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

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

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

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?

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.

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.

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.  

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! 

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! 

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.

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

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

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.

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.

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

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?

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?

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…

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)

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)

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).

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. 

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. 

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

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.

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.