If John Harrison had not been Khan...

steamwright · September 2014

If John Harrison had not been Khan, but had been one of the other 72 in the Botany Bay, would you have been more satisfied with the story?

This was the suggestion of an article I just read, and I have to say, I prefer the concept. The article noted that up until the moment he identified himself as Khan, it was (in the writer's opinion) a good tale. After that moment, it was all about referencing The Wrath of Khan. The writer does give actor Cumberbatch applause for doing a great job with what he was given.

I'm liking this idea. There's still elements I didn't care for, like the strong parallel to Spock's death, and the universtal transporter, but overall, I think the story would have radically improved had John Harrison been among the 72, and we would have seen a CGI image of young Ricardo Mantalban in stasis.

One thing to overcome with this version would be the sensor that would have triggered Khan to awake first.

artan42 · September 2014

I'm still of the opinion he wasn't THE Khan anyway, merely one of the 72 who just uses the name Khan. Again Spock Prime was the only one who used his full name but he had been told there was an augment called Khan hanging around and jumped to a conclusion.

I still think 'Harrison' was a strong character with depth, certainly better than Marcus, especially the whole crying over his crew thing.

quintaris · September 2014

There's only one Khan with fine Corinthian leather...

http://interrobangstudios.com/comics-display.php?strip_id=1643

(that said, I liked Cucumberbatch as a villain, but yes, having a different name certainly would have helped)

bohiap · September 2014

I partially agree. I would have liked it better if the villain was just John Harrison. The movie would have worked if it wasn't Star Trek. In fact, I could actually enjoy that movie if it wasn't a Star Trek movie. But, there's to many in-jokes and call backs to Wrath of Khan.

I grew up in the 80s. TNG was on when I was in high school. IMHO Wrath of Khan is one of the best sci-fi movies of all time.

Into Darkness just seems like a popcorn glossy imitation. Like, they weren't trying to make a Star Trek movie, they were fanboys that were making a sci-fi movie and threw in a bunch of Trek stuff.

John Harrison works as a villain, Into Darkness works as a summer popcorn movie. For me, it doesn't work as Star Trek,

kestrellius · September 2014

John Harrison just plain wasn't Khan. He was a good character -- probably on par with Khan -- but he was a pragmatist, not an egotist, and he was barely even evil to begin with. Khan was never cold and logical. Come on, he was Captain Ahab. What they should have done was made Marcus the primary villain. Have the crew team up with Harrison, and not shoot him in the back. Now, while I would appreciate the guts it would take to make a well-known villain like Khan into a hero, it wouldn't really work, so Harrison is still not Khan in this version. Maybe he's not even in the same batch, just some other escaped Augments. Then, when it's over, Starfleet decides to keep him on, because he's so useful, but he needs to be supervised. So, he joins the crew of the Enterprise. Bam. New character to keep things interesting for the next film, no weird last-minute villain switching that ruins the flow, and Benedict Cumberbatch gets a chance to shine as the menacing-but-not-quite-villain Harrison!Khan was always wanting to be.

hevach · September 2014

Honestly, it would have been best if they'd left the augments out entirely. The only reason they used them at all was so at some point somebody could yell, "Khan!"

One of the early theories about the movie was Gary Mitchell, who could have done everything Khan did, fit the personality a little better (not perfectly, but he's obscure enough not to provoke a holy war over it),closed a plot hole or two, and even would have been less of a facepalm with the whole magic blood thing, because they were alreayd giving him every plot-convenient power they could think of anyway.

Also, that way there's only one of him, and it's not silly that they're worried about not having enough blood to save Kirk despite having access to 72 perfectly good bags of the stuff.

Unknown · September 2014

This content has been removed.

jonsills · September 2014

Khan only turned into Ahab after watching so many of his people die after Ceti Alpha V shifted its orbit (huh?? Orbits don't work like that!), particularly when the Ceti eel ate his wife's brain.

And Khan II: Electric Boogaloo had his Ahab moments too - although his big dramatic moment made me laugh. (Crushing Admiral Robocop's head: "You should have let me SLEEP!" Geez, and I thought I woke up grumpy...)

adverbero · September 2014

I think if they had left out the augments it would have worked well on its own merit

Story about a man working for an department that doesn't officially exist goes on a rampage, Starfleet brass try to cover it up but also need him caught....

Could have worked fine

starswordc · September 2014

steamwright wrote: »

If John Harrison had not been Khan, but had been one of the other 72 in the Botany Bay, would you have been more satisfied with the story?

Not really. Cutting out the TWOK references still leaves a lot of other logic and scale problems.

jeffel82 · September 2014

No.

I'm of the opinion that the reboot should be used to tell original stories, not rehash old stuff.

Into Darkness was somewhat interesting as an exercise in re-interpreting The Wrath of Khan, but ultimately I think that sort of self-referential navel-gazing is harmful. Give me something new.

artan42 · September 2014

valoreah wrote: »

Khan being some British guy was just the tip of the iceberg.

Because a Mexican is a more realistic as an Indian right? At least the British have some vague possibility of being in India or being called Khan.

Besides Cumberbatch was a far more imposing, calculating, cold, rounded, menacing, intelligent, etc. villain than Montalb

worffan101 · September 2014

TRIBBLE--Uh, I mean, STID--was full of more plot holes than a Dutch dam made of Swiss cheese.

That said, Benedict Cumberbatch's acting was epic--to the point that he stole literally EVERY scene despite the bad writing and poor lines.

adverbero · September 2014

worffan101 wrote: »

TRIBBLE--Uh, I mean, STID--was full of more plot holes than a Dutch dam made of Swiss cheese.

That said, Benedict Cumberbatch's acting was epic--to the point that he stole literally EVERY scene despite the bad writing and poor lines.

Indeed, which is what made the movie disappointing for me I think

I personally find a Mediocre movie with good characters more annoying than just your average mediocre film, because you get the feeling it had more potential to be good.

I'd go as far as to compare his scences in STID to Alan Rickman in the robinhood movie

worffan101 · September 2014

adverbero wrote: »

Indeed, which is what made the movie disappointing for me I think

I personally find a Mediocre movie with good characters more annoying than just your average mediocre film, because you get the feeling it had more potential to be good.

I'd go as far as to compare his scences in STID to Alan Rickman in the robinhood movie

Or Regina Mills in Once Upon a Time...or Loki in Thor 2...or Loki in Thor, for that matter.

Drives me NUTS when there's so much talent and potential being wasted by hacks.

steamwright · September 2014

artan42 wrote: »

I'm still of the opinion he wasn't THE Khan anyway, merely one of the 72 who just uses the name Khan.

Hmm...I've only seen the film once, but this could work. If somehow another sleeper other than Khan Noonian Soong was thawed, I could see him recognizing the vulnerability of his leader and using the name to keep attention on himself. No one cares to do anything to the other sleepers except use them as pawns, and the deception remains in place, even when "John Harrison" is put back in suspension.

What would be mind-blowing (but should not ever be filmed, at least with Bad Robot & bad writing) is that they all are brought back at some point and Harrison's deception is revealed, and the real Khan proves even more of a challenge, especially working with Harrison.

moonshadowdark · September 2014

artan42 wrote: »

Besides Cumberbatch was a far more imposing, calculating, cold, rounded, menacing, intelligent, etc. villain than Montalb

alexmakepeace · October 2014

Why bother with the augments at all? They've already been done. The whole point of the reboot was to gain creative freedom, so why not go somewhere new?

I mean, I could see visiting Khan and the augment for an episode (or even a two-parter) of a hypothetical TV series, but for a movie, let's have something new.

I also didn't particularly care for Cumberpatch. He overacted, and it didn't seem to fit. I mean really, that single tear? Awful!

kestrellius wrote: »

[Khan] was barely even evil to begin with.

Sure he was. He rationalized his attacks on Starfleet and Section 31 as revenge (not a good act), but in the process killed lots of people who had nothing to do with Starfleet or Section 31. That seems pretty evil to me, or at least stupid. So much for augmented intelligence.

I mean really, if he wanted to hurt Section 31 so bad... why not just reveal its existence to the public?

mimey2 · October 2014

jonsills wrote: »

Admiral Robocop

Phew...I thought I was the only one who called him that.

Anyways, the best thing that John Harrison could've been was just 'John Harrison', and not an Augment.

But the larger over-arcing issue is that they split the story in two. One half roughly dealing with Marcus and the 'militarized Starfleet' thing he was doing, and the other trying to mold WoK into it.

If it was fully focused on one or the other, it would've at least been more cohesive. Either fully dive into WoK in it's own way, or go entirely for dealing with Marcus.

Take the Section 31 line in the movie. Just ONE line about them. All that is stated in the movie is that they are a 'rogue element in Starfleet' more or less. Guess what? 95% of the movie-going public ain't gonna know **** about that. I doubt that most people ever watched DS9 or Enterprise, and even if they did, unless they are a major fan of ST, they probably won't remember it. The movie doesn't care to explain further about it, so why should the audience care?

hawku001x · October 2014

no more re-hashes, we need new bad guys and new sci-fi origin stories

ok maybe just one more then...... this is who he should have been: the angry and vengeful Harrison

artan42 · October 2014

steamwright wrote: »

Hmm...I've only seen the film once, but this could work. If somehow another sleeper other than Khan Noonian Soong was thawed, I could see him recognizing the vulnerability of his leader and using the name to keep attention on himself. No one cares to do anything to the other sleepers except use them as pawns, and the deception remains in place, even when "John Harrison" is put back in suspension.

What would be mind-blowing (but should not ever be filmed, at least with Bad Robot & bad writing) is that they all are brought back at some point and Harrison's deception is revealed, and the real Khan proves even more of a challenge, especially working with Harrison.

I've watched it a few times keeping this in mind, there doesn't appear to be any point where anyone with authority can say his is Khan Noonian Singh other than Spock Prime, who has no contact with him at all.

trygvar13 · October 2014

bohiap wrote: »

I partially agree. I would have liked it better if the villain was just John Harrison. The movie would have worked if it wasn't Star Trek. In fact, I could actually enjoy that movie if it wasn't a Star Trek movie. But, there's to many in-jokes and call backs to Wrath of Khan.

I grew up in the 80s. TNG was on when I was in high school. IMHO Wrath of Khan is one of the best sci-fi movies of all time.

Into Darkness just seems like a popcorn glossy imitation. Like, they weren't trying to make a Star Trek movie, they were fanboys that were making a sci-fi movie and threw in a bunch of Trek stuff.

John Harrison works as a villain, Into Darkness works as a summer popcorn movie. For me, it doesn't work as Star Trek,

I agree with you completely. I grew up in the 70's and first saw reruns of TOS. And then, I saw a preview of TNG on the Star Trek IV VHS. I loved DS9, was never too sure about Voyager and enjoyed Enterprise (not the Temporal Cold War story line however) but the JJ verse just doesn't work for me. It's like stealing a Rolls Royce logo and putting it on a Lada. It's fun to watch. But it's not Star Trek.

John Harrison should have been... John Harrison. They had just created a new universe. They could anything with it. But all they could do was "botch" the best Star Trek movie ever. Hollywood as no imagination. The last movie that really got me was The Matrix.

Unknown · October 2014

This content has been removed.

richardcranium63 · October 2014

Here's my main problem with JJTrek ST:ID.

It was just a lazy rehash of the ST2:TWoK storyline & script. JJA & RO, rather than write an all new original story line & script, chose the lazy TRIBBLE path. I think that they were just too busy with all of their other projects & counting their money. Yes, it was in the new time line & they threw in Admiral Markus & S31 for good measure. And I definitely won't complain about seeing Alice Eve in her undies. But it was just too much of the same. As a life time ST fan, I want NEW, not a rehash of "been there, done that". After all, aren't we supposed to be "seeking out new life & civilizations" & "to boldly go where no one has been before"?
I also didn't buy NC as Khan. There will only ever be one Khan in my book & that is RM.
But seriously, who at [CBS] Paramount signed off on the story & final script ?!?!
Did they really think that ST fans would not notice?!?!

I really hope that RO & his team bring something new to the screen with ST Reboot #3.

Correction: Not CBS but Paramount

Unknown · October 2014

This content has been removed.

ryan218 · October 2014

richardcranium63 wrote: »

Here's my main problem with JJTrek ST:ID.

It was just a lazy rehash of the ST2:TWoK storyline & script. JJA & RO, rather than write an all new original story line & script, chose the lazy TRIBBLE path. I think that they were just too busy with all of their other projects & counting their money. Yes, it was in the new time line & they threw in Admiral Markus & S31 for good measure. And I definitely won't complain about seeing Alice Eve in her undies. But it was just too much of the same. As a life time ST fan, I want NEW, not a rehash of "been there, done that". After all, aren't we supposed to be "seeking out new life & civilizations" & "to boldly go where no one has been before"?
But seriously, who at CBS signed off on the story & final script ?!?!
Did they really think that ST fans would not notice?!?!

I really hope that RO & his team bring something new to the screen with ST Reboot #3.

CBS have nothing to do with JJTrek. As a result of the viacom split, the movie rights for Star Trek went to Paramount Studios while CBS retained the TV rights. That's why Paramount had to reboot Star Trek in the first place; CBS owned the rights for the Prime Timeline. CBS have no say on the new Trek.

As for who at Paramount thought we wouldn't notice...

Probably the same ones who signed off on the Transformers films.

leviathan99 · October 2014

steamwright wrote: »

If John Harrison had not been Khan, but had been one of the other 72 in the Botany Bay, would you have been more satisfied with the story?

This was the suggestion of an article I just read, and I have to say, I prefer the concept. The article noted that up until the moment he identified himself as Khan, it was (in the writer's opinion) a good tale. After that moment, it was all about referencing The Wrath of Khan. The writer does give actor Cumberbatch applause for doing a great job with what he was given.

I'm liking this idea. There's still elements I didn't care for, like the strong parallel to Spock's death, and the universtal transporter, but overall, I think the story would have radically improved had John Harrison been among the 72, and we would have seen a CGI image of young Ricardo Mantalban in stasis.

One thing to overcome with this version would be the sensor that would have triggered Khan to awake first.

No. The John Harrison disguise and Carol's fake identity were both pointless twists that add nothing to repeat viewings.

I liked the movie, actually, but think it sacrificed a lot of screentime that could have been spent building a better movie with all the pointless fake identities.

The initial intelligence briefing could have had Marcus explain that they believed that a 250 year old terrorist named Khan Noonien Singh was behind the attacks. Kirk could have said something like, "Pardon me, shouldn't he be dead?" Marcus could have said, "He was frozen and launched into space. My theory is that the Klingons thawed him out."

The secret that Marcus thawed him out is PLENTY of secret.

drumcd74656 · October 2014

If John Harrison had not been a pseudonym for Khan it would have gone a long way to help things - but then they would have had to do something different than a cheap, stealth remake of The Wrath of Khan.

Perish the thought of the Hollywood Machine doing something original. They want money, not art.

jonsills · October 2014

ryan218 wrote: »

As for who at Paramount thought we wouldn't notice...

Probably the same ones who signed off on the Transformers films.

Well, they were both written by Orci and Kurtzman...

artan42 · October 2014

valoreah wrote: »

Yes.

Really not, not even in brown face in Space Seed.

valoreah wrote: »

Pretty sure there are people from all over the world in India at any given time.

I also imaging there are more British there than Mexicans.

valoreah wrote: »

Whatever dope you're smoking, please share it.

Is this just nostalgia for TWOK or hatred for ID that's blinding you to the fact that Cumberbatch was better than Montalb

ryan218 · October 2014

artan42 wrote: »

Is this just nostalgia for TWOK or hatred for ID that's blinding you to the fact that Cumberbatch was better than Montalb

If John Harrison had not been Khan...

Comments