The Problem with Khan: Trek‘s Shortage of Suitable Villainy

I don’t care if it’s Benicio Del Toro or Edgar Ramirez who ends up playing the mysterious villain in the long-awaited second JJ Abrams Star Trek movie, I swear. The only thing that I’m worried about is that, no matter who gets the role, it’s beginning to look a lot like they’ll be playing Khan Noonien Singh and… Well, do we really have to do this again? Isn’t there anyone else who can take over the Big Bad role for the next Trek?

Admittedly, the answer to that question might be “no”; the seemingly unquenchable desire to see Khan make a comeback in the second Trek movie from this new series underscores a strange fact about Trek in all its various forms: It didn’t really get into the arch-nemesis idea. Sure, there were a lot of recurring characters, and certainly all manner of alien races that were considered threats, but in terms of individual recurring villains…? Not so much. Surprisingly, there really is no Trek version of the Joker, or the Green Goblin or whoever.

When Trek was a television series, this was a plus; it meant that each episode potentially had the same weight as any other, and that you wouldn’t think that a Tribble episode or Harry Mudd or whatever would just be killing time until the next reappearance of the Big Bad – A problem, I think, that some of the revival series fell into, especially the arc-based Deep Space Nine, which (for me, at least) had episodes that really just felt like filler when I wanted to get to the next development with the Dominion. But movies are different; they almost demand the kind of sense of scale and “Things are going to get bad” that automatically comes with an arch-nemesis, and also the brevity in exposition that comes with one characters, rather than, say, an entire race like the Klingons or the Borg. There’s less time for worldbuilding in a movie, compared with a series, and more need for the bad guy to have a particular face.

(Consider Nero from the last Trek movie; an attempt to fill this gap, but not necessarily an entirely successful one; he lacked the name recognition that Khan or, let’s be honest, any other character from the original series could have brought, and I think that ultimately hurt both him and the movie, a little. Plus, let’s be honest: No-one really cares about the Romulans that much, even if you do destroy their entire race. They’ve always been the grumpy Vulcans to most people.)

So, it pretty much is Khan or nothing, right now, isn’t it? There aren’t any other singular villains in Trek that share his elevated status (Even if that status only, ironically, comes from his being plucked from relative obscurity and built up in a movie not unlike this one will likely be, twenty-odd years ago. While I’m at it, please someone tell me that I’m not the only person amused that said movie is called The Wrath of Khan considering that’s the character’s first name? Admittedly, The Wrath of Singh doesn’t sound as good, but still; it’s like calling the movie The Wrath of David or The Wrath of Jim or something). That feels like it could be a problem for Trek movies going forward, which is why I’m hope that the denials that whatever actor ends up as the big bad is going to get his Ricardo Montelban on aren’t just swerves/lies because everyone has already guessed what’s going on. I’d rather see an attempt to build up other familiar ideas and/or faces in the second movie, so that we won’t be left with the idea that Khan is the one major bad guy in the entire franchise.

Of course, not using Khan in the second movie also has the added benefit of keeping him available for a shock appearance in the third, just in case the second movie leaves audiences extremely disappointed. Trying new ideas and not giving the audience what they think they want only works for so long if the audience isn’t receptive, after all…

News From Our Partners

Comments

  • Scotty

    Or, and this is just a wacky thought, they could create something new. I know, I know, that’s crazy talk.

  • TF_Loki

    Yeah that was my thought. wasn’t the main audience for TrekBoot1 non fans anyway? They won’t care who the villain is as long as it’s entertaining.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Khan was formal title like President or King, not his first name.

    Which makes Kirk’s infamous “KAAHHHHNNNN!” a bit silly in retrospect. It’d be like him yelling “Mr. Presidennnnntt!!” instead of the guy’s name.

  • Rollo Tomassi

    Khan was formal title like President or King, not his first name.

    Which makes Kirk’s infamous “KAAHHHHNNNN!” a bit silly in retrospect. It’d be like him yelling “Mr. Presidennnnntt!!” instead of the guy’s name.

  • Breakfastfood

    it is amazing how you can tell a Grame cracker article from the title

  • Breakfastfood

    it is amazing how you can tell a Grame cracker article from the title

  • Russell Dady

    I have to say this is a very silly article.  Star Trek has any number of recognisable A-list villains, whether individually or collectively.  The Klingons haven’t shown up yet, nor this era’s Romulans.  The Mirror Universe offers a wealth of plots.  There’s also no reason I know of why this reboot should be confined to villains who appeared in TOS or the movies featuring that cast; it seems almost inevitable that the Borg will be reused eventually, and they could introduce the Dominion if they wanted to.  Or, as someone else pointed out, they could do what they did last time and introduce a new villain; I doubt this film will rigidly follow the plot of Wrath of Khan anyway, if only because that movie relied upon Khan’s appearance in the TV show.

    But even sillier is the complaint about the title “The Wrath of Khan”.  ”The Wrath of Khan” sounds cool because the name sounds exotic and cool.  If the character had been called Ben Noonien Singh, no doubt it would have been “The Wrath of Singh”; likewise, if he had been something completely made up, like Velocitorix, it would have been  ”The Wrath of Velocitorix”.  This is possibly the most frivolous complaint I can think of to make about a movie’s title.

  • Russell Dady

    I have to say this is a very silly article.  Star Trek has any number of recognisable A-list villains, whether individually or collectively.  The Klingons haven’t shown up yet, nor this era’s Romulans.  The Mirror Universe offers a wealth of plots.  There’s also no reason I know of why this reboot should be confined to villains who appeared in TOS or the movies featuring that cast; it seems almost inevitable that the Borg will be reused eventually, and they could introduce the Dominion if they wanted to.  Or, as someone else pointed out, they could do what they did last time and introduce a new villain; I doubt this film will rigidly follow the plot of Wrath of Khan anyway, if only because that movie relied upon Khan’s appearance in the TV show.

    But even sillier is the complaint about the title “The Wrath of Khan”.  ”The Wrath of Khan” sounds cool because the name sounds exotic and cool.  If the character had been called Ben Noonien Singh, no doubt it would have been “The Wrath of Singh”; likewise, if he had been something completely made up, like Velocitorix, it would have been  ”The Wrath of Velocitorix”.  This is possibly the most frivolous complaint I can think of to make about a movie’s title.

  • tar22

    “It’s like calling the movie The Wrath of David or The Wrath of Jim or something”Uh yeah, that is what it’s like. Except his name is Khan.There’s also the common biblical phrase: The wrath of God.What kind of complaint is this? Good grief.

  • tar22

    “It’s like calling the movie The Wrath of David or The Wrath of Jim or something”Uh yeah, that is what it’s like. Except his name is Khan.There’s also the common biblical phrase: The wrath of God.What kind of complaint is this? Good grief.

  • IronSyndicate

    I think this problem is much, much, much worse when it comes to the Superman movies. There, despite having a wealth of villains to choose from, they keep going back to Luthor or Zod. Every single time.

  • IronSyndicate

    I think this problem is much, much, much worse when it comes to the Superman movies. There, despite having a wealth of villains to choose from, they keep going back to Luthor or Zod. Every single time.

  • Logan

    Exactly! As someone who never liked Star Trek growing up, what made the last movie so appealing was its independence from any previous continuity, and it’s probably the same reason the movie performed better than any previous Star Trek (http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/chart/?id=startrek.htm). I have a pretty vague idea of who Khan is, but as it’s all new to me, as long as it looks cool I’m down.’

  • sandwich eater

    No disrespect to the incredible Richardo Montalban, but you’d think that this time they could cast and Indian to play an Indian.  Come on they could get the guy from Lost; I bet Abrams has him on speed dial.

  • sandwich eater

    No disrespect to the incredible Richardo Montalban, but you’d think that this time they could cast and Indian to play an Indian.  Come on they could get the guy from Lost; I bet Abrams has him on speed dial.

  • groo

    what about Q?

  • groo

    what about Q?

  • Thenishan

    Listen up. Hulk Hogan should play Khan. Whacha gonna do bruther, when Khanamania runs the cosmos wild on youuuuuuuu?

  • Thenishan

    Listen up. Hulk Hogan should play Khan. Whacha gonna do bruther, when Khanamania runs the cosmos wild on youuuuuuuu?

  • Johnzdrake

    Gul Dukat was an exemplary archvillain. Not that you could use him in this context very easily, but he was extremely memorable. Kor, Kang, Koloth, Mark Leonard’s Romulan commander, Mirror Universe anybody, the Borg, the Gorn, the Tholians, Q (though I wouldn’t want to see him in a movie), etc. It’s not that there haven’t been memorable villains it’s just that with the exception of DS9, not many Treks used the same villains over and over again, so finding one who stands out in the crowd is tricky. 

  • Johnzdrake

    Gul Dukat was an exemplary archvillain. Not that you could use him in this context very easily, but he was extremely memorable. Kor, Kang, Koloth, Mark Leonard’s Romulan commander, Mirror Universe anybody, the Borg, the Gorn, the Tholians, Q (though I wouldn’t want to see him in a movie), etc. It’s not that there haven’t been memorable villains it’s just that with the exception of DS9, not many Treks used the same villains over and over again, so finding one who stands out in the crowd is tricky. 

  • Jason Landers

    Is this article for real?????

  • Jason Landers

    Is this article for real?????

  • Jason Landers

    Is this article for real?????

  • PapaLazarou

    Khan is not his name but his title.

  • PapaLazarou

    Khan is not his name but his title.

  • PapaLazarou

    Khan is not his name but his title.

  • Dave

    It’s not the lack of good villains that’s the problem.  And it’s not a problem of the actors hired to portray them: Malcolm McDowell, Christopher Plummer, F Murray Abraham, Tom Hardy, etc make up an outstanding array of talent.

    The problem lies in the the crappy writing that’s plagued nearly the entire series for the last 20 years. Write the villain as legitimate, terrifying threat; flesh them out; make us as invested in them as we are in the main cast. I know it’s difficult to accomplish in a two-hour timespan, but it’s not impossible.

  • Dave

    It’s not the lack of good villains that’s the problem.  And it’s not a problem of the actors hired to portray them: Malcolm McDowell, Christopher Plummer, F Murray Abraham, Tom Hardy, etc make up an outstanding array of talent.

    The problem lies in the the crappy writing that’s plagued nearly the entire series for the last 20 years. Write the villain as legitimate, terrifying threat; flesh them out; make us as invested in them as we are in the main cast. I know it’s difficult to accomplish in a two-hour timespan, but it’s not impossible.

  • Dave

    It’s not the lack of good villains that’s the problem.  And it’s not a problem of the actors hired to portray them: Malcolm McDowell, Christopher Plummer, F Murray Abraham, Tom Hardy, etc make up an outstanding array of talent.

    The problem lies in the the crappy writing that’s plagued nearly the entire series for the last 20 years. Write the villain as legitimate, terrifying threat; flesh them out; make us as invested in them as we are in the main cast. I know it’s difficult to accomplish in a two-hour timespan, but it’s not impossible.

  • Casey Jones

    Well, that is one of the few problems with the the original franchise: Khan is the only specific villain to appear more than once.  

    Star Wars had Darth Vader. Doctor Who has the Daleks. For a villain to have real gravitas with the audience, they must *recognize* him. Yeah– someone will play Khan Noonien Singh. He *is* Star Trek’s only memorable villain who survived his first on-screen encounter with Kirk. 

    I am all for bringing in more original characters like Nero. He proved a capable threat and a worthy villain– even if his anger was directed at Spock instead of Kirk. (That is was his flaw as a movie villain, not the fact that he was an original character.)

    Movies are big business, and every trekkie *knows* Wrath of Khan was the best original Star Trek movie ever made. So yeah– the studios will capitalize on that. Given how great the first new Star Trek turned out… is that so bad a thing?

  • Casey Jones

    Well, that is one of the few problems with the the original franchise: Khan is the only specific villain to appear more than once.  

    Star Wars had Darth Vader. Doctor Who has the Daleks. For a villain to have real gravitas with the audience, they must *recognize* him. Yeah– someone will play Khan Noonien Singh. He *is* Star Trek’s only memorable villain who survived his first on-screen encounter with Kirk. 

    I am all for bringing in more original characters like Nero. He proved a capable threat and a worthy villain– even if his anger was directed at Spock instead of Kirk. (That is was his flaw as a movie villain, not the fact that he was an original character.)

    Movies are big business, and every trekkie *knows* Wrath of Khan was the best original Star Trek movie ever made. So yeah– the studios will capitalize on that. Given how great the first new Star Trek turned out… is that so bad a thing?

  • Casey Jones

    Well, that is one of the few problems with the the original franchise: Khan is the only specific villain to appear more than once.  

    Star Wars had Darth Vader. Doctor Who has the Daleks. For a villain to have real gravitas with the audience, they must *recognize* him. Yeah– someone will play Khan Noonien Singh. He *is* Star Trek’s only memorable villain who survived his first on-screen encounter with Kirk. 

    I am all for bringing in more original characters like Nero. He proved a capable threat and a worthy villain– even if his anger was directed at Spock instead of Kirk. (That is was his flaw as a movie villain, not the fact that he was an original character.)

    Movies are big business, and every trekkie *knows* Wrath of Khan was the best original Star Trek movie ever made. So yeah– the studios will capitalize on that. Given how great the first new Star Trek turned out… is that so bad a thing?

  • Casey Jones

    Independent of continuity? Every person on that screen was an exaggerated characterization of their 60′s counterparts. It was nostalgia espresso. 

    Originality requires courage, and risk. The studio demonstrated with the first movie that they don’t *need* to step too far outside what’s already been established. The movie was a blockbuster. If they make a third one– and they probably will– then that would be the time to expect something fresh. After Khan’s been used. 

  • Casey Jones

    Independent of continuity? Every person on that screen was an exaggerated characterization of their 60′s counterparts. It was nostalgia espresso. 

    Originality requires courage, and risk. The studio demonstrated with the first movie that they don’t *need* to step too far outside what’s already been established. The movie was a blockbuster. If they make a third one– and they probably will– then that would be the time to expect something fresh. After Khan’s been used. 

  • Casey Jones

    Independent of continuity? Every person on that screen was an exaggerated characterization of their 60′s counterparts. It was nostalgia espresso. 

    Originality requires courage, and risk. The studio demonstrated with the first movie that they don’t *need* to step too far outside what’s already been established. The movie was a blockbuster. If they make a third one– and they probably will– then that would be the time to expect something fresh. After Khan’s been used. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    “Independent of continuity? Every person on that screen was an
    exaggerated characterization of their 60′s counterparts. It was
    nostalgia espresso. ”

    That doesn’t add up. How does basing the characters on their 60′s counterparts make it dependent on continuity?

  • Ssteve1011

    Villains have never been a driving force behind trek movies. That being said the wrath of khan is my favorite trek movie of all time. He was a great villain to oppose Kirk and he had so many great lines in the movie

  • Ssteve1011

    Villains have never been a driving force behind trek movies. That being said the wrath of khan is my favorite trek movie of all time. He was a great villain to oppose Kirk and he had so many great lines in the movie

  • Ssteve1011

    Villains have never been a driving force behind trek movies. That being said the wrath of khan is my favorite trek movie of all time. He was a great villain to oppose Kirk and he had so many great lines in the movie

  • Tae

    I totally understand your argument. But I see one fatal flaw (Other than the non-fatal one, being that Nero was actually awesome and perfectly pitched for that movie. If we are comparing the movies in their order, Nero is better than Veeger). 

    Khan wasn’t a famous bad guy until Wrath of Khan. He was a cool character who appeared as many times as Tribbles, and less than Harry Mudd (Who could be reimagined in an amazing way. Get Eric Stonestreet). Harve Bennett (I think it was him) just liked Khan, so history was made.

    That could very easily happen again. 

  • Tae

    I totally understand your argument. But I see one fatal flaw (Other than the non-fatal one, being that Nero was actually awesome and perfectly pitched for that movie. If we are comparing the movies in their order, Nero is better than Veeger). 

    Khan wasn’t a famous bad guy until Wrath of Khan. He was a cool character who appeared as many times as Tribbles, and less than Harry Mudd (Who could be reimagined in an amazing way. Get Eric Stonestreet). Harve Bennett (I think it was him) just liked Khan, so history was made.

    That could very easily happen again. 

  • Leader Desslok

    I always liked KANG, The Klingon Commander who was played by THREE different actors in the original series: John Colicos (Errand of Mercy), William Campbell (The Trouble With Tribbles) and Michael Ansara (Day of The Dove). Although, Colicos’ version was pure evil, Ansara’s is my favorite because he was tall and menacing and (due to his accent) his voice had an exotic sounding flair, just like with his Mr.Freeze! Also, according to NEXT GENERATION, Kang is remembered as a great hero of the Klingon Empire.

    There are quite a number of villains, the producers just have to look deeper into the original series. Hey, remember the super-powerful Gary Mitchell and Charlie X? See, I found THREE VILLAINS all by myself… 

  • Leader Desslok

    I always liked KANG, The Klingon Commander who was played by THREE different actors in the original series: John Colicos (Errand of Mercy), William Campbell (The Trouble With Tribbles) and Michael Ansara (Day of The Dove). Although, Colicos’ version was pure evil, Ansara’s is my favorite because he was tall and menacing and (due to his accent) his voice had an exotic sounding flair, just like with his Mr.Freeze! Also, according to NEXT GENERATION, Kang is remembered as a great hero of the Klingon Empire.

    There are quite a number of villains, the producers just have to look deeper into the original series. Hey, remember the super-powerful Gary Mitchell and Charlie X? See, I found THREE VILLAINS all by myself… 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christopher-Backa/100001345616164 Christopher Backa

    They could introduce Kang, Koloth, or Kor to the series and make Kor the reoccurring klingon he was supposed to be during the original run of the series, it just never worked out that way. I really don’t want Khan in the next film. Star Trek was never Kirk vs. xxxxxx. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christopher-Backa/100001345616164 Christopher Backa

    They could introduce Kang, Koloth, or Kor to the series and make Kor the reoccurring klingon he was supposed to be during the original run of the series, it just never worked out that way. I really don’t want Khan in the next film. Star Trek was never Kirk vs. xxxxxx. 

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Christopher-Backa/100001345616164 Christopher Backa

    They could introduce Kang, Koloth, or Kor to the series and make Kor the reoccurring klingon he was supposed to be during the original run of the series, it just never worked out that way. I really don’t want Khan in the next film. Star Trek was never Kirk vs. xxxxxx. 

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    You completely missed the point. He’s not saying there’s no villains, he’s saying the franchise doesn’t have a Vader or Joker level villain. One that’s iconic and synonymous with the franchise.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    You completely missed the point. He’s not saying there’s no villains, he’s saying the franchise doesn’t have a Vader or Joker level villain. One that’s iconic and synonymous with the franchise.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    You completely missed the point. He’s not saying there’s no villains, he’s saying the franchise doesn’t have a Vader or Joker level villain. One that’s iconic and synonymous with the franchise.

  • Gornllg

    Would have loved to see Harry Mudd, the Gorn, or Oxmix.

  • Gornllg

    Would have loved to see Harry Mudd, the Gorn, or Oxmix.

  • Gornllg

    Would have loved to see Harry Mudd, the Gorn, or Oxmix.

  • Carparts

    The first time I saw the new Star Trek I thought it was freaking awesome.

    The second time I watched it, it felt like a bad SNL sketch.  It was almost like watching a completely different movie, and not in a good way.

    Anyone else have have this experience?

  • Carparts

    The first time I saw the new Star Trek I thought it was freaking awesome.

    The second time I watched it, it felt like a bad SNL sketch.  It was almost like watching a completely different movie, and not in a good way.

    Anyone else have have this experience?

  • Carparts

    The first time I saw the new Star Trek I thought it was freaking awesome.

    The second time I watched it, it felt like a bad SNL sketch.  It was almost like watching a completely different movie, and not in a good way.

    Anyone else have have this experience?

  • Kandor

    If it were up to me I’d go with Q. Sure ,he was next generation, but he was an enjoyable character and he deserved chance in the big screen.

  • Kandor

    If it were up to me I’d go with Q. Sure ,he was next generation, but he was an enjoyable character and he deserved chance in the big screen.

  • Kandor

    If it were up to me I’d go with Q. Sure ,he was next generation, but he was an enjoyable character and he deserved chance in the big screen.

  • Darkknight9761

    I kinda doubt that they will use Khan as the villain, given J.J. Abrams’ penchant for trying to be original. Still, that being said, if he does choose to go that route, I’m interested to see how the character will be interpreted.  

  • Darkknight9761

    I kinda doubt that they will use Khan as the villain, given J.J. Abrams’ penchant for trying to be original. Still, that being said, if he does choose to go that route, I’m interested to see how the character will be interpreted.  

  • Darkknight9761

    I kinda doubt that they will use Khan as the villain, given J.J. Abrams’ penchant for trying to be original. Still, that being said, if he does choose to go that route, I’m interested to see how the character will be interpreted.  

  • Kirk Out

    As a child, I stayed up late to watch Star Trek, and have faithfully followed it thru the various movies and Star Trek Next Generation. The other TV manifestations held no interest for me, they could have been great, but I just was not interested in devoting the time to watch it. I found the new Star Trek fantastic, and the story line original. Of course, the same characters as the original are here, but the plot freed them from the past. An alternate reality as Uhura said Khan? Bring him on! 

  • Kirk Out

    As a child, I stayed up late to watch Star Trek, and have faithfully followed it thru the various movies and Star Trek Next Generation. The other TV manifestations held no interest for me, they could have been great, but I just was not interested in devoting the time to watch it. I found the new Star Trek fantastic, and the story line original. Of course, the same characters as the original are here, but the plot freed them from the past. An alternate reality as Uhura said Khan? Bring him on! 

  • Kirk Out

    As a child, I stayed up late to watch Star Trek, and have faithfully followed it thru the various movies and Star Trek Next Generation. The other TV manifestations held no interest for me, they could have been great, but I just was not interested in devoting the time to watch it. I found the new Star Trek fantastic, and the story line original. Of course, the same characters as the original are here, but the plot freed them from the past. An alternate reality as Uhura said Khan? Bring him on! 

  • http://twitter.com/nld33 Norm

    Khan, bad idea. Very sad & bankrupt idea’s. Too top it off the crew Damon Lindelof , Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci who are producing & writing this are Khan fan boys from the 80′s and once they remake Khan they will probably jump ship anyway.

  • http://twitter.com/nld33 Norm

    Khan, bad idea. Very sad & bankrupt idea’s. Too top it off the crew Damon Lindelof , Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci who are producing & writing this are Khan fan boys from the 80′s and once they remake Khan they will probably jump ship anyway.

  • http://twitter.com/nld33 Norm

    Khan, bad idea. Very sad & bankrupt idea’s. Too top it off the crew Damon Lindelof , Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci who are producing & writing this are Khan fan boys from the 80′s and once they remake Khan they will probably jump ship anyway.

  • Omegasaga

    How could you say that after 45 yrs of TREK, there isnt memorable villians???

    Commander Kruge ( Loyd from TREK III)
    SYBOK  ( lame brother from trek V)
    Kligon from TREK VI
    BORG & the Queen from FRIST CONTACT

    the list goes on

  • Omegasaga

    How could you say that after 45 yrs of TREK, there isnt memorable villians???

    Commander Kruge ( Loyd from TREK III)
    SYBOK  ( lame brother from trek V)
    Kligon from TREK VI
    BORG & the Queen from FRIST CONTACT

    the list goes on

  • Omegasaga

    How could you say that after 45 yrs of TREK, there isnt memorable villians???

    Commander Kruge ( Loyd from TREK III)
    SYBOK  ( lame brother from trek V)
    Kligon from TREK VI
    BORG & the Queen from FRIST CONTACT

    the list goes on

  • Omegasaga

    are you saying the 2009 Trek was ONLY good because of Nostalgia?  Thats nuts.

    Trek 09 was possibly THE best trek movie ever.  it was certainly Epic.
    I have freinds that never saw a trek movie and were blown away by it.

  • Omegasaga

    are you saying the 2009 Trek was ONLY good because of Nostalgia?  Thats nuts.

    Trek 09 was possibly THE best trek movie ever.  it was certainly Epic.
    I have freinds that never saw a trek movie and were blown away by it.

  • Omegasaga

    are you saying the 2009 Trek was ONLY good because of Nostalgia?  Thats nuts.

    Trek 09 was possibly THE best trek movie ever.  it was certainly Epic.
    I have freinds that never saw a trek movie and were blown away by it.

  • Anonymous

    The problem with STAR TREK 2009′s Nero was he came off as a whiny wuss of a villain. He’s mad at Spock, the guy who tried to save his world, instead angry at how some star light-years from Romulus exploded yet the shockwave travelled so fast it destroyed his homeworld before they could evacuate? Talk about misplaced anger.

    Nero would have been better served if Spock was negotiating peace between the Romulans and the Remans (who had returned as we learned from Star Trek: Nemesis) or the Klingons and during the peace negotiations, that’s when Romulus’ star goes supernova. Nero then blames Spock for lulling his people with the promise of peace, leading to them lowering their guard and allowing their destruction. Even “better”, if Spock was leading a Federation Diplomatic mission of peace. THAT would give Nero a much better reason for hatred of the Federation in general and Spock in particular.

    As far as Khan, sure, he would be a great villain. Newsarama mentioned an idea that I riffed off, The Rise of Khan, where Khan shows up in cryosleep, but I thought it would be cool if he had amnesia. While he had his other eugenetically augmented abilities, his memories would be blocked, but he was still useful to the crew, since the Enterprise would be on other missions until it got to a station where they could transfer Khan. Over time Khan could win over parts of the crew, especially when he sides with an away team that gets in trouble violating some local planet’s law, and Kirk is forced to side with the locals to avoid some diplomatic incident–and because the away team is guilty. Khan disagrees with the punishment and rescues them, and puts a division between Kirk and his crew. The movie ends with Khan mutinies and getting support from some of the crew and overturning the local government, with support of some of the local residents. In short, you have similar enemy with a different story than TWOK.

    As far as other villains, typically TOS villains were more remember as aligned species than specific individuals, the Klingons, the Romulans, Artificial Intelligences (e.g., Nomad, M5, Lazarus, etc.), etc. Now that the reboot origin has been done, subsequent movies can focus more on the backstory of the villain, to flesh him or her out. 

    Of course there’s what’s remembered and what happened. TOS did often introduce specific characters who were villains with specific motivations (e.g., Charlie X, Gary “Glowy Eyes” Mitchell, Dr. Tristan Adams and his mind-control spotlight barber chair, et al.)–and did so in under an hour. It would seem easier to do the same in the 2-hours of a movie.

    – Ken from Chicago

    P.S. It would also be cool if we had MULTIPLE Starfleet ships and not just the Enterprise alone in action. Sure, the Enterprise might be the last surviving ship in a battle, but before then, have it in a team would be cool.

  • Black_Manta

    Get Shatner to play a Mirror, Mirror version of himself. He could be Empirer Tiberius. It worked in the books.

  • Black_Manta

    Get Shatner to play a Mirror, Mirror version of himself. He could be Empirer Tiberius. It worked in the books.

  • Black_Manta

    Get Shatner to play a Mirror, Mirror version of himself. He could be Empirer Tiberius. It worked in the books.

  • Gaelbach

    How does having Leonard Nimoy in it and a giving a tiresome, involved explanation of how the film fit into established continuity NOT make it dependent on continuity?

  • Gaelbach

    How does having Leonard Nimoy in it and a giving a tiresome, involved explanation of how the film fit into established continuity NOT make it dependent on continuity?

  • Gaelbach

    How does having Leonard Nimoy in it and a giving a tiresome, involved explanation of how the film fit into established continuity NOT make it dependent on continuity?

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    Because they weren’t explaining it to establish it into existing continuity. That was a courtesy. All they really did was make a time travel story that involved an existing continuity, which they promptly deleted. Being dependent on continuity would mean that you need knowledge of older stories to get what’s going on. That’s simply not the case. They could’ve had Old Spock be from a universe completely different than the old one and the story wouldn’t miss a beat. The only people who would even notice are the old fans, and they weren’t actually the target audience for the movie…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    Because they weren’t explaining it to establish it into existing continuity. That was a courtesy. All they really did was make a time travel story that involved an existing continuity, which they promptly deleted. Being dependent on continuity would mean that you need knowledge of older stories to get what’s going on. That’s simply not the case. They could’ve had Old Spock be from a universe completely different than the old one and the story wouldn’t miss a beat. The only people who would even notice are the old fans, and they weren’t actually the target audience for the movie…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    Because they weren’t explaining it to establish it into existing continuity. That was a courtesy. All they really did was make a time travel story that involved an existing continuity, which they promptly deleted. Being dependent on continuity would mean that you need knowledge of older stories to get what’s going on. That’s simply not the case. They could’ve had Old Spock be from a universe completely different than the old one and the story wouldn’t miss a beat. The only people who would even notice are the old fans, and they weren’t actually the target audience for the movie…

  • sandwich eater

    Although it has some historical connotation as a title, Khan is a common name.  No one has the title Khan in the 20th century (when Khan was born).  Khan was definitely his name not his title.  However, Khan is usually a last name. 

    (If he did take Khan as a title he’d be called Noonien Singh Khan like Genghiz Khan for example)

  • sandwich eater

    Although it has some historical connotation as a title, Khan is a common name.  No one has the title Khan in the 20th century (when Khan was born).  Khan was definitely his name not his title.  However, Khan is usually a last name. 

    (If he did take Khan as a title he’d be called Noonien Singh Khan like Genghiz Khan for example)

  • sandwich eater

    Although it has some historical connotation as a title, Khan is a common name.  No one has the title Khan in the 20th century (when Khan was born).  Khan was definitely his name not his title.  However, Khan is usually a last name. 

    (If he did take Khan as a title he’d be called Noonien Singh Khan like Genghiz Khan for example)

  • sandwich eater

    I agree so much.  I’m so sick of those 2 guys as movie villains.  I want Brainiac to be the villain.  I’d settle for Metallo, Parasite or Mr. Mxyzptlk (admit it would be hilarious).

  • sandwich eater

    I agree so much.  I’m so sick of those 2 guys as movie villains.  I want Brainiac to be the villain.  I’d settle for Metallo, Parasite or Mr. Mxyzptlk (admit it would be hilarious).

  • sandwich eater

    I agree so much.  I’m so sick of those 2 guys as movie villains.  I want Brainiac to be the villain.  I’d settle for Metallo, Parasite or Mr. Mxyzptlk (admit it would be hilarious).

  • sandwich eater

    I’ve only seen it once, but the more I think about it the less I like it.  I loved it at first, but then stuff started to bug me.  First, I hate that they erased 200 Trek years and 40 real years of continuity.  Second, what’s the point of starships if they can beam someone light years away? Third, red matter? Fourth, Kirk was pretty emo in this movie; I prefer the swashbuckling personality of the original.  Fifth, product placement has no place in a Star Trek movie.  Not only is Star Trek set in the future, but it is set in an anti-capitalist utopia, where there are no human corporations.

    I do think the movie diluted Trek to appeal to the mainstream audience.  Remember the commercials for this movie proudly proclaimed it’s “not your father’s star trek.”

    I’d actually rather have had a new tv series then movie series, because the wait between movies is long and difficult and there’s currently no space-based American TV shows. Overall I’d still say I like the movie, but not as much as most of the other Trek movies. 

  • sandwich eater

    I’ve only seen it once, but the more I think about it the less I like it.  I loved it at first, but then stuff started to bug me.  First, I hate that they erased 200 Trek years and 40 real years of continuity.  Second, what’s the point of starships if they can beam someone light years away? Third, red matter? Fourth, Kirk was pretty emo in this movie; I prefer the swashbuckling personality of the original.  Fifth, product placement has no place in a Star Trek movie.  Not only is Star Trek set in the future, but it is set in an anti-capitalist utopia, where there are no human corporations.

    I do think the movie diluted Trek to appeal to the mainstream audience.  Remember the commercials for this movie proudly proclaimed it’s “not your father’s star trek.”

    I’d actually rather have had a new tv series then movie series, because the wait between movies is long and difficult and there’s currently no space-based American TV shows. Overall I’d still say I like the movie, but not as much as most of the other Trek movies. 

  • sandwich eater

    I’ve only seen it once, but the more I think about it the less I like it.  I loved it at first, but then stuff started to bug me.  First, I hate that they erased 200 Trek years and 40 real years of continuity.  Second, what’s the point of starships if they can beam someone light years away? Third, red matter? Fourth, Kirk was pretty emo in this movie; I prefer the swashbuckling personality of the original.  Fifth, product placement has no place in a Star Trek movie.  Not only is Star Trek set in the future, but it is set in an anti-capitalist utopia, where there are no human corporations.

    I do think the movie diluted Trek to appeal to the mainstream audience.  Remember the commercials for this movie proudly proclaimed it’s “not your father’s star trek.”

    I’d actually rather have had a new tv series then movie series, because the wait between movies is long and difficult and there’s currently no space-based American TV shows. Overall I’d still say I like the movie, but not as much as most of the other Trek movies. 

  • http://twitter.com/RodimusBen RodimusBen

    How about Q? The Duras sisters? Lore? Sela? Dukat? Eddington? The female changeling? Damar? Brunt? Weyoun? Kai Winn? Seska? The Borg Queen?

  • http://twitter.com/RodimusBen RodimusBen

    How about Q? The Duras sisters? Lore? Sela? Dukat? Eddington? The female changeling? Damar? Brunt? Weyoun? Kai Winn? Seska? The Borg Queen?

  • http://twitter.com/RodimusBen RodimusBen

    How about Q? The Duras sisters? Lore? Sela? Dukat? Eddington? The female changeling? Damar? Brunt? Weyoun? Kai Winn? Seska? The Borg Queen?

  • Richardcasey

    Uhm, WHY does it look like it’ll be Khan? Infact, I’m pretty sure Abrams and Co have said it ISN’T going to be Khan.

  • Richardcasey

    Uhm, WHY does it look like it’ll be Khan? Infact, I’m pretty sure Abrams and Co have said it ISN’T going to be Khan.

  • Richardcasey

    Uhm, WHY does it look like it’ll be Khan? Infact, I’m pretty sure Abrams and Co have said it ISN’T going to be Khan.

  • Anonymous

    I think anyone who knows Bad Robot’s works, knows that they are all about “comparative existences”. So don’t expect to see something exactly the same as before. If Khan is in it, it doesn’t mean he is the villain, just because he was the villain before. Second, who says we only have one villain or issue to deal with? –It’s my guess that Abrams and Co. will juggle and spin. 

    Like in FRINGE, Reciprocity could still be playing out….you could see people change roles, or pass them onto someone else, someone we don’t even know. Additionally I have always wondered given that Bad Robot’s first film with Star Trek played strongly on whom is Spock going to be, if that also had to do with the fact that the previous time line was also attached to ‘the mirror universe’ and so the fate of this one is sort of struggling between the identities of the other two and just weighing out the effects of the initial displacement?

  • Anonymous

    I think anyone who knows Bad Robot’s works, knows that they are all about “comparative existences”. So don’t expect to see something exactly the same as before. If Khan is in it, it doesn’t mean he is the villain, just because he was the villain before. Second, who says we only have one villain or issue to deal with? –It’s my guess that Abrams and Co. will juggle and spin. 

    Like in FRINGE, Reciprocity could still be playing out….you could see people change roles, or pass them onto someone else, someone we don’t even know. Additionally I have always wondered given that Bad Robot’s first film with Star Trek played strongly on whom is Spock going to be, if that also had to do with the fact that the previous time line was also attached to ‘the mirror universe’ and so the fate of this one is sort of struggling between the identities of the other two and just weighing out the effects of the initial displacement?

  • Anonymous

    I think anyone who knows Bad Robot’s works, knows that they are all about “comparative existences”. So don’t expect to see something exactly the same as before. If Khan is in it, it doesn’t mean he is the villain, just because he was the villain before. Second, who says we only have one villain or issue to deal with? –It’s my guess that Abrams and Co. will juggle and spin. 

    Like in FRINGE, Reciprocity could still be playing out….you could see people change roles, or pass them onto someone else, someone we don’t even know. Additionally I have always wondered given that Bad Robot’s first film with Star Trek played strongly on whom is Spock going to be, if that also had to do with the fact that the previous time line was also attached to ‘the mirror universe’ and so the fate of this one is sort of struggling between the identities of the other two and just weighing out the effects of the initial displacement?

  • Anonymous

    Exactly -it was execute the possibility of change. Reciprocity is occurring to help balance the new timeline out…planet for planet…but we don’t know if the effects are ever going to let the timeline be the same at some point, as the previous, but clearly with out Vulcan, the immediate time period in the new timeline could be signifigently different. Not to say that nothing will repeat, because you could say the previous timeline(s) is it’s parental timeline(s), and there for some ‘genes’ may be passed, but they may come out in different ways, or from unexpected places, while also making way for brand new things (evolution/law of averages)

    All the best cowboys have daddy issues. Be better than your father.

  • Anonymous

    Exactly -it was execute the possibility of change. Reciprocity is occurring to help balance the new timeline out…planet for planet…but we don’t know if the effects are ever going to let the timeline be the same at some point, as the previous, but clearly with out Vulcan, the immediate time period in the new timeline could be signifigently different. Not to say that nothing will repeat, because you could say the previous timeline(s) is it’s parental timeline(s), and there for some ‘genes’ may be passed, but they may come out in different ways, or from unexpected places, while also making way for brand new things (evolution/law of averages)

    All the best cowboys have daddy issues. Be better than your father.

  • Anonymous

    Exactly -it was execute the possibility of change. Reciprocity is occurring to help balance the new timeline out…planet for planet…but we don’t know if the effects are ever going to let the timeline be the same at some point, as the previous, but clearly with out Vulcan, the immediate time period in the new timeline could be signifigently different. Not to say that nothing will repeat, because you could say the previous timeline(s) is it’s parental timeline(s), and there for some ‘genes’ may be passed, but they may come out in different ways, or from unexpected places, while also making way for brand new things (evolution/law of averages)

    All the best cowboys have daddy issues. Be better than your father.

  • Excronimuss

    You couldn’t just jump into WRATH era with young Jimmy Kirk anyway, there’d need to be a Space Seed-ey type event before you could tell a Wrath-ey event.

  • Excronimuss

    You couldn’t just jump into WRATH era with young Jimmy Kirk anyway, there’d need to be a Space Seed-ey type event before you could tell a Wrath-ey event.

  • Excronimuss

    You couldn’t just jump into WRATH era with young Jimmy Kirk anyway, there’d need to be a Space Seed-ey type event before you could tell a Wrath-ey event.

  • Madcat

    Why not use the Gorn?!?..Just imagine velociraptors with starship capabilities and they view other races and/or species as nothing more than food sources.

  • Madcat

    Why not use the Gorn?!?..Just imagine velociraptors with starship capabilities and they view other races and/or species as nothing more than food sources.

  • Madcat

    Why not use the Gorn?!?..Just imagine velociraptors with starship capabilities and they view other races and/or species as nothing more than food sources.

  • sandwich eater

    Best idea ever

  • sandwich eater

    Best idea ever

  • sandwich eater

    Best idea ever

  • Tribbled

    I would’ve thought, given the changes from the last movie having ALL the original stuff available but different that they would have explored one of the threats that the original series never had the time or budget for. My personal hope was to see the Tholian Web. Just think, they were a badass in the original series (sure they got bluffed but hey Kirk is Kirk) but they left with some mystery. We never saw them (an original series race that was NEVER seen, Abrams could go nuts with FX and story because we know NOTHING about them…..except they can’t bluff). Oh well, maybe in three.

  • Tribbled

    I would’ve thought, given the changes from the last movie having ALL the original stuff available but different that they would have explored one of the threats that the original series never had the time or budget for. My personal hope was to see the Tholian Web. Just think, they were a badass in the original series (sure they got bluffed but hey Kirk is Kirk) but they left with some mystery. We never saw them (an original series race that was NEVER seen, Abrams could go nuts with FX and story because we know NOTHING about them…..except they can’t bluff). Oh well, maybe in three.

  • Tribbled

    I would’ve thought, given the changes from the last movie having ALL the original stuff available but different that they would have explored one of the threats that the original series never had the time or budget for. My personal hope was to see the Tholian Web. Just think, they were a badass in the original series (sure they got bluffed but hey Kirk is Kirk) but they left with some mystery. We never saw them (an original series race that was NEVER seen, Abrams could go nuts with FX and story because we know NOTHING about them…..except they can’t bluff). Oh well, maybe in three.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    If you want to see TOS adventures with this cast, check out the ongoing Star Trek book from, I think, IDW.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    If you want to see TOS adventures with this cast, check out the ongoing Star Trek book from, I think, IDW.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_QKN5MHOI6VUFOYCTV5REK7M7A4 Jacob

    If you want to see TOS adventures with this cast, check out the ongoing Star Trek book from, I think, IDW.

  • Faherman

    There shouldn’t have to BE a villain, dammit.

  • Faherman

    There shouldn’t have to BE a villain, dammit.

  • Faherman

    There shouldn’t have to BE a villain, dammit.

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XA4RDSRSUX3XRSCPRR7XNGSPUQ Joshua

    DS9 had Gul Dukat and the female shape shifter

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XA4RDSRSUX3XRSCPRR7XNGSPUQ Joshua

    DS9 had Gul Dukat and the female shape shifter

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_XA4RDSRSUX3XRSCPRR7XNGSPUQ Joshua

    DS9 had Gul Dukat and the female shape shifter

  • Not Daniel

    It’s true, they HAVE said that.  But why let facts get in the way of a good, uninformed rant?

  • Not Daniel

    It’s true, they HAVE said that.  But why let facts get in the way of a good, uninformed rant?

  • Not Daniel

    It’s true, they HAVE said that.  But why let facts get in the way of a good, uninformed rant?

  • Lastnamecumbie

    Well enterprise changed the timeline originally by introducing us to the borg early so what if they use kahn but throw a curve ball in there by bringing in the borg which can be possible

  • http://profiles.google.com/video.beagle Video Beagle

    Those were 3 different characters.
    Kang was played by Ansara. Colicos played Kor, and Campbell played Koloth.  They were different in TOS and they were different when they reunited in DS9 (played by the original actors).

  • http://profiles.google.com/video.beagle Video Beagle

    I haven’t done a second watch, having gotten the SNL sketch feeling while watching it the first time. 

    Yes it had “epic” battles, but Trek wasn’t ever about that.

    The special disappointment was nuKirk who was playing a parody of what Shatner has become, rather than what Kirk was.  While he had swagger, Kirk was also very by the book and got to his position by being better then those around him, not by being the guy standing next to the captain when he was hurt.

  • http://profiles.google.com/video.beagle Video Beagle

    The problem with Q, is that unless you cast DeLancie, why bother.  And he’s frankly too old, and too not a name to be the big villian for the movie, I’d think.