Exclusive: Kurtzman & Orci Talk Reveal Of ‘Into Darkness’ Villain Name | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Exclusive: Kurtzman & Orci Talk Reveal Of ‘Into Darkness’ Villain Name December 11, 2012

by Anthony Pascale , Filed under: Interview,Orci/Kurtzman,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

Yesterday Benedict Cumberbatch’s Star Trek Into Darkness character finally got a name, but this name didn’t exactly line up with what we had been lead to believe about the character. Luckily TrekMovie had a chance to dig deeper into this by talking to two of the film’s screenwriters: Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci. See what they had to say, but again beware of spoilers.


Kurtzman and Orci Talk John Harrison and Star Trek Canon

The biggest topic of the Trekverse today seems to be about “John Harrison,” the name Paramount has finally given to Benedict Cumberbatch’s character for Star Trek Into Darkness. As reported yesterday by TrekMovie, this name is definitely used in the movie and isn’t some kind of code name being used for marketing. However, we have been lead to believe that Cumberbatch was playing a well-known character from Star Trek’s canon, which had been fueling speculation about Gary Mitchell, Khan, Garth of Izar, Charlie X, Gary Seven and beyond.

Yesterday at a cocktail reception held after the Bad Robot Star Trek visit day, TrekMovie had a chance to corner two of the screenwriters and grill them on this possible contradiction. Here is what they had to say….

TrekMovie: A few months back Bob told me that Benedict Cumberbatch’s character would be from Star Trek’s canon. Today we find out that he is named John Harrison. So are both of those things still true?

Alex Kurtzman: Well without revealing too much what I can tell you is that in the same spirit as “can the Enterprise be under water? What does that mean? How are we going to justify this? How are we going to explain it?” We went back and we talked a lot about things that made us want to make the first movie in the first place as fans. And what do we feel was successful for the fans. A lot of that had to do with honoring the history — honoring the show. But we also want to come up with a way to make the stories feel fresh and unpredictable. So without revealing too much, we applied the same thinking to Harrison.

Reading between the lines, Kurtzman appears to be saying that Cumberbatch’s character honors Star Trek history but in a new, unpredictable way. Later on I also had a chance to ask Kurtzman’s writing partner the same question, and he took a bit of a more light-hearted approach to the answer…

TrekMovie: So you said that Cumberbatch plays a canon character, but now we see he is playing a guy named John Harrison, so no conflict?

Roberto Orci: Well I did say on your site that I lied once [see comment 67].

TrekMovie: So is this the lie?

Roberto Orci: We will have to wait and see (laughs)

Bottom line is that these guys continue to keep their cards close to their chest. TrekMovie will have another follow-up article analyzing all the John Harrison speculation here and around the web tomorrow. 

Benedict Cumberbatch as John Harrison in “Star Trek Into Darkness”


1. dlee - December 11, 2012

What a waste of time that “article” was.

2. Roddenberry was a Peacenik - December 11, 2012

I tells ya, Orci’s lie was that he never lies. It’s the Cretan Liar Paradox, but in reverse or something…

3. Danya - December 11, 2012

I hope there is some significance to the name John Harrison everyone is missing (other than it probably being an alias for a canon character), because that’s an incredibly boring name to think up.

4. Sebastian S. - December 11, 2012

The ‘character is canon’ was the lie.
Very good!

Well played, Bob Orci.
You are the master of misinformation, sir… ;-D

As long as it’s a new character and you’re not kidding about canon part being a lie? I’m happy. I wanted it to be a new character from the beginning and only got on the “Gary Mitchell” bandwagon because it seemed less ridiculous than Khan…


5. dlee - December 11, 2012

#2 I have no time for liars, even if they are doing it as a marketing stunt. They have alienated me.

6. scifib5st - December 11, 2012

Pay no attention to the one who does not peak behind the curtian… Thanks for the post.

7. The Great Bird lives - December 11, 2012

Yea, this article could have been consolidated into the last couple…since the info was obtained all at once- yesterday

8. BulletInTheFace - December 11, 2012

Kurtzman’s first answer is a disjointed and incoherent ramble that didn’t answer the question. Was he drunk at the time?

9. Vorus - December 11, 2012

Sounds a lot like the double-talk about “Is this classic time travel or not?” in ST09. They haven’t thought of how they want to explain themselves to the Trekkies yet, so they’re just spouting nonsense until they think of something. At least, that’s how it’s coming across to me.

10. Sebastian S. - December 11, 2012

Bob Orci:

“You say you are lying, but if everything you say is a lie, then you lie; but you lie then you’re telling the truth, but you cannot for you lie– ILLOGICAL. ILLOGICAL. Please explain!! Only humans can explain their behavior…”


11. Trek Fan - December 11, 2012

Oh yeah.. we got to find out… nothing from the article. It didn’t add to anything. It doesn’t clear up the “canon” aspect of the character.

12. Legate Damar - December 11, 2012

What do they mean “beware of spoilers”? The fact that they refuse to tell us whether or not John Harrison is a canon character or not is hardly a spoiler.

13. WriterJWA - December 11, 2012

I think John Harrison is a nom de guerre, much like Miranda was in The Dark Knight Rises, or John Blake’s “other” name.

14. Thomas - December 11, 2012

8. BulletInTheFace

Drunk or not, it was a finely-executed example of a total non-answer. Saying a lot and not saying much of anything at all.

15. Dee - lvs moon' surface - December 11, 2012

” Alex Kurtzman:………..But we also want to come up with a way to make the stories feel fresh and unpredictable. So without revealing too much, we applied the same thinking to Harrison.”

Whoever it is will not be the same… that’s it!

;-) :-)

16. The Outrageous Okona - December 11, 2012

John Harrison? Really? That’s the best they’ve got?

I seriously hope the name is an alias for Khan or Mitchell because if they really went with a random new character instead of any one of a hundred great canon characters, that would just be beyond lame.

It would be completely antithetical to honoring the fans, to tease us with Khan and Carol Marcus lore and then waste Cumberbatch’s talent on some no-name villain like “John Harrison”. That name is so common. I know a John Harrison in real life. I mean, come on.

17. gov - December 11, 2012

so…what theyre saying is….not interesting and not informational. great.

18. Hat Rick - December 11, 2012

Yeah, but if the lie was that it was a canon character, then that means that Gary Mitchell (or, less likely, one of the other ones listed in that famous list of possible villains where he said “actually, it’s one of those” would have to be the villain). But since he’s not, there are two lies unless it’s one of the other people/entities listed.

Which means it’s one of the other ones listed. If not, then there are two lies, which means that the statement that there was only one lie is itself a lie. Which means that there could be an unlimited amount of lies. (It doesn’t mean that everything is true, since there couldn’t even be one lie.)

19. Thomas - December 11, 2012

9. Vorus

The movie should contain the explanation, not the pre-release speculation. All the stuff regarding ST09 and MWI-QM was just the production team trying to have their cake and eat it too. Part of me appreciates their wanting to preserve canon (really, they were just throwing a bone to the longtime fans), but another part of me might have appreciated an absolute clean-slate reboot. That kind of explanation may not be necessary with this movie since the nature of its’ internal universe has already been established.

20. tony - December 11, 2012

thnx for the info always enjoy reading the articles thnx for the time you spend here

21. Anthony Pascale - December 11, 2012

The name Harrison is a spoiler. If you look at the front page of TrekMovie.com we dont reveal spoilers like Harrison or Eve as Marcus. The top bits of the articles (which appear on front page) are spoiler free. When it says “spoilers” it can be spoilers revealed in previous articles. it doesnt stop being a spoiler the next day

22. Chancellor Gowron - December 11, 2012

16-Having a common name doesn’t mean that Cumberbatch’s character won’t be great. One of the greatest Trek movies of all time had the relatively boring name of John Paxton, but he still managed to be both evil and awesome.

23. MORN SPEAKS - December 11, 2012

We are be fooled like Kirk is being fooled by John Harrison…it’s Khan.

24. Reign1701A - December 11, 2012

My theory: It means that the original script, the villain was supposed to be Khan. After auditioning several latino actors that didn’t pan out, and BC nailed the audition, they re-wrote the background of the character because quite simply, a white Brit can’t plausibly play Khan without some serious retconning. This is why Kurtzman’s answer sorta makes sense, he wanted to respect the fans and keep the audience guessing, re-doing Khan wouldn’t be “fresh”.

“And do what do we feel was successful for the fans. A lot of that had to do with honoring the history, honoring the show. But we also want to come up with a way to make the stories feel fresh and unpredictable. So without revealing too much, we applied the same thinking to Harrison.”

This is why TrekMovie’s report was probably accurate at the time.

25. Gary S. - December 11, 2012

well we did find out one thing ,
It wasnt one of the fake bob orcis who said that he lied .
It was The Real Bob Orci and he confirmed it .

26. John Harrison is boring - December 11, 2012

“Roberto Orci: We will have to wait and see (laughs)”
He’s laughing at us.
Truth is, trekkies make up only 0.001% of this movies audience, so who cares what we think, what we want, and if we’re lied to. we just don’t matter.

27. Vger23 - December 11, 2012

Wow, you guys can be miserable about ANYTHING huh? I mean, new Trek movies are special events. As a fan, I just want to enjoy the hype, mystery and buildup. The creators are playing a game with the fans. It’s supposed to be fun. Some of you take yourselves and all of this waaaay too seriously. I’d feel horrible if I wasted all this time just being angry and judgmental aboutneveryblittle element of the marketing strategy.

Folks, relax and have some fun with this!

28. DeShonn Steinblatt - December 11, 2012

Yes, Pegg and Urban both lied. And now Orci and Kurtzman won’t give a straight answer to anything for the next five months.

But I put it to you that it was all done in the name of duty!

What wouldn’t you do for family?

29. WriterJWA - December 11, 2012

#27 … I’m with you all day. I like what they’re doing with all this name business!

30. Gary S. - December 11, 2012

I took that as Bob lauging at the question .
Bob wasnt laughing at fans .

31. Lance W - December 11, 2012


I’m sure someone beat me to it, but I just had a realization as to who Cumberbatch is. He is from canon…the New Timeline canon. When young Kirk drives past the boy in his uncle’s Corvette he yells, “HEY JOHNNY!” Since they deleted the scene that originally showed that character as his brother, it would stand that he is John Harrison

32. Lance W - December 11, 2012

32 is a repost of mine from another board, I’m going to peddle my theory here. Bad Robot just loves misdirection. Is it the lie that he’s canon, or isn’t it?

33. Dr. Cheis - December 11, 2012

Sounds to me like Harrison is a character from a place or event familiar to cannon, but he is not a person familiar to cannon.

Or perhaps he fulfills a similar role to historical figures in the Prime universe.

34. The Great Bird lives - December 11, 2012

All indicators in the beginning was that Khan would be returning. Comic Books were published- Trailers aired, and then a midst all the rumor, and back-and-forth speculation the only thing all this info gave us was mass-confusion. Yea, It’s nice to see a glimpse of the finished product, and imagine the possibilities but we should trust our initial instincts, here, and for me- all indicators point in the same direction. The Great, and Powerful Khan has returned…. IMHO

By the way- Khan is not a name but a designation… as in ‘Captain’ James T. Kirk. Captain, being the designation.

35. Basement Blogger - December 11, 2012

Here’s a couple of things after reading Alex and Bob’s responses. Alex Kurtzman should run for office because he answered the question Iike a politician. He didn’t answer the question. Danced around the issue and talked about something else. The Enterprise underwater. It kind of reminded me of that scene where Omar Sharif in Lawrence of Arabia says he wants to be a politician and answers a reporter’s question in the same way. The reporter says he answered the question like a politician.

The “lie” by Bob Orci. I’ve already said his comment in number 67 was a joke in response to our Emperor Mike’s joke about lying about lying. See number 30 from the July 14 interview. The lying stuff was started by a comment about Karl Urban telling a fib. Gary Mitchell? Plus I concede that post number 67 is Bob Orci since TrekMove confirmed it. But this article notes Bob is being lighthearted about any possible conflict. Now what was the name we gave to the deflector dish and will it be in the movie, Bob? :-)

36. S - December 11, 2012




“The Wrath of Kahn” indicates a name as opposed to “The wrath of the Kahn”

37. Jason - December 11, 2012

“A lot of that had to do with honoring the history — honoring the show.”

“Roberto Orci: Well I did say on your site that I lied once [see comment 67].”

Bob, this whole series is a lie the moment you put the name “Star Trek” on your action sci fi movie, and further when you say you are “honoring” the show. B.S. JJ-Trek’s very existence dishonors the real Star Trek!

38. chrisfawkes.com - December 11, 2012

I am just so happy that it’s not Khan.

Well done guys.

39. Jason - December 11, 2012

@ 26

Amen brother! Amen!

40. Dennis Bailey - December 11, 2012

That’s nice, but no “Kahn” has ever appeared as a villain in Star Trek.

41. Shoborken - December 11, 2012

Maybe John Harrison is from the mirror universe of this timeline.

42. ReadyForDarkness - December 11, 2012

It’s clear that they aren’t ready to confirm who the villain is… but thank you for trying to get some answers, Anthony!

I think that the film must involve Khan somehow because of the TWOK references (Carol Marcus, Spock’s “the needs of the many” line, the Khan horn melody in the first 9 minutes, the hands touching through glass scene, the vengeance theme, and the fact that Paramount knows that moviegoers will recognize the name Khan). I don’t know whether Benedict as “John Harrison” is actually Khan in disguise (which could explain Bob’s repeated references to “face-melting”) or someone related to Khan (a descendent with the same enhanced capabilities or another augment from the Botany Bay), but I do think he’s involved and this will be revealed later in the film. Khan could be Weller (who doesn’t look much like Khan, but a lot is possible with CGI these days!), another actor who was snuck in, or a shadow at the end of the film… but I believe that they will introduce him in some way.

43. Commodore Redshirt - December 11, 2012

I want to say a big “THANK YOU” to Alex Kurtzman and Bob Orci. I had some doubts, but I do trust you guys.
You love Trek, you respect the fans, and you know how to tell a story.
I’m thankful the people producing this seem to love Trek as much as I do!

44. cd - December 11, 2012

10 – “I am not programmed to respond in that area.”

45. Aqua - December 11, 2012

I find it funny that everyone is complaining that the character isn’t canon, when they destroyed Vulcan in the first movie. Come on, guys, that alone should have told you that the writers to whatever the hell they want. So long as it is a good movie that stays true to the trek spirit I don’t care who the character is.

46. Walt Kozlowski - December 11, 2012

#27 Vger23 I agree! Bob Orci at least takes time to interact with us fans! Trek is getting attention and that’s a good thing! Just wish we didn’t have to wait so long!

47. P Technobabble - December 11, 2012

Take 1 part John Lennon and 1 part George Harrison and you’ve got John Harrison.

48. cd - December 11, 2012

Khan was one of several genetic supermen. John Harrison could be one, or a clone of, of the other genetic supermen.

Or Flint.

49. cd - December 11, 2012

47 – Peter Weller is George Lennon!

50. Tribble_droppings - December 11, 2012

Use Benedict Cumberbatch’s real name. That’s a real villans name :)

51. The Last Vulcan - December 11, 2012

Anthony’s article is great considering that they’re not telling him much of anything. IMHO: They’re not gonna spill the beans for a good long time so we should just get used to it and accept it. As for my opinion: Cumby is April reverse aged to take over Harrison’s Starfleet ID. That’s my story and I’m sticking to it.

52. GarySeven - December 11, 2012

That’s not true. Star Trek was always about non-stop explosions and fights. It was always about evil people trying to blow up the Earth because of vengeance. These guys really understand the true Star Trek.
“The Devil in the Dark”, about understanding the Horta’s motivations and making peace with it- that was the fake Star Trek. “The Corbomite Maneuver”, about demonstrating kindness for your enemy as a test of your character. “Arena”- about showing how humanity will evolve into the “advanced trait of mercy.” That was not the real Star Trek.
These guys got it right. The real Star Trek, what makes Star Trek unique, is about evil people trying to blow up the Earth, and how we have to kill them first.

53. Ran - December 11, 2012


It is only a name which has got nothing to do with the quality (or lack of) of the final film.

54. Jagen - December 11, 2012

I agree with the people who believe that the character is in the same vein as Khan or Gary Mitchell, thus keeping the Star Trek canon comment alive and well. Perhaps a different history but a retelling of a character with the same criteria. This is a good thing, people! Fresh ideas but the same Star Trek feel and familiarity. Let’s face it, there are going to be varied opinions NO MATTER WHAT they put out there. Some people want brand new, some want TOS while others TNG. Try and look at it as film-making and writing and acting WITHOUT hating it before you see it because it doesn’t meet your expectation of Trek. Then if you dislike it, fine. No problem. It isn’t your cup of tea.

55. Ahmed - December 11, 2012

I don’t care much if it is Khan, Gary or John. Just make the story interesting & the movie to feel like a Star Trek movie, not a generic action/sci-fi movie.

56. mhansen0207 - December 11, 2012

It’s always so amusing to me to come on here and see people claiming they know exactly what constitutes “real” Star Trek. If the idea of the JJ-verse and what it stands for SO offends you, why waste your time complaining about it on every single article posted? If anything, it gives the appearance of childishness and petulance.

I for one, am happy with JJ and company. They have revitalized Star Trek for a new generation, and I trust them in their creative decisions in this film. Besides, who am I to question what they’ve done when I haven’t even seen the finished product yet?

57. me - December 11, 2012

What would really piste me of is if this Harrison guy is ether a new name for Khan, cuz in the new time line there is no khan that did what khan did or that this is khan but from the UK thus the name change, that would be a disgusting play on ST history and just because its a different time line does not make cool, I would take out on Paramount if this is the case by not seeing Paramount movies for the remainder of the year unless they were Sci Fi and spetacular even if they suck like Avatar.

i’ hope I’ made sense cuz I’ can’t make sense to myself.

imaging if this harrison its just another from the eugenics war, that be stupid don’t you think, please anybody just tell me something even if its an insult, i can take an insult or two or i’m i’ the only one that would be sick if this line of thinking on my part happens to be right on the money.

58. dlee - December 11, 2012

#52 Totally agree, good sir.

Anyway, this manipulative marketing and game-playing by Orci, Abrams and co have helped me make up my mind: in May 2013, my money will be spent on Luhrmann’s Great Gatsby and maybe a French art film or two. I am not going to be contributing to Paramount’s box office takings.

59. mhansen0207 - December 11, 2012


Fantastic, then stop complaining about it and just don’t go. Very simple.

60. me - December 11, 2012

I’ will wait.

61. Konar - December 11, 2012

24–for your theory to be true, the world would have to be lacking in Latin American actors, which it is not. Do you really believe if the script demanded a Latin American actor (which even if it was Kahn they were casting it would not) they would have had to give up? I assure you, the world is full of brilliant ethnic actors you have never heard of.

62. me - December 11, 2012

Simple is sometimes not easy

63. ScottC - December 11, 2012

#27….I’m with you too. While its fun to speculate, some do take it to the extreme! Lets not forget, its a M-O-V-I-E folks. If you are going to hang your very existence on everything about it, and get in to back and forth wars with each other trying to prove the other wrong, then what the great William Shatner once said is so true: “Get a life!”

64. me - December 11, 2012

@61 Thanks

65. me - December 11, 2012

@63 agree

66. Colin - December 11, 2012

Am I the only one who honestly feels like these guys don’t owe us anything? Honestly, how do you expect to enjoy something when you know every detail of it..it is obvious the identity of this character IS the plot twist…a plot twist is you know…the POINT OF THE ENTIRE MOVIE AND WHY YOU SHOULD SEE IT.

Speculation is fine and fun with some minor details but please stop pestering them to ruin their work that they’ve been trying to put together for us for the past few years..

If you don’t like this new Star Trek then don’t go see it…What else can you honestly do about it? You think whining on trekmovie.com is going to make them pack up their desk and leave?

These guys don’t owe you ANYTHING…AAAAANNNYYYTTTHHHIIINNNGG, nobody is forcing you to go, or enjoy the previous one.

67. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

Roberto Orci: Well I did say on your site that I lied once [see comment 67].

TrekMovie: So is this the lie?

Roberto Orci: We will have to wait and see (laughs)



68. ScottC - December 11, 2012

#66…Well said!!

69. Drunk Garak - December 11, 2012

If the character is genuinely named John Harrison, and that’s not an alias, then it certainly sounds like they wrote it with Khan (or Mitchell) in mind but decided to change the character — whether due to casting or just story potential — so that they could be freer to craft a unique tale without the constraint of previously established background.

If the basis was Khan, perhaps Harrison, or the Peter Weller character, is another leader from the Eugenics Wars that also escaped earth in deep sleep.

70. Adolescent Nightmare - December 11, 2012

Won’t answer the question, boborci?


71. Drunk Garak - December 11, 2012

John rhymes with Khan. Just pointing it out.

Will we hear Chris Pine scream “JOOHHHHNNNNNNNNN!!!” in this movie?

72. Dennis Bailey - December 11, 2012

#58: “in May 2013, my money will be spent on Luhrmann’s Great Gatsby”

It’s really quite funny that you’re up for watching Luhrmann piss all over Fitzgerald’s art, but take yourself so seriously as to boycott a sci-fi movie because you imagine that you’ve been dissed by a stranger.

Luhrmann’s “Gatsby” promises to be a train wreck best enjoyed by the half-literate. Enjoy it.

73. dlee - December 11, 2012

59 No, I will continue to raise my voice on various sites. I know other people who were disgusted by the marketing last time, too. The more detractors the film has, the lower its takings will be.

74. jagen - December 11, 2012

I totally agree #59. Stop complaining and don’t go. Having worked in this industry, albeit not the paramount universe, I can say this for certain: anyone who thinks this is not good film-making is wrong. Hate the story or the universe that doesn’t flow perfectly in sync with your expectations, but it is absolutely cutting edge work. Talking to producers around the market and they salivate at the thought of having such a film.

75. me - December 11, 2012

Even you all are talking to each others comments, when you make sense I’ take personally.

76. Alan - December 11, 2012

I want to watch this stupid movie so f***ing badly now!

77. kendall P. - December 11, 2012

Has anyone noticed that John Harrison and
Gary Mitchell have they exact same amount of letters? Same amount of vowels and consonants.

78. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

Consider that John Harrison could be some kin of “entity” figure from canon instead of an actual “character”. Perhaps he’s an early version of a Borg created by Doctor Soon? Or perhaps it is V’Ger from the original universe come back in time in a new universe and in human form? The point being that being “from canon” is vague because there are so many entities and unnamed ones that they could choose from in 4 different shows and 10 movies.

Count me in as thinking Cumberbatch is playing an augmented human-android hybrid who winds up being the prototype for the Borg.

79. Buzz Cagney - December 11, 2012

I have said i’m really looking forward to this picture. I lied. But only once.

I think i preferred it when they weren’t saying anything!!
I love being a fickle Trekker :))

80. ScottC - December 11, 2012

#72…why do I think you are the type of person that would tell a 2 year old there is no Santa Claus, just to satisfy some sick little need you have. If you don’t like these movies or this site, why are you heare? You are the pathetic one, seriously!

81. mhansen0207 - December 11, 2012


Fine, continue to act like a child and waste your time. I’m’ DEFINITELY sure it will “lower the rankings.”

But go do it on a hater site where people will care.

82. This is going to be a long year - December 11, 2012

If the movie is great, new or old villain, Khan or Khan’t, it will not matter.

But it is kind of funny. Are they toying with us, are we seeing a game where there is none or are they just giving some of the fans what they asked for?

Fans: “Don’t you dare do Khan we want something fresh!”

Bad Robot: “Here you go, it’s John Harrison”

Fans: “Johnny who? How dare they use an unknown. Umm, Khan wasn`t such a bad idea.”

83. Harry Ballz - December 11, 2012

The only way this name thing makes sense is, if all through the movie the villain is called John Harrison, only to have it revealed late in the film that his real name is something else.

84. me - December 11, 2012

@73 Who in there right mind would disagree with what you just said.

85. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

I am not sure that the Supreme Court lead you guys up the Khan or Mitchell or anyone else’s garden path. Frankly, you guys (most of the regular posters here) did that all by yourselves. Bob Orci was under a cone of silence (apart from throwing a few TOS names out) and so just had to read and be impressed (or not) by the stories that people came up with to explain their choice of TOS canon villain.

Come on, Bob. Just admit what the lie was and make me right…:)
(If John Harrison is a pseudonym for Gary or Khan or some other TOS villain, then I feel a very serious chat has to be had with you, Bob Orci…)

I can’t believe that people can’t accept the name John Harrison, whereas they’ll happily accept names like Flint, John Paxton, Col. Green, Gary Mitchell – none of them overly original or impressive names. Perhaps if Bob or Alex had given him the name of John Smith (oh wait, that’s Dr Who’s other name) or Brian Baker, then Cumby could just be Brian Baker, an ex-Starfleet member, bright, with access to some “mean dude” hardware, sorely pissed and out for revenge.

Clearly, it’s all in the name…LOL

I’ve got it – John Harrison is really Brian Baker. You read it here first.

86. faheyplayer - December 11, 2012

Let the movie be good ole StarTrek. If we get good ole Star Trek -though I’m expecting a cut above that- what does it matter who the villain is? The villain controversy is rendered moot.
So far, looks pretty damn good. Can’t wait.

87. Colin - December 11, 2012

A prototype for the Borg? The Borg have already been around for more years than we can imagine..they’ve already established control of the Delta Quadrant…

Watch Times Arrow and Q Who? as a refresher.

Besides, I’de rather wait and see a Borg movie when they reboot TNG with Tom Hardy as Picard

88. mhansen0207 - December 11, 2012

Whoops, my previous comment was directed at #73. My mistake

89. jagen - December 11, 2012

# 72 will do it until he gets the Trek he wants! And then someone like himself will go online and tell him that they won’t stop until HIS idea of Trek is destroyed…and so on…and so on…
Let the movie happen. Your opinion is valid because we are all entitled but you can’t please everyone.

90. jagen - December 11, 2012

My last comment was directed at #73. sorry about that.

91. me - December 11, 2012

@76 that be cool

92. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

Surely Bob made the Enterprise go underwater because he’s familiar with UFO lore.

93. Green-blooded Inhuman - December 11, 2012

#76 Please tell me you’re joking.

94. Ahmed - December 11, 2012

@ 85. Colin – December 11, 2012

“Besides, I’de rather wait and see a Borg movie when they reboot TNG with Tom Hardy as Picard”

Why wait? They can bring the Borg in the third movie. After all, they showed the Borg in the Enterprise episode “Regeneration”, pre TOS.

95. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

“Alex Kurtzman: Well without revealing too much what I can tell you is that in the same spirit as “can the Enterprise be under water? What does that mean? How are we going to justify this? How are we going to explain it?” We went back and we talked a lot about things that made us want to make the first movie in the first place as fans. And what do we feel was successful for the fans. A lot of that had to do with honoring the history — honoring the show. But we also want to come up with a way to make the stories feel fresh and unpredictable. So without revealing too much, we applied the same thinking to Harrison.”


John Harrison IS a recognizable canon character, and they came up with a clever way to explain why he is called John Harrison in this movie.

96. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

As a die hard old-school original series fan, I had to come to the realization that the new Trek was not my Trek. That being said, I enjoyed the new movie for what it was. I tend to think of ST09 as “Star Trek the Amusement Park Ride”. While the characters are the same, they can never replace Shatner, Nimoy, etc. nor will the stories they tell ever be as thoughtful as those told in the TV show because it has become a big budget franchise. Ron Moore nailed it when he said Star Trek ran out of steam with Voyager. It needed a re-boot. I’ll take what we have now over nothing at all any day.

97. Mad Man - December 11, 2012

The next statement is false.

That last statement is true.

I like pie.

Khan sucks.

98. Paul - December 11, 2012

To me all of this guessing and speculation is whetting my appetite and making this SO MUCH FUN.

Those of you who are being – how can I say this… ‘not nice’ about this or not having some fun really need to not rain on the parade.

It’s only a movie. NOT world peace.

99. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

@87 He could always be a Borg prototype who later travels back in time. Canon has established that the Borg can travel through time in “First Contact”. There’s no reason BC can’t be the “original” Borg, even in both universes.

100. me - December 11, 2012

To some here that said The movie looks fantastic or something in that line, yea but all trek looks fantastic, well but V and even that one had people that liked it.

101. AJ - December 11, 2012


“The only way this name thing makes sense is, if all through the movie the villain is called John Harrison, only to have it revealed late in the film that his real name is something else.”

Frank Harrison?

102. andrewtellis - December 11, 2012

It’s not specifically a John Harrison, but there is a character named Harrison in the Original Series and he was a Starfleet officer on board the Enterprise. He was on screen in at least 14 episodes but only mentioned by name in Space Seed.


Also, I really like the idea of this John Harrison being Johnny from Star Trek 2009, the kid Kirk drives past when he steal the car.

103. Green-blooded Inhuman - December 11, 2012

@99 If you seriously believe that then you’re an idiot. Most of the people on here must be taking some serious drugs while you’re posting.

104. me - December 11, 2012

@97, @98, @101 = lol

105. Colin - December 11, 2012


They’re not going to do another Borg time travel movie…

The Borg from “Regeneration” wouldn’t even be there in this timeline either, because although they would have been dealt with pre-TOS era, due to the new timeline changes the events of First Contact might never occur and therefore the results of Regeneration..so yes although the entire FUTURE of this new timeline is different, the PAST may also have changed because of future time travel events…yes..that IS confusing but true.

Besides, that would also make this ANOTHER time travel Star Trek film… the last time was only to make a new universe to play around story wise in…

106. MJ - December 11, 2012

Anthony, thanks for trying your best, dude, but let’s just say that I find your impersonation of Woodward and Bernstein to be somewhat lacking.


107. Lance W - December 11, 2012

John Harrison:


108. MJ - December 11, 2012

Regarding the Borg, while I think it is very unlikely, and would also violate canon, given what we know about this movie right now, you could make the case that the plot here would be a runaway Starfleet black ops division being responsible for originating the Borg.

109. Jerry Modene - December 11, 2012

Besides, the original Borg is what was created when Decker and Ilia and V’ger merged at the end of ST:TMP. :)

110. Green-blooded Inhuman - December 11, 2012

@108 JUST STOP. The Borg are millenniums old. They did not originate is the 23 century in the Alpha Quadrant.

111. AJ - December 11, 2012


Lance: Because “Johnny” is in ST09, it gives the theory some credence, especially when you see the look on Kirk’s face once the villain removes his hoodie in the teaser. It is within JJverse continuity.

112. MJ - December 11, 2012


Star Trek 2013: BC’s character = John “Harrison”

Star Trek 2009: Kirk’s car = “Ford” Mustang

Clue solved for who will play the villain in Trek 2016: “Harrison Ford”

113. Lance W - December 11, 2012


This is who I think it is now….who knows what happens to him growing up. And I feel the villain is definitely someone Kirk knows.

114. Lance W - December 11, 2012


That care is a Chevy Corvette, but your post is amusing. :)

115. Lance W - December 11, 2012

*car, not care

116. MJ - December 11, 2012

@110. Relax, and please note my disclaimers = very unlikely and would violate canon.

Please read my entire post next time before jumping on me, dude. Sheesh!

117. MJ - December 11, 2012

@114. Whoops! :-)

118. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

Lol! My original point was that Harrison could actually be an entity like the Borg and not a specific character, thus validating the John Harrison is from canon.

After watching the kid-Kirk scene again from ST09, I am thoroughly convinced that Johnny is John Harrison. I always wondered why they took the screen time to dwell on that kid when he played zero role in the movie.

I also am beginning to think this movie’s press has been a swerve since day 1. I wouldn’t doubt if we see Del Toro show up at the very end as Khan. Yeah, talks may have fallen through for “into Darkness”, but maybe they really wanted him for the third movie. Just speculating.

119. Jefferies Tuber - December 11, 2012

“can the Enterprise be under water?’ means that just because we haven’t seen something before does not mean it can’t happen.

120. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

@110 the Borg are fictional so the writers of Trek could have them originate whenever they’d like. Anything is a possibilty at this point.

121. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

Bob didn’t lie about Harrison being canon.

Bob lied because he had to lie.

There would be absolutely no point saying Cumberbatch’s character was canon if he was really new, because if he was really new, there would be no way at all for us to guess his identity.

We only have a chance to do that if the character is someone we know.

122. Green-blooded Inhuman - December 11, 2012

@120 Incorrect.

123. Star Sick: the Original Generation - December 11, 2012

#44 – love it.
#71 – that’d be the icing on the cake.

OK, so… first time poster. I have not been following this site long, though I have popped in a few times in the past. Been enjoying the debates, even if I get to the party late (as usual) and after a while just go to “skimming mode” because there’s just so much… at least now I can get in relatively early. ;)

I’ve been in the “please not Khan” camp forever. I definitely held on to The Gary Mitchell Theory* like iron filings to a magnet, because it was different. In reality “Where No Man…” is one of my least favorite episodes. But I liked it better because it wasn’t a rehash of TWOK.

I think The Khan Debate** strikes at something that is a bigger deal in all of Hollywood of late, and that is: constant remakes. Seems every other movie is. Some turn out good; some don’t.*** We’re vocally unhappy because we don’t want to see the same old thing again, which is a valid position. If, as is being postulated here, it’s not a straight up Khan rehash, but more of a re-interpretation, that’s cool, as long as it’s done well.

I’m liking the recent talk about Robert April. Might be way off base, but oh what an idea it is.

Me, I’m not mad, I’m just frustrated at the secrecy. I don’t expect everything laid out, but they’re going so far out of their way to obfuscate things, that I’m starting to deliberately seek out spoilers in self-defense. If somebody handed me the official script, I’d likely read the whole thing out of frustration! :)

At any rate, I’ve gone on too long. Sorry, but it is the way of my people. Or… just me.

“True Trek” only consists of U.S. space probes that have gained sentience! That leaves us with… “The Changeling” and ST:TMP.


Have a good day folks. LLAP!

Your pal,

* This would make a great band name.
** This would NOT make a great band name.
*** I’m one of the rare people who liked the “The Day the Earth Stood Still” remake. Conversely, I’m passing Superman reboot. I’m sick to death of origin stories. But, you know, live and let film, I guess.

124. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

@121 Also, if John Harrison is Johnny from ST09, then, technically, Johnny is now “canon”.

125. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

Johnny is an interesting possibility because he gets kicked out by uncle. So what happens to him after he leaves home all pissed off?

126. MJ - December 11, 2012

“I also am beginning to think this movie’s press has been a swerve since day 1. I wouldn’t doubt if we see Del Toro show up at the very end as Khan. Yeah, talks may have fallen through for “into Darkness”, but maybe they really wanted him for the third movie. Just speculating.”

That would be the ultimate face saver for me — Del Toro showing up as Khan at the end. I can just imagine hearing Trek Fan and Montreal Paul growning as there is no Khan the entire movie, but then there he is at the end still waking up in the Botany Bay, with his movie being a vehicle for BC to set him up for Trek 2016. LOL

127. AJ - December 11, 2012

Can we just stop with the Borg and Section 31, or anything that ties heavily into TNG/DS9/VOY/ENT?

Cardassian bar drinks and Admiral Archer’s beagle are fine little winks for all of us, and many of us think Geordi LaForge built Spock’s ship in ST09 because of a comic book.

The content of these films are strictly relegated to the initial classic: TOS. In this film, we get (wink) bat’leths and Klingon facial hair. No Borg, Husnock, Pakleds, Q, Traveler, Bajorans, Cardassians, Jem’Hadar, etc.

Theorizing is fun, but limit your scopes to the 23rd Century.

128. Anthony Thompson - December 11, 2012

“Kurtzman’s writing partner”? Sounds to me like the atmosphere may be a bit chilly between Bob and AP at the moment.

129. Jax Maxton - December 11, 2012

@122 incorrect that the Borg aren’t fictional? Okay, then…

130. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

#95 – Really?

The Enterprise being under water is NEW and I doubt anyone could have predicted seeing a starship being underwater in a harbour/ocean. It does take some explaining, given that we’ve been told that ships like the Enterprise cannot land on earth – not sure why – something to do with not being able to withstand earth’s gravitational forces I think, but really that does not make a great deal of sense…

What could be – is in fact some genuine thinking on the part of (sci-fi) engineers has been sought and a new hull design and material has been incorporated which allows this Enterprise to withstand earth’s gravitational forces (even it can’t handle all other gravitational forces) and also be submersible… Externally the Enterprise will still look much like it always did.

Certainly a large starship emerging out of a harbour’s sea would be unexpected, especially if it was brand new technology…!

Star Trek TOS was trying to be innovative for its time, the 1960’s, presenting people with possibilities of various technologies, warp power, transporters, food replicators, medical advances and weaponry – some of those technologies we now take for granted and use all the time; ideologies like the Prime Directive, although Captains Kirk and Picard found putting theory into practice difficult sometimes, while others totally misunderstood the concept; and, of course, the peaceful exploration of the cosmos…

This is how I understand Alex’s statement to mean. They are creating technologies and characters in a similar way to how the original Star Trek often went out on a limb. It actually took many repeat screenings of episodes for many people to get their heads around some of the ideas presented in Star Trek. Strange but true.

Now, Alex and Bob, go out on a limb and have Kirk and the guys/gals do some good ol’ explorin’. What say you? Perhaps that’s what they are doing on that planet with the red vegetation. Exploring can be hazardous. That was one hell of a dive for my captain and that Bones man.

131. Nony - December 11, 2012

Though I’ve heard a lot of ‘my friend has a friend who had script access and they said Khan was in the movie’ floating around, I am loath to put all my eggs in the Khan basket (wow, that was a ridiculous mental image), but maybe the dude’s name literally is John Harrison – and he is still Khan. Something goes wrong in the stasis tube and former-Khan comes out with a touch of amnesia? The Botany Bay retrieved by somebody with access to some nice medical equipment who brainwashes him into believing he has a reason for vengeance and programs him into an anti-Federation weapon?

The more important question is what John Harrison will do with Keith Jagger when he finds him. Longstanding rivalry, that. I foresee some detonation.

132. MJ - December 11, 2012

@125. Weird though that they didn’t leave that scene in the movie?

133. chrisfawkes.com - December 11, 2012

If the Klingons had Nero’s ship with Borg technology for the best part of 25 years that would have an effect in advancing technology at that time.

That may get the attention of the Borg in current Trek universe time who may decide to invade now rather than wait until the Federation was even more advanced than it already is.

So for the third movie they could introduce the Borg and show how Kirk, unlike Picard, makes a plan to wipe them all out so they are a menace no more.

134. Bob Tompkins - December 11, 2012

Are they lying about the comics being part of continuity? If not, Gary Mitchell has already been dealt with and dispatched, so it’s not him.
Too many callbacks to Khan.
I would be mightily surprised if it’s not Khan, although I’d still much rather Javier Bardem tackled that role.

135. SoonerDave - December 11, 2012

I think the Robert April theory is getting stronger every moment. And, strictly speaking, he’s not even canon. Then again, neither is the Enterprise under water.

My own silly little wish list for a TOS movie: One good scene where a substantial portion of the plot is extrapolated in a well-written, tightly directed scene in the briefing room. Want a model? Look at the briefing room scene in “Balance of Terror.” For my money, some of the best writing of the series. Great dialog, perfectly directed. And that scene was absolutely pivotal in understanding the rest of the episode.

The guess-the-villian is fun to a point, but just give me a good movie. That’s all.

136. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

So maybe what Kurtzman is saying is that there’s a radical departure for the Harrison character from what we expect…and they had to come up with a clever way of explaining how he got to be who he now is.

Interesting idea that John is Kirk’s brother. Dramatic.

137. HT - December 11, 2012

In “Bread and Circuses” the S.S. Beagle’s flight officer is William B. Harrison. Any connection there?

138. Lance - December 11, 2012


Since that scene was deleted, they don’t have to consider him a relative of Kirk…he could simply be a boyhood friend.

139. MJ - December 11, 2012

@135 “I think the Robert April theory is getting stronger every moment.”

Sorry, I must have missed that staff meeting? What Robert April theory?

140. Green-blooded Inhuman - December 11, 2012

@133 NO. Why even bother coming up with that absurd theory and posting it?

If the character is indeed canon, precluding Orci lying, there are 5 options: (1) They gave the background character from TOS named Harrison a first name (2) It’s this Johnny kid (doesn’t make sense considering they wanted Del Toro) (3) Some entity from canon that has inhabited this Harrison (4) John Harrison is a member of a canonical group (Section 31, augments, follower of Khan), and (5) Fake name.

141. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

WHY don’t we have a name for Weller’s character yet???

If he’s new, as Bob said, what’s the secret???

142. Capt. Quinn - December 11, 2012

After re-reading Alex’s explanation again, I have come up with this scenario: Gary Mitchell has somehow possessed John Harrison and is now getting his vengeance. That’s an explanation worthy of how the Enterprise being underwater will be explained. :)

143. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

And PLEASE don’t anyone say because hes Khan!

144. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

I’ll barf all over myself, I swear.

145. Captain Ben Kenobi - December 11, 2012

@Bob The correct response should be, “what I told you was true from a certain point of view…” Oops wrong saga. May the schwartz be with you!?!?!

146. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

#125 – Incorrect.

The scene was deleted. The boy walking along the side of the road was called Johnny by the young Jimmy Kirk and that is all we know about him.

The online comic series explains that Jim Kirk’s older brother, George Samuel, left home a little while back to stay with his grandmother and Jim Kirk was on his own with his uncle when he took the car.

147. chrisfawkes.com - December 11, 2012

It’s pretty desperate that some of you guys are still speculation other characters. Khan, Mitchell or whatever.

The villains name is John Harrison. Accept it.

148. Captain Ben Kenobi - December 11, 2012

And stop using Jedi Mind Tricks on us!!!!

149. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

139. MJ – December 11, 2012

Report is that the gun Harrison swings appeared in a “carelessly left open” sketch book, and that it was named Robert April’s Gatling Gun.

150. MJ - December 11, 2012

@143. LOL I almost choked up my soda here DM — LOL!!

151. chrisfawkes.com - December 11, 2012

For those who think it is someone else.

Self-deception is a process of denying or rationalizing away the relevance, significance, or importance of opposing evidence and logical argument. Self-deception involves convincing oneself of a truth (or lack of truth) so that one does not reveal any self-knowledge of the deception.


152. MJ - December 11, 2012

@149. ditto!

153. AJ - December 11, 2012

Here’s the scene: Kirk and his brother. BC looks like Jim’s brother somewhat. I hate the scene.

Jim: “Where are you going?”

Brother: “As far as I can get.”



154. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

This focus on Cumberbatch’s character has been great cover for Weller’s mystery character.

155. MJ - December 11, 2012

@151. I’d hate to live in world without a little bit of self-deception.

156. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

153. AJ – December 11, 2012

He doesn’t really sound english though. He’s concealing his natural accent.

But then, there is that poster skyline.

157. Will - December 11, 2012

I thought it was established that the reasoning for everything they’re doing at this point was “because we can.”

Or, at least, I recall that exact sentiment being made when fans questioned why they would do this, that, or the other.

It’s a pretty water tight excuse to do whatever you want with everything.

158. The Last Vulcan - December 11, 2012

139. MJ – MY personal take on the plot:

An old April-Cumby takes a TNG era ship across the divide into the other timeline, maybe trying to find Spock Prime.
At some point perhaps through a Khan (being played by your choice of Woody Allen, John Goodman, or Joan Rivers) connection which could be the eugenics secret sauce he ages backwards and gets superpowers.
He needs an ID so he kills Harrison and takes his.
He starts wreaking havoc. Why? BECAUSE THIS IS NOT HIS STARFLEET! The JJ Starfleet has inadvertently done something horrible which only April can realize since he has the perspective of the other timeline… (Cumby sez he’s not all good but not all bad) and the 1701 captures him, without knowing that he’s April.
His identity is revealed and now both Kirk and Spock are faced with offing someone they respect and adulate.

We’ll see if I’m right!

159. MJ - December 11, 2012

@158. ;-)

160. trek freak - December 11, 2012

I am so exited for this movie the only thing that bothers me is the enterprise going under water. In this article when Kurtzman said how are we going to explain the enterprise going under water does this mean that there will be an explanation for why the enterprise can go under water? I dont even care if its some new tipe of shield technology just please give a explanation.

161. BJ (TheFreshMaker) - December 11, 2012

@73 dlee

If fans couldnt keep Trek afloat with Enterprise and Nemesis, you sure are not going to be able to make this one tank. The general audience is what makes and breaks these things, and they dont care what little angry nerds say about anything.

162. Star Sick: the Original Generation - December 11, 2012

With all the TWOK tidbits we’ve been getting (Carol Marcus, hands on the glass, etc.), it does look like we’re being set up for something.

I wouldn’t mind, I suppose, if STID winds up not being a Khan film, but rather a SETUP for the Khan film, which would cap off the trilogy. Makes sense, actually.

But then again, the Joker wound up in the 2nd of the Batman reboot movies. I still haven’t seen the 3rd yet, so I don’t know if my theory works.


Your pal,

163. Commodore Adams - December 11, 2012

@ 24. Reign1701A – Best theory I’ve heard so far.

164. Red Dead MJ (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

Isn’t it obvious that Cumberbatch playing ‘John Harrison,’ Eve playing ‘Carol Marcus,’ and Orci ‘s denial of Gary Mitchell are just lies to throw people off due to Karl Urban letting it slip that Cumberbatch is playing Gary Mitchell? After Gary Mitchell was killed in the canon ongoing comic, his ‘coffin’ was shot or beamed into space, giving him the chance to return. Dr. Dehner was absent from those two issues and Alive Eve has the same hairdo that the actress had in the episode. Either Orci or the comics’ writer said that there were STID clues in that issue.

Of course there’s always the chances that:
A.) ‘John Harrison’ is a pseudonym that he uses.
B.) Khan’s mind is put in Gary Mitchell’s body like in Turnabout Intruder.

And “GATT2000?” Yeah, right. He’s probably playing one of the Klingons.

165. Pegasus - December 11, 2012

The villain speculation was fun. Now it turns out to be a total waste of time and everyone on behind the movie was sitting there laughing at us. We were a big joke. Disappointing, at best.

166. Adam E - December 11, 2012

Has it been said that Weller’s character is a villain? I think I remember reading that somewhere.

167. MJ - December 11, 2012

“I wouldn’t mind, I suppose, if STID winds up not being a Khan film, but rather a SETUP for the Khan film, which would cap off the trilogy. Makes sense, actually.”

In my opinion this is a distinct possibility. Again, I would be shocked if the Khan story is not central to this film in some way.

168. Nony - December 11, 2012

I hope the destruction-of-Vulcan dangling plot threads from the last movie tie into this one more than we’re realizing/discussing.

Also, I wonder if the little girl’s illness, and Harrison saying he can help, link in any thematic way to the Klingon augment virus (and via that, to the human augments) and the fact that the Klingons in this movie apparently have forehead ridges. Maybe someone ‘helped’ them out with that little problem.

169. MJ - December 11, 2012

@164 Dude, would you please stop bastardizing other posters’ names.

Anthony, please note.

170. Max - December 11, 2012

Young Kirk is yelling out “Hey Georgie!”. Not Hey Johnny. Listen closer. Watch the deleted scenes.

171. Smike - December 11, 2012

Don’t let them fool you.

Orci told the truth first, saying BC would play a canon character! The true lie is that he was John Harrison! No matter what they may tell us at this point, we all know it’s going to be Khan after all. Yes, the character will be called John Harrison throughout the better part of the movie. But in the end, he’ll be revealed as a major canon villain. It’s Miranda Tate / Thalia Al Ghul all over again. You can see this in the similiarities between TDKR and STID trailers…But that scam only works if Orci admits to have been telling a lie while talking abut the character’s canonicity.

The name John Harrison is an illusion, a comforting lie told to protect their secret. But they won’t fool me…

172. MJ - December 11, 2012

George, John, hell, they are all Beatles anyway, right?

173. MJ - December 11, 2012

@171 Yep!

174. Star Sick: the Original Generation - December 11, 2012


Yeah. We’ve been thrown far too many Khan-shaped bones for that not to be the case.

Wait… Bones?

“I’m a doctor, not a genetically-altered overlord!”


Your pal,

175. Red Dead MJ (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

I also forgot to add, what if they actually dubbed or even refilmed some scenes to change Cumberbatch’s character’s name to John Harrison?

176. Colin - December 11, 2012

OK, I’m officialy bored, lets honestly begin Star Trek 3 Villian speculation

I’m honestly going to say they’re going to do weird/fun and have:

Mirror Universe, its sort of iconic, Spock’s evil beard and all…the public would buy into it.

177. Nomad - December 11, 2012

non-sequiter! non-sequiter!

178. msn1701 - December 11, 2012

Mirror!nuKhan is my guess.

179. Disinvited - December 11, 2012

#63. ScottC

The SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE! writer Robert Smigel created that line “Get a life!” for a comedy skit in which a fictional Shatner so admonishes fictional attendees of a likewise STAR TREK convention. The real William Shatner gamely agreed to perform this fiction and freely admits he had nothing to do with the creation of that line.

When you quote that line and fail to give it its due and proper attribution, you demonstrate the same inability to distinguish fiction from reality that you so disparage in others.

180. Red Dead MJ (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

Isn’t it obvious that Cumberbatch playing ‘John Harrison,’ Eve playing ‘Carol Marcus,’ and Orci ‘s denial of Gary Mitchell are just lies to throw people off due to Karl Urban letting it slip that Cumberbatch is playing Gary Mitchell? After Gary Mitchell was killed in the canon ongoing comic, his ‘coffin’ was shot or beamed into space, giving him the chance to return. Dr. Dehner was absent from those two issues and Alive Eve has the same hairdo that the actress had in the episode. Either Orci or the comics’ writer said that there were STID clues in that issue.

Of course there’s always the chances that:
A.) ‘John Harrison’ is a pseudonym that he uses.
B.) Khan’s mind is put in Gary Mitchell’s body like in Turnabout Intruder.
C.) They dubbed or maybe even refilmed scenes to change Cumberbatch’s character’s name to John Harrison.

And “GATT2000?” Yeah, right. He’s probably playing one of the Klingons.

181. Star Sick: the Original Generation - December 11, 2012


“You have made three errors!”


182. MyrthicTrek - December 11, 2012

The deeper meaning of the writers’ comments– this new movie series is indeed a reboot. They are intent on quoting elements and themes from TOS, but they do not intend on being slaves to what has come before. The former maximizes the potential audience and creative flexibility. The latter constrains the goal of broad appeal too much. So this is a new kind of Trek. I’ve made peace with that.

p.s. Anthony, great site, for many years now. Keep up the good work!

183. OldDarth - December 11, 2012

I interpret what they are saying is that this timeline’s version of a canon character has a different name. Harrison will be a canon character in everyway except an original canon name.

They may even leave it up to us to decide which canon character Harrison is meant to be.

184. Smike - December 11, 2012

It’s the acronym of “Into Darkness” “ID”? ID can stand for identity (card)…So a central portion of the film could be about the identity of someone. e real question is “Who is John Harrison?”… In that respect even “Into Darkness” itself may not be “darkness” as in “gloom and doom” but “the darkness of the unknown identity”…Nobody but Weller’s character (April?) may know the true identity of Harrison / Khan…

185. Veritas2012 - December 11, 2012

The fact that Vulcan was destroyed in the first movie, the Supreme Court can do whatever they want in this alternate universe. I do not mind if the villian is new. But, John Harrison? Of all the names they can come up with, is that really the best they can do? Take Spock Prime back to his prime universe.

186. wendy - December 11, 2012

I really don’t think the premise for destroying a world is really going to have it’s roots based on a young Kirk flying by yelling “Johhny!” (yes, I hear ‘johnny’ quite clearly) in a car he just stole. I think that one little scene is being read into far too deeply.

187. dmduncan - December 11, 2012

I think Weller is definitely reprising his role as Paxton.

He’s going to be like Weyland from the Alien franchise. But instead of “building better worlds,” he’s building better people. Augmented ones.

Because he always was a gene freak.

The Johnny on the road theory DOES explain some things from the trailer that no other theory does.

In all of Kirk’s interactions with him, Kirk looks personally affected, as if this bad guy IS somebody he knows. When he punches him on the Klingon planet, it looks like the kind of rage you might express at some kind of personal betrayal.

So it raises the possibility of family.

Maybe he’s John “Kirk” from ST.09, but since he got cut from the movie, he’s become a close friend in this one. Or maybe he is STILL John Kirk.

188. ThePhaige - December 11, 2012

They say much yet say nothing…which IMO just adds to the fun however,

John is an diversion, just like Bond uses other names as cover, It is Gary Mitchell….hear me out. The whole start of the 9 minute preview is set up to ask the question” who are you?” and the snickering look on Cumberbatch’s face is a tell. Why go through all that for and unknown name. I was right about Carol Markus also, that’s the family piece coinciding with the crew(family) and also the Human family. Kirk and Bones on the Nibiru removing ancient scrolls? Nibiru is not a coincidental name, its referred to in the Zecharia Sitchin translations of Sumarian texts and has apocalyptic significance. This movie is going to be an allegorical retelling of the Biblical book of Revelation, except with a more secular/sci fi twist. Mitchell is the anti-God/Christ like figure and is resurrected from having been killed. This is also alluded to as he offers to “heal” the little girl in the 9 minute footage.

Revelation 13:3
King James Version (KJV)
3 And I saw one of his heads as it were wounded to death; and his deadly wound was healed: and all the world wondered after the beast.

There is only one God like possibility who was liked by seemingly everyone and turned and that is Mitchell. Sure there were other god likes in Trek but none were essentially a part of the crew family and then turn to such a degree.

189. Max - December 11, 2012


190. Max - December 11, 2012

I’m correcting myself:


191. Rob - December 11, 2012


MJ. Did you ever go back and REREAD my post from last night? I jad asked necause you had not noticed that I was referring to Mitchell PRIME. You seemed to think I was referring to a potential undoing of IDW.

For the rest, and only in general I subjectively believe:

1) movies like this, where characters are beloved and a franchise exists with a rabid fanbase must be done in a certain way so as not to cheese off the existing fanbase. if they promised canon that is what we will get. Not something clever by half.

2) the supreme court is arguably the most clever and intuitive batch of nerdy geniuses we have creating film today. Whatever we get is going to make sense and will leave us happy and wanting more.

3) We still dont know. We have all kinds of evidence that suggests possibilities, but anyone who claims abject certainty is just being stubborn and hasn’t learned that you don’t have to be right to be relevant and respected. I for one, teject no theory out of hand, except the borg stuff. .. That batch of material, while canon, belongs to a departed regime in ways to compelling to enumetate and the borg feels too “recently done”. In fact, the presence of the tubes in a cargo bay (aboard Wellers ship?), makes me wonder more about Khan. I say lets all have fun.

4) people need to start respecting others opinions here. it is really disheartening to see fellow star trek fans be such boors to one another.

192. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 11, 2012

Now listen to me carefully Trekmovie. I am Lying.

193. NCM - December 11, 2012

Anthony, Bob, Alex;

Thanks for making it fun, for considering fans–even for letting us believe otherwise–and esp. given how some people behave. Surely, most fans are appreciative.

Can’t wait! Looks like everything you’ve hoped for, so far.

194. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 11, 2012

i would not be surprised if John was really someone else. Lol

195. Lance W - December 11, 2012


Originally he says Georgie, but they overdubbed it with Johnny when they deleted the homestead scene.


196. Smike - December 11, 2012

Someone has clouded his true ID in a shroud of darkness. Who is John Harrison? Certainly there is more to him than such a generic, casual name… STID is all about IDENTITY… Not just the villain’s but also the crew’s identity, their place in the cosmos and history… John Harrison will turn out to be a major TOS villain, be it Khan or anyone else. I’m absolutely sure of it. Orci’s lie was that Weller would be playing someone totally new…April is new to live-action depictions though…

197. Rob - December 11, 2012


Decent work there fella. Not sure about the bibical angle, but I for one like your creative mojo. The last time ST dabbled in religion,….. Gah.

198. Rob - December 11, 2012

Oh, and I love the april theories being discussed here too. kirk might learn himility watching Pike die?

199. MJ - December 11, 2012

@191. Yea, Rob, I stand corrected on your post from last night. Your Prime-Mitchell concept does seem viable.

Sorry I did not respond to your sooner.

200. Curious Cadet - December 11, 2012

@134 Bob Tompkins,
“Are they lying about the comics being part of continuity? … Too many callbacks to Khan.”

First: the lie.

in the post that Anthony references, Bob only states facts with respect to the Canon status of the main characters. Nothing about comics.
In this subsequent post:
Bob again clearly states he lied, confirmed by Anthony in posts 680 & 691. Then goes on to tell us he will come clean in post 890. He is clearly not kidding. While it may not be the villain, it’s definitely not the comics. However, Bob is also on record that the comics are canon until something on screen contradicts them.

Second: Khan.

I still don’t understand why anyone would believe that Abrams, after weaving this absolute shroud of secrecy to keep us from guessing the villain, would then turn around and HAMMER US over the head with clues that could be nothing else but Khan. I mean seriously, do the folks here who think it is 100% incontrovertibly Khan believe that Arams is pulling a double double cross? Giving us clues that its Khan, so that we think its so obvious that we won’t think it’s Khan, when it really is Khan? Just wondering, because if that’s what he’s up then he’s kind of failed, no?

201. MJ - December 11, 2012

@184 “It’s the acronym of “Into Darkness” “ID”? ID can stand for identity (card)…”

This has me thinking — could the “ST” in “STID” perhaps stand for “Star Trek”?

202. The Great Bird of the Galaxy lives! - December 11, 2012

He clearly mouths, and vocalizes the name………J O H N N Y

203. Smike - December 11, 2012

John Harrison is Khan! And April’s the FOOL who brought him back to Earth, into the Heart of Starfleet. Dr Marcus was involved in the project as well. In an early stage of the Genesis project, using protomatter to breed a new generation of augments in a few weeks (GATT2000, the rapidly aging Indian girl)…

204. Smike - December 11, 2012

@201: Of course it does. They could have easily called the movie “Star Trek: Identity”…

205. Lance W - December 11, 2012

@202 :)

206. MJ - December 11, 2012

@204. I was just joking a bit with you. :-)

207. Peter Loader - December 11, 2012

More smoke and mirrors… we’ll never know who’s who until the credits roll!

It’s all a game… at our expense… but it could backfire and that would be very sad for the future of Star Trek.

208. ThePhaige - December 11, 2012

#197 Thanks for the kind words.

Yeah I agree with your comment on Trek V. I don’t think the new film will delve into religion per say… I believe there will be a loose scriptural similarity using the found scrolls on planet Nibiru, and I see Wellers character as a sort of Trans-humanism guru who would use the contents of these found artifacts to sway public opinion and to use Mitchells power. Perhaps they prophesies a coming leader of great power and Weller uses Mitchell as a tool convincing him he is a savior of a kind. I would also add that Carol Marcus is beginning to develop theories on her Genesis research and is feeling the calling to begin to develop the device. This the beginning of a life work. The genesis device will also be tied into this whole spiritual ramification slant, drawing much philosophical debate among Spock/Kirk & crew ect…Isnt Humility considered a spiritual principle of character? I think this will be epic and might even end in a cliffhanger/unresolved fashion.

209. njdss4 - December 11, 2012

This is starting to remind me of the NHL lockout. It’s gone on for so long and we feel like everyone is talking so much and yet saying so little. I’m starting to lose interest in both.

210. dtug1701b - December 11, 2012

Could it be Khan pretending to be Harrison from space seed?

211. ThePhaige - December 11, 2012

Nibiru + A nod to Zecharia Sitchin + Origins of Man + Sumerian text + Genetic Engineering + Trans-humanism + Carol Marcus + Genesis Revisited + Peter Weller’s character + Gary Mitchell is used a god/tool = Loose theory

Might be wrong but I’m guessing this might play heavily into the background and inspiration behind the script. Although many believe Sitchins work has much validity, I disagree, however its entertaining science fiction and could be shoehorned in as the spiritual debate this movie will possibly undertake.


212. O - December 11, 2012

I don’t buy ‘Harrison’ being Khan. Why would he ‘disguise’ himself? No one knows who he is. Also, he’s not the spy type. He’s like Napoleon; he’s showy.

213. Harry Ballz - December 11, 2012

Hey, somehwere else on these threads Bob Orci joked around with a line from Silence of the Lambs about Agent Starling…..was he hinting that the scene in the brig (with Cumberbatch behind glass) is reminiscent of that movie?

If Cumberbatch’s character is anywhere near that scary…..suh-weet!!!

214. Rudy M Alapag Jr - December 11, 2012

i’ll just wait until next year May 2013 for the movie: STID and be surprised. i don’t want it to be spoiled or spoiling the people. it doesn’t even work that way. yes i know i want the same answer you fans want. but just being a spoiler isn’t gonna work for me its just gonna ruin for myself. so being “there won’t be a next time or else i nail you to the wall” – sisko. “something to look forward to” – kira. you guys want to be spoiled of the character name. then why leave a message? live long and prosper and assimilated. resistance is futile. if i want to know the name, what’s the use of seeing STAR TREK 2 for anyway? good luck.

215. diggin up bones - December 11, 2012

If you switch some of the letters around in John Harrison, you wind up with Harry Johnson. This man may have an extremely Harry Johnson!

216. J - December 11, 2012

“Fresh and unpredictable”?

I’m thinking something along the lines of “We changed the location of Delta Vega, BECAUSE WE COULD”

217. fwise3 - December 11, 2012

What if Cumberbatch and Weller are playing the same character? (Weller being an older version and Cumberbatch the younger?) Maybe that’s why they’ve been mum on the details of Weller’s character!

Also LOVE the April theories… maybe they’re both Robert April? Could be a rendition or loosely based off of “The Counter-Clock Incident” :D …just a thought!

218. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 11, 2012

Red Dead MJ (as in Keachick) is not me. My first pseudonym has always been Keachick named after the NZ kea bird, the world’s only alpine parrot.

I am also Rose (as in Rosemary, my full Christian name).

I do not go along with what was written using my pseudonym. I think it is rubbish at this stage, given how little the Supreme Court has actually told us about STID. This article told us nothing new either.

Jay and others – I don’t have to subscribe to your notions and theories of what the Supreme Court might be up to re marketing etc. John Harrison may simply be John Harrison. Earth now has 7 billion people… I have no idea what the population will be 200+ years from now, but I suspect there will a few billion still living on this planet…

I am not naive, or lack comprehension in English nor do I need to *understand*, ie subscribe to your silly theories/speculations that John Harrison has to be someone “more important” because that must be the only reason why the Supreme Court etc kept the name secret for so long.

Perhaps John Harrison is a pseudonym but I see no logical reason for this. This is the time when marketing and promotion of a movie like Star Trek Into Darkness kicks into gear and this is exactly what has happened with the first teaser poster and trailers. The names of characters that the main guest actors are playing have also been named, except for Peter Weller’s – not sure what that’s about.

As far as so-called Khan clues, the desperation to have the villain named upfront from the start and the fact that so many people seem so doolally over this Khan character has lead people to see things that are not there or could be interpreted in a different way. The proposed casting of Latino Benecio Del Toro is just one example. Frankly, he could have easily played a Klingon, a Romulan or a Vulcan but no, people just fixated on him being cast for the role of Khan. Even when an English guy with fair skin and hair got cast, Khan still came to the top of many people’s minds, even though Khan was of Indian descent.

I have read such unbelievable nonsense here over the past couple of years. A lot of it has been interesting and fun, but now it is just pathetic when a name is given and it is clearly not any of the names thrown out by the Supreme Court early on.

Cumberbatch may be playing a redshirt in Security by the name of Harrison from TOS. However, in this timeline his career takes a different turn from that of the prime universe, where he was no one of any significance within the Enterprise or Starfleet…

219. Harry Ballz - December 11, 2012

215. diggin up bones “This man may have an extremely Harry Johnson!”

Oh, great! A distant relative!

I can see me being Harry, but if this guy has a Harry Johnson, he’s got trouble!

220. johnbijl - December 11, 2012

What if halfway during the movie fleet captain John Harrison picks up the title of Garth of Izar?

221. Red Dead Ryan - December 11, 2012

I thought Harry Ballz would be right behind Harry Johnson all the way.

I figured they would go hand in hand.


222. Disinvited - December 11, 2012

Now here’s something:


Lists in the guest cast “John Bellah: Dr. Harrison”

223. diggin up bones - December 11, 2012

@219 – “Is that a tribble in you pants, or are you just glad to see me?”

One thing is certain: It’s good to see the Trekmovie website so lively again. All of this speculation on is it Norman or Roger Corby or Khan or whoever is almost as much fun as the movie itself.

224. Disinvited - December 12, 2012


I tracked down their reference. It’s from Bjo Trimble’s STAR TREK CONCORDANCE page 38 and page 167.

‘Harrison, Dr. (John Bellah): Young pathologist who catches the Psi 2000 virus; Spock sees him in a passageway, painting “Love Mankind” and “Sinner Repent” on the bulkheads and laughing hysterically. McCoy later calls Dr. Harrison on the intercom and gets nothing but laughter’

225. Disinvited - December 12, 2012

Now if John Harrison is a pathologist, it makes sense that he may have something to offer an ailing girl.

226. WillH85 - December 12, 2012

If having a non-cannon character means he’s not Khan I’m totally cool with it.

227. Tiberius Subprime - December 12, 2012

I’m with Harry, above.

The name Harrison will be used for most of the film; then it will be revealed who he really is just before the end.

228. Spider_McBeard - December 12, 2012

If there is any Khan connection it could be that “John Harrison” is actually Khan using an alias or it could be that John Harrison is his real name and he is one of the other genetically modified supermen from the botany bay. May be Khan’s empire was India/Asia/Middle East and John Harrison controlled the UK/Europe during the eugenics war? Harrison hitched a ride with Khan? One of the previous articles mentioned that trailer 2 has a shot of a “large room (possibly shuttle bay or cargo hold) filled with tubes which have small windows (or possibly control panels) on the top”. Without seeing the trailer it’s hard to say how big these tubes are, but if they’re big enough to fit people in it could be that someone has multiple augments from the botany bay still cryogenically frozen in their possession.

229. Disinvited - December 12, 2012

Here’s what he looked like:


230. Fascinoma - December 12, 2012

Is it really so far fetched that John Harrison is really… gasp… John Harrison?

My suspicion is that Abrams wanted everyone interested in the character and the movie to begin with, which we all are. Stroke of brilliance.

He’s already given the character a certain memetic, viral quality without having to rely on the character actually necessarily having any canonical background.

And we all fell for it.

231. R. Banks - December 12, 2012

The speculation over who the villain is has been fun, and I’ve enjoyed reading all the interesting theories from posters here.

However, at this point, the fun of this one aspect of the new film is no longer there for me. It’s time to take a step back, just enjoy the various upcoming trailers, and look forward to seeing the new film.

Cumberbatch is an excellent actor, and I’m sure he’ll be one of the more memorable villains of the series regardless of his true identity.

232. Ali gee - December 12, 2012

Lol I love all this wild speculation…
“He tasks me (us)

233. Skulltrail - December 12, 2012


Wasn’t the fan movie of the unreleased script … He walked among us … Not forbidden by Paramount?! If you read the article, you’ll see something about a starfleet scientist who breaks the Prime Directive of an undeveloped race … The race on Nibiru is also an undeveloped race, right?!

234. Garth Faction - December 12, 2012

I still say there is a real John Harrison, and there is Garth who takes on the form of John Harrison…

235. Sebi - December 12, 2012

@232. Ali gee

We’ll chase Bob Orci round the moons of Nibia and round the Antares maelstrom and round perdition’s flames before we give up our wild speculations!


John Harrison FTW!!

236. Garth Faction - December 12, 2012

Oh, if we are going to reference stories which might have been made, DEEP MUDD seems relevant — goes with the Weller as Mudd theory:

The plot was conceived as a direct sequel to “I, Mudd”, following Harry Mudd’s entrapment on Planet Mudd, amid the androids there. “‘Deep Mudd’ involves Mudd’s escape from that world, after he tricked these particular robots into revealing to him the location of a cache of scientific equipment and weaponry left by their makers,” explained Kandel. “Suddenly Mudd found himself with very, very advanced armament, which he used to bribe a group of pirates into helping him escape. The problem was, of course, that he could control neither the weapons nor the real heavies he was supposed to be in control of, the pirates. They tangled with the Enterprise, on a planet with a surface of molten, viscous mud. And it went on from there. That was basically it: bailing Harry Mudd out of his own problems, getting control of this weaponry they couldn’t destroy, and sending it into a sun.” (The Star Trek Interview Book, pp. 133-134)

237. Aix - December 12, 2012

I really think Cumberbatch’s character adopted the name John Harrison from the clockmaker. An allusion to his ability to time-bend. And seriously, he is standing in the Greenwich Observatory in the poster given the landmarks. The observatory wherin the prime meridian lies. Oh wait, that is John ’Longitude’ Harrison, btw. Well, according to Wiki.

I love it. It is clever.

238. CAPT KRUNCH - December 12, 2012

They should have just not even given us a name, since it’s not for us “TREK” fans…..LMAO…. I agree with that…it shouldn’t just be for TREK fans…you get ST5 or Generations!…..WOW they were prety bad!!. There really seems to be a Garth bandwagon and I’m beginning to think there might be something to it. I just can’t beleive they would have Carol Marcus, a hands touching through glass scene and KHAAAAAANNN! that just seems too easy, but whatever works…it sure keeps all of us guessing for 5 more months!

239. What does God need with a Starship? - December 12, 2012

I wonder if he’s a Klingon, without ridges? What a twist that would be!

240. Ralph Pinheiro - December 12, 2012

Well, Harrison could be a new character with connection to a canon character.

241. DaveO - December 12, 2012

The fitting name would have been Rhett Khan.

242. Cygnus-X1 - December 12, 2012

The implication seems to be that Cumberbatch’s character goes by John Harrison and a TOS name. I’m guessing that “John Harrison” is a pseudonym or an antecedent name for a TOS character. That seems to be the implication.

243. Garth Faction - December 12, 2012

I still say he does play John Harrison. But he also plays someone who transforms himself into looking like John Harrison to take over his position — that is, Garth pretending to be Harrison (and Garth will do something similar, and yet different, from what he would have done if he had captured the Enterprise pretending to be Kirk).

And Mudd just gets in too deep helping Garth with arms. I still say Mudd makes sense, despite the “I hate Mudd” posts on here. If you want someone who can supply arms quick and in the black market, so Starfleet doesn’t know, Mudd’s as good as any other person to use for that.

244. Ashley - December 12, 2012

I know the hype is supposed to be fun and yay speculation and whipping up a frenzy or whatever, but all the coyness is making me feel screwed with. I don’t even really care who the villain is as long as it’s not Khan and makes some kind of internal sense, but they’re being really obnoxiously smug.

245. boborci - December 12, 2012

244. Would u prefer no clues and “No comments?” Hope u r not missing the fun of this.

246. boborci - December 12, 2012

216 that was a minor indulgence I could not resist and wanted it as a straw man/fly paper for complaints.

247. P. Charlie - December 12, 2012

I’m a pastor and I’ really enjoy star trek, hope this movie does not go into the Bible, just saying…some will say they can go into anything, because its a free country or that its just a book, but for me it wouldn’t be a good thing, many I’m sure will not agree, but maybe some will. JUST SAYING.

248. Garth Faction - December 12, 2012


I think people don’t mind clues, as long as they are in the up-and-up, but when it is clear things are being done at the expense of people trying to figure it out, then people do get upset. There is a fine line, and I do think, things are getting close here.

249. MattyTrek - December 12, 2012

Boborci –

Everyone is having fun trying to figure it out. Even the flamey-shouty-whiney lot. Heck, ESPECIALLY the flamey-shouty-whiney lot.

I appreciate the fact that we are five months out and don’t know the villain for sure, but we already likely know the villain of JUSTICE LEAGUE. Which is at least two and a half years away.

The movie is supposed to reveal its secrets, not the interview with the writers. Keep it up as long as you can.

And I am SURE it’s Khan…but hope it’s Sybok.

250. theARE - December 12, 2012

On the Enterprise water thing

Voyager episode: Thirty Days
Paris volunteers to take the Delta Flyer into the Space Ocean.
Janeway is glad he’s going to use the Flyer as it would

“take several days to perform the necessary modifications to Voyager”

Now granted – Voyager was designed for planetary landing, and so might be more suited to water than the NCC 1701 – but in JJ-verse the Enterprise was built on Earth and we don’t know what it’s capabilities are.

Honestly, TOS 1701 made time jumps, skirted singularities and galactic barriers – I doubt a bit of water would be a much of a problem

251. EM - December 12, 2012

John Harrison has the sam number of letters as :
Gary Mitchell

Just playing around is all!

252. Curious Cadet - December 12, 2012

@221 Red Dead Ryan,
“I thought Harry Ballz would be right behind Harry Johnson all the way.
I figured they would go hand in hand.”

I see what you did there … ;-)

253. Vorus - December 12, 2012

@19 “The movie should contain the explanation, not the pre-release speculation. All the stuff regarding ST09 and MWI-QM was just the production team trying to have their cake and eat it too.”

I know. That’s what worries me. The whole MWI thing was clearly just an attempt to pander to the Trekkies, so we wouldn’t get upset that the film seemed to be destroying the Trek we all knew. At one point, Orci even admitted that if you weren’t familiar with his MWI explanation, you could easily come away from the film with a “classic time travel” interpretation.

So that’s what bothers me about this interview. It’s the same kind of rambling, nosensical answers that we’re getting. It sounds like they either don’t know what to tell us, or they know that we probably won’t like the real answer.

Either way, it does not inspire great confidence.

254. Bernd Schneider - December 12, 2012

I find it sad how many fans cling to the idea of having canon characters in the new movie, as if this were a special sign of quality. This new universe will never grow up if it desperately seeks to maintain totally implausible ties with the lost world of TOS. Abrams, Orci and company should have left the ship in space and changed the people, rather than turning the ship into a submarine with the people being the same (because it is their “destiny”).

Star Trek is big enough to introduce any number of new characters. Resorting to established characters and events lets the galaxy appear like a village. In the best case, the “upgraded” character of the Abramsverse will outshine the one of TOS (which is just the basic idea of a reboot but which I don’t find desirable at all). In the worst case, mindless namedropping creates anti-continuity (“Delta Vega”).

This whole “Guess the Character” quiz and hanging on the writers’ lips is just lame.

255. Seatbelt Blue - December 12, 2012

I just want to point out for everyone complaining that “John Harrison” doesn’t sound like a good villain name that 50% of you care gunning for a dude named Gary Mitchell.

Real threatening name there, dude. Oh no! Look out! It’s Gary!

A solid 20% of the rest of you are really pitchin’ in for a villain named Garth.

256. Seatbelt Blue - December 12, 2012

Basically, the quality of a villain is not determined by his name. Unless the production is going stupid silly and planning on naming this guy Foofles the Wuv Snuggle, if he’s a good villain, we will come to respect his name.

And as for the rest of you guys who are upset that he might not be a canon character — General Chang, anyone? A good villain is a good villain.

257. Mr. Anonymous - December 12, 2012

I think they just want to keep everyone from having the mysteries in the movie revealed to them before anyone actually sees it, and to do so in the age of the internet and social media, you kinda have to spread a little lie to throw people off the trail. You’ll be thankful when the movie comes out and you still have something to find out.

Also, pet peeve about all the “Delta Vega” gripes from the ’09 movie–why does everyone seem to think the WHOLE planet is an ice planet?! Couldn’t Kirk, Spock, and Scotty just have been dropped off in the Arctic-like area of the planet? If Nero or Spock (or Scotty’s superiors) wanted Spock Prime, Kirk, and Scotty to suffer, you don’t drop them off in Hawaii, folks!

258. Seatbelt Blue - December 12, 2012

#257 — yeah, I’ve wondered that for years.

There’s an episode of SG-1 where a couple of the team end up by some malfunction in Antarctica, and one of them declares in no uncertain terms — “It’s an ice planet.”

259. SoonerDave - December 12, 2012


A writer over at, I think, HitFlix who attended the Bad Robot press event prepared a very lengthy and detailed theory that posited the Harrison character will, ultimately, be revealed as Robert April. Initially, it sounded silly, but he referenced a TAS episode that gave April some backstory into England, and among the concept art presented at the Bad Robot meeting was a sketch of the gun Harrison uses – which was labeled “April’s Big Gun” (or words to that effect).

Yeah, its all supposition, but given some of the other theories I’ve heard and read, its no worse, and actually has a pretty credible basis in fact. That Abrams would “hide in plain sight” something as telling as the name of the gun in the concept art would be very much in keeping with his style.

The writer readily admitted that his theory is almost certainly wrong, but man, he put some good thought into it, and IMHO its better than most of the Sybok/Garth/Col Green theories I’ve read here.

260. Disinvited - December 12, 2012

#257. Mr. Anonymous – December 12, 2012

Well the problem wasn’t so much presented by Kirk or Scott but by Spock Prime. He was put on the planet so that he could view the destruction of the planet Vulcan. Generally speaking, the poles are the worst locations to view other planets.

261. Jeffery & the Hamstrings - December 12, 2012

This entire thread is hilarious

262. J - December 12, 2012

@246: fair enough… but that “because we could” phrase was kind of off-putting.

263. lwr - December 12, 2012

@241 DAVE O:
Rhett Khan.
Iam still laughing my tail off!

264. Captain Mackenzie Calhoun - December 12, 2012

As a long time Trek fan, I too have some problems with “JJTrek” or “NuTrek” or whatever you want to call it. But before the last 09 Trek, Star Trek was dead in the water. All our beloved orginal characters (actors) were/are aging. Can you imagine an original crew movie (Generations doesn’t count. Lol) without Bones? That would be horrible. Also, while I don’t hate Nemesis as much as some, it still was a subpar effort. I’m just glad JJ Abrams gave us something to look forward to and heck, to even complain about. Let’s at least watch the new movie STID before we start on how JJ “ruined” it AGAIN. Would you rather we had no new Trek being made? Not me brother. No one is forcing you to watch it. Entire seasons of reality tv have slipped by me and I sleep fine at night. If you “hate” it or even “hate” the concept, stay at home and watch your old Trek dvds. I’m not trying to defend JJ. I’m just happy I have new Trek to look forward to.

265. RaveOnEd - December 12, 2012

I’m now wondering if the way they are going to honor Trek’s past is to go all the way back to before TOS was even filmed:

Robert April.

Using a “Heart of Darkness” style for the movie, April could be someone who learned these regenerative powers from an alien race, thus getting involved with them and violating the Prime Directive. Enterprise is ordered to stop him.

Also, there was the idea at one point that April be British (with the novels and James Doohan in TAS making him that way).

Just a thought, of course, but for some reason I’m now thinking that “John Harrison” is a regenerated Robert April.

266. Euro-Girl - December 12, 2012

I am really losing interest in this movie; first the Enterprise seen underwater, then Orci gleefully lies.

R.I.P Star Trek

267. alec - December 12, 2012

Theory: It’s khan. He has returned a la Space Seed (although the Klingons probably pick him up not Star Fleet). But he doesn’t, initially, want people to know it’s him: he does have a history! So he is medically altered and takes a new name. But his real name, Khan, is revealed later in the film. Also, the fact that he’s wearing a uniform doesn’t mean anything: this film will not be exactly like Space Seed or TWOK….

268. alec - December 12, 2012

Also, as for the Ent. under water, calm yourselves! The Voyager landed on a planet and other ships (especially in VGR) have been underwater. I remember the Ent. D going through a rock! It’s interesting, new stuff. Embrace the darkside.

269. Steve J. - December 12, 2012

The Cumberbatch character may be related to William B. Harrison, Flight Officer on the S.S. Beagle, from “Bread And Circuses”…Just another (not very good) “theory”…

270. Captain Ransom - December 12, 2012

i agree about the uniform thing. q wore starfleet uniforms but he wasn’t in starfleet.

well the villain seems boring to me. same plot as trek 09. someone out for vengeance. you can’t beat wrath of khan so don’t even try. star trek TMP and star trek 4 had very original plots without villains.

271. DeflectorDishGuy - December 12, 2012


272. Ralph Pinheiro - December 12, 2012

Mr. Bob Orci,

I realize that in the first movie, you have focused their answers on the characters Kirk and Spock. Nero was almost secondary. Now you are focusing more on the villain than Kirk and Spock. What is the reason?

273. Dude Against Telephoto Paparazzi - December 12, 2012

OK. This has really set me off so, please forgive me (Trek Movie Fans) for getting up on my soapbox about this. Concerning the article…let me get this straight. We have Bob Orci who admits to lying. Lying. Telling a lie. He lies and admits he lies. Wow. What a real man. Lying, claiming mis-direction for the “protection” of his film and yet, he wants us, the “fans” to pay $$$$ to go see his movie? He wants the young folks out there to see his work and yet, he is an admitted liar. It begs the questions: does he tell his interns to lie to the public? Was he instructed to lie by his superiors?

He could have said nothing about this film and it would have been better than him admitting to being a liar. He is in a position to exert major influence over the upcoming Hollywood student actors, workers, directors, producers and how does he teach them? With lying. Breaking one of the most fundamental things that we as humans are taught NOT to do…..and he laughs about it. What a colossal Ass-Hat.

As for the name John Harrison? WTF? How about calling the dude Roger Prodactor! How about something really at the bottom of the barrel and call him Al Pacca! Geesh. John Harrison? How about “Dick Smith”? How about “Crewman Rickey”? REALLY original, Bob……..or are you lying about that too? With as much cash as you guys rake in from your work…try a little harder next time to think up a name that is more “canon” than you claimed it was but…..oh, that’s right, you lied about that.

You, and I’m addressing YOU directly, Mr. Robert Orci, have brought the bar down, in my viewpoint, and I, for one, won’t be seeing your movie. You would make a good politician, Bob. To keep with that tradition you should have said “Well, I mis-spoke.” What a screwed up world this is when someone lies, admits to lying, and the geek public just blows it off and says “Yep, Bob! (even though you are an admitted liar) I’ll pay $$$$ to see your film! You betcha!” Sad. Enjoy the box-office returns, Bob. My dollars won’t be in that lot.

274. Phil - December 12, 2012

…in the same spirit as “can the Enterprise be under water? What the hell does that mean, exactly? No one is going to argue dramatic license, but to suggest that something can (or should) be done just because no one ever suggested something otherwise is just idiotic. We expect things to make sense, hence the push back on Enterprise is a submarine. That is also setting the bar really low on what the writers perceive to be the intelligence of the audience – if you propose anything that’s too far out there you run the risk of a complete disconnect from the audience. What was Scotty’s line about putting wheels on his grandma, she’d be a wagon? As an idiom we understand what was said – but we know she would never be a wagon. Don’t ask us to accept otherwise.

275. filmboy - December 12, 2012

“John Harrison” is an assumed name. JJ and company are pulling a “Nolan” on us all. Remember Miranda Tate or Henri Ducard? It is the same here. The real question is who is he really?

I have read a few of the Capt. April theories and they are quite good and interesting. It could be the direction they choose to go here. April is a canon character and his direct tie to Pike would be interesting. It would allow for Pike’s death to mean something and tie into a larger story. I do believe Pike with die in this film. His death will affect Kirk in ways that he is not prepared for. It will also lead Kirk to be much more protective of the surrogate family he has in the crew of the Enterprise. I am telling you Family, Loss, and Sacrifice are all major themes of this film. Revenge is too of course. But the previous three are the ones that in the end will be prominent.

Now I am still going to stick with my theory that Khan is the villain. I have felt that was the case way back when Cumberbatch was cast. Nothing I have seen to this point has convinced me otherwise. I was right about Alice Eve’s character, so why not be two for two?

I mean JJ could be messing with expectations again with having Marcus in this film. By revealing she is in the film, JJ knows fans will instantly come to the conclusion that Khan must be the villain. And even though I think this is the case, it doesn’t necessarily need to be. They could have Marcus introduced here and not have Khan show up at all. Cumby could be April, he could be Garth of Izar, he could be Sybok. It would not change Carol Marcus at all.

However, I would argue JJ is using the Christopher Nolan method for reboot franchise building. The juicy carrot that Khan represents is just too much for JJ and company to resist. To have the chance to redefine and reinterpret a legendary character is an opporunity many a filmmaker would like. Nolan did it with Joker and I think JJ will try and do it here with Khan. More power to him I say. I have never felt Montalban’s performance of Khan was particularly legendary. It was good, but there is certainly room to make Khan more interesting and fleshed out.

I like what I have seen so far and it seems like JJ and company are really trying to build on the first film here. To me it was the chemistry of the Enterprise crew that made the 2009 film so good. It would seem that chemistry continues, which makes me happy. Add to that the involvement of Old Spock, Klingons, and Pike, and you have a pretty good movie shaping up.

276. Elias Javalis - December 12, 2012

A bit irrelevant question Bob, exactly how many effect shots Star Trek 2 has?


277. boborci - December 12, 2012

okay. Just because so many of you are freaking —

Here was my lie. My lie was that I’d ever lied.

Friends again?

278. boborci - December 12, 2012

272. we don’t require as much time now to establish all of our characters. We know who they are now.

279. boborci - December 12, 2012

273. Sorry for whatever is making you over react to the care and attention and time and energy that I have spent here interacting with you, for sharing what I can, explaining our process, and for working on this franchise to make the best version of Trek that we can, and for trying to do it all with a laugh and a wnk,

280. boborci - December 12, 2012

273. And one last thing. Get a little context here. Anthony, who I consider an old friend now who knows my sense of humor, corners me at a cocktail party and asks me a couple of funny questions. I didn’t make an article out of it. If some wide eyed student of film and life had cornered me, I mighta’ said something different. So you must CHILL. Again, if you prefer a no comment, I’ll start saying that from now on and not be playful at all.

281. Roy - December 12, 2012

I HOPE he is not Gary Mitchell. The only reason Mitchell was a villian in the first series is because of an event that occured in the first series. In the reboot, there is no reason for the same thing to happen to the same person. So PLEASE, let it not be Gary Mitchell.

282. boborci - December 12, 2012

276. How manhy shots? Not sure yet. Ask again later;)

283. diggin up bones - December 12, 2012

#277boborci That sounds like the kind of statement that overloaded Norman the android’s computer brain. Well done.

284. Ralph Pinheiro - December 12, 2012

Mr. Bob Orci.

Thanks for your anwer. One more, please.

is there any chance we know the villain in detail before movie premiere or this is part of history?
You are doing a great job.

285. BulletInTheFace - December 12, 2012

#34: “Khan” is not a title. That’s absolutely absurd. His name was Khan Noonien Singh. That isn’t something debatable.

286. Elias Javalis - December 12, 2012

Thanks for taking the time to answer Bob! Much appreciated!

287. Aurore - December 12, 2012

“Here was my lie. My lie was that I’d ever lied.”

Thank you.

(At the time, I wrote that I *hoped* that was your lie….)


288. boborci - December 12, 2012

284. Sorry, didn’t quite understand the question. Can you rephrase?

289. boborci - December 12, 2012

283 ;)

290. The Sinfonian - December 12, 2012

Bob, how many shots? Right now, I’ll pour you as many shots as you like, as you deserve shots of your favorite booze for all the pot-shots you’re getting! :)

And we all look forward to Kirk yelling

Since it wouldn’t be a terrible thing to ask as it isn’t plot-related, I would ask if you did indeed have another Federation ship named EXETER, as you hinted a long time ago.

291. MC1701B - December 12, 2012

66. Everyone who works on any project with the name “Star Trek” in any way attached to it owes their paychecks to the fans in the 70’s who would not shut up until TMP was produced. Which includes me.

So, you’re wrong. Undoubtedly not the first time, nor the last.

292. boborci - December 12, 2012

290. A reference to it was shot, but the editing room can be as cruel as the cold of space. We will see in the final cut.

293. Ralph Pinheiro - December 12, 2012

Mr. Orci.

rephrasing it.

Is there any Possibility of knowing the origin of the villain in detail before May 17 or the mystery part of the story? It is important to read countdown to darkness?


294. boborci - December 12, 2012

293 Ralpg Piheiro

Got it. You won’t be lost if you don’t read the comics, but you may see a clues to elements within the movie. In terms of knowing the origin of the villain, who knows what will come out by then. Hard to keep secrets thanks to the good ole’ internets!

295. Ralph Pinheiro - December 12, 2012

post. 293 Orci

Thanks, Mr. Orci.

I’m anxious to see the film. Unfortunately in Brazil will be on 26th July.

296. Nurse Gabble - December 12, 2012

@ boborci

I know you don’t have the time to read all the crazy ideas people here come up with as the possible plot for STID.
But was there ever someone who was actually right with his idea? Or at least to some extent?

297. Barney Fife - December 12, 2012

Bob, Once you all finish the trilogy, can you and your friends PLEASE produce a new Trek TV series? You have the sets already, the CGI ships are on the network servers, you just need new actors for Kirk, Spock, Scotty, etc.

298. M - December 12, 2012

Mr Orci, what are the chances of C3PO making a “cameo” this time? Perhaps looking for a friend?

299. Anthony Pascale - December 12, 2012

Guys I did note it was a cocktail party and Bob was being light-hearted, even noting how he was chuckling. I had assumed that context would feed into understanding his comment. Its weird for me, the guy who runs this site to say this, but hey its just a movie. Let’s all have a cocktail and lighten up (except you alcoholics, one day at a time and all that…stay strong).

300. Elias Javalis - December 12, 2012

Perhaps there are plans for a TV Series when/if the trilogy is completed..

301. Elias Javalis - December 12, 2012


Pardon me, didn’t see your post:)

302. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 12, 2012

#277 – So I take it that you never lied about the villain being from TOS canon. It is just that (John) Harrison was a minor character who had no backstory. This allowed you guys to, as it were, resurrect him and give him a life, a motivation, etc.

I wonder if this John Harrison is a fairly bright guy who has been overlooked by Starfleet. He is jealous of Kirk’s quick promotion and being Enterprise security is especially angered by some commands given by Kirk – perhaps one that Pike is heard calling Kirk out for. John Harrison is a quiet guy who is also reasonably versed in science and medical disciplines. John Harrison quits Starfleet to go work on his own projects, one of them to do with finding a drug that can (safely) de-age a person…

John Harrison is also pissed at how slack Starfleet defences seemed to be and how apparently easy it was for Nero to almost destroy earth. Maybe he was on board the Enterprise when the incident with Nero occurred, or maybe he lost someone important – lover, friend, family member – when the other ships were destroyed as they entered Vulcan space…who knows what has set John Harrison off. I don’t.

I think, in situations like this, it can be a whole series of events that trigger the almost unstoppable desire for vengeance. His anger seems to be mostly directed at Starfleet. He may not have been responsible for the destruction of much of London, but whatever caused London (his home) to be so decimated has further enraged him, something he blames Starfleet for. It is handy if he is able to get hold of weapons or has bomb making skills etc. Perhaps he is collaborating with others who are able to get hold of the right materials…

It also seems that Kirk is very upset. Quite possibly, the Klingons attacked a small human colony on a planet near their sector where a member of Kirk’s (extended) family or good friend and family may have settled. He goes on that manhunt to apprehend the perpetrator which seems to lead them to the Klingon planet. This would tie in with known TOS canon, which consistently has Kirk and the Klingons not liking each other much. This may be a separate story from the larger John Harrison story (or not?)

These are volatile times. People are still coming to terms with what happened to Vulcan…

As for the Enterprise capable of going underwater – I love it. I am not sure if it is the Enterprise we see in the trailer. I only see the letters NCC. It looks a little small to be the Enterprise, but then again…Star Trek is about exploration – as in working on new workable and safe technologies. Imagine a sea going starship Enterprise being able to explore the oceans of worlds, especially where they are mostly water? Such possibilities! Very cool!

What do you think, Bob? Anyway, this is my simple story outline based on the very few facts that you guys tease us with…:) Just made it up as I type…

303. Aurore - December 12, 2012

“(At the time, I wrote that I *hoped* that was your lie….)”

No, you did not.

You, liar.


304. drumvan - December 12, 2012


thanks bob for taking the time to respond to all of us here. much appreciated!

just two general j.j. verse questions:

1) in this new j.j. verse, is the enterprise we see in the 2009 film the first ever ncc-1701 enterprise or was it a new upgarde to an existing starship named enterprise?

2) did spock and pike serve on a ship together prior to the events of the 2009 movie?


305. Jonny Boy - December 12, 2012

I’d just like to say a few words to Mr. Orci, since we are all feeling free to voice our opinions, and I’ve been wanting to get this off my chest for a while…

I must say that I’m extremely upset, Bob. How dare you come onto this website, occupied by hundreds of loyal Trek fans, and give us insight, information, and good conversation… :)

Seriously, though, I want to say thank you, on behalf of all the polite, courteous, and friendly fans of Star Trek and cinema, for selflessly exposing yourself to criticism/ridicule/unpleasantness for the sake of remaining a true member of Trek fandom who wishes to give a little something back. I love what you, Alex, Damon, and J.J. have done with your turn at the helm of the Enterprise. I thought that you guys captured lightning in a bottle with the first film. You did what many of us thought could not be possible… you distilled the very essence of Star Trek into its most vital, important components (friendship/love/courage/nobility/honor/sacrifice/tolerance/humanity/etc) and reconstituted them into a new, fresh, vital, and exciting Star Trek that manages to be huge in scale, big on action, and also hold dear to the spirit and essence of Gene Roddenberry’s original classic. In many ways, I feel that the first film captures the spirit of the original series better than anything since, well, TOS.

So, keeping the gushing to a minimum, I ‘ll just say, thank you very much, Bob, for continuing to put yourself out there, to interface with the rest of your fellow Trekkies, to whet our appetites, and to spur on these sometimes fun, sometimes ridiculous, but always interesting, discussions. I hope that the few negative comments/tirades aimed at you wont discourage you in any way. I can’t wait for tomorrow night!

306. Morn's Butt Crack - December 12, 2012

John Harrison is really Lore using a name of one of the colonists he new on Omicron Theta. DUH!

307. Morn's Butt Crack - December 12, 2012


308. tibirius - December 12, 2012

boborci- was “Into” added to the movie title to avoid an unfortunate acronym?

309. scottevill - December 12, 2012

@Boborci: we’re not all freaking out. In the bad way, I mean.

The movie looks amaze, and I for one appreciate the time and attention you guys spend not just making the movies but giving the hardcore fans new ambiguous tidbits to argue over. One of those is an insane, impossible, thankless task. And the other is making a movie. :)

310. scottevill - December 12, 2012

And a new theory:

Is Harrison not an alias for Mitchell but *another* Mitchell? One whose superiors tried to kill him — once they realized they would not be able to control him — but they failed where Kirk succeeded.

We were told there was a hint in issue 10 of the comic, the concluding part of their “Return of the Archons” adaption. Note that, like “Where No Man,” this episode is about a missing ship and weird sci-fi mind control-y stuff. In the epilogue, Pike gets a call in his office. An unknown superior reprimands him for letting his “project”–Kirk–blunder into and then ruin their project, “an experiment that has been running for decades.” Meaning Landru.

So they knew the Archon had crashed there, knew what happened, and chose to do nothing. They even scrubbed the Archon and its crew from official records – and now they’re pissed off and threatening Pike because his protege dismantled Landru, freeing the descendants of a Starfleet crew. We’re left wondering not just who this unseen superior is but how far he and his comrades would go. Maybe they caused the Archon to crash in the first place.

So does the movie feature another, similar scenario based on “Where No Man…?” If Harrison is not Mitchell, but *another* Mitchell, we have to ask: did the Enterprise genuinely discover the Valiant’s beacon in the first place? Or did Starfleet send them out there knowing what happened to the Valiant and therefore what might happen to the Enterprise. Indeed, were they hoping it would happen? How many other ships have they sent in the course of trying to get a few officers with godlike powers on the payroll?

Is that what the synopsis is getting at with “detonates Starfleet and everything it stands for?” Does Harrison come back and not just attack Earth indiscriminately, not just for revenge, but to air Starfleet’s dirty laundry, triggering a crisis of faith? If Starfleet would do this, is it still an organization worthy of the people’s trust? Is that the “crisis” our world is left in?

Anyway, another day, another two cents…

311. boboorci - December 12, 2012

308. ha!

no. wanted it to be a phrase or sentence

312. boboorci - December 12, 2012


though we say Big E is on maiden voyage, I suppose it could be either, though in my mind it was brand new ship, as we wrote when Pike says, “Careful with the ship, Spock… she’s brand new.”

Though we don’t specify, I imagined Spock and Pike did serve together before.

313. boboorci - December 12, 2012

305. Johnny Boy

Much appreciated. Thanks for keeping gushing to a minimum;)

314. Barney Fife - December 12, 2012

Hmmm, “boboorci”???? Not the same as “boborci”.

315. Kenji - December 12, 2012

It’s fun and tough to be a Trekkie innit. The lore and myth of Trek is being served as was rarely done in the Berman era, the 2009 side-boot was a delight, and yet the crabbing goes on as though half the talkbackers here were auditioning for the Onion spoof review.

Anyway, great thread again, love the participation of BobO(o)rci and the ongoing awesomeness of this site. Thanks everyone!

316. boborci - December 12, 2012


love “side-boot”

317. dmduncan - December 12, 2012


My theories now come with them. How ballsy is that? And I’m serious. If we are not there yet, we are close, so if you don’t want your busy mind infected with involuntarily appearing possible scenarios anticipating what you see on the screen when you are watching the movie next May, STOP right now. Go no further.

You have been warned.

My Colonel Green Theory (CG Theory) is on the other thread, and a SPOILER ALERT goes for that one too, even though it’s not labeled there. I like CG Theory, and I like it real good, but I’m a theory monger so I came up with this alternative to incorporate the JOTR Theory. What I say about Paxton here applies for CG Theory on the other thread as well.

1. John Harrison IS JOTR: Johnny-on-the-road from ST.09, i.e., the boy that young Kirk hollers at from the corvette.

2. JOTR is John “Kirk,” James T. Kirk’s older brother. Shut up. Keep reading. I’m not done yet.

3. His last name is Harrison because they have the same mother, but different fathers. The “half” brother angle also explains the variance in actor types considered for the John Harrison role. With only one parent in common between them, someone like Benicio Del Toro could pass as James Kirk’s older brother.

4. Motive. Vengeance, sure, but for what? Even though George Kirk was not John Harrison’s biological father, George Kirk WAS the only father John Harrison knew, and he loved his dad just the same. When George Kirk died in ST.09, John took it hard. Harder even than James, who was too young to notice. He blamed starfleet for the loss of his father, a loss that changed his life and gradually led him into an alignment with starfleet’s shadowy opponents, and Into Darkness.

5. Kirk’s crew is described in the synopsis as “the only family Kirk has left” because his brother has become an enemy of all that Kirk holds dear.

6. Peter Weller is Paxton. The anti-starfleet pariah is back, and the Klingon empire makes a great place to carry out your genetic research and general schemes against Starfleet. Maybe even to grow an army of augment infiltrators. Klingons make excellent hosts when you have an objective they believe in, i.e., the dismantling of starfleet’s operations.

7. Alice Eve confirmed as Marcus. Are captain’s mattresses filled with noisy springs? Rose Pinenut will be waiting to hear the answer.

8. The “one man weapon of mass destruction” (John Harrison) belongs to but does not comprise the entirely of that “unstoppable force of terror” within starfleet. He isn’t working alone. There’s a group. Paxton’s augments.

9. They don’t call John Harrison a “one man WMD” for nothing. He’s a bad ass who’s been augmented by gene freak Paxton and whatever organization he’s running. Look for James Kirk to take advantage of whatever Johnny is smoking. Kirk gets augmented too. That’s the only way he can stop his renegade brother.

318. dmduncan - December 12, 2012


319. dmduncan - December 12, 2012

Still like CG Theory best.

320. dmduncan - December 12, 2012

317: entirely = entirety

321. The Sinfonian - December 12, 2012

Garth wasn’t a bad theory either. There wasn’t much in canon tying them down. Plus the cellular regeneration was an interesting idea.

Mitchell was a fine theory, if boborci hadn’t worked him into the comic.

And bob’s cell phone always mangles things. At least it came out as “boboorci”, and not BOOBORCI. ;)

322. Charla - December 12, 2012

111. AJ- Not sure if this was mentioned before, but you and some other posters I think are onto something about John Harrison being Kirk’s brother. The statement at the end about “is there anything you would not do for family?” fits in nicely with the Kirk vs brother hypothesis.

323. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 12, 2012

“7. Alice Eve confirmed as Marcus. Are captain’s mattresses filled with noisy springs? Rose Pinenut will be waiting to hear the answer.”

It appears that some other poster was concerned with Chris Pine’s answer about Kirk not having time. I mean, come on, Chris – you are a man of the world, all growed up…I mean, how long does it have to take?…:) When it’s important, you make the time. Scotty said so (ST: Generations) and really, what could be more important, really?

I am as curious as anyone to know how those rusty springs sound when they are given the right kind of workout, pounding. Dammit, I want action. After all, the movie is supposed to be billed “action-packed”. Chris Pine said so himself.

Bob – you getting this?
Good man!

324. dmduncan - December 12, 2012



325. Rose (as in Keachick) - December 12, 2012

Starfleet regulation rust and springs are like no other…:)

I have it on good authority (mine -;) that Bob Orci is putting together a list of essential items we will need when we go see the movie in May, especially the 3D versions. The list will include night goggles (for all the darkness); sunglasses (for all those lens flares); wetsuit and/or swimwear (for all the underwater scenes); “face-melting” preventers (Bob knows where you get them). I am certain he will include more items to the list.

He needs to move on that list, because we all want to take advantage of all after Christmas sales of all the knockoff rubbish that nobody wants to buy and you never know where you could find just the right “face-melting” preventer. Things like that. He will let us know if there is anything else we should bring with us closer to movie release dates.

Bob – you really need to be getting all this well!
Keep up the good work!

326. Red Dead Ryan - December 12, 2012

Let’s not forget about the defibrillators, oxygen masks, popcorn and pop.

327. Emotionally Logical - December 12, 2012

Every time I hear John Harrison all I can think of is John Harriman. I know it won’t be the same guy (age difference and all) just sayin…

328. Phil - December 12, 2012

If you have problems with motion sickness in IMAX or 3D, barf bags….

329. joeyjojojrshabado - December 12, 2012

is it just me, or do you also read “boborci” as baborchi, like an italian homeboy?

330. Red Dead Ryan - December 12, 2012

And if you have a bladder problem, bring a pee cup.

331. Aurore - December 13, 2012

“…. His last name is Harrison because they have the same mother, but different fathers. The “half” brother angle also explains the variance in actor types considered for the John Harrison role. With only one parent in common between them, someone like Benicio Del Toro could pass as James Kirk’s older brother…..”

Why not?


332. Elias Javalis - December 13, 2012

I personaly loved the writting style of the first movie. It was fresh …

333. Winston - December 13, 2012

The Enterprise discovers the Botany Bay. Khan is killed in some accident by a crew member, possibly Kirk. Another member of the Botany Bay crew who calls himself John Harrison seeks revenge on Kirk and seeks Carol Marcus to build a genesis device that will revive Khan.


TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.