Benedict Cumberbatch Responds To Star Trek Into Darkness Villain Rumors & more in FilmInk Mag |
jump to navigation

Benedict Cumberbatch Responds To Star Trek Into Darkness Villain Rumors & more in FilmInk Mag April 8, 2013

by Staff , Filed under: Spoilers,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

With Lord of the Rings, Star Trek and Sherlock Holmes, Benedict Cumberbatch is playing with roles dear to many fans but the actor says if he thinks too much about that it would lead to "madness." Find out what else he had to say about his villainous role in Into Darkness in an exclusive preview excerpt from his interview with Australia’s FilmInk Magazine. But warning, Cumberbatch responds to specific spoilers.


Cumberbatch can’t worry if people hate his portrayal of iconic roles

In the May issue of Australia’s FilmInk, Star Trek Into Darkness bad guy Benedict Cumberbatch talks about a number of things including his time studying in a Tibetan monastery. But he was also asked point blank if the reports about his character in Into Darkness are true – and he also talked about taking on iconic roles. Here is an exclusive excerpt from his interview…

Your’re playing a variation on the villain, Khan, played by Ricardo Montalban in 1982’s Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan?
"Umm, I play a character called John Harrison. I can’t say more."

Sherlock Holmes, Smaug in The Hobbit, and now John Harrison. Are you burdened by these larger-than-life characters?
"I do feel a bit disconnected from reality! I go into an audition, and I don’t think about the consequences of getting the job; I just worry about trying to. If I woke up and thought about how much hate there might be for a particular decision that I’ve made bout a particular huge iconic role that’s dear to many people before I got my dirty ands on it, then I would not sleep at all because obviously that way madness lies. You can’t please everyone, and I’ve been lucky enough to work with people with great taste. I’ve trusted them, and good things come when you trust people."

Benedict Cumberbatch interviewed in upcoming issue of Australia’s FilmInk

The issue also has a feature on Star Trek Into Darkness which includes exclusive interview comments with JJ Abrams, Chris Pine, John Cho, Karl Urban, and Zoe Saldana. There’s also a bunch of classic Star Trek tidbits throughout the issue like
Trivia and a celebration of the character Khan.

May issue of Australia’s FilmInk has extensive Star Trek Into Darkness coverage with interviews

The May issue of FilmInk is on stands April 17 for those in Australia. Overseas
readers will be able to purchase digital version via Zinio or iTunes. (and there is always EBay if you need the real copy). Unfortunately Star Trek isn’t on the cover of this one, the Trek goodness is on the inside.

Cover of May FilmInk with Star Trek Into Darkness interviews
(on the inside even though "Spring Breakers" are on the outside)


1. For Warpever It's Worf - April 8, 2013

Nice deflection, there, Cumby. Oh, and… First.

2. Fansincesixtynine - April 8, 2013

Wow. Not even a denial?

3. Adolescent Nightmare - April 8, 2013

Everyone wants to be the first to get him to crack, but


will never crack!

4. Kirk - April 8, 2013

He played a young Stephen Hawking in a bbc drama a few years ago. It was very good. There was a scene where Hawking angrily rushes to the dance floor to dance without his girlfriend, and his movements are very labored. With a lesser actor it would’ve been almost impossible to pull off a scene like that without becoming uninentional comedy.

5. Space Nixon - April 8, 2013

In politics we call that a non-denial denial

6. Space Nixon - April 8, 2013

7. Dennis Bailey - April 8, 2013

Yeah, they’re hardly pretending now that he’s not Khan – just trying to run out the clock. LOL

8. AyanEva - April 8, 2013

Dang! I was 100% convinced that Harrison is in no way Khan but now little tendrils of doubt are beginning to creep in.

No, I’ve stuck with my not-Khan position this long, I’ll see it through to the end. If I’m going to be wrong, I’ll at least be wrong with conviction! LOL

9. thomoz - April 8, 2013

Well I guess this means the third film will be called “Star Trek: The Search For An Original Plot Idea”. I am annoyed with our not Khan scripting.

10. Aix - April 8, 2013

I have heard he’s just been cast in Del Toro’s new horror film with Jessica Chastain. If I were an actor, I would kill to be Cumby right now.

11. Punkspocker - April 8, 2013

#8, I’m with you. Sherlock and Smaug are larger than life. I think he’s referencing them. He’s tired of denying it. Dammit, Ben, I’m a social worker, not a non-denial denial mind reader!

12. redrevan - April 8, 2013

He didn’t study in a Tibetan Monastery, he taught English to the monks there.

“…before I got my dirty hands on it…”
Oh Mr. Cumberbatch, you humble thing. This is the 4th time I’m seeing that question though.


13. I'mPaul - April 8, 2013

I want to see SpringBreakers SOOOOO BAD!

14. Sybok's Secret Brother - April 8, 2013

s#!t… he’s Khan… or some clever variation… damn…

15. Frank Jay Gruber - April 8, 2013

Folks, keep in mind that Khan is the name of a larger than life historic figure. As such, it is a mantle. Harrison might easily declare himself Khan in the film as a way of stressing his effect on the world or galaxy. Who is to say TOS’s Singh or his makers didn’t do the same thing?

16. Khan was Framed! - April 8, 2013

At the top of this page it said spoilers?

I don’t see anything we don’t already know here.

17. Ash - April 8, 2013

@Aix-I know right? After this year, this guy is gonna be HUGE. He has 5 movies coming out and the third season of Sherlock. If all goes well this guy is gonna own Hollywood. He’s already a great actor, he now just has to prove he can hold the big screen as well as he does your tv set. I think he’ll pull it off.

18. Marja - April 8, 2013

I wish we could see a full-face view of Cumberbatch on the poster, not that chin-down frowny face. I think he looks much more threatening when he’s addressing Kirk in the brig. Plus he looks like Cumberbatch, which will attract any number of new audience members.

That pic of Spock and Kirk on the Keeping it Reel page – Kirk looks fine, but why does Spock look like Russell Crowe?

19. TrekkerChick - April 8, 2013

“Captain. Dr. McCoy has run a genetic analysis on this individual and I have found a match with a North American male actor from the mid-to-late 20th Century…


20. - April 9, 2013

I wonder how many of those who think it’s Khan will go out right after seeing the film on a drunken binge to drown their sorrows when it turns out Khan is not in the film nor referenced.

Take a taxi to this one guys.

21. TrekkerChick - April 9, 2013

I don’t really care… If there’s something cool hidden behind “John Harrison”, then great. If not, and the story is good, I’m fine with that.

22. Basement Blogger - April 9, 2013

@ 20


I’ve got other things on my mind than getting depressed about being wrong about a film. MJ, Red Dead Ryan and myself have already said we could be wrong. Unlike J.J. keeping a secret, I’ll say it now if I’m wrong. In the words of James T. Kirk, “Here it comes.”

Here’s my mea culpa. if I’m wrong, “I was wrong in deducing that BC was playing Khan.”

That being said, you must remember that our leader Anthony is also in the group. And if we’re wrong, his source has some explaining to do.

One last thing. just in case you haven’t read it from me. Actress Marion Cotillard denied she was playing Talia Al Ghul. in The Dark Knight Rise. She said she was playing Miranda Tate. True. But that was an alias because we learn she was actually revealed to be Talia later in the movie. Link.

23. William Bradley - April 9, 2013

What you miss is the fact that her playing Talia, while pretending to be someone else, made perfect sense.

The quintessential white Englishman playing a Sikh Indian superman originally played by a Mexican actor makes no sense.

Nor does having a world-straddling dictator pretend to be a Starfleet officer.

24. MJ - April 9, 2013

“I wonder how many of those who think it’s Khan will go out right after seeing the film on a drunken binge to drown their sorrows when it turns out Khan is not in the film nor referenced.”

How passe. I have moved on from that. It’s probably not Khan. If it isn’t, I am hopeful that Anthony spills the beans soon on how he helped Orci with the disinformation campaign last year with the “breaking news” article of his?

25. Crewman Darnell - April 9, 2013

Aside from my natural misgivings about Khan being in the movie, there is more than just that at stake for me. I (foolishly) agreed to a wager with my girlfriend. If Khan is physically present, she wins the bet and consequently, I will spend an *entire* day in very uncomfortable attire. (Or lack thereof.) Yeesh…

26. Anthony Pascale - April 9, 2013

RE: Spoiler warnings
Any article that discusses any spoilers has the warning – new or old spoilers. If it didn’t then there would be complaints there was no warning before someone saw the K word in print.

If there were new spoilers to report that would be clear from headline and/or intro front page text.

27. Buzz Cagney - April 9, 2013

Its not Khan. If it was Khan it would get a worldwide simultaneous release.
I mean, all this secrecy will mean nought to more than half the world pretty quickly after our Oz chums down under get online!

28. Basement Blogger - April 9, 2013

@ 23

William, the movie has not come out yet. So how they alter Khan into John Harrison has not been made public. But before you say genetic alter a character has not been done in a move, let’s go back to James Bond again. As John Harrison would say, “Shall we begin?” In “Die Another Day” (2002); North Korean bad guy Colonel Moon transforms himself into a white man, Gustav Graves by gene therapy. Want a Star Trek example? Okay. Got one. Troi is kidnapped and finds her self transformed into a Romulan, in the TNG episode “Face of the Enemy.” So it’s quite possible to alter Khan into a caucasian.

But why would Khan seek to disguise himself? Remember he’s a fugitive. If he makes an appearance on earth as he was, he would be arrested. There’s a photograph of McCoy examining Harrison’s arm. Is it possible he’s about to discover who Harrison is?

Anyway, here’s what we do know. Kirk wants to know who Harrison is. Harrison is better at everything, I’m guessing he means he’s saying he’s more advanced and not talking about XBOX. He has superhuman strength. His character is canon. He’s concerned about his “family” probably not the Mafia. Oh, he’s come back to earth for revenge. So the ball is in your court. Who do you think he is?

29. Aurore - April 9, 2013

Your’re playing a variation on the villain, Khan, played by Ricardo Montalban in 1982′s Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan?

“Umm, I play a character called John Harrison. I can’t say more.”


Don’t say a word, you beautiful creature.

“For All That is Concealed Shall Soon Be Revealed”….


30. Aurore - April 9, 2013

“Your’re playing a variation on the villain, Khan, played by Ricardo Montalban in 1982′s Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan?”

It seems like Mr. Cumberbatch is being asked a… “variation”…of the same question he’s been asked about a thousand times over the months….


31. Khaaan, the weasel - April 9, 2013

There are mainly two hopes I hold up for this new movie:
1. Should ‘John Harrison’ turn out to be Khan, I hope that that revelation comes wrapped up in some nice and REALLY unexpected plot twist.
2. Not ANOTHER lame revenge story. Dangit, that would make THREE revenge-themed Trek movies in a row … well, as I said: I just hope it won’t be just another variation on the “villain bent on revenge, attempting to blow up everything”-story.

32. matt - April 9, 2013

20 – Chris Fawkes

We will have to wait for another opportunity to find out if there are people out there so low on self worth that the would react such a way to a movie prediction failing to come to fruition, because if is most certainly Khan

33. Buzz Cagney - April 9, 2013

#31 I think you are hoping for quite a lot from this cut-and-paste team.

34. Emperor Mike of the Alternate Empire - April 9, 2013

Cumberbatch sure knows what he is doing. Nice deflection John. er Khan er Lord Garth er Gary Mitchell.

35. EM - April 9, 2013

I notice, too, that everyone involved with the production uses the phrase “called John Harrison” instead of “named John Harrison”. I think that that is their out for not lying. Some of the characters in the movie do call him John Harrison, I’m sure. But, his name is Khan!

36. VAD_BAXTER - April 9, 2013

I find it funny that EVERYONE on here thinks it’s Khan, refer to superhuman strength, has an alias and is in Star Fleet.

There are ONLY two epic characters from TOS that fit the bill:

Khan & Mitchell

EVERYONE on here and most fans in general discount Mitchell because he was killed in the comics (which are a part of nu-canon) yet nothing prevents Mitchell with his God like powers from making a full recovery. Coming back to Earth via some sort of miracle. He could easily defeat Khan with his arms and legs tied behind his back.

The Character has to be a member of Star Fleet since he is some sort of “007” type agent for them.

So what do we know:

Khan is out as a direct character, based on him maybe. I suspect it’s a hybrid character based on Khan & Mitchell.

Do I personally think JJ & Co are being honest with us about all the details?

Heck NO! JJ likes to keep people guessing until the first showing of the film….

Until then sit tight and don’t worry too much…

After all how much more can they Frack up TREK?

37. Curious Cadet - April 9, 2013

@ 28 Basemenr Blogger,
“But why would Khan seek to disguise himself? Remember he’s a fugitive. If he makes an appearance on earth as he was, he would be arrested”

If these guys want to do Khan his way, then they will — Lily white Cumberbatch and all …

But, Khan’s hardly a fugitive by anyone eye’s in the 23rd century, unless we also buy into the premise that Marcus woke him up and enlisted him into Starfleet as some kind of mercenary super soldier, and now he’s gone rogue and needs to be disguised. Recall they had Khan on board in Space Seed for a while before they really started digging though the archives after he showed his hand at dinner. I mean, shouldn’t his picture have popped up the first time they ran his name if he was such a fugitive? As someone argued about a de-aged April, hiding in plain sight, people might think he looks like a young Captain April, but who would think he really is … Much less a forgotten dictator from 200 years past.

With some of the stretches going on to reconcile pet theories, virtually anyone is still possible, with none more likely than another. Even Gary Mitchell is possible if you start genetically altering faces, and changing the very nature of the original character. If Harrison is Khan, there’s very little of the character created by Ricardo Montalban left in him, and to that I say what’s the point — not that it’s not possible by some wild convolutions of established canon. And if it is him, are they going to show us a picture of Ricardo Montalban in a before and after comparison of Khan/Harrison? That might actually be worse than Arnold’s appearance in Terminator 4. Montalban CGI-ed into a cryo tube would be cool, but intentionally highlighting the dramatic contrast between him and Cumberbatch would be comical. To say nothing of trying to explain Khan’s whole back story to the audience, what he’s been up to with Marcus (or whomever), how he relates to April and why and how he changed his appearance.

So yes, Khan could disguise himself and he might have a reason to change his face, but then what’s the point? To salvage a script originally conceived for someone else to keep an already late film from being pushed back even further? If so, that’s the worst possible justification I can imagine, because whatever the case, Khan is simply wasted on Harrison.

38. Beck - April 9, 2013

I guess I’m a rare fan who could really care less whether he plays Khan or not. As long as the movie is good, I’m satisfied.

39. Gary - April 9, 2013

Hey! I know! Cumby is the Son of Khan!

40. matt - April 9, 2013

35 – EM

I think you are picking up on a transatlantic difference here. In the UK we use “called” very commonly. I went out with a girl called Mary” as opposed to the US, which seems to employ “a girl NAMED Mary. The ‘Batch, being British, is likely employing the former, and shouldn’t be seen as a dodge or hint.

41. Randall_Williams - April 9, 2013


Perhaps if you watch “Skyfall” and then compare it with STID you may
have your answer. 007 turns on ____ and Harrison (007 type) turns on

42. John from Cincinnati - April 9, 2013

Maybe the villain was originally going to be Khan (when Benicio Del Toro was offered the part)

Now, maybe they just tweaked the character a bit to reflect the Anglican features of Cumby. (ie. Khan dies during the resuscitation process so, one of his Lieutenants takes over)

43. JimGrant1701 - April 9, 2013

Wouldn’t Khan be frozen on the Botany Bay? Everyone dismisses Garth as a minor character in TOS. I remember when “Wrath of Khan” came out, the name didn’t ring a bell. He was a minor character in an episode that not many people talked about. It’s only after that movie that “Space Seed” hit it big.

44. Aurore - April 9, 2013

I still think it ‘s not Khan.
That goes without saying…my fellow Star Trek fans…


45. docholliday - April 9, 2013

As Admiral Kirk said to Khan in TWOK, “Youve managed to hit everything else, but you keep missing the target”!

46. Aurore - April 9, 2013

…’Still holding out hope for a brand new character to the canon…

So, what is it going to be?

As I said earlier…soon, all shall be revealed…


47. Cinema Geekly - April 9, 2013

“Umm, I play a character called John Harrison. I can’t say more.”

Well……that settles it. He’s Khan.

The fellow who posted the wiki for Non-Denial-Denial was dead on.

48. Curious Cadet - April 9, 2013

@43. JimGrant1701,
“Everyone dismisses Garth as a minor character in TOS.”

I think it’s more that Garth was a lunatic. But like Khan in TWOK, everybody forgets he was once a decorated captain. For Garth to change his identity makes a certain amount of sense without also heaping on the ponderous backstory Khan brings to the plate. And as others have pointed out Garth may or may not be associated with other things like Wayne’s World (which is silly given the name “Darth Vader”, but…). Calling him Harrison until the end after Cumberbatch has proven himself will create a brand new association with the name Garth, and you have a new Trek villain equal to Khan. Perhaps one that gets locked away like Hanibal Lechter or Magneto, only to break out again one day.

I agree with your assessment, BTW. I’m hoping they surprise us with a canon connection to Harrison that hasn’t really been explored.

49. Aurore - April 9, 2013

“Well……that settles it. He’s Khan.”

That settles it…for you, and probably some other fellow fans, of course.

I’ll wait for a confirmation article…


50. EM - April 9, 2013

@49 Matt

Thanks for pointing out the differences in manner of speech. I’m Canadian (have watched a lot of British Television) and never picked up on the difference.
I really don’t care if it is Khan or Gary Mitchell or just plain old John Mitchell! I’m looking forward to a big, fun action movie!
Benedict Cumberbatch will certainly bring a huge amount of ability to the role of the villain, whatever he’s called!

51. EM - April 9, 2013

My last post is directo to @40, not @49!

52. EM - April 9, 2013

directed…sausage fingers! Or advanced age!

53. Thorny - April 9, 2013

43… I disagree about the popularity of Khan prior to Star Trek II. He was definitely far better known than Garth, thanks mostly to Ricardo Montalban being a much more famous actor than Steve Ihnat. Montalban was also starring in the hit series Fantasy Island at the time as well as popular pitchman for Lincoln-Mercury (I think.) I suspect that if you’d asked fans prior to the announcement of Star Trek II who was Trek’s most famous humanoid villain, you would have gotten equal responses for Kor (John Collicos), Khan (Montalban), and Gary Seven (who ended up not being a villain, but you went thought most of the episode before you knew that.)

54. Yanks - April 9, 2013

Khan was never in Star Fleet.

No one has ever indicated that Cumby is playing that “iconic” Star Trek character. I’m most certain that it was said that STID would include an iconic Star Trek character.

Cumby is not Khan.

I believe Cumby plays an Augment.

Next please.

55. Jack - April 9, 2013

40. Agreed.

56. Jack - April 9, 2013

For me it’s the learned shape-shifting thing that made Garth a ridiculous character.

57. The Sky's The Limit - April 9, 2013

I’m pysched to see the movie, but even if it is a variation of Khan, it’ll be interesting and entertaining. I hope the third movie returns to a premise where a situational obstacle (i.e Planet Killer, NOMAD etc.) must be conquered versus the repeated “shoot em up, kill the bad guy” premise that is repeatedly revisited.

Totally stoked about seeing the movie in IMAX!

58. The Sinfonian - April 9, 2013

Khan never in Starfleet? Well, he was flying on a DY-100, a product of the United Earth Space Probe Agency, one of the predecessors of Starfleet. So in a way, he was “on” Starfleet. :)

@56 I had always preferred a “learned the technology” thought: that it was 99% nanotechnology, and 1% mental interfacing with that nanotech. Garth is still an interesting character. Greatest hero of Axanar, a major defeat of a Klingon advance…. who was injured and went insane due to the injuries.

59. Captain, USS Northstar - April 9, 2013

Hmmm — @53: you bring up Gary Seven? BC would make a great Gary Seven and a twist on that character in the JJ-verse could be very intriguing. It might fit with some of the things we’ve seen in the previews and the 9 minutes of footage shown with “The Hobbit.”

@57 — I’d love to see what the Doomsday Machine would look like in this new envisoning of Star Trek. To this day, that episode ranks tied as my all time favorite along with “The Trouble With Tribbles.”

60. The Sky's The Limit - April 9, 2013

@57 – I recently watched “Conscience of the King.” One of the more character driven episodes that shows a side of Capt. Kirk you don’t see explored very often in future episodes. While this type of story wouldn’t fly as a full-feature movie, it certainly has some endearing traits as far as Capt Kirk’s personality is concerned.

61. The Sky's The Limit - April 9, 2013

meant for @59!

62. Basement Blogger - April 9, 2013

@ 54

Yanks says “No one has ever indicated that Cumby is playing that “iconic” Star Trek character.”

That’s not entirely correct. Bob Orci said in an interview on this website that BC’s character was canon. Link.

This website has listed its sources as saying BC is Khan. Link.

63. Keachick - April 9, 2013

Will the Khan name still get mentioned if we find that John Harrison or any other character in STID is in no way connected with Khan or any Botany Bay crew whatsoever?

Just wondering…oh wait, there is likely to be a third movie coming on the horizon…:((

64. Khany 2013 - April 9, 2013

Cumberbatch is playing Khan. Star Fleet gave him plastic surgery and wiped his memory, but they weren’t completely successful… so he has returned… to have his vengeance!

65. captain_neill - April 9, 2013

He is not Khan. Period.

And if he is then I am sorry but you cant outdo Ricardo Montalban.

I am looking forward to Into Darkness but keen on Khan being redone especially when Cumberbatch is of a different ethinicity than Montalban.

66. EM - April 9, 2013

54. Yanks –
“Khan was never in Star Fleet.”

So what? That was the old time line. He might have been a good citizen in this timeline! Until something sets him off!

Cumberbatch would make an amazing Khan! Regardless of race.

67. Craiger - April 9, 2013

What if is just a disgruntled Starfleet officer with no alias, that doesn’t like their current policies? What if the Prime Directive got in the way of saving a loved one or ones while he was on a mission and blames Starfleet for that.

68. Not Khan - April 9, 2013

Craiger #67 has the right idea: there is no reason to think it has to be Khan, but simply a Starfleet officer, who, like Kirk, does not always follows the rules and blames Starfleet for some sad event in his life history…

69. Dean-O - April 9, 2013

Why are all these people grasping at straws in hopes that BC is Khan? He is simply not the right actor to play any new version of Khan. Khan being in this movie would come across as ridiculously contrived.

This childish fan boy with blinders on issue has become old. Very old.

70. LizardGirl - April 10, 2013

Where’s Anton Yelchin in these magazine/internet interviews? I haven’t seen one with him about this movie or his character in this movie. Just about everyone has done these, except Anton.

71. captain_neill - April 10, 2013

Talking with a friend a few weeks ago and he mentioned an interesting possibility.

What if Harrision has a link to Section 31? Could be interesting

72. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 10, 2013

Hmm – there may be a clue regarding that (or possibly just a red herring) in Countdown to Darkness #3.

73. RBanks - April 10, 2013

I think it would be pretty interesting if Harrison turns out to be Khan, or have some major link to the Khan character.

If that doesn’t happen, it’s by no means a deal-breaker for me. My group of friends and I are going out for a few drinks the evening of the 17th, but we won’t be drowning our sorrows if Harrison is someone else completely.

We might drown a few sorrows if STID turns out to be a bad film, but I don’t think that will happen. More likely, we’ll have a few in celebration of the outstanding Trek film we just watched.

74. Patrick - April 10, 2013

If Chris Pine yells, “JOOOHHHNNNNNNN” at some point in this movie, I’m walking out.

75. Josh C. - April 10, 2013

Maybe he’s not denying it’s Khan even if he’s not because:

1) if he did, no one here would believe him anyway

2) They see us having too much fun thinking he’s Khan

it’s not like this is the first time this has come up

76. Aurore - April 10, 2013

“Yep, it’s yet another thing I can’t talk about [laughs]. I’ll tell you this, it’s iconic and it’s exciting. I’m bored of denying that it’s Khan now, because people keep saying it.”

Mon “pauvre” chéri…

As I was saying upthread, Mr. Cumberbatch has been asked a variation of the same question over the months.

I’m personally satisfied with the way he answers the same question…over…and…over…again; he does not say no…. nor does he say yes…

So, the speculation continues….I like it.

He is not playing Khan Noonien Singh, by the way. In my opinion, evidently. But, he’ll prove to be the kind of “worthy adversary” my beloved crew deserves to face.


77. Fro Joe Koolaid - April 10, 2013

I have no idea why no one is talking about Joachim. I mean Cumberbatch looks like the guy who played him and that one small shot of “John Harrison” walking out of a room witha bigger guy with a pony tail and what appears to be stasis tubes. I mean at this point I’m almost convinced Cumberbatch is playing Joachim and will lead to the next one being about Khan.

78. ObsessiveStarTrekFan - April 11, 2013

Joachim has been bandied about as the possible villain in numerous threads on this site over at least the past few months, and possibly longer.

Time will tell. Not long now – although I have to admit, as the excitement ramps up, time seems to pass more slowly ;-)

79. Robert - April 11, 2013

I don’t know if it’s Khan or not. I hope it isn’t. But I’ve got to share this: Had a weird dream last night where I was watching a trailer for STID. In it, Cumby turns up wearing Montalban’s costume from TWOK. Then I see a USS Reliant souped up like the new Enterprise. In my dream I screamed NO!!!!!!!! Weird, huh?

80. Basement Blogger - April 12, 2013

@ 69

Ah… Dean-O. My old friend. At least this time you didn’t call the people in the Khan faction “idiots.”

Look, I’m not rooting for Khan. Frankly, I think it’s a bad idea. I just deduced that BC is Khan. Could I be wrong? Yes. If it is Khan, then I’m going to keep an open mind. STID could be a great movie. Let’s just hope it’s Star Trek.

81. Yanks - April 12, 2013

2 of my posts are gone… ?????

Saw them the other day…

82. Jake - April 14, 2013

Does anyone think these JJ Abram’s Star Trek movies have something to do with the “Mirror Mirror” episode. We are talking about the 2009 Star Trek, Into Darkness, and probably the next one????????????

Abram’s may be up to something bigger. We might find StarFleet is going to be an, empire in this one. And by the end of the third movie, StarFleet, Kirk and his crew are all villians.

Is that possible? The offshoot of this one is that Cumberbact is a villian, an augment perhaps. And is tough. But the real story will be what is going on with Kirk and StarFleet.

Again to mention. “Mirror, Mirror”

Its not like the the last movie was in an alternative universe or anything.

83. Disinvited - April 14, 2013

#82. Jake – April 14, 2013

I doubt CBS would let the focus change from their iconic trademarked heroic characters to their Mirror versions. At least, not without some strong indication that there was a demand indicating record breaking sales.

I have often wondered what would happen if Prime Khan slipped into the Mirror universe somehow? is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.