Is this simply a cameo?

Does this open the door for Shatner”s return?

379. Phil - April 30, 2012

@371. Wasn’t that Raiders of the Lost Ark?

380. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

@ 371….You guys have a tough job. You’ll never win with a large majority of this fan base. They will complain and whine and complain about how the show is stagnant, then when it’s taken off TV they will whine about bringing it back. Then when you bring it back, like you guys did, they will whine that it’s not their show of old. Then if you do a film about exploration and the unknown they will complain that it was too slow and had too much CGI, etc.

You just can’t win sometimes. Still, thanks for the work you guys do on the films. There are those of us who are greatly appreciative of the fact that you brought the show back to the big screen. The last adventure was a good one and I’m looking forward to the next.

I will reserve my judgement until I see the completed product. Until then, thank you and live long and prosper!

381. El Chup - April 30, 2012

I believe the face melter comment is meant to be a dig at those not showing approval – in other words he’s sarastically suggesting that we are making out that the movie will be so bad that you can’t look at it.

I might be wrong of course……

382. boborci - April 30, 2012

Yeah. In this universe, Indy hasnt found it yet. Sitting next to Indy right now, by the way, on set of Enders Game. He says “hi…”

383. Phil - April 30, 2012

@372. Not necessairly…recall that Spock dies in Wrath of Khan. And Spock was melting down toward the end of his last scene with Kirk…

384. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

At least the whole “face melter” comment has this fickle group going in a completely different direction…LOL

385. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

@382…LOL that’s AWESOME!!

386. Peter Loader - April 30, 2012

Folks forget you preconceived notions of Khan as seen before. This will be something new and not a rehash of any events with respect to Space Seed or the Wrath of Khan. Cumberbatch will delight us with his acting abilities and quite possibly make this version of Khan his own, just as Heath Ledger did as The Joker. I look forward to this movie. Hell yeah!

387. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#382.

You’re working with Harrison Ford again? Cool!

388. Stovetop Kor - April 30, 2012

All this masturbatory self-congratulation is nauseating.

389. Celeste - April 30, 2012

I am unsure how I feel about these spoilers (assuming they are all true) but overall I am disappointed.

Spoiler 1- I guess I dont have a problem with Nimoy coming back (if he is) but I really wanted the new cast to stand on their own this time

Spoiler 2- again if true I am mostly disappointed about this. I wanted a story completely original to the new ‘verse, the fans out there have already taken a number of TOS characters (including Khan) and rehashed them for the JJ Verse, I dont need to pay to see a movie of that

Spoiler- okay I guess. But by this point I’m kinda tired of seeing Klingons so often

390. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

382. boborci

Tell him that this “kid” in Sonoma is sending “MacGuffin research” his way, (and to Mr. L), in an attempt to help get that V we all want badly…

391. El Chup - April 30, 2012

There’s always time for Harrison Ford!

392. crazydaystrom - April 30, 2012

A few decades ago I was smittened with and greatly enamored of a particular girl who I had idealized and as a result put on a pedestal (figuratively, of course). Eventually I found out she was a bit of a tramp and my feelings for her changed forever, my fifteen year old heart broken. Finding out we’re to be ‘Khan’-ed again is the closest I’ve come to that feeling since.

I hope the movie turns out to be magnificent Trek. Could happen. But on the surface, at least, this seems uninspired.

On the other hand, if Keenser is the best JJ & Co can come up with for a new character…. Well there was Nero. I liked him more than a lot of people did.

And, though a fan since ’66, the Kelvin scene in ST ’09 has become my #1 favorite Trek scene of all time. So we’ll see… But for right now I’m going to cry in my beer for a while (figuratively of course). And go read a book.

393. MJ - April 30, 2012

@388. For my part, my self-congratulation is non-masturbatory.

394. Harcourt F. Mudd - April 30, 2012

Son of Khan, more like. I guess, he was defrosted, instead of his father.

395. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

365. MJ – April 30, 2012

I was leaning toward Joaquim. But it doesn’t shock me that it’s Khan either. I didn’t close any options completely. And I noticed you were hedging your bets by saying Khan OR one of the other Botany Bay figures. The evidence could have gone either way.

But then that means JJ lied when he said Del Toro was not being considered for the part of Khan.

I believed JJ.

396. Commander K - April 30, 2012

Khan is INDIAN

If you can’t find an INDIAN, get another SOUTH ASIAN

If you can’t find a SOUTH ASIAN find a LATINO

If you can’t find a Latino…Cumberbatch??? Makes no sense to cast him if Khan is meant to have indian heritage, he’s paste-y white!

397. Smikeslordbuffy - April 30, 2012

The one pivotal problem I have with these news: Cumberbatch (at least in the set pics provided) does ABSOLUTELY NOT look like Khan…I’ve got no problems with Khan returning, but he needs to look the part. Cumberbatch doesn’t! Not one tiny little bit…Finnegan, yeah, Mitchell, check…but Khan??? So no, I am not excited…

398. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

Nestor Carbonell FOR KHAN!!!!

399. Thorny - April 30, 2012

I’m disappointed. Of course, I’ll still be waiting in line on Opening Day, but I’m very skeptical. There just isn’t any replacing Ricardo Montalban as Khan. Cumberbatch is a fine actor, but he doesn’t have 1/10th the magnetism of Montalban. They really should have made a movie about the Enterprise crew first, and saved this movie, which is going to be All About The Villain ™ for Trek Reboot 3.

400. MJ - April 30, 2012

@357 (to Bob Orci) “You have no idea what you are doing. Get out of the way so James Cawley can take over. I hope your eyebrows get burned off by one of Abrams stupid lens flares.”

Sidewall, didn’nt you see Anthony’s post about keeping the comments here on the up and up? There is no place for these kind of remarks here. You should be ashamed of yourself, and should apologize to Bob.

401. porthoses bitch - April 30, 2012

Well if youve read this far than it’s a given that your not spoiler phobic. But here’s a question if there were to be a shatner cameo would you like to be surprised ? As Sulu said “good to see you in action one last time”

402. Tom - April 30, 2012

378 Ivory

I think it opens up possibilites for Shatners return but I’m not sure if Bob, Alex and Damon saw it that way. I hope so because it would be awesome. You would think we would have known if Shat was there but the way they have kept it under wraps who knows

403. Jenna - April 30, 2012

boborci it’s been said a lot before but you are awesome for coming to this board and reading all the ranting and inserting some humor and wisdom. Thanks and good luck.

404. MJ - April 30, 2012

@395. DM, I believed what JJ actually said was “not true” when a reporter asked him is Del Toro had been signe on to play Khan. Del Toro never signed on, so I don’t think we can say JJ lied.

Yea, I was hedging my bets that it could have been another Botany Bay member.

405. Tom - April 30, 2012

Has anyone wondered if Leonard was referring to this movie or NEXT in the CNN interview, He already completed his work so what could he mean when he said “we’re talking”……..

406. PEB - April 30, 2012

so wait, you’re all bored with Khan because of one movie and one tv episode? Really? Seriously? If Nolan can remold the Joker after thousands of appearances in comics, tv, film, and video games (especially with Mark Hamill’s AMAZING take on him) and fans of the Batman series arent bored, then really it’s time for some of you to suck it up. You’re limiting the franchise when you bash this new take on it. I read comics, there are multi-verses in the comics and you deal with it. You play a video game or read the books or watch the movies and none of them totally match up in look or complete feel and Trek opened that can of worms when they wanted to deal with the mirror universe and other alternate universes way before Trek 09 ever came out. If this is a completely fresh take on things then everyone should chill out. The Dark Knight was INSANE and this has the possibility of being just that. And again, for everyone saying they’re going to skip this one or bashing it for being a rehash well I have 3 words for you STAR TREK VOYAGER….you watched it, you probably have the dvd set and it was a whole lot of badly written rehash that everyone loves to beat up on now but watched it when it was on the air because of its name.

407. Harcourt F. Mudd - April 30, 2012

Spock Prime enters the room. Everyone turns round, Khan looks at Spock Prime intently.

SPOCK PRIME: I knew your father.

408. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

@ 406. PEB….well said. Sometimes when you read the whining and complaining you can just make out the voice of Shatner..it’s three words that sound just like they did when he uttered them on SNL…….

409. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

382. boborci

390+ …seriously…

410. PEB - April 30, 2012

could…could Spock Prime die? Saving the life of nuSpock? I mean it would be a logical action and it is Khan, AND it would be a little funny considering it would mean Nimoy would’ve just beaten Shat’s Trek movie record.

411. Rob - April 30, 2012

I’m finding myself excited by this news but not surprised as Cumby was listed as Khan on imdb a few moths back. At this moment i can’t wait for this movie. Plus i like the idea of Klingons being in the mix .

412. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

404. MJ – April 30, 2012

@395. DM, I believed what JJ actually said was “not true” when a reporter asked him is Del Toro had been signe on to play Khan. Del Toro never signed on, so I don’t think we can say JJ lied.

***

If I remember correctly, he said that well before Del Toro rejected the role. And this was before there were any other actors in line. So JJ said that while Del Toro was the presumptive nominee.

I don’t remember if he was asked if Del Toro had been “signed” or if that was just the role he was being “considered” for. I thought it was the latter.

413. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Guys… the reason Shatner can’t be in the film is the same as last time. His character is DEAD. Ever seen a movie called “Star Trek: Generations”?

In the Prime universe, Kirk is dead, and Spock is alive — and is transported to the new universe. Even with the new universe… there is no way to bring Kirk back from the dead.

414. Ted - April 30, 2012

Looks to be more Epic then Transbattleship… oh, wait….

415. Thomas - April 30, 2012

For all the people who are so upset about another movie with Khan, I have to ask, how upset are you about another movie with Klingons? They’ve appeared dozens of times throughout the franchise, but everyone here seems okay with giving them one more go-around. Honestly, what makes Khan any different? What makes him immune to reinterpretation?

I’ll admit right here and now, I don’t know if this is a good idea or not. I won’t know until I’ve seen the finished product, and no one else here can honestly make any other assessment than that at this point. If it’s good in the end, I’ll say it’s good. If it’s bad, I’ll say it’s bad. I want this movie to be good, but if it isn’t any good, I won’t defend it.

416. MJ - April 30, 2012

It is interesting to me that despite all the negative posts here, if you look at the poll, which is nearly 1400 responses so far, about 2/3 of Trek Fans are either excited or catiously optimistice about the new film. Can’t say I’m too surprised then that it is mainly the 1/3 who don’t like it that are choosing to post here today. Being upset about something is typically a better motivator to post than liking something.

417. Nano - April 30, 2012

I think I need to change my name to PISSED! No I’m not drunk yet :)
ICONIC Anthony not exposure, hell why not just kill off Spock prime or Kirk again.

I think someone has been smoking too much Tribble Red!!!

418. draderman - April 30, 2012

Im sure boborci is feeling quite allayed now that we all finally know its Khan. He used the term “commiserate”, so without putting words in his mouth and implying absolutely nothing, i will make the following statement:

Perhaps… it would have been more desirable to create a completely original story, but perhaps… this is maybe what the people at Paramount want really really badly and perhaps… maybe the idea of doing a Khan reboot was part of the pitch made to Paramount when the multiple movie deal was being worked out and so maybe… when it came time to figure out what to do in XII Paramount said to themselves “Wait! The success of Wrath of Khan was directly responsible for ALL TREK after that, and we made a bazillion dollars. Now we gots JJAbrams & Kurtzorcielof & Chrispine & Zoe so… Why the hell dont we reboot Khan and make a quazillion dollars.”

The movie will be good. Cumberbatch will pull it off, and the movie will “feel” a lot like the first one. I agree a completely new original story would have been preferable, and i have a feeling some of the creative staff would agree, but im sure the writers still think of this as original to them, since it all takes place in their universe.

419. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

“In the Prime universe, Kirk is dead, and Spock is alive — and is transported to the new universe. Even with the new universe… there is no way to bring Kirk back from the dead.”

You know who’s fault that is? Not Nimoy, not Abrams, Not Orci…..SHATNERS! He took the pay check and “cried” his way to the bank. We have nobody but Shatner. He could have said no, like Nimoy and Kelly did. He took the cash and expected that they would magically reanimate him in the next flick. Nope.

This is not on Abrams. Even Nimoy pointed out the above….can’t argue with that logic.

420. Thorny - April 30, 2012

Well, I’ll also say this…. with the Klingon participation revelation and Alice Eve’s comment about “Star Trek” makeup, if Bad Robot has hidden the beautiful Miss Even under ten pounds of Klingon forehead and sharp teeth, someone needs to be shot… :-)

421. Andrews - April 30, 2012

So, Bob Orci, wanna explain your and the production team’s thought process for whitewashing an iconic Star Trek character like it’s nbd?

Yeah, I thought not.

422. MJ - April 30, 2012

Bet we get to 1000 posts within 24 hours here (unless Anthony provide another story by then)

423. Thorny - April 30, 2012

413… Technically, isn’t there an essence of Kirk still in that stupid Nexus? Guinan was both in the Nexus and in the Real World, why couldn’t Kirk be?
Not that I want Shatner in this movie. I didn’t even want Nimoy. Let this cast come out from the shadows of the predecessors for heaven’s sake. Instead, Nimoy (again), they’re calling it “Star Trek 2″ (again) and we’re getting Khan (again). Pine and Co. seem to be afterthoughts.

424. ChanceTR - April 30, 2012

I’m not happy about them bring Khan back, I was hoping for something new. This kinda deflates my excitement.

425. boborci - April 30, 2012

421. We were inspired by Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ.

426. MJ - April 30, 2012

DM, I guess we would need to know the exact timing of that comment by Del Toro, and know what exactly the reporter said to get that comment to truly determine if he lied or not. I think there is enough leeway for him to have said “not true” in that Del Toro was not under contract, but I can certainly see yours and others view that this is misleading at best.

Yea, JJ perhaps has a little of Bill Clinton in him. ;-)

427. MJ - April 30, 2012

@426, argh. I meant to say, “the exact timing of that comment about Del Toro by JJ”

428. Captain Roberts - April 30, 2012

Khan?

Khan.

So, when is Seth McFarlane re-booting TV “Trek” again…?

429. jas_montreal - April 30, 2012

I told everyone that it was Khan, lol. It HAD to be.

Oh man, this sequel will be AWESOMEEEE !!!!!!!!

430. Greg2600 - April 30, 2012

This movie is going to suck big time.

431. Jason - April 30, 2012

I had a feeling after seeing the 2009 film all of this would be in the next one. How boring and predictable.

432. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

“Technically, isn’t there an essence of Kirk still in that stupid Nexus? Guinan was both in the Nexus and in the Real World, why couldn’t Kirk be?”

Because that film went OUT OF IT’S WAY to go into detail about how Guinan only existed in both because she was forceably removed from the Nexus without her permission. You would not be able to exist in both if you made a choice to leave, ala Kirk….they made sure that they could not bring Shatner back in another film

433. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Re: “Whitewashing”

They TRIED to cast Benicio Del Toro. He backed out very late in the game — and left the producers with little time to find a replacement. They allegedly did look into other latino actors (including Edgar Ramirez)… but considering the short notice, I wouldn’t be surprised that any of them were unavailable. Benedict Cumberbatch was asked to audition, and he blew everyone away with his performance.

I don’t care what nationality Khan is… I just want a good interpretation.

@PED — Nail, meet head.

I’ll repeat this argument again. This is a REBOOT. A REBOOT. You have to go with Khan at some point in the franchise. It’s not like Khan has been done to death, either. He appeared in one Original Series episode, and one movie— amounting to just a couple hours screentime — in a franchise made up of thousands of hours. The Joker was done countless times before Chris Nolan and Heath Ledger rebooted him — but they did it anyways — because they had a NEW interpretation of him. Look how that turned out.

434. Terry - April 30, 2012

boborci: I can only speak for myself, but I would like to think that many Trek fans (such as myself) have complete confidence in you, Mr. Abrams, Mr. Kurtzman, and Mr. Lindelof after the outstanding film you gave us in 2009 (thank you!). I have no doubt that you give us another great film in 2013, and until we sit in the darkened theater on 05/17/13, anything reported is premature speculation, rumor, and gossip.

One thing for us fans to keep in mind: If the Nimoy rumors are true, this is encouraging for the movie as a whole. Nimoy reads the scripts closely, and would not hesitate to pass on a bad script (see “Star Trek: Generations”). If he is indeed back, it is *logical* to assume that we have another great story/script to look forward to.

435. boborci - April 30, 2012

400 its okay 357′s comment that lens flare shoukd burn of my eyebrows made lol.

436. Daoud - April 30, 2012

What if this Khan’s an android with Khan’s memory transferred?
What if this Khan’s an impostor?
I’m willing to give K/O the benefit of the doubt here…. because there are so many things that could be written.
.
And there’s plenty of time since the Nero Incursion in 2233, like a Butterfly Effect to have made 25 years later in 2258+ be a bit different.
.
I’m hoping they *re-use* some of the Nero Captured by Klingons story as “backstory” for Star Trek Dos Equis, and explain that the Klingons got information off the Narada… and identified in 2233 that finding Botany Bay was a damned fine idea.
.
And thus reviving Khan (or his imposter, or his android body later)…. essentially repeat the “Captain Horatio Hornblower” (HH) storyline, with this Khan filling the Don Julian/El Supremo role (going mad in an android body?), Alice Eve in the Barbara role, etc. That movie is a good outline of how to have Khan go mad in another manner. Even involves ships getting captured, etc.! 1951 with Gregory Peck, check it out!
.
@Dennis Bailey: Oh, you make me miss our good ol’ days tenplus years ago on the TrekBBS. :) Here’s hoping Anthony wipes out the impostor of you. But in exchange, you have to create with him the next TNG sequel comic book…. a followup to Tin Man!

437. boborci - April 30, 2012

400 its okay 357′s comment that lens flare should burn off my eyebrows made lol.

438. porthoses bitch - April 30, 2012

Now alice eve as mara.peter weller as kang….despite the tos movies and tng. And voyager and ds9 and enterprise I like my klingons old school. The greasy sweaty hells angels
of the galaxy

439. T'Cal - April 30, 2012

Like many here, I have made the analogy of the latest batman trilogy and Star Trek. For me Jack Nicholson was THE Joker and I was concerned about Heath Ledger being the new Joker. I’m open to a new Khan and I’ve seen Sherlock so I’m convinced that the character is in great hands. I just hope that they don’t completely dismiss the original timeline, which is everything pre-Kirk’s birth. Khan should already be on the Botany Bay back in 1996 IIRC but who finds him and how is completely up to the new writers.

440. El Chup - April 30, 2012

Piss Christ, eh? Bob.

Rather dissapointing that you would compare the reaction of some Trek fans to the reaction that said art piece achieved.

Somewhat arrogant me thinks.

441. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

Now it’s time to guess who Alice Eve is going to play. Let’s see. She’s supposed to be new to canon. That’s not confirmed. She’s blonde. And Alice watched every TOS episode.

1. Carol Marcus. Oh, why not.? They’re bringing back Khan.
2. Christine Chapel. Hey, they can have a love triangle just like Twilight. Uhura and Christine fight for Spock This could be great for the teenage male and female demographic.

3. Yeoman Janice Rand. More blonde ambition. Clairol will be doing product placement. And they want to bring back the beehive hair style.
4. Producer. She watched every TOS episode like Harve Bennett. She’s producing Star Trek 3. :-)
5. Dr. Gillian Taylor. Bummed out that Kirk didn’t pursue her and get her phone number in Star Trek IV, Taylor gets help from the whale aliens. They transport her to J.J. Abrams Star Trek universe.
6. Talosian. In an effort to show that they have a sense of humor, a Talosian projects himself as beautiful blonde and romances Kirk.

I keeed. I keeed. But maybe Alice could be playing Carol Marcus… :-)

442. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

425. boborci

Yes…it is Judeo-Christian…

443. Anthony Pascale - April 30, 2012

sidewall

warning for just being very unpleasant

444. Jax Maxton - April 30, 2012

While I really don’t like the idea of Khan being rehashed, it might be alright if Spock Prime is the one that leads them to Khan for some reason. Something along the lines of Spock Prime realizing that Khan can restore the balance to the timeline somehow. Otherwise, going with Khan is a bit of a letdown for me.

445. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Another thing — a lot of you guys who are “disappointed” in an old character being re-used in a REBOOT —- are you forgetting that the above article says it’s NOT a rehash of Space Seed?

Sounds to me like they’ve come up with an “original” and “new” storyline — that Khan figures into somehow. What the heck is wrong with that? I really don’t get the animosity towards it.

446. Jax Maxton - April 30, 2012

BTW, props for Bob Orci for wading into this nightmare soup of Trek-dom. A franchise as big as Star Trek is not made in a vacuum, and I’m sure the decisions being made are more “group” decisions than any one individual. The dude has a pretty cool job and does not need to come into these forums AT ALL.

447. Greg2600 - April 30, 2012

I really don’t want to bash Orci and JJ, because they have done projects which I revere (MI3, Lost, TF Prime). And some I detest (re: Michael Bay).

But come on, Kahn? I know this is a reboot, but for crying out loud, are we just going to become another comic book franchise? This was what I feared the most. I don’t care if the script is Oscar worthy, I’ve seen Wrath of Khan already, and I don’t want a remake of it. Especially without Shatner and Montelban.

448. Thorny - April 30, 2012

Hey Bob… okay, now that the cat’s out of the bag… how ’bout the movie’s title?

449. Andrews - April 30, 2012

@425 boborci: So charming and witty. I guess I’d forgotten that it was you and your bud who brought us the Transformers II minstrel show.

Keep sassing everyone who’s pissed at this racial regression from the GODDAMN SIXTIES like their complaints are somehow equivalent to fanboys writing angry blog posts about the engineering set and the lack of rank stripes on the female uniform. It’s really putting you and the production team in a fabulous light.

450. PromoBoy - April 30, 2012

How ’bout this for the third film: the return of Harry Mudd!
Zzzzzzzzzz……

451. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

@ 445: “What the heck is wrong with that? I really don’t get the animosity towards it.”

Because some folks can never be 100% happy, that’s why. Glass half full. They could do a film with 100% new characters, no villian and switch back to the Original Enterprise exterior and you would still have the same folks complaining because the film didn’t have an Ovaltine commercial during the films intermission or something….who knows…nit pickers are never satisfied.

452. Phil - April 30, 2012

@448 Star Trek 12: The Wrath of Khan

453. Jax Maxton - April 30, 2012

I also now see the new Trek movies as really good versions of theme park attractions. Think “Star Trek: The Ride”. These new movies are not the Trek that I grew up and fell in love with, but big loud action set-pieces set around the Star Trek universe. If I look at Khan that way, then I can leave my disappointment with the Khan decision at the door and enjoy the ride.

454. shunt - April 30, 2012

KHan had what 2 – 3 appearances before TWOK?

It’s not like he was a regular vilain. And it was 30-40 some years ago.

We’ve seen Klingons much more in trek and nobody is complaining that there back.

The Dark night had the joker and the movie was amazing. Imagine if old fans would have complain that it was a bad idea because Jack Nickolson did a great job or worse that we saw the joker from the original batman( with Adam West) enough!!!

Alote of fans were scared that ledger wouldnt be as good as Nickolson…. Well I think he was better!

JJ Abrams is very good and imagine Khan with today special fx. By the way, the director, the crew, the actors are all … way better than in Twok. I hated the original Khan as an actor. Very cheesy for me.

It will be great and I know all of you haters will be so exited when the first trailer comes out, you will be the first at the theater waiting all night in line!

I for one am very anxious to see JJ abrams new take on one of the best villains of trek. Khan deserve to be updated as star trek 09 was.

Cant wait for it or any trek might I add. (new tv show would be nice)

Kapla!

455. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

No universe got destroyed in the last Star Trek movie. How many times does that have to be reiterated before the premise of the story gets through to some people? In the prime universe, the planet Romulus got destroyed by a rogue supernova, nothing else. In the alternate universe, the planet Vulcan was destroyed by Nero, nothing else. Got it?!

While I am disappointed that the main villain seems to be Khan, played by Benedict Cumberbatch, I am still optimistically cautious, nervously excited, because Star Trek is (should be) about the events that affect the lives of Captain James T Kirk and the crew of the USS Enterprise. It always has been. If the writers want to have Khan become a hickey on Kirk’s backside in this alternate universe, well, so be it. I guess it all depends on how this Khan hickey plays out. I just wish they could have chosen someone else.

We just have to wait and see.

#338 – Leave off the insults like referring to movie goers who don’t share your opinions and outlook as “mindless drones” and other denigrating comments. Chris Pine said “relentless” and “action packed”. These words can be interpreted various ways (I noted this on another thread here). Nobody has hurt anybody.

456. Johnny - April 30, 2012

447 — Who said it will be a remake of “Wrath of Khan”.

When you heard Heath Ledger would play The Joker in The Dark Knight… did you say you’d already seen Tim Burton’s Batman (with Jack Nicholson)?

And did you eat your words afterwards?

457. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Well one thing I did get right: The viscerally negative reaction some fans would have to news of Khan in the sequel.

So keeping the news secret for as long as possible at least reduced the amount of berating Bob will take for it on behalf of the entire team.

And actually I was always for a Khan reappearance. Cumberbatch just does not look the part at all. Which I guess is another reason why I was leaning toward Joaquim.

So, they must have saw something in Cumberbatch’s performance that made them change the direction they were going for casting.

Actually, the only thing I am now biting my nails over is news of Klingons.

458. Ryan - April 30, 2012

How ’bout a danged trailer, Bob? ; )

459. shunt - April 30, 2012

2-3 appreances?

I think its maybe just one! Not sure???

Anyway you get the point!

460. Thorny - April 30, 2012

445… Khan’s not just any old character. He’s iconic. Bad Robot has sailed into very treacherous waters with this decision. I wrote two years ago the temptation would be irresistible to both Paramount and Bad Robot… I’d hoped Cumberbatch’s casting ruled out Khan, but no. And the possibility of Klingons being prominent really starts to push this movie into “Spider-Man 3″ or “Batman Forever” over-the-top mode to me. I hope they can pull it off. “The Dark Knight” did, but it seems to be the exception, not the rule. Good Luck, Bob and Company.

461. "Check the Circuit! - April 30, 2012

Nimoy: Sweet!!
Khan: Bummer. Too soon.
Klingons: Meh.
Star Trek 2.0: Still can’t wait!!!

Not what I was hoping for personally, but I have complete faith in The Supreme Court. Looking forward to having my face melted!!

462. Chancellor Gowron - April 30, 2012

Well I can’t really see Benedict Cumberlatch as Khan, but hopefully it will still be good. Glad to hear that somebody from the “real” Star Trek universe is coming back, and we can only hope that Shatner will now try to catch up with Nimoy. Out of the new actors, Quinto is probably the best, but he can never hope to be nearly as good as Leonard Nimoy. Still, even though I have my doubts about Khan, I knew this would be a good movie once I heard that the Klingons are returning. As long as they don’t butcher the Klingons like they did to the Romulans. Really, the Klingons should have been the bad guys in Trek XI. Swearing revenge against the Federation for letting their homeworld blow up isn’t really the Romulans style. Any real Romulan would have taken their information about the future back to Romulus, and help the Star Empire become powerful enough to crush the Federation in the future. Just destroying every Federation planet for revenge is really a more Klingon thing to do. Not to mention that Sulu’s sword fight would have been 50% more bad-ass if his oponent had a bat’leth or a mek’loth. I wonder if we’ll be seeing the ridged Klingons from the spinoffs, or the Augment ones from TOS. Should be pretty awesome either way though.

463. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

357 WAS funny.

And he was being nice. He could have wished for Bob to be totally incinerated by one of JJ’s lens flares. Instead, he wished Bob would just lose his eyebrows! Haha!

But I wonder. What does Bob really think when he reads fan vitriol about what they are doing???

464. PEB - April 30, 2012

oh and one other thing, while yes I would’ve loved to see an Indian actor portay Khan, you can in no way point your finger at the new team for something like this when beloved captain picard himself was a frenchman with a friggin english accent. if i remember correctly so did his brother and his nephew…born and raised in france. so because trek has done this on many different occasions, i could get past this casting simply because as of right now, all we know is that it’s khan and nothing more. maybe my oppinions will change next year, or maybe not. but there’s not even a full trailer to nitpick over yet guys.

465. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - April 30, 2012

Bob Orci, I salute you in advance for extreme effort that went into this story to make it work. It’s exciting to think Khan will be rebooted in this universe. And I’m sure it will work. You, Alex, JJ, and David, won my confidence in the first movie (2009).

466. Tony - April 30, 2012

Cautiously optimistic about Khan but I’m extremely excited!

But my big question is what about the music? Is Micheal Gianchino doing it again?

467. Phil - April 30, 2012

Sucks to be ZQ, I guess, now that he dies at the end of the movie. So much for the three picture deal.

468. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

The movie will be called Star Trek — The Grapes of Khan.

Premise: Khan goes berserk deranged when he sees what centuries of deep sleep did to his balls.

469. Jenna - April 30, 2012

449. Is it really necessary to make the same point so many times? We get it. This isn’t even definite yet so maybe pause the indignation? You don’t know the story for sure and at some point when you have tried to get the most racially appropriate actor it DOES become about the “best actor” if time is tight and actors are busy. Many of us disagree with you on that and would much rather see an excellent actor than someone who looks the part but can’t act just for the sake of it. Possible you could concede you might just be seeing racial prejudice where it isn’t in this case?

470. Caesar - April 30, 2012

Who’s “Micheal Gianchino?”

471. Andrews - April 30, 2012

Possible you could concede you might just be seeing racial prejudice where it isn’t in this case?

Wow, I can’t. So I’m sure you would have been really excited to see Sulu played by a white dude? Or Uhura by a white chick? As long as the actor was better, right? ~Colorblind casting~. It’s weird how that defaults to WHITE casting 99.99999% of the time, but life is funny that way.

472. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Somewhere in the real world, Vultan is silently banging his head against a tree.

473. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 281 Troubled Trouble

I couldn’t agree more. ;-)

Just another lazy, by-the-numbers, reshuffling-from-the-same-deck kind of sequel I’ve grown to expect these days from the Hollywood Machine. Then again? After “Cowboys & Aliens” I suppose I shouldn’t be terribly surprised. That was another one whose trailer and teaser info was far better than what appeared on screen…

474. British Khan? - April 30, 2012

Okay…here’s what’s got me cheesed off…

This universe is a off-shoot of the Prime universe, and as such is bound by the same basic history as in the Prime universe up until the point when Nero’s ship comes through the ether and attacks the Kelvin.

That means everything that occurred before this was IDENTICAL in both realities. Therefore, Khan was portrayed by a Latino actor, but was supposed to be of Sikh origins from Northern India.

At any rate, it has been established what his race is. Cumberbatch is a British guy, and is white as a sheet. I’m not being racist, but the point is…you can’t change fundamental characteristics of a character. The character then becomes something else, unintended by the writers.

And if you are going to (as my wife and friends state) turn him into an Indian Sikh, then why not hire an actor who is of that race and totally believable in that role?

Never mind JJ and Crew bottom-feeding or whatever everyone is saying, about rehash and all of that. The thing that angers me is continuity. Star Trek has always prided itself on it’s canon. Khan is not British. And I swear if he talks with any hint of a British accent, I’m crying foul on this production, big time.

And just for consideration, has anyone given an ounce of consideration to the fact that this is all cleverly crafted misinformation from the set? It’s sure generating a lot of emotions on here…and I wouldn’t put it past JJ and company.

475. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Up in Canada, Red Dead Ryan is so happy that he’s going to get laid tonight. No wait…he just checked his wallet. Short $10. Nevermind.

476. John - April 30, 2012

For the third movie they should bring Kirk back from the dead, fat and old.

477. Craiger - April 30, 2012

I wonder if JJ is going to go with villians the general movie going public knows about for the sequel and the third one? I know some would say well they didn’t know Nero but they knew about Kirk, Spock the rest of the Enterprise crew and the Enterprise herself. Most of the movie going public has heard about Khan and the Klingons right not having even seen TOS right? The general movie going public might not go see the sequel if they have to figure out who other Trek villains are that they don’t know about like the Talosions, Gary Mitchell ect. I doubt they knew Mitchell was Kirk’s best friend not McCoy as he was in ST 2009. They are doing Trek like the SW prequels. They made the SW pequels for people who never saw the orignals but threw nods to the originals in the prequels for the fans of the original SW series.

478. Tony - April 30, 2012

@470

Michael Giacchino. The composer of the last Star Trek movie.

Sorry it’s Monday and I can’t spell. :p

479. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Somewhere in Louisiana, Bob Orci is letting Harrison Ford read the Trekmovie comments. Ford shakes his head. “”Trekkies,” he says.

480. Krattle - April 30, 2012

Guys, did you not read Bob Orci’s #425 post? To quote him, he said:
“We were inspired by Andres Serrano’s Piss Christ.”

Don’t you get it? Doing Khan in the new movie would be like pissing on Christ. Go look up that piece of art and you’ll see what he means.

481. Krattle - April 30, 2012

I’ll spell it out for you: they aren’t doing Khan.

482. Aurore - April 30, 2012

Yes…

I wonder what Mr. Orci thinks of some of the 3% of Star Trek fans who are online…

No…no… do not answer. I know you are terrified.

That’s why there will be no beer factory in the sequel, for instance.

You live in fear of my …WRATH…as should be.

:)

483. Jax Maxton - April 30, 2012

I have always had a sneaking suspicion that this Trek reboot would end after 3 movies, and the 3rd movie would be a re-aligning of the prime timeline and the new timeline, getting everything back to how it was before Trek 2009. With Spock Prime being back, I still am now more sure than ever that this is the plan, with a new Trek TV show appearing soon after Star Trek 3. Otherwise, why bring Spock Prime back AGAIN only to overshadow all of the young guys? Seems kind of a pointless decision unless there is a bigger plan.

484. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

I love this place. All it needs is bourbon.

485. Krattle - April 30, 2012

#482

Is your comment directed at me? I can’t tell because it is so cryptic.

I doubt he thinks very highly of us. But those posts of mine have been my only on this site, ever.

I am terrified? Of what? Huh?

486. Capt. of the U.S.S. Anduril - April 30, 2012

I call bullshit. Cumberbatch looks nothing like Khan. Period. Not any version of him.

And seriously…that doesn’t sound like a confirmation that they’re doing Spock Prime. At all.

Pure bullshit.

487. Allen - April 30, 2012

i can live with spock, although I didn’t want ANY of the originals in this movie.

Kahn? seriously? I sure hope they have something completely different in mind for him. Even Enterprise’s take on the augments seemed like a remake of both space seed and Star Trek 2.

I wouldn’t mind the klingons as long as they don’t wear those stupid helmets they wore in the deleted scene for 2009.

488. TrekMadeMeWonder - April 30, 2012

Man this thread took off!

123. rm10019

Eat me.

489. Andrews - April 30, 2012

@480 Yeahhhh, the time for smirky troll comments is past. When a news site with a good deal of journalistic integrity is confirming rumors, including one about whitewashing a famous character — the one that, in fact, they consider so multiply confirmed it isn’t a rumor anymore –the time for playing coy is done. Either debunk it or confirm it. This goes beyond nerdrage to something really disappointing and backward.

This is my advice for bob orci to pass on to Abrams. Milking THIS particular controversy for more buzz is not a good idea, in addition to manipulating the actually understandable outrage of fans and non-fans over YET MORE WHITEWASHING in Hollywood, and is going to bite them in the ass. I know because of my learnings.

490. Jax Maxton - April 30, 2012

I still think Cumberbatch may be playing Picard’s father.

491. Jeffrey S. Nelson - April 30, 2012

Nimoy is becoming the Yoda of Star Trek. Just wish they work work The Shat into the storyline…

492. Allen - April 30, 2012

Are we sure this isn’t a delayed april fools day joke?

JJ: hey everyone i hate the fans so were going to piss them off buy making up really stupid false spoilers before the movie is released. If were lucky i can screw this one up so badly that they never ask me to do another star trek movie again. If they really wanted star trek to come back in force they should have picked Johnathan franks to dirrect because unlike me he actually knows what hes doing and wouldn’t do something stupid like point a flashlight in the camera for half the movie.

(yes i can’t stand jj)

493. Robman007 - April 30, 2012

Actually, Star Trek cannon is pretty screwed up as it is…thanks to TNG, later shows and even the early films. Klingons honorable? Romulans with head ridges? Enterprise seasons 1-4? Yeah, ok….

494. Aurore - April 30, 2012

485. Krattle – April 30, 2012
#482

Is your comment directed at me? I can’t tell because it is so cryptic.
I doubt he thinks very highly of us. But those posts of mine have been my only on this site, ever.
I am terrified? Of what? Huh?

___________

I apologise.

I should have clarified; my post was meant for Roberto Orci.

:)

495. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

Krattle: ASPC is simply highlighting centuries of misuse…

boborci: …will do what we can to get through the mountain of snakes…

496. Craiger - April 30, 2012

We are forgetting this could be a new version of Khan not the one from Space Seed. Remember the timeline has changed so events in this Universe wont play out like the Prime Universe. Events in Space Seed might not happen.

497. boborci - April 30, 2012

440. El Chup – April 30, 2012

It was something called A JOKE! I thought you humans were familiar with humor.

498. Basement Blogger - April 30, 2012

@ 484

Dmduncan says,
‘I love this place. All it needs is bourbon.”

Agreed. See we can agree on things. But my doctor says I should drink red wine instead. The cheap stuff tastes like vinegar. Where’s Picard’s wine when you need it?

499. Krattle - April 30, 2012

#495.

Right, but that’s not how Bob Orci meant it when he alluded that work of art. His comment was clearly sarcastic.

500. draderman - April 30, 2012

500!

501. Captain Dan - April 30, 2012

Kinda expected the rage.

I’m a bit surprised it is, after all my own denial, Khan. But meh, this will be a different story and I have faith in the team to put together a great story that will be so different from Space Seed and Wrath of Khan – much like The Dark Knight was different from Batman.

I’m guessing these events are taking place about 20 years prior to Space Seed in the prime universe, while that won’t change how Khan might behave, our crew are younger and the technology/scenario could be quite different. The Botany Bay might be found in a different region of space – maybe the Klingons or Vulcans or someone else finds Khan first etc etc etc…

Bring it on! The only disappointing thing now is that there’s still over a year before I get to feast my eyes on this movie in a cinema!

502. Krattle - April 30, 2012

Oh so that’s how Bob Orci meant it…I see. Well, I was wrong.

503. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

499. Krattle

ahhhh, but how we do love to be “inspired”

504. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - April 30, 2012

Im most excited about Nimoy comming back.

Kahn will be good too!!

505. Chancellor Gowron - April 30, 2012

@496
Events from Space Seed might not happen, but everything before Nero arrived in the 2230s still happenned. That means that Khan’s entire history before Space Seed is exactly the same, including being frozen in the Botany Bay in the 1990s. Of course, by that logic, it technically wouldn’t make sense for Khan to be played by anybody other than Ricardo Montalban, but obviously that’s impossible. Still, you would think that they would have Khan be played by somebody who is either hispanic or Indian, and just have Cumberlatch play one of Trek’s many British villains like Shinzon, or Soran, or Gorkon.

506. boborci - April 30, 2012

479. dmduncan – April 30, 2012

HAHA! Basically!

507. Phil - April 30, 2012

@491. Jabba the Cap?

508. Vultan - April 30, 2012

#472 dmduncan

“Somewhere in the real world, Vultan is silently banging his head against a tree.”

YES! And man do I need an aspirin! Ha ha.

But really, now that I’ve had time to think it over… I’ve been hanging out here mainly just for the fun of speculation (and reading the funny and interesting comments from others). Now that’s over… eh, well, I guess this could be a fun ‘what-if’ sort of action movie, but frankly my interest has dropped quite a bit.

I may catch it in a theater (if the trailer is impressive enough). May wait for a rental. I’ve skipped Trek movies in the past, namely Insurrection and Nemesis, so I’m not going to rush out and see it just because the Star Trek name is on the poster.

Catch ya later.

509. Aurore - April 30, 2012

In fact, I may be wrong, but, I do believe he does think highly of us.

Sort of…

It’s just that he has a job to do…

510. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

506. boborci

All things being equal, I would agree with you. All things, however, are not equal.

511. Johnny - April 30, 2012

505 — But remember this is a reboot. All the “original” characters are being played by younger actors — so naturally they’d do the same thing with Khan. Using different actors doesn’t mess with the canon — we just have to live with the fact that the actors look different.

512. John Pearse - April 30, 2012

More Nimoy can never be a bad thing, and while I’m a bit sick of the Klingons, I’m looking forward to seeing a fresh take on them. But Khan? I don’t even see the sense from a commercial point of view. It seems to me that the people most likely to get the reference are the same ones who are least likely to appreciate it. The general public aren’t going to want to see the movie because Khan’s in it, because they have barely any recognition of who he is beyond a vague awareness that one of the movies had the word in its title. But I suppose that’s all part of the commercial strategy.

It’s a real pity that in all of space and time that Trek could explore, it’s been chosen to boldly go where man has been before.*

*What do you mean that’s an overused phrase? I was paying homage!

513. Carlos Teran - April 30, 2012

I’ll give the upcoming movie the benefit of a doubt and so far with an open mind. It’s kind disappointing to find out that the writers are just recycling old material. Then again, The Wrath Of Khan was precisely a recycled movie of sorts, and still my favorite Star Trek movie. So, don’t be so negative guys. Let’s enjoy the fact that Paramount is spending some serious money on this franchise again.

514. Chris Doohan - April 30, 2012

I decided NOT to read the spoilers, although I kind of got the Khan thing while scrolling through comments. That actually makes me more anxious to see the film.

Bob, no need to commiserate. Everyone who reads these blogs will likely see the movie three to four times.

C

515. Landru's cousin, Dandru - April 30, 2012

#233 wrote:
“He doesn’t need to, Khan isn’t genetically an Indian Sihk, it is just a name.”

Rewatch “Space Seed.” He’s identified as a Sikh.

516. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

488 – my bad, was supposed to be 114 not you in the slightest.

517. sean - April 30, 2012

#464

You must recognize that having an Englishman play a Frenchman is not quite the same as having an Englishman play a South Asian. Colonialism, decades of oppression, ‘brownface’, etc., etc.

That being said, I’m not accusing Bob or anyone else involved of racism. I’m just hoping there’s a really good reason why Khan is now British and white.

518. Landru's cousin, Dandru - April 30, 2012

#263 wrote:
“You obviously haven’t got a damned clue what Star Trek is,or what Roddenberry’s humanist ideals were all about.”

Actually, I’d say that applies to YOU, given your smug attitude of superiority.

519. boborci - April 30, 2012

514. Chris Doohan – April 30, 2012

Sympathize that no one gets answers.

520. Aurore - April 30, 2012

As I said earlier; it appears that I was wrong about Khan.

I can live with that.

I must, however, say that I did not expect Mr. Abrams to cast Mr. Cumberbatch
as Khan Noonien Singh(for reasons evoked by some posters upthread and on other threads, in the past).

521. BoltBait - April 30, 2012

I would bet that the people on this thread bitching the loudest will be first in line buying tickets when the movie finally hits theaters next year.

522. Andrew - April 30, 2012

Hey Bob. Please say hi to me so I can tell my friends I talked to you! (Trek 2009 made a trekkie out of me btw.)

523. MJ - April 30, 2012

@512. “But Khan? I don’t even see the sense from a commercial point of view. It seems to me that the people most likely to get the reference are the same ones who are least likely to appreciate it. The general public aren’t going to want to see the movie because Khan’s in it, because they have barely any recognition of who he is beyond a vague awareness that one of the movies had the word in its title.”

You are joking, right? Everyone who is a fan of action movies and sf movies, knows who Khan is, and that HUGE market is who this is aimed for.

524. punkspocker - April 30, 2012

This is hilarious. All this bickering. Bourbon! im gonna need a big fatty if its khan.

525. Johnny - April 30, 2012

512 — “It’s a real pity that in all of space and time that Trek could explore, it’s been chosen to boldly go where man has been before.”

Look… it’s a movie. They have to go with something familiar. It is a reboot after all — so anyone thinking logically should expect (and be excited) by the fact that Khan will be in the sequel. For a MOVIE, why wouldn’t we want the best villain that the franchise has to offer?

Like I said before — TV is the place where Star Trek can go where no man has gone before. That concept in and of itself works so much better on TV. I’m fairly confident that we’ll be seeing an entirely new Star Trek show hit the airwaves within the next two years — so that will be the perfect opportunity to try new and original things.

Meanwhile… the movie franchise we have is supposed to be a reboot of the Original Series. It has to stick to the traditional movie formula, and also be “easily identifiable” as “Star Trek”. What better way to do it then have Khan (and Klingons) be in the film?

Also — just another general comment: The only thing this report tells us is that Khan is in the film and that it’s not a retelling of “Space Seed”. So really, no one has any clue how they’ll utilize Khan. Why don’t we wait and reserve judgment before we start crying foul over the writers “rehashing” old stories.

526. HubcapDave - April 30, 2012

What happened to the days when the majority of us were chomping at the bit for Khan in the next movie, with Javier Bardem as our prime choice?

I for one will be interested in seeing what JJ, Orci, et.al. come up with.

527. Miles R. Seppelt - April 30, 2012

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAN!!! – Miles : )

528. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - April 30, 2012

Patrick Stewart pulled off a french role, and many other actors have pulled off different nationalities. It just depends on how good the actor is.
Keep in mind- the majority of viewers will be meeting Khan for the first time. In either universe.

529. Joachim - April 30, 2012

People always have something to complain about these days… We should just be grateful we not only got ONE fairly entertaining Star Trek flick within the last 4 years, but we’re getting another one in a year…

Trek probably could have died years ago with the continued watering down of the populations intellectual capacity!

Nuff said:)

530. Johnny - April 30, 2012

526 — Bingo. Except my choice was Antonio Banderas. :)

531. Aurore - April 30, 2012

520. Aurore – April 30, 2012
As I said earlier; it appears that I was wrong about Khan.
I can live with that.
__________

No you can’t.
But, you have no choice…

:))

532. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

519. boborci “Sympathize that no one gets answers.”

Ahhhh…but the mysterious unraveling of information is so much blasted fun! You know you love it.

533. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#449: “Keep sassing everyone who’s pissed at this racial regression from the GODDAMN SIXTIES…”

There’s no regression – Khan wasn’t cast as a Sikh in the 1960s, 1980s or, apparently, now. Perhaps he ought to be – but your “regression” objection is a red herring. It’s pseudo-indignation, manufactured to order.

Two things I wonder about many of the naysayers:

1) Why do the folks who decry the “lack of imagination” supposedly involved in recreating an established character seem to be the least imaginative of folks themselves? And,

2) How can you object so vociferously to the “sacrilege” of using a character whose name you can’t even spell consistently and properly?

534. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

Welcome Back Bob Orci. Nice to see you here again!

535. Captain Peabody - April 30, 2012

I find it really hard to imagine anyone managing to “redo” Khan successfully. Montalban’s performance, mannerisms, and appearance are so much the “DNA” of the character, and Cumberbatch is so different from him in speech and background (a Mexican playing a Sikh was one thing, but an Englishman?) that I’m not sure why you would even bother calling the new character “Khan,” even if he is somewhat a takeoff in backstory.

Nevertheless, obviously, the idea of judging the movie based solely on these pieces of information is just silly. Ultimately, to paraphrase Nick Meyer, people aren’t going to care what the movie was about, or who’s in it. All they’re going to care about is: “Is it good?”

Godspeed, gentlemen.

536. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

I am a bit Disapointed about Khan being in the Movie. But with that said. I trust Bob Orci and the court to give us a Bad A$$ Trek Movie worthy of Ricardo Montalban.

537. Joe Sidney - April 30, 2012

Orci, Kurtzman, Lindeloff and Abrams will BLOW OUR MINDS.
Do not worry.

538. joe35 - April 30, 2012

Not even the prospect of Cumberbatch playing Khan can get me excited about this movie. J.J. Abrams ruined “Star Trek” with his first movie, which was nothing more than his 12 year old “Star Wars” wet dream. Go play with your own franchise, J.J., and stop ruining someone else’s.

539. Shilliam Watner - April 30, 2012

It is disheartening to read some people’s comments here who want to wipe the noses of others in this news. Such animosity is unnecessary. How splendid that some of you were right about Khan being in the movie, but I don’t see the big deal of it.

It is the equal in this forum of kicking somebody when they are down. Why not instead just express your happiness about the reported events? I would hope we could all be better humans here.

The news to me is neither bad nor good. I’ll withhold my judgment ’til I’ve seen the film. I’ve said before that I don’t care if the villain is Khan as long as they do it well and with originality. I’m not going to decide now that I won’t like the film simply because they’re doing something I don’t think they should do. I’m going to see how they do it first, then pass judgment.

Be decent folks. It’s our last refuge in a world going increasingly mad.

540. Radioactive Spock - April 30, 2012

Nice. As I posted some time ago, there’s no reason for the outrage at this. Circumstances of Khan’s thawing are no doubt going to be far different than in Space Seed. Maybe the Klingons find him this time. I for one am extremely excited.

541. Commodore Mike of the Terran Empire - April 30, 2012

Hey Joe35. Chill Out.

542. rm10019 - April 30, 2012

Bob Orci, was there much if any rewriting for BC once cast instead of another actor? Like to speak to his ‘voice’ or characteristics as an actor?

543. Sherlock FanGirl - April 30, 2012

RIP Joel Goldsmith.

http://www.gateworld.net/news/2012/04/stargate-composer-joel-goldsmith-dead-at-54/

544. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#535: “I find it really hard to imagine anyone managing to “redo” Khan successfully. Montalban’s performance, mannerisms, and appearance are so much the “DNA” of the character…”

I dunno; I think that if you can recast a character originated by William Shatner you can recast *any* part. LOL

545. Vultan - April 30, 2012

Javier Bardem is the villain in the next Bond film, Skyfall. His character’s name is Silva. Not Blofeld or Goldfinger. He’s playing an original character.

That’s just weird.

546. EM - April 30, 2012

Oooooh! I hope that it is Khan. And I hope that there are Klingons. Spock Prime would be nice, too.

547. Rick - April 30, 2012

Funny how we now compare different genre films due to theme, style, plot, characters used, etc. Like this STAR TREK film to THE DARK KNIGHT where you really have to escalate things for the sequel. Funny shouldn’t this film be compared to THE WRATH OF KHAN?;) Did I spell KHAN right? All kidding aside I was one of those who didn’t want Khan in this film and if he was it would be their take on SPACE SEED. Still we are not 100% sure on anything yet, but at this point I will hold my opinion till I walk out of the theater next year. I won’t be one of those complainers suddenly caught off guard by a really interesting and fun film. It has happened in the past with some things.

I do see there is big interest in this film with over 460 comments, so that must say something. Also it is cool to find out they are filming some of this film close to where I live.

548. Andrew - April 30, 2012

Out of curiosity, what were the general sentiments on this board when it was first announced that they would be re-booting the original series of trek with a block-buster movie, back a few years ago ? (I was too young then to keep track of such things.)

549. The Art of Film is Dead. - April 30, 2012

I think Khan is primarily being used because genre film’s today are too expensive to be more about the creative than using every advantage possible to guarantee sufficient returns on the investment.  Since Trek films–including Abrams previous film–don’t do upper-scale blockbuster business, it makes sense Khan would get the nod regarding subject matter for the new film.  I don’t like it either, but that’s what the industry is about today.

550. Rick - April 30, 2012

Geez suddenly there is 547 comments man talk about buzz. ;)

551. sidewall - April 30, 2012

@ Orci and Anthony

I apologize for my comments about the structural integrity of Bob’s eyebrows.

I honestly think the direction that this movie and the last took the franchise in has been absolutely awful, not well thought out, full of bad creative choices and a complete misunderstanding or disregard of what drew people to it in the first place. Frankly, I think the writing and directing have thus far been absolutely terrible. That being said, a set of bad movies doesn’t merit that level of vitriol, so, sorry.

552. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

Great news about Khan!

Maybe they can do a scene by scene recreate, like they did for Psycho.

(Just kidding. ;)

553. MJ - April 30, 2012

@538 “J.J. Abrams ruined “Star Trek” with his first movie, which was nothing more than his 12 year old “Star Wars” wet dream. Go play with your own franchise, J.J., and stop ruining someone else’s.”

Jesus Christ, dude. Mellow out!

554. Thomas - April 30, 2012

515. Landru’s Cousin, Dandru

A Sikh is a follower of Sikhism, a monotheistic religion found in India in the 15th century. This does not refer to a specific ethnic group; rather, Sikhism in India encompasses dozens of ethnic groups.

If anything, I would guess that whoever wrote Space Seed may have misidentified “Sikh” as an ethnicity; as has been pointed by author Greg Cox, Khan neither wears the traditional turban nor does he wear a beard. Sikhism forbids the cutting of hair.

555. Johnny - April 30, 2012

548 and 549 — Exactly. Exactly. You simply have to go with Khan on such a big budget movie. Although, I think they can pull it off, considering the care that went into the first film, and all the positive buzz about the sequel.

People are complaining about re-doing Khan — but remember they’ve already rebooted the entire Original Series cast… and done it surprisingly well. I don’t think anyone thought that they could have found actors who could pull off Kirk, Spock, and Bones… but they sure as heck did in Pine, Quinto, and Urban. Why can’t the same thing happen with Khan?

556. Magic_Al - April 30, 2012

The argument about whether the Prime Universe was destroyed or ended is reasonable because it depends upon point of view. From Spock Prime’s point of view, the Prime Universe is destroyed and Vulcan is destroyed as surely as Hitler took over the world due to Edith Keeler. Hmm… actually why doesn’t Spock Prime go to the Guardian of Forever, which has not yet been discovered by the Federation in the alternate universe, and use it to stop Nero?

557. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Hey guys, stop bitching about Cumberbatch being a pasty white Brit. The “Indian” and “Sikh” will be added in post.

558. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

But seriously, I look forward to a grand action adventure movie.

559. Landru's cousin, Dandru - April 30, 2012

I know this is a radical thought, but… how about actually seeing the film, folks, before deciding it sucks?

560. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

Bob Orci – Say “Hi” to Harrison Ford. Tell him that I was pleasantly surprised with the way he played his character in “Cowboys & Aliens”. Great stuff. Thank you. Good luck with your Enders Game project, btw.

#421 – “So, Bob Orci, wanna explain your and the production team’s thought process for whitewashing an iconic Star Trek character like it’s nbd?”

What does “nbd” mean? Obviously Bob Orci decided to comment on your post by alluding to being inspired by Andres Serrano Piss Christ. I googled Piss Christ – whoa…Frankly, I don’t get either post. Maybe that’s a good thing?

(Please, people – try to refrain from using abbreviations unless their meaning is well known. This is a worldwide web…)

561. MJ - April 30, 2012

@557. Here’s hoping for Cumberbatch doing Chrysler commericals next year and mentioning “rich Corinthian leather,” :-)

562. Johnny - April 30, 2012

The Prime Universe was not “destroyed” or “ended”. Think of a line. When Spock Prime traveled backwards in time, he essentially “looped” back to an earlier point on the timeline. But the moment he entered the past — a NEW line branched off from the existing line — creating a new set of events.

The Prime Universe wasn’t eliminated —- it is still there and everything that happened there happened. We’re just on a new timeline created when Spock traveled back.

It would look like a fork.

563. Andy Patterson - April 30, 2012

Khan. Really? (sigh)

564. Phil - April 30, 2012

@558. So do I. I’ll fire up Wrath of Khan on Netflicks tonight, and save myself 13 bucks next year. Wonder how ZQ took the news when he was told he would die at the end of the remake?

Yeah, yeah, I’ll go see it, probably not on opening weekend, though.

565. MJ - April 30, 2012

@562. Yes, and that fits with current thinking in physics — the multiple universes interpretaation, if you will.

566. TheDoctor - April 30, 2012

And most of you wonder why Trekkies have such a bad reputation? You have absolutely no idea where the story is going. Saying they are completely out of ideas sounds idiotic and immature. Not to mention the fact that in terms of a business decision, this is genius. The general public who doesn’t know too much about Trek certainly knows Khan. But besides that, this is the same writing team that defied most of you haters and revitalized the franchise.

So get mad and type away your frustration. You talk about things being tired and out of ideas, but before the last film came out Trek was absent from the big screen for nearly a decade for that very reason.

So instead of flaming and attacking Bob, why don’t you take a step back and think about how uninformed your overtly negative opinions are. All you have, in reality, is a character’s name. None of you have any idea how the character of Khan will be portrayed nor can any of you pretend to know. This is, as most of you have so astutely pointed out, a completely new universe. Khan is going to be a different person, we aren’t going to see someone taking up Ricardo Montalban’s role.

You all act as if you know what is best for the franchise. You don’t. The franchise is in perhaps the best hands it could be in Hollywood. This isn’t Michael Bay making some uninformed decision to get people into the seats. If Khan is in the film, it will make sense, and it will be original.

567. Phil - April 30, 2012

@560. No Big Deal.

568. rtrj - April 30, 2012

I question this leaking out all at once, with JJ being soooo secretive,
is he capable of disinformation? If this is all a ruse, imagine the
lol bob orci is experiencing now!

569. MJ - April 30, 2012

@564. But if you don’t see it opening weekend, you won’t be able to start bitching about it ASAP here? ;-)

570. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#475.

“Up in Canada, Red Dead Ryan is so happy that he’s going to get laid tonight. No wait….he just checked his wallet. Short $10. Nevermind.”

Yeah, its a real bummer. The hookers raised their fees to adjust for “inflation”. :-)

571. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#538 “J.J. Abrams ruined “Star Trek” with his first movie, which was nothing more than his 12 year old “Star Wars” wet dream. Go play with your own franchise, J.J., and stop ruining someone else’s.”

Trek is as much Abrams’s franchise as it is the trekkies’ – more so, in fact, as he’s working with the people that it *actually* belongs to – Paramount Pictures.

572. The Observer - April 30, 2012

The public have heard the “True Fans” are outraged yet again!

So they’ve begun lining up at theaters already!

573. Mike C. - April 30, 2012

150 – agreed.

574. El Chup - April 30, 2012

Where’s Rick Berman when you need him?

He could’ve given Bob a job you know…..

Bob-a-job I say!

Naaahhhh, you ‘mericans would’nt get that wouldya…..

575. Sherlock FanGirl - April 30, 2012

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1118053333

576. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@572

It don’t matter. True Trekkies will always be safe from public humiliation as long as this lot still exist…..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7zWNJHS9PBE

577. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

Sherlock FanGirl, it’s sad that Goldsmith died at such a young age.

That said, you’re not going to get any attention for the story by posting the link in this comment thread. People are focused to the point of obsession on Kha-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-n!

578. sean - April 30, 2012

#554

Yes, Sikhism is a religion. It is a religion with a majority membership of Indians/South Asians. Still, a British man could indeed be a practitioner. However, his name would likely not be Khan Noonien Singh.

Marla refers to him being Sikh, and draws a portrait of him wearing a traditional Sikh turban. It’s obvious that the writers intended him to be Sikh, regardless of whether they fully understood Sikhism.

579. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

@575: Hats off and a moment of silent prayer for Joel Goldsmith.

580. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@564 — Phil — What don’t you understand about it NOT being a remake of “Space Seed” or “Wrath of Khan”? I’m beginning to think you guys are just trolling.

581. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

HAHAHA WHAT A JOKE!! Oh dear God they are going to try and reinvent the wheel with Khan? I hope Richardo is not rolling in his grave with this news.

BORING!!

So let me get this straight. JJ and the rest of the dumb dumbs all complained (and this includes the nit wits at Paramount) that Trek was just “rehashing, too much continuity etc”. So they decided to put together the last lousy film with a story that was so stupid that that it took a mountain of money to pull Nimoy out and make him a sell out to it. They ERASED all of TOS,TNG,DS9 and VOY with this ridiculous time travel story. And what do we get? Another REHASH. SO WHAT EXACTLY was the point again for the time travel, erase everything movie???? WHAT EXACTLY IS NEW AGAIN? One word: NOTHING! NOW they want to do Star Trek 2 all over again? What a joke! It looks like we will never see any “NEW” Trek again.

So they jumped onto the Star Wars band wagon for the last film. Now they want to jump on the Batman one? Idiots!

I will not spend one dime seeing this movie!

I hope this movie bombs!

PS: Note to Transformer Twits: KHAN is Indian NOT a skinny white brit. This Khan occurred “BEFORE” ENT which was not touched by the Abrams time travel mess from the last movie. Khan still remains “Indian”. (Once again proving you are and never were fans of Star Trek.)

PSS: Note to T.T. Peter Parker IS Spiderman. Not Clark Kent or Bruce Wayne. Just a heads up before you ruin another film series.

582. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

#551 – “and a complete misunderstanding or disregard of what drew people to it in the first place.”

You mean “complete misunderstanding or disregard” of what drew YOU to Star Trek. I think Bob Orci has a reasonable understanding because he was drawn to Star Trek (TNG series initially) long before he started writing any Trek movie stories, or so I believe. Please do not speak for other people in this way, especially when the opinions you have expressed here about Star Trek 09 are so very negative.

I grew up watching the original 1960′s series when it first came to NZ screens in the late 1960s.

583. CJS - April 30, 2012

Until Bob Orci descends from Star Trek heaven on a cloud and states absolutely that Cumberbatch is playin Khan, I won’t believe it.

584. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

As I said earlier, I find it ironic and hilarious that people are bitching about Khan being in the sequel and think he’s being overused after TWO previous appearances and yet ignore the fact that Klingons are also going to be in the movie. Klingons have been featured COUNTLESS times in Trek history, for frak’s sake.

The only person who complained about the Klingons was Harry Ballz, and he also complained about Khan. At least Harry was consistent in his statements. Unlike most of the other posters here.

585. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#581: “Khan still remains “Indian”. ”

Mexican, actually. Except that he isn’t, any more.

You may “hope this movie bombs” all you like. It will succeed. :-)

586. rtrj - April 30, 2012

#583.-”Until Bob Orci descends from Star Trek heaven on a cloud and states absolutely that Cumberbatch is playin Khan, I won’t believe it.”

Works for me ;)

587. Captain Hackett - April 30, 2012

It is fascinating.

588. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

#585

-Mexican, actually. Except that he isn’t, any more.

I suggest you go watch Space Seed and refresh yourself on the origin of the character. Clearly you are delusional after bumping your head at the alter of “all things Abrams”.

Sorry but I do hope it bombs. I know I will not add one dime to it. I am not going to be one of you people who swallow everything with the words “Star Trek” on it. The last movie clearly was a Star Wars rip off and now they are going to try and make Khan the new Joker? Please! It is pathetic and smells of desperation.

Khan is Indian not a skinny brit. These guys clearly don’t know a thing about Star Trek. After all this time they could not watch a few episodes/films before writing this new mess? Ridiculous.

Here is to bootleggers. One great way to get back at Paramount!

589. Trekker5 - April 30, 2012

OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!! Can not believe this!!!! :O Am sooo happy to have Mr.Nimoy back :D And are old pals the Klingons!! I must agree with Aurore @ #531 about Khan;had hoped they wouldn’t do Khan. But,alas,I’ll be alright,I’m so excited that knoe something about the movie right now that I don’t care!!! :) :) Yay!!! :)

590. Captain Hackett - April 30, 2012

You will have your answers when you watch the new movie.

591. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 585. Whilst the actor may have been Mexican, the character is and only ever was a Sikh of South Asain extraction. His name is Singh FFS.

If you knew anything about Sikhism you’d know that “Singh” is a bit of a giveaway.

592. Lt. Dakin - April 30, 2012

So Khan is in Star Trek II and Star Trek 2.

593. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@588

Go read the response of 589 and you will see a great example of someone with low entertainment standards and just swallows all things Trek.

Pretty sad that these so called Trek fans have sunken so low. They are not fans at all.

594. Devon - April 30, 2012

” #585

-Mexican, actually. Except that he isn’t, any more.

I suggest you go watch Space Seed and refresh yourself on the origin of the character. Clearly you are delusional after bumping your head at the alter of “all things Abrams”.

Sorry but I do hope it bombs. I know I will not add one dime to it. I am not going to be one of you people who swallow everything with the words “Star Trek” on it. The last movie clearly was a Star Wars rip off and now they are going to try and make Khan the new Joker? Please! It is pathetic and smells of desperation.

Khan is Indian not a skinny brit. These guys clearly don’t know a thing about Star Trek. After all this time they could not watch a few episodes/films before writing this new mess? Ridiculous.

Here is to bootleggers. One great way to get back at Paramount!

Nope

595. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#588: “-Mexican, actually. Except that he isn’t, any more.

I suggest you go watch Space Seed and refresh yourself on the origin of the character. Clearly you are delusional after bumping your head at the alter of “all things Abrams”.”

LOL – I’ll recite “Space Seed” for you line for line if you like – I’ll stumble, but I’ll get most of it. And my point, while simple and direct and inarguable, zipped right past you. ;-)

596. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@591

OH BUT NO! Let us all kneel at the alter of Abrams and accept “any old thing” merely because the words “Star Trek” are on it. Fans must accept it no matter how stupid or ridiculous it is.

I wonder how much they paid Nimoy to sell out for again for this film. Clearly he is banking money for his grandkids.

597. Captain Hackett - April 30, 2012

- no. 396

Who cares about their ethnic group that the characters belong to?!

Did George Takei get pissed off that the Korean actor, not Japanese, took over the role of Sulu? NO!

Did Nichelle Nichols get pissed off that the Hispanic actress took over the role of Uhura who is African? NO!

Take your chill pill!

598. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 492 Allen

Oh, I sure as hell wish it were…

I keep hoping that Bob Orci will post a big “Happy (belated) April Fool’s Day, Everyone.” ;-)

I am a tremendous fan of Benedict Cumberbatch’s work, particularly his new BBC “Sherlock” series (he is, IMO, the best since the late Jeremy Brett), but from a physical casting perspective? This is going to be another Tom Cruise/Lestat situation (a miscast actor who tried REALLY hard). I’m sure he’ll do his best, but I can already see the critics laughing at Star Trek all over again…

And the use of Klingons? Sorry, but I’ve had enough of them. Multiple movies and countless episodes have really got them covered, IMO. This movie reeks of a reshuffled card deck; same old cards we played with last game, but a new order, that’s all. My anticipation has soured into trepidation.

And to those who are gloating that they predicted Khan?
Yes, you were right (and good for you, too; I salute your uncanny guesswork) but I hardly see a genuine lack of imagination as any cause for a ST fan to celebrate. After all these years, they’re still “Chasing Khan” (as was done with Nero, Shinzon, etc). So many ST movies have tried to copy the Khan/Moby Dick formula.

Guess I was really just hoping for something new…..

599. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#591: “Whilst the actor may have been Mexican, the character is and only ever was a Sikh of South Asain extraction. His name is Singh FFS.”

And an Englishman rather than a Mexican playing a Sikh who didn’t look anything like a Sikh is a problem for you lot – how? Is it just a matter of how dark or light-skinned the actor is? There’s a word for that.

600. ensign joe - April 30, 2012

I hope it’s not Khan.. This will be the first Trek movie I won’t see.. Oh well..

601. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@581 Guy Fawkes: You do know the old timeline wasn’t “erased” right? It still exists. We’ve just “looped” back and started a NEW timeline that has branched off and exists PARALLEL to the old timeline. They did this to respect the old timeline while also throwing continuity out of the window.

602. DeShonn Steinblatt - April 30, 2012

572.

Indeed, nothing like a little true fan outrage to let the people know they’re in for another good time at the cinema.

Of course, it certainly helps that the true fans consist of reality avoiding idiots who would have you believe that a movie about a bunch of space zombies and their incompetent queen is thoughtful and intelligent.

603. richpit - April 30, 2012

I’m sure I’ll still like the movie and see it multiple times and buy the blu-ray, etc…but I am a little disappointed in the Khan news.

But, I have faith in JJ and his boyz to do right by us fans. I think Bob Orci has proven pretty well that he’s a Trek fan.

604. Jips - April 30, 2012

If these ‘rumors’ are indeed true I will be greatly disappointed. Khan’s already been done in movie form. They should have opted to do something different instead.

605. murt - April 30, 2012

If Khan is being played by a white guy I will not be watching this movie and I hope others do the same.

606. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@Devon

-Nope

Guess again. I will not add one dime to this mess. Waste your money if you want.

@Dennis

-LOL – I’ll recite “Space Seed” for you line for line if you like – I’ll stumble, but I’ll get most of it. And my point, while simple and direct and inarguable, zipped right past you. ;-)

Yawn. I got your silly point. But many actors have the ability to play different ethnic roles. Al Pacino can do Italian and Cuban. This guy doesn’t even look Indian. Since you can recite the episode go back in your mind and tell us the location and ethnicity of the character known as “Khan”. I will bet you the words “British” don’t appear.

Thank god for movie pirates. I am not paying one dime to see them urinate on Star Trek 2.

607. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

Sorry #605, but that hope is a forlorn one.

608. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

I think it’s a terrible call, showing a complete lack of creativity and an even bigger lack of understanding of Khan.

Khan is not Kirk’s Joker or Lex Luthor.

If there was one villain that they should have stayed away from, it was Khan.

They can’t create a different character? They can’t use another villain that hasn’t been done perfectly?

It’s a shame.

609. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@589 — “Guess I was really just hoping for something new…..”

Yes… something new from a REBOOT with the same old crew re-imagined. Yep… you’re making sense.

610. Commodore Adams - April 30, 2012

OMG!!! YES YES YES!!!!

Everything I wanted. A wicked villain and KLINGONS!!! LOL YES I GOT MY KLINGONS.

Huge fan of Cumberbatch in Sherlock….was an unexpected choice for Khan…as implied before that he was Sikh fighter….maybe he is Sikh just of British decent. Hey Benicio would have been a great choice but he does not have to look like Montalban.

After the tease with Klingons in the first movie (i.e. seeing the ships during the Kobayashi test) and the cut prison scene…I really wanted to see some bad ass Klingons and their ships in battle. But not just a sub plot…ha ha I love that.

The fact that they were able to gives us some of column A and column B with some Dark Knight Rises behind it…this movie is going to be fantastic.

611. justin - April 30, 2012

I think JJ and the rest of his team have proven they have some idea what they are doing. Trek 09 was great and many of the other projects they have partnered on as well. So with that said, back off haters.

612. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#606: ” I got your silly point.”

Nope, your initial response reveals otherwise. ;-)

613. Chingatchkook - April 30, 2012

It’s Kahn…I’m stoked! I’m really curious to see how Cumberbatch is going to pull that off, he’s not exactly a knockoff of Ricardo Montelban, but never the less I’m thrilled. May 2013 can’t come soon enough!!!!

614. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

A lot of Sikhs are dark-skinned, and a lot of others are lighter-skinned. Same holds true for the overall Indian and South Asian populations.

Just like how there are light-skinned Latinos and dark-skinned Latinos.

Anyway, it was never stated that Khan was Indian. He was a Sikh from India who could have been naturally Caucasian but was created in a lab in India, and raised by adoptive Indian Sikhs, thus a citizen from India who is a Sikh.

615. captain spock - April 30, 2012

in an alternate universe JJ abram can do what ever the heck he wants to do as far as trek.even if the trekkers dont like it he making better movie then Burgman & braga ever did , i’m glad it not space seed remake , that would be a slap in the face of the actor who played Khan.
i’m so glad Mr Nimoy is comming back even though for months we were told no origonal series cast was going to be in trek2. or maybe they keep it a hush hush thing to be a surprise for the fans who knows. the Klingons again oh please they been so over used it un real now i’ve view the spoilers it kinda ruined it for this over 45 years trekker for trek 2 now they have a wsusjestion by me for the title to uese lets call the new movie star trek2: the return of Khan …if any one can come up with something better lets hear it..

616. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@ 608 Guy Fawkes: “Khan is not Kirk’s Joker or Lex Luthor.”

Really? He’s not? Then who is? This is a MOVIE series… they have to bring out the big guns.

I’m all for them creating new characters — but they can do that with a new TV show with a new cast and premise.

The movie series is clearly a REBOOT so it should be treated as such.

617. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

It’s also funny that someone so predetermined to dislike a movie admits that they’re going to watch it on bootleg.

The grownups know, after all, that Paramount will make a metric buttload of money off of this film, bootleggers or not, and that watching a pirated copy is meaningless even as a symbolic protest.

All you’re actually doing is admitting that you have to see this movie somehow. LOL

618. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@600 “And an Englishman rather than a Mexican playing a Sikh who didn’t look anything like a Sikh is a problem for you lot – how? Is it just a matter of how dark or light-skinned the actor is? There’s a word for that.”

As an Englishman myself, who is also the same age as Mr. Cumberbatch, and just as white, but also, conincidently, has spent 14 years as an immigration lawyer dealing with, amongst others, south asian and Sikh clients, I would say yes, there is a distinct difference. However, perhaps I would notice that more than regular cinema goers.

Point is that there is the credibility issue to be gotten over. As crude as it sounds, in the sixties, in a less globalised world, you could just about get away with a Mexican as a Sikh, simply because there are some physical similarities between a light caste South Asian man and a hispanic one. A fair skinned caucasian, in a more glabalised world, is, to my mind, streching the credibility a bit too far.

Still, all that said, if Cumberbatch is playing Khan then they have already shat all over the pre-Kelvin prime universe canon, so I guess it’s just nitpicking to go on about his ethnicity if more obvious elements are already in the toilet. I’m just hoping that there is a credible way around it, like he isn’t the same Khan. i.e, He’s a part clone or something. I guess we shall have to wait and see.

619. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 617

Kirk was an explorer. He didn’t need a nemesis. Is Kirk no longer an explorer?

If anything, the only nemesis of the original Kirk was his own prejudice towards Klingons.

620. sean - April 30, 2012

#583

It’s weird you mention that, I just took this picture from my window.

http://img560.imageshack.us/img560/4525/theorcifromabove.jpg

621. sidewall - April 30, 2012

@582.

Hence the phrase “I think” rather than “We think.” (although there are a great many Trek fans who would agree with me, I cannot speak for them.) If you want to defend a generic action movie with a bland (but newly written) villain, terrible dialogue, and a plot with more holes in it than swiss cheese, that’s your opinion. It’s wrong, but you are free to it.

622. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

Anyone who actually supports this idea of this guy being Khan are just not fans of Trek and just don’t get it. I think they should go stick to their Harry Potter books and keep on watching American Idol. That is more of their understanding abilities.

ST XII appears to be a rehash of ST II. Another film lacking any type of original story or characters. Already creatively bankrupt at the Star Trek offices over at Paramount. I thought we already cleaned house by getting rid of Rick Berman and Brannon Braga. It appears nothing has changed.

RIP Star Trek XII

623. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#614: “He was a Sikh from India…”

Actually, he was never even established to be a Sikh. What was said was, “From the northern India area, I’d guess. Probably a Sikh. They were the most fantastic warriors.”

*Probably* a Sikh, admitted to be “a guess,” was the closest to stated-as-fact that we got.

624. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@618

Well, I’m not one of those people who says that they will nit see the movie. Hell, I’ll pay my admission just for another chance to see Nimoy Spock, even if the rest of the movie is garbage.

I think sometimes it’s worth realising that some fans will try all forms of Star Trek in the hope that they will have their reservations changed. Hell, I struggled through 7 years of Voyager. I think it’s awful, but I kept on watching it in the hope it would shows elements of the Trek I had come to love. I think that’s why people will still check these things out, even if they are unhappy at the choices being made.

625. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#622: “Anyone who actually supports this idea of this guy being Khan are just not fans of Trek and just don’t get it”

Sorry, Star Trek fan from the night NBC broadcast “The Man Trap,” here. I “get it” just fine – what you don’t “get” is that your *opinion* doesn’t set the definition of what’s worthwhile and what’s not.

626. Chingatchkook - April 30, 2012

#622
I am a fan of Trek, and I do get it. And I’m delighted that Khan is back. Sorry if that rubs you the wrong way, but the fact is that we all have different opinions, the question is can you get along with someone who has different ideas? The whole notion of the Trek universe espouses that ideal. It’s a pity that we haven’t learned that lesson here in our time yet.

627. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - April 30, 2012

well, honestly this is very disapointing news, if he indeed is Khan my anticipation for this movie just went WAAAAAAAAAAY Down.

Seriously 3 writers and you cant come up with an imaginative new villian you have to rehash a villian to use as a crutch because he was popular in th one movie and one epsiode he appeared in.
Geesh

While I am glad to here spock prime will be around now, you can’t help but wonder if its because they are worried about the comparisons to be made between star trek II and Star Trek II: In name only.

disapointed to say the least.

628. Capt. Tomorrow - April 30, 2012

Can’t we ever see a full-out war between the Federation, Klingons, and the Romulans? Does it always have to be just ONE bad guy/group.

629. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

556. Magic_Al – April 30, 2012
“The argument about whether the Prime Universe was destroyed or ended is reasonable because it depends upon point of view. … the Guardian of Forever, … and use it to stop Nero?”

And remember, Spock recorded both timelines with the Guardian of Forever, with on his tricorder. Which tends to imply you can visit either timeline through the Guardian.

630. Chingatchkook - April 30, 2012

#625
Thanks Dennis, well said.

631. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 624

Why are you being so obtuse over this? His last name is Singh. You obviously didn’t clue up enough from my earlier post. South Asians with the last name of Singh are baptised Sikhs. Before it’s adoption by Sikhs it has Hindu origins. You will only find it being used throughout South Asia and in ex-pat South Asian communities, and almost entirely Sikh ones at that.

He is perhaps not Indian, but he is most certainly of South Asian origin. There really isn’t much to debate here.

632. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@622 Guy Fawkes:

Where the HELL are you getting your info? What is telling you that this will be a re-hash of Wrath of Khan? Who’s to say that they’re not going to use Khan in a completely new way?

People who support Khan being in the movie aren’t fans of Star Trek? That’s just pathetic and naive. As I’ve said countless times in this comment section alone, this is a REBOOT of the Original Series. They are supposed to tell stories with the same characters, but in new and exciting ways.

Please explain to me how this is different from Batman or any other comic book films? Were you opposed to The Joker being in The Dark Knight?

633. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@629 Are CGI space battles your idea of Star Trek?

634. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

You clearly miss the point. I will not pay to see this mess. Much like I didn’t pay a dime to see the last piece of Star Wars wanna be garbage they tried to pass off as Trek. Now we get a British white Khan. Yeah…REAL original! HAHA But there you are defending at the alter of all things Abrams.

Goes to show you that Star Trek still suffers from creative bankruptcy.

@Johnny

-Really? He’s not? Then who is? This is a MOVIE series… they have to bring out the big guns.

There has to be? Why? We had 6 films with the original cast and 4 with the TNG. No on going villain to make all you kids happy. This goes to show you that some of you are easily amused. I bet a stick with a string on it would keep you entertained for hours.

Sorry but the idea of Khan is a joke. When people say these guys are so “brilliant and creative”. I fail to see it. This is another fine example of rehashing.

635. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - April 30, 2012

624, exactly Ill still be watching it and I am sure I will find enjoyment in the final product, its just at the end of the day I had hoped for a bit of originality.
Instead of rehashing a popular villian.

636. Jonboc - April 30, 2012

Thought about steering clear of the spoilers, but the trekkie in me couldn’t muster the willpower. And I’m glad!! I’m more excited than ever…..I don’t know that these rumors are true…I take everything I read online with a grain of salt….but damn I hope they are!

Cumberbatch as Khan? Inspired! And you grumblers…are you kidding..this guy is so good, I’d love it if he were playing Abe Lincoln from The TOS episode Savage Curtain. Can’t wait.

Klingons…not surprising…and if this film can take their disposition back to the treacherous, stab-you-in-the-back attitude of old, and erase memories of the grunting honor-ridden brutes of the past couple of decades I’ll be thrilled and welcome their return with open arms.

And Nimoy? Are you kidding me? if this is true it will just be delicious icing on what is shaping up to be one hell of a delicious cake! Wow. Much to ponder.

637. Kev-1 - April 30, 2012

I’m glad Nimoy is back. Expecting 2X the action in this movie. Will it work?

638. captain Worf - April 30, 2012

I’m excited about the Klingons. I loved the first movie and can’t wait to see this one.

639. K.H. - April 30, 2012

I see, as usual Trekkies are doing their best to make me feel ashamed to count myself as one of you.

It amazes me, for a show that always made the point about not prejudging things, just how quickly so many of you jump to the conclusion before you’ve seen even so much as a trailer, that the film is obviously going to suck.

640. drumvan - April 30, 2012

it’s now gotten to the point that i just scroll thru to see bob’s comments on all this. anyone else the doing same?

641. Seany-Wan - April 30, 2012

@boborci – Any engineer crew members names Cleary? ;-)

642. Bill - April 30, 2012

LOL. I don’t know what to think. I’m an odd 26 yr old guy that somehow balanced my life with equal portions of social activities and following huge franchises including Star Trek. Ricardo Montalban is Khan; none of this Joker comparison holds a candle because that formula was based on the fact that the Joker had never been cast so perfectly like Heath Ledgers portrayal. Shatner Vs Montalban is iconic! From hell’s heart I stab at thee! For hate’s sake, I spit my last breath at thee! I just don’t know if they can compete with any of that.

643. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@641 If you do that you won’t get an answer to your question ;)

644. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

Khan, really !!!

I hope they will come up with a new & fresh take, if that even possible.

If Nimoy is coming back, I think it is very reasonable to have Shanter back as well.

Can’t say that I’m very excited about the movie, now that they are bringing back Khan, but will go and see it anyway.

645. Lostrod - April 30, 2012

#419:

“You know who’s fault that is? Not Nimoy, not Abrams, Not Orci…..SHATNERS! He took the pay check and “cried” his way to the bank. We have nobody but Shatner. He could have said no, like Nimoy and Kelly did. He took the cash and expected that they would magically reanimate him in the next flick. Nope.”

Hmm. Spock died in TWOK. Supposedly at Mr. Nimoy’s request. Why not complain that “he took his paycheck and cried his way to the bank”? Couldn’t Mr. Nimoy have said no as well?

Wow. Sounds like a bit of double standard to me.

Nothing against Mr. Nimoy. I’ve met him and Mr. Shatner and found them both to be gentlemen and worthy of our respect – not tiresome cheap shots.

Regards.

646. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

633. El Chup – April 30, 2012
@629 Are CGI space battles your idea of Star Trek?

No. Why’d you ask me that?

647. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#631: “Why are you being so obtuse over this?”

I’m not – I’m being precise, and referring to the actual source material this kerfluffle is based on.

I suppose that’s cheating – we’re supposed to be restricted to hysterical, polemic assertions based on emotion, here.

648. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#634: “You clearly miss the point. I will not pay to see this mess.”

I didn’t miss it – I just think it’s funny that you don’t see how badly you’re failing to make any point.

Your paying or not paying is meaningless – there will not be an empty seat because of you.

But you plan to see the movie. You can’t help yourself. LOL

649. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

Yes, most people named Singh happen to be Sikhs. But, I have to think there are a few Hindus, or even Muslims (at least in India) with that name. It’s probably India’s equivalent to “Jones” or “Smith”.

#634.

Will you stop rehashing yourself? You’re reminding us of Captain Neill.

This is trolling. Please stop it. We’ve had enough, and we get it.

650. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@632

-Where the HELL are you getting your info?

Easy little man. Your mother might take away the computer from you.

I get my info just like the rest of you. I suggest you ‘READ” the threads of what has been reported.

-What is telling you that this will be a re-hash of Wrath of Khan?

Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Khan. Yawn. STII Rehash.

-Who’s to say that they’re not going to use Khan in a completely new way?

Well genius. If you knew anything about Star Trek you would know that Khan is Indian not a skinny guy from England. As for “A new completely new way”. Thanks for proving that some of you so called fans will accept any rehashing no matter how bad it is.

-People who support Khan being in the movie aren’t fans of Star Trek?

Yup!

-That’s just pathetic and naive.

Why because it is a hard truth? Khan is not the Joker. Khan is not a white British guy. He is Indian. Clearly you don’t know your Trek.

-As I’ve said countless times in this comment section alone, this is a REBOOT of the Original Series.

Reboot? No rehash. All the big 7 have been recasted to look like the original people. That is not “REBOOTING” that is REHASHING.

-They are supposed to tell stories with the same characters, but in new and exciting ways.

So you are just admitting that it is a rehash. Thanks for backing me up.

-Please explain to me how this is different from Batman or any other comic book films?

First off Star Trek is not based on a comic books. So your understanding of Trek is very limited. Star Trek proved through TNG,DS9,VOY and ENT that it did not have to rely on the rehashing of TOS to get by. But pseudo fans like yourself will accept “Space Seed/ST II” redone 5 times instead of hoping for/wanting something new. It is truly amazing to see how limited some people are who enjoy seeing the same story redone over and over again so many times calling it “new” or “a different” take”. Sad.

-Were you opposed to The Joker being in The Dark Knight?

No. But I am opposed to seeing the white brit play the Indian Khan.

651. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

You suppose Marla McGivers is in this anywhere? ;-)

652. Commodore Redshirt - April 30, 2012

If someone else posted this I’m sorry, but the new movie has got to be called:
“The Rehash Of Kahn”

653. TwilightTrek - April 30, 2012

What gets me is this.. Bob Orci and J.J. are slightly older than me but we basically grew up loving two of the same TV shows. Star Trek and the Twilight Zone. The thing for me though is I liked those shows for their moral challenges. Think TOS’s “Let that be your last battle field” or Twilight Zones “The Monsters Are Due on Maple Street.” What makes me disappointed is the people of my generation who got their chance at the Star Trek universe have seemed to let the moral driving force of its creator die and instead chose to focus on making it an action movie franchise. Even “The Undiscovered Country” got it. I appreciated we had a Muslim captain in 2009 but really is Star Trek now just turning into Die Hard / The Last action hero? I think Rod Serling and Gene Roddenberry would be disappointed. Not everyone just wants to stuff their face with popcorn and see explosions for 2 hours straight.

654. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

I’m glad Niimoy is coming back. But still no Shatner? :-(

655. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@647

Just wondering why you’d want to see a massive war when Star Trek was supposed to be about exploring strange new worlds.

656. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@ Guy Fawkes

I find it insulting that you think I’m easily amused. I’m not.

If this franchise were in the hands of say… Michael Bay… do you think I’d be excited? No. Because Michael Bay doesn’t “get” Star Trek like the current creative team does.

There are 11 Star Trek movies. I only like six of them. The Motion Picture, Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis all SUCK. Three of those suck precisely from the lack of a main villain, while the others suck because they were terribly written and directed.

You know what WAS a rehash of “Wrath of Khan”? “Star Trek: Nemesis”.

THAT was a poorly executed knock-off.

There is absolutely NO indication that they’re rehashing anything here. All we know is that Khan is in the film. Explain to me how that is a “rehash”?

657. somethoughts - April 30, 2012

Wow!!! Boborci and Anthony, I love you guys!!!

I cant wait bob!!!! This is gonna be epic, cheers!!!

658. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

So if Kahn is a borg scout sent to assimulate this universe using biological spores, would you still say it’s a rehash? Conscentrate on the word reboot.

659. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

Why would JJ Abrams & boborci reboot Star Trek, if they are only going to repeat same OLD STORIES in one form or another ?

Dammit people, why not come up with new stories & something exciting, instead of redoing stuff again & again.

660. Lostrod - April 30, 2012

#452:

“@448 Star Trek 12: The Wrath of Khan”

How about “Star Trek 12: The Vengeance of Khan”?

That was the original title before George Lucas asked them to change it because it sounded too much like “Star Wars: The Revenge of the Jedi”.

So Paramount obliged and then Lucas changed his film to “Return of the Jedi”.

Regards.

661. captain spock - April 30, 2012

JJ was in`1966 & bob born in 1973

662. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

How about “Trek Hard With A Vengeance?” LOL

663. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@ Guy Fawkes — “Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Khan. Yawn. STII Rehash. ”

Uh… but how do you know THAT’S the story they’re going to tell with Khan? It could be something completely new.

Furthermore… here’s the difference between “reboot” and “rehash”. Reboots take the original premise and characters and reimagine them in new and exciting ways. See, the new Star Trek.

On the other hand, “rehashes” take the same premise and characters, but just retell a story that we’ve already seen before. In essence, a “rehash” is a “remake”.

J.J. Abrams isn’t remaking a damn thing.

664. TwilightTrek - April 30, 2012

I want to clarify. I’m not against action movies. JJ and Orci please make all the mindless action movies you want. What I’m disappointed in is that you’ve turned one of the very few franchises that was about more than just seeing stuff blow up into nothing more than mindless entertainment. Well mindless entertainment with a shocking plot twist here or there.

665. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@649

I am merely answering the questions that I see people asking me. If I have to repeat myself then I suggest you just “deal” and go whine at someone else.

I am pleasantly surprised to see the number of real Trek fans who have all said the same thing “They couldn’t come up with something new.” The idea of white British Khan is laughable.

To those that say “give it a chance, blah blah”. Forget it! I don’t need to sit back and watch another disappointing Trek 2009 again. A story with plot holes it in so big that you could drive a car through them. This is going to be no different. How are they going to explain the “white brit named Khan Noonien Singh? Sound a bit Indian to me.

For all you pseudo fans who claim to know anything about Trek I suggest you read the following.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Seed

No where in this do you see the words “Skinny white brit by the name of Khan Noonien Singh”.

After reading that, a few of you will still be in doubt and continue to pray at the alter of all things Abrams.

Read the following:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Noonien_Singh

Note:
-Khan is one of a group of genetically engineered supermen, bred to be free of the usual human mental and physical limitations, who were removed from power after the Eugenics Wars of the 1990s
-Khan first appears as an Indian who is both admired and reviled by the Enterprise crew.
-Khan had been both the most successful conqueror and the most benign ruler of the group, ruling more than a fourth of the world’s area across Asia to the Middle East from 1992 to 1996

So with that, I hope this movie bombs. I will not add one dime to this steaming pill of rehash. Thank god for bootlegs!

666. Shilliam Watner - April 30, 2012

Wow, forget my pleas for decency and forget my presence at this web site. I came back and succeeded in being a different person here, but the level of immaturity and outright attacks and insults reminds me of AICN. I thought we could be better, but obviously not.

There needs to be a LOT more banning here if they want to keep levelheaded people around who want thoughtful and civil discussion. Instead, the trolls are allowed to run wild and I want no part of that.

I deal with enough needlessly belligerent people during the course of my work day. I don’t have to deal with it here and I won’t.

Sorry, but it’s not worth trying to add intelligent, civil discourse to what appears to be a kindergarten class. This is utterly pathetic, and downright embarrassing.

Goodbye folks. We hardly knew each other, but it wasn’t meant to be.

667. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

While you guys are looking up the word reboot, look up the words genetically altered, too.

668. Johnny - April 30, 2012

You guys do understand the meaning of “reboot”, correct?

If Paramount, Abrams and co. wanted to make something entirely new and original… they wouldn’t have freaking REBOOTED Star Trek: The Original Series. They would have created a new sci-fi film.

No… instead they chose to revive the classic characters and re-imagine them in new and exciting ways. Why can’t this apply to Khan, as well?

If you want to “boldly go where no man has gone before”, then you’d better hope they come out with a new TV show (which I think is very likely by the way). You can’t do it with the films if you want them to be financially profitable.

669. scotty971 - April 30, 2012

Outstanding News! The only thing to make this more epic is to include Shatner. Here’s hoping!!!!!!!

670. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

#570 – “Up in Canada, Red Dead Ryan is so happy that he’s going to get laid tonight. No wait….he just checked his wallet. Short $10. Nevermind.”
Yeah, its a real bummer. The hookers raised their fees to adjust for “inflation”. :-)”

I’d be careful what you say, Red Dead Ryan. Some people are now calling Chris Pine arrogant and sexist for making a similar quip a little while back. Duh to those people.
************************************************************************************
I have not watched Space Seed in a while. I remember Khan was referred to as being a Sikh – “PROBABLY* from Northern India” were, I believe, the words Marla said.

Interesting aspect to this and how people can be confused in assuming religion/ethnicity. This is a true story and it happened to my own cousins who are brothers -
A few years ago, the younger brother got pulled up in an Auckland street and chided by an older Sikh man because he was not wearing a turban. My cousin is neither Indian nor Sikh. He just has the darker skin tones and features similar to those who are Sikh Indians.

His older brother, with a similar look, was told by Auckland Int’l Airport Security, which is where he works, to shave his beard and take some leave. This was just after the 9/11 attacks in New York. People became unduly nervous and upset when they came into contact with my cousin. They thought he was an Arab (terrorist). LOL. Sad as well.

They are not of Arab or Indian descent.

I am telling this because I do know that it can be very easy sometimes to mistake the actual ancestry/religion/identity of a person because of their skin colour. There are also some very fair Indians around. Although not common, such variations are possible.

Was it ever stated that Khan was of full Indian descent or could he have been of mixed race?

671. Lostrod - April 30, 2012

#539:

“Be decent folks. It’s our last refuge in a world going increasingly mad.”

Amen to that.

Regards.

672. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@659

Quote:” Why would JJ Abrams & boborci reboot Star Trek, if they are only going to repeat same OLD STORIES in one form or another ?

Dammit people, why not come up with new stories & something exciting, instead of redoing stuff again & again.

I completely agree! But you have a small minded bunch who will accept anything with “Trek” on it. They can’t follow a movie series without getting lost on simple details and have to have their hands held through out the movie because they just lack the brain power, so pretty lights and explosions will do.

These people would accept “The Search For Sybok” with Sybok being playing as a “woman”. Whooooo real original. They would sex it her up and have her do Kirk. Wow. So “American Idol”. haha

To redo Khan is just a joke on Abrams part. It goes to show you that they are all over rated and creatively bankrupt. What is next after this? The Search For Whales? (Combine 3&4)?

673. filmboy33 - April 30, 2012

@boborci,

Now that we know Khan is the villain, why not confirm that Alice Eve is playing Carol Marcus.

She certainly looks the part and while it may scream TWOK Redux, I feel she would be a strong character to add to the film. As many have pointed out on here, Carol is open to reinterpretation. I think there is furtile ground there from which to develop a strong love interest for Kirk and complex female character to add to this universe.

In addition, it would be interesting if you add on the pregnancy at the end and force this Kirk, who lost his own father too soon, to have to choose between his obligation to Starfleet and his crew or his obligations to his unborn child.

In fact, I feel that father figures play a role in this film and are a theme through the series to this point.

You have Spock Prime being a mentor or father figure to Spock, you have Pike as the father figure to Kirk, and then perhaps you have Peter Weller’s character being a father figure and mentor to Khan. It stands to reason that having Kirk become a father would be a logical, if obvious, way to drive that theme home.

I guess I just want to see them expand on Carol from TWOK and make her a strong foil for Kirk as I think she has it in her.

674. Dennis Bailey - April 30, 2012

#665: “http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Seed

No where in this do you see the words “Skinny white brit by the name of Khan Noonien Singh”.”

That’s it? That’s the extent of your argument, your idea about how to hold up your end of a debate?

Have you ever actually watched “Space Seed,” or is everything second-hand “research” and knee-jerk sarcasm?

I don’t know if I can talk down far enough to reach the level you’re “debating” from. LOL

675. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@Guy Fawkes

The idea of a “white British Khan” is laughable to you… but the idea of a “Mexican Khan” isn’t?

676. Lostrod - April 30, 2012

#561 – MJ:

“@557. Here’s hoping for Cumberbatch doing Chrysler commericals next year and mentioning “rich Corinthian leather,” :-)”

Just wait for the reboot of “Fantasy Island” with Mr. Cumberbatch and a short sidekick blurting “It’s the starship!” …

Regards.

677. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

668. Johnny – April 30, 2012

You guys do understand the meaning of “reboot”, correct?

***

Yes. That is when you are kicked out of a bar once. And you climb back in through the bathroom window. And then they catch you and kick you out again.

678. Max - April 30, 2012

I still think Cumberbatch’s character is a stand-in for Khan and the production leaked the info to throw everyone off. And maybe the whole Benicio thing was a stunt too.

679. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

HAHA

So if you are not happy with this rehash of Khan (via the “Dark Knight” rip off now instead of Star Wars) you are now labeled by those that bow at the alter of Abrams as trolls who should be banned.

The truth hurts huh?

No new characters. No new ideas. Just rehash the old ones because those involved in Trek (Berman and co) were creatively bankrupt have been replaced by people who are also creatively bankrupt (Abrams, Orci Kurtzman)

For those who think that Abrams,Orci and Kurtzman are in the same league as Christopher Nolan. You are need to get your head examined.

680. Daoud - April 30, 2012

So, who’s got a good mock title for this?
.
“Star Trek 2: The Rehash of Khan”
.
“Star Trek, Part Deux-Deux”
.
“Star Trek, Episode VI, The Return of The Khan, Aye”
.
“Star Trek 2: Khanicide”
.

681. Jonboc - April 30, 2012

#659. “Dammit people, why not come up with new stories & something exciting, instead of redoing stuff again & again.”

…even if this WAS a carbon copy of Space seed, or Wrath of Khan…which it clearly isnt…it would STILL be brand new to the majority of movie goers who are casual fans. It will be fresh and exciting to the audiences that will flock to see it. The disappointment of a small faction of the original dwindling fan base and that disappointment’s direct effect on the box office success of this blockbuster will be negligible at best. No worries!

682. Johnny - April 30, 2012

It’s useless arguing with you people.

I don’t know how many times I can say “they’re not rehashing Space Seed or Wrath of Khan”… while people continue to say “Why is Abrams rehashing Wrath of Khan?”

Reserve your judgment people. I GUARANTEE you the movie will be amazing.

683. Sean - April 30, 2012

My guess is the Klingons discover the Botany Bay and seduce Khan into going to their side and seek vengance vs the Federation and help them develop superior Klingons like Khan & his crew?

Pretty close?

684. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#679.

“No new ideas”.

Funny you should say that. I don’t see any new ideas coming from you. Just the same ol’ trollish whining!

685. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@679 Guy Fawkes

Once again, I ask you: How do you know it’s a rehash of Wrath of Khan?

And how is this different from Batman Begins and The Dark Knight?

Because I for one think that’s a damn good comparison. A beloved franchise with tons of pre-existing material being REBOOTED by a strong creative team — that chooses to use the best villains the franchise has to offer.

686. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Guy Fawkes: Were there any KLINGONS in Space Seed or Wrath of Khan?

Didn’t think so.

687. filmboy33 - April 30, 2012

@Guy Fawlkes,

I feel that Khan still has plenty of possibilities left in him as a character. While I love Montaban’s performances in Space Seed and TWOK, I do not feel they are the definitive take on the character. Nor do I feel they should be held sacred and the character forever remain untouched.

In this case, I am willing to give those involved the benefit of the doubt. I quite enjoyed Star Trek 09, more than I ever thought I would have. Alot of that has to do with Nimoy returning to the character and the chemistry of the main bridge crew.

Everyone hated on Heath Ledger once he was cast as the Joker and we see how that turned out. I say let’s have alittle faith and see what happens.

688. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Khan “may not” be a real Sikh, and Captain Kirk “may not” be a real male.

They weren’t writing these episodes in the sixties with lunatic fans in mind who would debate the characteristics of fictional characters as if they were real.

How long is the Starship Enterprise? ZERO feet, ZERO meters, folks. ZERO.

Space Seed was written to convey the idea that Khan Noonien Singh was an Indian/South Asian Sikh. It even looks like they caramelized Ricardo Montalban for the role.

So that’s what they were trying to convey. The fact that they didn’t nail it down beyond the shadow of all fans ability to doubt doesn’t mean much.

689. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@Johnny

-The idea of a “white British Khan” is laughable to you… but the idea of a “Mexican Khan” isn’t?

Again you are just nursing a bruised ego. Richardo was able to pass himself off as Indian. His Latino heritage allowed him to do so. But skinny white Brit Cumberbatch does not have ability to do so. It is believable as Brad Pitt playing Mr.Sulu.

Cumberbatch:” Good Morning Chaps, My name is Singh, Khan Noonien Singh.

HAHAH

They must of been drunk when they came up with this idea.

690. Goosenecked Fan - April 30, 2012

DAMMIT!!! Orci, I said NO KHAN a BILLION TIMES!!! You people are IDIOTS!!! KHAN?! Are you freakin’ KIDDING ME???!!

SUCKFEST!!!!

691. Neil24 - April 30, 2012

Cumberbatch can’t be Khan.

First, he’s too young. Maybe when they were trying to cast Del Toro, they had someone around the age you’d expect Khan to be, but not Cumberbatch, who’s just too young.

Second, I don’t care how good of an actor he is. The JJ-verse can’t get around the canon that Khan is of Sikh origin. Cumberbatch can’t pull off being of Sikh origin. There’s no getting around the fact that Cumberbatch looks like he enjoys tea and crumpets and not papadams and samosas. Plus, the set pics we have seen of Cumberbatch only prove my point.

My guess is that Cumberbatch may be another crew member of the Botany Bay — perhaps one of the other Eugenics leaders, maybe Joaquin. Perhaps the Klingons intercept the Botany Bay and intervene in a way where Khan is not revived but one of the others is.

692. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

I’d bet a paycheck Kirk isn’t going to find the Botany Bay. Someone will have to, but it won’t be Kirk. So it won’t be about Kahn trying to take over the Enterprise. It won’t be about Kahn taking vengence against Kirk, he won’t even know him. So how can this be a remake?

If they can’t write an original story with Kahn, how can they do it with Kirk?

If they do retell the set-up of Space Seed, now I don’t believe they will but if they do, I’m sure they will have a twist on the ending.

Maybe Prime Spock says, “Hey let’s go get this guy called Kahn. With the write drugs, he could be a lot of help”.

693. somethoughts - April 30, 2012

#12

I asked for Khan, check
I asked for Klingons, check
I asked for 3D although converted, check

Christmas came early for me :))))

Thanks boborci, I wish you told us earlier, I wanted to name my son bob orci but went with James ;)

694. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

680. Daoud – April 30, 2012

So, who’s got a good mock title for this?

***

I’m sorry. Did you not read my John Steinbeck inspired suggestion at 468, or are you just LOLing silently?

695. klingon proverb - April 30, 2012

Revenge is a dish best served Cold.

I hope when JJ, Bob and Co release a KILLER awesome movie, just like the last one, we can all be grateful that our favorite franchise is in good hands.. especially after it makes $$$,$$$,$$$.

And we will all be grateful that @boborci is not a klingon, for all of you who are “sigh”-ing would deserve some great Revenge a la mode.

696. Red Dead Ryan - April 30, 2012

#692.

Kahn is actually spelled “Khan”. You’re welcome. :-)

#693.

Good for you!

697. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Regarding the plot — we know there is very likely a THIRD PARTY involved. How does Peter Weller factor into this? Klingon commander?

Who says the movie will be about Kirk vs. Khan. Maybe KHAN is actually the third party amidst a Kirk vs. Klingons story?

698. Luke - April 30, 2012

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan 2

699. boborci - April 30, 2012

522. Hi Andrew. Thanks for posting on my favorite trek site. Stick around!

700. sean - April 30, 2012

#670

It isn’t stated directly, but the implication seems clear.

1)Marla believes he is Sikh
2)His last name is Singh, a name closely associated with Sikhs, and more broadly with South Asia
3)Marla draws a portrait of him in traditional Sikh headgear, which he sees and does not correct
4)It is said he ruled over most of Asia and the Middle East
5)Montalban’s complexion is clearly darkened by makeup

Now, some folks here are saying, “Yeah, but no one comes out and SAYS he’s Indian”, which is strictly speaking true. But I have to say, that feels just a wee bit disingenuous. Why all the mental gymnastics to justify putting a white guy in a part that is, at the very least, heavily implied to be Asian? “Well, he *could* have been adopted, he *could* be Sikh but not Indian, he *could* be a white guy that just so happens to be called Singh”. Yeah, that’s all possible, but in situations like these, I tend to favor Occam’s Razor or its less flashy cousin, (K)eep (I)t (S)imple (S)tupid.

So the simplest explanation? Khan is intended to be South Asian Sikh. Montalban was used because in 60s Hollywood Mexican was ‘close enough’. End of story.

701. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 609

Johnny~

“Yes… something new from a REBOOT with the same old crew re-imagined. Yep… you’re making sense.”

What I meant was, I was hoping for a ‘new voyage’ and not a regurgitation of the Khan story, that’s all. If you’re happy about this? Then good for you. Some of us aren’t.

And no, reboot and remake don’t necessarily have to be the same thing; “Casino Royale” rebooted the Bond franchise without remaking “Dr No.”
_______________________________________________________

# 666 Shilliam

I know. It’s getting nasty again, isn’t it? So much for all the ‘let’s be kind and respectful of each other’s opinions’ stuff’, eh? Too bad.

This place is starting to look like an Ain’t It Cool News forum….

702. D-Rock - April 30, 2012

@ Guy Fawkes

You are HILARIOUS!! But you should take your ball and go home.

703. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

Quote:”Guy Fawkes: Were there any KLINGONS in Space Seed or Wrath of Khan? Didn’t think so.”

HAHAH Who cares! I don’t recall seeing a skinny white British guy trying to pass himself off as Indian in Space Seed or Wrath Of Khan.

It is still a stupid movie idea of rehashing to the lower forms of people like yourself. I saw Star Trek II, time to give us something new. Opppss can’t do that!.

-Funny you should say that. I don’t see any new ideas coming from you. Just the same ol’ trollish whining!

Again, people who point out the obvious are now getting yelled at by the likes of people like you who love to see remake after remake and re-read the same old books over and over again.

- Once again, I ask you: How do you know it’s a rehash of Wrath of Khan?

They are using Khan as the villain. What the hell do you think it is going to be about? Khan will “SAVE THE DAY”? Khan will be a “great hero”.
Again, defending the obvious how sad of you.

-And how is this different from Batman Begins and The Dark Knight?

I already answered that. This is Trek not a comic book. It is amazing how easy it is to entertain you. You were probably front row when Ron Moore was slamming Trek because of “continuity”. haha

-Because I for one think that’s a damn good comparison.

It isn’t. It is grasping at straws hoping to find something to justify this mess.

-A beloved franchise with tons of pre-existing material being REBOOTED by a strong creative team — that chooses to use the best villains the franchise has to offer.

Strong creative team? Really? I take it you didn’t see Cowboy vs Aliens are Transformers 1 and 2. HAHA Sorry but Khan was 1 character we saw in 1 episode and 1 movie. He is not the “Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, Mr.Freeze” etc. You again are using that silly “rebooting” term to justify “rehashing”.

The purpose of them doing the last movie was to erase all TOS to VOY timeline. So they could do “new” things. Not rehash TOS episodes/movies again. But again you will be happy watching STII redone 5 times by anyone. How many times do you read the same book until you finally get tired of it and move on to something ELSE?

You are no fan of Star Trek. Period.

704. Goosenecked Fan - April 30, 2012

It really is the sign of the apocalypse when fans like some of you support the idea of British Khan!!! How retarded!!! Ugh…I hate it when they do stuff like this!!

EPIC. FAIL.

Orci are you reading this? You’re a creatively bankrupt LOSER BOY!!!

705. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

How about we ALL say hello to 522 Andrew…

Welcome aboard…

706. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@702

I make a valid point. Something that Johnny can’t disprove. It was bad enough we had Nimoy sell out for that lousy Star Wars wannabe that was sold as a Trek film. But to do Khan again with the white skinny brit. Laughable. Just laughable!

707. Captain Karl - April 30, 2012

I knew the Khan spoiler weeks ago. Just didn’t think it was up to me to spill the beans.

708. D-Rock - April 30, 2012

I actually see more of Top Gun than Star Wars in ’09. Not enough Kenny Loggins by a long stretch however. That is something I’d like to see in the sequel.

709. Aurore - April 30, 2012

T.R.E.K. : Khan’t Please Everyone.

710. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

696. Red Dead Ryan – April 30, 2012
“#692.Kahn is actually spelled “Khan”. You’re welcome. :-)”

Yes, thank you. Maybe Bob and company had the “write” drugs too that helped them with the script.

I shouldn’t post when I drink.

711. Devon - April 30, 2012

“make a valid point. Something that Johnny can’t disprove. It was bad enough we had Nimoy sell out for that lousy Star Wars wannabe that was sold as a Trek film. But to do Khan again with the white skinny brit. Laughable. Just laughable!”

No.

712. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Guy Fawkes:

Who said Khan is even the villain? Like I said… maybe he’s a third party to Peter Weller’s villain?

Point is… we don’t know a damn thing… other than the fact that Khan is in the movie.

And no… the Batman comparisons are valid. Bob Orci has repeatedly said that they were inspired by Nolan’s Batman films and that their intent is to to make The Star Trek Sequel like “The Dark Knight”. There you go.

713. jesustrek - April 30, 2012

Orci Gracias por incluir de nuevo en esta cinta a Spock Prime…Nimoy es un lujo verlo en accion a mi heroe de infancia, tambien espero verlo en la siguiente. :)
Saludos.

714. Devon - April 30, 2012

659 – “Why would JJ Abrams & boborci reboot Star Trek, if they are only going to repeat same OLD STORIES in one form or another ?”

What story are they repeating?

Some of you have tend to confusing reusing a character with reusing a story.

715. The Unknown Poster - April 30, 2012

Very excited.

For those of you angry about Khan, why? He’s long established as Kirks arch-nemesis. And, even though us extreme fans might want to see something else (I dont), Khan is going to appeal to the masses and get a ton of extra pub.

Add Shanter to this film (which they can do now, with Nimoy, even if its the hologram scene) and you’ve got the recipe for an epic.

Star Trek doesnt exist unless it makes a lot of money. They are appealing to the largest audience.

As for Cumberbatch, who cares that he’s a Brit as long as he can act

716. Jonboc - April 30, 2012

So Cumberbatch can’t play Khan? Really? In a movie where the ENTIRE original series regulars have been recast?? Are we really having this discussion?

717. Johnny - April 30, 2012

714 — “What story are they repeating?

Some of you have tend to confusing reusing a character with reusing a story.”

Thank you very much.

718. Greg2600 - April 30, 2012

@Guy Fawkes

“No new characters. No new ideas. Just rehash the old ones because those involved in Trek (Berman and co) were creatively bankrupt have been replaced by people who are also creatively bankrupt (Abrams, Orci Kurtzman)”

Agree with the first part, but JJ and Orci/KM are not creatively bankrupt. They just have chosen to treat Star Trek like a comic book franchise. That’s fine, but I simply and solidly disagree with that approach 1,000 percent. If this is the route they go, Star Trek is dead to me. It’s not a comic book franchise.

719. corvette king - April 30, 2012

Finally got to the bottom of the string. Look, this could and should be fun. Its not a remake of ST2 and it would be fun for the klingons to find the botany bay, wake up the eugies, arm them and send them on their way to to retake their places on our planet.

Remember, the writers are counting on us knowing TOS and ST2 story already, they are going to twist it so we are suprised at the end. I hpope.

After all, we are not going to see citizen kane folks.

720. spooky - April 30, 2012

If all this is true… then my heart just sank.
“Sigh”
Another go at Khan? Klingons? Seriously, this is tunnel vision or an epic case of drawing upon the greatest hits compilation this early in the reboot. I am sad now. :(…

721. dmduncan - April 30, 2012

701. Sebastian S. – April 30, 2012

This place is starting to look like an Ain’t It Cool News forum….

***

You kidding me? Look at the length of the posts here. If anybody finishes a complete sentence on AICN, the Vatican officially considers it a miracle.

722. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@Devon

Hmmmm YES.

Another name I can add to the bruised ego list.

@Johnny

Just stop it already. All your conjecture is just pathetic. You know he is the villain so stop fooling yourself. You have the photo of him in the fight scene. Sorry but they are not going to make Khan the “hero”. The character was a dictator from the 1990′s. Please do watch “Space Seed” again. All the events of Space seed still happened because the Abrams “time line wipe” occurs AFTER Enterprise.

Funny how I have seen them say they want to make the movie just as good as STII Wrath Of Khan. What better way then to rehash it. haha

Orci Gracias por su idea de historia flojo. por favor díganos que está bromeando. ¿Qué tipo de escritor no te crees que eres? Gracias a ustedes, Star Trek aspira a lo grande!

723. Harry Ballz - April 30, 2012

The title of the movie might as well be…………

Star Trek: You Khan Forget About Originality

or

Star Trek: I Khan Do Anything You Khan Do Better

724. Tony - April 30, 2012

Guy Fawkes:

You’re not really adding anything except immature screaming and frankly rude name-calling.

Why not be nice dude?

Oh by the way, I hate your masks. Scare the shit out of me every time and they’re so damned overused.

725. D-Rock - April 30, 2012

A dictator in the 1990′s? Whoa. I thought Star Trek was a documentary not an entertainment. I did a search of Khan on CNN’s website and nothing…I’ll keep looking!

726. BitterTrekkie - April 30, 2012

So Orci has written more lip service for Nimoy to give us.
Wonderful.

727. Pizza - April 30, 2012

You rewrite the frakking universe, and you pick Khan?

It took you how many years to come up with this idea?

No words to accurately explain this debacle!

Wow, major letdown for an original idea.

728. boborci - April 30, 2012

704. I read everything on this site.

729. Adam E - April 30, 2012

http://khaaan.com/

730. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

You guys don’t get it. They are re-shooting Space Seed.

The Wrath of Khan remake won’t be until ST 22. They all have to get old for that one.

731. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

704. Goosenecked Fan – April 30, 2012 “You’re a creatively bankrupt LOSER BOY!!!”

eeesh. I know he, (boborci), gets this all the time, but where is Anthony?

732. corvette king - April 30, 2012

I found my Star Trek Walkie Talkies from the seventies afew weeks back and some blocks I drew buttons on for warp drive, shuttlecraft, engineering, bridge while I was at my Moms. It was great to see them again.

Back then, it was about imagination, fun, lots of fun. Everything that can possibly be imagined has been done. If you are looking for an original idea, you need to turn to physics.

Hollywood writers today are a product of their upbringing so why wouldnt they want to write about Khan?

733. the Dogfaced Boy - April 30, 2012

Bob, do you notice how some times I switch from reasoning with these rehash idiots and just say things to antagonize them?

734. Adam E - April 30, 2012

@boborci: Since you read everything on the site you know how the fans are apprehensive about having Khan in the movie. And since you know that, I don’t see why you would do it without making it work. So I’m looking forward to seeing what y’all do with it. Perhaps an exciting twist to Khan’s story?! And I’m glad the Klingons will be in the film. But maybe these “spoliers” are just garbage and it’s something completely different.

Question: Is any of this leaked information (spoilers, set pics) “leaked” on purpose as part of the marketing?

735. Adam Cohen - April 30, 2012

I’m not excited for a reboot of Khan. I’m sure it will be an entertaining movie, but this is not why I watch and love Star Trek. I wish the production well and eagerly await Trek’s return… to television, where my Trek can exist freely.

736. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

By the way…Sad news today about Joel Goldsmith.

737. Goosenecked Fan - April 30, 2012

#728. Well, good, Bob because when this tanks at the box office…remember when you totally defied the will of the fans and went ahead and made your own Khan movie.

If you read everything here then you KNOW what a hugely unpopular notion this was in fandom. 10 to 1 NO ONE wanted to see Khan in this film!

Sorry about the “loser boy” comment but I JUST DON’T understand why you people set up this alternative universe/timeline only to do the same characters, aliens, etc as in the PRIME universe! Plus, if Cumberbatch plays Khan he is seriously miscast!!

Why not give the fans (and non fans) something they haven’t seen before? Klingons, Khan, Spock Prime? This is just ridiculous!!

Seriously!!

738. corvette king - April 30, 2012

My kids went nuts when we opened the boxes from my childhood. I forgot about all of my trains, and my AFX set. Make the movie, revisit Khan, Klingons and Kirk. Its fun!

739. Captain Karl - April 30, 2012

I think I see where the majority of disappointment comes from for the ones here posting it. We live in an age where nothing is not a target of reboot/reimagining/remake, whatever you want to call it. We have seen so many things from the past brought back for another go because it is the safe thing to do, take a known property with a good track record and make it again. I equate it to the director’s cut of several movies where the original theatrical release is shuffled here and there and it may have a different ending, it may have things cut out originally put back in or it could have new effects shots that take away or add, depending on your POV, to the original experience.

We have had board games, theme park rides, comic books, graphic novels, magazine articles and sudoku puzzles turned into movies. We have had old television series turned into movies, some tongue-in-cheek, some serious. But these things have been done and I see no end in it being done.

Irregardless if the 2013 Trek movie has a fresh take on it, it is still characters that have been fleshed out before and Hollywood seems to be taking the path of fan-fic by taking established characters or movies and changing them around and calling it fresh, new, rebooted. Imagine if you will, all the childhood imagined stories where the kids take their action figures of well known characters and make up stories as they play. This is what you are getting out of Hollywood today.

And it’s not just Hollywood, it’s the music industry, too. Artists take samples of old songs, mash them together to a beat, rap over top of it with a few self-penned lines and call it a brand new song. I can go through most of the top 40 stuff my daughter listens to and say, I’ve heard that sample from somewhere, then pull up the original and play it for her, so she is aware of the heritage of the source material.

So you can complain all you want, it’s not going to stop. Just remember, if we did something like this in High School (well, in the era I went to High School, I don’t know if it is still true today), took a sample of something and included it in our term paper and called it our own, we would have received an F for plagiarism.

Get used to it folks, sit back and enjoy the ride as they call it “What’s Old is New Again.”

740. Chingatchkook - April 30, 2012

I remember the naysayers in 2008/2009 saying they wouldn’t go to the movie because they didn’t like the redesign of the Enterprise. Rooiiighhht…..I’m sure that stopped all sorts of people from going to see the movie. Just like this news isn’t going to stop anyone from seeing the 2013 movie.

It’s gonna be great.

741. Vultan - April 30, 2012

#732

“Hollywood writers today are a product of their upbringing so why wouldn’t they want to write about Khan?”

By that logic, Gene Coon would’ve been writing about Ming the Merciless instead of creating the character of Khan.

742. Lostrod - April 30, 2012

#710:

“I shouldn’t post when I drink.”

How about a new drinking game where we take a shot anytime anyone uses the phrase “rehash”?

I’m stumbling already … :)

Boborci – next beer’s on me, my friend.

Regards.

743. corvette king - April 30, 2012

Do you think Gene Coon created Khan or a riff on a dictator from WWII who offered the world order and a new race of people?

744. Hugh Hoyland - April 30, 2012

I could never shake the feeling of Khan, and IMO it makes the most sense. Seriously, unless they were going to attempt to go totally esoteric wiith the movie aka “The God Thing” , than this is the logical choice IMO.

Now can we figure out the new twists this particular Khan story is going to have? :) I bet we cant but I also bet its gonna be fun as all get out.

745. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - April 30, 2012

715 how is he Kirks arch-nemesis seriously, he was a one shot villian (a great villian mind you) in a epsidoe in the FIRST season of TOS, no mention is made of him again tilll TWOK and even after that no mention (even just in passing) is ever made of him again.

Kirk didnt give him a second thought in all the years that passed between space seed and TWOK.

Arch nemesis in Trek would be someone like Gul Dukat to Sisko or Q to Picard. Khan was not an arch Nemesis to kirk.
I would call the Klingon Ambassador Kirks Arch Nemesis just as much if not more so than Khan lol You act like they have the same years and years and years history that batman and joker have and they dont.

746. somethoughts - April 30, 2012

I trust the sequel will be as entertaining as ST2009 and will be worth the wait, live long and prosper :)

People complaining are the same people who complained when they heard about tos reboot and recast of the uncastable iconic roles.

People need to relax and go see the movie then judge.

Im stunned and excited, am I dreaming? Boborci for president

747. Vultan - April 30, 2012

#743

I’m not saying the idea for Khan came from nowhere.

Ming was a popular villain in Gene Coon’s childhood. But that didn’t stop him from creating something different. He had the opportunity. He took it. He made Khan.

Were there any other frozen Sikh supermen in fiction at that time?

748. corvette king - April 30, 2012

Nah, the pastry chef from Sweet Lady Jane on Melrose for president. outragous 7 layer mocha cake we are eating. Simply decadant.

749. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@Guy Fawkes — “All the events of Space seed still happened because the Abrams “time line wipe” occurs AFTER Enterprise.”

Wait, what? Yes… the new timeline starts after Enterprise… but it starts BEFORE “Space Seed”. It starts just moments before Kirk’s birth. Space Seed occurs AFTER Kirk has become Captain of the Enterprise, sometime during the “five year mission”.

But this is irrelevant — because they’re not remaking Space Seed or Wrath of Khan.

And I’m not saying Khan is “the good guy” either. What I’m saying is… just… maybe he’s not the “real bad guy” of the movie!

750. thebiggfrogg - April 30, 2012

From the writers of Transformers and Cowboys and Aliens comes…

Enough said.

751. corvette king - April 30, 2012

Then what are you saying? I said writers are a product of their upbringing and I thought you found a flaw in that logic:

“By that logic, Gene Coon would’ve been writing about Ming the Merciless instead of creating the character of Khan”.

I don’t get your point

752. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 721

dmduncan~

Too true… my mistake. ;-D

753. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - April 30, 2012

Ricardo Montalban was 47 when he first played khan and he looked like a man in his late 40s. Bennedict is 35 and looks nothing like a man in his late 40s, so not only is Khan in name only the wrong nationality hes 12 years younger than the real khan.

754. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@750 — Again… they are not the only ones who wrote Cowboys and Aliens. Like I said before, that film suffered from “too many cooks in the kitchen”, and poor directorial choices.

Also… they did indeed write the script for the first Transformers film. But they did not write the Transformers 2 script (despite the fact they’re credited). Just an FYI there.

Let’s see… other writing/producing credits? Two little shows called LOST AND FRINGE… both of which have massive critical acclaim.

Rephrase: “From the writers of Star Trek”.

755. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

721. dmduncan – “If anybody finishes a complete sentence on AICN, the Vatican officially considers it a miracle”

THAT is hysterical.

756. With Fans Like These - April 30, 2012

#750

“From the writers of Transformers and Cowboys and Aliens comes…

Enough said.”

From thebiggfrogg, a guy who hasn’t done anything, ever, and likely never will, comes…

Enough said

757. Max - April 30, 2012

@734
Bingo!
The nerd rage has already reached a boiling point and will keep everyone occupied on the message boards for months to come until the trailer comes out and reveals that Cumberbatch is playing Joaquin.

758. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@757

How do you know what thebiggfrogg does in his life?

Hell, I’ve done a great deal in my life and career. But it depends on whether or not people value working in the movies over saving lives and dealing with all kinds of cultures makes a person the more accomplished.

It’s best not to judge people by words on a screen. Sometimes you don’t know why you’re talking to.

759. spooky - April 30, 2012

739. Its lazy to me. Star Trek has a vast catalogue of alien cultures and nearly an endless trove of storylines to explore. Instead we are returning to the Jame Bond storyline; which goes:

A. Villain or Villains cause trouble for the galaxy,
B. Heroes intercept the Villain/Villains and conflict ensues,
C. Conclusion; Everyone gets their asses defeated but pulls through somehow. Everything is resolved and happy until the cycle starts up again in the next movie only with the intention of outdoing the previous entry.

Where is the wonder? Where is the focus on alien cultures, instead we have conflict between characters who should not be in charge of a massive starship having a bitch slapping contest on the bridge of the ship. I don’t mind having characters in conflict but that scene from 2009 was to me, embarassing. Spock prime suggesting it to Kirk was most… illogical!
Does anyone remember the 90210 Trek hatefest that people wanted to avoid?! Its kind of like that now isn’t it!

The scale that the previous movie had was cool, if only we could have had a good story of intrigue and conspiracy based around Romulus on the eve of a proper reunification. That was a promise that was never fulfilled and will never happen now, thank you Trek 09′ writers. I like seeing large scale sets and it filled out with life in it, movement and reality like in a real world. I think exploration is sorely lacking in Trek movies but it has devolved into acttion sequences and explosions with little time to invest in the settings or characters. Most of the time, these characters are simply skipping across scenery with little time to wonder about actually being on an alien planet. I enjoyed Star Treks 1 through 6. They were all vastly different and interesting from movie to movie. I know many view the movies as being weak but look at the thorough storyline throughout the original 6 movies. Its growth and new developments that they take time to explore and create worlds that have a lasting impression. Look at the Genesis planet in the Wrath of Khan. Look at Vulcan in the 3rd and 4th movie. Even Rura Penthe had a distinct connect with me even though we never really saw it from space. Sure it did not have the grand scale of Trek 09′ but it had interesting alien characters and established characters who have earned their growth as characters. I don’t feel that way with these new actors because they are in name only. Sorry… Its going to take me awhile to warm up to them. Throwing them in endless close scrapes, illogical setups and abrupt pay offs will not endear me to them.

I hope those rumours are bogus and Trek 2013 is a wonderful and thoughtful film. Not a greatest hits compilation CD.

760. Vultan - April 30, 2012

#751

My point is imagination isn’t only found in physics.
Not everything has been done.

We just have to think harder.
And try.

761. CarlG - April 30, 2012

Yay Klingons, but Khan? Really? They couldn’t get an actual Indian actor? OR at the very least a guy with a tan?

No offense to your sources, Anthony, but I REALLY hope this is debunked.

I feel like someone cut a hole in my sails and let all the wind out. :(

762. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - April 30, 2012

But on the opposite side of the coin Voyager essentially showed that Eugenics wars didnt happen in the 90s either so perhaps Kirk and crew coming back and saving that George and Gracie changed how Khan ends up on the Bottany bay.

I am trying to look at it from both sides, like i said Ill sitll watch it, and know i will most likely enjoy its just, for now i am disapointed. really wish there had been an original villian instead this time.

But it freaking Rocks if indeed Nimoy is Back, just please please dont let him sacrafice himself to save the crew again.

I do have to say his tweet only seems to indicate he talks to Abrams and Quinto cause he is friends with them and as such intrested in the work they are doing.

763. Niall Johnson - April 30, 2012

The addition of Spock Prime suggests to me that this rework of Star Trek still need validation and a leg up. I’m not waiting with baited breath on this one.

764. corvette king - April 30, 2012

I never said that imagination is only found in physics. I said original ideas are only found in physics and even there, its a riff on an idea thats only been proven for a time.

Its all been said and done. I think the real lesson here is if you are really looking to have an original idea, at some point, you’ll have to cheat, and where is the fun in that, plus, you’ll get caught.

Moving on, we are finishing our cake

765. BitterTrekkie - April 30, 2012

753.
If the producers gave a damn about those sorts of details, they would have cast Ray Liotta as Pike instead.
He more closely resembles Jeff Hunter then that Greenwood guy.

766. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

It is odd though, that this confirmation has NOT come from Paramount or even from Bob Orci on these threads.

I’m sure it’s credible (sadly), but I’d have one hell of a laugh if it turned out to be a false rumor planted by higher-ups from Paramount to throw us ST geeks off the scent… ;-D

One can always hope. ;-)

767. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@Johnny

- Wait, what? Yes… the new timeline starts after Enterprise… but it starts BEFORE “Space Seed”. It starts just moments before Kirk’s birth. Space Seed occurs AFTER Kirk has become Captain of the Enterprise, sometime during the “five year mission”.

You see this is the TYPICAL twisting of words. When I said the events of space seed took place BEFORE ENT. I clearly mean that Khan was a dictator. Went into space with the rest of his people. BEFORE the Abrams 2009 “lets wipe out everything because we have nothing new to offer” movie.

So Khan is still a dictator, genetically enhanced and yes…STILL INDIAN!

So this movie sounds stupid already. I hope it bombs. I will not add one dime to it. I will enjoy the local bootleggers on this one.

-But this is irrelevant — because they’re not remaking Space Seed or Wrath of Khan.

And you know this how?

- And I’m not saying Khan is “the good guy” either. What I’m saying is… just… maybe he’s not the “real bad guy” of the movie!

Wake up and give your head a shake. He is not going to be the hero. The photo of the fight scene clearly shows that. Also you keep forgetting WHO Khan is. A DICTATOR! A genetically enhance “Superman”.

Again..proof you are no fan of Trek. Go back to American Idol.

768. Oddness - April 30, 2012

Oh boy…hows Shat gonna be after this announcement …lol ! Now Nimoys up to 8 to Shats 7.

I’m as big a Trek fan as anyone and I’m going to reserve discernment until I see the Flick. Of one thing I am convinced is BC can pull of anything in the acting realm. I have seen a theme in sci-fi lately with movies & Tv shows etc and thats that the Apocalypse, end times, anti-christ archetypes, nwo & secret societies seems to sell. So Khans back story fits this as well. Hence the Khan-Genesis dichotomy in Wrath. The times are ripe for his return and although I too am apprehensive Ill take the wait and see position.

769. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

Again I see a lot of people disappointed with the no new idea approach to this movie. Just rehash.

Khan is not the joker. So we are now going to see Trek follow another movie series instead of standing on its own two feet. This is quite sad.

Christopher Nolan blows away Abrams and the Transformer twins out of the water. “Cowboys vs aliens”. “Transformers 2″. Pure garbage. Where is their “Inception”?

Will Khan say “Why so serious…..Spock?” Do you know how I got frozen?

RIP Trek.

770. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

You know, if I want to watch Khan, I will go and watch Space Seed & Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.

I was hopping that JJ Abrams will come up with a new idea or new villain, but I guess we are stuck now with this new Khan.

I will cross my fingers & hope they will come up with something really fresh & smart

771. DiscoSpock - April 30, 2012

This has to be a joke…this has to be a joke…this has to be a joke…

772. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 765.

Have to disagree with that one.
Ray Liotta is a fine actor (I loved Goodfellas), but I think they made the right choice with Bruce Greenwood in ST09. He reminded me of Jeffrey Hunter, but with just a bit more seasoning and a bit more cool…

IMO, I thought Bruce Greenwood’s Pike was one of many highlights of ST09.

773. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@771, yep, that was my feelings when I read the news

774. Montreal_Paul - April 30, 2012

@boborci – While I am glad that you are putting the Klingons in the movie. I am glad that you were even able to fit Mr. Nimoy into the movie. I am a little disappointed that you chose to do a Khan story. I thought the whole idea of the new universe was to be able to tell original stories and not be bound by anything from TOS and anything that followed. I’m just saying that this would have been a great opportunity to bring in a new character or new alien. I think you guys did a great job with the first movie. I will still go and see the movie but I was really looking for something new.

That being said, I hope that this is just a false information. There hasn’t been any official confirmation on the matter.

775. Borgminister - April 30, 2012

This place has lost a bit of class with all the personal insults… :(

776. The Original Spock's Brain - April 30, 2012

OK fine.

777. Johnny - April 30, 2012

Guy Fawkes — How many times do I have to mention that Orci and Kurtzman DID NOT WRITE Transformers 2? Do your research. They went on writers strike and left Michael Bay with a 13 page outline!

No… Star Trek is not Batman. But… this is a FILM SERIES… and for movies to be successful, they need to follow the traditional formula. Look at the previous Star Trek films. The ones that tried to “boldly go where no man has gone before” sucked critically, and financially.

And once again… I didn’t say Khan would be the hero. I merely said maybe he’s not the MAIN baddie of the movie. Look at Batman again for example. Is the “Scarecrow” the main villain in those films? No… but he is still there. Maybe they’re playing a similar scenario with Khan.

How do I know? I don’t. But NEITHER DO YOU. You don’t know they’re rehashing anything.

778. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 776

That will always happen when things get heated. It is the way of things….especially in nerd communities.

779. Johnny - April 30, 2012

And for the record, I DESPISE “American Idol” and all other reality TV crap.

780. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

775. Borgminister ” This place has lost a bit of class with all the personal insults… :( ”

Agreed. You would think that all of these people claiming to be genuine Trek fans would maintain dignity.

781. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

How are you doing, Bob Orci? Feeling like you’re being hung, drawn and quartered by the angry mob? Well, actually by one person mostly – Guy Fawkes, a real *charmer*, puking out his scorn on all and sundry. You are one cool guy or maybe a bit crazy as well…:)?! They do say you need a touch of craziness in order to survive the real crazy stuff. Homoeopathy has been known to work on occasions.

Many of European descent are of Indo-European origin, including those coming from the what is now called the UK. One of these Indo-European races migrated way back when from Northern India. This occurred long before the recent migration of people from India, Pakistan etc. The *Aryan race is one of the original Indo-European peoples. Perhaps that is what the Indian Sikh man may have recognized when he saw my cousin. Most of us are throw backs. Whose to say that this white-skinned Khan is not a throw-back as well? Lots of English people lived in Northern India until the end of WW2, when India gained its independence from Britain. However, if an fair English person married into a fairer Indian family, what might some of their children look like? Possibly someone who may look a bit like the dark-haired Benedict Cumberbatch?

Tea is also from India.

*Hitler gave the Aryan race and the swastika very bad names. Totally misappropriated the ancient Hindu/Buddhist symbol as well as defaming Aryan race…The man was an ignorant, disgusting despot! That man did no one any favours.

#700 Sean – Thank you for your polite, well reasoned answer to my post at #670. What you do say makes the most sense. I am playing around with other possibilities, given that there is actually no definitive canon stating *factually* the racial makeup of Khan in Space Seed, only supposition on Marla McGivers’ part.

782. Sebastian S. - April 30, 2012

# 774

Montreal Paul~

That was my hope as well (in post #766). Since the confirmation is not official (from either Paramount or Orci), I’m still clinging to a shred of hope on that one….

783. Keachick - rose pinenut - April 30, 2012

I meant to say -”…Bob Orci, you are one cool guy…”

784. spooky - April 30, 2012

777. Johnny – April 30, 2012
The ones that tried to “boldly go where no man has gone before” sucked critically, and financially.

That was then and this is now. The audience of today is not the audience of yesterday so there is a possibility of something within the grey area of being accepted and embraced. Its a risk, a chance, an interesting trove to explore. Isn’t that what Star Trek TOS originally embraced? Shouldn’t that be what ST 2012 embrace?

You don’t know they’re rehashing anything.

Khan was a character that was realized in television and in movie form already, two mediums. How is it not a rehash when its obvious that his presence in the movie is to use him in a familiar situation and purpose?

785. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

@Johnny

-Guy Fawkes — How many times do I have to mention that Orci and Kurtzman DID NOT WRITE Transformers 2? Do your research. They went on writers strike and left Michael Bay with a 13 page outline!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transformers:_Revenge_of_the_Fallen
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Kurtzman
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roberto_Orci

They are listed as writers. Do YOUR homework. The movie was horrible. Robots and Humans all go to the same heaven. WOW! So ground breaking! HAHA

-No… Star Trek is not Batman. But… this is a FILM SERIES… and for movies to be successful, they need to follow the traditional formula.

Really so rehashing Khan is somehow validated in your mind by this logic? haha Whatever happened to the formula of “space the final frontier, these are the voyages of the starship enterprise, its 5 year mission to seek out NEW life and NEW civilizations! To boldly go where no man has gone before.

Please…you are embarrassing yourself now!

-Look at the previous Star Trek films. The ones that tried to “boldly go where no man has gone before” sucked critically, and financially.

Lousy writers. And I am not getting into a Nemesis debate with you. I guess Generations and F.C. were rip offs of what again?

-And once again… I didn’t say Khan would be the hero. I merely said maybe he’s not the MAIN baddie of the movie.

Of course he is. Look at the cast already. Who else is there to be a villain. Khan was a dictator. He is not going to be “mr.nice guy”.

-Look at Batman again for example.

You are stuck on this because you think it is your saving grace. It is not. Star Trek is not a comic book.

-Is the “Scarecrow” the main villain in those films?

Batman Begins???

-No… but he is still there. Maybe they’re playing a similar scenario with Khan.

Does it matter? They are still rehashing Khan when they are just too LAZY to come up with new character. Did they spend all their creativity creating that silly “Nero” character? You know the guy who is made at Earth for a sun that exploded that destroyed his world. Du’h!!!

-How do I know? I don’t. But NEITHER DO YOU. You don’t know they’re rehashing anything.

They are using Khan as the villain. It is a rehashing. You can live your life with your head in the sand all you want. But it is painfully obvious.

-And for the record, I DESPISE “American Idol” and all other reality TV crap.

You are more into the rehashing of movies etc. The same thing over and over again. Gottcha!

786. The Last Vulcan - April 30, 2012

I am in awe of boborci and I genuflect at his feet. But there aint nuthin’ nohow nowhere that’s gonna convince me that Cumby is Khan until I see it on the silver screen. I’ve been in this crazy biz long enough to smell a ruse when I see one.

1. Cumby is not Khan. It would be like casting Joe Manganiello to play Gandhi.

2. The first movie unis are history, to be replaced by the gray slacks and matching jacket with the single departmental color slash on the right shoulder. The only time any of the cast has been seen in the old unis was in the “leaked” pics which were set up on purpose by JJ & Co. to mislead.

That’s my story and I’m stickin’ to it. :)

787. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@781, I can hardly say that it is just Guy Fawkes who is not happy with this news, check the poll result above

Excited (40%)
Cautiously optimisitc (22%)
Mixed feelings (20%)
Worried (18%)

That is about 38% who are not sure about this new Khan

788. Let Them Eat Plomeek Soup - April 30, 2012

Yes, I know everyone’s done it already, but

KHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNN!!!!

Here was I, thinking it was going to be Lord Garth…

But who gives a frack? Now I know, and I find that’s all I wanted.

Oh yes, SPOCK PRIIIIIIIIIME, too! :D

I must say, this is the most comments in one day I’ve ever seen.

789. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@Spooky: “The audience of today is not the audience of yesterday so there is a possibility of something within the grey area of being accepted and embraced. Its a risk, a chance, an interesting trove to explore. Isn’t that what Star Trek TOS originally embraced? Shouldn’t that be what ST 2012 embrace?”

No. The audience today is much more stupid and would not pay to see anything “risky”. That said, there is a happy medium between brains and brawn, which is exactly what ST09 is. Ask the critics, or the majority of fans.

Guy Fawkes:

NO. Do YOUR homework. I have acknowledged that they are CREDITED as the writers… but they did not in fact WRITE the script that made it to the screen. True story. Ehren Kruger and Michael Bay did.

And why do you keep saying rehash. So what if Khan is the villain? Does that mean they are retelling Space Seed or Wrath of Khan. Is this all you can come up with?

They’re going to tell a completely NEW story that happens to have Khan in it. Then you’re going to eat your words. I’d be willing to bet BIG money on it.

790. Alisa - April 30, 2012

I love Cumberbach as the new reinvented Sherlock Holmes. I can’t wait to see what he does with the classic character of Khan, and how that character will be different in this timeline.

791. jorDe' Klingon Warrior - April 30, 2012

I’m dissappointed they’ve gone for Khan and not an original villan, but still excited to see Klingon Warriors included.
Klingon Warrior will always bring film to a Action Movie Level.

792. Guy Fawkes - April 30, 2012

Oh yes and that poll is the “be all end all”.

Almost 40%. Whatever. Enjoy your rehash of STII. Prepare for STXIII: The Search For Sybok.

793. Johnny - April 30, 2012

41% Excited
21% Cautiously Optimistic
20% Mixed Feelings
18% Worried

Do the math.

62% of fans are either “optimistic” or “excited” about Khan being in the movie. Only 18% are worried. There you go.

794. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - April 30, 2012

Since 2009, didn’t want to believe the naysayers… the constant complaints, the fears -decrying the lack of a well-written plot or a thought-provoking storyline Surely after the initial introduction of the new timeline, the sequel would take our imaginations into that new universe full of new adventures.
Guess all the stories are told. Just variants of old characters. Nostalgic, regurgitated tripe. And people here are actually happy with it. Well that was certainly worth the wait.

795. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@793, you forgot there are 20% with Mixed Feelings.

But really, the argument here is about the lack of creativity on the part of the writers.

796. Vulcan Soul - April 30, 2012

Okay, after reading this I can now officially confirm:

This team is creatively bankrupt!

Rehashing ALL these old elements in a movie series that has already become more about dwelling in history (via “prequels”) than moving boldly into the future is BEYOND pathetic!

This is not science fiction. This is not what Trek was about.

Give us something NEW already!

797. El Chup - April 30, 2012

@ 794 Johnny,

You are aware that “cautiously optimistic” means that people have heard things they have reservations about but are hoping it all turns out ok, right? It certainly does not equate to “excited”.

In other words, 59% of people voting in that poll have read something in this thread that is giving them reservations to some extent and stopping them from being just plain excited. Therefore those that are unreservedly looking forward to it are actually in a minority. I can’t remember any previous Star Trek movie creating such reservations in polls – including the first JJ Trek.

SoI wouldn’t get carried away with this notion that the people who are seeinng some issues in this news are only a small minority, You only have toread the talk back and look at the poll to know that this news have really devided feelings and put hesitation in the majority of people, and of those people in some a lot more than others.

798. Captain Robert April - April 30, 2012

I don’t know which is worse, the creative bankruptcy of doing Khan (after going through all the trouble of blowing up the timeline, to supposedly clear out all that pesky continuity so that “original” stories could be told @@), the obvious “up yours” to the fans by going in this direction in the first place (kind of like the last movie, for that matter), or the number of said fans who cheerfully lap this crap up and, ala Oliver Twist, ask for more.

Pathetic.

799. Johnny - April 30, 2012

There is no lack of creativity from the writers.

This is a Star Trek movie, that is the sequel to a Star Trek REBOOT.

Khan is arguably the most iconic villain in the series. It would be illogical NOT to use him in a reimagining of the series. It would actually be lazy to come up with a new villain — because in all honesty that wouldn’t be hard at all.

What is hard is to use a classic villain yet still tell a story we haven’t seen before.

Which is what they’re doing here. Anyone who thinks there just “remaking” or “rehashing” Wrath of Khan is quite frankly, an idiot.

And no… I’m not forgetting that 20% with “mixed feelings”.

My point is that 62% of fans (a majority, mind you) is either “optimistic” or “excited” about it. Please try to argue that.

800. El Chup - April 30, 2012

This thread is now 800 posts long. In that time the people who are creaming their jeans over what they think is going to be Trek version of Citizen Kane seem to have missed that once every 4-5 posts a new person to the thread comes in and complains about the Khan decision and lack of creativity.

How, therefore, is it possible not to accept that there has been a backlash to this news?

801. El Chup - April 30, 2012

Oh, and 800th! (I missed first)

802. Captain James T. Kirk - April 30, 2012

Gag me with an Orion Slave Girl!!!!

803. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@797 El Chup:

Sorry… but I read “cautiously optimistic” as “if they do it right, it will be great.”

Not… “I have MAJOR reservations about them doing Khan.” That would fall under “Mixed Feelings” or even “Worried”.

“Cautiously Optimistic” means “This could be great.”

And “Excited” means “This WILL be great!”

804. spooky - April 30, 2012

794. 796. Yep & Amen!

I’ll look forward to seeing the writer come on the board explaining the rhyme and reason for the story direction of the movie after its release in 2013,

It might go something like this…

We had a laundry list items of what needed to make a successful blockbuster, and it goes something like this:

1. Khan – scored high as Star Trek’s most beloved movie villain, must include somehow… even if he somehow managed to changes skin colours and adopted an English accent.
2. Klingons – scored high as Star Trek’s most loved alien races, they have to be in the movie because they were in the last 25 movies.
3. Uhuha/Spock – scored high amongst the fangirls as a needed storyline to get the ladies in the theatre seats.
4. Explosions – scored high for the Michael Bay set..
5. Kirk being bad-ass; *Remember boys and girls, guys who kick ass have a bigger penis!
6. Lensflares reduced 50%.
7. Include a British actor: They make cool villains! :D

I am kidding of course, sort of. I would not be too surprised though.

805. Buzz Cagney - April 30, 2012

I’ve no doubt this will be a good movie bu i am still feeling disappointed. And come on, get Shat in. They’ve run the checklist on everything else, so there really is no excuse.

806. Allenburch - April 30, 2012

802. Captain James T. Kirk “Gag me with an Orion Slave Girl!!!!”

Sounds like fun!

807. El Chup - April 30, 2012

What can’t Johnny tell the difference between “Cautiously optimistic” and “excited”?

It’s disingenuous to merge the two together.

808. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@800 El Chup — ”

This thread is now 800 posts long. In that time the people who are creaming their jeans over what they think is going to be Trek version of Citizen Kane seem to have missed that once every 4-5 posts a new person to the thread comes in and complains about the Khan decision and lack of creativity.

How, therefore, is it possible not to accept that there has been a backlash to this news?”

It’s called a “vocal minority”. Poll indicates otherwise.

809. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@799. Johnny,

“Khan is arguably the most iconic villain in the series. It would be illogical NOT to use him in a reimagining of the series. It would actually be lazy to come up with a new villain — because in all honesty that wouldn’t be hard at all.”

With all due respect, I do see the logic here at all. When Ron Moore reimagined BSG, he came up with a new take & very fresh ideas.

How hard it is for Star Trek current writers to try doing that.; to come with something NEW & ORIGINAL

810. El Chup - April 30, 2012

Johnny, more and more people are coming into this thread and saying they think that the Khan choice is a creative let down.

Do you deny that they are doing this, or are I reading a dofferent thread?

811. spooky - April 30, 2012

803. Johnny – April 30, 2012

Sorry… but I read “cautiously optimistic” as “if they do it right, it will be great.”

And if you are wrong, what then?

“Cautiously Optimistic” means “This could be great.”

And “Excited” means “This WILL be great!”

So you read everything as great… did you put the poll together yourself ?

812. El Chup - April 30, 2012

Johnny, the vocal minority appears to be you. There are less people in this thread defending it than there are criticising it.

I guess us Trek fans don’t really have opinions that matter though, right? Just as long as you and the masses get your big box office receipts.

813. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@807 Johnny,

“It’s called a “vocal minority”. Poll indicates otherwise.”

I think that you need to go through the threads here & see for yourself.

We should agree that everyone want to see a great Star Trek movie & every one is entitled to his/her view.

814. Andrew - April 30, 2012

@ 699. Thanks! I do plan to stick around for quite some time. I’ve made a parody movie of sorts with my friends, inspired by Trek 2009. It’s about a flying building powered by Mt. Dew. You can find it on youtube by searching andyfinlee. Shots of it are in my Demo Reel video if you want to check it out. Lens flares are plentiful. Also, I will now always be able to say Bob Orci said hi to me!

815. BringBackKirkPrime - April 30, 2012

I called this one long ago with Khan’s return. Very happy to see Spock Prime back. Now if they could really come through with bringing the Shat back, it would be really great.

816. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@ 809 El Chup

No. We’re reading the same thread. But like I said it’s called a “vocal minority”. Look at the darned poll. 62% are either “Cautiously Optimistic” or “Excited”

That’s not a “majority of fans” saying this is a creative letdown.

I honestly find it unbelievable that you people don’t think they can tell a NEW and ORIGINAL story that has Khan in it. I guarantee you it won’t be a remake of Wrath of Khan or Space Seed. Guarantee it.

Once again, I circle back to Nolans Batman films. Yes, it does apply, Guy Fawkes, I don’t care how much you argue otherwise. But everyone had hissy fits when Heath Ledger was announced to play the Joker. Then EVERYONE had to eat their words once they saw the movie, didn’t they?

817. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@814

I will second that, Shatner should be back for one last time

818. CoffeeProf - April 30, 2012

52

You are my new hero!

819. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

815. Johnny,

“I honestly find it unbelievable that you people don’t think they can tell a NEW and ORIGINAL story that has Khan in it. I guarantee you it won’t be a remake of Wrath of Khan or Space Seed. Guarantee it.”

Unless you are in touch with the writers, there is no way that you can “guarantee ” that.

820. spooky - April 30, 2012

789. Johnny – April 30, 2012
No. The audience today is much more stupid and would not pay to see anything “risky”. That said, there is a happy medium between brains and brawn, which is exactly what ST09 is. Ask the critics, or the majority of fans.

So according to the poll and your reading of what the poll means. 62% of people are stupid? The majority of fans today are fans only of this new Trek are they not?! Especially if you assert that they are stupid.

821. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@816

But how can they bring Shatner back without breaking continuity? He DIED in Star Trek: Generations.

As much as I’d LOVE to see him appear in the sequel — it would really feel like fan pandering if they write him in.

On that note… what is it with everyone wanting Shatner in the movie… but NOT wanting Khan? Personally I’d much rather see a NEW (yes, I said a NEW) take on Khan than a “forced” appearance from Shatner.

822. El Chup - April 30, 2012

*15 Johnny,

You are making a fatal mistake here. You are reading rehash of TWOK/Space Seed from a select few people and attributing it to the rest of us that have reservations about Khan.

I accept fully that they may be able to tell a new story with him. But I think what a lot of people are saying is, new story or not, why go back and dig out an old character from the past when you can come up with a completely new one?

Oh, and please don’t respond with that Batman or Khan is Kirk’s Nemeis rubbish. Khan isn’t Kirk’s Nemesis and Star TRek is not a comicbook about cape wearing superheroes.

823. Anthony Pascale - April 30, 2012

Goosenecked Fan

you have been warned before, now banned for flaming

824. Uvie - April 30, 2012

I’m too lazy to scroll up but wanted to make two comments:
1. Zoe Saldana identifies as being black….which probably makes her “racially” close to Uhura being (East) African
2. When TOS was being filmed in the late ’60s, can someone please tell me if there were that many South Asian actors around in the US film industry that fit the type they wanted for Khan?

Don’t care about Khan either way…I’ve come to accept that this is a different reality. And that the things I love about Trek, I can still find in the original timeline so I enjoy the reboot for the pretty. Benedict Cumberbatch is a fantastic actor, probably one of the best of his generation and he’s the main reason to watch the sequel (at least for me). Though if the fact that he is playing Khan is true, I will be a little disappointed in JJ and the production team…And look Benedict has done the whole speaking Hindi in one of his BBC radio dramas so I’m sure he could probably fake an accent or whatever but I won’t be surprise if there are people upset with the possible post-colonial implicated ramifications about it.

And the whole discussion about comparing the Batman reboot to the Trek reboot…both directors have different styles and each of us probably prefer one director over the other. I admit though, it would be pretty intriguing to see Nolan direct something for the Trek franchise.

825. spooky - April 30, 2012

Spock died and they brought him back… why not Kirk?

826. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@820 spooky

No… I’m not saying the FANS are stupid. The moviegoing audience is. Face it. A lot more people than “just the fans” are going to see the movie. It has to appeal to both fans and the general audience alike. If the movie were for “just the fans”… it wouldn’t make any money, unfortunately.

62% of us FANS are either optimistic or excited that the writers can tell a good story using Khan…. that also appeals to the “stupid” audience. It’s that simple.

827. Geodesic - April 30, 2012

@boborci

If there’s some hot, Spock on Spock mindmelding or khatra swapping, I’ll be a happy dude.

828. spooky - April 30, 2012

827. That would actually be friggin awesome!

829. spooky - April 30, 2012

826. Johnny – April 30, 2012

The rest of us have the Wrath of Khan on DVD and Blu-Ray. i thought they did it well back in the 60′s and the 80′s. Now, its just rehashing the character is it not?

830. Jonathan Todd - April 30, 2012

Okay, has anybody considered the following:

Khan, Spock Prime and Klingons. All elements that have been rumored to be in the Star Trek sequel for MONTHS!

1) Do you guys think its at all possible that maybe they’re “confirming” these so-called rumors to throw us off and that the plot could be something entirely different IE they’re just saying that Khan is the villain to hide who the REAL villain is so we’ll all be surprised? I mean, look how secretive JJ Abrams is about his movies. I find it hard to believe that they would let so many MAJOR spoilers about their movie…slip in one day.

2) Leonard Nimoy is back. You guys should all know that Nimoy does NOT simply act for the sake of acting. He’s very picky and choosy about what he does these days and for good reason, he can afford to be like that. This is the dude who turned down being in Generations with the Shat because he felt the script did not do the character of Spock justice. When he was in Star Trek 2009, he said it was a great script. He was right, not a perfect movie but I think MOST Star Trek fans old and new, including myself, were very pleased with the film.

I think its safe to say that Nimoy knows what makes good Trek at this point, and that if it was a bad script/just another retread of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan he probably would NOT have agreed to appearing in the movie. Last time this dude said he would retire, he seemed pretty adamant so just like with Fringe it would take a compellingly good script to draw him out of retirement.

My point is this. “OMG Khan its just gonna be a rehash of stuff we already know!” Don’t jump to conclusions when all we know so far are 1) who the villain was going to be 2) Nimoy is in it 3) Klingons are in it. What did we know about Star Trek 2009 before it came out? 1) who the villain was going to be 2) Nimoy would be in it 3) It would involve Romulans. And if I recall, especially coming off of the (mostly) disappointing Star Trek Enterprise, most Trek fans were probably doing what you all are doing now: “OMG, ANOTHER PREQUEL! Its gonna suck like Enterprise!” But nobody could’ve predicted stuff like Vulcan getting blown up, or Spock and Uhura’s relationship, or other aspects of the movie. And like I said, I think most of the nay-sayers were pleasantly surprised by the movie.

Give it a chance folks. All we’ve seen so far are few behind the scenes shots that don’t really tell us much of anything about the film. What we do know is this – those of us who have seen Benedict Cumberbatch in other projects like Sherlock know how much of a fantastic actor he is, and I think he’ll do Ricardo Montalban proud in the role.

831. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@825 spooky

“Spock died and they brought him back… why not Kirk”

They would need a plot device to accomplish that. With Spock’s death, they conveniently laid his body to rest on the Genesis Planet.

On the other hand, Captain Kirk died when he was crushed by a bridge on a rocky planet… and Picard left the body there. And that’s not to mention that his body is stuck in the Prime timeline. In order to get him into the film… they’d have to revive him in the Prime timeline, then send him back into the new, “alternate” timeline. But going with the rules established in the previous film… time traveling back would create a NEW alternate timeline — i.e. ANOTHER one in addition to the one that already exists.

Of course they could go that “hologram” route… but I can’t help but think that would feel like fan pandering.

And no… Khan is not Kirks ONLY nemesis… but he’s certainly his GREATEST nemesis. He has only appeared in ONE episode of the show, and ONE of the Original movies. It is NATURAL for him to appear in the REBOOTED film series. We all know he’s floating around out there… so why NOT have them find him?

I WILL continue to compare this to Batman… because Orci and Kurtzman have been. No… it’s not a “comic book” series… but the same concept still applies. Khan is deeply “seeded” in Star Trek lore. You can’t just ignore him and just “make up” a new villain. If there was a weak link to ST09 (which I’m personally not sure there was), it was Eric Bana’s villain. He almost falls flat as a “generic pissed off villain”.

This is Star Trek. I want to see familiar elements of Star Trek (aka Khan and Klingons) in a Star Trek reboot. But clearly some of you don’t agree. Now I respect that… but it’s just that most of you guys aren’t making any sense arguing your points. :)

832. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@ 830 – Jonathan Tudd

Now see… finally someone who’s talking sense around here. You make excellent points. That’s what I’ve been saying all along:

Why does Khan being in the movie make it a “rehash” of Space Seed or Wrath of Khan? Are you guys that narrow-minded as to think they can’t tell an ORIGINAL story utilizing Khan?

833. Buzz Cagney - April 30, 2012

Helloooo. For all of those that can’t grasp Kirk is not dead i’ll explain. Kirk is not dead. You may have noticed him in the last movie. He was the skinny guy who kept getting his assed kicked.
So, now we’ve established Kirk is not dead i do believe it may be possible to find room for an older (not dead) Kirk played by Shatner.
Personally i’d rather not but as they’ve run the checklist on everthing else then why not.

834. Chris Rod - April 30, 2012

I DONT WANT KHAN.

Especially, VISUALLY, I DON’T LIKE THE CASTING FOR *Cucumber to play Khan…

I am a LOYAL Star Trek fan who loves JJ Abrams work with Trek so far.

835. Chris Rod - April 30, 2012

+ WE WANT THE SHAT :D ,please?

836. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

Star Trek is science fiction, there are many ways to bring Kirk back.

William Shatner wrote a novel about this,

The Return
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Return_%28Star_Trek%29

If they want to bring him back, they would do it in a second.

Frankly, I don’t see any reason why they shouldn’t bring Shatner back if they are going to bring Nimoy again.

837. Adam E - April 30, 2012

They could bring in Shatner to do a voice over for the “Khaaan!” scream!

838. Johnny - April 30, 2012

This is mind-boggling. All you commenters want Shatner… but not Khan?

I don’t get it.

839. Tuskin - April 30, 2012

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55344

Trek Movies “source”

I don’t believe a work written here, read the article, read their “source”. Someone on the ‘inside’

I don’t believe any of this.

840. Ahmed Abdo - April 30, 2012

@838

Maybe because we want a fitting end for Captain Kirk !
And there is really no reason not to have him in the movie.

As for Khan, just go through the 800 + comments.

841. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@839

What… you think aintitcool is Trekmovie’s source?

Nope. Trekmovie has their own “inside” sources.

Want proof of this?

aintitcool is now reporting that trekmovie has confirmed Khan:

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55368

It appears that Trekmovie is AintitCool’s source.

842. Aussie Ian - April 30, 2012

Open your minds people! This movie will be set in an alternate universe, where things are different but kind of the same. Here’s my take on this new movie:

Cummerbatch is in the movie – but he is not Khan! Alice Eve is – you read it here first! it’s the 21st century and time for original scripting to make Kirk’s counterpart as ultimate villain, a woman who is his intellectual equal and a truckload physically stronger!

Star Trek is about embracing new possibilities.

What better way to Boldly Go Where No Man has Gone Before than to have a woman do it!

Yeah, bet that’s messed with your pre-conceptions about the movie a bit now, hasn’t it?

843. Johnny - April 30, 2012

@842 — As cool an idea as that is… it’s not going to happen.

Remember… it’s an alternate timeline that started AFTER Khan and the rest of the Botany Bay was stranded in space.

The shift in the timeline wouldn’t cause him to switch genders while in cryogenetic sleep.

844. Spacecadet - April 30, 2012

@BobOrci: With ST XI you have made a goooood job, but I hope, ST XII will be more philosophical, more than only a good against evil plot. That would – for my taste – be too simple for “good” Star Trek, would you agree?

845. MJ - April 30, 2012

@800 El Chup: “This thread is now 800 posts long. In that time the people who are creaming their jeans over what they think is going to be Trek version of Citizen Kane seem to have missed that once every 4-5 posts a new person to the thread comes in and complains about the Khan decision and lack of creativity.”

Perhaps that is becuase nearly every 5th post is written by you?

BTW Einstein, look at the survey results. SCOREBOARD !!!!

And of course all of the people who are mad are posting here. That is more of a motivating interest to post.

846. MJ - May 1, 2012

@838 “This is mind-boggling. All you commenters want Shatner… but not Khan?”

Sure, they would love an 81-year old 275 pound Kirk to be the movie, but not a recast Khan played by one of the best up and coming actors around today.

LOL Yes, it is utterly ridiculous…in fact, it is surreal.

847. Thomas - May 1, 2012

830. Jonathan Todd

Just nice to see someone making their point while also being reasonable and not resorting to personal attacks. I also agree with the points you make. J.J. loves his secrets and three big ones like these are starting to seem like a smokescreen that we fell for big time. Of course, there’s always the possibility that any or all of these are true. We won’t really know until next summer. Also, Nimoy’s participation (if true) makes me hopeful. If it weren’t up to snuff, he’s already established a willingness not to participate.

848. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

#838 Want is perhaps the wrong word. What i’m thinking is more like a Why Not. As I’ve said elsewhere, to keep bringing Nimoy back and not Shatner is definitely looking like a disrespectful snub now.
And like Bill or not he doesn’t deserve that.

849. Azrael - May 1, 2012

I would say I was sorry to miss an interesting discussion, but I’ve read it and it isn’t. I cast my vote, won’t say what it is, and I am not going to stick around in a crowd of sockpuppets on this thread.

Shilliam, if you are still about, I wish you well, and I hope to see you on another thread where people can be more civil to each other.

Mr. Orci, I have faith in you, the rest of the team, the cast and most importantly in Star Trek itself.

LLAP all

850. MJ - May 1, 2012

@826 “62% of us FANS are either optimistic or excited that the writers can tell a good story using Khan…. that also appeals to the “stupid” audience. It’s that simple.”

Elitism rears its ugly head. Who elected you head of the Trek and movie thought police?

851. MJ - May 1, 2012

@849 “I cast my vote, won’t say what it is, and I am not going to stick around in a crowd of sockpuppets on this thread.”

(did someone mention “El Chup”)

;-)

852. MJ - May 1, 2012

“Mr. Orci, I have faith in you, the rest of the team, the cast and most importantly in Star Trek itself.”

Azrael, I agree with you 100%. You and I seem to agree a lot these days…times change indeed.

I am checking out of here now as well. Still feeling the shine of my prediction being proven right here today in spite of all the lambasters and doubters.

Time to give the floor over to the haters and their sockpuppets. See you soon, Azrael and others on a new article.

853. Peter Loader - May 1, 2012

You know the message commenting system on Trekmovie.com needs updating so that people can directly respond to an individual post as a sub comment rather than have to use an identifying number of the post your trying to respond to. Scrolling up and down to read them is a pain in the butt.

854. NCM - May 1, 2012

Cautiously optimistic–sick of Klingons, and I’d leave Khan in his strangely ‘honored’ place; but I think a small role for Prime makes sense (hope Khan doesn’t kill him again), and I look forward to seeing what the court’s drawn up and how the cast will execute it.

I think the cast is excellent and I can’t wait to see what Cumberbatch will bring. (Wonder if they managed to sign him for the third one.) If the pale Brit’s really to play Khan, I think the film’s success rests disproportionately on his performance. Hope it won’t mean he has to be more charismatic than our favored crew.

It may not be the Trek I wanted, but it’s bound to be a fun ride (and I don’t plan to miss it). Besides, boborci said something about sympathizing with not being able to address questions–gives me some small hope that we’ve been mislead.

855. MJ - May 1, 2012

@848 “Shatner is definitely looking like a disrespectful snub now.”

My goodness, how times change, Buzz. :-) Guess I was right on that account as well. ;-)

Later all…..

856. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

I’m not mad, MJ, i’m just disappointed.
Not so much about Khan more so about Klingons. I find them simplistic and one-dimensional. And they’ve been done over and over.
My excitement over this movie has definitely taken a notch down which means its going to have to be very good indeed to please me.

857. Thomas - May 1, 2012

I had another thought just as I clicked the Say It button on my last post:

J.J. was reportedly very upset when the first spy photos were leaked. Try as he might, he hasn’t been completely successful in keeping the cameras away. Now, I don’t know if J.J. has ever deliberately made any misleading statements to the fandom in the past. However, I find myself wondering more and more if perhaps all this info coming out all at once isn’t really part of a concerted misinformation campaign on his part. Of course, none of this will be borne out until next summer, or until we hear something else that points in a particular direction.

858. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

Ah, misquoting now to further your own view, MJ!
I thought you were better than that!
And what is it with all the self-conratulation going on around here! Its not pretty, particularly when you keep repeating it!

859. MJ - May 1, 2012

Just having some fun with you….it was a joke, Buzz. :-)

860. MJ - May 1, 2012

…and apparently not a very funny one. Sorry dude!

861. Devon - May 1, 2012

@781, I can hardly say that it is just Guy Fawkes who is not happy with this news, check the poll result above

Excited (40%)
Cautiously optimisitc (22%)
Mixed feelings (20%)
Worried (18%)

That is about 38% who are not sure about this new Khan”

That doesn’t have anything to do with who is “not happy” with any decision. I would fall in to the “mixed feelings” link but I am by far NOT in the “Unhappy” catagory. I personally would have gone with a new villain, BUT then again I was pleasantly surprised by the latest film, so my mixed feelings are that I’d rather a new villain, but I don’t really have a problem with Khan either.

However, unlike some of the posters here who can not differentiate, I know enough to know that reusing Khan does NOT mean reusing a story, so I have no problem. That’s completely silly and one dimensional to even assume.

862. Devon - May 1, 2012

#741 – “By that logic, Gene Coon would’ve been writing about Ming the Merciless instead of creating the character of Khan.”

Exactly. Naysayers tend not to think about the logic of what they say, thus why they usually come up with flawed statements.

863. Gary Neumann - May 1, 2012

WOW!!! THE INTENSITY!!! HAHA!

AMAZING!

864. MJ - May 1, 2012

@816 “However, unlike some of the posters here who can not differentiate, I know enough to know that reusing Khan does NOT mean reusing a story, so I have no problem. That’s completely silly and one dimensional to even assume.”

Ah, you mean like these detractors are intelligent, but their patterns show one-dimensional thinking?

“Z-minus 2000 meters Mr. Sulu………fire……fire”

865. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

No worries MJ. Humour can be a difficult concept! ;)

And for all of you doubters that fear a ‘pasty Brit’ can’t do an Indian accent i’ve discovered a piece of footage from the next Movie as Khan serenades Marla and wins her heart. Its a rare for Trek musical scene but I think it will work….

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=03DKl3lOY4k&feature=fvst

866. DJT - May 1, 2012

“In. Con. trol.”

867. thebiggfrogg - May 1, 2012

What #759 said.

Better go back to the ol’ dumpster (re: #756–wish he’d give me a little elbow room; this place is small). Good thing I have wifi here.

868. thebiggfrogg - May 1, 2012

Cumberbatch and Nimoy are the only glimmers of hope. We’ll see…

BTW, I was just elected king of the Trek movie thought police. Thank you all for your support!!!

869. Adam - May 1, 2012

If it really is Khan, it’s no surprise that Cumberbatch is enjoying himself – what a departure from the work he’s done before. Let’s not forget what he’s said so far:

“It’s a very exciting set to be on. JJ is very imaginative. He’s involved in the details, the acting and all the wonderful ideas he has for capturing stories in A FRESH AND IMAGINATIVE WAY.

“Just the range of stuff I get to do in one day, it’s great. Also, what he’s asking me, it’s just wonderful. I can’t say much nicer than that.”

870. Digginjim - May 1, 2012

Disappointing. No need to go over old ground. Its just a real shame – with all the potential of Trek for exploring new worlds and new ideas we get a Nolan style rehash of something we’ve already seen which, frankly, is pretty good as it is… I’m sure Abrams and co will put a few twists in to change it up, but can’t we just have some good sci-fi instead of another damn action movie…. Khan was not needed….

871. Mark Lynch - May 1, 2012

Must not read this article…………… need to be spoiler free! ;-)

872. RC95 - May 1, 2012

…does Cumberbatch have the right look for Khan?

I am, as the vote above supplies, “cautiously optimistic” about this venture. I really did not (still kind of do not) think that the writers would try and do a Khan-related movie so soon in their series. Khan is infamous to Trek, and while I’m literally counting down the days until May 17th, 2013, I am slighly ‘iffy’ about the concept.

Also, hearing that Nimoy would be back made me happy – but also a little crestfallen when I read that he had completed filming his scenes so quickly. Does that mean less Spock Prime screen time? Less importance? Not a good thought…

It would be amazing if William Shatner was indeed in the new movie. Although, I’m really not too sure how they would fit him in – and Khan. But, I leave these decisions in the capable hands of the filmmakers, and will keep trying to build a time machine that transports me to May next year. Just because…

If it is Khan, then bring it on. We’ll deal with it as it comes…just like we’ve dealt with the undesirable Spock/Uhura romance – with denial. Fans are magicians in that way.

873. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

Whatever you may think of whether they should or should not have done this, boy, are they ever brave to even attempt it!
(if indeed they have. It really remains to be seen)

874. Disappointing - May 1, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch really. That is disappointing.

875. ironhyde - May 1, 2012

Okay. BobOrci and I have had our disagreements at times, but first, I just want to say I actually think Transformers 2 was the best of those awful movies. Done. I said it.

Next, I think Trek XI needed Nimoy back. I totally disagree with those saying it’s a sell-out and a rehash to have him there — for the same reasons that you can’t have Doc in the first Back to the Future not die, not go away, and still not show up for the sequel. It would, in fact, be MORE of a sell-out not to have him in. Same with Spock. He is part of this universe now. I love that he is back in SO many ways. Awesome move. Love it. Wanna kiss you Bob-o :) hahaha

Third, I felt crestfallen when I read about Khan. So much so that I can’t even remember what the 3rd spoiler was :P But I also believe there will be a twist. Because Jack of All Trades frigging rocked :) and Hercules was, like, one of my favorite shows as a kid. The Island was smart enough to be slick, and Cowboys & Aliens was totally a good ride. I actually find myself believing in you. I know you’ve got a trick up your sleeve. I know you will turn my worries and despair on it’s head. Besides, I can always come back and nag you AFTER, if not :P

It’s a great day when news comes out about the next Trek. I’m looking forward to more.

876. Aurore - May 1, 2012

“…does Cumberbatch have the right look for Khan?”
__________

I would say yes. Definitely.

If we are dealing with K.H.A.N.

Kevin Henry Atkinson-Nesbitt

That is just my opinion, naturally.

‘Still looking forward to seeing an outstanding sequel.

877. Mr Lirpa - May 1, 2012

A great Character is a great character and a great actor always brings a different take when they play that character. forget the joker and Bond, think of the century’s that people have been playing Hamlet and Macbeth!

Khan is a fascinating character. Montalban did a fantastic job brining Khan to life. Benedict Cumberbatch really is a very different type of actor to RM but he also has a fantastic screen presence. I can’t wait to see what he does with it.

Can’t wait to see what Bob Orci and the other writer come up with either. I’m guessing that someone else found the botany Bay and that this version of Khan is already established in this reality, maybe even in Star Fleet?

As for the enthicity issue, no one seemed to mind that Cpt. Richard Robau was play by the fantastic Faran Tahir… just saying. or that Spock, clearly a Vulcan is played by a Human, clearly a different species!!!

878. tobiasnicholls - May 1, 2012

Kinda shocked by the negativity of these comments.

I think Star Trek (2009) was good enough for us to sit back and TRUST JJ and the writers.

I mean, seriously, they’re not going to waste their time of something rubbish? I didn’t want the last film to be Kirk etc… I wanted another TNG film (well, that mix of TNG, DS9 and VOY)… but the last film blew my mind. I loved it. It completely won me around and I’m sure, whatever I think of the choices, this next one will be awesome. Personally I don’t think it’ll be as good as the last, or as First Contact (those two films rule the roost for me)… but I reckon it’ll be high on the list.

I seen to be one of the few people more excited by the news of Khan than anything else. The Klingons don’t interest me, didn’t miss them at all. Spock Prime’s return I think is a bit of a shame as I want the new crew to stand alone. Khan though… good. Personally I’m glad he’s in it. In only for one fact – once they’ve used him, the media can stop asking for him and the writers can then go and do other things.

I have no problem with them reusing established characters. I mean, surely that’s going to be the fun of a new time/reality? To see the new takes on known characters?!

I’m still hoping Alice Eve is Janice Rand. And I hope Bruce Greenwood has a decent size role as Pike – because I want to see more of these characters.

Also, OBVIOUSLY too late for this film…. but for Star Trek 13/3 – howabout mixing it up. How about introducing the Borg into the new timeline? I love the idea that anything can happen now. How about Spock becomes Locutus? Okay, maybe not…

but also… I want bravery from the writers… as this is a new timeline, and anything can happen… How about they do something big like, killing off an unexpected character. I’m not saying kill off Sulu… but they could. They can do anything.

And we as fans… should let them. You shouldn’t give the fans what they want… because different fans want different things. You can’t please everyone – you just do the best you can.

The the ‘best’ these writers can do… is ‘awesome’.

879. Aurore - May 1, 2012

“… what is it with everyone wanting Shatner in the movie… but NOT wanting Khan? Personally I’d much rather see a NEW (yes, I said a NEW) take on Khan than a “forced” appearance from Shatner.”
_________

I would have preferred a character( preferably a new one) other than Khan.

But, If he is to be in the movie, I sincerely hope that the story will be compelling.

As far as Mr. Shatner is concerned, I share your point of view.

880. Quatlo - May 1, 2012

We just might be through the looking glass here people.

881. Poliander - May 1, 2012

I think Peter Weller could play a Klingon character – perhaps Kruge? Hope that this movie will not feel like “Mission Impossible” in space… Khan is a good choice IMHO, like the idea really!

882. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

Can Johnny stop being a bootlick long enough to realize that this is just going down the same old road and that many people on here have said that. Your “poll” is not scientific and knowing you, you probably voted 100 times in favour of this rehash.

STXII sounds like a joke now with the white British Khan. Clearly the writers are out of ideas and were never fans of Trek.

883. simon - May 1, 2012

bad idea to use khan again…
bad idea to use the factory for the engineering..
bad idea to use spock in this mess..
good idea to see this movie in 42 tv..
these guys doesnt care about star trek they are proffecionals just to make money..hollywood is in a downhill these days and so star trek..
thanks god i have my tos series,my tng series ,my ds9 and voyager..and of course the 6 main movies to watch..
the last film was a huge dissapoiment for star trek fans..and the funny thing is that the fans dont admit that..but they hide from theirselfs..
where is the drama,where is the music of the 80s movies,where is the good scenario,anyway the only good thing in the last movie was carl..period..
ah something else ..how many times you gona see the last movie again ha?

884. pkRaiden - May 1, 2012

I doubt this comment will be seen by anyone important but I feel I need to write it anyway.

boborci, please ignore all the butthurt trekkies on this page right now. if these spoilers are correct, im sure you guys will make it a hella fun. if they are not then i eagerly await some confirmed news.

either way you and the rest of the team will make one hell of a movie or die trying (which im sure is what some of these posters would love to do to you but in reality would probably run and hide if they saw you in person).

i enjoyed the hell out of your first film and i hope you all go on to make some more.

so to reiterate and being this to a close. ignore all the comments. make an awesome film for all us fans out there. and we will see you at the movies!

p.s. please give paramount/cbs a call and see if you can get some form of a tv show back…..it would be appreciated.

pkRaiden

885. Marshal - May 1, 2012

Khan Noonien Singh should NOT be played by a White, English Guy……there I said it.

Would you cast Samuel L Jackson as James Bond? Would you cast Kal Penn as Captain America? Would you cast John Cho as Superman? No! And no-one, including ethnics has a problem with this because it makes sense. So why all the White-washing? Why is it seen as acceptable?

There is NO in-universe explanation for a change in ethnicity that will hold up to scrutiny. Anyone who has watched Space Seed knows that not only was Khan referred to as North Indian and Sikh, but that he LOOKED Indian with BROWN skin. Since the new timeline occurs AFTER the Botany Bay was launched, what could possibly have happened to turn him into another ethnicity?

The only LAME reason I can think of is that the Klingons find the Botany Bay first, discover Khan and co are superhumans. Surgically alter Khan with a new appearance (as they did Darvin in ”The trouble with Tribbles”) in order for him to infiltrate Starfleet (hence his uniform), he turns on them and goes sole thanks to his ambition.

As I said this would be LAME and LAZY writing and nothing more than a workaround thrown in at the last minute to make up for the fact that Del Toro turned down the role (he’s an idiot).

Personally, love the idea of Klingons, and would have loved the idea of the Enterprise crew going up against both Khan and Klingons.

But in their casting, they have show the finger to one of Gene Roddenberry’s most important messages – IDIC. Having extras in the background who don’t say a word and barely get screen time, or a guy who gets killed off within the first 5 minutes of the movie is NOT something that fulfills that message.

Hollywood morons can keep throwing out the bone, but maybe we aren’t going to fetch anymore, maybe we’re going to throw it back in your face.

886. GG - May 1, 2012

I wouldn’t get too bent out of shape about it. Khan could still be a good idea, because his story can still take “alternate” turns in the new universe that would make for interesting stories. For example, Khan could..

1. Take over/commandeer a Klingon ship and crew (instead of taking over the Enterprise or the Reliant),
2. He could take over the Klingon Empire, reigning as the new Klingon leader?, or
3. He could take over the new Vulcan colony?

Lots of possibilities.

As for how Khan looks in the pics? Well, the hair style confuses me. It doesn’t really convey “Prince” or “King” in his appearance. Montalban’s hairstyles were always long as Khan.

887. CmdrR - May 1, 2012

boborci:

371 – I got your joke, Bob.
Wow. Tough room. Hope you’ve got something strong in a tumbler while you’re reading these posts.

Hi to Indy. Tell his kid to stop raiding the lost trunk of Marlon Brando’s costumes.

425 – Yikes. Yer in… big trouble with that stream of humor.

888. J - May 1, 2012

Wasn’t April Fools a month ago?

889. J - May 1, 2012

Ok ok, let me ask you this:

IF this “This is not your father’s Star Trek 2″ movie is a Khan rehash and Leonard “I’m done acting this time, no srsly!” Nimoy is in it then the following question arises:

Which of the Spocks dies at the end and which of the Spocks are they going to search for in “This is not your father’s Star Trek 3″

890. The Bear - May 1, 2012

“The Lens Flares of Khan”….disapointed, there’s just so much more that would have been fresh and exciting.

891. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

Mr. Orci:

This is not a star trek question although I do love trek and what you guys are doing.

Anyway since you are a great writer and do all these action movies have you ever given the idea to tackling a He-Man and The Masters of The Universe script? It seems it would be on par with Transformers with all the characters and action you could probably put into it.

Just wondering…Thanks for reading this post

892. Aurore - May 1, 2012

“Spock died in TWOK. Supposedly at Mr. Nimoy’s request.”
_________

Mr. Orci,

Could you stop doing whatever it is you are doing, right this minute?

Since you personally know Mr. Nimoy, find the relevant info . This point can be clarified once and for all…for my benefit.

For months, online, I’ve read that Mr. Nimoy had asked for the Spock character to die. Yet, of late, in an article* I read that he had denied asking for such an outcome. I want the facts!

Help a fellow Star Trek fan out. Please.

:)

*If authorized here; here is the link to the article:
http://www.aintitcool.com/node/45445

893. Odradek - May 1, 2012

@885

Would you cast Samuel L Jackson as Nick Fury? Would you cast Patrick Stewart as Othello? Would you cast MacBeth by an all-black assemble?

Well, Orson Welles would. What a moron.

894. justai - May 1, 2012

No need for me to weigh in heavily here as my fellow trekkers have spoken my mind:

I’m VERY disappointed!

I won’t be going to see this at the theatres – not worth my money.

Will wait to watch it for free on some torrent movie site on the web.

895. Marshal - May 1, 2012

@893

Nick Fury is originally African-American in the comics, and is thus played by an African-American in the movies.

Patrick Stewart as Othello is white-washing (albeit on a small scale). Give me an example of MacBeth being played by an all-black ensemble? Give me an examples of ethnic actors playing major white roles. Then give me examples of white actors playing major ethnic roles. I think you’ll find it very obvious the latter is more prevalent.

It sounds like you’re the moron here. Next time you want to comment, try switching your brain on first. Then you may be able to correctly use ensemble instead of assemble. Idiot.

896. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

Man I just read that Bond is going gay in the next movie!
But he’s still going to be played by a ‘pasty faced Brit’ so its not a total disaster!

897. VZX - May 1, 2012

OK, title talk:

Bob Orci already referred to the movie as Star Trek 12, but the hat the crew are wearing has a big number 2 on it, so because of this I believe the title will NOT have a number in it. Not only that, but placing a number 2 in the title would just piss off many fans while a number 12 really wouldn’t make sense (since it is now out of continuity with the other films).

SO, I doubt there is a number. Also, unlike Tony, I stongly believe they will still have Star Trek in the title. The studio tried a non “Star Trek” with the show Enterprise, and I don’t think they will allow that to happen again.

They might also avoid a “Star Trek” Something Something” title since the TNG films did that four times already. So, the distinguish this movie from those it would have to be different.

OK, no number, no sub-title, and must have “Star Trek” in the title.

898. J - May 1, 2012

Let’s not stop there: Khan should be a Jewish woman with Kwik-E-Mart accent. Sulu is Korean now, so who cares?

Right, I forgot…:

Something FTW!

899. Sallah - May 1, 2012

Somewhat disappointed to hear they went the easy route and chose Khan as the villain instead of reinterpreting one of the “lesser” villains from TOS and turning him (or her) into a major player.

I am still going to have an open mind about the sequel… but man, Cumberbatch is going to have a REALLY hard time filling Ricardo’s shoes.

900. Khan is not the easy route - May 1, 2012

Why is Khan the easy route? If any thing, it’s harder because of how great TWOK is. Khan being in this movie puts an even greater amount of pressure to deliver a great movie. It has to be on par with, or better than TWOK, otherwise Star Trek fans will simply pan the movie.

901. Marshal - May 1, 2012

@898

No Sulu is a Japanese character. But is played by a Korean actor. Because they look similar and can pass for each other.

If James Bond was suddenly turned into an African-American, people would be up in arms because it would be a stark difference. Look at the reaction to The Hunger Games, and those characters (played by African-Americans) were not even described as being white in the novel in the first place. Still didn’t stop a backlash against their casting.

Khan being played by a Latino is fine, because they can pass for Indian. White people can not pass for Indian. Simple to understand really….well if you have intelligence to begin with.

902. Odradek - May 1, 2012

895. It sounds like you’re the moron here. Next time you want to comment, try switching your brain on first. Then you may be able to correctly use ensemble instead of assemble. Idiot.

Point taken. I maybe I an an idiot for that, also a non native speaker.
(By the way, the “moron” was directed sarcastically to Welles, not to you.)

903. Odradek - May 1, 2012

Doh, I see. Mixed up am and an. Can’t wait for a clever remark about that.

904. Trekboi - May 1, 2012

This is PATHETIC!

“White washing” in 2012?
having a white guy play an Indian, this is disgusting, totally disrespects the character & takes us back to the days of Breakfast at Tiffanys.

Jeeezzz

Gene would be rolling in his grave.

905. Trekboi - May 1, 2012

Why don’t they just have him play Daystrom in “Blackface” make up?

906. Trekboi - May 1, 2012

the mighty, genetically superior Khan played by a skinny, nerdy white guy? Ricardo was a stretch this is just heartbreakingly dissapointing.

They was as well call the film “STAR TREK: The Revenge of Khan” cause it will be as bad as “TRANSFORMERS: Revenge of the Fallen”

907. CmdrR - May 1, 2012

898 & 901 – Lt. Sulu was named for the Sulu Sea… Roddenberry, a WWII Vet, told George Takei, a Japanese-American man whose family got stuck in a detention camp during WWII, that he wanted a name that would be “Asian.”
The name Hikaru is never used during TOS. Sulu is Asian. John Cho is a great choice.

908. SoonerDave - May 1, 2012

@892

The idea of Spock dying was developed by Harve Bennett and pitched to Nimoy. Nimoy agreed because he thought, at that time, it was the end of the character. I believe the quote Bennett used was “Why don’t we give Spock a grand death?” or something akin to that.

Nimoy did not insist on Spock being killed off in Trek 2. In fact, Nimoy himself went to great lengths to debunk this very prevalent urban myth in just the last few years, wherein he explained that he was attending some sort of function and overheard then-Paramount head-honcho (Eisner, if memory serves) discussing the Trek franchise with a third party, and then claiming that Nimoy “made us put it (Spock’s death) in his contract.” Nimoy, on overhearing this, challenged him and said (in effect) “You go find my contract and show me where it says that.” Stunned, he tried to do precisely that, and discovered it was not, in fact, in his contract.

When the buzz about Spock’s demise in TWOK emerged (and, mind you, this was waaaay back in the pre-Internet-instant-rumor days) and the studio became inundated with complaints, and also found that the pre-release/test screening feedback told Bennett and Paramount that TWOK had major hit potential *except* for the part about Spock dying (which was not explicitly shown at the screenings, from what I recall reading – only the part where he leaves the bridge), Bennett decided to figure out a way to make Spock’s “death” ambiguous. And that led to the pickup scene of Spock’s “coffin torpedo” hooked to the end of TWoK that nearly led to Nicholas Meyer wanting his name off the film, as he thought the “non-death death” was a cheat.

Bottom line, Nimoy may have been ambivalent about Spock’s future in the TOS movie era, especially after the critical failure of TMP, but it was Bennett that started the idea of killing off the character that, in effect, put us where we are today.

And I’m very afraid that bringing in Spock Prime again in JJTrek 2 represents a serious risk of going to the well once too often. Certainly willing to see how it all plays out, but with Budgineering obviously returning, a Khan backstory at hand, and some Nimoy presence, I can’t say it gives me a great deal of optimism that a great original work is at hand.

But we’ll see. Won’t condemn it out of hand at this point.

909. Dennis - May 1, 2012

Looking forward to this being the inevitable great hit that it will be!

Kh-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-a-n! LOL

910. J - May 1, 2012

@901: You’re absolutely right on Sulu being Japanese. What I meant was “Sulu is now played by a Korean actor”. Still, casting a Korean COULD (I mean no flame war) be perceived as the implementation of “all Asians look alike” protocol…

911. Frederick - May 1, 2012

Wow, this guy is ethnically exactly what you woule expect from someone named Khan Noonian Singh. They nailed it.

912. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

Based on what we now know, I have a theory…

Spock Prime warns starfleet about Khan still being out there aboard the Botany Bay, Peter Weller’s character (a descendent of his character from Enterprise; John Frederick Paxton, leader of the xenophobic terrorist organisation Terra Prime) gains wind of this & goes to find Khan first, seeing augments as the future of a dominant human race, rather than the terrible mistake they really were; the Enterprise crew now have to fight against a Khan who is well-funded and well-equipped due to his corporate backing, rather than a desperate pirate…

Sound plausible?

913. goatse goatse - May 1, 2012

maybe spock prime will sacrifice himself to save ispock

914. DiscoSpock - May 1, 2012

#912 – No.

915. Shamelord - May 1, 2012

Khan, Hi! Feel the love tonight?

916. Mark Lynch - May 1, 2012

If BC is playing Khan, then I just lost all interest in this movie. I certainly will not be going to the cinema to see it.
Might catch it on Blu-Ray once it hits the bargain bin.

I thought the whole point about rebooting the franchise in an alternate Universe was to be able to tell fresh new stories.

So we have the second film in this brave new Universe and the best the writers can do, and this is with having many extra months to work on it, is…

“Hey lets do Khan, but we’ll make him a pasty faced English guy. No one will notice or say anything!”
It’s one thing to ignore certain elements of Trek that have come before, but WTF?

Seriously? That’s the best you can come up with for a sequel?

I really thought Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelorf were better than this.

Colour me very disappointed.

917. Sebastian S. - May 1, 2012

# 809.

Ahmed~

“With all due respect, I do see the logic here at all. When Ron Moore reimagined BSG, he came up with a new take & very fresh ideas.”
__________________________________________________

Good point!
They only borrowed two ideas from the old series and those were the Pegasus and Cain (and even those elements were completely changed from the keel up!).

Ron Moore and company really took advantage of the whole ‘rebooted universe’ concept for BSG (no Ovions, no Borellians, no Eastern Alliance; just the Colonials and they Cylons; and even the Cylons were completely redone).

918. VOODOO - May 1, 2012

While I think the idea of Cummerbatch playing Khan is an odd one no matter how fine of an actor he is, it is in no way racist decision…That’s an absurd thought that some of the posters are suggesting.

919. John from MD - May 1, 2012

If true, very sad…

920. Christopher Roberts - May 1, 2012

912. Possibly. Factor in, that Montalban-Khan doesn’t make it off the Botany Bay but his essence is somehow transferred to one of Paxton’s followers.

921. Dennis - May 1, 2012

Cumberbatch as Khan is clearly as popular here at Trekmovie as was the decision not to have William Shatner in the last Trek movie.

Therefore, it’s probably a winning move. ;-)

922. VOODOO - May 1, 2012

I would not have chosen Khan as the villian (it’s too obvious + it’s been done before) but there are a lot of interesting directions they can take the character they we have never seen on screen before.

I would love to see Khan in his prime ruling on Earth and see exactly who he was etc…Also, the Eugenics war could be very interesting. Khan may not be the way I would have gone, but I’m sure the guys will do a great job with the movie.

For those of you who are saying you won’t go and see this movie I’m calling bull s***. You know as well as I do that you will be in line the first day with your Vulcan ears on and having a conversation in Klingon.

923. Aurore - May 1, 2012

“If James Bond was suddenly turned into an African-American, people would be up in arms because it would be a stark difference.”
__________

I do not know whether it’s true or not, but, some have said that Pierce Brosnan wanted Colin Salmon to follow in his footsteps as James Bond.

I don’t know what most people would have thought of such a bold choice…
I am not sure of what ** I ** would have thought either, for that matter.

However, I do remember that a few people (myself included*) seemed to have a problem with the idea of a blond James Bond, a few years back….

*Shameful, I realise that. But, believe me, I have absolutely nothing against blond people…my husband , and… “some of my best friends are”….blond.

:)

924. Richard Daystrom - May 1, 2012

Man, I missed a lot here yesterday!

925. VOODOO - May 1, 2012

By the way, Cummerbatch may not look the part, but he is an amazing actor who is going to nail the part of Khan.

926. rm10019 - May 1, 2012

Nothing to see here :)

927. Aurore - May 1, 2012

@908.

Many thanks for your informative, and, detailed reply.

928. Michael - May 1, 2012

Klingon bastards have rehashed a fanchise! LOL

929. me - May 1, 2012

Star Trek : RIP

930. Vice_Admiral_Baxter - May 1, 2012

Hmmm…. it would be VERY funny if TM got this all WRONG!

Not that I personally know anything about the film…..

Muahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!

931. crazydaystrom - May 1, 2012

“Everything old is new again.”
Cliche’ but true, it would seem.

“There’s nothing under the sun that’s new.”
Jesus was apparently correct (my agnosticism now under reconsideration…jk).

This movie may turn out to be ‘golden’ Star Trek but using (a?) Khan seems so very calculated. OVERLY calculated IMO. And now that Mr. Nimoy is back (which makes sense and, all things considered, is logical) I would not be surprised at all to find out Mr. Shatner makes an appearance as well. But for the first time since 1966 my expectations for new Trek have been lowered. And that is probably a good thing, again, all things considered. Maybe the story will be a good and satisfying one. For me and many of us the story is what’s most important.

Ridley Scott while developing a prequel to his ALIEN found concepts and ideas so interesting that he felt a great science fiction film could be made from those ideas even if the story had no connection to ALIEN whatsoever (though the connection is now obviously there with his PROMETHEUS). That’s what I want with Star Trek. Could happen. But expectations now lowered.

The last science fiction movie I saw that I thought had a truly original (for film) concept was FINAL FANTASY: THE SPIRITS WITHIN. And the INCEPTION conceit was original as well. And there’ve been sf movies that I liked and enjoyed even more than FF:TSW – SUNSHINE, MOON, DISTRICT 9, SOLARIS, CHILDREN OF MEN, SERENITY to name a few. But with Star Trek it would seem the thing for me to do is turn my brain off, munch my popcorn and hope the ride is a fun one. And hope the next reboot will be more science fiction and less space opera (which, in truth, is what Star Trek has always been, space opera).

932. noleknight - May 1, 2012

Boborci…Man I really hope you call everyone out and make them eat crow after this movie blows away the first one.

Some of you people posting are just retarded. Yes, Star Trek is about boldly going where no one has gone before, but this is a MOVIE and it needs to sell. I guarantee you this movie will still have the essence of what Star Trek is about. The kissing and making nice, and playing prime directive and not upsetting culture can be for the next TV series. The goal is to get more than just the Trekkers to come see the movie…it’s to sell and ensure the future success of Star Trek. By getting more people to embrace Star Trek, it will ensure the success of future TV series.

And for those of you blasting Benedict for playing Kahn…Jesus…Ricardo was a Mexican! Talk about intolerance, some of you Trekkers are completely oppositie of what Trek stands for!

933. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

@901. Marshal – May 1, 2012
“If James Bond was suddenly turned into an African-American, people would be up in arms because it would be a stark difference.”

Well, if he was an African-American, then that would totally change the nature of the character; not because of the “African” part, but because of the “American” part! ;-)

934. denny cranium - May 1, 2012

Again its show business people.
The Paramount suits looked at the last movie and said what specifically brought people to the theater?
Paramount marketing people probably said Nimoy. It brought all the rabid Trekkies in .
The Par suits said ok get Nimoy back pay him a dumptruck full of money.
Then the suits looked back at the previous Trek sequels and saw the love for TWOK and looked at the last Batman movies box office.
The Par suits then said great lets get this Khan guy back and get those writer guys in from the last film.
Cue boborci and crew.
I trust that Bob is not going to phone one in cash his check and then go on to the next project.
I said previously in an earlier post I’m excited about all of this. It’s the themes in TWOK that made it such a great film.

935. denny cranium - May 1, 2012

And if Paramount made up its mind that it was going to be Khan no matter who scripted or directed it?
I for one am happy to have Bob at the helm.
I don’t think any other of the writers can steer

936. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

#917 But BSG isn’t Star Trek. Its fans by far were fewer and further in between. What i am saying is BSG: Who cares.

937. DeShonn Steinblatt - May 1, 2012

Can we stop with the “if” crap. It makes you look like…

well, you know how it makes you look.

938. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

Good Morning

939. Damian - May 1, 2012

Must say I’m disappointed (though not surprised) about the Khan redo. Movies the last few years have been persistently pursuing the reboots and redo’s of popular characters. For myself, I’ve had little use for the whole remake thing. There were really only 2 exceptions. I love James Bond movies and the reboot with Casino Royale was a good move (though James Bond movies were always their own little entities anyway, as opposed to sequels) and Star Trek (2009) because it was not a true reboot in the sense that they built on what came before, they did not replace it.

But Khan, seriously. He was involved in only 2 on screen appearances, but those were so well done, I don’t have a need to revisit Khan again. And Khan was so expertly portrayed by Ricardo Montalban, I can’t fathom how anyone thinks that any actor, no matter how good or high caliber, is going to one-up Montalban in that role. If there was ever perfection, it was Montalban’s portrayal of Khan. I ask, why redo perfection? If there was some flaw with Khan, maybe I could see it, but there was none.

I had a very high opinion of the new crew following Star Trek (2009) and their ingenious way of creating a sequel/prequel/reboot all at the same time. But I’m afraid that just the fact that they are rehashing an already perfect character forces me to nudge my opinion down a few notches. I was hoping for something new, something I’ve not seen in Star Trek before. Khan is not new, now matter how they do it. He will still be the same person, now matter how they try to redo it.

I’m not saying I won’t go see it. But I may wait a few days to see it to get a feel for what my expectations should be.

940. Buzz Cagney - May 1, 2012

#923 there was quite a few that suggested Colin as 007. Personally i thought the guy has that ‘certain something’ that any Bond actor needs. He’s tall, handsome and carries himself with style. Of course changing the characters ethnicity would have been a gamble but i think Colin had everything needed to carry it off.

941. celticarchie - May 1, 2012

Bored now.

It’s gonna be just as crap and boring as they’re last pathetic attempt in 2009.

Not watching, not even remotely interested.

942. T'Cal - May 1, 2012

Star Trek: The Rise of Khan

As long as they treat the story, individual characters, races, and most of all the audience with respect, I’m good with whoever the guest stars are. For instance, I hope they treat the Klingons as a proud, strong, intelligent warrior race. Khan must not simply be superior physically but intellectually as well. Including Nimoy Spock must be for a real reason rather than, “ain’t it cool?” The team is capable of this but didn’t they write the awful film Transformers 2? Still, they were responsible for MI3, which I thoroughly enjoyed. Here’s hoping…

943. dscott - May 1, 2012

@941 – Why are you still here then? ;)

944. VOODOO - May 1, 2012

Another thing…All you people who are complaining that you want “your ST” back and that the last film wasn’t cerebral enough I say get a life…Do you not remember that ST was dead and buried before Abrams and company raised it from the dead and made a quality ST film that appealed to most die hard fans and far more importantly the general public? This is a business and films like ST 09 sell to the general public not a small group of nerds who want to see the return of Neelix and Quark in series that nobody would care about.

So my advice to all 300 of you who long for the days of Enterprise, Voyager, DS9 when nobody cared about Star Trek is to rent the dvd’s and play your ST role playing games and then get out of the way as Abrams, Orci, Kirk and Spock continue to bring this once dead franchise back to life.

945. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 1, 2012

Those of you saying you’ve “lost all interest” in the movie, or that you won’t see it, are lying.

Period.

946. BitterTrekkie - May 1, 2012

945.
You’re right. I probably will see it, just not in theaters.

947. BitterTrekkie - May 1, 2012

Where it will count the most, I want to add to that last sentence.

948. Gary Robert Phillips - May 1, 2012

357. Funny.
441. Whale Aliens!
463. Lens flare incineration.
581. True that! Trashed ST history for a big, new, fresh direction of…time travel and Khan? Would have been better just doing it straight…the first meeting of the original crew.
662. L.O.L.
695. Hopefully!

When the news came out about the Spock/Kirk Prime scene written for Shatner, I wrote that it would work very well as the “open” for the next movie. Spock giving the “Happy Birthday” Medalion to younger Spock. Still a good idea for somewhere in the film.

ANYWAYS, who says the “boborci” shown here is the real deal. This IS the internet afterall.

Just trust JJ & company will make an entertaining flick. THEY want to make money and WE (Trekers, old school) want more TREK!

949. rm10019 - May 1, 2012

Perhaps they will CGI BC to look exactly like Naveen Andrews ;)

950. Barfco - May 1, 2012

Since this is a different timeline they can make all sorts of different changes that didn’t appear in the other universe. Now the fight scene between Spock and Cumberbach makes sense. That cargo ship looking thing must be the Botany Bay. I can see them starting the movie by showing the end sequence from the first movie where you see Spock Prime saying Thrusters on Full and then instead of it going straight into the sequence in the first movie the camera pans down back into the audience and we see Cumberbach in the audience clapping at the Kirk promotion and then they kick into the new credits. People would be like what is Khan doing in the audience?

951. Whalien - May 1, 2012

#948 — that would be Whaliens…lol!!

952. Dalek - May 1, 2012

As soon as the trailers start coming out, most of the naysayers are going to be salivating whilst downloading the theater cam versions before apple has finished uploading them to its monstrous servers.

They will be watching it in all movie theaters on opening night, if only to be armed with what us Trekkies like to do most, nitpick until the most illogical facets make some sort of rational sense, or that sense of delicious self-righteousness on debate forums such as this takes hold over polite conversation.

Nimoy, Khan, I’m excited!

953. Troubled Tribble - May 1, 2012

932: WHY do Star Trek then?! Call it something else if the CORE IDEALS of Roddenberry’s Star Trek aren’t going to supposedly get bums on seats in the cinema for todays action/explosion/fast-cut audiences? (which I’d argue with by the way – Trek I and IV were intelligent sci-fi and they did very well indeed). Give today’s audiences an intelligent well written slice of thought provoking sci-fi and I’m sure they’d lap it up, because it’s something we just do not get these days – everythings dumbed down and hopelessly shallow. Trek needs to take risks not play it safe.

Don’t take Star Trek and turn it onto Star Wars and expect fans to accept it without some grumbling, especially when a supposed reboot to take Trek in a NEW direction, is already rehashing old villains……

As for these utter MORONS who claim “you aren’t a true Star Trek fan if you don’t like these new movies”…. ughh…. perhaps it’s people like yourselves that should “get a life”, or at least develop a little TASTE in movie-making… Broaden your little “I need explosions and villains” minds…..

954. Pashuntlee Weighting - May 1, 2012

Wow!!

So much crap about the movie! “OH! There needs to be new villain!”, “How do you re-boot Khan!”, “Bad choice of actor..!”

To all the naysayers: Patience!
The TOS re-boot was not thought of highly in the beginning and was fantastic. And, let’s look at that for a moment. It wasn’t a rehash of an existing storyline! It showed how the crew came together. It was the precursor to the TOS universe that we know!

Khan, aside from Klingons, is the most well known villain from the TOS universe! In fact, there was even mention of him in TNG. Anyway, if you look at the TOS timeline in which JJ worked the first time it was all EARLY. Even before the Menagerie!

We really don’t know how Khan is being introduced to this plot!!
So, again: Patience!

PRIOR to ‘Space Seed’ there is no storyline with Khan. The only real back story or character info we have regarding him is he is genetic superhuman from the Eugenics War and fled Earth after a failed attempt at dominating the world powers.

Similar to JJ’s re-boot, we may find that this is the precursor to ‘Space Seed’. The Eugenics War..? Why or how they tried to take over..? More of his time on Earth prior to fleeing..? Too much potential fodder there…

We were amazed with what he did the first time! Have faith that he’s not going to screw us with this…

Patience!

.

955. Pashuntlee Weighting - May 1, 2012

That actually should have been The Cage… Not the Menagerie… Sorry

956. Tiberius Subprime - May 1, 2012

As a Trekkie all my life, I agree with 954, Pashhuntlee Weighting.

Come on, guys, chill out. I didn’t want Khan either, but not for the reasons you’re all whinging about.

Now that it may be a reality, 954 has valid points that need to be considered.

957. Dunsel Report - May 1, 2012

Hoping boborci has written an homage to Nicholas Meyer’s “Time After Time,” where Khan goes around murdering people, slapping around Chris Pine and saying “I think I’m going to enjoy the 23rd century.”

958. CGren123 - May 1, 2012

I’m glad that there will be Klingons. I’ve got mixed feelings about Benedict Cumberbatch is playing Khan. I think it’s a gimmick, bringing Khan back, but I think Benedict Cumberbatch will be brilliant!

However, I’m over the Moon about Leonard Nimoy coming back as Spock!

959. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - May 1, 2012

If Spock, and Co. Can take a rusty, beat up bird of prey into Earths past to acquire 2 humpbacks and bring them back to the future- why can’t they go back and prevent the catastrophe that caused the timeline to split?

960. Marshall McMellon - May 1, 2012

Well, I won’t deny I’m a little disappointed to see the Khan rumors being confirmed (I was definitely in the ‘Hoping Against Khan’ camp)- But- I’m not devastated over it and I’ll still lay down my $10 to see it on the big screen. I just tell myself “Hey, it’s an alternate timeline- It’ll be an alternate spin on the Khan story.” So be it.

I’m sure I will still enjoy it. :)

961. PunkSpocker - May 1, 2012

I have a theory. Pine is quoted as saying something like “Cumberbatch can do amazing things with his voice, or has a great vocal quality” something like that. I think the villan is a super-being who plays the roles of several past bad guys who took down the enterprise. Cumberbatch is playing several roles. not just khan. just a thought.

962. Mark Lynch - May 1, 2012

Let’s be honest, Star Trek was never about villains and there was never a recurring villain or nemesis for Kirk and crew.
All that happened with Khan is that Harve Bennett had a good idea for the re-use of Khan after having watched numerous episodes of Star Trek including “Space Seed”. His original treatment was then improved upon by Jack B. Sowards and Nick Meyer into what we finally saw.

Many people are comparing Khan in the ST Universe with The Joker in Batman`s. This seems about as relevant as comparing apples and oranges. Khan, 1 showing. Joker, too many to remember.

A lot of the time, what was originally thought of as a “bad guy” by Kirk, had him changing his mind about them at the end. For examples “The Corbomite Manoeuvre” and “Arena” come to mind.

Star Trek has never been primarily about the “bad guy” and “big explosions” but I guess when you only have a 2 hour movie every few years rather than 26 forty-four minute episodes a year. Something has to give and it would seem decent story telling and character development has to go in this case.

But know they are even throwing ethnicity out with the bathwater. Just how is it going to be explained that Khan Noonien Singh originally from the Northern region of India and a Sikh warrior, winds up looking like a pale faced Londoner?

All of this, if it is true about Cumberpatch playing Khan, is a shame for me as I grew up on Star Trek and have been a fan for as far back as I can remember.
What was it that JJ Abrams said early on? “This isn’t your Fathers Star Trek.” Well, I certainly can agree with him 100% there.

I wonder what the title of the sequel will be?
My vote is for “Star Trek: You Khan’t Do This!”

I’ll just hang out for Prometheus in a few weeks. Now that will be some decent Science Fiction story telling.

963. boborci - May 1, 2012

734. No.

964. Justin Burton - May 1, 2012

Nimoy khan…. Klingons…

Ok so here is my take on the movie. .
The Enterprise Crew finds khan
They get there ass handed to them
Spock finds Spock Prime for advice they team up
Klingons get wind of this and either show up to help or to kill everyone cause of what happened in Enterprise series

Genesis device shows up with a Carol and David Marcus David dies Enterprise gets blown up

Did i mention that this is a rehash of 2 and 3? lol

JMB

965. BiggestTOSfanever - May 1, 2012

If they are almost done filming, why can’t the movie come out a little sooner?
I am sooo looking forward to 380 days from now!

966. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

Highly illogical to complain, nitpick and whine about a movie you’ve never seen. You complaining folks have not even seen a trailer..you have no idea what the movie is about, yet you are all complaining about the film and getting about as irate as would be expected if they announced that the Enterprise would be changing its name to the good ship Lollypop.

Grow up and give the flick a chance. Half the folks complaining here and saying how bad it will be are the same folks that will watch the movie three times over, buy the Cumberpatch Khan doll, then log onto here and and complain about how this is not Star Trek, all while reinacting the Kirk/Khan fist fight from the film and downloading the pirated copy….

967. Jay - May 1, 2012

Ok…. i’m officially stunned. I can’t believe they are doing Khan, especially with a white guy playing a character that is famously of Indian heritage. I don’t get that at all. It worries me.

I have alot of faith in this brain trust (JJ, Bob, etc.) because of how well the 2009 movie was done, but I fear this will hurt their credibility with Trekkies when they cast a white English actor to play a character of Indian descent.

I also thought it was too “obvious” for this brain trust to go in that direction. I thought it lacked imagination.

Well, I have to hope now that the story they crafted is so good that it will explain this and make the Khan story interesting again. Sounds like it will be a completely new story. Not “Space Seed” redue, but because of the new time line, it will be a completely new story of how Khan is brought out of stasis.

Last and not least, I have to eat some crow. I owe appologies to those that kept saying the villain will be Khan. I still can’t quite believe it. But oh well.

968. VZX - May 1, 2012

OK, why do people continually state that all the complainers will still watch the movie several times? Yeah, some will, but I bet most will not.

I am a huge Superman fan (even got a S-shield tattoo), but I refused to see Superman Returns in theatres cuz I wasn’t crazy about the kid story line. If I get turned off about a movie, I will not see it. I got better things to do with my time and money than take a chance on a movie that might piss me off.

969. Mike Day - May 1, 2012

Leonard Nimoy IS in it too. My prediction is he sacrifices him self (like in ST:II) but this time to save the new Spock. Which will lead us to the next film in which he is brought back again, leading us to the film after that where the Borg stop Kirk et al from bringing those two whales into the future and instead assimilating the poor whales. It will be called Star Trek: XIV Cyborg George and Gracies Revenge on The Japanese featuring the crew of the Sea Shepherd.

970. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

well looks like nimoy is saying on his twitter ppl are jumping to conclusions about spock.

971. jamesingeneva - May 1, 2012

WOW this thread has got to be one of the fastest growing threads I’ve seen in a while lol…

Thanks Bob for visiting with all us diehards!

972. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

How much you wanna bet that the Nimoy rumor is wrong, inlight of recent tweet, and if thats wrong then I am going to also bet that Khan could still be inaccurate

973. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - May 1, 2012

I believe the alternate timeline Is what makes this seem confusing. But as we saw when Spock Prime met up with the young Kirk, in the cave, the timeline is, by nature, trying to repair itself, and we will continue to see evidence of this in the 2nd installment.
Spock Primes contribution to the story is his knowledge of the other timeline, and his ability to warn his younger self of what Is to come. The fact that Spock Prime is still ‘connected’ to the original timeline should be what is accelerating the timeline’s repair, or possibly the cause of it’s realignment altogether.
I believe we will be pleasantly surprised by the pacing, and “relentless” plot line.
Very……very excited. My brains going a mile a minute.

974. Daoud - May 1, 2012

@963 Thank you Bob, you’ve made my day with but one word. You’re the new Calvin Coolidge, and too bad the nick “Silent Bob” is already taken, because Silent Cal would be proud of how you’re holding back.
.
(For those who don’t know, Coolidge’s dry Yankee wit and frugality with words became legend. His wife Grace recounted a young woman sitting next to him at a dinner party confided she had bet she could get at least three words of conversation from him. Without looking at her he quietly retorted, “You lose.”)
.
So Bob, are you on the Enders set today? What’s for lunch?

975. Orb of the Emissary - May 1, 2012

Oh.. my… prophets!

976. Daoud - May 1, 2012

@933 Ctrl-Opt-Del: Ummm, don’t know much about Bond history, do you? The first Bond filmed was about James “Jimmy” Bond, an American spy, with Felix Leiter as his British colleague. So we’ve already seen that. And we’ve seen Leiters of both European and African complexion.
.
@Indo-Europeans: Both North Asians and Hispanics are southern Indo-European peoples. The Spanish language, and the Hindi language are both direct descendants of the Ur-Heimat Proto-Indo-European. I think the issue is with a northern Germanic Indo-European such as Cumberbatch in the role… but for those saying a Hispanic Mexican like Montalban (whose family descends from Spain) and the fictional North Asian Khan (whose family? would be perhaps Parsi: the Persians who ran northern India) aren’t related… know SQUAT about history, linguistics, and genetics.

977. cathy - May 1, 2012

well it may be good but a better plot would have been ( spock) Leonard Nemoy correcting the time line back, to were it should be.

978. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

Would be sooo very funny if this was all just rumors and not true one bit. All the complaining and crying for nothing

979. rls1138 - May 1, 2012

First time posting, sorry to be so long-winded.

Now, as to this Star Trek II news I couldn’t be happier that Nimoy is returning and if what AICN has spoiled is true, sort of makes sense. But I have an issue with Spock Prime deciding to tamper with the flow of events in the new time line after taking such great pains NOT to do that in the last film. It just doesn’t quite ring true to the character, but hopefully it will all be explained. I just don’t want these films to be all about “changes to and tampering with the timeline”. They did a great job re-booting so they could start fresh and I would have prefered it if they had moved on from established characters and story arcs.

However, I could not be happier with the Klingons being featured in a bigger way as I love me some dirty, mean-spirited original series Klingons!!!

BUT, I am not in any way happy about them using Kahn. Not at all. NAH-AHN. I read a piece on AICN not to long ago where they stated that the Star Trek films have been trying to live up to his particular villany ever since the original Star Trek II and not really ever succeeding. To me he was a character that had a marginally interesting original series episode (I mean, really, it was a “bottle show” shot cheaply but with an excellent performance by Montalban) and an exceptional film appearance. But his motivations and what made him so great in ST II evolved from that episode and took fifteen years to pay off. I get what the new team is trying to do with the character if AICN’s spoilers are true, but I would have much rather seen a totally new story with totally new characters involving exploration and discovery rather than more shoot-em-up. I can get shoot-em-up from Star Wars. Plus, while I can accept minor physically alterations in the main cast, having a pale Brit play an Indian sikh is not something I can see them explaining away especially since Kahn in the alternate timeline should look EXACTLY like Montalban as the events that put him and his peopl out there all took place BEFORE the Kelvin was destroyed. It’s a real shame they couldn’t lock down Édgar Ramírez as he at least physically could pass for Montalban. Plus after seeing him as Ares the God of War in Wrath of the Titans, I would have LOVED to see him put the smack down on Kirk. But my gut feeling is that they won’t even bother to try and explain it. Also, I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if the film makers decided to go with Kahn because it puts him in THEIR Star Trek II and they might not have been able to pass that up. I just have to have faith that there new take on the character is as good as what they did with the last film.

980. Chain of Command - May 1, 2012

@Bob Orci:

I see nothing wrong with bringing back Khan. Nothing whatsoever. If it’s done with intelligence and flair…Go for it! Start Star Trek over and have fun! Some of us out here would die to be in your shoes (You get to play with all of the toys!)

@ everyone else: My thought process is this: Star Trek is starting over. It’s a totally new take. It doesn’t mean that what you grew up with is gone. It doesn’t mean the enjoyment factor of the original interpretations of those stories is now “void.” You can still watch them anytime you want. No one pulled a Nero and wiped out Shatner or Stewart, or Nimoy or Frakes. All the stuff they did is on VHS, DVD, Blu Ray, TV and online for illegal download somewhere I’m sure. The new version of Star Trek does not erase the original version anymore than Roger Moore erased Sean Connery, Daniel Craig erased Pierce Brosnan as James Bond. Watching “Casino Royale” does not ruin my enjoyment of “Dr. No”. This new version of “trek” is just a new spin on the most memorable and iconic characters from the franchise. Watch or don’t watch. It’s that simple.

I for one can’t believe there are still people who STILL want a movie based off of one of the soap opera/technobabble laced, wall-paper musical, Berman-era spinoffs. Only serious die-hards would go see that and Paramount would not and will never not fork out 200 million to tell a story about Janeway, Sisko, or Archers crews. TNG BARELY held their own when they made the leap to the big screen and only had one decent film out of four (And TNG was the most popular of the spinoffs whether people want to agree with that or not).

981. Greenberg - May 1, 2012

He’s not even a Mexican! JJ you dumbass.

982. Sebastian S. - May 1, 2012

# 936.

Buzz~

BSG fans, that’s who… ;-)

Just because ST is a bigger franchise doesn’t mean that it’s the only quality space opera franchise out there, you know. That’s a profoundly narrow perspective. Besides, Ahmed and myself were only using it as an example of a good reboot, that’s all.

983. AJ - May 1, 2012

I’m looking forward to this.

For all who complain about the writers having thrown in the towel on an ‘original’ Star Trek story, the fact that this is a TOS reboot kinda kills your arguments, ‘original Star Trek’ being an oxymoron.

I’ve become a fan of Cumberbatch from his work in ‘Sherlock,’ and seeing him do an over-the-top genetically enhanced superman is certainly going to be something to look forward to. Also, Klingons? Bring ‘em on.

984. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 1, 2012

#976: Are you ALWAYS this smarmy, condescending and holier-than-thou? Christ, man. People like you are the reason geeks get a bad name.

985. celticarchie - May 1, 2012

943. dscott – Morbid curiosity. Can hardly be considered ‘still’ here as this is my first post here in months. I saw a link to some Trek rumours, I followed it here.

986. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 1, 2012

#976: And by the way, given your snide comment about people not knowing their James Bond history, you got something wrong–Felix Leiter wasn’t in the 1954 version of Casino Royale. Clarence Leiter was.

987. Jay - May 1, 2012

#980 I completely agree with you.

988. Killamarshtrek - May 1, 2012

Well I didn’t see this coming. I can’t say I’m enthralled that we are re-treading on hallowed ‘Khan’ turf (why put all that un-needed pressure on yourself?).

Having said that I have faith in Bob orci & the rest of the guys to put a new spin on it & make it different & interesting (& exciting obviously!).

If anyone can come up with a reason why – we have a genetic superhuman from a war in the 1990′s which never happened who was launched in a ‘sleeper ship’ which never got built and who is an indian sikh but looks and sounds like an ‘Upper Crust’ english gent – then it’s these guys!

989. Max91 - May 1, 2012

#980
Well said. Well Said.

990. Jay - May 1, 2012

#988 I think the timeline will be updated obviously. The war in the 90′s will simply be moved to the mid-21st century.

They have been doing this with every new version of Star Trek whenever they reference some “past” event that we have past in real time.

991. Damian - May 1, 2012

My issue with redoing Khan is my own general opinion about redoing things in film in general. This goes beyond Star Trek. My own personal opinion is redoing a character (or a remake of a film that was already well done in other cases) is generally due to a lack of imagination. Too many filmmakers today decide to do what is easy and not take risks. There are very few directors I hold in high esteem today because they don’t take risks. One of the few contemporary directors I enjoy seeing movies from is Paul Thomas Anderson (“Boogie Nights” “Magnolia””There Will Be Blood”, etc). He only puts out a movie every 2 or 3 years but they are always well made and his movies are more art oriented than most. I’m also an avid Hitchcock and Kubrick fan, and IMO there is not better director than Hitchcock (one of the reasons I don’t give much credence to Academy Awards is Hitchcock never won best director).

Again, this is just my personal opinion of redoing something well done in any movie, not just Star Trek. It just strikes as a lack of imagination, and that would go for any attempt to redo something well done on screen.

Will I go to see the new movie? Probably. Will I wade through crowds on opening night in light of what we now know? Probably not. I’ll likely wait till the crowds thin a bit and I get a feel for what my expectations should be.

This is just a bit of a disappointment. After the genius of the story for Star Trek (2009), I just expected more than a regurgitated villain from Star Trek past. This new crew is better than this.

992. rogerachong - May 1, 2012

IMO this is all great news. Here are my thoughts on the direction that they are taking. What if Khan is found by the Klingons and kidnaps a warbird. He acts somehow to incite war between the federation and the empire ( sort of like the Clone Wars but shorter). All the while Khan is using this as a ruse to gain support and control on Earth (like Palpatine). Uhura must DIE. You heard it here first as this will send Spock in a loop and drive all the female viewers into tears (the same thing was done in TDK if you all recall). By the end of the movie the Klingons are defeated and Khan rises as a ruler on Earth and in the closing scene ressurects an army of Augments. The Enterprise is now a rogue crew (just like TDK) and must join with others like Andorians and some renegade klingons to defeat an Augment led army in Star Trek 3. Star Trek 2: Khan Rises will have an epic Klingon and federation space battle among other great set pieces involving Kirk, Spock and Khan. The sequel will also be mind blowing and all the fans will be lining-up from around the block on opening night to see the next two films. Have faith the next two entries will be one for the ages and the real power of Khan will be revealed.

993. sean - May 1, 2012

Actually, we should be completely fine with John Cho as Superman, or a black man as James Bond. Those characters are not limited to white men (notice Felix Leiter in the latest series is, in fact, a black man). Superman is from another planet, for goodness sake. He can be any color you like. And plenty of Brits are black. It’s not as if there’s a dearth of roles for white performers of European descent.

The problem is the reverse, which is what some folks are upset about with Khan. There is no history of Hollywood ‘colorwashing’ white roles. You don’t see Davey Crockett being played by Omar Epps. But you do have a history of people like Peter Sellers or Mickey Rooney putting in buck teeth and slanty-eye makeup to appear Asian, you do have a history of white guys pretending to be Native American by putting on brown makeup and saying ‘How’ a lot, you do have westerns where all the Mexicans looks suspiciously Italian. There’s a long history of that, which is what people talk about when they say ‘whitewashing’. So no, it’s not the same when the reverse happens (and it rarely, if ever, does). The reality is, the modern Television & Film landscape hasn’t changed a whole lot. It is still predominately white. And no, that is not balanced out by a few Tyler Perry productions.

Racism is not some artifact of the past that we can wink at and say ‘Boy, those folks sure were silly, weren’t they?’. It is alive and well. Look at the furor that erupted when Donald Glover was rumored for the new Spiderman. Or the ruckus over casting two black performers as characters in The Hunger Games. The vitriol spewed their way was absolutely vile and disgusting. And there was A LOT of it, mostly coming from white people who were upset that characters they assumed were white, weren’t white.

994. badwolf - May 1, 2012

Well to the last commnet that khan was mexican guess what dombass khan was nd was always a indian from the east. Lets all not forget that this mob mentality of hating what. Jjand team are getting the exact same treatment that nic meyer was getting for killing spock and yet most trek fans claim its there fav flick so relax and wait and see jj last was the best trek in a very long time unless you wa t berman back to put the final nail in the coffin of trek

995. Killamarshtrek - May 1, 2012

@990 You’re probably right Jay, they’ll just conveniently leave out the year of the war. Can’t see how they’ll explain how Khan is British though!

996. Silvereyes - May 1, 2012

MJ and Red Dead Ryan

I’m one of those that have disagreed with you on the Khan issue. I still don’t believe it actually. I just don’t see why they would go there… And I totally disagree with you gentlemen in how you came to your conclusion. I also think your “I told you so” attitude throughout is annoying at best, but the fact remains this is just my opinion and as such means nothing. You were right, I was wrong, and as I wrote to MJ in a thread sometime ago I will now sit at your crow eating buffet table dig in. Regards…

997. Dennis - May 1, 2012

#995: “Can’t see how they’ll explain how Khan is British though!”

You mean, instead of Mexican? I imagine that if he wants to Cumberbatch can match Montalban’s Latin tones and accent.

About to go over 1000 posts here – clearly, a lot of publicity interest being generated by this news. All good for Abrams, Paramount, and Star Trek. :-)

998. James Cannon - Runcorn Trekkie UK - May 1, 2012

Bob Orci… You and JJ Abrams have pissed off a LOT of fans here …

Can’t wait to hear why you and him have to say…

999. Ralph Pinheiro - May 1, 2012

@ boborci: I always thought the Khan (if true) an anti-hero, someone feared for his intelligence and not by physical force. I love Klingons as fearless and intelligent warriors, remind me of the Vikings. I hope these villains are strong and charismatic. If Cumberbatch is Khan, I want he is someone that I love and hate.

I wonder if the footage has already ended. The main cast has ended? You want to keep the mystery until the first trailer?

Thanks Bob. Good job.

1000. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

A good thread, in spite of the flaming. #999

1001. boborci - May 1, 2012

974. Yup, on the set. Lunch? I think it’s Mexican food. Or is it Indian?

1002. Silvereyes - May 1, 2012

Bob Orci, I don’t believe it. It’s a trick! I’ll believe it when I see it… Anyway, it doesn’t really matter if it’s Khan or Pipi Longstocking… I’m sure you’ll make it work. As far as the idiotic insults directed at you from the cretins above suffering from the incurable Get-A-Life syndrome, well, don’t let the bastards wear you down.

1003. Dennis - May 1, 2012

And that was 1000!

Pissing off fans is not bad for Star Trek, regardless of what trekkies think – it certainly generates press. The Onion had a flawless take on this back in 2009 which still gets linked to a lot.

1004. Silvereyes - May 1, 2012

#1001 Bob

Bob shouldn’t it be bangers and mash?

1005. SoonerDave - May 1, 2012

@978

You know, after the conspicuous period of silence, followed by photo leaks, followed by silence…and suddenly, *this*, made me wonder *precisely* the same thing — all tinfoil in the radar.

Would not put it past JJ and crew one bit.

If that’s what they’ve done here, ya’ gotta know that boborci and the rest of them are reading some of these comments and ROTFLOL at the reaction.

That’s why I’m hedging my bets either way :)

1006. Killamarshtrek - May 1, 2012

@997 in 1966 it may have been acceptible for a mexican to play an indian sikh, or even a caucasian to play a native american indian with a little face colouring and a long black wig (I think Nimoy did it in some western). We both know that’s just not acceptable in this day and age!

The leaked pictures show Cumberbatch looking exactly the same as he does in ‘Sherlock’ – something here just DOESN’T add up!

1007. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

Sure it does. He’s certainly put on a lot of muscle.

1008. Killamarshtrek - May 1, 2012

@1004

#1001 Bob

….or perhaps Fish & Chips? Roast Beef and Yorkshire Pudding?

1009. Quatlo - May 1, 2012

@ 1005: See #880

1010. rickindc - May 1, 2012

The studio is providing false leaks, Cumberbatch is not playing Khan, he is playing Col. Greene.

1011. Craiger - May 1, 2012

Could the sequel be sounding more like the Augments mini arc in Enterprise? That had genetically engineered superhumans trying to start a conflict between Starfleet and the Klingons.

1012. The Old Trout - May 1, 2012

Get over yourselves guys, this is a film or if you are American a MOVIE. Accept it for what it is, a caprice, an entertainment, a far fetched tale. No-one will die because it isn’t pure trek and if we’re lucky we will get another one in a couple of years. Yes I’m a trekkie of 40 odd years standing. Live long and prosper y’all.

1013. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

@976. Daoud – May 1, 2012
Your condescension aside, I am fully aware of the television production of Casino Royal of which you speak; but that was a completely distinct entity from the films, wherein the main character was only made American as the (far more insular back then) US audience wouldn’t have watched a TV play with a British hero.

In all the films he’s been British, and in the original novels he is too, so to make the next Bond in the movie franchise American *would* be a significant departure; even if it did happen once in what amounts to no more than a minor historical footnote…

1014. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

*Royale

1015. Gary 7 - May 1, 2012

1982: “Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan”

2013: “Star Trek: The Wrath of Khan II”

How fresh and original.

1016. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1010: “The studio is providing false leaks, Cumberbatch is not playing Khan, he is playing Col. Greene.”

No.

1017. The Unknown Poster - May 1, 2012

745 – Khan is Kirk’s arch nemesis because that is how he was portrayed in Star Trek II. Quality of the feud over quantity in my opinion.

1018. Captain Cody - May 1, 2012

Spock Prime is going to revive Khan! Why? Does Khan have something that the Vulcan colony needs to survive?

1019. Azrael - May 1, 2012

Someone up thread said that Nick Fury was an “African American” originally in the comics. NO HE WAS NOT. Nick Fury was a white guy up until the mid 90s when Marvel started their “Ultimate Universe” line of books. At that point the artist designing the NEW VERSION of the character based his appearance on Samuel L. Jackson, which is why they cast him to play the part. Remember they had already tried to make a Nick Fury movie with David Hasslehoff (look it up).

Oh, and Anthony, could we add encouraging illegal activites like movie bootlegging to the list of bannable offenses?

1020. Dave Galanter - May 1, 2012

WOW! over 1000 comments.

My first reaction was: “I wanted to see a new story.” Then I realized–how do I know I won’t, even if this is Khan?

Seeing familiar characters in a new story is what a series is about, and if we see the familiar character of Khan in a new story, then what’s the complaint? I have none, so long as the story is good. And I’ll judge that when I see the movie on opening day.

1021. Ralph Pinheiro - May 1, 2012

AICN made a speculative digression:

“What if Old Spock Prime dispatched a heavily armed crew to where he knew the Botany Bay would be drifting? What if Khan and his crew were (likely against Old Spock’s protests) quickly caged and “broken” and repurposed into Starfleet Team Six, the Federation’s most deadly secret weapon? And what if this “tamed” Khan, with his genetically-engineered superior intelligence, has spent years biding his time as Starfleet puts more and more of its trust in him?”

“What if the Klingons are utilized early on to demonstrate how badass Khan’s Starfleet Team Six is?”

1022. boborci - May 1, 2012

1015 lol

1023. Charla - May 1, 2012

VZX it MIGHT piss you off. That’s the key word. ALL of the information thus far that we have read about is speculation and a huge *maybe*! This whole thread cracks me up. So, based on this information, the lot of you have decided that the new movie sucks and your disappointed, and your not going to go see it? Really?

To the rest of the pessimistic posters, it is still shameful how people here talk so rudely, but I am done with that. I have come to realize that some people are inpatient, quick to judge and will believe anything, etc. There’s more but you get the point.

I am glad to see Anthony ban someone for being so uncivil and rude! OH and Harry, You Khan not be part of this! :P

I understand everyone wanting to see the new movie, and getting leaked information. I hope everyone will not base their opinions on the information provided thus far to determine whether or not they will go see the movie. I mean it’s Trek!! Who would of thought another Trek movie would even be made??? That alone is exciting!!

Let’s see it first hand and then decide, shall we? There are a few of us on ‘chat’ that are going to go see it on the same day, at the same time. (Yes we have to work out the overseas time zones but we will) Then we are going to meet up with each other in the chat room and discuss how much we loved it -or not- afterwards. It of course is BYOB. haha. Should be a fun time!

Everyone is invited, lets see how many TrekMovie bloggers/posters/people we can get to attend, when the movie is released.

1024. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1020: “Seeing familiar characters in a new story is what a series is about, and if we see the familiar character of Khan in a new story, then what’s the complaint? ”

Exactly so.

1025. table10 - May 1, 2012

Now that the cat is out of the bag, JJ and co should use this to their advantage, promoting the movie should be ‘khan’ heavy to get the general public ready and use to the idea of khan’s place in the star trek mythology

Not just a great baddie, but ‘the’ baddie, the lex luthor to superman, the joker to batman

I just watched the first teaser to the dark knight. It didn’t show any footage but was very powerful, it showed nothing but the logo while you overheard various monologues from the film, including the joker. It didn’t hide that the joker was central to the story, it celebrated that fact early on so the audience would have time to get excited with the knowledge that this was not going to be just a sequel to batman begins, but a sequel involving the #1 showdown on everyone’s list

1026. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

Good idea, #1025.

1027. NoSeth - May 1, 2012

If Spock Prime dies, I will never watch a JJ Abrams Star Trek movie again.

I’m still disappointed over the arrogance involved in thinking that they can make a Khan story. Khan had his story. It had a beginning and an end. There is absolutely no chance they will make something as good or better. They can only hope to make a good movie.

Very poor decision.

1028. n1701ncc - May 1, 2012

Very disappointed bob orci that you and JJ would bring back Khan. Should have left him alone in the Prime world. As for no joker type characters there are plenty of them. Harry Mudd comes to mind. What about Gary Mitchell what a great villain he could be. What about Charlie X. Also you could have used the Talosians of Talos IV with Pike. All great movies but noooo we are getting Khan again. I guess the next movie Sybok will make an appearance along with V’ger.

1029. Adolescent Nightmare - May 1, 2012

The world seems a little brighter today. So excited!!!

1030. Rob Lock - May 1, 2012

I think i will just wait for this to be official. I am sure after this story you might hear a few comments from J.J. or Bob to settle down the masses. They have done a great job keeping few photos out of the media and filming is almost complete, so i have my suspicions a lot may just be hear say. Bottom line is, I will believe it when I see it!

1031. AJ - May 1, 2012

What would you call the inevitable Double Feature?

1032. Dave Galanter - May 1, 2012

#1027 Arrogance? Seriously? No offense, but I think it’s more arrogant to say “your story won’t be as good as this one, even though I’ve no idea what your story is about.” If not arrogant to say it, at least very presumptive.

“Wrath of Khan” is my favorite Trek movie–including JJ’s outing–but it would be silly for me to say that it will ALWAYS be my favorite since I’ve not seen all that will be made.

1033. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@ boborci , any time frame regarding the teaser or the trailer ?

1034. DX7 - May 1, 2012

This is from Memory Alpha regarding the first draft of Space Seed and possibly could be clues to what may happen in XII :

“In writer Carey Wilber’s original treatment, the Khan character is a Nordic superman named Harold Erricsen. This evolved in the first draft, where the character first introduces himself as John Ericssen, but is later revealed to be Ragnar Thorwald, who was involved in “the First World Tyranny”. Thorwald is more brutal in this version of the story, where he dispatches the guard outside his quarters with a phaser.”

Just sayin.

1035. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1027: “If Spock Prime dies, I will never watch a JJ Abrams Star Trek movie again.”

So *many* people said that in 1984 – and, truly, it killed Star Trek forever. ;-)

1036. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

Okay, 1982. LOL

1037. The Art of Film is Dead. - May 1, 2012

#916

The filmmakers didn’t choose Cumberbach initially.  They tried to find an ethnic-looking actor ( Del Toro and a few others were looked at, remember?) but were unable to secure one.  Within the time and pressure of a rapidly approaching start date, they were able to grab Cumberbach.  There was probably very little choice, but actually, they got lucky–I have heard nothing but praise about this guys acting ability.  Will there be fallout because of the ethnic and canon inconsistency?  Yes.  But, I hope as a society, and as Trek fans, we can move past this.  It wasn’t something that was planned you know.  

1038. boborci - May 1, 2012

1028. I can see the trailer now…

Evil has taken many forms…

… First there was Vader…

… Then there was Khan…

… Now… The biggest threat to ever face the galaxy…

GARY

1039. boborci - May 1, 2012

1028. I keeeeeeed!

1040. Rola - May 1, 2012

@ 993 and 1006, I agree. I will absolutely see the movie. However, in 2012 it’s a shame that an Indian actor was not chosen for the role of Khan, if in fact that is who Cumberbatch is supposed to portray. I still hope the movie is good and does well. I’m not going to rush to judgment.

1041. Daoud - May 1, 2012

@1025. Table10: Dennis should say *excellent* idea. Doesn’t this time out right then that next spring’s San Diego Comic Con… can be the…
.
Khamic Khan!! You’re right, blast it from the loudspeakers, Cumberbatch is Khan. After all, we knew Chris Hemsworth was Thor in advance and that turned out okay! Bad Robot should go full press now. Tie ins with Burger Khan (King), Khano-Cola, Khantests, Khanventions, etc.
.
@Dandru. The difference is, I don’t care what you think. Burp.

1042. Daoud - May 1, 2012

@Bob. Get thee to Avatar’s in Sausalito!
http://www.yelp.com/biz/avatars-restaurant-sausalito
.
I think they’d cater a set if Harrison asked.

1043. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

1034. DX7 – May 1, 2012

This is from Memory Alpha regarding the first draft of Space Seed and possibly could be clues to what may happen in XII :

“In writer Carey Wilber’s original treatment, the Khan character is a Nordic superman named Harold Erricsen. This evolved in the first draft, where the character first introduces himself as John Ericssen, but is later revealed to be Ragnar Thorwald, who was involved in “the First World Tyranny”. Thorwald is more brutal in this version of the story, where he dispatches the guard outside his quarters with a phaser.”

Just sayin.

***

Oh yeah, I see what you’re saying. At some point, Cumberbatch pulls his Montalban mask off and reveals himself to be Ragnar Thorwald.

1044. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

1038. boborci – May 1, 2012

Hey that sounds like a great spoof.

1045. Dalek - May 1, 2012

1038 @boborci – gary lol now that’s funny!

According to the poll the majority of Star Trek fans are excited or optimistic (with caution). I’d say that the more vocal negatives are definitely in the minority (as always).

1046. Bill Coleman - May 1, 2012

Well I have faith. If it is okay to bring back General Zod for Superman, Moriarty for Sherlock Holmes, Marion Ravenwood. for Indiana Jones… oh wait…

Why shouldn’t it be just fine for Khan to come back in Star Trek? How many time have retelling of stories been just as good or even more entertaning than the first go around? How many movies feature a large british liner sinking? How many times did Q show up in Star Trek TNG,DS9 or Voyager?

Do not be put out my fellow trekkies. I tell you that these people are professionals. It isn’t like one person is writing this, they have a good team of solid writers, both nerds and non nerds. This will be a fun, action packed, character driven story of groovyiness. Why? Because if it isn’t they won’t be back for a third one.

But look forward to the endless conversations about what went right, what went wrong and how this part of the movie would have been great in the episode.

Just remember how bad the first Captain America movie was. Have faith. Then if it sucks, call them on it. Good luck guys. BTW Harrison, what is up with Indy 5, yes or no? My 6 year old really wants to know.

1047. Cat - May 1, 2012

I have to agree with a lot of the sentiment here if indeed they are bringing back (or going to?) Khan (it depends on the timeline, doesn’t it?). Khan’s story was already told, and done extremely well if I may say so, both in Space Seed and Wrath of Khan. A few years back, when Adam Sandler announced he was re-imaging the iconic sports flick ‘The Longest Yard’, many sports afficionados and movie buffs asked; “Why?” I’m getting the same sense here in these comments and it does make sense. Lets hope that either the rumours are not spoilers afterall, or that indeed Abrams and Orci have come across an idea for a ‘re-booted’ Khan that’s too good to let go.

1048. brit-trek - May 1, 2012

as much as I’m a fan of Cumberbatch and I’m not that concerned by the return of Khan ,

i do think this is a bad piece of casting .

i wonder if those who , dismiss the implied ethnic background of Khan in his original appearances , would have been as happy to see an African American actor cast as Kirk….

In the final draft of Space Seed , Khan is of Indian ancestry.

Khan was depicted as gracious, fearless, and generous. But also ruthless and arrogant . a very well rounded villain of exotic ethnic ancestry was created and presented to the American public in 1967..a year of major race riots in Newark and Detroit ….a year that the Supreme Court ruled that prohibiting interracial marriage is unconstitutional…so this was a brave and interesting message about humanity’s future presented by the star trek creators when seen in the context of the times ..

roll forward to 2012 .. and we return to blackface casting ..

1049. boborci - May 1, 2012

1045 we can do better than the poll indicates. I wont rest until expectations are so low that everyone can only be pleased.

1050. chrisfawkes.com - May 1, 2012

How disappointing. Khan.

The villain that 80% of trekkies don’t want and 100% of non trekkies don’t care about.

All this anticipation, what a let down.

1051. Damian - May 1, 2012

I don’t think the writers are so much arrogant. I think it’s more a matter of convenience. Khan was a popular villain in Star Trek. He was also involved with what many would argue was the best of the Star Trek films (though not my own personal best–but that’s another thread). I believe the writers are trying to cash in that popularity. They hope the name recognition will fill some more seats for a few more weeks.

To me, it’s not arrogant. It just seems rather unoriginal, and dare I say a bit lazy. After the last film, I felt they were creative enough to design their own completely unoriginal character as a villain.

I guess I’m just disappointed. The reason to redo a popular character or villain is because you feel there was something lacking. There was absolutely nothing lacking in Montalban’s portrayal of Khan. I never thought to myself, Gee, I wish he did this differently. I was completely satisifed with the character and feel absolutely no need or desire to go back to that.

And this goes back to my point earlier that I generally take a dim view of redo’s overall, not just with Star Trek. There is far too much redoing, remaking and rebooting in motion pictures today. I was really hoping for something completely new and unoriginal. I won’t insult anyone’s intelligence and say I won’t see it. I’m too much of a Star Trek fan for that (I went to see Star Trek V in the theaters twice–so yeah, I’m hardcore), but my excitement will be greatly tempered and I likely won’t fight the crowds on opening weekend.

I kind of hope what some people hear are speculating is true, that this is all just a ruse to generate interest, but somehow I doubt it.

1052. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

1049. boborci – May 1, 2012

1045 we can do better than the poll indicates. I wont rest until expectations are so low that everyone can only be pleased.

***

Haha! That should happen pretty quickly after they hear you and Alex have been signed to reboot The Mummy and Van Helsing.

Congratulations, by the way!

1053. Ivory - May 1, 2012

Hey Bob,

Can you say if Leonard Nimoy has a cameo role or is it something more substantial?

1054. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

Hey I knew they were going to react badly if the story was about Khan. Had no idea it would be enough to go past 1000 posts on day TWO!

Just hope I’m not sitting next to any of you mumbling cranky pants on opening night.

1055. chrisfawkes.com - May 1, 2012

Shinzon and Nero were just other versions of Khan so with 160 million to spend on what should be the defining movie where do we go?

Over the same ground again.

1056. Dave Galanter - May 1, 2012

1051: “I don’t think the writers are so much arrogant. I think it’s more a matter of convenience.”

Actually, if anything, keeping continuity fans happy and fitting into what is known about Khan would make things less convenient, not more. If their thought is “we’re not doing a weekly series and we want to do something big and have only a limited number of movies to tell stories that are iconic” then that may be why they chose to do Khan.

1057. Ralph Pinheiro - May 1, 2012

Mr. Bob, I wish you say something more concrete about it. Filming is done. Why hide it? Any clues?

1058. Andrew - May 1, 2012

@ 705

Thank you sir. I’ve started watching TNG, and despite the first season being less than stellar, I’m starting to enjoy it quite a bit. I’m slowly becoming a real trekkie.

1059. chrisfawkes.com - May 1, 2012

@1054

I don’t think any of us mumblers will be there.

1060. boborci - May 1, 2012

1057 filming not done!

1061. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

boborci,

just heard the news. I hope the new Mummy will be as good & funny as the 1999 version

1062. Azrael - May 1, 2012

@1054 GOOD!

1063. Azrael - May 1, 2012

sorry meant 1059. No offense duncan, as much offense as possible intended fawkes,

1064. Scotty - May 1, 2012

I had mixed feelings when I read the spoilers. I think the main thing about going back to Khan for me, and maybe most of you, is that The Wrath of Khan was Star Trek at its absolute best. I’m sure everyone here has grown up with it, watched many, many times, can quote the movie, etc. Its sort of our baby, and the thought of anyone touching that, or trying to make changes to it, even in an alternate time line is a bit hard to accept. Ricardo Montalban was/is Khan in all of our minds.

Having said that, Benedict Cumberbatch is a terrific actor (if you haven’t seen the UK show “Sherlock,” you really should check it out). He has a way of playing a character who’s genus, bordering on insane and I think he could really do something interesting with that character. It won’t be the same, but its not supposed to be.

The writers are as big of fans as most of us, and I think they know now to ef this up. I think in their minds, they have 3 movies to work with and they want to go all out and put as much as they can into it, and I’m Khan is one of their favorite areas to go to.

One thing that has been on my mind is that the first movie while exciting, fun, and a thrill ride, lacked something that the original star trek had. It sort of lacked the heart of the original. The original usually had some sort of underlying message about humanity. I know they had a lot to cover in the first movie, but I hope that its not a trend that will follow the next two. I want more than just an action movie that is called Star Trek, I want the warm fuzzies that come along with it. I would rather them slow the action down a bit (it doesn’t have to be a Transformer’s movie) and take a little time to develop the characters.

Speaking of characters, in the original star trek, one of the main characters was the Enterprise herself. It felt like a home to these characters and in a way the Enterprise was Kirk’s love romance. In the last movie, I didn’t really get that feeling at all. Other than the scene of the Kirk/McCoy flying up to the Enterprise for the first time, I didn’t really feel introduced to the ship as we were in the original 2 star trek films. And I have no sense of the inside layout of the ship. Filming on location for the Engine room is fine and dancing but you get the feeling that it was shot on location. You get a brief glimps of some of the areas of the ship but not much. The bridge didn’t feel homely at all and looked like a department store. But thats just my opinion.

1065. Jay - May 1, 2012

Nimoy (Yay), Klingons (Yay), Khan (Nay)

Agree with the poster below.

133. FrustratedTrekkie – April 30, 2012

The idea of creating an alternate universe was to allow the franchise to present new stories and situations that hadn’t been encountered before. Instead of something new in the next movie we’re instead getting a new take on a villain established in TOS and used to perfection in Star Trek II.

Disappointing. I really wanted a new standalone Star Trek story.

1066. johnd - May 1, 2012

You people better not screw this up.

1067. Damian - May 1, 2012

1056–Redoing Khan will fill the seats, and that’s all that matters to the studio. My misgivings about Khan do not revolve around a fear of doing a remake of Space Seed or The Wrath of Khan. It will be a new story. I just believe to try to outdo perfection is foolhardy.

The fact that they only will have maybe 1 or 2 more movies (based on their own statements), I would think they’d want to do their own thing, without going back to a character already done perfectly already. I feel the reverse of your argument. If they were doing a weekly series, maybe then I could see doing a new take on Khan. Why waste one of your 2 or 3 big moments to tell a Star Trek story on a character already hashed out? That’s my question.

1068. Ralph Pinheiro - May 1, 2012

Ok, Bob, filming will finish this week, won´t it? but give us any clue?

1069. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

Mr. Orci, did you see my question at 891 :)

1070. star trackie - May 1, 2012

interesting thread…full of logically measured responses mixed with wild angry rants lol

Bottom line. This movie will make money hand over fist and the only crowd they need to please is the crowd that showed up the first time. And yes, Khan or no Khan, those people will be back in droves. An occassional squeaky wheel isn’t going to make or break this movie.

Personally, I ove the idea of a new spin on Khan, love a possible return to the Klingons of TOS, which have been sorely missed for the past 20 years, and, above all else, I, for one, am thrilled the Nimoy will be back! The very fact that he said “yes” to the script validates the whole movie as far as I’m concerned…Leonard Nimoy knows his Star Trek! The sequel, after an almost unbearable lapse of time, is finally becoming all too “real”. Exciting times ahead!

1071. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

1059. chrisfawkes.com – May 1, 2012

@1054

I don’t think any of us mumblers will be there.

***

Chris, I understand this is not what you wanted, but the principle of self consistency should mitigate your misery here.

I don’t now how many times I’ve said it. It’s acceptable to reboot Kirk, Spock, McCoy and the rest of the crew, but not acceptable to reboot any other franchise character?

The principle has already been endorsed by anyone who wants to see a new Star Trek movie with any of the TOS characters.

If Bob can help to get this franchise soaring again, I think that helps the long term prospects of the show reappearing on TV as well. If Khan helps that to happen, then it’s a good thing.

1072. Captain_Conrad - May 1, 2012

New universe and we decide to start ripping off the original… Awesome

1073. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

now = know

1074. n1701ncc - May 1, 2012

bob orci I feel honoredt that you responded to my post. I do say thank you sincerly. There are many posts on here that you could respond to so i again I thank you for responding to me.

Yes when you put it the way you did…it does not have a mass appeal.

I guess i am too old school and would love to see some of the other characters move to the big screen. I think Mudd could be turned in a great joker like villian. Maybe you would consider it for the 3rd movie.

Although I am disappointed in Khan I am sure you and JJ will do a great job with the movie.

1075. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

Using a thirty year-old movie that’s well-remembered as inspiration is reasonable.

1076. Dave Galanter - May 1, 2012

Actually, JJ Abrams fills seats, as does “Star Trek,” and really Bob and Alex seem to have an enviable record of seat-filling themselves.

By the way, I love “Space Seed” but it wasn’t perfection and it wasn’t even a very smart Captain Kirk that appeared in that episode.

“Hi, I’ve threatened your doctor with a sharp implement. You can call me Khan.”

“I wonder if you’re a product of late 20th Century genetic engineering?”

“I”m tired of your questioning, but would like to read up on how to take over your ship, should that come up.”

“I see. Please, read our technical manuals for details on that. Despite your overt threat of physical violence, I shall not place a guard on you until I’m sure you’re a homicidal maniac, and then I shall place one, and only one guard on your flimsy cabin door.”

Uh huh. ;-)

Anyway, I don’t know their motives. They don’t consult me. I’m just telling you what they could be thinking because I’d wonder if it was the right move to, and if you like Trek and think a Kirk/Khan showdown is fun, you may want to see how it would go down with this new universe. Would I like them to do a different story? Yes. Frankly, I’d like them to make my last Trek book “Troublesome Minds” into a movie and fly me out and let me play with props on the set until I’m a drooling mess who needs to be hospitalized. But barring that, they’re professionals who made a good Trek movie in 2009 and I’m looking forward to seeing what they do with this one.

Ahead, maximum warp.

1077. be flat - May 1, 2012

“The idea of creating an alternate universe was to allow the franchise to present new stories and situations that hadn’t been encountered before”

ABSO-LUTELY NOT! New stories? You can ALWAYS present NEW stories. Did, let’s say, “ST:Nemesis” need an alternate universe to present a NEW story? No. Or, better yet, take ST:ENT “These are the voyages” for instance – the TNG timeline events (well, Riker was fat and all, but you know)

BUT you actually CREATE an ALTERNATE universe/timeline (whatever – reboot) to be able to RETELL THE SAME stories DIFFERENTLY!

1078. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 1, 2012

#1012 wrote:
“Get over yourselves guys, this is a film or if you are American a MOVIE.”

That made no sense. We say “film” here in the United States, just like everyone else does.

1079. Martok - May 1, 2012

BOBOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOORCIIIIIIIIIIIII!!!! :D

WHERE IS SHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAT!!!!!!!!!!!

1080. Daoud - May 1, 2012

How about a 50-year old movie? I rewatched Captain Horatio Hornblower over the weekend… 1951 I think it was. That has a lot of transferable ideas in it. Hoping Alice Eve gets a character with that sort of relationship to Kirk. ’09 was a bit more of a Spock(s) movie. ’13 should get back to Kirk!
.
Then again, I’d love to see WRATH OF GARY.
.
Makes me think of Spongebob’s pet snail!

1081. VZX - May 1, 2012

Y’know, I wonder if there were any seeds planted in Trek 09 that gave any hint to the story for this sequel. I’m goning to watch it again soon to check. It would be cool if there was. Keep it threaded it together as part of a trilogy, perhaps.

The klingon scenes were cut, but maybe they have something to do with the new movie. Did the Klingons gain any new tech from their 25-year possesion of the Narada, perhaps?

I also wonder how the Eugenics War will be ret-conned

1082. Luke Michalski - May 1, 2012

I think the majority of the trek fans here should take a breather. I remember JJ saying something about making Trek more about the characters and how they work together in this amazing universe that Roddenberry created. Introducing such a strong villain into the mix can only mean a very character driven story. I can’t wait. In my opinion, those are the strongest stories to be told. (LOST anyone?)

And boborci, don’t let tell anyone different. I know you guys will knock this out of the park. Oh, and say hi to everyone on set from Luke Michalski from Wisconsin. That would be shweeeeet!

1083. With Fans Like These - May 1, 2012

Reading the disrespectful way some of the so-called “fans” talk to Bob, knowing he’s reading this thread, maybe the writers chose Khan to thin the herd a bit? I know I would have.

Comic book and sci-fi fans eat their own. To do any comic book or sci-fi franchise film nowadays, you’ve got to have a pretty thick skin to be able to subject yourselves to the unending derision of the so-called “fans”, beginning before production even begins, up to it’s release and beyond. Nothing you will do will please those kinds of people, some of whom have already made the Trek sequel in their own heads.

This small group of people spitting vitriol are the same ones who turned themselves inside out with rage when Heath Ledger was cast as the Joker, and then he gave an interview prior to shooting saying he’s not a fan of comics, doesn’t read comics and doesn’t plan to follow what has come before. The same hate is now being directed at you and Benedict for violating the geek prime directive, and that is, “never change anything or do anything unexpected” or face the wrath of the inflexible and the unimaginative.

Just remember that for every hater and rude, inconsiderate fanboy comment, there are a thousand people you will never hear from who think Star Trek is in good hands and are behind you guys, all the way!

Say, “hi”, to Harrison Ford if you have a chance. Have him tell George to let you guys write Indy 5 ;)

1084. VZX - May 1, 2012

BTW: I just saw Bob and Alex are re-doing The Mummy and Van Helsing. Add Spider-man to that. They’re currently doing Ender’s Game. What ever happened to that View-finder movie?

1085. boborci - May 1, 2012

891. Have nit considered He-Man. I believe someone else is attempting that.

1086. Ralph Pinheiro - May 1, 2012

Mr. Orci, Even ending Star Trek XII, have you thought about the history of the third movie?

1087. NCC-73515 - May 1, 2012

Bob, I hope your Klingons have some interesting beard styles. I always admired the Klingons because of their beards, I even try to get similar styles XD (so far I had Chang, Gorkon, Kruge, old Kor, and Worf) …am I in for a treat?

1088. Kirk, James T. - May 1, 2012

Well well well,

I dont really know what to think but I don’t think this is bad news at all.

I doubt the next movie will feature a Khan like we saw in Wrath of Space Seed – it’s going to be totally new and original but using the characters originally seen in TOS and WoK.

Spock Prime makes sense because if it didn’t I doubt Nimoy or Abrams would use the character and since the destruction of Vulcan was such a massive deal I doubt it won’t come up in the sequel.

All in all this is good news, Khan is to Star Trek what the Joker is to Batman but besides that slim parallel – the next movie is in the hands of the guys who made such a success of the first movie. And think of the marketing for it – I mean it’s Kirk v Khan

I see the Abrams movies as superb celebration’s of everything that is great about Star Trek – taking those bits from a universe of fantastic characters and updating them for a new generation.

1089. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

Thanks Mr. Orci! Your a class act! :)

1090. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1083

“Comic book and sci-fi fans eat their own. To do any comic book or sci-fi franchise film nowadays, you’ve got to have a pretty thick skin to be able to subject yourselves to the unending derision of the so-called “fans”, beginning before production even begins, up to it’s release and beyond. Nothing you will do will please those kinds of people, some of whom have already made the Trek sequel in their own heads.”

I don’t like the idea of bringing Khan again & I see it as lacking in creativity somehow, but that doesn’t mean that I disrespect boborci & the rest of the team.

I believe that everyone should voice their concerns or excitement in a civil way.

“Say, “hi”, to Harrison Ford if you have a chance. Have him tell George to let you guys write Indy 5 ;)”

Actually, I think boborci should write new Star Wars trilogy, if Lucas ever returned to that universe.

1091. Scotty - May 1, 2012

I hope they play this Khan a little differently and show him more insane than the original. I’m tired of “bad guys” being bad for not very good reasons. I’m also tired of them being out for revenge. I didn’t buy Nero as a very good villain. Floating around space for 20 yrs to take his revenge on the universe just didn’t seem legit. After 20 yrs I’m pretty sure I would have gotten bored and moved on.

To me, the best evil villains are always a bit insane. For those of you who have seen Benedict Cumberbatch’s “Sherlock” show, the Moriarty is the perfect villian–extremely smart and completely bonkers.

1092. Damian - May 1, 2012

Not all us dissenters are disrespectful. I’m disappointed and tend towards the side that saw this alternate universe as a way of telling new and original stories with the original crew with no real idea of how it will turn out for them. Going back to the well with Khan just seems a waste of a great opportunity to do something completely original.

1076–Your book is next on my list of original series stories books to read (I got a little behind, obviously). I am finishing up with the Vanguard and Stargazer books currently, but am looking forward to catching up with the original series novels. Whether I agree with their posts or not, it is nice to see people involved with the Star Trek on screen or off post here.

1093. VZX - May 1, 2012

Wait, so now there is a He-Man movie coming out, too? Wow, nothing like continuing the trend of reboots. I guess you have to be James Cameron to do any original movies on a big budget.

1094. Captain Rickover - May 1, 2012

I’m not sure what to think of this spoilers.

Nimoy – Yes, allways a pleasure to watch this noble man

Cumberbatch as Khan – No, really not convinced. Cumberbatch is fantastic as Sherlock, because he fits the role and is an fantastic actor. He was good as college student or a young Stephen Hawking. But Khan… Wasn’t it supposed to be the same ST-universe til 2234? Khan’s from 1996 an he’s a giant (physically spoken), one head taler than Kirk with twice the shoulder-size. You can’t compare the Khan-case with Ledger’s joker to Nicholson’s one, because this jokers are from two entirley different Batman-universes. Cumberbatch as Khan could only work if the writers and director want to say goodbye to the Prime-Universe entirely. So, I’m not sold on this idea and I’m not sure what to think of.

Klingons – yes, the more the better – except they’re changend as drastically as the Enterprise was in the last movie.

1095. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1093

“I guess you have to be James Cameron to do any original movies on a big budget.”

Or Christopher Nolan

1096. rogerachong - May 1, 2012

Congrats Bob on the Mummy and Van Helsing deals at Universal. So now anyone who needs a job in Hollywood will have to stay on your good side. Hey I need a job and I will be happy to be the gopher or do anything else you need to get done. I suppose that Star Trek Too script that you sent to the studios as a reference really and truly rocks. Haters will hate but Transformers was boxoffice gold. You guys are really on a roll and should be very proud of ALL the work you did. I do not keeeed about that job, hook me up baby!

1097. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

@1093 I respectfully disagree with your He-Man statement I think that the 1987 was not really what a He-Man movie should be…It did not even have Battle Cat or explore He-Man’s back story. So in my opinion a He-Man movie would be refreshing and “new”…I think that with what Mr. Orci and Co did with the Transformers movies would be interesting to see them tackle He-Man…Just my opinion.

I for one though on Star Trek 12 think it will rock!

1098. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

1003. Dennis

I think you’re right. Main stream folks don’t really care about what Trek-Geeks think anywho. In fact, if the nerds say, “it’s not true Trek”, the mainers say, “Oh…I’ll go see it.”

1099. VZX - May 1, 2012

Or course, I would love to see a He-Man movie. So, I’m a shmuck for complaining about all the reboots and adaptation even though I go see those movies anyway.

1100. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

I’d go see a reboot of Shazam or Greatest American Hero.

1101. VZX - May 1, 2012

1095. Christopher Nolan. Inception. Good point.

1102. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1094: “Khan’s from 1996 an he’s a giant (physically spoken), one head taler than Kirk with twice the shoulder-size.”

Neither of those things are true – although Montalban was more broad-shouldered than Shatner:

http://tos.trekcore.com/gallery/albums/1×22/Space_Seed_167.JPG

Actors in TV and movies, BTW, are made to be exactly the height necessary relative to other actors. Anyone got a Cruise box? ;-)

1103. VZX - May 1, 2012

1097: Are you kiddin? The 1987 Masters movie rox my sox! It’s 80s cheese at its best! Not only that, but Frank Langella’s Skeletor was a great performance, add Ralph McQuarrie and Mobius’ designs for a great production value.

1104. Michael Hall - May 1, 2012

“Another thing…All you people who are complaining that you want “your ST” back and that the last film wasn’t cerebral enough I say get a life…Do you not remember that ST was dead and buried before Abrams and company raised it from the dead. . .

You mean, like a zombie? Agreed! And gussied-up as it was by a $150 million makeup-and-apparel budget, I must say The Undead shambled around quite impressively, too. But I still wouldn’t have confused it with anything that was actually like, you know, alive.

1105. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

LOL@1100 I actually think He-Man has some good background to it, I mean look all the characters to work with? He-Man, Skeletor, Merman, Stratos, Snake Mountain, Castle GraySkull..Then you have the side stories of the Evil Horde and even bringing in She-Ra. I mean I think if someone could get that story right you can easily do a few movies about it, just like with Star Trek.

FYI sorry if I am talking to much Star Trek on this blog lol…..

1106. If you read this, then you just read this. - May 1, 2012

All you naysayers are completely wrong. Of course Khan can be played by a ‘pale, white englishman’ in the new movies’. Look, this is sci-fi and anything can happen.

Obviously, the Botany Bay is caught in an inter-spacial loop that transcends subspace. A superheated plasma pocket converges with a tachyon eddy creating a subduronic rift, this results in…..Khan being white.

There. A clear and reasonable explanation

1107. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

To everyone giving Bob Orci grief for apparently re-using Khan, are any of you making a new Star Trek movie?

No? Then shush.

Thank you for your (& all the other crew & cast’s) efforts Mr Orci, I look forward to seeing the fruits of your labours ~1 year hence :-)

1108. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

Doh I mean He-Man (shakes head in embarrasment)

Oh Mr. Orci one more quick one, if you had to cast He-Man in a new movie whom comes to your mind first…

Okay I am done with He Man talk lol.

1109. Capt. of the U.S.S. Anduril - May 1, 2012

After sleeping on it and thinking about JJ Abrams a bit…this is a red herring folks. It’s gotta be.

Also…if the Klingons are in it, they must be part of the massive budget. Ie. applying and removing the make-up EVERY TIME ONE LEAVES THE SET. Even for a bathroom break! Seriously. No matter what, if the Klingons were in it, surely we would’ve gotten a peek of one by now.

And i still say that Nimoy’s statement means absolutely dick. Did he say, “Hey, I’m on the set of Star Trek!”? No. He said that he chats with Abrams and Quinto. That’s it.

1110. Just have a question For Mr. Orci - May 1, 2012

@1103 I just think the movie had flaws…I love the 80s grew up then but was disappointed, granted when I was a kid I loved the old 87 movie but could have been better.

Guildor was not Orco lol…Though on the DVD I have they mentioned that it cost to much to CGI an Orco in at the time I believe the director stated that anyway lol.

1111. If you read this, then you just read this. - May 1, 2012

1088. Kirk, James T. – May 1, 2012
Well well well,

I dont really know what to think but I don’t think this is bad news at all.

I doubt the next movie will feature a Khan like we saw in Wrath of Space Seed – it’s going to be totally new and original but using the characters originally seen in TOS and WoK.
—————————————————————————————————–

THAT’S TWOK!!!!!!!! YOU DARE TO GET IT WRONG!!!!! I’M SETTING MY PHASER TO OBLITERATE!

1112. Damian - May 1, 2012

If nothing else, this has gotten my interest more than anything has in the last few months. I think this is the first thread I posted multiple times for a while.

At the end of the day I’m disappointed with the spoilers (also not so keen on Nimoy’s reappearance–I loved his portrayal, of course, but I thought he had a great send off in Star Trek already).

But as a hardcore Trekkie, someone who owns all 11 movies, 5 TV series, the animated series, and hundreds of novels spanning all the series and more, I will still go to see it, and hope against hope that redoing Khan does not prove to be their undoing.

1113. AnonymousWasAWoman - May 1, 2012

Was so hoping they weren’t going to go the Khan route…still have a little over a year to keep hoping that one’s wrong. Khan is massively, massively played out.

I would have loved to see what Cumberbatch and the new cast would have done with ‘Where No Man Has Gone Before.’ The Gary Mitchell scenario is still a rich and untapped vein of incredible potential. Yes, I know, it’s been said before, here and elsewhere. You’ll just have to indulge me in taking a last minute to mourn.

KHAAAAAAN!!!

There. That’s done.

That said, seeing Nimoy reprise the Prime role will be a delight. There’s still a great deal of story to be mined, there.

1114. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1107

“To everyone giving Bob Orci grief for apparently re-using Khan, are any of you making a new Star Trek movie?

No? Then shush.”

You mean, we just shut the hell up & not express our opinions as fans ?

If we live in a third world country, I’d say, YES SIR, but we are not.

It seldom when people agree on everything, we can argue & give our reasons for our views, but you can’t tell people to shut up, just saying.

1115. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

@1114. Ahmed Abdo – May 1, 2012
Expressing your opinion is one thing, calling a guy who is an active member of this online community stupid/unimaginative/lazy is another. (In case you didn’t realise, the user “boborci” is the *real* Roberto Orci.)

1116. If you read this, you just read this - May 1, 2012

@1107

“To everyone giving Bob Orci grief for apparently re-using Khan, are any of you making a new Star Trek movie?

No? Then shush.”

You mean, we just shut the hell up & not express our opinions as fans ?

If we live in a third world country, I’d say, YES SIR, but we are not.

It seldom when people agree on everything, we can argue & give our reasons for our views, but you can’t tell people to shut up, just saying.

—————————————————————————————————

Yes…..because people who live in ”Third World” countries are not allowed to have an opinion. We should just ignore them. (FACEPALM)

1117. Jeff O'Connor - May 1, 2012

Excellent news all-around. I was never against Khan but I wanted Klingons more, so… yeah.

1118. jonny - May 1, 2012

Happy Real Spock is back!! They will be ruining Khan. I’m not sure who the actor is but to play Khan you NEED Ricardo Montalban. As for Klingons, always good.

It’s unfortunate the we have to settle for a popcorn action flick to gte new Star Trek instead of a new, insightful series that follows the Next Gen rule of thoughtful, intelligent exploration.

We’ll see…

1119. If you read this, you just read this - May 1, 2012

1115. Ctrl-Opt-Del – May 1, 2012

@1114. Ahmed Abdo – May 1, 2012
Expressing your opinion is one thing, calling a guy who is an active member of this online community stupid/unimaginative/lazy is another. (In case you didn’t realise, the user “boborci” is the *real* Roberto Orci.)

—————————————————————————————————-

Yes, Roberto Orci is a Trek fan and was the first man to play badminton on the moon.

Show some respect.

1120. J. - May 1, 2012

# 1113

How is Kahn “played out” as you say? Last time I checked… Kahn has only made two appearances… the last being in 1982. I fail to grasp this “played out” notion you mention.

It’s funny, actually. When it was clear that Nolan was reimagining the Joker in the Dark Knight, I didn’t hear any Batman fanatics smack their foreheads and say, “you jackass! The Joker is all played out!”

But… Trekkies are a bit of a different breed, I suppose.

My message to Mr. Orci is this: Carry on. Don’t let the nerds bring you down, for you will create something that they will never in a million years get the opportunity outside of fan videos on youtube filmed inside their parents basements.

1121. Scotty - May 1, 2012

If Cumberbatch is indeed playing Khan, it’s interesting to note that we see him in a dark colored starfleet uniform in the leaked photos, and he also said in an interview that he filmed scenes in the Budweiser plant (the engine room). I’m sure there’s plenty of ideas on why Khan would be dressed in a starfleet uniform and hanging out in the engine room of the entherprise, but it seems more like someone actually in starfleet.

As for Bumberbatch’s size, I read that he did beef up a bit for this part.

1122. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1115

I know that boborci is the real Roberto Orci & in all my comments on this sites, I never, said that he or the writing team are stupid or anything like that.

I only expressed my disappointment that they choose to bring Khan back.

I do appreciate the fact that Roberto Orci drop by the site & interact with the fans from time to time.

I firmly believe in what Voltaire said, “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

1123. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

Seriouisly…what a lame conversation this has turned into. *cry* *whine* *outrage* If rumors are true, Khan is being played by a british guy, even though we don’t know the details this is an outrage :-/ Seriously….pay attention to Shatner’s SNL comments. This is exactly what he was talking about.

1124. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1114: “You mean, we just shut the hell up & not express our opinions as fans ?”

By all means express your tiresome, repetitious and unimaginative opinions that have no impact of any kind on anything.

This is the Internet, after all.

Why has no one yet started an Internet petition, determined to collect one million signatures to “Show Parmont and JJ Abramson That Remaking Wraht of Kahn Is Sacrilige And Will Cause Teh Final Death Of Trek?!!!”

Internet petitions – fanboi weapon-of-choice since 1998.

1125. B.T. Dubbs - May 1, 2012

who is Khan?

wait… is this where i pick up my $1,000 Wal-Mart gift card???

1126. Nano - May 1, 2012

“ST 2.O Khan Again” with a new Macco $99.95 fresh coat of paint! Why so long a wait to rehash an old villain? Perhaps to fill the holes in the story line, just my guess; nevertheless, I’ll watch though I’m truly disappointed with an entire Trek universe to play in. Space the final frontier boldly going backwards!

1127. LizardGirl - May 1, 2012

How the heck did this happen? I turn my back for one day and this already has OVER 1,000 POSTS!! I think I said something around the 100th post or so. I’ll start reading from there I guess *sigh*.

1128. @boborci from Ian - May 1, 2012

@boborci

Reading through these comments, I wanted to reach out and thank you for enduring the vitriol that has been directed to you with class and humor.

The respectful, thoughtful, and loving treatment you gave to Star Trek in the 2009 movie is very sincerely appreciated. You stayed true to the spirit of the franchise, from the familial structure of the crew, nods to the old continuity (ie. Admiral Archer’s prized beagle) to the heartwarming passing of the torch with the inclusion of Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime in a central role that was perfectly written and executed.

Your contributions to Star Trek (in addition to all of those of JJ Abrams and the cast and crew of the latest films) have rejuvenated a franchise that has been inspiring and entertaining me as long as I’ve been old enough to dream about the wonders of the cosmos.

There has been no film that I’d felt more anticipation or trepidation about than the 2009 Star Trek movie. By the time the opening credits rolled following what was the single best opening scene of any star trek movie,you put my fears to rest, demonstrating that the heart and soul of Star Trek was in good hands.

Regardless of how I may feel about the content of these “spoilers”, I will reserve any judgement until I have had a chance to watch the film. You and the rest of the team have earned my respect and gratitude.

In the meantime, I thank you for your work and for engaging with us here on trekmovie.

May you live long and prosper.

1129. rogerachong - May 1, 2012

Here is a thought about Cumberbatch. JJ was looking for a latin actor and failed. Time ran out and production had to start. Enter the pale British dude. What to do?

Bob: That’s easy to fix JJ.
JJ: OK let me have it, how do we pass off a white dude as Khan.
Bob: What if the real Khan dies when the Botany Bay is boarded by Klingons and Joachim his Number One survives to adopt the name Khan as his own as an honor to his fallen leader.
JJ: Hey that’s so crazy it just might work and it would surprise the audience as well when Khan dies.
Bob: Yeah then we can continue with the original script with no real changes and one pissed off vengeful augment named Khan. It’s like Khan 2.0.
JJ: Make it so Bob!

1130. whatinblueblazes - May 1, 2012

First, I don’t think that we should necessarily treat the “spoilers” above as being ironclad. Insider sources, particularly for those as crafty as JJ, Orci and company, aren’t always to be trusted. I wouldn’t put it past them to wage a war of disinformation and rumor. I’m personally unsure of whether or not this information should be considered credible. I suspect it is, but only time will tell.

Second, even assuming the spoilers above to be genuine, there’s no reason to conclude that the plot will be a rehash of Space Seed or TWOK. As many above have pointed out, this is a new universe (albeit with many of the same pieces). Just like it’s possible to play chess in a staggering number of different ways with the same ages-old pieces, I firmly believe that a huge number of new stories can yet be told with the same characters established in TOS and the films. I don’t think that this will be a rip-off. At all.

I, for one, have confidence that we’ll see something unique and interesting that will bring yet more classic Trek to a new audience in the 21st century. I think it’s premature to gnash teeth or flail arms. Let’s wait and see what’s out there.

1131. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@1127 LizardGirl: It’s not worth going back and reading..it’s the same spew..a bunch of over sensitive closed minded militant Trek fans who are throwing a fit because Khan MAY be in the new film and that he is being played by a british guy *gasp…petition coming soon!*

It’s just getting sad because the same folks that are crying are the same that will watch the movie three times over, buy the Cumberpatch Khan doll, then log onto here and and complain about how this is not Star Trek, all while reinacting the Kirk/Khan fist fight from the film and mourning the death of the good old days of Voyage/Enterprise and TNG style movies that nobody watched….

1132. Scotty - May 1, 2012

I’m glad things fell thru for Benicio Del Toro. I think when the movie comes out, everyone will think that Cumberbatch was one of the highlights of the movie.

1133. Damian - May 1, 2012

1126–Agreed. I was hoping for something fresh and new. Same crew, new voyages. No matter how you dice it, Khan is not new. And this indicates this is another good guy vs bad guy movie. I was hoping to go where Star Trek has not gone before.

But at the end of the day, 1124 is right. Our views will have absolutely no impact (if for no other reason, the story is written, they are not going to gut it because of comments here). I’m more or less just venting, exercising my 1st Amendment rights, if nothing else. I’m not deluded enough to actually think my opinion matters at the end of the day.

1134. Dilithium_doublebock - May 1, 2012

@ too numerous posts.
The desperate search for Hispanic actors lead them to hire Lilly white Cumberbatch. This is not “evidence” of Khan. Cumberbatch has black hair; this is evidence of a character with black hair, nothing more. There were photos of Cumberbatch and Quinto fighting with no context. Spock could have been in a weakened state, dreaming, fighting an android or hologram or any number of shape shifting aliens. But it was not “evidence” of Khan.

Gloat all you want. I’d do the same in your place. But please don’t use words like evidence and logic when all you had was a lucky guess. You had no special insight.

Congratulations on your guess.

1135. Ctrl-Opt-Del - May 1, 2012

@1122. Ahmed Abdo – May 1, 2012

I wan’t talking about you, dude, you were the one who leapt on my post & took it all personal like…

1136. Basement Blogger - May 1, 2012

It’s logical to bring back Leonard Nimoy. Look, they destroyed Vulcan. What happens to Vulcans and the Federation is an interesting plot line. I thought the best parts of the 2009 movie were the Vulcan scenes.

Spock Prime is now assisting in rebuilding Vulcan civilization. The Federation may become dominated by humans. Will other alien races find this acceptable. And will the Klingons take advantage of the turmoil? Fascinating stuff. Let’s hope the Supreme Court keeps their promise about going deeper and present some ideas for this movie along with the action.

By the way if the pig alien Tellarites provide security for the Federation, I think the Klingons are going to starting to salivate at the taste of bacon.

1137. If you read this, you just read this - May 1, 2012

1129. rogerachong – May 1, 2012

Here is a thought about Cumberbatch. JJ was looking for a latin actor and failed. Time ran out and production had to start. Enter the pale British dude. What to do?

Bob: That’s easy to fix JJ.
JJ: OK let me have it, how do we pass off a white dude as Khan.
Bob: What if the real Khan dies when the Botany Bay is boarded by Klingons and Joachim his Number One survives to adopt the name Khan as his own as an honor to his fallen leader.
JJ: Hey that’s so crazy it just might work and it would surprise the audience as well when Khan dies.
Bob: Yeah then we can continue with the original script with no real changes and one pissed off vengeful augment named Khan. It’s like Khan 2.0.
JJ: Make it so Bob!
—————————————————————————————————-
That would explain Cumberbatch…..but still a bit of a let down. From the drawn out, dramatically evil-to-the-end death in TWOK to….impaled in the back with a batleth.

Be as lame a death as Kirk being shot in the back or crushed under a rusty old bridge……..oh wait.

1138. Damian - May 1, 2012

1133–last sentence, deluded should be delusional. Sorry

1139. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Guy Fawkes

What aren’t you understanding about this NOT being a rehash of Space Seed or Wrath of Khan? This has already been established. The writers aren’t stupid. They KNOW that trekkies won’t go for a “remake” of Wrath of Khan… so it’s obvious they are taking Khan in a NEW direction. Like I said… maybe he’s not the “main” villain… but Peter Weller IS?

The script MUST be good if Leonard Nimoy decided to participate. Remember, he is notoriously careful and picky when it comes to his own involvement with the series, and if he doesn’t like a script, he’ll choose not to participate — Star Trek: Generations, case in point.

If they have Nimoy’s blessing, then it’s a VERY good sign.

1140. AJ - May 1, 2012

The “Botany Bay” had 30-or-so years to drift in the ‘new’ timeline, so anything could have happened to it in that time. And, I’ll bet the writers moved the ’1996′ reference up to the mid-2000′s to make the ship’s nuclear engines and sleeper compartments more believable. It means, “this is not your father’s ‘Khan,’ ” at least.

1141. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1136

I’m happy to see Mr. Nimoy again & can’t wait to see what they will come up with regarding the Vulcans

1142. Factchecker - May 1, 2012

Please don’t have old Spock die saving everyone from young Khan after ‘remember’ mind melding with Quinto….

Very sad we haven’t boldly gone in a new direction.

Guess that’s what Blu rays are for.

1143. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@900 — Now that’s what I’m talking about. Doing “Khan” is to the easy route. They KNOW they’re going to get compared to “Wrath of Khan”… so they must be doing something they think will blow our minds.

@1140 AJ — Yeah, I’d be fine with them making subtle changes like this… even if it would technically go against continuity. You can’t do 1996 — because that would just confuse a large portion of the audience. They obviously can’t go with the exact interior design of the Botany Bay, either… because it’s very antiquated compared to similar sets we’ve seen recently.

I really don’t care what they do with stuff like that… because the new series is a “modernization” of Star Trek. If it screws with the hardcore trekkies’ precious “continuity”… then so be it.

1144. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

“Very sad we haven’t boldly gone in a new direction.”

As said many times before, the whole premise of doing a remake of TOS is NOT ORIGINAL. Part of the fun of redoing TOS is taking characters and putting them into NEW stories. This will NOT be a remake of Space Seed..will NOT be a remake of Wrath. It will simply have a common villian IF the rumors are true.

The last film would have been better off if it simply labled as a complete reboot and not the lame Alternate Universe crap that was created to simply appease the closed minded militant Trek “get a life” fans….urgh!!!

1145. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@1143: Continuity has already been jacked up. It got jacked up the minute TNG aired and they made Klingons honorable and Romulans with head ridges. It was jacked up when Klingons were given a crazy new language and head ridges and it was most certainly jacked up when KHAN recognized Chekov.

A new Trek for a new day. Trek 11, while having some issues, was a great film that was better then most of the garbage that game before it. Trek 12 will be equally great, then we will get 13 and hopefully a new show…just pray that the militant fans don’t scare everyone away from wanting to touch the show again after the bizarre and sad reactions to the new films

1146. Johnny - May 1, 2012

Congratulations @1144 Robman007

One of the best posts of this entire article. They’re rebooting the Original Series, people. They have chosen to “rehash” the same old characters…. BUT the direction they’re taking these “old” characters is entirely new and original. The writers have established that they won’t tell the same old stories again… so I’m not sure what the complainers are going on about. Guess they’re just stubborn.

Where you’re wrong though, Robman… is abotu the “Alternate Universe”. It essentially IS a “complete reboot”… albeit it’s just a reboot that RESPECTS the original timeline. Instead of having the film basically “erase” the previous canon… it simply creates a new reality. It is a reboot — just one that respects the old material.

1147. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@ Johnny 1146

I understand that about the Alternate Universe and I get it. I just thought it was a lame excuse to avoid angering militant fans. We had plenty of films and shows that established that going back in time and changing things erased the future…so why not this instance? I think that was the case until reshoots..then we got the silly Alternate Universe talk.

I do get that part and I understand…I just think it was silly.

Without the Alternate Universe and going with total reboot you could say that the new Khan was a genetic experiment created in a western europe lab, but was broken out, kidnapped and raised in the middle east, hence the name….works fine and dandy..

1148. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1129. rogerachong

Here is a thought about Cumberbatch. JJ was looking for a latin actor and failed. Time ran out and production had to start. Enter the pale British dude. What to do?

Bob: That’s easy to fix JJ.
JJ: OK let me have it, how do we pass off a white dude as Khan.
Bob: What if the real Khan dies when the Botany Bay is boarded by Klingons and Joachim his Number One survives to adopt the name Khan as his own as an honor to his fallen leader.
JJ: Hey that’s so crazy it just might work and it would surprise the audience as well when Khan dies.
Bob: Yeah then we can continue with the original script with no real changes and one pissed off vengeful augment named Khan. It’s like Khan 2.0.
JJ: Make it so Bob!

———

Now THAT could work… assuming they feel it’s necessary to explain the “white” Khan. Which I’m not sure they even need to do. But overall, that’s a great theory.

1149. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@ Johnny….

..this closed minded talk is a pattern that started with the original films and continues to this day. Even when TNG came out it was “this is not MY Trek” …now folks unversially love TNG. Then DS9 came out and it was too “militant” and “warlike”…etc, etc….now these new films are nothing like our past Treks of TNG, DS9, TOS, ENT, etc.

Folks even whined, petitioned and cried when Spock died, the Enterprise was destroyed, etc…even though these were great plot twists and are now accepted as great moments in Trek.

1150. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Robman 1147

Well this way it keeps them from getting “lazy” with the writing. With the original continuity essentially still in place (up until Kirk’s birth)… the writers will have to adhere to the established backstory of Khan (while possibly getting away with tweaking the dates and stuff).

I feel like it would appear lazy if they just created their own backstory for Khan and threw him into the movie just because “they wanted to do Khan”, you know?

1151. Salt Monster - May 1, 2012

Why Does Star Trek Need A Villain?

Why can’t they go into unexplored space in search of the answer to some mystery (a derelict ship, an archaeological find for example) and find something very terrifying, some new threat, a virus, a creature, whatever. Why can’t that be Star Trek? Why must every move try to recreate TWOK?

Why are people equating Star Trek with Batman? Batman is a comic about a vigilante. Star Trek was high concept Science Fiction television series. They are not and have never been the same thing.

Ship out of danger?

Nope.

1152. Scotty - May 1, 2012

@Robman007 1147

I don’t think it was done just to appease the hard core fans. I think it was also done to show respect to the characters/actors/history that came before this Trek. It was a clever way to say that everything that happened before still happened, that those versions of events aren’t simply erased to make way for this new version.

1153. VZX - May 1, 2012

1151: Salt Monster: Yeah, good point. I think that a villain is cool and all, but Star Trek is more than just good vs evil.

I think that the 1st Star Trek film, TMP, is a great example of spectacular science fiction and a world-ending threat without a villain. (VGER was not a villain) The same with Star Trek IV, the whale probe.

The problem is that the audience won’t come see intellectual stimulation. They want things that go boom. They want a villain to say “Boo” to.

1154. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@1151 “Why can’t they go into unexplored space in search of the answer to some mystery”

Because every time they have tried THAT type of film, it is a disaster. Star Trek I, V, Insurrection…all films about the unknown that fell flat. Voyager, Enterprise, Countless TNG, DS9…

You folks have to understand..these movies are not made to satify just TREK FANS! The last time we got that we had TNG Films that blew goats. They HAVE to appeal to the LARGER AUDIENCE in order to be made. That means epic villians that folks are familiar with…explosions, space battles, Needs of Many situations, Kirk fist fights, Spock Neck Pinches the Enterprise full phasers blasting with an epic universe comes to an end plot line.

That is what will make more films and THAT will get us new films. The new film may not have satified the larger number of militant fans out there who wanted exploration and spiritual odysseys, but it got the non fan interested and made a hell of alot of money in the process.

To make a film about exploration simply because it’s what a number of Trek fans want is Illogical and you can kiss the franchise goodbye if you go in that route.

1155. Brian A. Tyndall - May 1, 2012

With the new timeline, I don’t see a big problem bringing back Khan, no different than the Enterprise being the lovechild of the TOS ship and the movie one. I have to say I was glad the Klingons were not in 2009′s based on how they “looked”. I want KLINGONS.

1156. With Fans Like These - May 1, 2012

@1090 Ahmed Abdo

“I don’t like the idea of bringing Khan again & I see it as lacking in creativity somehow, but that doesn’t mean that I disrespect boborci & the rest of the team.”

If you haven’t spewed negativity at Bob, then you weren’t one of the “fans” I was talking about, clearly.

Yesterday, someone said: “From the writers of Transformers and Cowboys and Aliens comes…Enough said.” That’s just f-ing rude, man!

No one is denying you your free speech, people, but how about some basic human decency and respect? Or hasn’t Star Trek taught you anything in 40 years?

To the critics, like thebiggfrogg, I ask; what have you done? Most of you have a never ending head full of complaints and the time to voice them on here, but which one of you critics has ANYTHING to show for yourselves that has generated the interest, the ticket sales and the other ancillary revenue Bob, Alex and Damon have? Put up, or shut up! For Sagan’s sake, the movie isn’t even done filming yet, and a good chunk of you are writing it off as if J.J.’s making Star Trek 5! Is it possible that you have grown so old and so inflexible that you have outlived your usefulness as fans? I think, yes.

Major studios trust their very valuable franchise enough to let these guys work on it as they see fit… if you don’t like some choice that you can’t imagine how it’s going to play out, just go find something else to do until the film comes out, then you can go back to criticizing… When there is something tangible to criticize.

Yes, comic book and sci-fi fans eat their own. This thread is the proof. Good entertainment, tho… and a window on who the audience is for a film like this. I think I’ll stick with writing drama :)

1157. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

1152. Scotty

Good point, but not true…it was done so that old fans would come and watch the movie and not send in petitions left and right. It was done to keep out the outrage. I’m not saying I didn’t like it…although I would have prefered saying that the future has been re-written..I’m just saying that the films were not given a proper reboot, ala Casino Royale and Batman, because it would have pissed of militant fans..and Trek 09 was a gamble that needed Trek fans support.

1158. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1154 Robman007

See that’s what I’ve said in multiple comments. People don’t seem to be listening or comprehending… because I don’t think any of them would argue that Star Trek I, V, or Insurrection ARE good movies.

Movies HAVE to follow a traditional hero vs. villain formula. Of course, there can always be room for intellectual themes and undertones though. Just look at any of the “good” Star Trek movies.

1159. Salt Monster - May 1, 2012

1154:

Those disasters you speak of were a direct result of TERRIBLE WRITING.

And those TNG films, each one tried in some small way to rehash TWOK–except perhaps Insurrection was just, again, terrible watered-down writing.

I don’t want them to write a movie only for Star Trek FANS. Don’t put words in my mouth. Watch the trailer for Prometheus and tell me that could not have been a BOLD NEW STAR TREK MOVIE, rich, smart, exciting, with EXPLOSIONS, but also SMART.

1153: The Voyage Home made a BOATLOAD of money so don’t tell me the audience wont come to see it. If the WRITING IS GOOD THEY WILL COME.

1160. THX-1138 - May 1, 2012

So…..

They are yet again going to apparently cast a non-Sikh or even Indian actor to play Khan. I hope it’s all subterfuge about Khan. It just doesn’t seem very original. You know, to boldly go, strange new worlds and all that.

What’s next, the Doomsday Machine?

1161. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@ 1158. Johnny:

I’ve been a fan for all my thirty years. My dad has been a fan since the start. Both of us love the adventure in the shows and LOVE the films with the battles and great villians. Trek 9 was a fav of both of us, not as good as Khan and VI, but good.

We will never have another Trek TV show if these next two films do not make goobles of money…even then, the show will look more like the new BSG or something similar with more action and a bit less on the adventure.

I’m not saying that the last flick was perfect, but I enjoyed the experience of watching it. I felt they took some great risks that will pay off in future films. Destroying Romulas in the Prime Galaxy and Vulcan in the new was awesome! I hated to see Vulcan go, but it opened up new and exciting chapters that can be explored.

I’m fine with Khan and Klingons. I’m ok with a Englishman playing Khan especially if he makes it his own and he is AMAZING in the role. It won’t be Space Seed or Wrath, it won’t take away from them. I’m excited about the film and won’t make a judgement until I see actual footage. To get bent out of shape over rumors is illogical.

1162. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

I see the small few are still trying to defend the rehashing of white khan. haha

STXII: The Whiting of Khan

1163. Captain of the USS Monte Carlo NCC-1986 - May 1, 2012

I am stoked to see Nimoy on the screen again IF this is true, he deserves one last hurrah on the bridge of the Enterprise. As for Khan, well, this IS an alternate reality, and they are re-doing the stories in the comics, so if its done right, who cares? should be a great flick. Hope its better than ST 11, not that it was bad. ST 5 and ST 10 still worse than what this movie will be, guaranteed. I agree above with people who say its time for Pine to be more ‘Shatner-like’. I say bring in Spiner as Arik Soong!!!!

1164. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

@ 1159..

The only way you can have a BOLD NEW STAR TREK is by making a BOLD NEW STAR TREK without ANY existing characters, without respecting cannon and starting over from scratch. By making it an alternate universe TOS REBOOT, the chances of going back to Khan, Kang, Doomsday Machine or anything else is very, very high. It comes with the territory.

The adventures are what needs to be unique, and this one will be unique..Khan or Klingons withstanding.

1165. somethoughts - May 1, 2012

They have used British actors to play French characters also, look how well Captain Jean Luc Picard turned out :)

I wouldn’t be surprised if KHAN stood for something and he is just a evil British guy created by Peter Weller to dominate earth and mankind.

1166. somethoughts - May 1, 2012

Having Leonard Nimoy in the sequel is genius, it’s a way of calming all the nerds, telling them hey it’s ok, look the original Spock is ok with Khan and you will be also.

1167. El Chup - May 1, 2012

@1158 Johnny,

Treks I & V are certainly not stinkers. Both movies have some very good elements to them. So I wouldn’t rush to say that every person not liking this movie thinks that those movies stink.

That said, I agree that Insurrection was a total turd, and I would rather see this upcoming movie that be forced to watch that crap again.

1168. Scotty - May 1, 2012

@Robman007 1157

It is true, because many fans who didn’t read spoilers and know that the were using the alternate universe explanation didn’t write petitions and they went to see the movie knowing it was restarting with the original crew.
If they were outraged, they would have been so when the movie plans were announced and wouldn’t have gone.

1169. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

“BOLD NEW STAR TREK MOVIE, rich, smart, exciting, with EXPLOSIONS, but also SMART.”

How do you know this flick won’t be all those, but with just a familiar face?You use Prometheus as an example, yet I see several familair objects in Prometheus..I’ve seen an Alien statue, the Space Jockey, Power Loaders and a Pulse Rifle..

Have you seen the new Trek movie? What happens…tell me, I’m curious to find out.

Is Khan really the villian? Is it just a rehash of WoK or Space Seed? Does Kirk “Score”? Tell me, because you and the other closed minded fans seem to be assuming this much, so logically I have to assume that you have seen the film and it’s just a rehash with nothing new to the table.

You can have a movie that is BOLD NEW, rich, smart, exciting, with EXPLOSIONS, but also SMART..AND STILL HAVE KHAN AND KLINGONS!!

1170. SirBroiler - May 1, 2012

I’m fine with Khan – but not with Cumberbatch in the role. Poor choice all-around. Still holding out hope that Khan makes a brief appearance as a corpse and C-batch is actually playin Joaqim.

1171. Captain Joe - May 1, 2012

I’m really excited about the return of Spock Prime and the Klingons. However, I’m on the fence about Khan being the villain (or at least a villain) in the new film. This could be the greatest Trek film ever made or one of the worst. I do have to say I’m intrigued as to how this is going to work out. However, in some ways, I think it would have been a braver move for the Supreme Court to have simply killed Khan off at the end of Star Trek by showing the the Klingons murdering him in cold blood after having tortured him in a scene after the credits. It would have also made the Klingons a much greater threat. Oh well, I’m still looking forward to seeing the new film when in comes out.

1172. B.T. Dubbs - May 1, 2012

1162 -

maybe whoever is feeding us spoilers is dislexic or something. Maybe they peaked at the script and BC is actually playing a character named ‘Hank’.

Then it would make sense him being white.

1173. Scotty - May 1, 2012

@B.T. 1172

LOL
“Star Trek 2: The Wrath of Hank”

1174. Robman007 - May 1, 2012

Besides..KHAN can be a title. Noonian Singh was his name..Khan was his title as ruler. If the original KHAN dies, which if folks would remember, almost happened when he was being unfrozen, then any one of his genetic superman followers can take over.

I could see Klingons finding the Botany Bay, losing Khan while unfreezing him, then another equally strong and smart Superman taking over the title of Khan.

Also, to those that point out that Joachim would have been young, there was a guy who was really buff, very white with black hair who was also named Joachim in Space Seed.

1175. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@ 1162. Guy Fawkes

“I see the small few are still trying to defend the rehashing of white khan. haha

STXII: The Whiting of Khan”

And I still see this ONE guy who still thinks this is a remake of Wrath of Khan. Haha.

1176. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@Johnny

-What aren’t you understanding about this NOT being a rehash of Space Seed or Wrath of Khan?

This is clearly a rehash of space seed and Wrath of Khan. The genetic superman who was once a dictator awaken in the future. And you expect him to be a “calm hero”? HAHAHA

-This has already been established.

By who? When?

-The writers aren’t stupid.

That is your opinion. Cowboys and Aliens and Trans.2 The plot holes in Star Trek 09 were horrible. These guys are NOT great writers.

-They KNOW that trekkies won’t go for a “remake” of Wrath of Khan… so it’s obvious they are taking Khan in a NEW direction. Like I said… maybe he’s not the “main” villain… but Peter Weller IS?

And real trekkies didn’t want a recasting of the TOS. But they did it anyways. These guys were never fans of Trek nor do they even care what real fans think.

-The script MUST be good if Leonard Nimoy decided to participate.

How so? The last one was poorly written. I think the boat load of money they paid him and ego kissing did it.

-Remember, he is notoriously careful and picky when it comes to his own involvement with the series, and if he doesn’t like a script, he’ll choose not to participate — Star Trek: Generations, case in point.

Urban legend! Who cares if he is “picky”? As long as the check has a lot of “ZEROS” on it. He will wear the ears in a dress.

-If they have Nimoy’s blessing, then it’s a VERY good sign.

Who cares if Nimoy gives his blessing? His approval does not mean anything. I didn’t realize that Trek revolved around this sell out Nimoy.

Spin it anyway you want. This movie is clearly going to be a rehash of space speed and Wrath of Khan. Taking “white brit” to play “Indian Khan” is a just ridiculous. As I said before I will not add one dime to this mess. They are just going to rehash everything now. Khan is not the Joker and Star Trek is not Batman. But that is how they are going to sell it to non fans like yourself.

If you are a real fan of Trek you would not support this rehash. You would support “something new”. Which we clearly are NOT getting. So RIP STXII. You find someone else to rip off. It won’t be me. Thank god for movie pirates.

1177. Scotty - May 1, 2012

Vulcans are strong and not big. I don’t think the new Khan has to have a chest as nice as Ricardo’s to be strong.

1178. Tom - May 1, 2012

Yo knuckleheads, it’s not a Wrath of Khan rehash. This has nothing to do with the Genesis device. If anything, it’s a Space Seed reimagining that might actually have very little to do with the original Space Seed, except that the crew finds the Botany Bay in space and revives a bunch of genetically-enhanced power-hungry men.

Seriously, that’s probably the only real connection to Space Seed.

I’d actually be interested in seeing a scene between Spock Prime and Khan wherein he threatens Spock’s life in a more-than-verbal way. In a manner that bespeaks fate, the universe trying to comply with original events, etc.

Naturally, he shouldn’t kill him.

But what if he did. How intense would that full circle motif be. The universe being consistent.

Dramatically, it would be very strong. However, since it’s Nimoy’s SPOCK, I couldn’t bring myself to support that strong piece of drama.

1179. Salt Monster - May 1, 2012

1169 — You assume too much and are insulting.

I never said the new Star Trek movie was going to be terrible. I merely asked a question. Why does Star Trek need a villain? You point out props. Props are not story. I merely asked the question, Why can’t Star Trek break the Star Trek formula mold and be bold (for a Star Trek movie)? I used Prometheus as an example.

I am not closed-minded. Closed-minded people do not ask questions. Nowhere have I said I want Star Trek to be my way, or a certain way, I just asked a question. Did I like the last Star Trek movie. Yes. Its heart was in the right place. Was it perfect? No. Is anything perfect? No. Was it as great as The Voyage Home or TWOK? No, it wasn’t. But that is okay, too. Am I allowed to feel slightly disappointed with the assumed direction of the new movie? Yes. And that disappointment has nothing to do with the so called “sanctity” of the original Khan. It has everything to do with a very familiar formula being used, yet again as it was used in the last film, and the one before that and so on… That does not mean it won’t be good. It might be great. I hope it is. But is it outside the box? It does not appear to be, no.

I attacked no one. You, however, need to calm down, Friend.

1180. somethoughts - May 1, 2012

#1176

Good for you, I am so happy you are in the minority :) My wife and I will watch it 3 times and enjoy delicious popcorn and laugh at the people who are narrow minded and judgemental before even seeing the finished product.

Did Star Trek teach you nothing? Take a hyperspray and calm down lmao

You are allowed to have a opinion but only after you watch it in the theatres!

1181. Max - May 1, 2012

I’m willing to bet the Klingons find out about the Botany Bay and Khan from Nero or one of his crew. They spend 20 years looking for him, then botch the thawing and prime Khan bites it right off the bat. They blew up Vulcan, why can’t this happen?

1182. Nano - May 1, 2012

1178 Good points although Knucklehead I’m not :)

1183. Peter Loader - May 1, 2012

Folks. Star Trek is an action movie now. You either have action or you have a love story or both. This movie will be as fast paced as the first, a roller coaster ride that doesn’t give you time to think and that’s the whole purpose, pure entertainment, no thought provoking stuff here.

1184. Salt Monster - May 1, 2012

1183 — Why can’t it be both?

1185. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

1139 Nimoys tweet this morning leads me to have doubts that he is actually involved in the new movie. I am surprised everyone is ignoring that he wrote essentially people are jumping to conclusions.

1186. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@1180

A fool and his money are soon parted. Enjoy the rehash. Some of us real fans are not interested in more rehashing. The only narrow minded people on here are the ones that worship at the alter of “all things Abrams”.

Thank god for movie piracy.

1187. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

“Leonard Nimoy‏@TheRealNimoy

I’m amazed.I talk to JJ Abrams and Zachary Quinto all the time. We’refriends.Conclusions are jumping. LLAP”

In other words he is friends with both and they talk doesnt confirm he is going to be in Trek XII

1188. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

He will be if they dump another truck load of money in his lap.

1189. Peter Loader - May 1, 2012

1184 – In my opinion, because Trek and a lot of other movies these days are formulamatic. Designed to appeal to a majority of the audience and return a substantial financial investment. Mind you, this doesn’t work all the time and you have major box office flops or movies that just break even. They tried to be thought provoking with Star Trek the Motion Picture, they learned their lesson with that one and went straight to an action flick with The Wrath of Khan. They’ve all been mostly action flicks ever since then.

1190. somethoughts - May 1, 2012

#1180

LOL real fans, god, If your idea of star trek ever became a real movie, us real fans won’t ever have another star trek movie again ever :)

Time to evolve pal or become instinct like the dinos ;)

I don’t think you moaning and groaning here will make them stop the production just for you :) I don’t care who is in it, as long as the movie stands on its own, is entertaining and makes one feel good, money well spent.

You are allowed to form your opinion after you watch your bootlegged version lol as Spock said in ST2009 LIVE LONG AND PROSPER!

1191. somethoughts - May 1, 2012

*#1186

1192. Robofuzz - May 1, 2012

I’m interested to see the reintroduction of Khan. I can think of several ways he gets reintroduced to the Trek universe that does not involve a Space Seed rehash. I think we should reserve judgement until we see the film. I have a feeling there are plot twists in store.

1193. Sebastian S. - May 1, 2012

# 1076

Dave~

” By the way, I love “Space Seed” but it wasn’t perfection and it wasn’t even a very smart Captain Kirk that appeared in that episode.

“Hi, I’ve threatened your doctor with a sharp implement. You can call me Khan.”

“I wonder if you’re a product of late 20th Century genetic engineering?”

“I”m tired of your questioning, but would like to read up on how to take over your ship, should that come up.”

“I see. Please, read our technical manuals for details on that. Despite your overt threat of physical violence, I shall not place a guard on you until I’m sure you’re a homicidal maniac, and then I shall place one, and only one guard on your flimsy cabin door.”

Uh huh. ;-) ”
________

Dave?

You forgot the lazy, poorly written Marla McGivers; who set the cause of women back 100 years in that episode. A wishy-washy traitor who sold out her shipmates to knock boots with a would-be fascist dictator.
It’s like the crew had their brains replaced with straw in that episode….

;-D

Thanks for reaffirming what I was nearly burned at the stake for saying in another thread. Nice to know I’m not the only one who saw that the Emperor had no clothes. I still believe (as do you apparently) that “Space Seed” was an average episode that was buoyed by a far superior sequel.

The whole “Khan is Kirk’s Joker” thing really began AFTER “The Wrath of Khan”. Before WoK, Ricardo Montalban’s Khan was just another villain of the week. A good guest performance to be sure, but that’s all (not unlike WIlliam Marshall’s Daystrom, IMO; or William Windom’s Commodore Decker). The episode itself really wasn’t so great when you look at it with as just an episode and not as a prequel to a superior movie….

OK; before I get burned at the stake again, I’m through with Space Seed…..

;-D

1194. Michael Hall - May 1, 2012

“Why has no one yet started an Internet petition, determined to collect one million signatures to “Show Parmont and JJ Abramson That Remaking Wraht of Kahn Is Sacrilige And Will Cause Teh Final Death Of Trek?!!!”

Hmm. Rather than appearing online, Mr. Bailey, such a document would almost certainly benefit as much from being made of straw as your one million hypothetical signatories.

1195. Rico - May 1, 2012

While I have confidence this movie will be good and do well at the box office, I just have to also add – this is the most original idea they could come up with? And yes, many are not familiar with the whole Khan story, but they are also not familiar with some new idea they could have done. I just find them going back to this concept a bit easy and unimaginative. But I’ll still see multiple times, because I’m sure it will still be a fun ride.

1196. Robofuzz - May 1, 2012

And let’s not forget that the encounter with Khan in Star Trek II set in motion a series of events that had profound effects on the story and character arcs of the original crew. (Spock’s death and resurrection, destruction of the NCC-1701, the Genesis planet, death of Kirk’s son, exile on Vulcan, saving the whales, etc). All set in motion by Khan. He’s kinda hard to ignore as a character.

1197. Geodesic - May 1, 2012

Well, assuming that any of this is true, using Khan does not necessarily mean that they are remaking Space Seed or Wrath of Khan. Its possible that they have an original story that uses elements from either story.

1198. Anthony Pascale - May 1, 2012

oh boy the old “real fans” thing. People should know that this trope is one of my biggest pet peeves.

No one can speak for “real fans”. Everyone here is a fan. No one knows the right way to be a fan, because there is no ‘right way’. But the definition of real fans is certainly not ‘people who agree with me’

Oh and linking to or advocating illegal activity like piracy is not allowed here

1199. captain_neill - May 1, 2012

Damn Team Abrams, damn them all to hell.

1200. bjdcharlie - May 1, 2012

Fascinating.

I predict the writers will play Kirk off Kahn et al by showing young Kirk as a vulnerable, imperfect, passionate human being. The Khan character will humanize Kirk, and be the driving force that makes Kirk grow into his full character. Obviously Spock Prime will be in on that dynamic as well. With Khan, we can ask the question (again) “what does it mean to be a human” and how can our imperfections and shortcomings be transformed into our strengths. There’s a lot of drama in that dynamic, and that’s what Star Trek is for me pure and simple: drama. Character driven drama. It’s gonna be good. I was a little disappointed with the Khan choice when I first read it, but on the other hand it’s been decades since TWOK, and it’s the alternate JJverse man. Do not underestimate the capacity of the writers to make it fresh and new and exciting. Cumberbatch sure doesn’t look like a Sikh though; that I don’t get. He is in any event an amazing actor.

1201. Driver - May 1, 2012

Star Trek 2: You doesn’t have ta call me Khan, you can call me Noonian or you can call me Singh, or you can call me Khan Noonian Singh, or you can call me Mr. Singh, or you can call me Mr. Khan, but you doesn’t have to call me Khaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaan!

1202. Geodesic - May 1, 2012

Here is my wishlist:
-Khan as an anti-hero that is set up to be a villain later on.
-Spock on Spock mindmelding.

If the movie has this, I will likely be changing my pants after seeing it. (This may be true regardless of whether or not these elements are in the movie.)

1203. Rick - May 1, 2012

hey, remember this?

http://trekmovie.com/2010/09/11/star-trek-sequel-update-abrams-orci-kurtzman-talk-khan-klingons-more/

1204. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

This…this is like being surrounded by a bunch of deranged geese…all convinced you stole their eggs.

1205. Vice_Admiral_Baxter - May 1, 2012

OK OK lets calm down on the rumors

1. It’s Gary Mitchell nu-Spock is fighting in one of the leaked picks.

2. No spock Prime

Bob Orci so am I close?

1206. numptee head - May 1, 2012

News at last. it’s been soooooooo long.
Cannot believe how long this thread is. go kahn go nimoy and the shat has got to be their also. have you seen how much weight he’s lost.

1207. Nony - May 1, 2012

Posting way after the fact, but…if it’s real, there’s more to the Khan spoiler than meets the eye, I’m sure of it. I think J.J. Abrams is usually good with casting people of color in his projects, and hiring the whitest actor alive to play a famous POC role in tv/movie history seems….too clueless and potentially inflammatory a move, no matter what caliber of an actor BC might be, to be that cut-and-dry legit. We’ll see what’s going on when the movie comes out.

1208. LizardGirl - May 1, 2012

Dang, last to the party and all the chicken’s gone.

I know that everyone’s had a chance to go at it but I’m reading most of this for the first time and I have to say that some of you have left the most rudest, mean, and discourteous comments I’ve read in a good while.

I’ve gotten so pissed that I can feel the heat rising off my face and neck. Seriously, Bob Orci reads this and the total lack of respect some of you’ve shown is embarrassing. Though, based of what I’ve read, some of you are so common as to not even feel ashamed.

So I’m gonna call some of you out, the ones that pissed me off the most and why.

El Chup (241, 263, 338) Arrogant, Condescending, Aggressor
All this time you and everyone else knew that the name Khan was being tossed around by the fans. Some believed and some didn’t. Now you’re acting as if this an outrage! At least we know! No wonder JJ didn’t want to release any info, “fans” like you. Here’s some of your quotes.

“those of us who repeatedly told the likes of Bob Orci that we want a traditional Star Trek style story ” –Oooh and you know what the story is right?

“people like Bob Orci claim to care what us long term fans, you know the people who kept the franchise going and enabled them to have these damned jobs in the first place, don’t mean a damn thing. ”

Talking about Bob as if he’s not here reading the posts as well. You act like that douche that complains to the staff that there’s not enough cream in his coffee and that he’s the only reason why they still work in this town.

Do you really think JJ and Bob and Kurtzman are trying to insult anyone? Do you REALLY believe that they won’t try their best to wow… or do you not want to be wowed? Is that it? You just want to be eternally pissed?

Then you keep “debating” with Johnny when it’s very clear you look down on him. He’s just being positive and that’s got you in a snit. You don’t have to agree with him, but the tone of your retorts feel condescending and passive aggressive. You remind me of my very first trek experience. You’re the stereotyped “nerd with a god complex”.

Guy Fawkes (785) Asinine and Foul
I don’t know what that was supposed to be…but you need to take a chill pill. Actually you need to take a few pills then take a long nap. Again a rant against Johnny that was boorish, insane and totally out of line. I read and respect comments that don’t agree with me. Is that so hard to do? What that was was pure hate. I didn’t know you before but now anything you say I will automatically dismiss because it came from you.

This will take forever. Let’s just say that there were some comments that I felt were unnecessarily harsh, critical, negative and naggy. Some seemed upset or disappointed just for the purpose of being upset or disappointed. As it was said before: this is a reboot trilogy. You shouldn’t be surprised to see characters from the original series.

Went in one ear, out the other. If you’re so sad, so mad, and oh so ever disappointed then stay your tail home when the movie comes out. Oh and 998, JJ is a GROWN MAN not a child and doesn’t have to answer to you or anyone else.

I agree with you 282, 288, 1083.
It would be nice to see some constructive criticism or a smidge of open mindedness but NO. The lack of faith and support is boggling and “disappointing” (just wore that word out didn’t we?).

I have a feeling that some of you are so bull headed that even if the movie becomes a success you’d be like “well…it was alright but…”. I know some of you are at least twice my age (early 20s) please act like it. Okay I’m done.

1209. boborci - May 1, 2012

1176. Guy Fawkes – May 1, 2012

“As I said before, I will not add one dime to this mess…”

If time is money, you’ve already given a dime on this board.

1210. Will - May 1, 2012

I think the movie is going to be great, based on how much I liked the last film. That being said, I understand the disappointment in the choice of Kahn. I am a trek fan going back to TOS growing up watching re-runs with my brother and my dad. It could be said that TWOK was a ‘rehash’ since he was in TOS to begin with. I felt the best choice would have been for this team to pick another TOS villain and make their own Khan (if you know what I mean). Because the universe was ‘reset’ there are so many possibilities to do a new take on Charlie X or Capt Garth or any of the interesting characters available. I thought the casting of Cumberbatch was great, and I am sure he will deliver – but it is just as interesting to consider what he could have done with a character that he could have really made entirely his own. Also – it’s got to be tough reading some of these, thanks for participating here Mr Orci (when many others wouldn’t)

1211. captain_neill - May 1, 2012

I was hoping I was right, was hoping for something original but they had to rehash the best stuff. Benedict Cumberbatch is a great actor and thans to these guys he wil now be the guy who tried to be be Khan. He wont be as good as Ricardo.

1212. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1209 boborci

Any word on the trailer ?
I think the only way for some of the fans to be happy, including me, is to see the teaser or a trailer, to give us an idea of where the movie is heading.

Right now, we all are arguing based on on assumptions & rumors, not facts.

1213. Montreal_Paul - May 1, 2012

@ boborci

When should we expect to see a trailer for the movie? Or even an official poster or movie title?

I would have liked to see some sort of official website like you guys did for the first one. Any chance of that happening again?

Even though I am disappointed with doing a Khan story… Your cast are fine actors and should do a good job. I’m hoping your script really stands up to the test of time like TWOK does.

1214. Ryan - May 1, 2012

A trailer in front of The Dark Knight rises is a huge opportunity!
Don’t pass it up.

1215. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Guy Fawkes —

How many times do I have to tell you that Orci and Kurtzman DID NOT write Transformers 2? Yes… they WERE involved with the screenwriting process (which is why they are credited), but they really only wrote a very short outline for the movie before they went on Writer’s Strike. The movie that you saw came from a last-minute, made-it-up-as-they-went script from Michael Bay and Ehren Kruger.

Also… Cowboys and Aliens suffered from too many cooks in the kitchen. Orci and Kurtzman were only TWO of way too many people who ultimately got their hands on the script.

Also did you bother to read this sentence from this very article:

“…however sources indicate that the film is not a rehash of “Space Seed,” the original Star Trek episode where Kirk and crew first encounter the genetic superman from the past.”

Did you read that? NOT a rehash of “Space Seed”… and it certainly won’t be a rehash of “Wrath of Khan”. Why not, you ask? Because Wrath of Khan was all about Khan exacting revenge on Kirk… but guess what? He has no reason to do that yet. So it’s really not that hard to figure out it’s NOT a rehash of “Space Seed” OR “Wrath of Khan”.

If you continue to post the same disproved “this is a rehash of Wrath of Khan” statement… then you’re clearly just trolling.

1216. Phil - May 1, 2012

wow, go away for the day, and ST 12: The Wrath of Khan posts double….

1217. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

1198 Anthony, what are your thoughts about Nimoy’s tweet this morning saying that conclusions are jumping?

1218. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@1209

-If time is money, you’ve already given a dime on this board.

HAHA I have plenty of time and pointing out a rehashing instead of doing something “new” to the people who say they are fans but are not it. Priceless! Look at the number of people who are writing they are disappointed with this direction. No $ for rehashing. Try again.

1219. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@ 1202. Geodesic:

Here is my wishlist:
-Khan as an anti-hero that is set up to be a villain later on.
-Spock on Spock mindmelding.

Those two ideas that would be AMAZING. Who’s saying that Khan is THE villain in this movie? Maybe they introduce the character in this movie, but position him to be the main baddie for the third film?

1220. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

*** Spoilers ***

An elite group of “real” Star Trek fans have obtained rights from Paramount for Star Trek 2015. Working Title – Star Trek: Boldly Wailing In Old Ways No One Has Wailed Before”.

1221. Phil - May 1, 2012

Here is the trailer
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJTi7KJPx_E

1222. Jenna - May 1, 2012

@ 1215 Johnny
You’ve made your very valid reasonable points several times. However, methinks this guy’s not too much of a listener. Is it true that some trolls do slink away if they are not fed?

1223. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Guy Fawkes

STOP saying that people who don’t share your opinion are not real fans. That’s insulting.

You keep saying the word “rehash” even though it’s been stated numerous times that it WON’T be a rehash. That’s borderline trolling.

1224. captain spock - May 1, 2012

please explane it to me Bob why did the surpreme court consiter doing a khan movie when their are so many other chartures out there in trekland that maybe the fans would wanted done ensted of a khan movie.
if you would read what the fans poll that have been all over the trek bbs, of what charture they think the movie was going to be about.khan was menchened but we never dreamed it would be about Khan
bob .. abrams-virse is in a alternate universe the sky is the limit of possabley of stuff you can do.yet is Khan forgive me some time i go to far with things bob.my apoligeys
i’m going to bring this up again sorry but the Klingons have been over done ,time travel is been very over done,
with out giving any thing about trek 2,,,, the enterprise crew of abrams virse is in the 22nd century , khan lived in the 20th century how can the crew of the enterprise meet khan unless their some kina time travel involed the film..one other possabilty khan & his augments is on a planet or stolen ship hum .. a fasanating premiss.

1225. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@Johnny

-Already provided the links that show that they were involved in the writing of it. Deal

-Also… Cowboys and Aliens suffered from too many cooks in the kitchen. Orci and Kurtzman were only TWO of way too many people who ultimately got their hands on the script.

Again provided the links. They were involved in the writing. It was a horrible movie.

-Also did you bother to read this sentence from this very article:

Yes I did but that doesn’t mean a thing. The don’t want to admit right now they rehashed Space Seed.

-Did you read that? NOT a rehash of “Space Seed”… and it certainly won’t be a rehash of “Wrath of Khan”.

Yes I read that. However that “unnamed source” proves nothing. White Brit as Khan…still laughable.

-Why not, you ask? Because Wrath of Khan was all about Khan exacting revenge on Kirk… but guess what? He has no reason to do that yet. So it’s really not that hard to figure out it’s NOT a rehash of “Space Seed” OR “Wrath of Khan”.

A space seed rehash. Yawn. I guess they blew all their so called creativity on the lame “Nero” character. You know mad at Earth for no real reason. A fine example of poor writing 101.

-If you continue to post the same disproved “this is a rehash of Wrath of Khan” statement… then you’re clearly just trolling.

It is a rehash. Whine about trolling all you want. But if you bothered to read some of the other comments on here you will see others are far from impressed. The idea of “been there done that” seems to be quite clear. But “rehashing” is something you clearly want. Enjoy. Buy 2 tickets.

1226. Johnny - May 1, 2012

1222. Jenna -

@ 1215 Johnny
You’ve made your very valid reasonable points several times. However, methinks this guy’s not too much of a listener. Is it true that some trolls do slink away if they are not fed?

—-

Thank you. I’m trying to engage in some intelligent conversation here… but Guy Fawkes seems to just be covering his ears and shouting “rehash” over and over again.

1227. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

Boborci For star Trek XIV instead of traveling back to save the future by bringing George and Gracie the Humpback whales to the 23rd centrury, how about the enterprise travels back in time and brings George Burns and Gracie Allen back to save the future instead?
I kid I Kid :)

1228. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@Johnny

-STOP saying that people who don’t share your opinion are not real fans. That’s insulting.

HAHA TOO BAD! If you are a real fan you will not be happy with the rehashing of Khan when so many other possibilities could of been done. Clearly you are no fan of Trek.

-You keep saying the word “rehash” even though it’s been stated numerous times that it WON’T be a rehash. That’s borderline trolling.

The idea of rehashing seems to have hit a nerve with you. Well it is rehashing of Khan. “White Brit Khan”. Oh no it is not rehashing at all! HAHAH Since you clearly can’t handle the truth I suggest you go back to the alter of Abrams and continue your disbelief.

1229. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

oh and personally I loved Cowboys and Aliens, Bond and Indy in the same movie whats not to love!

I am just still mad at myself not moving fast enough to order the bluray steelbook that target.com had as a limited exclusive.

While I am sure I will be very entertained by Star Trek XII, you have to appreciate why so many people were hoping that if it indeed was a villian, that it would be an original one, its actually a big complement to your guys talents as screenwriters that (i guess a small ) percerntage of us would rather see you create an entirely new villian of your own design and creation.

1230. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@Johnny

-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Khan_Noonien_Singh

But we get a “White Brit” this time around. Yawn. Rehash.

I guess they just don’t have the talent to come up with something new. We now jump off the Star Wars train and jump onto the Batman one. Sad.

1231. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

By the way they already updated it putting Benedict on the page! HAHA

1232. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Guy Fawkes 1225

“-Already provided the links that show that they were involved in the writing of it. Deal”

You provided links that say they were “involved” in the writing of it. Yes. They WERE. But like I said… they wrote an OUTLINE that they turned in before they went on strike, which Michael Bay then turned into a sixty page script. Then after the strike they locked themselves in rooms to try to “polish” that script before production started. Having to work off of a script written by MICHAEL BAY in such a short timeframe is not exactly the best way for Orci and Kurtzman to do their best work, now is it?

“-Also… Cowboys and Aliens suffered from too many cooks in the kitchen. Orci and Kurtzman were only TWO of way too many people who ultimately got their hands on the script.

Again provided the links. They were involved in the writing. It was a horrible movie.”

Oh… and it was a horrible movie just because of the writing? The movie suffered on EVERY level… starting with the fact that TOO MANY PEOPLE (not just Orci and Kurtzman) were “involved with the writing”. It also suffered from poor producing and directing.

“-Also did you bother to read this sentence from this very article:

Yes I did but that doesn’t mean a thing. The don’t want to admit right now they rehashed Space Seed.”

And you know this HOW, exactly? How the heck do you know it’s a rehash of “Space Seed”… when a source that trekmovie trusts says it ISN’T?

1233. MJ - May 1, 2012

@1228. There is no place for this kind of behavior here, dude. We get it toddler, you didn’t get your way and now you are having your fit. Just try to have your tantrum in a way that is less mean to others please.

1234. Phil - May 1, 2012

@1228. I’m not happy about it, but at this point it is what it is. To that end, I hope they do a good job with the characters and story they have, because anything less then Oscar worthy performances mean the franchise is doomed.

1235. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Guy Fawkes:

Where are you getting the “truth” from? How do you know it’s a rehash?

JUST because Khan is in the movie makes it a “rehash”. Is that all your narrow mind can believe?

How would coming up with a completely “new” villain be better than using Khan in a NEW way? Personally, I think a new villain would just end up being a “generic sci-fi” villain — unable to live up to the standard set by Khan.

1236. Red Shirt Diaries - May 1, 2012

What does “guy fawkes” mean? Is tha suppose to be a naughty reference? If so, it is really in poor taste.

1237. Tom@tom.web - May 1, 2012

Let’s get ONE thing straight, once and for all.

Khan, and NOT Kahn.

There. Someone had to say it.

1238. DS9 Forever - May 1, 2012

@125: “i think orci-abrams-lindelof aren’t that dumb!!!”

You didn’t watch the last season of Lost, did you?

Yeah, I know Orci wasn’t involved with Lost, but he’s a hack anyhow. Abrams was gone from Lost by then, but his first Trek movie was pretty weak sauce.

Anyhow, Lindelof’s dumb enough for all three of them.

1239. boborci - May 1, 2012

1224. I can confirm and deny nothing at this juncture.

1240. Phil - May 1, 2012

@1236. From Wikipedia:
Guy Fawkes (13 April 1570 – 31 January 1606), also known as Guido Fawkes, the name he adopted while fighting for the Spanish in the Low Countries, belonged to a group of provincial English Catholics who planned the failed Gunpowder Plot of 1605.

1241. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1237

It’s strange isn’t it. Everyone here claims to be a Star Trek fan… yet they can’t spell “Khan” correctly?

1242. Tom@tom.web - May 1, 2012

Damn it, you malcontents. If you’re going to make the tired comment that it’s a rehash (which it’s very clearly not), can you at least use some synonyms of the word “rehash”? You’re revealing that you’re mindless, redundant drones.

1243. The Walking Phobia - May 1, 2012

Oh Bob, you fiend you! First ‘leaking’ those pictures (We know it was you and JJ, Bob, especially those Spock ‘Volcano’ suit ones – lens flare all over it!) And now these spoilers, you evil genius puppet-master you ;-) Ahh I love you for it! Keep up the good work.

But seriously people, some of the comments here are acting like Bob, JJ, Damon, etc. don’t live in the real world like the rest of us, albeit more than likely with nicer houses and cars, and that they aren’t aware of the cultural sensitivity that surrounds characters of color and what an audiences’ reaction is going to be to that character. As an ethnic minority myself, I’m going to give them the benefit of the doubt that if indeed they are bringing Khan back and using the amazing acting skills of Benedict Cumberbatch to do so, that the storyline will address any concerns. Also, you do all know that how ‘Khan’ is spelt can imply that it isn’t an individual name, but rather a title meaning: Sovereign or military leader or ruler. You can google it, it’s in the dictionary too, so it could be being used that way….just saying.

I personally don’t care either way if it’s Khan or not, or if there are twenty-million gazillion Klingons bringing a whole world of hurt to Kirk and company. I will wait until I actually park my behind in a movie seat with my extra-buttered popcorn, come May of next year and actually watch the film before I pass any judgment on it.

1244. Daoud - May 1, 2012

So, yes, this is a Re-Khan mission…. har har.

1245. Red Shirt Diaries - May 1, 2012

@1237. You mean Madeline Kahn is not going to be in the movie?

Damn!

1246. Jack - May 1, 2012

Okay — we all had the same information as you guys who thought it was Khan (Del Toro being approached etc. ). I can’t speak for everybody here, but I think we all made the connection. Yes, the signs, the very few that they were, pointed to it. And so did the secrecy.

But there were darned few of them (signs). Heck, there was mainly just “sign,” singular (hispanic actor). That left plenty of room for the possibility that it wouldn’t be Khan. That room seems to be shrinking.

I was just kind of hoping for someone new. That said, if it is, I trust that these guys can do a hell of a good job. It won’t be your grandfather’s Khan.

Hadn’t planned on checking out this post, until a guy at work, who’s never even seen this site and isn’t a frequenter of geek sites, period, said, “Hey, I read in the paper that they’re remaking Wrath of Khan.”

1247. Jack - May 1, 2012

1245. I know! I thought these effects guys could do anything.

1248. Daoud - May 1, 2012

@1245 Redshirt: Sooooo tirrrrrwed… so verrrrwwwwwwwwwwwwy verrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrwy tirrrrrwed! Maybe Noel Clarke gets to be the sheriff that’s cleaning up the town of Enterprise Rock, eh?
.
@Bob, I like my rehash with a bit of chopped red onion, tomato, and definitely finely chopped potatoes. And a lot of bacon…. or ba-KHANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN. Anyway, looking forward to when the film comes out and then you can let loose with explaining all the behind the scenes “Making of Star Trek Sequel” discussions. Good thing you’ve got about forty-seven other projects to work on now to distract you!
.
And hey, how about a modern update of Horatio Hornblower himself? It’s been 50+ years, and nothing like some good C. S. Forester on the big screen!

1249. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

1239. boborci – “I can confirm and deny nothing at this juncture.”

OOOPS – lol

1250. Geodesic - May 1, 2012

@1221

Nice, but this is the real trailer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oHg5SJYRHA0

1251. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

1248 post so far !!!
I wonder if we will hit the 2000 mark tonight.

Well, The Avengers will arrive in 3 days, that should keep some of us busy for a while.

1252. MC1 Doug - May 1, 2012

I was hoping this wasn’t going to be the case, but it apparently appears to be so. So they’re revisiting Khan Noonian Singh. *sigh* Is there nothing original left in Hollywood?

While Montalban owned the character, let’s face it, he was no more eastern Asian than is Cumberpatch. I’ll be happy to give him a chance, however, what I am unhappy about is that the producers have opted to go for the familiar rather than giving us something totally new. Call me cautiously hopeful, but mostly…. disappointed.

1253. Frederick - May 1, 2012

On the other hand, if these rumors are true, the fact that Nimoy has agreed to come back means that he likes the script, otherwise he wouldn’t do it. So, that’s something.

1254. Suellen from Savannah - May 1, 2012

Well I am betting it won’t be a rehash, but a totally different twist. Think about Spock and Uhura that was totally different yet using the same characters. So if Khan is in the movie I hope he will be like just a passing thought for setting the theme of the movie much like the battle between Nero and Kelviin. I have faith in Bob Orci as a 53 yr old Trekker I enjoyed the 2009 movie. My biggest complaint with the 2009 movie was the awful Star Fleet Uniforms.

1255. Suely - May 1, 2012

UAU! I am very excited waiting for this movie! The new cast is so fantastic as the first!

1256. denny cranium - May 1, 2012

@boborci- looking forward to seeing the end product.

I hope we see all the elements of what made TWOK a great movie.

Thanks for taking the time to talk to us who are looking over the walls of your sandbox.

1257. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - May 1, 2012

Have a heart, people.
I have 7 children, and the ones who are old enough to watch have never experienced Khan with today’s opticals, and effects. He’s such a great villain, and my kids deserve to get a modern taste of him. We wanted to know more about the villain, and the plot-line, and we got it. Now we’ve got some information to feed our obsessions, and we should be grateful for not being left in the dark. All this griping, and flaming takes away from the positive conversations that some of us are trying to have.

@Bob Orci

Although many of these comments seem negative, It’s nice to feel the passion again. You guys know Trek, you love Trek, and that’s all that matters.

1258. Red Dead Ryan - May 1, 2012

There is a way to alleviate some of the “Benedict Cumberbatch is white and Khan is supposed to be Indian” criticism: Have Benedict (as Khan) speak some dialogue in Punjabi. That obviously won’t change his skin color, but it will depict him as coming from Sikh culture.

1259. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@Johnny

If you are telling me they didn’t get paid for the “writing” (no matter how big or how small) you are crazy. They wrote for it no matter how big or small and take credit for it. If they were so upset over it, then they should not take credit for it. But their wiki pages have it listed.

So you loss this argument

STXII The Wrath Of Rehash.

1260. Captain Rickover - May 1, 2012

# 1252 MC1 Doug

Exactly my thoughts.

What happend with the “where no man has gone before”-part of Star Trek?

Of course it had to be Khan, because Khan sticks out of all the countless enemies, because of TWOK. It’s a marketing point, Khan’s name will likley bring in dollars. And at last (sadly) that’s the only thing that counts. I can’t imagine how the writers will use Khan in some new way. What will he do in the new movie? Trying to regain his lost power, destroy earth or starfleet and fight Kirk and Spock. With the help of the Klingons perhaps and surely with some alien device (I bet on that).

The disappointment grows with every minute.

1261. CarlG - May 1, 2012

Guy Fawkes must be a larf and a harf at all the parties he’s not invited to.
I think the next charmer that utters the self-important twaddle of a phrase “true fan” deserves a tranya enema.

1262. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

-You guys know Trek, you love Trek, and that’s all that matters.

No they don’t. They love the money Trek brings them.

1263. Phil - May 1, 2012

@1250 Hey!! Was that Tim Russ behind the bar?

1264. Phil - May 1, 2012

@1260. Well, nows it’s “where no man has been lately”…..

1265. Guy Fawkes - May 1, 2012

@1261

Waa Waa but you still have yet to disprove what I said. So you can kindly take your bruised ego elsewhere.

Quote:”What happened with the “where no man has gone before”-part of Star Trek?”

Truly lost to the world of rehashing.

1266. Red Dead Ryan - May 1, 2012

#1199.

“Damn Team Abrams, damn them all to hell.”

Well, at least you’ve come up with different this time. I just hope when you pound your fists into the sand that no specks fly up and get stuck in your eyes! :-)

As for Guy Fawkes:

All I have to say is that I can’t wait for the day when this “Guy” “Fawkes” off for good!

1267. Weerd1 - May 1, 2012

I wouldn’t yet put this past being JJ Abrams throwing some red herrings out. Regardless, wait to judge until you actually SEE THE MOVIE.

1268. CarlG - May 1, 2012

@1258: Still, it’s just going to seem weird at best, vaguely condescending at worst. It’s like casting Dame Judi Dench as a ninja — awesome actor, but the part is just plain wrong.

1269. Craiger - May 1, 2012

Aren’t we all forgetting that Peter Weller is in the sequel? He is a CEO of a corporation. Maybe he creates a new Khan based on the Eugenics experiments of the 1990′s?

1270. CarlG - May 1, 2012

@1261: My ego is both intact and superb, and I’m not arguing with you. Just poking fun at your stridency and general unpleasantness.

“A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject.”
– Sir Winston Churchill

1271. Captain Rickover - May 1, 2012

# 1269
Then he won’t be Khan after all. No it’s Khan, the Khan. There is no way around it any more. It’s Khan and we have ti live with that. I think it was too obvious after Trek’09 re-starts the TOS-universe. I was hoping for a surprise. Okay, perhaps I asked too much since Star Trek aiming for the 13+ years popcorn-kids and not for science-fiction-fans any more.

1272. punkspocker - May 1, 2012

I’ll give my two beans, Cumby’s super humaniod villan will usurp the identity of Khan, but he’s not really Kha n (but he is Khan). Now back to George RR Martin, unpredictable stories.

1273. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1271.Captain Rickover

“Okay, perhaps I asked too much since Star Trek aiming for the 13+ years popcorn-kids and not for science-fiction-fans any more.”

To be fair, it is not just Star Trek, look at other movies, they all targeting young audience. You can hardly find a major movie with an R rating these days.

1274. Red Dead Ryan - May 1, 2012

Yeah, I think I was right about some people here coming down with bird flu. :-)

1275. Johnny - May 1, 2012

No.. @1259 Guy Fawkes.

I don’t know where you got that I said they didn’t get “paid” for their work on those films. What I’m saying is that you CAN’T use Transformers 2 as an example of Roberto Orci and Alex Kurtzman’s writing abilities. Yes… they “worked” on the movie… but they did not write everything that you saw onscreen. Like I said… they OUTLINED the movie, then went on strike. Then they came back and tried to “polish” what Michael freaking Bay had come up with in the meantime. They did not “write the script” in the traditional sense. What don’t you understand about that?

Compare that to Star Trek… where Kurtzman and Orci came up with the story and wrote the entire film from scratch, by themselves. Look at the difference in quality. It’s a totally different scenario than what happened with Transformers 2 or Cowboys and Aliens.

1276. Josie - May 1, 2012

you want to know the one question I have reguarding the Star Trek movies…all of them and I am a total fan but WHY has Q never appeared in a Star Trek movie…now that JJ has pretty much started over I think its time for Q to mess with someone’s head and I would love to see him and James T. Kirk go head to head

1277. Phil - May 1, 2012

It’s not a rehash, it’s not it’s not it’s not…..

Sulu: Captain, we have a ship on sensors. The SS Botney Bay. She’s adrift.
Kirk: Scotty, take a team over and fix her up!
eight hours later
Scotty: Good as new, Captain. All she needed were some new spark plugs. Oh, there were some frozen guys over here, and we thawed them out…
Khan: Thanks for the help, Captain. Our crew of space Avon sales reps were off to Ceti Alpha 5. Could I trouble you for directions?
Kirk: Second star to the right, straight on till morning…
Khan: Thank you. Safe travels
Kirk: Back at you. Scotty, return to Enterprise. Buckle Up!!
roll credits……

1278. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@Guy Fawkes:

You’re STILL calling this a rehash. You just can’t get it through your head that it WON’T be, can you?

1279. Sebastian S. - May 1, 2012

# 1244

Daoud~

Good one! ROTFLMAO!! ;-D

1280. Capt. Tomorrow - May 1, 2012

@633. Not entirely, but it would be nice to see all 3 mixing it up. Besides, if I’m paying 10 bucks for a Star Trek movie I don’t want just a big-screen version of Court Martial or The Measure Of A Man.

1281. Adolescent Nightmare - May 1, 2012

People should look at mainstream sites and see what normal people think of this news.

Hint: They want Khan.

1282. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1281. Adolescent Nightmare

” People should look at mainstream sites and see what normal people think of this news.

Hint: They want Khan.”

Not really, they are having similar arguments as we have here on trekmovie

CONFIRMED: Benedict Cumberbatch is [redacted] in Star Trek 2!

http://blastr.com/2012/04/confirmed-benedict-cumber.php

‘Star Trek 2′ Villain(s) Revealed At Last? TOS Character Cameo Confirmed?

http://screenrant.com/star-trek-2-villain-rumors-sandy-168545/

1283. Devon - May 1, 2012

“Besides, if I’m paying 10 bucks for a Star Trek movie I don’t want just a big-screen version of Court Martial or The Measure Of A Man.”

Unfortunately, some fans this is what Star Trek should be, simply because Gene Almighty said so. Thus why said fans are not part of any large successful undertakings.

1284. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

To be fair, most of the folks at Star Trek official boards seem to like the idea

Spoilers for ST12!

http://www.startrek.com/boards-topic/33352338/spoilers-for-st12

1285. Fubamushu - May 1, 2012

Star Trek is now dead to me.

If there was any lingering doubts before, they have been dashed—Abrams, Orci, Kurtzman, et. al. really have no frakkin’ clue about Star Trek or how to come up with an original, creative script.

I refuse to see this movie. I won’t even watch it on Netflix.

1286. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1285 Fubamushu

How do you know that they have no clue how to come up with a original, creative, script?

Who’s to say they can’t tell a creative new story using Khan?

1287. Ryan - May 1, 2012

LOL @ the whiners

This movie will make a ton of cash and bring in loads of new fans. You “Star Trek is dead to me” people won’t matter anymore :)

1288. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 1, 2012

Phew! Finally got through reading all these comments…Holy moly.

I agree with one poster who called Anthony Pascale to sanction people who encourage others to bootleg/movie piracy. They are nothing but common thieves.

My curiosity has been aroused by the notion of Benedict Cumberbatch playing an Indian Khan. However, I wonder if the writers have rewritten Khan to be only part Indian. Human genetics throw a variety of combinations when it comes skin colouration, hair etc, without the *aid* of eugenics, so, as Spock would say, “There are always possibilities…” Marla McGivers (TOS Space Seed) only surmised Khan’s genetic makeup.

Anyway, my objection to having Khan in the new movie is not because of the character himself, even though he was always just a hickey in Kirk’s eyes who ended up getting Spock killed, but nothing more, especially once Kirk got Spock back, quickly and happily forgotten. The reason is because of the constant discussion (almost obsession) with this one character. I am just so sick of reading about Khan, blah, blah, blah and then people will talk about Khan again, even on threads that have nothing remotely to do with the character. The notion of going to see another movie with the same bloody character, after being so inundated, has me groaning as in “Oh No, not more Khan bloody Khan!”…Is this just an American obsession with this one character?

People can be such fun-spoilers.

1289. Old Geezer - May 1, 2012

@1128 @boborci from Ian:

That is exactly how I felt. I spent the first 15-20 mins. of the movie thinking, “please don’t screw it up; please don’t screw it up” and the next 15-20 mins. thinking they were doing okay but still a lot of movie ahead to screw up. Finally relaxed into it, went back the next day to see it without worrying about whether it was any good or not. Saw the darn thing 8 times in the theaters, currently own two blu-rays of it, and still watched it every time I could when it was aired on tv recently.

I know it is not THE original Star Trek, (of which I have been a fan since the beginning) but it IS the Star Trek we have now and I am happy with it. I look forward to the next movie, although I expect I will again sit through the first viewing with a bit of trepidation – please don’t screw it up.. and I expect I will see it several times more than once. LOL.

1290. VulcanCafe - May 1, 2012

@boborci

Just tell me that Aspect Ratio is doing the trailers again, those rocked!

(Of course they had excellent source material, but still…)

1291. Adolescent Nightmare - May 1, 2012

1282.

I said mainstream. Blastr and screenrant are even nerdier than here.

1292. DeShonn Steinblatt - May 1, 2012

Perhaps each poster should be limited to 50 posts per talkback.

In the interest of repetition and boredom.

1293. spooky - May 1, 2012

1283. Devon – May 1, 2012

What a steamy load. That is not what I want to see. I certainly don’t want to see a flashy version of Khan 2.0 either. I want to see attention paid to other alien cultures that were a part of the Star Trek mythos. Not rehashes of familiar territory.

1294. Adolescent Nightmare - May 1, 2012

1285.

See you tomorrow with your new name.

1295. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

Filming for ‘Star Trek’ sequel at Lawrence Livermore Lab

http://www.mercurynews.com/entertainment/ci_20525780/filming-star-trek-sequel-at-lawrence-livermore-lab

1296. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

still no one has nothing to say about Nimoys tweet about conclusions are jumping?

1297. Jack - May 1, 2012

Wait. Are we basing the Nimoy stuff solely on that interview and the tweet.

Maybe he is in the flick, but this certainly isn’t a smoking gun.

I’ve got no problem with a fresh take on the character — I still think that simply remaking Space Seed is, well, unimaginative at best. I’ve got faith they’ll not do that, if it is Khan. Heath Ledger as a joker is a good example — he’s a maniac with green hair, but he ain’t Nicholson or Caesar Romero.

I had someone on here this week telling me I was against change and wanted a TOS remake etc. because I’d asked why Quinto, and not the Captain, would give the “Space, the final frontier,” Intro (after she suggested it). Not the case. If it makes for a better movie and it makes general sense in-universe (or even if it doesn’t), I say change is better than forcing homages.

1298. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

@1295. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow

Guess everyone is so focused on the Khan story, that they aren’t talking much about Nimoy involvement in the movie.

1299. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1295

Not much to say. Could be typical denial.

Also… it almost sounds like he only thinks people are jumping to conclusions based on his previous tweet about “conversations with J.J. Abrams and Zachary Quinto” — rather than the actual reports that say he’s in the film.

1300. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

1296 he tweeted this morning a post that seemed to indicate that people are reading to much into what he said on cnn and tweeted yesterday
basicly saying today that Quinto and Abrams are his friends he talks to them.and that conclusions are jumping.

I take that to be people who are saying he is back as spock are jumping to conclusions

1301. sisko - May 1, 2012

Khan?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

KKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not happy.

I don’t care that the movie’ll probably be really really damn good. No Khan. Original villains please, come on.

1302. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 1, 2012

1297
i just think that if that spoiler is wrong who is to say that the Khan spoiler is not wrong as well?

1303. Jenna - May 1, 2012

1299. I think you are right. And if people are jumping to (presumably incorrect) conclusions about that, it still seems possible to me (even likely) that most of the conclusions people are jumping to about Khan (like that it’s actually the same character not just someone with a similar name/title) might be incorrect too…

1304. Jenna - May 1, 2012

1301. : )

1305. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

1208. LizardGirl – May 1, 2012

Dang, last to the party and all the chicken’s gone.

***

Hey, I got you covered. As soon as I saw they had chicken I started stuffing my pockets. How much do you need?

1306. Jack - May 1, 2012

1299. Agreed. No disrespect to people like Basement Blogger, but I don’t think anyone here was ever disputing the evidence (hispanic actor almost cast for role/dark hair/leaked shot where he, arguably, appears to be fighting Spock as an equal) or the fact that there was no absolutely no evidence that he wasn’t playing Khan (apart from, maybe a Starfleet sciences uniform, but, yes, Khan could be wearing one and, yes, did in Space Seed [not sciences]).

My thought on all this is that “this is proof it’s Khan” camp was jumping to conclusions, because there wasn’t much else to go on. The only really telling clue was the Del Toro bit, but even then he could have been playing anybody. Unless Bob one day went, “Damn it Mrs. Fletcher, how do you do it! You got me.” well, we’d be waiting for more clues.

Has Anthony divulged what his sources have actually said? Is he being leaked this?

1307. Charla - May 1, 2012

No takers on the after movie party in the chat room? Everyone thinks it’s gonna be that bad because of a few rumors and spoilers?

Wow. I am all for Bob and the rest of the SC allowing the expectations to go so low that y’all would have to love the movie. Now that is marketing.

1308. boborci - May 1, 2012

1218. Guy Fawkes – May 1, 2012

I would love to respond, but I didn’t understand you post.

1309. LizardGirl - May 1, 2012

@1304 dumduncan
As much as you got. Original recipe only.

1310. Jack - May 1, 2012

1295. etc. That’s what I took from it.

He could still be in the thing. But that tweet’s no confession.

1311. Jack - May 1, 2012

Charla @1023 @1306. Sounds fun. I’m in. How ’bout a live chat during the screening :)…

1312. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1305 — If trekmovie is being “leaked” information… then I’m disappointed. J.J. Abram’s love of “secrecy” has been well established — and is clearly being put to use in the marketing (or non-marketing) of the Star Trek sequel. Trekmovie should respect the creative team’s choices on what to reveal and when.

1313. Jack - May 1, 2012

1311. “Trekmovie should respect the creative team’s choices on what to reveal and when.”

Gotta say I agree. Although, had that other AICN stuff, with Khan, come out already?

BTW. I’m really craving chicken now.

1314. DS9 IN PRIME TIME - May 1, 2012

boborci

I just want to say thank you for your vision! Please some how convince the right people to bring star trek back to TV in conjunction with your movies!

1315. boborci - May 1, 2012

1306. I’ll be there!

1316. Geodesic - May 1, 2012

lol

This news is already written into the Wikipedia article for the Star Trek sequel. It’s also on Memory Alpha.

1317. Ahmed Abdo - May 1, 2012

boborci, on a different issue, are you guys involved in the Jack Ryan reboot ?

1318. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

1308. LizardGirl – May 1, 2012

@1304 dumduncan
As much as you got. Original recipe only.

***

Jacket breast pocket. Inside left. Take it all.

I would get it for you, but all the dinner rolls shoved up my sleeves is limiting my flexibility.

1319. Jerk - May 1, 2012

Great…Khan. I needed more reasons to avoid this at the box office. Because the awful disappointment of the first fantasy spiritual metrosexual space jam wasn’t quite reason enough.

1320. Jack - May 1, 2012

I wish I didn’t get so darned excited and could limit myself to one post.

I was hoping to see somebody new (just to see an interesting new character(s), and finally, a worthy addition to the Trek stable of characters) — but, I actually feel an odd and completely unexpected sense of relief. I am sure of few things in life, but I’m sure that that these guys won’t rehash Space Seed.

I totally get the temptation of wanting to put your mark on Khan — and Nero was fun, but he wasn’t it. Hopefully you guys got the Wrath of Khan stuff out of your system last time (revenge!!!!!!! not-ceti-eels). There are some pretty amazing possibilities with the character — it’s a big universe.

1321. Jack - May 1, 2012

1317. I don’t want to know where you’re keeping the coleslaw.

1322. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 1, 2012

You do realise that these other articles that posters have linked here are all getting their information from this very thread…LOL No doubt Wikipedia updated their *information* about the character Khan by reading the article on this thread.

Which means that if Anthony Pascale has got it wrong, then so has everybody else…Duh

Need I remind people of what officialdom have said -

“Before we start it is important to note that it is still the case that no plot or character information for the Star Trek sequel has been officially confirmed by Paramount or anyone associated with the movie. The following based on reports from other outlets and/or TrekMovie sources. As always, Paramount’s policy is to not comment on what they consider rumors.”

In other words – ZILCH

Bob Orci – cannot confirm or deny

So far we have had 1310 posts about well…um and some of those posts made for difficult reading (looking at you Guy Fawkes). Someone is testing general Trek fan reaction. If Khan really is the main villain, too late to change things now, however, so far from what the poll is saying, the studio should be “cautiously optimistic” that the movie does well!

1323. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1318: “Great…Khan. I needed more reasons to avoid this at the box office. Because the awful disappointment of the first fantasy spiritual metrosexual space jam wasn’t quite reason enough.”

Why not? What’s wrong with you?

Because, you know, if you folks who keep declaring that you have no use for these movies and no time to be bothered would *actually* move on instead of hanging around whining and lying, everyone would be happier – even you, if you’re capable of it.

1324. Shilliam Watner - May 1, 2012

boborci – As an intelligent fan of Star Trek, who has been watching since the show originally aired, I would like you to know that I will reserve judgment until after I’ve seen the movie. Even if Harry Mudd is the villian, and I really really dislike Harry Mudd.

I’m sorry you’ve had to endure the immature insults of so many in this thread. I hope you know they are the minority of fans, and are really working out other unresolved issues when they get so abusive over news they don’t like.

But even if I don’t like the film, I give good, cogent reasons why not, and I won’t heap on any cheap abuse.

Good luck and Godspeed.

1325. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 1, 2012

“You Maniacs! You blew it up! Ah, damn you!” Whoops, wrong franchise. Ahem. “It’s a mad house. A maaad house!!”

1326. dmduncan - May 1, 2012

Yeah, it’s gonna be a totally different story. They said a long time ago that even if it was Khan they wouldn’t redo Space Seed.

1327. Jerk - May 1, 2012

#1321 – You know what’s worse than a whiner? A whiner about whiners. Whiners have just as much right to waste their time now and then whining about the JJverse as nerdgasming fanboys have to waste their time nerdgasming about it.

1328. Dennis Bailey - May 1, 2012

#1325: ” You know what’s worse than a whiner?”

Nothing. Thanks for playing, though.

Trekmovie is a good place to come to find out what’s going on with new Trek movies and other stuff. That some people feel the need to use the forum to narcissistically self-dramatize as if the fact that Hollywood persists in making entertainment that lots of people enjoy rather than heeding the narrow demands of the fanboise is a nuisance, and of no value whatever.

1329. Douglas - May 1, 2012

Whew! A lot of postings to go through! As the Talosians said at the end of The Menagerie “There method of storing records is crude and consumed much time…are you ready to assimilate?” Well, OK. First, thanks for the Star Trek news, I decided to go through the spoilers because I’m so eager to see more Trek. At first when I heard of the Kahn character in the plot of the next film I felt let down. However, when I remembered how brilliantly the Starbuck and Baltar characters were recreated in Battlestar Galactica and the caliber of talent in the ST sequel I felt reassured. The Bad Robot production crew are the best and I’ve never seen anything but quality from them. So to all those who are angry at the Kahn casting, just give it a chance and some time to sink in. As more photos and a trailer comes out you will have a chance to make a more informed judgment. Also, I’m thrilled to be able to see Nimoy again on screen. His gravitas is always welcome. And, from what I saw of the Klingons on the deleted scene portions of the last ST film on disc, these guys are not fooling around. They look seriously tough & brutal with no camp behavior at all. And with JJ’s attention to detail I’m sure the non-military Klingons will be quite complex. I find that interesting and adds to the impact of a plot.
Finally, for those flaming others or posting stuff your grandmother would not want you to say, please remember the joy in Star Trek. Why you became a fan. Even when the episodes or films have not been the best they have often been the most interesting shows around. Try to be grateful that there is a family of fans that share some of your interests. That you are not alone and just the object of geek jokes. I hope that’s not too naive but I think we Star Trek fans should be grateful for one another and not bash each other for a disagreement on some aspect of ST.

1330. Dunsel Report - May 1, 2012

The choice of the haughty Cumberbatch to play Khan suggests to me that J.J. Abrams will be bringing back the sorely-missed TOS trope of the evil planet dictator (a la Kodos the Executioner, or the dude who orchestrated gladiator TV shows.)

I predict: This is not the strung-out Khan whose sanity has been ground down by spending 20 years watching eels eat people’s cerebral cortexes. This is the Khan who had power over millions and will try to do it again.

It also means there could be thought-provoking Prime Directive-violating excitement.

1331. SciFiJunky - May 1, 2012

When it comes to all things sci-fi/fantasy, I am like a drug addict desperate enough to inject anything into his veins in the hopes of getting the fix I need. And for me, Star Trek is the highest quality of crack on the market. Therefore, I will most definitely be in a theater to see Star Trek 12 at some point during its opening weekend even though I am most definitely not in favor of Khan appearing in any form in this movie.

However, I absolutely love the cast—including the addition of Benedict Cumberbatch (who I think is an outstanding actor) and am cautiously optimistic they will not let me down. So I will reserve judgment on the quality of the movie, and if it deserves multiple viewings, until I see it.

1332. Jamie - May 1, 2012

What rubbish.
And people complained about the various series re-hashing old storylines. There doesn’t seem to be anything original here.

If Abrams is just going to re-hash old Trek stories, they could have spent the money on giving Enterprise a 5th season with all the promised exciting storylines that Manny Coto has hinted at in old articles.

As much as I like Benedict in Sherlock, there’s nothing in this article that has persuaded me to see this film.

Sadly Star Trek ended for me with the final episode of Enterprise, may it’s memory rest in peace.

1333. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1330 Jamie — ” What rubbish.
And people complained about the various series re-hashing old storylines. There doesn’t seem to be anything original here.”

Really? How do you know? We DO know it won’t be a rehash of Space Seed or Wrath of Khan. Doesn’t that indicate they’re going to tell an ORIGINAL story with Khan?

1334. Captain Rickover - May 1, 2012

# 1271

Exactly. That’s one of the problems these days with many movies. But there are some exceptions like “Inception” or “Avatar”. They’re original movies, risky and bold and in the case with “Inception” extraordonary complex and intelligent too. And that’s what Star Trek should be: Original and new and not reimagineing anything. But, heck, the suits are in command and they want DOLLARS, as many as possible with so few risk as possible. So – it’s Khan, it’s save. I wonder if their extraordonary “bravery” in trying new pathes and new villains (ironically spoken) will be honored at the box office?

At last, we – the sceptical minority – should be happy that no one on this board called the Khan-is-villain-decison visionary…

1335. Allenburch - May 1, 2012

Hey boborci: Will you be in the SF Bay area for Star Trek filming?

1336. Johnny - May 1, 2012

@1332 —”Exactly. That’s one of the problems these days with many movies. But there are some exceptions like “Inception” or “Avatar”. They’re original movies, risky and bold and in the case with “Inception” extraordonary complex and intelligent too”

Did you just call “Avatar” an original movie? Have you ever seen “Dances with Wolves”? Or read “The Princess of Mars”?

Don’t get me wrong… I think “Avatar” is a masterpiece… but it is in essence a “mashup” of previous science fiction and adventure stories. It takes a VERY familiar story, but tells it in a completely new and imaginative way. In that sense, it’s an “original” film… but the story certainly is not.

Why can’t this Star Trek sequel do the same thing? Why can’t it take a “familiar” character, and do something “new” with him? Why not?

1337. NCM - May 1, 2012

Bob Orci, hope you’ll one day write a book about the making of what I hope will be a successful trilogy. It’d be great fun to eventually get all the scoop you can’t serve up today.

Say, when do we reach the next “juncture?”

I can appreciate people’s (reasonably expressed) disappointment, given the rumors, but one and all ought to keep in mind that whatever you’ve done/not done, you’re the only one here who’s done anything for Trek or the fans.

1338. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 1, 2012

Hey, so many people were clamouring that they needed to know who was the villain was that the rumour machine got going (source unknown) convincing AICN and Trekmovie that Khan was the bad boy of the sequel. Someone did what so many people asked for…gave them a name.

The truth is that nothing has been officially confirmed yet. I guess if Anthony Pascale feels that his source is reliable, then there is a good chance that Khan is the villain and he is being played Benedict Cumberbatch. Of course, Cumberbatch has neither confirmed nor denied this.

Only 12 months and 15 days until we find out who the cucumber-patch really is… sigh. (I like cucumber btw).

In other rumours that perhaps Bob Orci is able to confirm – the movie People Like Us has been entered into the Cannes Film Festival, along with Chris Pine’s other film, Rise of the Guardians, and that Chris Pine is going to Cannes between 16 – 22 May to represent the two films. Busy man is our fine Chris Pine! I just hope that he does not get the Sam Harper hat confused with the Jack Frost hat…:)

1339. J - May 1, 2012

@1107

“To everyone giving Bob Orci grief for apparently re-using Khan, are any of you making a new Star Trek movie? No? Then shush”

I guess in your alternate universe there are no rottentomatoes or movie reviews whatsoever

1340. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 1, 2012

I get aggravated when I see incorrect spelling, especially when the misspelled word is constantly used in an asinine and sarcastic manner. It just grates on me like nails on a blackboard.

The word is “ALTAR”, not “alter”

No doubt other misspellings will scream for my attention. Be warned.

1341. Jack - May 1, 2012

Heck, Shakespeare rehashed stuff. The Bible rehashed stuff.

And who says it’s gonna be a rehash.

PS. Got to say, I’m not thrilled when folks apologize to Bob Orci for other people’s comments. If you disagree with those comments, speak your mind… but I’m pretty sure Bob can defend himself, if he needs to.

1342. J - May 1, 2012

@1153 “The problem is that the audience won’t come see intellectual stimulation. They want things that go boom. They want a villain to say “Boo” to.”

Makes one wonder why revive Trek in the first place if it’s only a matter of “boos” and booms. You can put that in any movie and people will still go see it. You don’t need to slap “Star Trek” name on it.

1343. J - May 1, 2012

@1180: “My wife and I will watch it 3 times and enjoy delicious popcorn”

Awwww…

1344. J - May 1, 2012

Here is the poster

http://trekkie.pl/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/star-trek-12-something-something-poster.jpg

1345. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1336 i tend to make my own decisions on what movies i enjoy or nor dislike. I never follow reviews or review sites.

Just like your entitled to not be disapointed if the rumors do infact prove to be true i am entitled to be disapointed if i want.

1346. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

Even now that it is confirmed the writers are just trying to redo the best Trek, everyone is still excited?

I am now losing faith in this team. They are riding on our peoples success and BenedictCumberbatch will be inferior to Ricardo Montalban.

I am now wanting JJ Abrams to leave the Trek franchise.

1347. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

Seriously these guys are unoriginal and seem to draw on other ideas, I mean come on Nero was a Khan knock off.

1348. Bill Peters - May 2, 2012

My word people I would wait to Judge the film tell after I see it and that Is a Year and a few weeks more away, I can;t say weather or not I like a movie based on even the Trailers, Trailers are cool but I like to see the Product before saying if it is good or bad.

Mind you everyone has a Favorite Star Trek Movie and ones they don’t like but to Judge a Movie based on what you think Is in it before you see it is weird fro my Perspective.

1349. Bill Peters - May 2, 2012

Mind your Spelling and Writing at 12AM and 2AM Respectively is hard to do too….I know I am going to see this movie several Times Just so I can say what I like and Dislike about the Film.

1350. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

1332

Yea Avatar is a great film but it is not original at all.

1351. EAGLEMAN1969 - May 2, 2012

Bob Orci:

SERIOUSLY, bring STAR TREK back to television.

Then we can have ANOTHER 1,500 posts here every couple days! ;-)

Must say the jump right to the action in ST XI (they ALL count as Star Trek) was very welcome. Set the right tone for something different.

You know the fans are DEDICATED! Hit it out of the park with ST XII.

1352. Captain Rickover - May 2, 2012

# 1334 Johnny

Doing new things with Khan… What will he do? Playing a philantrope and try to save the world? Perhaps he had changend his mind (in Klingon prison or anywhere else) The Enterprise-crew battles him, because they know from old Spock he’s a villain. But in the end Kirk and Spock recognizes their mistake and crew and Khan works together to battle the evil CEO-dude Peter Weller is playing who is the Darth Sidious-like mastermind behind all evil things and an agent of the klingon Emperor.

That would be a new thing (at least for Khan). But more likley he will be evil with evil plans, getting back his lost power, using an alien device for his dark goals, try do kill Kirk, Spock and comrades, destroy the Enterprise and use other people for his goals. Sorry, but it’s obvious what Khan will up to and if change the concept not drastically you can only do variations of what has been already done with him. A new innovative way was the superb Khan-centric comics from last year (or was it 2010?) trying to give us a new perspective of Kirk’s archenemy.

But I don’t think that will be the case with the new movie. Cumberbatch’s will be very likley the same evil Khan from Space Seed or TWOK with nothing else in mind as proofing his superior intellect and ruling the universe (why just earth?). I would be honestly surprised if it will turn out different. But this movie needs to make money and it will only earn enough of that, if Khan is the foe. It’s a very simple formula: What are the needs of the massmarket? Khan = extraordonary popular villain = evil = badass. Allways works, success very likley, no risk (only with some hardcore Khan/Montalban-fans, but they are so few you can savely ignore them). So, let’s do it.

I’m neither denying the movie will be a fun ride or lame or boring. I certainly going to watch it, I’m not a fanatic maniac. BUT: Despite how great it will turn out, for me it allways would have been greater if Cumberbatch had played a new villain you do not know from the beginng what he’s after. That’s what I found a bit sad and it disappoints me.

1353. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

Star Trek II: THe Wrath of Khan is one of my al time favourite Trek movies and to me Ricardo’s perfomance cannot be beat, but I do know Bendict Cumberbatch is a good actor.

I am trying not to reserve judgment because I am hoping that these guys can prove me wrong. I was just hoping for something new but at the same time I can totally understand why they went for Khan.

I am hoping he is like Heath Ledger to Jack Nicholson’s Joker, both different and both great. With Khan though I wil still lean toward Ricardo Montalban, in the same way I stil prefer Bil Shatner to Chris Pine, even though I enjoyed Pine’s performance.

1354. Mark Lynch - May 2, 2012

I wonder what the fallout will be if all these rumours turn out to be not correct?

1355. C Miles - May 2, 2012

I posted this previously, in another thread but don’t think it made it.

Pardon me if its in one of the 1000 plus above.

I’d noticed that they are filming this week at Lawrence Livermore.

I’d mentioned that I thought perhaps they’d been in the NIF there.

Much more techie than a brewery. Perhaps an engine room, perhaps a research lab, perhaps some botany bay or cryogenics or Botany Bay lab stuff?

Anyhow the article re: NIF film location is here-

http://www.mercurynews.com/entertainment/ci_20525780/filming-star-trek-sequel-at-lawrence-livermore-lab?source=most_emailed

And definitely Google image search to check out the NIF pics for a spoiler -ish view of some possible interior sets.

By the way… NIF? They’re tryin’ ta make Fusion.

1356. C Miles - May 2, 2012

NIF Pictures here.

The most futurist science on the planet. (this side of CERN, anyhow)

http://www.boston.com/bigpicture/2010/10/the_national_ignition_facility.html

Still trying to figure how it will fit into JJ verse.

Please, please let this be the new engine room, and please, please let those Cumerbatch comments a little while back regarding a loud brewery be a red herring.

1357. RichyG1701 - May 2, 2012

Wow. I dont think any topic has generated such heated debate, certainly not since the announcement of a new cast to take on the legendary roles we’ve all come to know and love. And lets face it, that turned out rather well in my humble opinion. If (and I say if) the rumours are true, I’m willing to give it a chance. If nothing else, imagine Wrath of Khan with a 100 million+ dollar budget! I’m looking forward to seeing how the next few weeks pan out as we begin to find out a little bit more about Trek 13. Once I’ve watched Avengers, and Prometheus..and booked my tickets for Trek London. All said, not a bad few months to be a sci fi lover really!
Mr Orci, i’m sure you’re reading some of these knowing full well it was gonna be one heck of a sh’tstorm when the news broke. But that comes with the territory I guess. Good luck!

1358. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

1354
Even with a bigger budget you cant beat The Wrath of Khan.

1359. chrisfawkes.com - May 2, 2012

@1351

My guess is you will lose a percentage of trekkies who will not bother to see it if Khan is in it. Speculation but 20% is my guess. It won’t make a difference either way with the general public.

Where else this could backfire is that if the Khan rumor is true (remember Paramount have not confirmed it) is now you will have a very strong comparison between TWOK and the next trek.

If the next movie does not totally cream TWOK in terms of viewer experience then how is that going to look on a team that had so much more money to play with. The substantially larger budget will be the egg on the face so to speak.

Comparing Khan to the Joker holds only for a handful of trekkies. Most would never get that connection.

I’m still hoping that this turns out not to be true. However if it is not then i think it is unfair to the fans who do want Khan to pretend that it is only to let them down later.

1360. chrisfawkes.com - May 2, 2012

1071. dmduncan

I hear you i just don’t think it is a good move for the purposes you state. We agree in principle but not in how to get there.

1361. RichyG1701 - May 2, 2012

1355 i agree. One of my favourite films ever. Be interesting to see what they do with the character. If nothing else, its certainly not a dull time to be a trek fan at the moment :-)

1362. TomBot3000 - May 2, 2012

” To break my heart, you first have to win it… ”
I’m not surprised nor spoiled that Khan will be in this. I’ve seen the first season of Sherlock, so I know that Cumberbatch is a good actor. Since NONE of the new crew are really that close in essence, except perhaps Urban’s McCoy, why get worked up over this?
Now, Spock Prime being in this is exceptionally logical, as at the end of ST’09 he was the most glaring plot thread left not truly tied up. Here’s a guy who’s cranium not only is filled with valuable future tech information- but possible tactically critical information on enemies of the federation, alien threats(Doomsday weapon, etc.) and opprotunities to make right. I say possible because since the inclusion of Nero on this universe, things have been changed, so over time, some of PrimeSpock’s intel would be come useless. The end of ST ’09 makes it out like P-Spock’s going to go off to shepard the Vulcan refugees somehow.
I am neither inflamed in rage nor excited about this sequel; I saw ST ’09 once in the theater and later rented it to test my impressions. And they are exactly the same as my anticipation of a new outing- lukewarm.

1363. Damian - May 2, 2012

1355–Agree–some of the best movies ever made were low budget affairs. Paramount cut way back on the pricetag for Star Trek II and to many fans and non-fans alike, it was the best Star Trek movie ever made.

1351–I’d have a good laugh. It wouldn’t be the first time a major rumor about a Trek film was untrue. The signs are there though. Not just the thought of the Botany Bay floating in space at the end of Star Trek (2009), but the fact that Bob Orci noted some time ago he was reading “The Eugenics Wars” novels by Greg Cox.

1311–This site is a blog who’s job it is to research and post rumors (esp, ones with some evidence to back it up). If you just want the hard facts, that’s what Memory Alpha is for (BTW, it’s also posted on their article for the next movie). Bob Orci has posted here and I think he and his team understands that.

Really, if all the writers of this site posted were what was officially released by Paramount, CBS or the creative team writing the film, it would have maybe 2 articles posted.

1364. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

I am not getting worked up over this now. My rant is now over. I have detached myself from the debate, they are doing something that I had wished they would steer away from. I thought the alternate universe aspect was a good way to tell ne stories and not worry about canon.

I had warmed to this and my excitement was growing for Star Trek XII, to a level that was there when a Next Gen movie was released, and then came the announcement of the return of Khan. Now Khan is one of the best vilains Trek ever gave us but a redo, even a new take on the character would just seem inferior to what came before. Cumberbatch will be great but how can you excel in a role that was already done brilliantly.

I wil still see the film but completely saddened that they are rebooting more stuff rather than telling new stories in the new universe.

Also in regards to the money it will make, these guys could alienate every trekkie and it would still be the biggest Trek movie in box office takings. And that my friends is a very scary thought.

1365. Damian - May 2, 2012

1361–In essence, that is what is at the heart of my disappointment. I thought Star Trek (2009) was ingenious in the way it gave an new opportunity to give us stories with the original crew, while leaving everything in the prime universe intact. I was really looking forward to a completely original story and I loved Star Trek (2009) for that opportunity.

“rebooting more stuff” is the right term here. I am sure the new team will tell a completely original story about Khan. The problem is, no matter how you do it, everyone who’s seen Star Trek II will be comparing this story and this portrayal of Khan to that. You’ll be saying, Montalban would have done this or that.

My disappointment comes down to this. I loved the last film for the opportunity it gave us for completely new ground. But instead, it appears we are going back to pick up yet more pieces from the prime universe. No matter how you do it, Khan will be the same person, looking to rule because he believes that is his destiny. That is the core of his being. Anything else will be a completely different person and that in a way would be worse. That would be the writers writing a different character and just slapping the name Khan on it just for name recognition. But most fans of Star Trek II would see through that sort of deception.

I really do hope this is a red herring that we’ll all be laughing about 5 years from now (Hey, remember when everyone thought the new movie would be about Khan). But I really doubt it.

1366. EJD1984 - May 2, 2012

Just to get my two-cents in:

Personally I think it’s a mistake to use Kahn. The character, Ricardo Montalban’s performance, and TWOK movie are nearly legendary, and there will be endless comparisons.

I’m just seeing this as a lack of true imagination for the part of Orci and Kurtzman, and they should have just created a 100% new story. Plus with the inclusion of Nimoy/Spock into the plot-line, almost feels like a cheat (Theory – He’ll get wind of Kahn, and give some advice/intel as to how to deal with the situation)

I sincerely hope I’m wrong.

OK – My lonely little opinion and rant is done for the day.

*Unless this is a Team Abrams miss-information stunt.

1367. Jerk - May 2, 2012

#1326 – Thank you for continually demonstrating my point.

1368. If you want superpowers, stare directly at the sun. - May 2, 2012

Well, it’s been officially added to Memory Alpha…therefore it must be true.

As a man of Indian-Origin, a little peeved that BC is playing Khan Noonien SINGH. Over a billion Indians on the planet and you can’t find ONE to play Khan?

Ah, well, not too angry about it….because I’m waiting for the Bollywood remake in about 15 years. Song and dance sequences on the Botany Bay and all :)

You know you want to see Kirk bust a move.

1369. Daoud - May 2, 2012

I just hope they set up the threequel well with both Nimoy and Quinto disappearing and/or dying. You know so we can rehash with…
STAR TREK 3: THE SEARCH FOR SPOCKS

1370. Sebastian S. - May 2, 2012

# 1351

Mark~

I was thinking the same thing. Apparently no one else seems to have read the part about Paramount NOT confirming these rumors. But I’m not doubting them either.

I remember the rumors that swirled around before “Wrath of Khan” came out; Kirk and Spock were going back in time to make sure Kennedy was assassinated, Khan was seeking control of a ‘weather-making machine’, Spock and Kirk were in a love triangle over a new Vulcan officer, etc.

Until there’s official confirmation (and even Bob Orci hasn’t really confirmed anything in his posts on this thread), I’ll believe it all when (if) I see it….

;-)

1371. Jai - May 2, 2012

It wouldn’t surprise me if whoever is leaking these “spoilers” is actually pulling a fast one on everyone, especially the claim that Cumberbatch is Khan Noonien Singh. You can see that it’s generating a lot of media coverage, discussion & outrage from fans etc — exactly as you’d predict.

Would the movie’s creative team be above using this sort of thing as a calculated marketing strategy ? Not necessarily. This would actually make very good sense as an effective bait & switch approach, although the ethics are obviously pretty dubious.

Better to wait until there’s solid confirmation (or denial) from Paramount and Bob Orci.

Also, despite what someone earlier on this thread claimed, “Singh” is not “India’s equivalent to Jones or Smith”, and it’s completely non-existent among Indian Muslims. In terms of its historical origins, the surname is associated specifically with the North Indian Hindu Rajput warrior caste; from 1699 it also became a major part of Sikhism, originally for baptised Sikhs and eventually as a hereditary middle name or surname for all male Sikhs.

Anyway, this article left out the fourth spoiler. In the ST threequel, Benjamin Sisko finally emerges from the wormhole and finds himself in the JJverse more than a century in the past. Only this time, Sisko is played by Brad Pitt.

1372. Damian - May 2, 2012

You won’t get any official plot confirmations/denials from the Abrams team until the movie is released.

One consistency among all the Star Trek films under all the regimes is secrecy.

1373. Damian - May 2, 2012

1368–And Kasidy Yates will be played by none other than Angelina Jolie, of course:)

1374. drumvan - May 2, 2012

@1353

now that’s engineering! i wonder how you tap that big round party ball? ;)

1375. The Quickening - May 2, 2012

#1271

Well since this is an alternate universe, we already know he’s not “the” Khan anyway, but by that logic our Trek heroes aren’t “the” heroes we all grew to love either, which is one of the many reasons I am not a fan of this alternate universe gimmick. Actually, I think Craiger (#1269) makes a good point–I’m thinking the same thing myself: this is a new Khan and a new story and approach, therefore negative fans on the site need to chill ’till more info is available and confirmed, or they see the movie.

1376. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

First!

1377. Phil - May 2, 2012

@1365. Star Trek: The Musical

1378. SoonerDave - May 2, 2012

The pics from Livermore are really interesting. Wish there was some sane way of linking the pieces together.

We’ve seen pics of Spock descending into what was described as a volcano, and that term comes only from an inference from a “fiery” scene but given that he was in front of a green screen. Suppose Cumberbatch is a time-traveling bad guy who discovers Khan’s sleeper ship, *kills the “real” Khan*, and assumes his identity to build some sort of horrific weapon.

Somehow he leverages information about Khan Prime from Spock Prime, or perhaps Spock Prime advises the “alternate” crew that this isn’t the “real” Khan…Alternate Spock could be descending into something in conjunction with what’s being filmed at Livermore as part of a plot to foil an Evil Cumberbatch (How about we call him Khanberbatch?)

I know, I know, ridiculous speculation. But its all in good fun. What its supposed to be about, at least :)

Of course, watch all the stuff about Nimoy, Khan, et al turn out to be just bogus flotsam……lol

1379. Damian - May 2, 2012

Maybe Khan cuts off Spocks arms and legs and he gets severe burns all over his body from the lava. Then they have to create a special suit to help him breathe and move around.

Oh wait, I think that may have been done before.

1380. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1373 Hilarious.

I’m very interested now in this movie. Does Spock Prime tell the new Kirk and Spock about Khan? Knowing that Khan is floating around out there, does he try to be proactive to eliminate the danger before someone else stumbles upon the Botany Bay? I’m thinking the premise is something along those lines.

I’m exctied to see the Klingons, and with them and Khan, I’m thinking this movie may be more intense and possible a little darker than the 2009 film, which I welcome.

1381. ST Fan - May 2, 2012

Even if “Kahnberbatch” is Kahn, I still think this will be a great movie. I am disappointed it could be Kahn….but we really don’t know for sure until J.J. or Orci confirm it. I know this won’t be a remake of the Wrath of Kahn, in fact it will most likely be a completely new story. I think we can rest assured that J.J. is creating a wonderful movie that even 09 haters will enjoy. I still can’t believe there are ton of people who dislike ST 09. The actors portrayed their characters brilliantly..Karl Urban and Zachary Quinto being the best. I’m excited that Nimoy is coming back as Spock Prime, and as for the plot, we can only guess! In the meantime we can scour the Ongoing Comics for clues and wait for more spoilers!

1382. none - May 2, 2012

I think its time trekmovie open a forum….wow I did not know there where so many 2009 trek fans.

1378 coments is impressive

1383. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1378 Its a vocal minority that didn’t like 2009 Trek. It was a critical success and audiences in general loved it. Most Trekkies I know did as well.

As for the Khan story, I agree it will be completely new. This is a new timeline, so this story will be what happens with Khan in this timeline instead of what happened in Space Seed. So, having said that, we have no idea what the story is even if we know Khan is the “bad guy”.

1384. ChinHo - May 2, 2012

Is Benedict Cumberbatch in any way related to Roundtree Cumberbatch as some have claimed?

1385. Daoud - May 2, 2012

Naw, we’ve hit higher. I bet we can get it to 2013 at least.
.
Squirrel!

1386. TimeTravelHIstorian Kei - May 2, 2012

Here is your blueprint for the rest of the Abramsverse Trilogy Star Trek 2 gives us Khan and Spock Prime will be there minimally to help the crew handle him. A mind meld between Spock Prime & NuSpock will happen. The third and FINAL film in The Abramsverse will once again involve temporal displacements. This is going to create a crisis of some type that is going to destroy the Abramsverse timeline from the inside out. The whole thing is going to end with a surprise that is going to knock everyone out of their seats. A shot of the (TNG Enterprise E flying out of a time rift and followed by some kind of Patrick Stewart voice over. Restoring everything to the way it was before Abrams touched it. You heard it here first May 2, 2012. Essentially true trek fans have nothing to worry about because no matter how any of this plays out the bottom line is the prime timeline will be seen in theaters again. Patience is a virtue.

1387. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1383 I like how some think “true” Trek fans don’t like JJ’s version. What a joke.

Every incarnation of Star Trek is a new version of Star Trek. Each movie. Each TV series. In a sense the only “real” Star Trek is the original series. That doesn’t necessarily make it the best. I for one can enjoy each version for what it is and I’m very happy someone is giving us another one to enjoy.

1388. phil - May 2, 2012

thanks to overpriced tickets, this will sure to be a hit.

1389. Mark Lynch - May 2, 2012

I can’t remember if anyone has already mentioned this and I am not reading through 1383 posts (again!) to check…

But if Khan is the villain being played by Benedict Cumberpatch, why for the love of God, did they not cast Faran Tahir?

Just asking….

Bob Orci, you around to comment?

1390. n1701ncc - May 2, 2012

Bob orci now that we know its Khan , is it possible you can tell us what other characters were proposed for the 2nd movie. That might at least give us some hope about new movies going forward might include some of the other beloved Star Trek characters. Also you will not be giving away any plot lines for this movie.

Again looking forward to the movie even though is Khan

1391. Mark Lynch - May 2, 2012

Okay, #164 and #877 made mention of Faran Tahir…

Next time I will remember to use CTRL+F to see if there is already anything up. :-)

1392. Dennis Bailey - May 2, 2012

#1385: “thanks to overpriced tickets, this will sure to be a hit.”

If people will pay the price for a ticket, it’s not overpriced.

If a ticket is overpriced, people won’t buy it.

ECON 101.

1393. No thanks - May 2, 2012

Khan? A white, British Khan?

Thanks, Trekmovie. You saved me the two hours of my life and bandwidth I would have used eventually streaming the new movie from Netflix.

1394. sean - May 2, 2012

I really wish self-professed Trek fans would learn how to spell “Khan” already.

1395. TimeTravelHIstorian Kei - May 2, 2012

1384 I’m speaking to all the people who consider themselves Trek purists and are not 100% behind The Abramsverse. I’m sure there are plenty of true Trek fans out there who love The Abramsverse too but I think a lot of the resistance comes from the fear of not knowing where this new trilogy is going and fear that the Prime Timeline will never been seen on film again.

1396. Dunsel Report - May 2, 2012

Guessing there will also be a joke in there with Cumberbatch finding out from Nimoy that Khan was responsible for making the original crew go to the trouble of rescuing his body from Klingons.

Wait…Protomatter as the Maguffin?!

1397. captain spock - May 2, 2012

1224. captain spock – May 1, 2012
please explane it to me Bob why did the surpreme court consiter doing a khan movie when their are so many other chartures out there in trekland that maybe the fans would wanted done ensted of a khan movie.
if you would read what the fans poll that have been all over the trek bbs, of what charture they think the movie was going to be about.khan was menchened but we never dreamed it would be about Khan
bob .. abrams-virse is in a alternate universe the sky is the limit of possabley of stuff you can do.yet is Khan forgive me some time i go to far with things bob.my apoligeys
i’m going to bring this up again sorry but the Klingons have been over done ,time travel is been very over done,

Bob Orci 1224. I can confirm and deny nothing at this juncture.

iI take it the spreme court planed on doing Khan film from the start of planing the next star trek movie. ok one question you answered for me down.

with out giving any thing about trek 2,,,, the enterprise crew of abrams virse is in the 22nd century , khan lived in the 20th century how can the crew of the enterprise meet khan unless their some kina time travel involed the film..one other possabilty khan & his augments is on a planet or stolen ship hum .. a fasanating premiss

Bob, now your saying that Kirk & crew is going to meet up & battle with Khan the augments .on a stranded planet, in space on a stolen spaceship or the enterprise is going back in time via time travel.

it going to be one of the three senarios above. Bob My guess its going to be the time travel senario that how they meet Khan in this movie , why its allways the factor in trek movies they use time travel in the film’s.II can be wrong we will have to wait & see next May 17th, I know I’m going to watch trek2.

1398. PK - May 2, 2012

Having watched the first movie again last night I can say that whatever the new movies story is will be okay. The love and thought that went into making the first one is beyond belief. It is a perfect movie. Well cast, excellent story, amazing direction and so on.

If it is Khan then so be it. I said before the first one that nobody could replace William Shatner as Kirk but Chris Pine nailed it! The talented folks behind the scenes know Trek and understand it. I am 100% confident this movie will be awesome. The new cast members are great and Cumberbatch is awesome in everything he has done (especially Sherlock.)

Bring on 2013 and let’s see Star Trek reign supreme at the box office once again!

Don’t like to see the negativity, we should all remember and appreciate that Star Trek is alive and well and in GREAT hands.

1399. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1392 The not knowing is exactly the point. Without a new timeline, you would konw exactly where things were going. Unless you didn’t use the originaly characters and created a Star Trek set after TNG. I think they made the right decision.

No one needs to see the Prime universe/timeline again. We already know it’s story. We have the TOS series and movies to tell us what happened in the Prime timeline. We know the fate of most if not all the original characters in the Prime timeline.

1400. James Cannon - Runcorn Trekkie UK - May 2, 2012

Anthony: your ‘sources’ suck…

@TheRealNimoy: Humans. Please advise. Does “talking” sound like “appearing” ? LLAP

Don’t sound like Nimoy is in it at all!!!

1401. Marshall - May 2, 2012

Gotta love it….

Only Trek fans would be upset that their most iconic and compelling villains are returning for the third time ever. Bulls fans wouldn’t never want to bench MJ. Nobody was upset about Joker in DKR (they were weird about Ledger being chosen, but they ate their words on that).

Only Trek fans. You’d think they were resurrecting the Borg again.

1402. Ahmed - May 2, 2012

@1397

@TheRealNimoy: Humans. Please advise. Does “talking” sound like “appearing” ? LLAP

Looks like Nimoy is denying being part of the movie after all. I hope the other part about Khan is wrong as well

1403. VOODOO - May 2, 2012

James Cannon #1397

Mr. Nimoy seems to be suggesting that he is still in talks about appearing in the film.

I think this is nothing, but spin control. He most likely let something slip that he didn’t want to on live tv and is attempting some damage control here.

Both Anthony and AICN have independent sources that claim Nimoy is in the film and has already shot his scenes…AICN went as far to describe what he is wearing in the film… Anthony and AICN are too well connected to not get this info correct.

1404. Dave H - May 2, 2012

Let’s throw some creavtivity in here and “NOT” bend to fan pressure to rehash some well known villains such as Khan!
Remember Trek originaly died out even with al this so called fan support or pressure!
Cheers to to JJ’s team for 2009′s trek though!

1405. James Cannon - Runcorn Trekkie UK - May 2, 2012

#1400 . I noticed the beginning of this article has now been amended.

Fascinating ..

1406. chrisfawkes.com - May 2, 2012

Khan and Nero are so similar this would be like making a second Iron Man film where he was fighting an almost identical villain as in the first.

Surely no one would make that mistake.

1407. NoSeth - May 2, 2012

Interesting that JJ went through a lot of effort to wipe the prime universe off the books so as to not be bound by canon, yet he chooses a villain whose origins would not be affected by Nero.

They need to make sure everything is right when Khan is found, right down to the clothes he was wearing.

And boborci, don’t forget that Khan left Earth in 1996. While obviously there was no Khan in the real world, Star Trek is not the real world, and in the Star Trek world, there was a major war in the late 20th century that involved Khan, who disappeared in 1996.

1408. chrisfawkes.com - May 2, 2012

The funny thing is AICN is just taking a guess that it is Khan.

1409. BobbotheClown - May 2, 2012

I Khan’t wait to see it!

1410. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 2, 2012

#1383 wrote:
“Restoring everything to the way it was before Abrams touched it. You heard it here first May 2, 2012. Essentially true trek fans have nothing to worry about because no matter how any of this plays out the bottom line is the prime timeline will be seen in theaters again.”

First, no, this is NOT the first time anyone has said that–people have been predicting that since the 2009 film came out. And second, let’s cut the “true Trek fans” elitist crap, OK?

1411. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

there is another possiblity that may have been mentioned already – but i haven’t read through all the 1400 plus posts…

With the ever increasing quality of CGI, perhaps BC will play Khan, but his physical appearance will be altered to make him look like the Khan we all know and love.. er, or uh.. hate??

Maybe a remote possiblity – but then again maybe not. Films like X-Men, Avatar and countless others come to mind.

Didn’t Bobby O. himself say something like ‘the film is going to be a face melter’ or something to that effect back in the 300′s???

perhaps he was giving us a hint….

1412. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 2, 2012

1390 wrote:
“Thanks, Trekmovie. You saved me the two hours of my life and bandwidth I would have used eventually streaming the new movie from Netflix.”

Melodramatic bull. You’ll watch it, just like everyone else on this thread will. Anyone who says they won’t is lying and throwing a childish hissy fit. Period.

1413. Garbagescow - May 2, 2012

Hahaha 1404 giving the writers biographical history on a character TPTB seem to love and know more than the entire history of Star Trek.

1414. Scotty - May 2, 2012

#2010: No they don’t, they can do ANYTHING they want and they are rebooting a story/movie which I think is un-rebootable because its perfect already.

*THUMNBS DOWN*

1415. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1404 They don’t have to make everything exactly as it was in Space Seed, “Down to the clothes he was wearing.” No reason to do so.

Also, 1996 doesn’t matter. As “real life” has passed events in Star Trek history, current versions of Star Trek have altered that history. There is nothign wrong with updating the “historical” events as they were mentioned in the 60′s TOS tv show now that we have obviously passed those dates in real time. There is no need to explain it either.

1416. Scotty - May 2, 2012

#1407: Not likely as its still a huge amount of effort to do that, they would have simply cast someone who looks the part more.

1417. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1402 Actually it hasn’t.

1418. Damian - May 2, 2012

Re: whether Khan left in 1996 or not. Greg Cox’s Eugenics Wars novels did do a pretty good job of fitting the Eugenics Wars into current events. Basically the Eugenics Wars were a series of battles tied together but the general public were not really aware of the war itself. Bob Orci has noted in the past he was reading those novels, so it’s possible they will base some of Khan’s origins on Cox’s story.

However, it’s probably likely that they’ll leave the specifics of Khan’s origins a bit vague. Canon purists would likely balk at the idea of changing the timeline around for convenience so it’s probably easiest just to avoid being specific about dates.

They’ll probably just note the Eugenics Wars without using dates.

1419. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

Don’t forget JJ Abrams connection to Nicholas Meyer. One of his motivations for Re-Booting Trek in the first place was so that he could one day do his interpretation of Khan. Nobody should be surprised or upset about this because anybody with eyes to see or ears to listen should have seen this coming, This is a Star Wars fan taking everything he liked about boring old Trek and making it Star Wars like. Khan being Star Trek’s Darth Vader made this inevitable.

1420. Damian - May 2, 2012

Enterprise did much the same way with the episodes involving the Augments. They mentioned the Eugenics Wars without noting dates when it supposedly happened. In that way they did not violate canon about when the wars occurred, but they did not look ridiculous to current viewers by saying some global war occurred in the 1990′s that had already passed.

1421. Factchecker - May 2, 2012

So if they went to all the trouble to resurrect Khan….(and no offense to the Brit actor playing the part) but why the heck didn’t they cast an actor that at least looked the part?

Khan’s sidekick I can see. Khan? Heck no.

Javiar Bardem – absolutely.
Benicio Del Toro? Nope. Perfect Klingon choice though.
Antionio Banderas – if none of the above is available, maybe.

Sorry guys, I can’t see this being convincing.

1422. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

1416-

but if everyone is right in that this guy is a great actor, then maybe they really wanted him.

(i know it was reported they wanted Del Toro originally, but maybe they saw Wolfman and thought better of it…)

No doubt a lot of effort, but for just one character. Not numerous characters as in Avater.

just a thought…

1423. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

or Avatar anyway. don’t know about Avater.

1424. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

The Brit is a top notch actor who should have no problem pulling off Khan. Plus it’s a re-imagining of the character. I don’t think we have to worry about his performance. Heck Tom Hardy is playing Bane in Dark Knight Rises and the original character is Columbian. I don’t think nationality of the actor really mean a whole lot these days. Khan himself is supposed to be Indian and Ricardo was certainly not Indian either!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

1425. Jack - May 2, 2012

It’s disheartening how Trekmovie’s “sources confirm” it’s Khan is now being reported as fact (it will be Khan) all over the place. Maybe it is — but the evidence is still pretty flimsy “they let the cat out of the bag on the DVD commentary 3 years ago.” Although, I’d expect Bad Robot to deny it were it not the case…

1426. Jack - May 2, 2012

Bob, are you a source here? Anthony says no one connected to the production has officially confirmed this, how ’bout unofficially?

It’s good free publicity, anyway.

1427. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

The key is the Botany Bay scene Abrams wanted for the after credits of Star Trek (2009). These guys in charge are just fanboys who want a chance to create a new version of their favorite Star Trek Villain. It all makes perfect sense and to be honest I wouldn’t be surprised if the ending to the new Star Trek video game coming out shows the Botany Bay adrift in space.

1428. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1418 Yeah, I guess so. I just don’t see a problem with saying the war took place in the 2030′s. Why should the creators of a new Star Trek movie today be constrained by outdated predictions from the 1960′s TV show?

No issue with changing it. No need for explanation. No one other than the minority high strung Trekkie hard-cores will complain. So what.

1429. whatinblueblazes - May 2, 2012

@1425 Jack

I completely agree — I remain somewhat skeptical with regard to these “sources.” Until I see something resembling official confirmation, I’ll continue to treat these as rumors.

That said, I’d be quite happy to see Benedict Cumberbatch’s take on an iconic character, and quite excited to see how Orci and company managed to use the character in a fresh and original way.

1430. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

1424-

Be careful throwing out terms like ‘reimagining’… it’s words like that which saw Starbuck and Boomer get neutered! :P

Hopefully, it’s not that kind of ‘reimagining’, but more a ‘retelling’.

1431. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch knows he has big shoes to fill. That’s for sure.

1432. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

Hopefully it isn’t really a retelling at all. Just a new story surrounding a classic character.

1433. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1432 It almost certainly is a new story. This is a new timeline so the details of how Khan is found, etc. will be different from Space Seed.

1434. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

…so an ‘untelling’

or ‘unretelling’…

i’m so confused…

1435. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

Whatever happens I’m sure the fanboy’s will do a nice job.

1436. Dave - May 2, 2012

Jeez!……can’t we see something new???

you know… explore a strange NEW world…
seek out some NEW life and NEW civilizations,
boldly go where NO franchise/movie has ever gone before????

guess not… that only applied in the ’60′s apparently.

1437. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

Times have changed.

1438. Damian - May 2, 2012

1428–I’d have no issues if they wanted to use parts of Cox’s novels to make things more plausible. Bob Orci is a self professed fan of all things Trek, so I doubt he would make any changes to specified dates of when things occurred.

Again, they probably just won’t get into the whole date thing. It’s probably unnecessary to whatever story they want to tell and no point upsetting a group of fans if it doesn’t matter anyway. Trekkies will know the Eugenics Wars supposedly took place 1992 to 1996, non Trekkies won’t care.

1439. Basement Blogger - May 2, 2012

1425

Jack says, ” Maybe it is — but the evidence is still pretty flimsy “they let the cat out of the bag on the DVD commentary 3 years ago.” Although, I’d expect Bad Robot to deny it were it not the case…”

The evidence is not flimsy. Let’s look at this logically shall we?

1. Anthony is very careful about what he reports. He doesn’t report rumor as fact.
2. Bob Orci on this thread with some humor says he can’t deny or admit anything on this story. Yeah, you’re right , Bad Robot would come out and deny Khan and demand TrekMovie retract the story.
3. What about the evidence? You don’t cite any of the evidence. They were looking for a Hispanic actor. After Del Toro bugged out, there was a search for other Latino actors. Hmmm. Ricardo Montalban originally played Khan with Hispanic accent intact.
4. Leaked video. Cumberbatch in the video looks human. No funny ridges or pointed ears. Cumberbatch beats the daylights out of Spock. Chokes him with one hand. Remember Vulcans are stronger than humans. It takes a phaser shot from Uhura to subdue him. So we’ve got a human with superhuman strength.
5. Cumberbatch had to dye his hair black like Khan in TOS. He also said he had to work out for the role. No wimpy scientist here.
6. Oh and Anthony said, the guys leaked it out when they wanted a scene with the Botany Bay.

Let’s put this together. They wanted a muscle bound, black hair actor, preferably a Hispanic actor like Montalban. The villain would be human with superhuman strength. Oh and the writers in DVD commentary indicated they were going to tease us with Khan’s ship, The Botany Bay.

Looks like Khan. Sounds like Khan. The writers hint it’s Khan. And Anthony has great sources. It’s clear and convincing. IT’S KHAN.. And by the way I’m not rooting for Khan. We’ve been there and done that. Still will keep an open mind on the new movie.

1440. Planet Pandro - May 2, 2012

#1381:

“Khanberbatch”?

How about “CumberKhan”?

1441. Savoring Uhura's Juices - May 2, 2012

Khan has been confirmed by Wikipedia. My God it must be true!

1442. Damian - May 2, 2012

1439–Also, Bob Orci has stated in the past he was reading “The Eugenics Wars” I didn’t read too much into it at the time, but in light of everything else, that indicated a little research into the character.

1443. NoSeth - May 2, 2012

1416–it’s a movie with a 9 figure budget and taking 4 years to do. They can afford the effort to get things right.

The Eugenics Wars is not canon, so that wouldn’t matter.

I have to check out that story too. The Eugenics Wars were not supposed to be some covert war.

“War weary populations”

And Khan was a pretty big deal.

1444. Killamarshtrek - May 2, 2012

I’m still doubting these ‘sources’. An actor who looks nothing like Kahn, playing Kahn, is a doubt I’ve expressed before but has anyone noticed the other really obvious reason why one of these rumours CANNOT be true?

Apparently we’re told, Nimoy is appearing in the film and has already completed his work? Yet if you look at the images of him the other day at the Enterprise shuttle ceremony he has a full pair of eyebrows. On the set of ‘Big Bang’ 5 weeks ago he has a full pair of eyebrows. either he has the fastest growing eyebrows in history or he hasn’t played Spock recently!

1445. Michael Hall - May 2, 2012

“Only Trek fans would be upset that their most iconic and compelling villains are returning for the third time ever. Bulls fans wouldn’t never want to bench MJ. Nobody was upset about Joker in DKR (they were weird about Ledger being chosen, but they ate their words on that).”

Only the subset of Trek fans that are Abrams apologists could make the claim that Khan Noonien Singh was Kirk’s “Joker,” and do it with a straight face.

(That said, I have no idea how the use of the character in the upcoming film will pan out, despite the evident absurdity of Cumberbatch playing a Sikh. Maybe there’ll be an interesting story point justifying that, for all that I know But it’s obvious from the details leaked so far that the core of this film will be about the besting of a villain whom fate and the gods of the Supreme Court dictate must be bested at the outset, a concept as trite and shopworn at this point as it is foreign to the very essence of what made TOS so worthwhile and memorable. That, and not the use of the Khan character per se, is the source of my disappointment.)

1446. Planet Pandro - May 2, 2012

#1372:

Secrecy HAS certainly been a hallmark of all the Star Trek Movies. I’m thinking of the good ol’ days of sitting at my computer reading an entirely accurate leaked copy of John Logan’s script for Nemesis right around the time they were beginning the filming of said movie.

Or the destruction of the 1701 in the ST: 3 trailer.

Or the story (true? false?) of GR leaking the death of Spock from (the original) ST:2

1447. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1438 I undertsand what you are saying, and they may very well do that. I just don’t see a problem with “updating” the time of events to correspond with current history. That was the original intent anyway when Gene created Star Trek. It was a history of our future.

No problem IMO in updating that history to match our real history.

They have done this before – like when they included the Space Shuttle enterprise in the history of “Enterprise” ships. In TOS they obviously didn’t have that since the shuttle didn’t exist, but in TNG, Enterprise etc. they did. So updating the Star Trek timeline is not unprecidented. I’m sure there are many other examples of this but i’m too lazy to go research.

My point is that not only will casual or new fans not care, i doubt many Trekkies will either. It makes sense to do it.

1448. Jay - May 2, 2012

#1438 I undertsand what you are saying, and they may very well do that. I just don’t see a problem with “updating” the time of events to correspond with current history. That was the original intent anyway when Gene created Star Trek. It was a history of our future.

No problem IMO in updating that history to match our real history.

They have done this before – like when they included the Space Shuttle enterprise in the history of “Enterprise” ships. In TOS they obviously didn’t have that since the shuttle didn’t exist, but in TNG, Enterprise etc. they did. So updating the Star Trek timeline is not unprecidented. I’m sure there are many other examples of this but i’m too lazy to go research.

My point is that not only will casual or new fans not care, i doubt many Trekkies will either. It makes sense to do it.

1449. Spock/Uhura Admirer ;-) - May 2, 2012

@1344 J

Lol. :-D Even I have to laugh at some things. And that really is a TOS Purist Enthusiast response, as well as “fun, watchable.” ;-)

1450. Damian - May 2, 2012

“The Eugenics Wars” was just an attempt by Greg Cox to fit the Eugenics Wars into existing world events. It was never going to be perfect, since no such war ever really occurred. He was just trying to fit the mythos of Star Trek into the real world to at least make it more plausible while not contradicting canon.

There were a number of brush wars going on in the 1990′s (used in Cox’s novels) and you could argue Spock’s statements about war-weary populations in light of Cox’s novels. You could basically say that while the general populations was not aware of the real reasons behind the various conflicts in the 1990′s, the powers that be did not want to let on that those really responsible for those conflicts are in actuality missing and could potentially strike up additional conflicts. Further, Spock mentioned records from that period were fragmentary, and using Cox’s story, you could interpret that to mean that the real reasons behind the many wars going on was not kept in official records.

Sure, that’s reading a lot into the story, but it’s one way you can keep the existing storyline intact.

For me, I’m content with existing canon about the Eugenics Wars. To make changes to the date because the wars as originally envisioned back in the 1960′s did not occur would make things just that much more confusing. It’s just easier to go with existing continuity that the wars occurred in the 1990′s. I’ve never been big on retconning.

1451. Salt Monster - May 2, 2012

1189 (by way of 1184)

So The Voyage Home was an anomaly? The most profitable Star Trek movie of them all (at that time), a movie that contained no shots fired, a very thoughtful movie, and that was what? Just a freak accident that it did so well at the box office?

You must trust in the intelligence of your audience. I think Mr Nimoy said that once.

1452. Damian - May 2, 2012

1446–It’s certainly true that information is always leaked about Star Trek films. But official confirmations and denials just don’t happen under any Star Trek regime when it comes to the movies.

I seriously doubt you will ever see Bob Orci make a statement confirming or denying anything about the new movie until it is released. He may throw nuggets out there, but he’s not going to answer direct questions about the plot of the movie. And that’s really how it’s always been going back to the Motion Picture.

1453. Mark Lynch - May 2, 2012

We’ll know for sure when the first full trailer comes out…

1454. Planet Pandro - May 2, 2012

1452 Damian

Fair enough, good point.

1455. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

You can write the Eugenics Wars history as the way the future sees the past.

In other words, we may be living through the Eugenics Wars right now, and not know it because that’s NOT what we call what’s happening now.

But from the perspective of future history, the future knows things about our time that we ourselves do not know while living here and now.

Or maybe the ones who do know are called names, like “conspiracy theorist,” and are dismissed as fringe and out of touch.

Whereas the future may view those pariahs as the only ones other than the major players themselves who really knew what was going on.

So it’s quite possible that we are IN the Eugenics Wars right now.

1456. Planet Pandro - May 2, 2012

1451 Salt Monster

In a total nitpick, shots WERE fired in ST:4. Kirk shot the lock on that door handle to trap the surgeons.

(honorable mention to Chekov’s attempted stunning of the Gov’t Agent)

again, total admitted nitpick, sorry.

1457. Chris - May 2, 2012

I wish reports would stop calling these spoilers.

Each of the things “spoiled” will be revealed in the marketing, many months before the film is released.

These are not spoilers. They are pieces of very basic information about the movie which have simply been released in advance of the producers intentions.

Khan is the vilain? I shouldn’t have known that until opening day!

And I’m sure everyone would have cooperated to ensure that Nimoy’s credit wouldn’t show up on IMDB or Wikipedia until everybody had a chance to see the movie.

And what’s this about Klingons… in Star Trek??? My mind would have been so blown, now I’ll never get to experience it.

1458. Basement Blogger - May 2, 2012

@ 1444; 1453

Guys, Anthony has sources that says it’s Khan. Again, Anthony doesn’t report rumor as fact. He’s very careful. Don’t ignore the evidence. I’ve cited it in post 1439. Desire for Hispanic actor, villain is human with superhuman strength, black hair, etc. Look at the evidence. It all points to Khan.

Let me put it this way. If you go to sleep tonight and get up in the morning and see snow that wasn’t three before, what would you think? It snowed overnight Just like concluding it snowed, the circumstantial evidence with the sources says it’s Khan. It’s Khan. Now it’s a different argument if it is a good idea to bring back a character that we already know his motivation. I doubt they’re going to make Khan into a male stripper in this universe.

And let me answer the “Cumberbatch can’t play Khan since he’s not a Sikh.” I have yet to see anything in the canon that mandates he’s a Sikh. Yeah there’s the name. And in Space Seed, they say he’s likely Indian.. Okay, but there’s no line that says Khan was born to Indian parents, etc. etc., etc.. Remember that Khan is a product of genetic engineering. Heck, he could be engineered to have fair skin and black hair. And test tube dad could name him Khan.

1459. AnonymoousWasAWoman - May 2, 2012

Rumors are rumors; they can all be taken with a grain of salt until we see the actual end product. I may be unenthralled by the prospect of a Khan rehash, but everyone from J.J. Abrams to Chris Pine to Bruce Greenwood has had very good things to say about the script, and the cast is superb across the board. I’m optimistic.

I’m also still quietly holding out for the accuracy of an earlier rumor, one that said the villain wouldnt be Khan, but would be familiar to fans of the original series. Remember this one? “It’s definitely a character that will make fans of TOS excited. Think along the lines of Harry Mudd or Trelane or Gary Mitchell or the Talosians or the Horta. Actually it’s one of those that I named.”

In other words, GO HORTA!!! Benedict Cumberbatch’s ultimate transformative role! A great actor can’t just play a king, he can also play a throne! Or a Horta!

Nope, I’m still pulling for Gary Mitchell.

He checks a few of the known boxes that Khan doesn’t, current rumors notwithstanding. He’s someone you’d easily see in a Starfleet uniform. He’s someone who would start the movie in a position of trust, friends with at least a few of the established characters, and the increasingly tense discussions of whether or not to kill him would seriously test the loyalties and relationships of a relatively newly assembled crew, something Damon Lindelof recently described as an element of the plot. He’s also one of the five villains named in the older rumor above, for whatever that’s worth.

Alas, playing devil’s advocate, he does show up in the Ongoing comic books and is summarily dispatched, and something I read somewhere indicated that the sequel is meant to be taking place after the Ongoing comics. So the odds of the ‘not-so-nice-guy’ being Gary Mitchell are middling at best. But nothing I’ve heard short of this dubious rumor has given me any reason to believe Khan’s being reheated and served here, either.

1460. Johnny - May 2, 2012

@ 1352. Captain Rickover
# 1334 Johnny
BUT: Despite how great it will turn out, for me it allways would have been greater if Cumberbatch had played a new villain you do not know from the beginng what he’s after. That’s what I found a bit sad and it disappoints me.

What if they do have Cumberbatch playing Khan… but you don’t know what his motivations are from the beginning? Maybe it’s played a bit mysteriously, and his intentions aren’t revealed until late in the film?

1461. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

Benedict Cumberbatch is the most phenomenal (and I really do mean phenomenal) actor I have seen in like forever. His casting (for any role) is a stroke of genius.

He’s a heart-throb and on his way to international blockbuster stardom, but first and foremost, he’s a great thespian, one of the best out there, and sometimes you watch him, and you are sure: He’s actually the very best. As an actor, he’s intelligent, fearless, versatile, chameleon-like.

In the final episode of Sherlock he offered up a level of acting almost messianic in its quality, and his power as he stood alone on the roof single-handedly finished any argument that TV remains cinema’s poor relation.

Watching him is like eating the final spoonfuls of a high-calorie cake – rich, dense fare that would be impossible to feast on too often.

He will be nothing short of sublime in his take on Khan!

1462. Johnny - May 2, 2012

@1448 Basement Blogger — “I wish reports would stop calling these spoilers.

Each of the things “spoiled” will be revealed in the marketing, many months before the film is released.

These are not spoilers. They are pieces of very basic information about the movie which have simply been released in advance of the producers intentions.

Khan is the vilain? I shouldn’t have known that until opening day! ”

What if they AREN’T planning on revealing some of this info in the marketing? What if they deliberately wanted to keep the fact that Khan is in the movie a secret? This is J.J. Abrams that we’re talking about… so it’s isn’t beyond the realm of possibility that he’d deliberately keep Khan a big secret.

1463. AL - May 2, 2012

Why stop now? At this rate let’s just go full-bore-marketing-weasel and make the villain half-Khan-half-Borg (only in this “new” timeline — and with Khan being the badass he is — it’s Khan that assimilates the Borg).

1464. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

1463 -hehe

and then ‘the most intersing man in the world’ assimilates Khan.

1465. LizardGirl - May 2, 2012

We’ve really beat this thing upside the head…mercilessly with any and all weapons imaginable. With that said, I’m gonna beat it up some more!

If the spoilers are true, then I am stoked about the Klingons! They are one of my favorite alien species in Trek. Loved them in the Undiscovered Country! But if we’re going with the TOS Klingon then we’ll see a more human looking, and to be honest, less aggressive but just as ruthless entity.

They have a very unique culture in TNG. But not much about them is expanded upon in TOS. In fact we know nothing about them in TOS besides they’re opposed to the Federation. Maybe we see how that happens or something.

(Love TNG Klingons! Their divorce ceremony is the best: SLAP! –”N’Gos tlhogh cha!”–SPIT)

1466. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

*interesting

i should really review before posting.

Darn you iPhone!! you have ruined me!

1467. Ahmed - May 2, 2012

@1463. Al

“— and with Khan being the badass he is — it’s Khan that assimilates the Borg).”

Now, that is an interesting idea ;)

1468. Basement Blogger - May 2, 2012

@ 1462

Johnny, that quote isn’t mine. Try Jay @ 1457.

1469. Johnny - May 2, 2012

@1468 Basement Blogger

Whoops! My point still stands though.

What if they aren’t planning on revealing Khan in the marketing at all?

1470. Basement Blogger - May 2, 2012

@ 1463

Al says,

“Why stop now? At this rate let’s just go full-bore-marketing-weasel and make the villain half-Khan-half-Borg (only in this “new” timeline — and with Khan being the badass he is — it’s Khan that assimilates the Borg)”.

Al, I detect some sarcasm here. Are you saying that Hollywood has run out of new ideas? They just made a movie out of the board game called Battleship. :-) By the way they did bring the Borg into the new universe. Nero’s ship, the Narada, was built with Borg technology. See Countdown, the official prequel graphic novel.

1471. Captain Rickover - May 2, 2012

# 1460 Johnny

A nice try. But you know… It’s Khan. It is not important how good he may cover his evil plans, I know what he is up to. He is no Joker you never know what he’s after. He is a dictator who want his power back – in any form. I know that is Khan’s goal, the way he try to get there is of no interest. Surprises are nearly impossible. Why do you think Bob and Alex choose Khan? Because they want us not know who the bad guy is? No, they choose Khan, because they want to make clear who the bad guy is. Klingons might be bad guys too, but I guess they are just there to slow down a fast solution for the Khan-problem, a distraction if you want.

But as I said, I might be a fun movie, I will watch it, but my heart will not be 100 percent with it.

1472. Jenna - May 2, 2012

1461. Of Bajor
Totally agree with you. Although most people here just don’t know enough about him to understand that he could rock absolutely anything, regardless of skin color. (And I’ll add that I bet he’s just playing some variation of Khan where he doesn’t have to look like RM)
Today (he’s all over doing interviews in NYC and not looking at all like the “skinny loser” some meanies on the internet are pointing to) in an MTV interview they gave him a Star Trek “quiz” and he pretended not to know anything about Klingons or the Botany Bay even saying he thinks preparing in any way for roles is silly even though he’s an obsessive preparer! Earlier in an interview for VH1 the interviewer screamed Khan in his face and he just kind of gave her a blank look and moved on.

1473. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1455 except they ended in 1996 :)

1474. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

I still think it was a mistake not bringing back George and Gracie the humpback whales instead of Khan. But what do i know :)

1475. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

They were after all a big part of Star Trek IV which was the highest grossing of the TOS movies

1476. Phil - May 2, 2012

Maybe Peter Weller is playing Khan……

1477. PEB - May 2, 2012

#1436-

well in the 60s they were exploring during hour long television episodes. lets be real about it, there is NO star trek on television to explore new worlds and seek out new life and all of that great stuff that we ALL love about trek. but lets not act like in 2012, for a summer tent pole film that the makers of a (hopefully) successful blockbuster would go with a hit or miss plot. That doesnt mean that the core types of stories that make star trek great are irrelevant or shouldnt be in films but the whole point of this new era of trek is to attempt to re-assert the franchise as a strong, exciting, CURRENT “thing” and you have to be smart about the way you present that in only the second outting on the big screen. the smart thing would be to do 3 films, reawaken the audience then go the route of extremely successful/popular franchises by doing multiple comic book titles, video games, more novels, and very obviously a television show. to be honest, if this next film is a huge hit then you should expect a tv show. paramount wants to make sure a new show would be a ratings gem and not a show that only trekkies would watch. again, just keeping it real from an industry standpoint. to be honest with you, if this movie is a huge hit, i’d expect trekmovie to have new tv show news during or shortly before the production of the 3rd film.

1478. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Kirk- Now that we have been able to take back control of the ship, from this Khan character. Spock do you have any suggestions on what we should do with him.

Spock Prime- I here Ceti Alpha SIX is lovely this time of year.

:)

1479. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

@1472. Jenna

Indeed, however they will all soon be completely aware of his greatness!

On a side note…. NuTrek is for the masses, not just us Trek nerds. The reboot (like it or hate it) was a huge massive success and has attracted a new generation to Trek because they used the shows Icons.

If they had just made another film that continued the prime timeline (regardless of how much us nerds would have loved that) it would have crashed and burned.

To the naysayers….pffft!

To the Supreme Court…. The prophets walk with you! ;-)

1480. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1476, I am still holding out hope that weller is playing someone related or connected to John Paxton.

1481. NCM - May 2, 2012

“Savoring Uhura’s Juices”–Really distasteful. Pun intended, but seriously, have you no shame?

1482. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

1480. Weller has been cited as playing a “CEO”, now to me that means either Chief Executive Officer (Likely) or a Chief Engineering Officer (Unlikely)

It would be cool if it was something to do with Paxton

1483. B.T. Dubbs - May 2, 2012

1480-

Wasn’t he the shooting guard for the Bulls in the 90s??

1484. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

In the pictures of cumby that have been released so far, it looks to me like he is wearing the ‘new uniform variant’ (black shirt, grey pants) that Quinto and Pine have been pictured wearing lately.

I’m guessing completely new story and especially that Botany Bay is not discovered by the Feds.

1485. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1483 you are thinking John PaxSon. I am talking about the Weller’s character from Terra Prime.

1486. Smoke and Mirrors - May 2, 2012

@1458. Basement Blogger

You’re ignoring a VERY important fact. The alternate timeline began AFTER the Botany Bay was launched from Earth. Therefore Khan’s appearance and backstory will not have changed even after the timeline has changed. He would look the same thawed out in this timeline as he did in the Prime Timeline.

Obviously since this is a re-imagining of Star Trek, an actor doesn’t have to look exactly the same. Chris Pine obviously doesn’t look like Shatner, nor does John Cho look like George Takei.

But even if the actors change (or are of different ethnicity), the characters are NOT going to change. Kirk is still a White, American guy. Sulu is an Asian Guy, Uhura is a African-American woman.

Khan Noonien Singh is an Indian. It’s stated explicitly (not ”likely”) in dialogue in Space Seed. His appearance in the episode, such as brown skin supports it (he sure as hell didn’t look like a white dude), and McGivers even paints a picture of Khan in a Turban and Indian attire. You’d have to be a real dummie to just dismiss all of this evidence. He ruled in Asia and the Middle East. All this talk of him being born in a test tube in the West somewhere is rubbish. That’s like saying an American ruled in the Ying Dynasty. All comments like those are just grasping at straws to defend the undefendable.

If Khan is in the new movie, then it makes as much sense to cast a white guy as Khan Noonien Singh, as it would be to cast a Chinese guy as Pavel Chekov. Pavel Chekov obviously suggests Russian, as Khan Noonien Singh obviously suggests Indian.

The bottom line is that frozen Khan in this new timeline is exactly the same as frozen Khan in the prime timeline at the moment he was thawed. The question is what happened to him after he was thawed (was he killed and replaced, was he surgically altered by the Klingons, etc).

Personally, when I saw the first images of BC fighting Spock, the name Gary Mitchell screamed out at me. And as excited as I am to see Khan in these new movies (I would have been disappointed had they not used him), I can’t look at Cumberbatch and see him as Khan. My belief does not suspend that much.

1487. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

Maybe they are going to apply a digital bronzer to Cumberbatch in postproduction. Did you consider that?!

1488. Smoke and Mirrors - May 2, 2012

@1479

Agree that this new trek is intended to bring in a new audience. But I wonder after these (presumably 3) movies, how many of this new audience will stick around. Will they watch new trek TV? Will they watch old Trek? If Trek returned to the Prime universe, would they be up for it then?

At the end of the day, yes these movies are meant for mass appeal, but even if they attract new fans to this trilogy, will they attract fans to the franchise?

1489. Smoke and Mirrors - May 2, 2012

@1487

Of course they aren’t going to do it in post….they’ll do it in the movie. A long spray-tanning scene while Klingons pervs watch and shout ”Qa’pla!”. As we saw in Trek 09, we love product placement.

1490. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

@1479

That’s the million dollar question.

My guess is that despite the noises being made in some quarters, Trek will not return to mainstream TV (at least not for the forseeable future). I think it’s more likely they will at some point follow up this trilogy with a reboot of TNG.

Yes, I think the nufans will stick around for that.

1491. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

meant to be @ 1488 :p

1492. Smoke and Mirrors - May 2, 2012

@1490

Hmmm, not sure I share your optimism there.

Kirk, Spock, USS Enterprise, Klingons, Dammit, Jim, I’m a doctor, not a catchphase.

All these are pop culture, well known even outside Trek/Sci-fi circles, thus a modern reboot was likely to draw attention from non-fans.

Picard, Riker, USS Enterprise-D, Borg, Make it so.

I wouldn’t put money on these being known by the masses. As much as a TNG reboot would be cool, I don’t think it would be as much a draw as the TOS reboot.

1493. Johnny - May 2, 2012

Did anyone ever specifically say the Abrams incarnation of Star Trek would be a TRILOGY?

Why couldn’t they keep going after the third film?

1494. Major Lee 'TIBERIUS' Skywalker, Battlestar Serentiy - May 2, 2012

This whole thread stinks of red herrings…sorry if anyone else has came to the same conclusion, I gave up after reading a couple hundred comments. Seems like J.J.’s style, especially after how pissed off he got with the set photos. ‘Maybe if we throw them a few false bones they’ll stop paying attention to the real spoilers’

Hope it’s not Khan, but I’ll still see it anyway.

1495. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

@1490

If they ever consider doing a reboot of TNG, I think it would be cooler to start with young Picard on the Stargazer instead.

1496. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

@1492.

I agree about the lesser draw of TNG

@1495

That would be cool, buit it’s very much a fan’s perspective and not one that the mainstream audience would ‘get’. Whatever they do it has to make a shuttle load of cash.

1497. The Art of film is dead. - May 2, 2012

#1378

The use of this lab convinces me more than ever that Peter Weller’s (a racist and xenophobe) character is a CEO working with the Klingons, who discover the Botany Bay with all the crew dead, including the real Khan, and will use said DNA to create a Khan/Aryan hybrid (Cumberbatch) Actress Alice Eve, will play a female Klingon commander (the first Klingon female in TREK movies) will be working with Weller’s character.

Just wild speculation.

1498. Jack - May 2, 2012

I agree that Cumberbatch can no doubt pull it off — I’m crossing my fingers in hopes that they’re not asking him to do Montaban’s “Corinthian leather” accent.

“Places everyone!”

1499. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

Reboots, reimaginings and remakes are all we get these days. is there any originality left?

1500. Of Bajor - May 2, 2012

@1497.

Interesting hypothesis…and I like!

1501. Smoke and Mirrors - May 2, 2012

@1493

No, but a number of people have made some points on that before.

Pine, Saldana, etc are cheap for the first 3 movies having been locked into three-picture deals before they hit it big with Trek 09, but since their stars are rising, when it eventually comes to re-negotiation for a fourth (or more) movie, they will be in a position to demand more money to meet their increased status.

Also it’s hard to see JJ Abrams doing more that 3 Trek movies. Will the cast themselves be as enthusiastic after 3 Trek movies? Especially if there’s another director at the helm.

Will this cast still be playing the characters in their 40′s? Hasn’t this new Trek been marketed as a young crew for a young audience. It’s hard to see them going at it as long as Shatner and co did.

I’m not saying it will be a trilogy, how would I know? I’m just speculating. Eventually these movies will come to an end and the recent convention in movies seems to be for trilogies.

Still it’s just speculation on my (and others’ part)

1502. Smoke and Mirrors - May 2, 2012

@ 1497

VERY wild speculation, lol.

Paxton was a Xenophobe, but to aliens, not to other humans. As seen in ENT, he had close supporters from what would now be described as ”non-white ethnic minorities”.

If anything, Paxton would likely admire Khan, I don’t think he’d bothered by Khan’s ethnicity.

Oh and I’m not an expert but I’m sure read that, ”Aryans” actually originated in North India from the Indo-Aryans there. Something about them leaving North India/Asia and arriving in Europe via the Caucuses, hence the term ‘Caucasian”. So Khan being North Indian/Sikh would actually be an ”Original, prototypical Aryan”, and would be more Aryan than Paxton.

1503. Jack - May 2, 2012

Hmm, Bob’s comments (if they are his) on AICN seem to lean a little more toward a confirmation (totally guessing here – basically he doesn’t say, that I read, I can’t deny anything) — saying “I can’t confirm anything,” “Everyone Khalm down.”

I’m no marketer, but I’d guess that letting all this Khan talk go on for long, if it isn’t Khan, might lead to slightly-dissapointed press if it’s officially revealed a lot later that it’s not Khan.

1504. Nano - May 2, 2012

@ 1497 Another option: Wellers CEO character revives Khan to start a war with the Klingon’s! There is no need for a Botany Bay vessel in this universe, Khan could be in a hibernation Lunar Penitentiary

1505. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1497, last I checked Lursa and B’Etor from TNG and Generations were Female and they were klingons, as was Azetbur in star Trek VI and Vixis in Star trek V

1506. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

1458: “Yeah there’s the name. And in Space Seed, they say he’s likely Indian.. Okay, but there’s no line that says Khan was born to Indian parents, etc. etc., etc..”

LOL! Talk about NOT following where the evidence leads!

Okay, so YOU think pasty white Cumberbatch is playing Khan. The same darker skinned character from Space Seed. Correct?

Probably, he is. But then given what you just said, that seems to suggest you ALSO think Khan is either:

a) A white child adopted by Sikh parents with the name Singh, or
b) A child of Sikh parents with the name Singh who had their child engineered to look like a bleached white brit!

Both of which are just hilarious to me.

If Cumberbatch is really playing Khan, I’m imagining they will just expect us to accept the actor in that role just the way we had to do for Simon Pegg as Scotty, since he did not resemble or really act like James Doohan much at all. All they got the same with Scotty was the brogue, and it worked out okay.

And if Cumberbatch is as good as we have been told he is, accepting him as Khan may not be so hard to do after all.

But a) or b)? Those I’m not buying.

1507. Daoud - May 2, 2012

1451. Salt Monster: “no shots fired”. Pandro got the one there in 1456, with Kirk firing on the door… but I remember a bigger shot fired:
.
A HARPOON fired at George and Gracie!
.
What is it with Trek and whale references (Moby Dick) or whales!? :)
.
This Khan retelling sure should be one whale of a tale!
.
And it’s Cumby, dambit!

1508. Sebastian S. - May 2, 2012

# 1486
Smoke and Mirrors~

Agreed!
And if they hadn’t already tackled the Gary Mitchell story in the new ST comic series, I’d have thought the same thing (Bob Orci did say the graphic novel series would segue into the new movies somehow).

And I also agree with all your observations about Khan and the casting of the character. I think it’s very close-minded to dismiss any such observation as ‘racist’. I would think it’s even more ‘racist’ to cast an obviously Anglo actor as an Indian when there are many talented Indian actors out there. That kind of white-wash casting is a relic of the ’50s and ’60s. It’s like Mickey Rooney as a Japanese or John Wayne as Genghis Khan. The casting choice for the new Khan (as much as I admire Cumberbatch) may very well be laughed when the movie opens.

# 1494

Major~

Quite possible.
These rumors still have NOT been confirmed by Paramount, JJ Abrams or even Bob Orci on these threads (I for one, find that a mite suspicious). I wouldn’t be surprised if these rumors were classic red herrings (and I for one, would be greatly relieved if they were….). We can only hope!

;-)

1509. Johnny - May 2, 2012

@1504 Nano

See… that’s a good theory. That’s sort of what I meant when I said “Khan could bee a third party” to Peter Weller’s main villain.

1510. Aurore - May 2, 2012

I hope Mr. Orci will come forward and say:

“There has been a misunderstanding…Remember what Chris [Pine] said about Benedict’s vocal quality?…Benedict will NOT play Khan. He will…READ…Khan. Kubla Khan. Yeah, see… our villain kinda likes poetry…”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x7mEV9VUgtQ

:)

1511. sean - May 2, 2012

Nimoy has gone into full denial mode on Twitter:

Leonard Nimoy ‏ @TheRealNimoy
I’m amazed.I talk to JJ Abrams and Zachary Quinto all the time. We’refriends.Conclusions are jumping. LLAP

Leonard Nimoy ‏ @TheRealNimoy
Humans. Please advise. Does “talking” sound like “appearing” ? LLAP

1512. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 2, 2012

#1486 – “He ruled in Asia and the Middle East. All this talk of him being born in a test tube in the West somewhere is rubbish. That’s like saying an American ruled in the Ying Dynasty. All comments like those are just grasping at straws to defend the undefendable.”

No, it is not at all like saying that an American ruled in the Ying Dynasty. What you have written is rubbish. There are right now millions of people from Asia, the Middle East and India living right now in the United States, Canada, UK, Australia, NZ and many European nations. So it is not stupid at all to suggest that this Khan may have been conceived in a petri dish in some Western laboratory. People, whose ancestors lived in a different country from the one they live in, often go back to the land of their ancestors and sometimes decide to live there permanently. Real world stuff.

Then again, according to one poster in particular, “she who shall not be named”, my knowledge of reality of this world is not in line with either anybody’s or everybody else’s current knowledge or understanding what is going on in the world…

Yes, I would much rather have George and Gracie back, rather than whathisface Khan.

1513. Aurore - May 2, 2012

“Nimoy has gone into full denial mode on Twitter…”
_________

OK. I can understand that.

Now, for good measure, Mr. Abrams needs to go into full denial mode on this Khan nonsense, as well !

:))

1514. CJS - May 2, 2012

Clearly it never mattered who they cast to play Khan, since the ultimate plan is to CGI young Ricardo Montalban’s face into the final cut of the movie.

1515. Guy Fawkes - May 2, 2012

Too bad they erased all of Trek to only do the next film rehashing Khan. So much for creativity.

1516. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1511 as i pointed out yesterday, and it still hasnt been aknowledged in the main article, the way that his first (obviously miss read) tweet was posted as if it were proof that he was. again for now I am still taking these all as being rumors with out any sunstantial proof

1517. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Anthony what are your thoughts about Nimoys recent tweets that seem to indicate that people are wrong about his involvement

1518. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 2, 2012

#1513 – Yes, that would be good!

1519. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1515 they didnt erase all of Trek, All that 40 plus years of stories still exsists.
Having the story be a result of Nimoy and Nero being thrown into the past from a point in time after Nemesis, means all of those adventures and memories still live in Spock Prime.

And as was stated in the film its a alternate or parrallel universe if you will so both timelines exsist side by side along with the mirror universe on top of that.

1520. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1514 in that cast maybe Alexander Sidig would have been a better casting choice then :)

1521. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

They can’t be doing Khan in this movie. They’d have to cast Kal Penn for that role.

1522. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

They can’t be doing Khan. They’d completely miss out on the opportunity to cast Kal Penn and name the movie “Sulu and Khan go to Guantanamo Bay”.

1523. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

Or even better, “Sulu and Khan go to Botany Bay”.

1524. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Or how about,

Robert Downy as Kirk Lazarus as Khan in Star Trek : Blankety Blank

it could be a cross over with Paramount Pictures Tropic Thunder :)

1525. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Or how about,
Robert Downey Jr as Kirk Lazarus as Khan in Star Trek; Blankety Blank

It could be a cross over with Paramount Pictures Tropic Thunder. :)

Edit button would be really nice to have one day lol

1526. Desstruxion - May 2, 2012

Guess I’ll go back to my DS9 reruns until something more interesting comes along. RIP Star Trek 2…..er whatever it’s called.

1527. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

What exactly do the Khan-plainers prefer from the next movie? Reusing a character doesn’t necessarily mean rehashing a story.

1528. VZX - May 2, 2012

1510: Or maybe Cumby will not play the character Khan, but play with the action figure Kobra Khan! In the movie….

Ok, lame. I know.

1529. Britt Ponset - May 2, 2012

So Spock Prime will die at the end of this movie saving the Enterprise again, yet he will live through a mind meld with new Spock. Remember. I just hope for a good story, less action with more time for character moments. Hopefully the Klingons weren’t added as window dressing but have something big to do. Will the Klingons be using Khan and his crew in some kind of experiment because of the incident with the Augments? Does Khan join with Kirk and crew to defeat the Klingons only to disagree on total destruction of the Klingons so their alliance comes apart at the end of the movie setting up a sequel? Too many possibilities and only 12 months of speculation to go!

1530. Suellen from Savannah - May 2, 2012

Well given all the postings an unofficial spoiler can get can’t wait to see what happens when the real trailers start.

Bob, I would love to ask you in person and one on one what you really think of all the posting on the so called spoilers.

1531. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

@1530
I hope he doesn’t hold us in… KHAN-tempt!

1532. jtd - May 2, 2012

Enjoy yourselves.

I’m not bothering with this crap.

Abrams DESTROYED TREK ONCE.

If you can’t see through it, you’re all fools. He doesn’t care about Trek. It’s all about ripping off the fans.

Go ahead and waste your money and FINANCE this garbage. I hope they keep making more and more of them.

REAL TREK died decades ago.

1533. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 2, 2012

#1497 (The Art of Film Is Dead) wrote:
“Actress Alice Eve, will play a female Klingon commander (the first Klingon female in TREK movies)”

So I take it you’ve never seen The Search for Spock, The Final Frontier or Generations, eh?

1534. Devon - May 2, 2012

“1515. Guy Fawkes – May 2, 2012

Too bad they erased all of Trek to only do the next film rehashing Khan. So much for creativity.

You’re rehashing the same drivel of and over again, get over it dude.

1535. Landru's cousin, Dandru - May 2, 2012

Or The Undiscovered Country, for that matter. Four of the 11 films so far have had female Klingons in them–a third of all the films!

1536. Geodesic - May 2, 2012

Hey, everyone remember this? :)

http://www.theonion.com/video/trekkies-bash-new-star-trek-film-as-fun-watchable,14333/

1537. Devon - May 2, 2012

“Abrams DESTROYED TREK ONCE.”

Abrams had nothing to do with Voyager or Enterprise, sorry.

“REAL TREK died decades ago.”

Awww.

1538. jtd - May 2, 2012

“Brilliantly recreated characters of Starbuck and Baltar” in Galactica?

Yeah, this film is for you, boy. Right up your alley.

What’s next, Arnold Swarzhisname as Kor?
(Nah, Abrams would have had to actually have WATCHED a TOS episode like “Errand of Mercy” for THAT to happen!)…

Paris Hilton as Chapel?
I can see that. That is, I can see Abrams et al taking this route but I WON’T be seeing IT.

IS THERE NO DECENCY LEFT? IS NOTHING SACRED ANYMORE?

Well, in a couple weeks we’ll see how FANS welcome Tim Burton’s take on Dark Shadows. Burton turned the gothic soap INTO A FREAKIN COMEDY!

Maybe he’d do Trek justice on the big screen. Yeah. Let him maybe remake Helter Skelter with Johnny Depp as Charlie Manson. Make it a Comedy! Oooh, beautiful blood splattered all over the walls from Sharon Tate’s corpse! Yummiee!

I can proudly say that I’ve HAD IT with the bastardizations of old classic TV shows. Mission Impossible, The Wild, Wild West, The Hitch Hikers Guide to the Galaxy, Battlestar Galactica, The Prisoner…

Is it just me?

THIS IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!

I BEG EVERYONE HERE NOT TO SEE ANY MORE OF THESE MOVIES!

JD – Talking to you from Hell.

1539. jtd - May 2, 2012

ST XI was worse than Voyager and Enterprise COMBINED!

ABRAMS DOESN”T GET TREK. Get it?

It’s just a big FX thrill for kids.

As if you didn’t know it, the last so-called Trek movie was easily the most Juvenile “Trek” movie in the history of Trek films.

ST X: Nemesis looks CLASSY, SOPHISTICATED, and INTELLIGENT by comparison. It also didn’t violate any of the basic “rules” of the Trek Universe nor change or replace characters.

Put it another way: ABRAMS HAS REBOOTED TREK. And I mean that in a very BAD way.
Don’t give me any of this “alternate timeline” bull, either.

1540. Johnny - May 2, 2012

@Guy Fawkes 1515 – “Too bad they erased all of Trek to only do the next film rehashing Khan. So much for creativity.”

They DID NOT erase all of Trek! It’s a new timeline that runs parallel to the original one. What don’t you understand about that?

I also see you’re STILL using the word “rehash” despite the fact that it WON’T be a rehash. What don’t you understand about that?

The truth is you have NO IDEA if it will be a rehash or not. There are plenty of directions they can go with Khan WITHOUT rehashing Space Seed or Wrath of Khan.

What if the real Khan dies and Joachim takes the name? There goes your “whitewashing” argument.

Or what if Khan fills more of an “anti-hero” role? Not “the” bad guy… but rather he “becomes” one at some point?

1541. Devon - May 2, 2012

^^ Sour grapes. The film was more well liked and successful than almost any other Trek installment and you can’t change that.

1542. Devon - May 2, 2012

Sorry, my message was at JTD, not you Johnny.

1543. Devon - May 2, 2012

“1527. Geodesic – May 2, 2012

What exactly do the Khan-plainers prefer from the next movie? Reusing a character doesn’t necessarily mean rehashing a story.”

Exactly. That’s like saying “The Wrath of Khan” rehashed “Space Seed,” or every time Q was in an episode it was a “rehash” of “Encounter at Farpoint.” Some people simplify things WAAAAAY too much for their own good.

1544. AJ - May 2, 2012

What? Kirk, Spock & McCoy again? Can’t the writers think of something original? ;-)

1545. Travis - May 2, 2012

Ok people… lets stop complaining about KHAN because he is now the Villian… GET USED TO IT!! Now let me give you people myideas what might happen in Star Trek Sequel!

1) Star Trek: The game 2013: There has been talk that this game may give a hint who hijacked the Enterprise to the Sequel and they are right! get ready for major spoiler…. READY…. John Fredrick Paxton’s son is the leader of the Terra Prime terriorst group hell bent on destroying the Federation…1st clue

2)Khan: Something tells me that indeed Terra Prime is involved in finding SS Botany Bay and Paxton will be the ONE waking Khan… Not Kirk! however i do think the classic battle will be between Kirk and Khan and bring us to a different ” Space Seed ” story.

3) Spock Prime: Theres only one reason why JJ Abrams and Co. brought back Leonard Niomy… Khan! think about it there is one character who knew Khan inside and out and died and came back to life to tell the tale. If young Kirk and Spock need advice and guidance to defeating Khan it will be Spock Prime.

4) Klingons: The klingons get invovled because Paxton and Khan need a vessel and what a perfect vessel than a Klingon Bird of Prey that can cloke! Instead of this being a Federation matter now it has turned into a classic Klingon/Federation staredown that all you complaining fans wanted.

Stop complaining about how you want this movie to be! When i first told you that Kirk will meet Khan once again guess who was right… ME. Khan will put people in seats for this movie just like Star Trek II did… ENJOY :)

1546. Jack - May 2, 2012

Wasn’t a big fan of the Terra Prime stuff, personally. I’m really hopIng Weller’s playing someone else entirely.

1547. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 2, 2012

Yep, it just might be you, jtd.

Referring to JJ Abrams’ version as a crime against humanity is not only downright inane but insulting to all those millions of people around the world who are victims of war and persecution – you know, REAL crimes against humanity? How dare you come here ranting and screaming such bombastic rubbish? How dare you in another breath rant on about decency or about the sacred? Have you no decency?

What a disgraceful post.

Go back to Hell and stay quiet. I have no wish to listen to anyone claiming they come from Hell.

While on the subject of totally disrespectful and ignorant rants, I also have had a guts full with people ranting on about JJ Abrams…having “raped” Star Trek (occurring on another site recently). Not only is it truly ignorant, disrespectful, insulting towards the Bad Robot team and the cast and crew of the Star Trek movies, it is even more so towards the victims, as these assertions also trivialise the real trauma suffered by the real victims of real rape, another real crime against humanity.

1548. jtd - May 2, 2012

Read my review of Abram’s FIRST TREK ABOMINATION, Keachich.

I stand behind every word of it.

I’ve been a Trek fan since 1966.

1549. Weerd1 - May 2, 2012

There’s about nine people in America who stuck with Enterprise long enough to have any idea what Terra Prime is, or why Weller would be connected. I wouldn’t assume Weller’s presence indicates TP any more than David Warner played the same character in Star Trek V, VI, or on TNG.

I STILL think these spoilers reek of disinformation. Well played @boborci, well played…

1550. Jack - May 2, 2012

Orci’s here a lot (of course, he’s on other sites too) — I wonder if he wouldn’t slip it to Anthony were it not Khan, just so the site doesn’t take a hit if it’s wrong. Then again, Anthony probably wouldn’t be able to keep quiet on that either. Which makes me wonder, again, if this is being leaked, unofficially.

1551. Dennis Bailey - May 2, 2012

#1548: “I’ve been a Trek fan since 1966.”

So have I.

Loved Abrams’s last Star Trek movie, and really looking forward to this one. I’m sure that like the last it will be both excellent and successful. :-)

1552. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

Hm.

1553. Red Dead Ryan - May 2, 2012

jtd/Guy Fawkes

SHUT THE F*CK UP AND QUIT YOUR BITCHING!!!!!!!

1554. Trick - May 2, 2012

Hm, not much left to say that hasn’t already been said, some of which was best not said perhaps, ha.

I would have preferred to see Khan–if we were going to see Khan at all–in a third movie, after the crew had a few more missions–and one more movie–under their belt. I’d like to have seen them face Khan after establishing better the relationships that made us all keep watching TOS. Maybe the idea is that facing Khan will bring this about?

Can’t help but be interested in seeing what they have come up with, especially now that they have to get around a super white dude with the last name singh, whose visage is just as well-known as his name.

I’m sure they know what they are doing, but I am worried that they are doing Khan because he is known (and because they have a good story, I hope) while also forgetting that he is known, huge, brown, sweaty chesticles and all.

Nice to have Nimoy back (if he is and it serves the story) and even nicer to hear that we’ll see Klingons. Maybe this is all misdirection and the villain is arne darvin.

1411.
Like the face melting thought.

Perhaps the Klingons find Khan, join forces with him and let him–and his posse–loose inside of starfleet (starfleet uniform in leaked pics). Perhaps this happens after some facial reconstructive surgery so that he wont be recognized via historical records?

Maybe they’ll use some Ricardo photos for a before/after shot. Be a nice nod, if a bit convoluted for the non-initiated.

1555. jtd - May 2, 2012

My bitching is justified.

I have a full grasp of Gene Roddenberry’s vision of Star Trek.

I was there when it all started.

Intelligent writing, Science Fiction, Character development, Logic, Common Sense — ALL THESE THINGS ARE ALIEN TO JJ ABRAMS’ THINKING.

Then again if you think Transformers is on par with Star Trek XI, I’m obviously wasting my time here.

1556. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

541. Devon – May 2, 2012
^^ Sour grapes. The film was more well liked and successful than almost any other Trek installment and you can’t change that.

This is why George and Gracie need to be brought back for the 3rd film,
or better yet its not to late, to write a quick scene for trek 2013 where George and Gracie help defeat Khan, they can cast Lisa Lampanelli as Gracie and Zack Galafanakis as george

I am obviously just having fun with this :)

1557. Red Dead Ryan - May 2, 2012

#1555.

Go somewhere else and get lost. Jerks and losers like you aren’t welcome here. This site is for TRUE FANS. Not you. You’re nothing but a petulant little troll!

1558. Jack - May 2, 2012

1555. Jtd. Your opinion’s been noted and is now recorded here for semi-posterity.

1559. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1554 Nimoy is indicating via his twitter otherwise, It would be kind of sad though, if it really was legit and as a result of being leaked, JJ says screw it and nixes it.

Still I think the fact that Nimoy has now done several tweets in the last day leaning towards your jumping to conclusions angle that, he is not involved

1560. Sebastian S. - May 2, 2012

# 1538 jtd

” THIS IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY! ”
________________________________
:-o

As Shatner once said on SNL, “For crying out loud, it’s just a TV show!” ;-D

I’ll admit, I’m not over-the-moon with some of these spoilers either, but jeez; a little perspective here, OK? No one’s taking away your videos of the original episodes or the TOS movies, and I’d hardly call rebooting a TV show and not satisfying every single member of it’s target audience ‘a crime against humanity’. I wasn’t thrilled with “Nemesis” or “Insurrection” but I wouldn’t classify them as war crimes either…

No offense, but you might want to switch to decaf, jtd…. ;-)

1561. Basement Blogger - May 2, 2012

@ 1506

Dmduncan

The whole point of my post was to argue against those who doubt Anthony’s sources and the evidence that it’s Khan. No question that after just watching “Space Seed” that they should actually use an Indian. I’m just arguing what the writers might have to do to avoid that since they’ve cast Cumberbatch as Khan.

Let’s go over what Lt. McGivers in Space Seed says about Khan.

He’s (Khan) from the “Northern India area. I GUESS. PROBABLY A SIKH.” Like the caps, Dmduncan?. So that’s canon. It says he’s “probably” a Sikh. “Guess” and “probably” are the wiggle room. The writers are going to use this is an out to say it’s not mandatory he’s racially a Sikh.

But could a Sikh Indian look like a caucasian? Go over to Governor Nikki Haley’s (S.C.) website. Look at her picture. Look at the picture of her on her book. If you didn’t tell me that she was an Indian, I might guess caucasian, perhpas Italian. Now, I agree there are some pictures where she does look dark.

Like I said, Dad Test Tube (Khan’s father) might have his son genetically engineered to have lighter skin. In Space Seed, it’s unknown how they grew ‘em. Did Dad Test Tube. plant his space seed in a light skin woman? Sorry for that. Or did he use an egg from a caucasian woman and his own space seed? Sorry again. Maybe. Check out the lighter skin like Norah Jones. (Father was Shankar.)

You have to ask Bob Orci how come Cumberbatch is fair skin but has black hair. I guess we’ll have to wait for the DVD commentary in late 2013.

1562. IHATEANYTHINGFUNMADEAFTER1970 - May 2, 2012

Get off my lawn.

1563. Johnny - May 2, 2012

re: Nimoy’s “denial” tweets… I still think he’s only denying that HIS TWEET indicated he’s in the movie.

Remember… both trekmovie and aintitcool have sources that say Nimoy is in the movie. I’m assuming those “sources” are more than that initial Nimoy tweet.

1564. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

1561. Basement Blogger – May 2, 2012

Yeah but I think that’s a stretch, that they would do that. After all, they were considering Latinos up until Cumberbatch, so if it’s truly Khan then they were clearly thinking of following the tradition.

And there’s just a simpler way of dealing with the issue that’s established in Hollywood: For Iron Man 2 they replaced Terence Howard with Don Cheadle and the two look absolutely nothing like each other.

So what do you do as a viewer? You ignore the difference. You play along.

That will be much easier to do with Cumberbatch as Khan since nobody has played the role for 30 years, and many viewers have come to the franchise for the first time, and they will be put upon even less to ignore the difference between Montalban and Cumberbatch than viewers were with regard to the difference between Howard and Cheadle, who played the same role a mere few years apart from each other.

1565. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

DON’T YOU PEOPLE GET IT!?!?!?

We’re recreating the TOS episode Day of the Dove!

Guy Fawkes, JTD and several others here are those anger sucking energy creatures! Just as they fed off the crew of the Enterprise and the Klingons, they’re feeding off of you who respond angrily to them!

You’re only making them stronger.

Guy Fawkes, JTD, I’d like to thank you for your strident support of Star Trek! I love that you and others are so passionate! I LOVE YOU MAN! I wish I could give you big hugs! Your tireless efforts to keep Trek pure and honest are amazing, and if I could give you all a big trophy or some kind of award, I WOULD! But I can only thank you for your efforts and rehash my use of the word LOVE here. Because I do, guys, I REALLY DO LOVE YOU! You’re too amazing for words, really. My effusive blather is but a dim beacon to your magnificence!

COME ON EVERYBODY! Give Guy and JTD and their buddies some REALLY HUGE LOVE!

1566. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 2, 2012

“Intelligent writing, Science Fiction, Character development, Logic, Common Sense — ALL THESE THINGS ARE ALIEN TO JJ ABRAMS’ THINKING.”

Well, I guess it takes one to know one. And here I thought you were some spoiled 12 year old brat, not old enough to understand what real crime is or about what is really decent or sacred. I don’t need to read any of your reviews. Your posts are an abomination. Shame on you.

1567. Jack - May 2, 2012

Basement Blogger, nobody’s denying your evidence, buddy. :)

Some things you just can’t argue — some folks (me) will still think there’s an (increasingly slim) possibility that it might not be Khan until it’s officially confirmed. I think it’s probably Khan, too — but nothing’s fact until it’s confirmed by somebody on the production. I’ve been in news for years — “sources” can mean a lot of things.

Let us have a little hope while we still can :).

1568. AJ - May 2, 2012

Khan had fair white skin in TWOK, and a nice tan in Space Seed, so those beds on the Botany Bay were obviously dual-purpose.

Also, in fictional “1996,” looking back from “real” 2012, anyone of Khan’s caliber would have gone to school and university in the US or, even more likely, the UK. Think Eton or Harrow, and then Oxford/Cambridge; then listen to Cumberbatch speak. It fits perfectly.

It makes more sense to think/use one’s imagination than to succumb to the nostalgia we all feel for our beloved Sikh’s Mexican accent (and the actor who played him so well). I’m sure the film will throw a wrench into that argument, but it’s a logical speculation.

As Basement Blogger mentioned a few messages ago, there are individuals of Indian descent with lighter skin. It’s actually explainable without some kind of Michael Jackson skin-lightening back-story.

1569. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

1561. Basement Blogger – May 2, 2012

Yes, Governor Haley COULD pass for Italian. And though most people think I resemble Wolverine, I could also make a passable Khan Noonien Singh.

And NEITHER of us looks like we are in the same hereditary family as Cumberbatch.

But none of this matters. I’ll be a good audience member. If Cumberbatch is playing Khan, then I will just accept him as a successor to Montalban in the role the same way I accepted Don Cheadle as Rhodie in Iron Man 2, even though I really liked Terence Howard as Rhodie in Iron Man.

1570. Jack - May 2, 2012

Just my opinion, but why don’t we just let the guy (jdt) have his opinion. Disagree with his specific points (Trek 09 was lacking intelligence etc.), if you want… but, heck.

No need to patronize him either.

1571. Walter Kozlowski - May 2, 2012

First of all I love all things Trek! I noticed the last year or so friends and coworkers asking me when the next film will be out cause they really enjoyed the last one. Some are new Trek fans, some just like a good movie! I think The Alternate Universe is genius! How can you have a rehashing in a Alternate reality that poses the what if! I think Bob and Alex are right on!

1572. Jack - May 2, 2012

1569. dmduncan – May 2, 2012

Exactly.

If he is Khan, though, I’d expect to see some Indian actors/community groups a little frustrated — there are very few Hollywood roles for East Asians out there, arguably.

1573. jtd - May 2, 2012

Mr. Keachick – rose pinenut:

One of my comrades, a hardcore Trekker named James Dixon, committed suicide after seeing J.J. Abrams’ 2009 film. It was that bad.

I’m Dead Serious about this.

What I consider to be an “abomination” is to allow the likes of Abrams to tarnish the vision of Gene Roddenberry’s creation.

Randomly throwing stunts and adventure scenes and special effects on the screen accompanied by lens flare and a shaking camera does not make a good film–science fiction, Star Trek, or otherwise.

1574. Jack - May 2, 2012

Here we go…

1575. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

I love this. It’s getting surreal.

1576. CarlG - May 2, 2012

jtd, you NEED to have more RANDOM words CAPITALIZED IF you’re going to WIN US over to your SIDE of THE argument. Question JJ’s parentage too, that’s always a strong talking point.

@1570: Well, I certainly don’t want everyone here to march in lock-step to one opinion, but seriously? If he’s going splatter the internets with these self-parodying histrionic screeds, he should get ready for a little mockery from people who’ve kept a sense of proportion.

Ok, a lot of mockery. ;)

1577. bjdcharlie - May 2, 2012

Pointless post, move on.

Or if you are a glutton for punishment, i just want to say this genius Fawkes is on to something. He’s right about all this rehashing. Why on God’s green earth would you ever want to rehash this old boring Kirk, Spock, and McCoy thing? You’d think someone with a bit of sense would give it up after 79 of those miserable wastes of times? Ya know (i’m sure Fawkes would agree) those writers are crazy i mean they’re even calling it by the same name “Star Trek”. You’d think they’d get creative and stop all that rehashing for the millionth time and think of a new name for crying out loud. But I’m with you Fawkes, the rehashing has really gotten out of hand. It’s a shame we have to put up with these moron writers and this totally forgettable rehashing and do something new. I bet they’re gonna rehash that scow Enterprise too, and maybe those clueless inert idiots will finally get a clue on how to build a starship that’s different (i.e. not rehashed), not just an uncreative rehashed one. Dunno about the rest of youse but me and Fawkes are fed up with the constant rehashing. I dare those writers to rehash and make me have to write 150 additional pointless rehashings. The Wrath of hanK. Dickens was an irritating rehasher too, I bet you didn’t know that.

That, or we could just excited about the interesting character dynamics we could get from a Khan story. I watched Space Seed again today, paying especially close attention to Spock’s (Prime, of course) reactions to and impressions of Khan. Watch it again with that in mind, and your mind will run riot thinking of possible plot elements that could arise out of that knowledge. Note, for example, Spock’s disdain at Kirk and Scotty almost celebrating Khan. It was meant then to show the difference perhaps between an emotional versus a purely logical point of view on Khan. Spock Prime will carry all of that into our sequel, and even more interestingly, Spock Prime LOST HIS LIFE to Khan in TWOK, gave his all. “The needs of the 99% outweigh the needs of the 1%.” That’s just a little sample; my point is that Spock Prime’s experiences could suggest exciting story-telling opportunities. Even though I’m surprised they went with Khan, I think it’s a theme that hold much promise. Now will JJ confirm that Cumberbatch is Khan, please!

1578. CarlG - May 2, 2012

@1573: Your views intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

1579. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

1573: “Randomly throwing stunts and adventure scenes and special effects on the screen accompanied by lens flare and a shaking camera does not make a good film–science fiction, Star Trek, or otherwise.”

And it doesn’t make healthy people commit suicide. If you really had a friend who did that, he had much deeper problems that made the outcome of a Star Trek movie much more important to him than it should have been.

1580. Walter Kozlowski - May 2, 2012

Randomly throwing stunts and adventure scenes and special effects on the screen ! Sounds like every Science fiction film ever made!

1581. CarlG - May 2, 2012

@1579: Aww, come on. Don’t discourage him, I want to hear more about his made-up friend! :D

1582. Jack - May 2, 2012

1576. Heck, mock away. I just wasn’t feeling up to an epic keachick vs. jtd battle over who’s more outraged. One of them was going to accuse the other of molesting kittens and/or the Armenian genocide, at some point.

That was before I’d gotten snacks. Now I’m ready for anything.

1583. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

I’m eating a whole thing of sour cream and onion Pringles®! What are you guys eating while the show plays on?

1584. Jack - May 2, 2012

1578. Awesome. Ditto.

Oh, I looked it up — there was a page or two about a now-dead fan who’d been oft mocked by other fans. His corpse may have been eaten by rats. I couldn’t read it all and stay sane. Still, it would suck if it was true.

1585. Trick - May 2, 2012

1582.

Snacks are awesome. I think that is something we can all get behind, yes?

1586. Walter Kozlowski - May 2, 2012

I take a large coke,a large popcorn and a box of Zoloft! LOL

1587. The Art of Film is Dead - May 2, 2012

#1505, 1533, 1535

I didn’t say first female Klingon.  I know we have seen female Klingons in power.  I meant a female with her own ship as a major, legitimate commander (or the Klingon equivalent), and major character in a TREK movie.  Lursa and B’Etor were renegades and did not represent the empire in TNG/Generations; Azetbur was a politician in TUC; Valkris was a lover of Kruge in TSFS; Vixis was a minor character, hardly developed and did not command her own ship in TFF.

1588. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

1581. CarlG – May 2, 2012

@1579: Aww, come on. Don’t discourage him, I want to hear more about his made-up friend! :D

***

You may be right. He calls himself jtd, and his friend who committed suicide is James Dixon. James T Dixon, perhaps? jtd?

1589. CarlG - May 2, 2012

@1583: Well, I was gonna stick with popcorn, but since jtd actually had the temerity to play the faux suicide card over a movie he didn’t like, I think I might just head right for the liquor cabinet and and pour me something Scotty-approved.

Or, I’ll just let him self-destruct overnight and giggle at him over breakfast. Win-win!

1590. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

1573. jtd – May 2, 2012

jtd, are we…speaking…to James Dixon…now? Does James have…something to say to us?

1591. CarlG - May 2, 2012

@1587: K’heylr was an interesting character too — a unorthodox Klingon lady of authority, but sort of an outsider at the same time.

1592. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

My Pringles® are gone already! But I have some Reeses® Big Cups in the freezer! Everybody take a break, I’ll be right back!

1593. Ahmed - May 2, 2012

The discussions is getting really nasty around here, I think that everybody need to cool down.

1594. Jack - May 2, 2012

1593. You’re probably right.

1595. Cygnus-X1 - May 2, 2012

Man.

What a bummer.

All of the troubling rumors confirmed in one fell swoop.

It’s only their second picture and already they’re ripping off the best of Trek past.

So, do Chris Pine and the gang travel back to 20th Century San Francisco for a comedic interlude too, or…is that it for the recycling road-tested Trek concepts? Maybe McCoy goes mad and runs wildly through a time-portal back to 20th Century San Fran. See what I did there? I mixed two past Trek plot ideas into a “creative” new one.

And hey, the Klingons, ay? How ’bout those Klingons…

Haven’t seen enough of them over the years. From TOS to TNG to DS9 to Enterprise…I never get tired of those Klingons. And by never, I mean long ago.

Any new characters in this movie? I’m just asking. Anything slightly outside the box? Anything…dare I say…original?

Well, it’s all up to this Cumberbun guy now that everyone’s raving about. If he’s compelling, like Heath Ledger in Dark Knight, then this sequel will probably be worthwhile even with a mediocre story and unoriginal concepts.

But all of this stealing from the shoulders of giants just rubs me the wrong way. If they do an injustice to Montalban’s Khan, I’m gonna be pissed. And not in the British sense, but in the ugliest of ugly American senses.

Effing pissed.

1596. The Original Spock's Brain - May 2, 2012

This Mexican, for one, does mind BC in the role. He has the potential to recreate an iconic character for a new generation of fans who aren’t that familiar with TOS.

1597. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

Well, I was all preachy early on about being respectful and all, and while I still believe that, and am trying to model it, I have to admit that the fervency on both sides is fascinating. I’m not trying to belittle it.

I mean, I love Star Trek (just click on my name and see) but I can’t get that upset about this. It’s crazy to assume the worst just because they’re doing something you wouldn’t. There are a hundred different ways to do another Khan story. I’ll save my scorn or praise ’til after I’ve seen the film, and for now I’ll try to be optimistic. To me, that’s the healthiest and smartest way to do it, but hey, everybody has his or her style.

It’s certainly making for an interesting sociological experiment in observant pathology.

1598. Jack - May 2, 2012

jtd. Sorry for being a dick — you have every right to your opinion.

1599. The Original Spock's Brain - May 2, 2012

I meant DOES’NT mind SORRY. DUH!

1600. jtd - May 2, 2012

jtd is used to honor his memory, or if you prefer:

http://jamestdixon.last-memories.com/condolence

I especially recommend the memories section.

Suicide or Murder. The end result is the same.
Some Star Trek fans are more SERIOUS than others over the material.
Some take sacred blood oaths.

MY family name you would not be able to pronounce.
MY actual initials could be misinterpreted.
MY nickname is about as common as Jack.

It sounds better than “Shilliam Watner” or “Jack Ass” don’t ya think?

I can really appreciate how a thread can be flipped around here.
This is about Abrams’ filthy take on Trek. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Now I will put forth a question: What is the difference between a Star WARS fan and a Star TREK fan?
Answer: A Star WARS fan won’t sit back, shut up, and TAKE IT when an important piece of their film fan heritage is Screwed with.
- Who fired first, Greedo or Han?
BIG OUTCRY–even against The Creator!
See what I mean?

Star TREK fans, on the other hand, have become a bunch of domesticated, in-bred, couch-potato, paid-off Wimps who are willing to take ANY bastardization of “their” universe, if Holy Paramount Pictures SAYS SO!

Paramount will make a change. Some speaker for them will say it’s freaking CANON NOW. And you’ll all just smile, sit back, and pat each other on the back for Doubting!

If you’re FANS you’ll STAND UP for Star Trek!
Or are the Star WARS fans BETTER THAN YOU?!?!

1601. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

I WOULD like to say that I have many friends from the Middle East, and have met many others through them, and some of them are darker and some of them are lighter skinned.

It seems premature to condemn the use of Cumberbatch until one sees the circumstances and explanation. That can only be done after seeing the film. Anything else is supposition.

supposition
noun
belief, surmise, idea, notion, suspicion, conjecture, speculation, inference, theory, hypothesis, postulation, guess, feeling, hunch, assumption, presumption.

And supposition is not fact. Supposition backed by fervency and belligerency is not an argument based on logic and reason. It is merely strong, misdirected emotion, backed by nothing but opinion, with nothing resembling facts.

So it’s not even really an argument. Which is why I won’t directly interact with these people unless they approach me decently, and present something other than invective.

1602. dmduncan - May 2, 2012

Alrighty then!

1603. Ahmed - May 2, 2012

@1600. jtd

You know that none of the rumors were confirmed by the writers or Abrams ?

As you; I’m not very excited about bringing Khan again, but really, no need at all to be aggressive or hostile against others. We need just to express out view in civil way.

If there is one thing I enjoy about Star Trek, is the idea that humanity in the future managed to overcome their differences & to cooperate as a race.

1604. Cygnus-X1 - May 2, 2012

1049. boborci – May 1, 2012

—-1045 we can do better than the poll indicates. I wont rest until expectations are so low that everyone can only be pleased.—-

I’d say you’re well on your way there.

But you might regret the bar-lowering strategy if it disenchants people from paying to see the movie.

Then again Spiderman was one of the biggest blockbusters of all time, so you probably have nothing to worry about in terms of quantity of ticket sales. Unless perhaps there’s an even better-looking special FX movie up against you.

1605. Red Shirt Diaries - May 2, 2012

Just an observation,

“Guy Fawkes” has been consistently posting the same hate on nuTrek since this story first came out two days ago up until post #1515. However, at that point, he disappears, and this “new” poster called “jtd” all of a sudden starts consistently posting very similar nuTrek hate posts starting with #1532 and continuing through this evening.

Very interesting!

1606. jtd - May 2, 2012

Yeah, let’s sit back and enjoy the ride…

Anyone remember Will Smith playing Captain James T. West in “Wild, Wild West” some years ago? I bet he’d make a fine Captain James T. Kirk, too.

Paris Hilton as Christine Chapel? Sure!

Ah but this is all an alternate universe/timeline thingy. That’s Fine. That’s Okay.

Where and when are you going to draw the line?
HOW FAR must it deviate from what fans like myself would call “Classic Star Trek”??

How many times are you going to say to yourselves: “As long as Paramount makes money on it, Star Trek will stay alive, and these films will help indoctrinate newer, younger fans into Star Trek.”

Must it fall to the level of a Power Rangers movie or a Cartoon?
IMHO–and I am Not alone here–ST XI was just that.

1607. Thomas - May 2, 2012

If recycled plot elements weren’t heedlessly driven into the ground, it just wouldn’t be Star Trek.

1608. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 2, 2012

There is a worrying pattern developing here, though many fans were warning us of this after the 2009 film, albeit prematurely I felt at the time. After all I mostly enjoyed it. But it’s becoming grudgingly clear to me that this new team may not respect the previous material and are increasingly insensitive and tone deaf when it comes to the concerns of the fans. Now I realize the reality of the market and the need to profit, bit can’t creativity be part of the equation? It’s as if accountants came up with this checklist of plot contrivances. After the long wait I was hoping for more.

1609. Yammer - May 2, 2012

I think I get it…initially disappointed but this JJverse trek does cover versions of Trek tropes, sexed up and jauntily paced, with so far terrific results.

1610. Basement Blogger - May 2, 2012

By the way watching “Space Seed” again made me like the episode more than I did in the past. I wasn’t a big fan of the episode. It just struck me as Khan is just plain evil and Kirk is just plain good. But as I watched it, a smile crossed my face. This show is pretty good. Here’s why.

1. Ricardo Montalban

Wow. He’ s just great. Regal Tyrannical. Merciless. Totally believable as a man whose goal in life is to rule others.

2. Dialogue

There are no lines that made me groan. It’s actually the stuff around the table that’s discussed between the characters that grabbed my interest. The discussion about the Eugenics War. Spock’s confrontation at dinner. Was Kirk really interested in Khan’s background at dinner or was he sizing him up. I mean maybe Lt. McGivers was right to apologize for Khan’s treatment at dinner.

3. Action

Okay, the engine room fight between Kirk and Khan was good BUT you could clearly tell half of it was done by stuntmen. And Shatner’s stuntman didn’t look anything like Kirk. Maybe the art of editing was primitive back then.

Khan says he’s five times stronger than a human. Yep. He breaks open the locked door. Whacks a guard so he flies about five yards. Wow. And does Khan have his neck pinch thing?

The most tense scene is when Khan makes the crew watch Khan being suffocated to death. Again great acting form Montalban.

4. Sexy Time

In the commentary to TWOK, Nicholas Meyer comments that fans questioned whether the prodigous chest of Khan was Montalban’s or make up magic. You get the answer in Space Seed. ladies. Montalban is indeed “cut.”

And Lt. McGivers (Madlyn Rhue) is gorgeous and sexy. There’s real chemistry between her and Khan. Smoldering. I’m not a fan of using the Starfleet mini-skirt for the movies but seeing it on the TOS turns the women into sex objects. Va-va-va-voom.

5. Things to explore in the new movie.

Well, I would like ideas with my action. Since the movie will have more time than an episode, maybe they could take a quick flashback to the Eugnics War. What is the state of the Vulcans? What is the state of the Federation? I imagine there’s plenty of time for some thoughtful dialouge too. No need to tell Kirk and Spock’s backstory. I just hope thisnew movie is deeper as promised. .

1611. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

1610. Basement Blogger – Kirk wining the fight by beating down Khan with a flimsy plastic tube was terrible. But at least is wasn’t a stuntman… And they never even occupied the same room in TWOK.

I think these two need a REAL fight!

1612. jtd - May 2, 2012

General Notes…

1. I’m not “Guy Fawkes” and if you bothered to study our two typing styles you’d notice a difference…

2. I am speaking out of my commitment to Star Trek… I don’t want to see it go the way of other 60s TV revisions/remakes…

3. There is nothing worse than seeing something you’re a fan of become dumbed-down, rehashed, and aimed at the lowest-common denominator…

4. Red-Shirt Diaries: You have an interesting definition of “hate” in regards to standing up for Star Trek… If someone dressed your sister up like a man, would you smile and call it a “re-imagining” for a new generation?

5. I am Upset… I understand the psyche of Abrams and his crew… I know their backgrounds and batting records…I can forsee the direction he’d take it… It would not be pleasant to first generation fans over the age of 50… Maybe the 5-year olds might giggle and enjoy it…

6. We’ve got to stop him before it’s too late…

1613. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

1610. Basement Blogger – Forgot to mention that I watched Space Seed when it first aired, so I guess I was around 8 years old. I’m a little over 50 now, but even back then the stuntmen bothered me, and I thought it was so lame that Kirk beat Khan the way he did.

It was a good episode, but not one of the best. I wouldn’t mind seeing them do it differently. I really want Kirk to have a good, physical, self-defining moment and do some serious ass-kicking, on Khan and others. He needs that. He was beaten up too much in the first film, and saved too often.

1614. jtd - May 2, 2012

moauvian waoul – aka: seymour hiney – Ah, the voice of reason here at last!

1615. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

OK ya’ll! Gotta go to bed! Love the bunch of ya! I’ll come back tomorrow and see how many hundreds of posts have happened since this one. Have a good night and tomorrow!

1616. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Having seen, Cumberbatch in the NTLive production of Frankenstein as well as his performance on sherlock holmes. I just dont see him having the same presence and Gravtis as Montalban.
There is charm and sophistication that Ricardo in every role he did that Cumberbatch just hasnt shown yet.

1617. Shilliam Watner - May 2, 2012

1608. moauvian waoul – sorry, just noticed your comment and the the nice, wonderful, measured and logical tone in which it was framed. I don’t share your concern, but can’t know for sure ’til I see it. Still, I understand your concern and praise the way in which you made it known.

You, sir, are a scholar and a gentlemen.

I’d like to add though, that I don’t think the inclusion of Khan precludes creativity. I see no evidence of that at all. Still, that is your opinion and I’ll honor it.

1618. Johnny - May 2, 2012

@1612 jtd

5. 5. I am Upset… I understand the psyche of Abrams and his crew… I know their backgrounds and batting records…I can forsee the direction he’d take it… It would not be pleasant to first generation fans over the age of 50… Maybe the 5-year olds might giggle and enjoy it…

But guess what? I (and plenty of other people around here) know lots of “first generation fans over the age of 50″ who absolutely LOVE the new movie. It really hasn’t been dumbed down to reach the lowest common denominator. At the heart of ST09, there is a classic tale of unlikely friendship and race relations. If you think about it, there really wasn’t much room for anything more “intellectual” than that — the movie was about introducing (or “re-introducting” to the old fans) the characters and universe. Now that that’s been done and the audience has been “acclimated”, the sequel can branch out and include some of the classic Star Trek themes and ideals. I believe Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman have even said as much.

1619. Red Shirt Diaries - May 2, 2012

I think we have a couple of clowns here who have multiple “clones” posting hate on nuTrek. Can I prove it? No! Do I think it is likely? Yes!

1620. Red Shirt Diaries - May 2, 2012

@1612 “We’ve got to stop him before it’s too late…”

This uncomfortably sounds to me like a public threat of harm?

Not cool. No, this is the kind of unintelligent discoourse that a belligerant “LOSER” would resort to.

It would be the understatment of the decade to say that I am way beyond unimpressed with this clown.

1621. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 2, 2012

1614. jtd – ” waoul – aka: seymour hiney – Ah, the voice of reason here at last!”

Who…me? (looks around the room) Not so sure about that, but it’s the thought that counts. ;)

1622. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Another reason for questioning the use of khan now is based on comments by Abrams and co who have in interviews said the crew will still arent quite yet to where they will be when TOS began. Nu Kirk isnt ready yet to have a show down with Khan If thats the case.

And also i am going back to my comments i made long ago, using khan for the second of these new star trek films is really asking for comparisons to twok even though its a differnt storyline and circumstances.

I would feel less hesitant about khan if he was say a force in the third film or if the crew has gotten to a point where they are on par with their prime universe counterparts

1623. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1619 I am pretty sure anthony can tell based on the posters ip addresses or what not

1624. K-7 - May 2, 2012

Re: Red Shirt. Yea, I think a number of people here have noticed that a lot of these ultra-negative posts look alike. It is telling to me how quickly this JTD character responded super quickly to you by saying “if you bothered to study our two typing styles you’d notice a difference,” as if it was deliberate to try to provide two different writing styles to avoid detection. That is pretty lame, but kind of funny as well. I’d say this guy is probably around 14 or 15.

1625. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 2, 2012

1617 Shilliam Watner – “You, sir, are a scholar and a gentlemen.”

I never get tired of hearing that. Actually I’m a repeat offender on this site, as many here can testify.

“I’d like to add though, that I don’t think the inclusion of Khan precludes creativity. I see no evidence of that at all. Still, that is your opinion and I’ll honor it.”

Thank you sir, and thank you for responding to my post. I see where you’re coming from….but this one I find particularly hard to swallow. We shall see. I do hope you are right and these fears are unwarranted. Have a good night.

1626. Red Shirt Diaries - May 2, 2012

#1623. You are definitely legit, my friend. Have seen your posts many times on these boards. I was not referring to you by any means.

1627. Cygnus-X1 - May 2, 2012

Friends! Friends! We mustn’t devolve into hating one another!

We should unite in hatred of the recycled concepts and lack of originality described in the above spoilers!

1628. Cygnus-X1 - May 2, 2012

I keeeeeeed!!! ;-)

1629. SoonerDave - May 2, 2012

@1610

Agree completely about the dialog in “Space Seed,” which was some of the best TOS writing combined with really judicious direction that made Shatner’s Kirk really strong in that episode. He delivered powerful dialog in a very reserved, measured, non-Shatneresque way. That dinner conversation was really compelling, because it drew out the conflict in about three different directions…Kirk vs Khan militarily, Spock vs Khan intellectually, Khan versus, well, both of them.

We saw that same caliber of writing in several other first-season episodes like “Balance of Terror,” “Court Martial,” “City on the Edge of Forever,” and even “Mudd’s Women.” I think its also why many have held the first season of TOS to be the best – the writing was arguably the best of its three seasons, and it made stories that could easily have gone over the edge very credible. Heck, I’ll watch COTEOF just to hear Spock’s recitation of the way McCoy’s intrusion altered Earth history into WWII. The dialog, and Nimoy’s delivery, were just terrific.

Anyway, didn’t intend to blather quite this much, but its great to hear someone else appreciate great writing and great dialog. And, then, we have “Spock’s Brain…”

As for all the unrest here about JJTrek 2, can’t we all just let it unfold and enjoy it? Am I crazy about a prospective Khan story? Honestly, no, but it is what it is, and I’m hardly going to trash the thing a year before its release. It is all just entertainment, isn’t it?

1630. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

I guess the question remaining now is are we going to see a new klingon character or are we going to get a new take on one of the prior Trek klingons.

1631. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

And who is the actor(s) portraying those Klingon(s)

1632. AJ - May 2, 2012

jtd:

I would request that you leave us alone.

You say your friend committed suicide after/because of ST09, but on your ‘tribute’ site, you mention your nick’s namesake ‘James Tiberius Dixon,’ dob 1947, was assassinated because of some UFO thing.

We get people like you on the site from time to time, and surely, as it is late at night, some people post drunk, and the unfortunate bi-polars and manics who cannot sleep sometimes come out with severe cases of reality detachment. It’s in my family, and I see it here. Right now.

Get some rest.

1633. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Hoping that Victor Garbor was secretively brought back in as one of those Klingons, since he was cut from Trek 09

1634. NCM - May 2, 2012

1588. dmduncan – May 2, 2012

1581. CarlG – May 2, 2012

@1579: Aww, come on. Don’t discourage him, I want to hear more about his made-up friend! :D

***

You may be right. He calls himself jtd, and his friend who committed suicide is James Dixon. James T Dixon, perhaps? jtd?

1589. CarlG – May 2, 2012

@1583: Well, I was gonna stick with popcorn, but since jtd actually had the temerity to play the faux suicide card over a movie he didn’t like, I think I might just head right for the liquor cabinet and and pour me something Scotty-approved.

Or, I’ll just let him self-destruct overnight and giggle at him over breakfast. Win-win!

1590. dmduncan – May 2, 2012

1573. jtd – May 2, 2012

jtd, are we…speaking…to James Dixon…now? Does James have…something to say to us?

———————————————

I’m not the morality police, but if someone’s distraught enough to make up such stuff, maybe you ought to just leave him alone if you’re not inclined toward empathy. DM, you once took inspiration from the Dalai Lama to respond to trolling. What a stunning transformation.

1635. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 2, 2012

Khan and Klingons …united by …Genesis…? Oh dear. T-That couldn’t be… It just couldn’t …right?

1636. Ahmed - May 2, 2012

The truth will be out in just one year & 15 days from now.

Til then, we have plenty of other excellent movies to look for, such as Prometheus.

1637. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

Boborci, how about a small cameo of Brent Spriner as Arick Soong. even if it were just a video recorded durring the time frame of enterprise, played back to provide info to kirk and spock about the augments and genetic supermen

1638. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

1637 and Skyfall :)

1639. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 2, 2012

Hey guys, we’re all passionate about Trek or we wouldn’t be here, posting at this ungodly hour. Some are simply more passionate than others.

1640. dtj - May 2, 2012

My wife and I conceived our child due to Trek 2009. Trek 2009 was so wonderful, that is caused us to add a new life to this world. Thank you JJ and Supreme Court!

1641. K-7 - May 2, 2012

Looks like jtd has stopped posting tonight…here’s wondering if his mommy just tucked him in? LOL

1642. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 2, 2012

speaking of skyfall, thats a great example of a production sharing quite a bit of info of the film making process without giving away what the story and surprises actually are, I kind of wish that this team would be the same. Skyfall it should be noted is still filming and its comming out this year :)

1643. Jack - May 2, 2012

1634. That’s what I was thinking… we (myself included) were kind of ganging up on the guy.

1644. The Art of Film is Dead - May 2, 2012

#1502

I’m thinking he’s not going to be the Paxton of the Enterprise episode in question, afterall, this is the B-universe version with similar traits, but not precisely the same phobias. Perhaps not even the same character at all.

1645. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

It seems that Team Abrams wil be living in the shadows of the great classics of TOS.

Instead of using the alternate universe preminse set up n the last movie to tell new stories free from the shackles of canon, we are going to get the classics retold.

After this then Star Trek XIII will prob feature the return of the Domsday Machine and Star Trek XIV will feature Orci and Kurtzman retelling Spock’s brain.

I am sure Star Trek XII will be a great and they will prove me wrong but come on these guys are doing what they critiscised Rick Berman for, rehasing old ideas.

1646. captain_neill - May 2, 2012

Star Trek Nemesis- almost a remake of Wrath of Khan in plot points and in themes

Star Trek XI- nods and winks to Khan and Nero was a poor man’s Khan.

Star Trek XII- alternate Khan.

Khan is one of my favs and along with First Contact the top Trek movie, yet there is so many other directions the next movie could have gone.

Cumberbatch could have been a great new villain but now he is just going to be in Montalban’s shadow.

1647. danielcraigsmywookiebitchnow - May 3, 2012

1644 remember the events of terra prime still took place in this universe, as the timeline didnt split until many years after Enterprise.

1648. Elle - May 3, 2012

This movie will be worse than the first one. Terrible. It just sounds terrible. Rehashing Khan Noonien Singh? is this a joke?

1649. Geodesic - May 3, 2012

We don’t even know if these ‘spoiler’s are true.

By the way, there will always be people that insist that an iconic role can never be recast.

How many people freak out each time there is a new James Bond?

Did anyone follow GWTDTT recently? I saw a lot of ‘fans’ freaking out over the Noomi Rapace vs Rooney Mara comparisons.

1650. captain_neill - May 3, 2012

Is there an original writer left in Hollywood these days?

1651. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - May 3, 2012

There isn’t a writer alive that could appease to everyone of us. All this talk about rehashing… Let’s be real. JJ, and crew do not make bank by retelling old stories, or robbing the well of it’s old ideas. Star Trek 2009 was unique, original, and respectful of the original format. Why should we expect anything different?
Bottom line is: If you didn’t like the first movie then what in the !@#$ are you doing here?
In addition, I would like to thank the facilitators of this site, and all you wonderful, intelligent people that post regularly, and rarely. I feel lucky to read your thought provoking ideas, and connect with like-minded Star Trek lovers.
And finally: Gene Roddenberry’s vision, with all it’s fundamental morality, has become more than just a show about a “Wagon train to the stars”; the message that it delivers is almost- to me- a sort of religion. It’s a nice, and comfortable place where I can relax, imagine, and be taken to a wondrous universe. Thank you all for helping me get there, and for keeping the vision alive.

1652. Red Shirt Diaries - May 3, 2012

Sure, jtd is a tremendous fantasy writer, and has been fully demonstrated on this comments board. But if you address him please note that he prefers that you call him by his pen name, Guy Fawkes.

1653. Geodesic - May 3, 2012

I don’t think Star Trek (2009) went far enough. They should have destroyed more planets than just Vulcan. And killing Spock’s mom wasn’t enough either. Every character from the Star Trek universe (other than the bridge officers on the Enterprise) should be killed. All planets, ships, and anomalies from previous movies and shows should also be destroyed.

1654. Devon - May 3, 2012

1645 “Instead of using the alternate universe preminse set up n the last movie to tell new stories free from the shackles of canon, we are going to get the classics retold.”

It is absolute amazing that in over 1500 comments, several of which have accurately cleared this up, that you STILL said this? Why? Please do tell us, in great detail, what story is being “retold” here.

1655. Geodesic - May 3, 2012

Stories consists of plot, theme, and characters. Using characters from other stories doesn’t not mean that this is the same story or a rehash.

1656. Red Shirt Diaries - May 3, 2012

@1646 “Cumberbatch could have been a great new villain but now he is just going to be in Montalban’s shadow.”

Memo to Heath Ledger?

Memo to Michael Gambon?

Memo to Dick Sargent?

Memo to Tom Baker?

Memo to Astin Kusher…..no, scratch that. LOL

1657. K-7 - May 3, 2012

I does seem nowt that jtd….whoops, I mean Guy Fawkes, has been tucked into his bed — that things are more relaxed and normal discussion and disagreements are back now. I guees we get a repreive when the kid is in school and when he gets put to bed at night. Gotta love teens though — very passionate and pretty fracked up.. I remember those day, wiht the hormones and not fitting in, and having some pretty messed up ideas. We should cut the guy a bit of slack — he is actually growing up here stil.

1658. captain_neill - May 3, 2012

Point taken and Tom Baker is my favourite Doctor but the format of Doctor Who allows each actor to be different as the character changes due to the regeneration.

Heath Ledger I don’t compare to Jack Nicholson, they are two totaly different takes on the character, that is what I am hoping for here.

I don’t want to be saying Cumberbatch will be better than Montalban but I also do agree that it is unfair to say Cumberbatch will pale in comparison to Montalban as I am sure he wil do a god job. Just he is going to get comparisons where as a new villain he could have been his own man. Know what I mean.

In the end of the day it will be like the new cast, great actors and do honour to the characters I love but I still prefer the originals. Pine and Quinto are great but Shatner and Nimoy will always be Kirk and Spock to me.

This doesn’t mean I dislike the new cast, far from it but they are not the ones I grew up loving and it is like any Bond fans who see Connery as the definitive Bond.

Hope this makes sense.

1659. The Art of Film is Dead - May 3, 2012

#1647

Yep. Forgot. My bad.

1660. captain_neill - May 3, 2012

1651

it’s great to see that Roddenberry’s ideal is still there, this hope for the futire that things will be better and we have overcome our difference is a philosophy I liked. Yet at the same time tel interesting stories about alien cultures and adventure stores. Yet with Trek instead of killing the guy at the end you realise that this was not a villain, but he actually thought he was doing right thing. Like Arena. the Gorn attacked the colony of Cestus III as it saw humans as the invaders and Kirk at the end of the fight when he defeated the Gorn said he would not kill him and understood why the Gorn did what i did.

This is a classic trait of Trek. I also love encountering no coporeal entities, creature beyond us. To me Trek is true Sci Fi

I was worried that vision was going to be lost with the reboot.

1661. Aurore - May 3, 2012

1528. VZX – May 2, 2012
1510: Or maybe Cumby will not play the character Khan, but play with the action figure Kobra Khan! In the movie….

Ok, lame. I know.
______________________

:)

No. Not “lame” at all, VZX.
You’re actually onto something, there. I can feel it.

Mr. Cumberbatch will.. “BE”…Kobra Khan.
All of the evidence points to this; he is a phenomenal actor whose voice quality is exceptional. The man can play ANYTHING!!!

What we will enjoy , in a few months, is a The Conscience of The King remake of sort.

Benedict Cumberbatch will play the charismatic leader of a Shakespearean troupe not afraid to experiment and go into the skin of improbable roles, from time to time…

1662. CmdrR - May 3, 2012

Fools! That’s MADELEINE Khan.
Cumberbatch will do most of the movie dressed as Marlene Dietrich. “Oh, Shewiff. A Wed Wose!”

Good think I’m here to keep you jokers in line.

1663. DiscoSpock - May 3, 2012

1612 – jtd

You need to stop talking for the older generations of Trek fans. Many of us LOVED the Abrams film, even with the flaws and failings that have been endlessly recounted around here.

You have no special knowledge of Roddenberry’s vision just because you started watching in 1966. I started watching in 1972. So frakkin’ what?! That doesn’t give us any special insight or wisdom, it just makes us older than the younger people. THAT’S ALL.

You don’t know the “psyche” of Abrams and crew, either, so get off it. Stop spouting off as if you are the ONLY. VOICE. OF. REASON.

You complain about the immaturity of Abrams’ Trek, yet your comments are the most childish ones around here. You must be at least 47 or 48 years old to have been alive and watching in 1966, probably well over 50. You should have developed some emotional maturity, self restraint, and sense of perspective by now. Clearly you haven’t.

You’ve made your contempt for Abrams and everything he and his crew does, so why not give us all a rest and stop commenting until you have something new to say? Oh, and stop the “I’ve got such deep insight into all of this and you’re all such children” attitude. It makes you look like a fool.

1664. DiscoSpock - May 3, 2012

1662 – At least, if it’s Madeline Kahn, the movie will end on a high note. ;)

1665. DiscoSpock - May 3, 2012

1622- “Another reason for questioning the use of khan now is based on comments by Abrams and co who have in interviews said the crew will still arent quite yet to where they will be when TOS began. Nu Kirk isnt ready yet to have a show down with Khan If thats the case.”

Exactly! That ‘what if’ is the basis of all kinds of great writing. In this case, “What if Kirk and crew encountered Khan before they were ready for him?” That’s an intriguing starting place, and since this is the “dark” middle movie (as Orci and others have said, they’re looking to the great sequel/trilogy successes), then maybe they LOSE this first encounter with Khan…or at least it goes badly.

Having too-young Kirk & crew meet the already-fully-himself Khan puts the conflict into a totally new light.

1666. Aurore - May 3, 2012

“Good think I’m here to keep you jokers in line.”
__________

No, no, no, no,no,no, no…

Unfortunate choice of word; wrong franchise.

I know what you meant, but, you should have said it differently!
Haven’t you followed the debates, here?

Get your facts straight, man!

We are Khan-wannabes.

1667. Charles d'Ile de Jouets d'Inadapté - May 3, 2012

In an era when we are suffering from the worst economic crisis in almost 100 years, increasing polarization of those with opposing viewpoints, denial, stagnation, and less civility, Roddenberry’s vision of a hopeful future is needed now more ever. Perhaps even more than it was in the turbulent Sixties.

It would be wonderful if the Bad Robot team surprised us with something truly special. Inspirational even.

I like Cumberbatch, but a Brit playing an Indian? It strikes me as a bit insensitive. Like hiring a Turk to play a Greek or an Israeli to play a Palestinian. C’mon guys, Bollywood is full of wonderful talent.

1668. Salt Monster - May 3, 2012

1507 — This is what I meant when I said “No shots fired”

From a quote by Mr Nimoy:

“The project I am most proud in connection with Star Trek I would say will be Star Trek IV, The Voyage Home, a film that I wrote and directed. And there is no violence, there is no bad person in Star Trek IV, there is no heavy, there is no villain. The drama grows out of misunderstanding, lack of information, lack of education. But there is no evil intent, there is no one trying to do anything nasty or negative to anybody. I am very proud of that. I think there is something to be said about the fact that as far as I know it is still the most successful of all Star Trek films, of all ten. It is my favorite, too”

1669. Salt Monster - May 3, 2012

1456. Planet Pandro

And like a nitpicker, you totally missed the point.

1670. CmdrR - May 3, 2012

1668 – Good luck.
Yes, I too grew up on TOS and value creativity.
But, this is Hollywood we’re talking about.
Transformers is a franchise! Not just a guh-zilliion-dollar movie, but a whole frakkin’ franchise.
There WILL be villains. There WILL be explosions. There will be NO deep thoughts.

For fun, read Tales from Development Hell. Have a tissue handy. You’ll need it, as they describe the reasons movies are what they are.

1671. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

1667-
“It would be wonderful if the Bad Robot team surprised us with something truly special. Inspirational even.”

Yes it would indeed. I’m starting to recover from the ‘blow’ of this ‘news’ and starting to hope again.

IDIC

IDIC

IDIC

:-)

1672. Aurore - May 3, 2012

“There WILL be villains. There WILL be explosions…”
__________

…Ahem… I like interesting villlains…I do not mind one explosion or…twelve…..

But, I can’t accept the FACT that the words joker and khan are now interchangeable. Check in any dictionary . I’m telling the truth.

I would not lie about such a thing…

:)

1673. CmdrR - May 3, 2012

You would think/hope that The Prime Directive (in addition to being a neat piece of philosophy) was and can be again… a great source of drama.

You would think/hope that wars… with or without wicked cool new renditions of the D-7 Klingon Battle Cruiser (no more frakkin’ whimpy Bird-of-Prey-only-holds-12-guys-and-one-hates-Trek-and-is-waiting-for-a-callback-from-Reinhold-Weege)… would offer an excellent platform for character development.

You would think/hope all of this can come together and make a Trek that’s both mass-appealing and good brain chow.

I guess we’ll find out in one year!!

1674. Aurore - May 3, 2012

“Villlain(s)” … that’s how you write the word these days.
You’ll find it in any dictionary, too. True story.

:)

1675. CmdrR - May 3, 2012

Three l’s?
OK. I gotta get a better dictionary.

1676. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

1538 jtd -
“THIS IS A CRIME AGAINST HUMANITY!”

Thanks for my first laugh of the day! And it was a real belly laugh, too. I certainly know now you cannot be taken seriously. And I say that with all the respect I can muster. As far as ‘best medicines’ go, that was quite a dose!

Again, thanks.

1677. Ivory - May 3, 2012

#831

There couldn’t be a better “plot device” to accomplish this than the Nexus where space/time does not exist. It’s far more logical than a “katra”

1678. The Art of Film is Dead - May 3, 2012

#1667

You do realize that the filmmakers did indeed try to find a person of color to play Khan (Del Toro & other Hispanic actors)? For all we know, they actually did search for Indian actors as well. However, with an approaching start date, and Cumberbatch practically falling in their lap, it would have been criminal to pass up that opportunity.

1679. Andi - May 3, 2012

No matter how good or bad this movie may be in the end seeing Loenard Nimoy again is worth it. I really had not expected him to ever come back as Spock (or do any other acting work at all). As a TOS fan from my heart I still have mixed feelings about the reboot but I’m looking really forward to this movie.

1680. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

“jtd: You need to stop talking for the older generations of Trek fans. Many of us LOVED the Abrams film, even with the flaws and failings that have been endlessly recounted around here.”

He does need to learn that he speaks only for himself. No one here has been a Trek fan longer than I have, and I do get tired of people pretending that Abrams’s movie only appeals to younger or newer fans, and suggesting that this is due to some deficiency in the tastes of young people.

1681. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1555: “My bitching is justified.”

No, it’s not. It’s just bitching.

#1555: “I have a full grasp of Gene Roddenberry’s vision of Star Trek.”

So do I – that’s an easy enough thing for anyone to claim, after all. You don’t show any evidence in this thread of having a full grasp of much of anything, though.

#1555: “I was there when it all started.”

So was I. I disagree with everything you’ve said. Game, set and match.

1682. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1600: “jtd is used to honor his memory, or if you prefer:

http://jamestdixon.last-memories.com/condolence

Okay, now I’m calling bullshit on this. You’re a troll, and you’re involving the reputations of real people – who may or may not be dead, and may or may not be posting here under a pseudonym. I think Anthony ought to take a look at this.

There’s no way that James Dixon’s middle name was “Tiberius,” dude. This is an elaborate and mean-spirited prank.

1683. jtd - May 3, 2012

Well, Mr. Bailey, I’ve never said I was James Tiberius Dixon.
I did say he was a close comrade of mine. I also said I used the “JTD” to honor him. I personally don’t care whether or not you believe in someone having the middle name of Tiberius. Well, just for the sake of argument, let’s say that JD liked to use the middle T to stand for Tiberius, being a Trekker and all. Does that ride better with you? Or if you bothered reading the tribute site you would know that Jimmy Dee and Gene were close buddies at one time and GENE used the middle name of Tiberius as Kirk’s middle name. Maybe it’s also too hard for you to believe, but it’s also hard for me to believe in the greatest of Abrams, so we’re even.
That particular tribute site was not of my doing (apparently I have to state this multiple times) but I point people towards it who make outrageous claims on the spur of the moment. That website incidentally was not just whipped up overnight to entertain the people here, unless you believe in date/time stamps being forged, and indeed all the names of contributors there.

Virtually everything else said about me here has been built upon feeble assumptions. How about attacking the Material rather than the Person?

The only “prank” perpetrated on this thread in regards to myself is that supposedly certain persons here believe me to be a Dead Man communicating with the living.

REALLY!

THAT is mean-spirited.

How about we all get back to the Topic of discussing Abrams’ film?
Or how about going after those who are attacking my identity and credibility?

1684. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

A little research makes clear that the “James Dixon committed suicide” gag has been floating around the Internet since 2010, always embellished with ridiculous manufactured details about his life, as well as inconsistent dates and supposed manner of death.

“It’s a joke,” as someone in a movie once said, “in very poor taste.”

There’s no way to know whether Dixon passed away or not – he evidently didn’t matter enough to anyone interested in “Star Trek” for the matter to have been mentioned anywhere in serious fashion. You certainly took up that gauntlet quickly enough when challenged, which is suspect.

As for your credibility – well, you have none at this point…James.

1685. phil - May 3, 2012

this new film will be as disposable as the last one. nemesis (the lowest grossing trek film) is more memorable than any of this tripe.

1686. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

jtd-

I’d love to here your rationalization of the “Crimes against humanity” line. Seriously, I can appreciate your passion but come on man. That could literally be a textbook example of hyperbole.

1687. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

jtd is simply seeing how far he can push the trolling – “Crimes against humanity” was just thrown in there to stir the pot.

#1685: “this new film will be as disposable as the last one. nemesis (the lowest grossing trek film) is more memorable than any of this tripe.”

Public reaction to the last film and interest in the new one prove you wrong.

1688. wissaboo - May 3, 2012

I think khan is the wrong way to go. Hope they arw wrong

1689. Gornorrhea - May 3, 2012

I was ok with the whole Khan idea, and I love Cumberbatch, but I just can’t get past this casting. Khan is not, as others have put it, a pasty, white Brit. I hope the movie proves me wrong.

1690. Blah - May 3, 2012

Hollywood’s whitewashing continues.

It’s interesting though, with the rise of nations like China and India, with their growing economies and space programs, it’s likely that if we eventually create a real-life Starfleet, it’s likely to be dominated with Chinese and Indians, not (forgive the bluntness) White people. And a real-life Kirk/Enterprise crew would probably be Chinese/Indian dominated.

Ah, well this is just Hollywood fun. Don’t take it too seriously.

1691. jtd - May 3, 2012

I’ll be the first person to admit that “Crimes against humanity” was an exaggeration. However, being a diehard Trekker all my life, I tend to make statements of this sort. I have been very critical of the film industry in recent years, notably the American output. Special Effects are Everything now. Writing is Irrelevent.

Hey, Dennis, did you ever meet James Dixon? Well, some of us have. Some of us have worked with him, and in fact some of us have not only worked with him but have contributed to this award-wiinning 1,500+ page Fandom Star Trek Chronology files.

Ridiculous manufactured details of his life?
You see quite an authority on the guy.
I’m sure you visited his grave and all.
Maybe he didn’t matter TO YOU but his wisdom touched many of us. Sure, I did not agree 100% with all his Treknical speculations, but he was a GOOD MAN with a Trek collection that I would give my left arm for.

It’s all past history now.
Dead and buried.
:(

Amazing what an Impact a J.J. Abrams film can have on a human being though, eh!

IT HURTS.

1692. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

The only thing that hurts is your lame trolling and making stuff like this up.

Did anyone check out jtd’s “memorial” page? *Anybody?* It’s a complete goof. LOL

1693. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

1687-
Dennis, yeah for some reason I still *tend* to take posts at their face value, which is idiotic as this is faceless communication.

And in #1686 I meant- HEAR your rationalization.

1694. chrisfawkes.com - May 3, 2012

It may be promoted as a celebration. 31 years of Trek movies basing villains on Khan is commemorated by bringing back Khan.

My guess is there will be no Khan and this is just a rumor. I expect free tickets if i’m correct.

1695. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 3, 2012

A different Khan, not a different kind of Khan, but a completely different person… I guess that could be interesting. The casting still doesn’t seem right though. And I’m sure BC is a fine actor. I really like Del Toro too but that choice wasn’t much better. All “people of color” are not interchangeable. Surely 50 years ago, on a little known, low budget tv series it would be more understandable or practical even, but now? Mmmmm.

1696. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

I like the idea that it could be Khan but not Khan Noonien Singh.

1697. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

All we know about Khan is that he had a name suggesting Sikh ancestry. He didn’t look Indian and was never established to be so.

Interestingly enough, a later Trek character named “Noonian Soong” turned out not to fit what might have been expectations based on his name.

1698. drumvan - May 3, 2012

this latest burst of posts is by far more entertaining than most of “insurrection”. please continue :)

1699. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 3, 2012

(cont’d) It just seems insensitive; lazy at best.

1700. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

Who’s going to be seventeen hundred and first?

1701. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

Me?

1702. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 3, 2012

1696. crazydaystrom.

Here’s hoping…

1703. jtd - May 3, 2012

Dennis, I’ll say this one more time. Just one more time for the record. For there seems to be a communications problem. Whether its subspace interference or a universal translator fault or something else is not for me to decide.

I have made nothing up.
I did not make that tribute page up.
I worked with James Tiberius Dixon.
I used JTD as a spur of the moment tribute to him.

Perhaps when you pass away they’ll make a suitable memorial page for you.

MAYBE YOU FIND IT ALL TO BE FUNNY.
I D O N O T.

Jimmy Dee undoubtedly does not rank very high on fan personality lists because he wasn’t a Capitalist. All of his writings were done free-of-charge and freely distributed on the internet over the course of 30 years.
Despite going to the grave a penniless, homeless and crippled man.
MAYBE YOU FIND THAT FUNNY? He beat his brains out reading all the novels and taking notes on them, collecting obscure Treknical works and writing articles about them. A for-the-fans-by-the-fans type of guy. He wasn’t a name-dropper and he didn’t ask Star Trek authors to plaster his name around.

Who’s worse, a so-called troll (i.e. critic of modern-day “Star Trek”) or a person who speaks ill of the dead?

To prove any of this I’d have to give you the location of Jimmy Dee’s grave.
But all things considered, you’d probably piss on it.

Isn’t that FUNNY.

1704. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

And crazydaystrom = 1701! The crowd goes wild!

1705. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1703: “Who’s worse, a so-called troll (i.e. critic of modern-day “Star Trek”) or a person who speaks ill of the dead?”

You’re trolling.

I encourage folks to go check out the “Dixon Memorial” page, see for yourselves.

BTW, anyone who *would* commit suicide because of a Hollywood movie would be remembered as a pathetic and lost individual, not as an inspiration or with any admiration whatever.

1706. Daoud - May 3, 2012

Crazydaystrom @1701: How enterprising of you! Who will be Exeter!? Dennis Bailey I hope at 1764!
.
@ The subject of James Dixon. Neat guy. Goes back to the rec.arts.startrek.* era on USENET. I remember when we’d look forward to the monthly updates in the 80′s and early 90′s. Then over to the TrekBBS era.

1707. crazydaystrom - May 3, 2012

Dennis-
I KNOW, RIGHT?!?!?!

But I’m ready for hate. No one likes seventeen hundred and FIRST posters. ;-) Though I’d like to think it would mean more to folks on THIS site. :-)

1708. jtd - May 3, 2012

Now to get back on topic…

Some wisdom regarding J.J. Abrams “Star Trek” universe:
(These are Observations, BTW. I state this because “trolling” is a loosely used word these days)

- The prime lesson we’ve learned from watching Star Trek 2009 was that fighting/punching rather than Negotiating is the solution to all our problems.

- The kid with the loudest mouth commands. Obviously the chain of command and rank is not to be taken with any seriousness anymore in Star Fleet. Even Uhura got her way by bitching at Spock when she was not originally to be posted to the Enterprise.

- Vulcans are far more Emotional in the Abrams Universe. Of course taking up from Enterprise this is more of a continuation of that failed series.

- Warp drive is an entirely different creature in this new universe. It’s more like Star Wars’ hyperdrive. Ships “jump” and travel time varies. The engine room alone shows an entirely Different sort of technology at work.

- Starships are no longer built in orbit but on planetary surfaces. Like the Enterprise in Iowa.

- Uhura and Spock were sexually involved. Pon Farr?

- Gravity and this stuff called “red matter” behaves differently in this universe.

1709. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1708: “The prime lesson we’ve learned from watching Star Trek 2009 was that fighting/punching rather than Negotiating is the solution to all our problems.”

It’s certainly true to TOS in that respect, then. The folks making that series never met a fist-fight they didn’t love, no matter how inappropriately shoe-horned into the fourth act.

Enterprise had some shortcomings, but ignoring fannish notions about continuity and “Treknology” nonsense were not among them.

As to all the other things you mentioned – fine, and so what? LOL

1710. jtd - May 3, 2012

(Continuing)…

- Delta Vega is no longer at the edge of the galaxy. In Abrams universe it’s very close to Vulcan, and glaciated.

Anyone care to use the term “Reboot” now?

I don’t buy into this alternate timegrime crap…

1711. Daoud - May 3, 2012

A better website is preserved by Alex Tong I think, the Dixon chronology from about 1994:
http://stng.36el.com/st-tng/trivia/timeline/trek7-notes.html
.
@1708. okay, Moby… I’lll throw a harpoon for now.
- The prime lesson we’ve learned from watching Star Trek 2009 was that fighting/punching rather than Negotiating is the solution to all our problems.
Huh? Robau attempted to negotiate. Kirk, snr., given no choice– sacrificed to save his crew. How do you negotiate with a madman, eh?

- The kid with the loudest mouth commands. Obviously the chain of command and rank is not to be taken with any seriousness anymore in Star Fleet. Even Uhura got her way by bitching at Spock when she was not originally to be posted to the Enterprise.
Huh? Prime Spock gave Kirk a regulatory method to have Spock withdraw his command. Pike had named Kirk second-in-command. That’s by the book. Spock out, Pike’s orders prevail and Kirk is in command.
And Huh? Uhura pointed out to Spock that he was disqualifying her from Enterprise where she trained because of his own bias. She didn’t yell, she pointed out he made an emotionally biased decision, which he then rectified.

- Vulcans are far more Emotional in the Abrams Universe. Of course taking up from Enterprise this is more of a continuation of that failed series.
Huh? Sarek, T’Pring, Stonn… original series. All non-emotional. Yeah. Right.

- Warp drive is an entirely different creature in this new universe. It’s more like Star Wars’ hyperdrive. Ships “jump” and travel time varies. The engine room alone shows an entirely Different sort of technology at work.
Travel time depends upon warp speed. TOS didn’t have CGI to show the effects. And behind the famous “screen” in Engineering was exactly the same sorts of pipes and valves… we just never were in there.

- Starships are no longer built in orbit but on planetary surfaces. Like the Enterprise in Iowa.
The first timeline around, it was built in San Francisco (Presidio area, probably).

- Uhura and Spock were sexually involved. Pon Farr?
Kissing and holding are sex? Fascinating.

- Gravity and this stuff called “red matter” behaves differently in this universe.
Red matter comes from the post-TNG era. Reading is fundamental.

1712. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

Who cares, really?

With your remarks about “the kid with the loudest mouth commands” (a little wishful thinking on your part?) it’s clear that you never really watched the movie closely enough to comment knowledgably on it. ;-)

1713. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1712 is directed at jtd/James T. Dixon, obviously.

1714. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1706: So was he real or fictional this Dixon chap? I’m leaning towards the latter based on what you’re saying…

1715. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

Well, he had a very definite and ridiculous Internet personna, which may have been a bit of a goof. There was no doubt, though, that his posts demonstrated deeply obsessive tendencies and during the period that he posted actively about Star Trek: Enterprise increasingly irrational anger and bitterness directed against individuals who worked for Star Trek.

He stopped being very active online as of the middle years of this decade. There’s no documentation to suggest that he’s dead, and the few gag posts to this effect that you can find describe him as variously having committed suicide in bizarre and unlikely fashion or having been killed to keep him quiet about some grand UFO conspiracy he’d “uncovered.” We can safely assume all that is bullshit.

1716. Daoud - May 3, 2012

@1714. As real I guess as anyone could be from TREK magazine to USENET through TrekBBS over maybe 20+ years. I thought it all petered away around when ENTERPRISE debuted, because that blew the whole timeline out of the water in so many ways. At that point, only Okuda’s sequencing made sense.

@BONUS round? Cool.
- Delta Vega is no longer at the edge of the galaxy. In Abrams universe it’s very close to Vulcan, and glaciated.

No problem. “Delta Vega” is a generic planetoid name used to describe the “warp anchor”/”gravity well” used in many a system to change (delta) velocity from gravitational acceleration (VeGA) coming out of warp. Vulcan has one in its system.
.
And glaciated? Yanno, reminds me of the time I visited this planet “Urrrth” to something they called “Aunt Arty Ka” and it was so frickin’ cold. Man, that planet must be glaciated.
.
care to use the term “Reboot” now?
I prefer “twisted”. Live long and prosper, dude!

1717. boborci - May 3, 2012

1650. captain_neill – May 3, 2012
“Is there an original writer left in Hollywood these days?”

Yes! The ones that wrote PEOPLE LIKE US coming JUNE 29th!!

1718. Picard's Fish - May 3, 2012

RE 1717

ziinnng

1719. crazdaystrom - May 3, 2012

Hey boborci-
You’ve probably been asked this before and have answered it, but what science-fiction other than Star Trek (and perhaps Ender’s Game?) have you really liked?

1720. jtd - May 3, 2012

Detla Vega is a generic planetoid name?

You may soon get me to laugh!

Source please?

Speaking of Enterprise–the less said about that pathetic series the better. Should be non-canon in the extreme, very much on par with Abrams’ lense flare feast. E blew any realism remaining in Star Fleet’s history out of the water is right. Everybody but Earth having advanced warp drive, transporters, and Roms with cloaks. To boldly go where Vulcans have gone before, but they let us use their charts… You’d think ShiKahr would be the capital city of the UFP and not San Francisco, and everyone would be speaking Vulcan… Phase guns instead of lasers… Ferengi and Borg. All the series needed was Q to pound a stake through the Bird’s legacy…

1721. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

@1697 Dennis Bailey

I suggest you go back and watch Space Seed again. Khan is specifically stated in dialogue to be from North India. He has dark Brown Skin and a painting of him shows him in a Turban and Indian attire.

I’m guessing his lighter appearance in TWOK is due to 15 years of being completely sheltered from sunlight either through living in the cargo bay or being totally covered up when outside.

Also while he does look whiter in TWOK, in certain scenes he looks browner, I’m guessing it’s all down to the lighting. Besides, Khan in the new movies would not jump off from TWOK but from his thawing in Space Seed, in which he is clearly brown and clearly Indian. If you dispute this, I suggest you go back and watch Space Seed again.

There’s really no argument here, just lame attempts to whitewash Khan’s history. Up to this movie and Cumberbatch’s casting, Khan was unanimously accepted as Indian. Just because a white actor has been cast as Khan, it does not give you the right to change his entire backstory/history to suit you.

He is INDIAN, get over it.

1722. rogerachong - May 3, 2012

Star Trek 12 Eugenics War: Attack Of The Klingons

Peter Weller as Peter Weyland / Senator Palpatine
Benedict CumberKhan as Darth Maul
Enterprise as Millenium Falcon
JJ Klingons as Storm Troopers
Cue the John Williams Score and boxoffice gold. Bob and Alex, yeah trekkie bitches dis is dah new Shiiit.

1723. Azrael - May 3, 2012

“The Bird’s Legacy” what a laugh. Gene didn’t do half as much as people like you seem to think. Most of the work was done by others, who you and others like you ignore.

For the record I think suicide is the ultimate expression of cowardice and no one who has committed suicide is worthy of tribute or respect. I don’t really care one way or another how you feel about that.

And don’t think I would feel different if someone close to me killed themselves, two cousins have already committed suicide by cop.

1724. jtd - May 3, 2012

Rogerachong truly understand the mind of J.J. Abrams!
I couldn’t have said it better myself.

1725. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1703: Well mildly amusing at first, but the the way you keep carrying on over it like a diva in high dudgeon has elevated it to “downright hilarious”!

1726. TrekkerDeluxe1701Z - May 3, 2012

Howdy!

I just wanna mention that I met the fabled James Dixon twice. The first time was in Las Vegas in the late 1980s a casino called Silver City and the last time was about ten or twelve years ago. The man lived for what he called Treknology. Man, he was nuttier than a squirrel and even had trained pet squirrels running around near his New Jersey home which was where I met him the second time. I mean, man, I’d mention bout the Enterprise having lasers when we were talking about ships guns and he’d correct me and say phasers. Then he’d go into this warehouse sized vault with shitloads of folders and books piled to the ceiling. Hed tell me that the Constitution class was originally launched with 2 banks of rarium transmission lasers but was refitted with retractle singlemount phasers when upgraded to Bonhomme Richard specs then outfitted with rim-somethingsomehing model phasers when converted to Enterprise class in ’66 blahblah blah. Stacks of blueprint packs would come flyin at me and hed show me diagrams of different models of ships, deck plans, phaser technology. Hed rattle off dates and stardates from this time line which marked off when Kirk first got laid to when he wrote his memoires on S.Monicus I or wherever. Sources and references and where thed contradict theyd be alternate timelines branching off. Like this guy was from NASA or something and the stuff was fukin real to him! Hed tell me about poisonous phaser cooling gases and their composition. Then all about photon torps and how they created a bad gas when lauched which led to photon vents on starships and relocation of the torpedo bays. Blueprints for Mark 1 for 2, 3. Blueprints for these for those. Alternate prints and his own interpretations. Man, the eyes on this guy. the eyes! Like those of a squirrel and his squirrels brought his mail in to him. trained squirrels! WTF!

=O

1727. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1726: Clearly the squirrels with the masterminds behind it all, pulling his strings… Diabolical, I tells ya.

1728. jtd - May 3, 2012

Azrael, can you perhaps grasp the concept that maybe, just maybe, there are Trek fans out there who take this “Legacy” thing a bit more, ummm, Seriously than you? Gene created Star Trek, don’t forget that. I agree that it’s the contribution of many people, but don’t forget The Bird. Don’t forget His Vision. I do tend to think that we are all, generally speaking, Trek Fans on this particular site. Yes?

Good.

Now, would somebody please explain to me how J.J. Abrams and crew have paid tribute to Gene’s Trek legacy? And I do mean beyond just making a movie with Star Trek on it and Star Trek namesakes in it.
The movie had a one-dimensional villain, gave us a punk Kirk, a very unmilitaristic/Unbelievable Star Fleet… Oh, maybe I should just repost my old review. This is like beating a dead tribble. 2009 Trek was easily the most Unsophisticated Trek film ever and aimed at the most Unsophisticated audience ever (namely youngsters). I want more Substance in my Trek, I want a real Story with Believable characters not cheap “homages” to the originals. Am I asking too much from TPTB?

Personally, Azrael, I don’t care about your feels towards people who kill themselves. Regardless, the exact cause of JD’s death remains inconclusive. Unless you can channel his katra and enlighten us!
JD, JC… Oooooh. Now you’ve got me doing it.

Trekker Deluxe: NO COMMENT!

1729. Azrael - May 3, 2012

Hey, YOU claimed he was a suicide, so don’t think you have a leg to stand on when someone comments on that. Nothing else you said deserves a response.

1730. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1728: You got one thing right — you’re the epitome of Serious Business and that’s for sure.

1731. Phil - May 3, 2012

Boy, this is a lot of venom flowing now about this very fictional Star Trek universe. Really now, just because there were a few folks who drilled it down to the nanosecond, it’s still fictional, people. If the current version isn’t too your liking, it’s still just fiction. You can enjoy all the versions, if you choose, or you can be bitter. Guess what, being bitter sucks. Embrace a little good Karma here, folks and seek the peace.

1732. NuFan - May 3, 2012

1717

I don’t think he watches anything that has no spaceships in it.

1733. Chris Miles - May 3, 2012

@Bob Ori (1717)

re: “People like us”.- Just saw the trailer.

First movie from your team I know can get the wife to go see

Oh, and Good Luck to Mr. Kurtzman on his directorial debut!

Elizabeth Banks- Beautiful AND Smart.

Pine and Banks.

When you were on the set or looking at the daily’s (do writers do that these days?) Did the thought ever cross your mind that She’d make a great Carol Marcus? No matter what she’s in – she comes across as smart and sassy.

So, regarding all that nonsense above.

I don’t give a crap where Delta Vega is. I Don’t give a crap where Khan is from.

I care about the archetypes and that it’s clear you respect the Spirit of the Canon/Roddenberry-verse while not adhering to every letter.

Fine with me. Bring his cool upbeat vision to more people.

Since I am exactly as old as Trek, and have been granted super Trek powers, I am sending you, via this note- a Troll Cannon- please use it wisely.

It’s your Universe now. Have fun, make some money, and keep us entertained.

Ps- (Can’t wait to see the scenes from inside Livermone on the big screen)

Thanks again, man. Good Stuff.

1734. Endeavour Crew - May 3, 2012

There is no doubt that JJ-Trek bears little resemblance to the original series in feel or execution.

Still, in retrospect I believe it was a good (not great) movie.

My point is…………like James Bond, Trek has and will continue to go through many iterations throughout it’s lifetime.

JJ-Trek is just one version of Trek, and whether we like it or hate it his team of people has enabled this franchise to survive into another decade and I’m grateful for it.

1735. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1731: This post is made of truth. ;)

1736. Damian - May 3, 2012

Wow. I mean WOW. Reading some of the comments here between jtd and others and I just keep saying to myself, people, it’s entertainment. Chill out a bit.

I love Star Trek. It’s my favorite show. I’ve followed every incarnation. I watched every episode from “The Cage” to “These are the Voyages”. I don’t hate any Star Trek, even the much maligned Star Trek V and Star Trek: Nemesis (still don’t get the hate on Nemesis, but whatever). I read the books on all the series, even extras like Vanguard and New Frontier. But it’s still just a hobby.

Yes, I’m disappointed to hear the writers are rumoured to be using Khan again. Yes, I think that lacks a bit of creativity and I was hoping for somethign completely original.

But, I’m not going to burn down houses over it. I’ll still see the movie (probably when the crowds die down a bit) and hope for the best. If it ends up being the worse Star Trek movie ever, if it bombs, if it’s the first Star Trek I ever hate, then you know what, I still have 5 TV series, an animated series, 11 other movies and hundreds of novels to enjoy.

Some of the comments here are actually a bit disturbing. If you don’t like Abrams take on it, the beauty of it is in the canon, it’s an alternate universe. You can completely dismiss it has no affect on anything that came before. There are still novels coming out for “The Next Generation” “Deep Space Nine” and “Voyager” so CBS at least thinks those other series are alive and kicking.

1737. Basement Blogger - May 3, 2012

@ 1717

Hey Bob, do you blow up anything in “People Like Us?” What about vampire teenagers? Ew, what about vampie teenagers who must fight to the death in gladiator games? :-)

Bob, good luck with the film. Looking forward to it.

1738. Weerd1 - May 3, 2012

I realize this is pointless, but it’s hard not to jump in when there’s this many emotions being cast around.

I love “Star Trek.” I do. I wasn’t around first run, but I am willing to bet I know as much as anyone who was about the storylines in the original series. Watching Classic Trek and TNG was my childhood and adolescence, and I owe a lot of my beliefs and philosophies to the overall themes of Trek. However, let’s be honest with ourselves.

Most of what we now call “Roddenberry Trek” didn’t come from Roddenberry. It came from Gene L. Coon. “Star Trek” itself was originally quite derivative of “Forbidden Planet.” The two purist versions of “Roddenberry Trek” are ST: TMP and the first season of TNG; they are not well respected by the majority of fans.

I don’t want to belittle Roddenberry, but if you read his own words, he set out to make “Hornblower in space.” A rip roaring, swashbuckling adventure, that might throw some allegory into its Sci Fi adventure. I would point out also, the first allegory Roddenberry does give us is a warning not to get too caught up in created fantasy worlds…

Star Trek has seen a lot of forms over the years, some better than others. The overriding theme I believe however is the ability of the human race to get past their built in flaws and excel. To always try to improve. How is that not the story of the JJVerse Jim Kirk? He is a complete ass when the film starts. He does not have the discipline Kirk Prime had that made him a hero… and in the course of a swashbuckling adventure (which Roddenberry loved and intended; how diplomatic is Kirk with Tracy in the Roddenberry penned “The Omega Glory”? How hard does Kirk work to save the Romulan commander and crew in “Balance of Terror”?) he finds the ability to overcome the obstacles in his path–many of which are of his own making–and become the Captain the universe needs. Is there coincidence? Sure: more coincidental than Kirk and Spock landing within days of McCoy in “The City on the Edge of Forever”? More coincidental than the Captain of the Enterprise having almost the exact same last name as the creator of the Nomad probe? I don’ t think so.

JJ’s Trek is a modern version of what Classic Star Trek was, not as we have reinterpreted it over the years. How many relationships did Kirk have with crewmembers? Remember the Christmas Party and Doctor Helen Noel? Remember Chapel trying her best to hook up with Spock? Or Rand trying to get the Captain to notice her legs? Dear Gods, look at the TOS uniforms, how the hell was that NOT a sexy space adventure?

Take a breath, take a step back, and objectively look at why you love Trek. If JJ doesn’t appeal to you, don’t watch it. There will be a different incarnation at some point. Vitriol, from lovers OR haters, is what is anti-Trek. Wait for a version you like more, or go back and watch your DVDs. Revel in the new stuff, but relax and in the end realize the goal of Star Trek is not to change the world; that’s a fortunate side-effect. The goal is to entertain. Like Roddenberry wanted.

1739. jtd - May 3, 2012

Damian, Trek is not entertainment. It’s a way of life.

1740. Borgminister - May 3, 2012

Wow. That’s sad.

1741. Red Dead Ryan - May 3, 2012

This “James T. Dixon” fellow sounds like the very source of inspiration for the continued stereotyping and ridicule of Trek fans. If what TrekkerDeluxe1701Z is to be believed. Dixon was the true dork, it seems. Couldn’t even stick his head out for a little “fresh air” just once in a while, it seems. Total detachment from reality. An unhealthy, and clearly ultra-fanatical attitude towards Trek. A blight on fandom.

Maybe it was for the best that he committed suicide. I hate having to say that, but JTD is NOT the model for how anybody should live their life. More like how NOT to live life.

1742. rogerachong - May 3, 2012

Star Trek 12 Eugenics Wars: Resistance Is Futile

SPOILER ALERT!!

CLOSING SCENE. You have been warned!

SCROLL DOWN SOME MORE!

LITTLE BIT MORE!

YES THAT’S IT!! Yeah… UMMMM that feels sooo good!

CumberKhan: It is inevitable Spock!! Can you not see the truth.
Spock: I will never give in and never surrender!!
CumberKhan: You and I are kindred with a shared katra. We are both creations of a unique genetic experiment. The blood in my veins and your human half are the same!
Spock: NOOOooo!!
CumberKhan: Join me and together we will defeat Peter Weyland/Palpatine and rule the galaxy as equals. Resistance Is Futile.
SPOCK: KHAAAAAAAAANNNNNN!!!

- Spock Falls Into a Volcano on New Vulcan- ROLL CREDITS.

1743. THX-1138 - May 3, 2012

People being surprised by the passion of Star Trek fans, negative or positive, are probably the same people that get surprised by the brightness of the sun on a hot day.

The ONLY reason Star Trek still exists is BECAUSE of the passion of the fans.

TOS was cancelled and the fans were so vocal they got it back on TV, if only for one more season.

TMP came out and fans were up in arms at the pace of the movie. If there were an internet back then it would have exploded.

They killed off Spock in TWOK and the fans screamed bloody murder (literally). Such a fuss was raised that it was in part responsible for his miraculous resurrection.

TNG came out and the old guard were up in arms at how it was too far removed from TOS. A bald Frenchy captain? WTF?!?

People still lament, bemoan, and generally bitch about STV. That movie came out 23 years ago.

Generations. Anybody ever hear of someone complaining about that flick?

How about Voyager, then? Nobody ever complains about that, do they.

Or Enterprise, for that matter.

Or Nemesis, either.

My point is, why act as if it’s a new thing that fans vociferously display their opinions about things in Trek that they don’t like? That is just the thing that keeps Star Trek the quality entertainment that it is. The vast, vast majority of us:

1) Know that it is fictional.
and
B) Actually do have a life.

But that isn’t going to stop anybody from putting in their $.02.

Do people go overboard? Yes. It’s the internet. You may have noticed that sort of thing happens here. Just like a Trek fans propensity for minutiae sifting complaints probably won’t change anything, neither will your dismay at their complaining. So get used to it. Or maybe move on or enjoy it. Or participate in it. Hell, there is an entire faction of fans that devote themselves to nitpicking everything about Star Trek. They sell a lot of books on that very subject.

Try to maybe go with it and not let it mess up your chi.

1744. Damian - May 3, 2012

1743–There’s nothing wrong with passion. I get passionate about Star Trek. I’m passionate about not wanting to see Khan again.

It’s just that there’s a fine line between passionate fandom and obsession. I know when to put it down and take a shower–or eat.

It’s just a little disturbing when I hear about this friend of jtd’s who apparently passed away under unusual circumstances and he seems to infer this was due in part to Star Trek (2009). It’s not life and death.

1745. Red Dead Ryan - May 3, 2012

jtd,

You sir, are officially TrekMovie.Com’s Greatest Obsessed Fan. Congratulations!

I hearby dedicate the JTD Zealot Award to you, jtd. You’re the first winner*!

*Most rational people, on the contrary, would feel more like a loser for winning such an award! :-)

1746. AJ - May 3, 2012

Dixon seems like one of those pathetic OCD hoarders they show on TV. It’s a pity he had no friends around to help him out.

1747. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1721: “I suggest you go back and watch Space Seed again. Khan is specifically stated in dialogue to be from North India. He has dark Brown Skin and a painting of him shows him in a Turban and Indian attire.”

Sorry, but I suggest *you* go back and watch “Space Seed” again to correct your misunderstanding.

Someone (Marla McGivers) offers the *opinion* – not a stated fact – that he is “*probably* a Sikh.”

Catch that “probably?” There’s no authority behind this. It’s an educated guess, never confirmed.

The painting which shows him in a turban (but not otherwise appearing to be a Sikh ) is – wait for it – by Marla McGivers, based on her own conjecture.

Again, his background is never established definitely either in dialogue or visually. We’re offered conjecture by a character, that’s all.

Your last point which you apparently mean to offer as evidence that he’s Indian is the fact that he “has dark brown skin.”

Sorry?

Did you think at all about how many people on this planet of different ethnic and racial backgrounds have what you describe as “dark” skin?

Khan had the same skin color as Ricardo Montalban – surprise! Montalban was not Sikh nor from North India.

We clear now? Good.

1748. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 3, 2012

“…Beating a dead tribble.” Tee Hee I liked that.

1749. Jonboc - May 3, 2012

@1708

Some wisdom regarding J.J. Abrams “Star Trek” universe:
(These are Observations, BTW. I state this because “trolling” is a loosely used word these days)

- The prime lesson we’ve learned from watching Star Trek 2009 was that fighting/punching rather than Negotiating is the solution to all our problems.

“I’m a soldier, not a diplomat.” -James Kirk, TOS.

- The kid with the loudest mouth commands. Obviously the chain of command and rank is not to be taken with any seriousness anymore in Star Fleet. Even Uhura got her way by bitching at Spock when she was not originally to be posted to the Enterprise.

Yes, Kirk was loud…he also happened to be, technically, next in command, I believe, thanks to Pike.

- Vulcans are far more Emotional in the Abrams Universe. Of course taking up from Enterprise this is more of a continuation of that failed series.

..could be…but more than likely a continuation from the early episodes of TOS…the time frame, of which, is mirrored in the movie.

- Warp drive is an entirely different creature in this new universe. It’s more like Star Wars’ hyperdrive. Ships “jump” and travel time varies. The engine room alone shows an entirely Different sort of technology at work.

Wha? You have “filled in, between-the-lines” a LOT more than I did.

- Starships are no longer built in orbit but on planetary surfaces. Like the Enterprise in Iowa.

…without reams of fan created facts and fiction at my fingertips to draw this conclusion, I have no problem with building on earth. makes perfect sense to me.

- Uhura and Spock were sexually involved. Pon Farr?

Don’t know about them being sexually involved, it was never elaborated on, nor did it need to be…but if it’s that time for Spock, why not?

- Gravity and this stuff called “red matter” behaves differently in this universe.

Not sure about this one, but red matter is a peculiar thing…never know what may happen when you throw red matter into the equation!

1750. THX-1138 - May 3, 2012

#1744 Damian

My point was you are never going to change it. “The air is the air. What can be done?”

Let’s not get bent out of shape over someone expressing themselves. Or join in and edify us with your alternate take. That sort of thing.

As far as someone killing themselves over a movie, I kinda have to call bullshit. My detector is ringing like mad about that. jtd is maybe in need of attention or a troll or whatever. I don’t care. If they give me some ammo (not literally-I mean the kind of idiotic things they post here) I’ll probably entertain myself by blasting away at their points.

And come away with my chi un-mussed.

1751. Weerd1 - May 3, 2012

It has long been my opinion that the song Uhura sings to Spock and Charlie in the episode “Charlie X” could be interpreted as Uhura mentioning having her heart broken by Spock in some previous relationship. I freely admit that is purely my own interpretation, but I had that idea before JJ Abrams made a movie about it. Surely, I am not the only one; at least BobOrci and Alex Kurtzman, right?

1752. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

That scene and one or two other early TOS scenes (such as the one in which Spock informs Uhura that Vulcan has no Moon) came to mind as soon as the Spock/Uhura relationship was revealed, yep.

1753. UpToV - May 3, 2012

“You can tell they’re just doing it for money and don’t really care about us Trekkie”…. Wah wah wah! Get over yourselves cry babies! These developments are AWESOME!

1754. moauvian waoul - aka: seymour hiney - May 3, 2012

“The painting which shows him in a turban (but not otherwise appearing to be a Sikh ) is – wait for it – by Marla McGivers, based on her own conjecture.”

I don’t know if they’d put that line in Space Seed so that she would be wrong or to misinform the viewing audience.

1755. drumvan - May 3, 2012

#1739. jtd
Damian, Trek is not entertainment. It’s a way of life.

jtd, if this statement is in fact how you really feel, then i weep for your existence. hopefully in the future you will find something “real” that can satisfy your soul.

if you’re just “yanking our chain” then fool me twice, shame on me.

1756. Daoud - May 3, 2012

@1751 Excellent point. In the WIRED prequel to Star Trek 2009, “Spock Reflections” as he bides his time on the Vulcan system Delta Vega planetoid, he recollects a scene with Uhura singing while he plays the harp. Could be key. Written by JJ & K/O, too it was.

1757. lostrod - May 3, 2012

Here’s someone who might have been considered for Khan role.

http://www.nydailynews.com/life-style/health/jersey-mom-busted-putting-5-year-old-tanning-booth-article-1.1071171

Regards.

1758. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1739: A way of life? No. Just no, and God help me if I ever start thinking like this.

1759. CarlG - May 3, 2012

@1757: GAH! Both Montalban and Cumberbatch are looking more handsome by far after seeing… that.

1760. Dennis Bailey - May 3, 2012

#1754: “I don’t know if they’d put that line in Space Seed so that she would be wrong or to misinform the viewing audience.”

Probably not, agreed – but once you start speculating on author’s intention rather than taking the finished work as it is you plunge down an entire other rabbit hole.

One could say, for example, that if the writer didn’t mean Khan to be Sikh he wouldn’t have brought it up.

Someone else could suggest that the ambiguity might have been deliberately introduced because after Montalban was cast one of the producers said “You know, Ricardo’s pretty definitely not Indian. Let’s change that one line to leave it open a little bit so no one can ding us on it.”

In any event, the actual story *as presented* leaves the matter open to interpretation by viewers – or by later writers. That’s what matters here.

1761. NuFan - May 3, 2012

1739

Now I know you’re faking. Just making fun of the worst type of fan.

1762. THX-1138 - May 3, 2012

That being said (I mean the stuff I wrote), I think revisiting the Khan storyline is kinda dopey.

There are soooooo many things that could make it not work. So, so much is working against trying to write something fresh and new about Khan in a multi-million dollar movie (hundreds of millions, maybe?) that may just truly piss off legions of fans and only serve to confuse an already somewhat attention deprived and perhaps apathetic new audience that you have to absolutely hit a grand slam home run for it to be a success.

After reading this spoiler I asked some of my friends and family for their opinion on Khan being in the next movie. Responses were:

“Awesome! Khan was cool in that one movie!”
“Why would they do that?”
“Are they going to remake Wrath of Khan?”
“I don’t get it. Didn’t he already die?”
“Well, that was a popular movie.”
“Will it be the one where they find him in space or the one where they find him on the planet?”
“Well, that’s original.”
“This will be so cool! They can do that battle again. The one where Kirk yells ‘KHAAAAAAN!” (Two people actually responded with only the KHAAAAN yell)

My own kids were split on the idea and my wife thought it was a bad idea. I sort of didn’t regard their opinion here as I probably have too much influence. I did get more than a few responses of “Who’s Khan?”

I’m not sure what it says one way or the other. But my opinion is that it is the writers trying to play it safe. I would rather they were going for brilliant originality. Either way I’ll go to the movie to see either an amazing movie or a real train wreck. I don’t think there is room for middle ground here.

1763. CmdrR - May 3, 2012

Sometimes these threads make my heart hurt.

Hi, boborci… Still laughing? Hope so.

Have you read “Tales from Development Hell?” It’s a quick read and something that would probably crack you up.

1764. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

1747. Dennis Bailey – May 3, 2012

Are you being deliberately stupid or are you just a troll?

Why would the writers mention that he’s from North Indian and probably a Sikh if they didn’t mean for the character to be a North Indian or a Sikh?

Would they ever have mentioned in the show that Kirk is from Iowa if they didn’t mean him to be and American? Would they mention Spock is from Vulcan if they didn’t mean him to be a Vulcan? So why would they mention that Khan is from North India if they didn’t mean him to be an Indian?

Why would they go to the trouble of having Mcgivers paint Khan as a Sikh if they didn’t mean to make it clear he’s a Sikh? Why would that go to so much trouble to drop exposition of him being an Indian Sikh if they didn’t intend him to be so?

Oh, and nice try trying to paint me as a racist. My comment on him having brown skin is that Cumberbatch clearly does not have brown skin, any more than Khan in Space Seed had white skin.

The surname Singh indicates Indian specifically Sikh, though some Hindu’s also have it. Tell me, generally what skin colour are Indians, Sikhs or Hindu’s. BROWN. It’s very simple to understand.

We clear now? Good. You rude little scab.

1765. AJ - May 3, 2012

Khan is a Sikh due to his surname, “Singh,’ which is the required surname of all Sikhs.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singh

1766. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

In fact I don;t see how any intelligent people can even debate Khan’s ethnicity. All evidence points to him being an Indian and most likely a Sikh.

So why is it that the character’s ethnicity and backstory, which has stood firm for over 45 years is suddenly up to interpretation and being completely re-written, just because a white guy got cast over a brown guy?

It’s rubbish. If a Chinese actor was cast as Gary Mitchell I’d bet my top teeth, people would be saying WTF? Weird casting choice!

But if a ethnic character gets whitewashed…..nah….it’s all open to interpretation, right? Test tubes, right? Western European laboratory, right?

1767. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

1765.

Not only that but Memory Alpha has been repeatedly cited as a source by the writers of not only the new Trek, but referenced by most writers of recent Trek TV or novels.

Read what it has to say about Khan. About his ethnicity. And especially the section about test-tubes and Western European laboratories.

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Khan_Noonien_Singh

1768. THX-1138 - May 3, 2012

And of course, there is the fact that Cumberbatch cannot possibly pass for an Indian or a Sikh.

I don’t know how many Sikh’s are fans of Star Trek. Or North Indians. But it was one thing to cast Montalban as one of their own. It’s an enitirely different thing to cast a clearly white-skinned Englishman as a native Indian. I’m just guessing but I wouldn’t think that would make any of those folks very happy. Kind of like the mild uproar being stirred by Depp’s portraying Tonto in the new Lone Ranger movie.

it’s one of the reasons I’m not too sure Cumberbun is playing Khan. They couldn’t be that ignorant, could they? Or did the Alternate Universe mix up what ethnicity everyone is? If it suits the story. Or the casting director.

1769. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

Guys. Breaking News!

Indian Sikhs have just been informed that Khan Noonien Singh will be played by a White, English guy in the 2013 Star Trek Sequel.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/05/18/images/2007051810341201.jpg

1770. Captain John C Baron - May 3, 2012

My initial reaction was ‘why Khan again?’ but the negative over-the-top reacrion of some fans does depress me. But now I’ve had time to digest the news my feeling is – Let’s give it a chance folks. Have some faith the writers will do something new and original.

And heck, I’ll buy akmovie ticket or ten just to see 60s classics like Khan and Klingons again.

Glad to see Nimoy’s back, too – always welcome. I always thought the scene which would have involved Shatner which was written for Trek 09 but never filmed could have been sweet. I hope they somehow find a way to write it in. Dare I hope?

1771. NuFan - May 3, 2012

You can always pretend that Khan being caucasian is what you’re upset about.

It’s just that we wouldn’t believe you.

1772. Flaming Nacelles Forever! - May 3, 2012

Isn’t there a limit to the number of post reply’s? Tried reading this on my phone…. yeesh….

I had a suspicion he was playing Khan, and to be honest, I think it’s fine to approach this story line…. and frankly why not? A Khan/Klingon story line mix is a deft use of recognizable characters in a completely new situation. It’s ballsy, but I have respect for the team involved.

To be blunt: this won’t be ‘The Final Frontier’ and dialed in.

My fear is that by the time JJ is done with his participation, I pray they don’t hit the big reset button and restore the timeline.

1773. Captain John C Baron - May 3, 2012

#52. My sentiments exactly!

1774. CmdrR - May 3, 2012

Khan was the product of “superior” genetics. Lord only knows who splooged what into that test tube.

In any case, Cumberbatch is Khan. Get used to it.

1775. One Angry Human Being - May 3, 2012

1774.

Oh, we’ve been getting used to it for a long, long time.

Just remember what goes around, comes around. We’ll see if your children like getting used to it.

1776. Dave - May 3, 2012

Every trek movie has tried to be as Good as TWOK– and every movie said they were trying to aspire to it…. Doohan said it about Chris Plummer and TUC, They said it about Nemesis – and they all fell short!

It was done… and it was done well.

I will see the movie… i will most probably like it… I was hoping for something original and the cord would be cut….. I thought that was the whole point of changing the timeline. Not to retell the same stuff in a different way.

Needless to say.. I am disappointed. -but I do wish cast and crew the best

1777. Basement Blogger - May 3, 2012

@ 1766 1769

I understand why you are upset but try not to make ad hominem attacks. People can have opinions that are different from yours, that doesn’t make them dumb. I agree with you that Khan is probably a Sikh. But since Cumberbatch had a great audition, they cast him. So how do they get away with this?

The line from Space Seed goes like this. Lt. McGivers says,

He’s (Khan) from the “Northern India area. I GUESS. PROBABLY A SIKH.”,

The words “I guess. Probably…” are the wiggle room for the writers. Space Seed doesn’t tell you who Khan’s mother is. So maybe Khan Sr. had his space seed mixed with a light skin woman to produce Cumberbatch who dyed his hair black for the role. Or maybe Khan Sr. planted his seed in a caucasian woman.

Take a look at Norah Jones, the singer. Her father is Shankar. And she can pass for caucasian with black hair. See Gov. Nikki Haley (S.C.) On her website, the pictures of her look like a caucasian woman who might be Italian. So the writers can say that Khan was engineered to have light skin but with black hair.

1778. THX-1138 - May 3, 2012

#1770

You get depressed about fan reaction? Man, are you into the wrong space show.

And CmdrR., I probably won’t get used to train wrecks but that doesn’t mean I won’t look. Not saying the new movie is going to be a trian wreck, but if Cucumberland is Khan the potential is there.

That’s why they sell popcorn at the theater. One way or the other, it’ll be a show.

1779. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

@1777

The Sikh question is only part of the issue and the only part that could be debated (barely given the evidence). The only thing that cannot be debated is that Khan is INDIAN as clearly stated in Space Seed.

And what of the fact that Khan is BROWN in Space Seed, when they thaw him out? He has BROWN when the Botany Bay was launched, and it was launched BEFORE the timeline changed. Therefore he must be brown when he is thawed out in this timeline. Khan cannot be ”engineered” to have light skin in this timeline…..because wasn’t light skinned when the Botany Bay was launched. Don’t forget this new timeline takes place after the attack on the Kelvin. The Botany Bay and it’s brown-skinned Khan has been floating in space for hundreds of years by this point. The Botany Bay could not be affected by the altered timeline until AFTER the Kelvin attack. His origin as a brown-skinned Indian cannot be altered by this new timeline.

As someone mentioned earlier the only option is that something happened to him AFTER he is thawed out, such as cosmetic surgery to alter his appearance.

And sorry but listing TWO people who are mixed and are white skinned to Indian parents is not a comparison with 1.2 BILLION brown skinned Indians. The overwhelming number of Indians are Brown, just like most Africans are Black and most Europeans are White. There’s really no defending representing 1.2 billion overwhelmingly Brown Indians, with a white guy. That’s like representing America’s founding fathers with a Chinese guy.

1780. Peter Loader - May 3, 2012

In this new movie Khan’s probably a rogue Klingon Augment who’s taken the name of Khan Noonien Singh for some reason.

Also an interesting fact: Khan (title), a title for a ruler in Turkic and Mongolian languages and also used by Afghans/Pashtuns for chiefs and noblemen.

1781. dmduncan - May 3, 2012

Hilarious. This deserves a repost:

1769. Smoke and Mirrors – May 3, 2012

Guys. Breaking News!

Indian Sikhs have just been informed that Khan Noonien Singh will be played by a White, English guy in the 2013 Star Trek Sequel.

http://www.hindu.com/2007/05/18/images/2007051810341201.jpg

1782. Ahmed - May 3, 2012

An article on io9 about the Khan story.

The Real Problem with Benedict Cumberbatch’s Villain Role in Star Trek 12

http://io9.com/5907467/the-real-problem-with-benedict-cumberbatchs-villain-role-in-star-trek-12

1783. Denny - May 3, 2012

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

LOL!

I think the guy with the sword should have been cast as Khan, look at his eyes, that guy definitely looks insane!

1784. Planet Pandro - May 3, 2012

1507

I can’t believe I forgot the harpoon! Well played!

1785. Keachick - rose pinenut - May 3, 2012

#1600 – “Answer: A Star WARS fan won’t sit back, shut up, and TAKE IT when an important piece of their film fan heritage is Screwed with.”

Well the Star Wars can rant all they want, but the Star Wars films (prequels and all) are what they are and I don’t see George Lucas or anyone else changing or re-making those parts of the movies that fans object to. You speak nonsense.

“Star TREK fans, on the other hand, have become a bunch of domesticated, in-bred, couch-potato, paid-off Wimps who are willing to take ANY bastardization of “their” universe, if Holy Paramount Pictures SAYS SO!”

Do not presume to speak for others. You are rude and arrogant.

What this and your posts following this one indicates is an obsessed individual not unlike those who join organisations like Al Queda. Star Trek, for most people, is not a religion. It is an entertaining and at times thought provoking television and movie series. Get some perspective before you do yourself an injury.

BTW, jtd, I am female.

#1582 – Oh Jack…you know me so well. We must get together sometime. My snack preference is for caramel flavoured popcorn – gives me a sugar rush and can cause bloating, but what the hell…:)

I must note that I have not read all the posts yet, so I apologise if I have repeated anything. My, you guys have been busy…:)!

1786. Guy Fawkes - May 3, 2012

Wow. People are still talking about the rehashing of Khan vai skinny white brit? Save your $12 dollars and go watch Space Seed and ST II.

1787. jtd - May 3, 2012

Keachick – rose pinenut – I’m speaking for the FiRST GENERATION FANS.
You can speak all you want for the fans you just started watching Trek within the past decade.

Rude and arrogant? How about proud and Caring about Trek?

At least you won’t see me DELETING MESSAGES off of this thread which don’t agree with me.

“Obsessed individual not unlike those who join organizations like Al Queda”

ENOUGH!
KROYKAH!

Female? Like I care?
The deceased would call you a Trekkess…

1788. dmduncan - May 3, 2012

1634: “I’m not the morality police, but if someone’s distraught enough to make up such stuff, maybe you ought to just leave him alone if you’re not inclined toward empathy. DM, you once took inspiration from the Dalai Lama to respond to trolling. What a stunning transformation.”

Not really, NCM. And why do you assume he’s making any of that up because he’s distraught vs. because he’s trying to score some morality points to help his argument that JJ shouldn’t make Star Trek films because JJ Trek films KILL PEOPLE?

That’s the lowest possible way to try and win an argument. Now if I suspected the suicide was true, I wouldn’t make fun of his nonsense, but:

First the guy says his friend committed suicide because of JJ’s Star Trek film. And then he posts a link to a memorial, written by HIMSELF, claiming the same friend was murdered over secret UFO documents — and then he says whether his friend committed suicide (over JJ’s movie???) or was killed because he had secret UFO documents doesn’t make any difference!!!

I don’t believe any of it.

Now it is possible that jtd is himself nuts. If I really thought he was nuts I wouldn’t poke fun at him. And the fact that he seems to be taking all the fun had at his expense (even before I made my comments) in stride proves to me he’s not nuts.

Just another pain in the ass. One of many taking the opportunity to bitch about the Abrams film because he knows Bob is reading.

1789. Guy Fawkes - May 3, 2012

1717. boborci – May 3, 2012

1650. captain_neill – May 3, 2012
“Is there an original writer left in Hollywood these days?”

Yes! The ones that wrote PEOPLE LIKE US coming JUNE 29th!!

I would hardly call rehashing Khan in this movie as an original idea. Hollywood is out of ideas and afraid to take chances on NEW material. Sorry but the idea of using Khan in this movie is a ploy by Abrams and yourself to milk old Star Trek ideas instead of coming up with something new. With the plot holes in the last movie so big you could drive a car through them. I will assume nothing will change for this movie.

Maybe STXIII in 2015 will do something different.

1790. AJ - May 3, 2012

No, jtd is just drawing attention to himself. We’re here to discuss the new spoilers.

Here’s an io9 article on another reason why casting BC as Khan may not be a good idea…

http://io9.com/5907467/the-real-problem-with-benedict-cumberbatchs-villain-role-in-star-trek-12

1791. dmduncan - May 3, 2012

Regarding the link in 1782:

Hey, i09, open a friggin history book. White supremacy is linked to Nazi eugenics. An awful large part of the 19th/20th century eugenics movement was NOT NAZI, NON white supremacy related. Margaret Sanger, founder of planned parenthood? Yep. Eugenicist. George Bernard Shaw, famous playwright? Yep. A dastardly old man who was RABIDLY eugenicist.

And yes, there are still people of power in the shadows who still maintain eugenicist views, and they are still pulling strings.

So, a movie about Khan is actually still relevant.

1792. NuFan - May 3, 2012

Bob Orci

Ask Harrison Ford who he thinks is more annoying. Star Wars fans or Star Trek fans?

1793. AJ - May 3, 2012

Oops…Posted the same article ;-)

1794. jtd - May 3, 2012

DmDuncan:

Yah, that’s it, J.J. Abrams’ Trek films kill people.

Short and straight to the point like a laser beam.

Now ONE MORE TIME: I didn’t write the memorial, Dmduncan. None of it. People asked and I directed. Nothing more. Nothing less. Now stop making a fuss over it. I don’t care whether you believe it or not.

The fact is he’s Dead.

IF he committed sucide (which seems likely–I Can’t prove it) I would’ve STOPPED HIM. Got it? But I wasn’t there.

The other guys posted the UFO crap and all that goes with it.
Maybe there’s some truth to it. The bottom line is I DON’T KNOW.

How difficult is it to follow?

Now just to make something perfectly clear, I did not say that ALL JJ Abrams films kill people. Only the one and only the one person.
I’ve never really followed Abrams other films so I’m not a real authority. I’ve seen bits and pieces of them. I’ve read about them. That’s about it.

Got that?

Just ONE killer film, but with the potential of kiling other Star Trek fans.
SHOULD a 2nd film be released, I think it’s my responsibility to to post a warning that it, too, could kill.

Now who the hell is Bob?

1795. Smoke and Mirrors - May 3, 2012

@ 1786

This isn’t just about one movie. It’s about the dignity and representation of an entire people that happen to make up a large chunk of humanity.

There are hardly many decent or major Indian roles out there. When the few that there are around become whitewashed and people (mostly white) defend said whitewashing, it’s bound to tick people off.

White people are well represented in all kinds of roles, if in a few years, James Bond was re-cast as Black, there’s still be Iron Man, Superman, Batman, Jason Bourne, Ethan Hunt, Jack Sparrow, and many more. If the Riddler was re-cast as Asian, there’s still be The Joker, Mr. Freeze, Zod, Davy Jones, Every villain in the Bourne movies and many more.

White people will never know how it feels to have one of the very few characters you could say comes from your community, get snatched away from you though an insensitive casting process, and you have literally no one else to represent your community. To have people defend this as fine is salt in the wound.

I even heard that in an upcoming Captain Nemo movie, Will Smith and Sam Worthington, have been considered for the role.

Oh, but let me guess….Captain Nemo isn’t necessarily Indian, he’s open to interpretation…..test tubes….Western Europe…….That’s okay, I mean there’s plenty of Indian heroes out there, right. And there’s a real lack of White hero roles. So we’ll snatch that one away too.

1796.