61 replies to this topic

[thecapn]

^^^^Ooh harsh!! LOL!!

I guess I still harbour a hankering for the days when Trek wasn't summer blockbuster fayre, 'cos I kind of like all the talky stuff, but I guess you show balance since you're a fellow DS9'er!!

I guess I'd really like to be nodding sagely with you and saying isn't it great that the clock's been set back to zero and let's see Kirk et al evolve differently due to the intervention of Nero. I'd really like to be able to say with you that I'm excited that we don't know where we're headed next, and actually at the moment, the writers themselves aren't, but all this talk of Khan (and recently Klingons and the Borg too) make me feel worried that the writers are going to simply latch onto what worked so well in the past, forgetting that TWOK was very a much a movie of 1982 and what made it such a surprising departure (and it was, much to the chagrin of trekkies who didn't like the "militaristic" feel of TWOK) was the towering performances of Shatner who bought gravitas and vulnerability to Kirk and the massively hammed-up Khan, a villain who actually had a point and worked his pain quite in the way that Nero didn't.

That may have come out a bit harsh...I hadn't had my coffee yet

I totally agree with you, I'm a "talky" fan, but that's just not where the franchise needs to go right now, I think. We need to have a break from the episodic, bring back a real fan base, then see what we can do from there. I also think Trek has always been so hard to get into for newcomers, especially later on.

Am I the only one that thinks these reports are totally bogus media hype? J.J. et al have NEVER said what they're planning. They probably don't even know yet. It's the media who are grasping at straws, Khan, Borg, etc. I bet we'll see something new and entirely unique.

[Gothneo]

...has anyone read the Star Trek Online synopsis that takes the "Star Trek" story forward in time? Unnecessarily complicated, with political and economic and social stuff. That's NOT the stuff of the summer blockbuster Trek needed to be. You want to see that on screen? It was done. It was called Star Wars Episode I. I mean, the opening scrawl was about trade negotiations?!! Not. Going. To. Cut. It. Yes, it did well because it was Star Wars. But we all know how bad those newer movies were.

Ha ha! I thought the opening scene of SW Ep 1 was one of the only good scenes in the entire movie!

Ah well.

I'm with Donster and jules. Lets explore a new universe.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

Perhaps it would work if Kahn was introduced, but have the events play out so that instead of becoming enemies, they are forced to become unlikely, but powerful allies?

[FHC]

Well you could argue that Khan is to Kirk what Moriarty is to Sherlock Holmes, but isn't trying to do a fanboy redux of Khan a little too obvious for a franchise that was supposedly distancing itself from the past 40 years?

This is the problem I have with much of Hollywood these days: they claim something is going to be "new" , "fresh", and "edgy", but what we actually get is a more high-tech rendering of an old story. The plot of ST09 was basically lifted mostly out of old Trek movies, and to my mind, the only way they can do anything interesting with Khan is to have him return to Earth as a genuine threat. I mean, do we really need to redo Space Seed when it was such a great episode to begin with, and why would anyone try and better TWOK.

And I'm surprised you'd think Robau would be any good as Khan, he doesn't have much screen presence. I'd rather see Lou Diamond Phillips or Johnny Depp in the role - crikey that would be a coup!!

Didn't have screen presence? Sometimes I think you've hit your head or something.

[Gothneo]

You know the best way to do Kahn in the new universe would be to have the opening scene of the next movie show Capt Klaa blowing the Botany Bay for target practice!

[DS9_Fan]

I'd like to see Khan, but there are others I'd rather see. Klingons are definately at the top of that list. The battle cruisers in the Kobayashi Maru sceene were bad-ass!

[slayerone76]

I think Khan would be awesome. Think of what they could do with a hand-to-hand combat scene with him and Kirk (or as I like to call new Kirk - Nirk).

Khan has always been considered kirk's ultimate nemesis - both mentally and physically. I would live to see a true, new-day battle of the wits.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

Didn't have screen presence? Sometimes I think you've hit your head or something.

LOL! Nah, barely noticed him! I don't know why they bothered shoehorning his character into the plot. I don't see him as Khan. The next movie needs a stronger villain than Nero turned out to be.

[JulesLuvsShinzon]

That may have come out a bit harsh...I hadn't had my coffee yet

****Reaches for cup**** I know what you mean!!

I totally agree with you, I'm a "talky" fan, but that's just not where the franchise needs to go right now, I think. We need to have a break from the episodic, bring back a real fan base, then see what we can do from there. I also think Trek has always been so hard to get into for newcomers, especially later on.

I'm inclined to agree. Talky only really works when there's a huge mythos to tap into so that the hardcore fan can say "Ah, yes, I know what Sisko's referring to!" , but Lucas-talky in Ep1 was alll about trying to build up that mythos and it really slowed down the pace of the movie.

Am I the only one that thinks these reports are totally bogus media hype? J.J. et al have NEVER said what they're planning. They probably don't even know yet. It's the media who are grasping at straws, Khan, Borg, etc. I bet we'll see something new and entirely unique.

They probably are. It maybe deliberate, though, that they allow these rumours to circulate and then check out the reaction on the internet.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

I still think it would be interesting to have circumstances come about that causes Kirk and Khan to have to form a powerful, but trying alliance. Then we could see the side of Khan that believes his actions in the 20th century were necessary for the good of humanity. A story like that, set as a present day allegory, should be interesting.

[reverie]

If we're talking present-day-allegories, Khan would probably be a terrorist.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

If we're talking present-day-allegories, Khan would probably be a terrorist.

Or perhaps ends up working with Kirk against such a threat. From all we've been given in "Space Seed" and the "Eugenics Wars" Novels, Khan is not really the evil person that does tyrannical things just because he feels like it. His actions, although brutal, are due to him wanting to clean house of all that he sees that weaken the whole of society, and usher in a regime of order and prosperity. I think a story that shows the more sympathetic side of Khan, forced to realize that while he may not always see eye-to-eye with Kirk, that Kirk and himself could do great things for the greater good, would be interesting.

[JMW326]

From all we've been given in "Space Seed" and the "Eugenics Wars" Novels, Khan is not really the evil person that does tyrannical things just because he feels like it. His actions, although brutal, are due to him wanting to clean house of all that he sees that weaken the whole of society, and usher in a regime of order and prosperity. I think a story that shows the more sympathetic side of Khan, forced to realize that while he may not always see eye-to-eye with Kirk, that Kirk and himself could do great things for the greater good, would be interesting.

Sounds a little like Hitler to me and there was nothing sympathetic about his actions. I am personally tired of movies and TV shows trying to make the villain have a good side or us feel bad for them. I want my bad guys to be bad guys. I don't want to feel bad for them or understand that they thought they had a valid reason for doing bad. Some people are just bad and do bad things that are unacceptable to modern society. You should love to hate a villain. Make a smart bad guy that plagues the hero and comes back for more in the next movie. If they do make the second movie about Kahn being the Villain I want to see a bad ass Kahn come in and use his "Superior Intellect" to totally turn Kirks world upside down where he barely gets out by the skin of his teeth with Kahn escaping to wreak havoc again later.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

Sounds a little like Hitler to me and there was nothing sympathetic about his actions. I am personally tired of movies and TV shows trying to make the villain have a good side or us feel bad for them. I want my bad guys to be bad guys. I don't want to feel bad for them or understand that they thought they had a valid reason for doing bad. Some people are just bad and do bad things that are unacceptable to modern society. You should love to hate a villain. Make a smart bad guy that plagues the hero and comes back for more in the next movie. If they do make the second movie about Kahn being the Villain I want to see a bad ass Kahn come in and use his "Superior Intellect" to totally turn Kirks world upside down where he barely gets out by the skin of his teeth with Kahn escaping to wreak havoc again later.

Khan wasn't like Hitler though. Hitler went after everyone he didn't like. Khan actually tried to clean up the world's mess and make it a better place for people to live, and ended up hated for it.

[A Chimpanzee & 2 Trainees]

Khan wasn't like Hitler though. Hitler went after everyone he didn't like. Khan actually tried to clean up the world's mess and make it a better place for people to live, and ended up hated for it.

I suppose that's up for debate, but I don't really see any difference, TBH. By deeming the world a mess and needing to clean it up, you end up pointing at some person or group that needs cleaning... i.e. eradicating them outright, containing them as a subjucated or "slave" race, or exiling them from the planet - a presumably valid, if expensive, option in Khan's universe. You as the leader are elevating yourself and your group, while dehumanizing the "others." The only difference that I can discern is that Hitler's target was decidedly racial, while Khan's probably has more to do with some combined standard of physical prowess and intellect.

[Gothneo]

Yep. Khan is to Hitler as what The X-Men are to Racism.

[Thomas E. Johnson]

I actually see Khan as more like Napoleon, or Ghengis Khan, or possibly even Julius Caesar to a degree.

[FHC]

I think Khan would be awesome. Think of what they could do with a hand-to-hand combat scene with him and Kirk (or as I like to call new Kirk - Nirk).

Khan has always been considered kirk's ultimate nemesis - both mentally and physically. I would live to see a true, new-day battle of the wits.

Yes just as I could not imagine Batman not fighting the Joker sooner or later.

[Gothneo]

There's no doubt that through all three years of TOS, Khan was one of the best adversaries of Kirk. I think Montaban's Khan routinely tops the list as the best "Bad Guy" in all of Star Trek. But I hadn't really thought of Khan as Kirks ultimate Nemesis in the manner your speaking of FHC, but I can see how one would get there!

For me it always seemed that Kirk's main adversaries were the Klingons, mostly because we got more then a single episode where Kirk was pitted against a Klingon. Again my main thread of reasoning is because all the original TOS episodes were more of a standalone format, so in each episode Kirk and crew simply overcome the adversarial obstacle (be it a person or something other) and move on.

[FHC]

As a person, Khan, as a group, Klingons. Although since there were so many of them, none stand out to me. Chang was the best developed, but outside that movie, not much to go with. If we hadn't just used up the Romulans, I think Balance of Terror could have made an excellent movie.