Latest Movie News Headlines

Bryan Burk and Damon Lindelof defend the misdirection used in marketing Star Trek Into Darkness

May. 20, 2013by: Alex Maidy

Now that STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS has been released and fans have learned the twists in the story, it is time for the filmmakers to defend their choices in the marketing and creation of the film. While it seems that most audiences truly enjoyed the movie, like IRON MAN 3 there are detractors who are not happy with the creative choices made by J.J. Abrams, Bryan Burk, and Damon Lindelof. But, in a very interesting breakdown over at Slash Film, they explain why they did what they did.

This will be the one and only warning regarding *SPOILERS* for STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS, people. If you have not seen the movie, stop reading now. This article will reveal the identity of Benedict Cumberbatch's character as well as elements from the end of the movie. Turn back now. Oh, and no whining about spoilers in the talk backs. Now, shall we begin?

The primary defense employed by Lindelof and Burk is that the common movie fan does not know about the origins of the Khan character from the original series episode "Space Seed". Sure, Trekkies and fans like us pretty much deduced the secret months ago, but even we were never quite sure that we had the right answer. Lindelof says that knowing the answer before the characters is a detriment to viewing the movie:

The characters believe he is one person: John Harrison. If everything you know going into the movie is Its a guy named Khan, even if you dont even know who Khan is, you know that youre watching a film where for forty-five minutes or an hour of the movie you are ahead of the characters. So youre just kind of waiting for them to catch up with what you already know, that he is not who he says he is. So theres the general idea of going to see a movie and allowing it to unfold as it normally does.

Along with editing the footage revealed in front of THE HOBBIT back in December so that it would not match the final cut of the movie to better hide Khan's identity was also used. Several of you are likely crying liar at Lindelof and the rest of those involved, but this is another part of the reason why J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot have been as successful as they have. Yes, they tricked us as an audience, but this also helped preserve a secret longer than the vast majority of movies that hit theaters. IRON MAN 3 and STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS were able to prevent spoiler alerts for 99% of fans and that is something we have not had since the advent of the Internet.

STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS is now playing everywhere.

Extra Tidbit: Lindelof also stated he will probably be involved in an upcoming STAR WARS movie thanks to his close ties with J.J. Abrams. Let the fanboy rage commence!
Source: Slash Film

Related Articles

MORE FUN FROM AROUND THE WEB

Strikeback
Not registered? Sign-up!
Or

12:57AM on 05/22/2013

Alex can you chill with the Editorial BS?? This is a news site

It's not your blog.

"Several of you are likely crying liar at Lindelof and the rest of those involved, but this is another part of the reason why J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot have been as successful as they have."

get this crap out of here, nobody needs to read this
It's not your blog.

"Several of you are likely crying liar at Lindelof and the rest of those involved, but this is another part of the reason why J.J. Abrams and Bad Robot have been as successful as they have."

get this crap out of here, nobody needs to read this
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:08PM on 05/22/2013
Successful doesn't necessarily mean good.
Successful doesn't necessarily mean good.
11:43AM on 05/21/2013

I Find It Strange That...

... Filmmakers feel the need to apologize for entertaining us. I mean if it were Lucas, then I'd understand cause he fu*ked Cinema History. But the big screen Star Trek remake guys having to apologize for panties and lying about the plot/charters so the audience could be surprised by the film they pay at least $10.00 to see? I don't get it. Well, maybe the panties scene but I liked it so, I guess not.
... Filmmakers feel the need to apologize for entertaining us. I mean if it were Lucas, then I'd understand cause he fu*ked Cinema History. But the big screen Star Trek remake guys having to apologize for panties and lying about the plot/charters so the audience could be surprised by the film they pay at least $10.00 to see? I don't get it. Well, maybe the panties scene but I liked it so, I guess not.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:40AM on 05/21/2013
I liked that his character was named John Harrison, until the big reveal. It worked for me. Especially when Cumberbatch said it with his menacing voice. I see no big deal with this, and even in Ironman 3. Both films were entertaining, that is all.
I liked that his character was named John Harrison, until the big reveal. It worked for me. Especially when Cumberbatch said it with his menacing voice. I see no big deal with this, and even in Ironman 3. Both films were entertaining, that is all.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:27AM on 05/21/2013
I still want a written apology from Lindelof for Prometheus
I still want a written apology from Lindelof for Prometheus
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:02PM on 05/21/2013
I completely agree but I'm not holding my breath.
I completely agree but I'm not holding my breath.
3:33PM on 05/21/2013
I'm also waiting for an apology...
I'm also waiting for an apology...
3:33PM on 05/21/2013
I'm also waiting for an apology...
I'm also waiting for an apology...
6:08AM on 05/21/2013

Using Khan was unnecessary

Lindeldorf and Abrams could have kept the John Harrison character for the entire movie and it would not have made a difference to the story. I think the only reason they created the twist would have been so they could have included the unnecessary cameo by Leonard Nimoy.
Lindeldorf and Abrams could have kept the John Harrison character for the entire movie and it would not have made a difference to the story. I think the only reason they created the twist would have been so they could have included the unnecessary cameo by Leonard Nimoy.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:59AM on 05/22/2013
you're right...


downvotes = incredibly dumb
you're right...


downvotes = incredibly dumb
3:45AM on 05/21/2013
Man, Star Wars fans must have been pissed off in 1980 to find out that the writers had been tricking them when it was revealed in Empire that Vader was Luke's father, Anakin, all along. What assholes those writers were. I bet they even needed to defend themselves for their decision. Oh wait. That's right. The only reason that these writers are defending themselves is because we live in an attention deficit age where people can't appreciate the importance of preserving movie magic. If you didn't
Man, Star Wars fans must have been pissed off in 1980 to find out that the writers had been tricking them when it was revealed in Empire that Vader was Luke's father, Anakin, all along. What assholes those writers were. I bet they even needed to defend themselves for their decision. Oh wait. That's right. The only reason that these writers are defending themselves is because we live in an attention deficit age where people can't appreciate the importance of preserving movie magic. If you didn't like the way that the characters and mythology were portrayed in the film, that's one thing. However, if you have a problem with maintaining the secrecy of a film's story throughout its marketing period, then you are clearly not a true movie fan.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:21AM on 05/21/2013
It doesn't really count if the secret that there trying to maintain is so blatantly obvious. Everybody knew that John Harrison was really Khan so it was no secret at all and if says they didn't, is kidding themselves.
It doesn't really count if the secret that there trying to maintain is so blatantly obvious. Everybody knew that John Harrison was really Khan so it was no secret at all and if says they didn't, is kidding themselves.
8:28AM on 05/21/2013
The difference being, in Star Wars, the twist affected the characters along with the viewers. In "Into Darkness", John Harrison saying he was Khan did not serve the characters anything. They knew John Harrison/Khan was a bad guy, and we know anything future Spock says about Khan could not help.
The difference being, in Star Wars, the twist affected the characters along with the viewers. In "Into Darkness", John Harrison saying he was Khan did not serve the characters anything. They knew John Harrison/Khan was a bad guy, and we know anything future Spock says about Khan could not help.
2:37AM on 05/21/2013

I don't understand?

You know, maybe it's actually because I only saw the trailers for Star Trek a couple times, and the rest of the times I saw them, I covered my eyes (to avoid spoilers... I do it a lot lately), but why do they need to defend anything?

The marketing for Star Trek Into Darkness was... fine... What? The movie had the exact same tone and story that the trailers demonstrated. At the very least, it had the same accuracy as any other trailer out there...

But Iron Man 3, on the other hand,
You know, maybe it's actually because I only saw the trailers for Star Trek a couple times, and the rest of the times I saw them, I covered my eyes (to avoid spoilers... I do it a lot lately), but why do they need to defend anything?

The marketing for Star Trek Into Darkness was... fine... What? The movie had the exact same tone and story that the trailers demonstrated. At the very least, it had the same accuracy as any other trailer out there...

But Iron Man 3, on the other hand, completely missed the mark with marketing. They're the ones that should be defending their "false advertising" (and they have), not the Star Trek writers... Come on.

The one thing I will say about the Star Trek trailers, at least the newest one, is that it pretty much shows 90% of the stuff that is in the latter half of the film. While spoilers are unfortunately very common in trailers nowadays, they didn't even try to cover up the spoilers with that trailer. It is one of the worst examples of giving away a movie that I've seen over the past few years.

But that's not something they should have to defend themselves for. Iron Man 3 needs its defenders because that movie was total shit. It was marketed as a dark, epic, deep, complex, brooding, ominous finale. The darkest of all three Iron Man films, and his greatest nemesis. Then they made a movie that tried to be funny for 90% of the time (I will admit it was funny), had the stupidest twist in the history of cinema, and transformed from a formulaic movie by Iron Man standards, into a formulaic movie by the general standards of the genre.

Mandarin, while he was ominous and mysterious and scary, was an interesting villain. His influence was in many scenes, and you could feel his reach. What exactly was his plan? How else will he make Iron Man's life worse? It was a unique take on the "villain" of a Marvel movie. And then they go and fuck it up, and remove any ounce of realism the movie had established, and turned the REAL villain into the most cliched "mad scientist, previous acquaintance turned vengeful" villain I've ever seen in a modern superhero movie.

Fucking horseshit, and that terrible misdirection and false advertising -needs- to be ostracized. Star Trek Into Darkness' marketing does not need defense because it marketed the movie exactly how it played out.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:45AM on 05/21/2013
They did say that Benedict Cumberbach would not be playing Khan. Like it or not, Ben Kingsley did (literally) play the Mandarin in Iron Man 3.
They did say that Benedict Cumberbach would not be playing Khan. Like it or not, Ben Kingsley did (literally) play the Mandarin in Iron Man 3.
3:50AM on 05/21/2013
He played a caricature of the Mandarin... did you even see the fucking movie? That did not count as the Mandarin at all. Guy Pearce blatantly says "I'M THE MANDARIN HERP DERP" in the final "battle." Whether that was before or after he BREATHED FUCKING FIRE is up to analysis.

Where did they say Benedict wouldn't be playing Khan? Even if they did, it was to keep what they believed to be a great secret. They were trying to guarantee that you would enjoy the movie and still be surprised
He played a caricature of the Mandarin... did you even see the fucking movie? That did not count as the Mandarin at all. Guy Pearce blatantly says "I'M THE MANDARIN HERP DERP" in the final "battle." Whether that was before or after he BREATHED FUCKING FIRE is up to analysis.

Where did they say Benedict wouldn't be playing Khan? Even if they did, it was to keep what they believed to be a great secret. They were trying to guarantee that you would enjoy the movie and still be surprised despite the leaks. It's a very simple concept. They may have told a small white lie, but it was for the betterment of the audience's enjoyment. The marketing for Iron Man 3 went way beyond "white lie" the second they start the trailer off. I think they could legitimately be sued for how much of a false advertisement the marketing was. Fuck them. Fuck them so god damn hard.

Again, I stand by my statement: Star Trek Into Darkness crew does not have to apologize at all. They didn't pull a blatant bait-and-switch.
3:59AM on 05/21/2013
I take it you don't understand the meaning of the word "literally".
I take it you don't understand the meaning of the word "literally".
8:23AM on 05/21/2013
I don't think anyone on the planet was surprised that John Harrison was really Khan. Not one person.
I don't think anyone on the planet was surprised that John Harrison was really Khan. Not one person.
12:03PM on 05/21/2013
Oh I know the meaning of "literally" and yet again I think I'm going to infer you didn't even see Iron Man 3. The movie is shit. There is nothing redeemable or memorable about it.

And I'm not saying people -were- surprised about the reveal of Khan, but because of the leaks, I think the filmmakers wanted to try to make it a surprise again. Did they succeed? Perhaps not. But they didn't pull a complete bait-and-switch like Iron Man 3 did.
Oh I know the meaning of "literally" and yet again I think I'm going to infer you didn't even see Iron Man 3. The movie is shit. There is nothing redeemable or memorable about it.

And I'm not saying people -were- surprised about the reveal of Khan, but because of the leaks, I think the filmmakers wanted to try to make it a surprise again. Did they succeed? Perhaps not. But they didn't pull a complete bait-and-switch like Iron Man 3 did.
+7
2:22AM on 05/21/2013
I'm tired movies being ruined by people who like to shout shit out to prove their smarter than everyone or want to be a know it all. No matter how much I tried to block it out even on MFC people say just too much. Hell the tagline of this article was enough for me to know prior to watching Star Trek this evening what the "twist" was. I commend Damon and JJ for wanting to keep shit under wraps. I am starting to wish the internet didn't exist when it comes to movies like this.
I'm tired movies being ruined by people who like to shout shit out to prove their smarter than everyone or want to be a know it all. No matter how much I tried to block it out even on MFC people say just too much. Hell the tagline of this article was enough for me to know prior to watching Star Trek this evening what the "twist" was. I commend Damon and JJ for wanting to keep shit under wraps. I am starting to wish the internet didn't exist when it comes to movies like this.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+2
2:20AM on 05/21/2013
I'm tired movies being ruined by people who like to shout shit out to prove their smarter than everyone or want to be a know it all. No matter how much I tried to block it out even on MFC people say just too much. Hell the tagline of this article was enough for me to know prior to watching Star Trek this evening what the "twist" was. I commend Damon and JJ for wanting to keep shit under wraps. I am starting to wish the internet didn't exist when it comes to movies like this.
I'm tired movies being ruined by people who like to shout shit out to prove their smarter than everyone or want to be a know it all. No matter how much I tried to block it out even on MFC people say just too much. Hell the tagline of this article was enough for me to know prior to watching Star Trek this evening what the "twist" was. I commend Damon and JJ for wanting to keep shit under wraps. I am starting to wish the internet didn't exist when it comes to movies like this.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+0
1:54AM on 05/21/2013

as far as Lindelof's concerned...

...he is a really decent writer...but he's not a "closer"...simple as that.
...he is a really decent writer...but he's not a "closer"...simple as that.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:51AM on 05/21/2013
Not to sound snarky but It puzzles me that people praise the 'misdrection' of the villain in "Star Trek Into Darkness" (which was so blatantly obvious, and as well as uninspired, who it was from the get-go) but not in "Iron Man 3", which did it much better, was much more interesting and was actually really surprising.
Not to sound snarky but It puzzles me that people praise the 'misdrection' of the villain in "Star Trek Into Darkness" (which was so blatantly obvious, and as well as uninspired, who it was from the get-go) but not in "Iron Man 3", which did it much better, was much more interesting and was actually really surprising.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:20AM on 05/21/2013
So they are saying that the movie isn't rewatchable? After seeing it once, you would then be ahead of the characters, so it must be only a one time watch.

Jesus Christ, even Lindelof's defenses have plot holes!

Changing the back story for Khan is something I welcome, but not like this. Cumberbatch's villain could have been any random bad guy, and the storyline/ plot would not have changed one bit. As such, I find it insulting to trot out the big villain solely to do so, when you have
So they are saying that the movie isn't rewatchable? After seeing it once, you would then be ahead of the characters, so it must be only a one time watch.

Jesus Christ, even Lindelof's defenses have plot holes!

Changing the back story for Khan is something I welcome, but not like this. Cumberbatch's villain could have been any random bad guy, and the storyline/ plot would not have changed one bit. As such, I find it insulting to trot out the big villain solely to do so, when you have nothing to do with that character. Don't force it, you are not obliged to use him. Use him when it's right, and it was not right here.

Plus don't let anything I just wrote detract in any way, shape, or form from Benedict Cumberbatch's acting skills. Despite the underwritten role, he is amazing in it. And hot as hell.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:45AM on 05/21/2013
So with you're logic, every movie you watch is a one time watch since you would be ahead of the characters?

I think he meant the FIRST time you watch it. All brand new and exciting.
So with you're logic, every movie you watch is a one time watch since you would be ahead of the characters?

I think he meant the FIRST time you watch it. All brand new and exciting.
+1
12:06AM on 05/21/2013
It's weird that Lindelof would take to the internet to defend his latest project.

What's that you say? Not weird? Does this every single time one of his masterpieces inevitably pisses off its audience? Far better at telling you why his movies are good than actually making them good? And kind of an asshat? Gigantic crybaby?

Sorry internet, I didn't know.

It's weird that Lindelof would take to the internet to defend his latest project.

What's that you say? Not weird? Does this every single time one of his masterpieces inevitably pisses off its audience? Far better at telling you why his movies are good than actually making them good? And kind of an asshat? Gigantic crybaby?

Sorry internet, I didn't know.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:22AM on 05/21/2013
Dude, you're my new hero!
Dude, you're my new hero!
11:30PM on 05/20/2013

MAYBE A LITTLE CHEESE WITH THIS WHINE

I for one appreciate the twists. It's like a duh moment. JJ already set precedent by altering the ST universe in the first movie. So, keeping it up for the remainer of how ever many ST movies he makes is completely necessary and wanted. I've seen the Khan story one way, so why not another? I also appreciate being challenged at a movies. I've seen so many whiners complaining about reboots and here we have a completely original reboot of characters were kind of getting to know all over
I for one appreciate the twists. It's like a duh moment. JJ already set precedent by altering the ST universe in the first movie. So, keeping it up for the remainer of how ever many ST movies he makes is completely necessary and wanted. I've seen the Khan story one way, so why not another? I also appreciate being challenged at a movies. I've seen so many whiners complaining about reboots and here we have a completely original reboot of characters were kind of getting to know all over again in this new universe. So, if you want to see the same old story, then rent the DVD of Wrath of Khan. Keep the twists coming. More please. I really hope the original treks and stories continue. Being Darkness was kind of a retelling of a story we were familiar with, an originally based story much like the first ST movie but then again the reimagining of this story was very good. Meh, it doesn't matter, my father and I watched the original series on tv so I'm hooked and will always see ST movies. I sat through all the others, how can I quit now? Thank for a great movie JJ. Can't wait to see what you do to Star Wars. Just wish I'd get to see another Cloverfield movie. Damn I love that retelling of Godzilla in NYC. L8r
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+5
11:09PM on 05/20/2013
Some Trekkie fans just need to not say anything. Seriously, complaining about a GREAT movie is pointless. Just because story details change or a characters race changes or whatever minor, unimportant detail changes, doesn't mean the film suddenly becomes bad. This is an extremely entertaining movie. It a fantastically well made summer blockbuster that does it's job. Seriously, is it really that impossible to just get over your precious memories of the beloved older films and series and just
Some Trekkie fans just need to not say anything. Seriously, complaining about a GREAT movie is pointless. Just because story details change or a characters race changes or whatever minor, unimportant detail changes, doesn't mean the film suddenly becomes bad. This is an extremely entertaining movie. It a fantastically well made summer blockbuster that does it's job. Seriously, is it really that impossible to just get over your precious memories of the beloved older films and series and just enjoy a well made movie? I have my fandoms too, but even I can separate myself from them if a film is good enough, and this movie is more than good enough.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
12:04AM on 05/21/2013
I am not a hardcore Trekkie, but I did take offense at the use of Khan here. Not because his back story was changed (it's an alternate timeline, that shit just makes sense), but because the use of Khan was pointless. Khan is an iconic MOVIE villain, and it's unnecessary to know his TV origins. However, even people that never saw 'Wrath Of Khan' still have certain moments embedded in their minds, a la 'Jaws' or some such. The villain in 'Into Darkness' could have been any random person, and I
I am not a hardcore Trekkie, but I did take offense at the use of Khan here. Not because his back story was changed (it's an alternate timeline, that shit just makes sense), but because the use of Khan was pointless. Khan is an iconic MOVIE villain, and it's unnecessary to know his TV origins. However, even people that never saw 'Wrath Of Khan' still have certain moments embedded in their minds, a la 'Jaws' or some such. The villain in 'Into Darkness' could have been any random person, and I find that insulting.
2:22AM on 05/21/2013
You're gonna have to repeat that for the Star Wars fanboys pretty soon.
You're gonna have to repeat that for the Star Wars fanboys pretty soon.
+4
11:08PM on 05/20/2013

Difference b/w Iron Man 3 and ST

I hated Iron Man 3 and loved Star Trek into Darkness. While both films had twists for their villains, I thought the difference was that while Cumberbatch was not promoted to be Khan in the trailers, he was still indeed a great and dangerous villain which we were promised. The Mandarin is supposed to be Iron Man's arch nemesis and was a character that some were looking forward to seeing since the first film. I'm not saying that's the reason why he was terrible, but he was really promoted to be a
I hated Iron Man 3 and loved Star Trek into Darkness. While both films had twists for their villains, I thought the difference was that while Cumberbatch was not promoted to be Khan in the trailers, he was still indeed a great and dangerous villain which we were promised. The Mandarin is supposed to be Iron Man's arch nemesis and was a character that some were looking forward to seeing since the first film. I'm not saying that's the reason why he was terrible, but he was really promoted to be a dangerous that would destroy Tony Stark similar to Bane and Batman. The Mandarin was none of the those things but a joke.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
11:00PM on 05/20/2013

MAYBE A LITTLE CHEESE WITH THIS WHINE

I for one appreciate the twists. It's like a duh moment. JJ already set precedent by altering the ST universe in the first movie. So, keeping it up for the remainer of how ever many ST movies he makes is completely necessary and wanted. I've seen the Khan story one way, so why not another? I also appreciate being challenged at a movies. I've seen so many whiners complaining about reboots and here we have a completely original reboot of characters were kind of getting to know all over
I for one appreciate the twists. It's like a duh moment. JJ already set precedent by altering the ST universe in the first movie. So, keeping it up for the remainer of how ever many ST movies he makes is completely necessary and wanted. I've seen the Khan story one way, so why not another? I also appreciate being challenged at a movies. I've seen so many whiners complaining about reboots and here we have a completely original reboot of characters were kind of getting to know all over again in this new universe. So, if you want to see the same old story, then rent the DVD of Wrath of Khan. Keep the twists coming. More please. I really hope the original treks and stories continue. Being Darkness was kind of a retelling of a story we were familiar with, an originally based story much like the first ST movie but then again the reimagining of this story was very good. Meh, it doesn't matter, my father and I watched the original series on tv so I'm hooked and will always see ST movies. I sat through all the others, how can I quit now? Thank for a great movie JJ. Can't wait to see what you do to Star Wars. Just wish I'd get to see another Cloverfield movie. Damn I love that retelling of Godzilla in NYC. L8r
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:50PM on 05/20/2013

No problem

I don't mind the choice of advertising for this one. I don't even mind the fact that they essentially lied about Cumberbatch being Khan to throw fans off the scent. The movie was still amazing, IMHO. :)
I don't mind the choice of advertising for this one. I don't even mind the fact that they essentially lied about Cumberbatch being Khan to throw fans off the scent. The movie was still amazing, IMHO. :)
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:01PM on 05/20/2013

Jesus H!

I've been reading this site for years and finally registered just so I could post on this freaking pity party. As Nero so plainly said in the first film: "We stand apart." This series is not meant to please the outrageously picky palettes of those select, insufferable Trekkies that sound more like the Westboro Baptist Church than fans of the overall universe. All the winks and nods to the previous films were awesome, and the switch up in the famous KHANNNN was just plain hilarious/incredible.
I've been reading this site for years and finally registered just so I could post on this freaking pity party. As Nero so plainly said in the first film: "We stand apart." This series is not meant to please the outrageously picky palettes of those select, insufferable Trekkies that sound more like the Westboro Baptist Church than fans of the overall universe. All the winks and nods to the previous films were awesome, and the switch up in the famous KHANNNN was just plain hilarious/incredible. Christ, at this point, I practically want the producers of the Twilight series to come in and take this stuff over just to piss off the portion of the Trekkie community that have their phasers set to eternal whine. end rant.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
10:54PM on 05/20/2013
I'm with you man, the Trekkies/Trekkers have be insufferable over this one. We don't get that many good blockbusters a year so why nitpick?
I'm with you man, the Trekkies/Trekkers have be insufferable over this one. We don't get that many good blockbusters a year so why nitpick?
9:57PM on 05/20/2013

Skyfall like

I like what they've done with the two new Trek films. In a way they were like set ups to what became the Original TV Show. Skyfall did the same in that it was almost a set up to what we got with The original Bond films - MoneyPenny and a Stiff upper lip english Gent giving the orders.
In a way Darkness is a set up to a 'Wrath of Khan' revenge movie later on - however they want to do it.

Give us more misdirection when it comes to marketing anytime. I want surprises and not knowing (or
I like what they've done with the two new Trek films. In a way they were like set ups to what became the Original TV Show. Skyfall did the same in that it was almost a set up to what we got with The original Bond films - MoneyPenny and a Stiff upper lip english Gent giving the orders.
In a way Darkness is a set up to a 'Wrath of Khan' revenge movie later on - however they want to do it.

Give us more misdirection when it comes to marketing anytime. I want surprises and not knowing (or seeing) the whole film before i sit down in the theatre is great.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:47PM on 05/20/2013

MAYBE A LITTLE CHEESE WITH THIS WHINE

I for one appreciate the twists. It's like a duh moment. JJ already set precedent by altering the ST universe in the first movie. So, keeping it up for the remainer of how ever many ST movies he makes is completely necessary and wanted. I've seen the Khan story one way, so why not another? I also appreciate being challenged at a movies. I've seen so many whiners complaining about reboots and here we have a completely original reboot of characters were kind of getting to know all over
I for one appreciate the twists. It's like a duh moment. JJ already set precedent by altering the ST universe in the first movie. So, keeping it up for the remainer of how ever many ST movies he makes is completely necessary and wanted. I've seen the Khan story one way, so why not another? I also appreciate being challenged at a movies. I've seen so many whiners complaining about reboots and here we have a completely original reboot of characters were kind of getting to know all over again in this new universe. So, if you want to see the same old story, then rent the DVD of Wrath of Khan. Keep the twists coming. More please. I really hope the original treks and stories continue. Being Darkness was kind of a retelling of a story we were familiar with, an originally based story much like the first ST movie but then again the reimagining of this story was very good. Meh, it doesn't matter, my father and I watched the original series on tv so I'm hooked and will always see ST movies. I sat through all the others, how can I quit now? Thank for a great movie JJ. Can't wait to see what you do to Star Wars. Just wish I'd get to see another Cloverfield movie. Damn I love that retelling of Godzilla in NYC. L8r
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:47PM on 05/20/2013

Great movie moment, bad marketing

I loved the movie, and when Khan introduced himself as his true self was a great moment in the movie. But I think if they would have marketed Khan they would've gotten an extra 20 million in the box office. He is the biggest and most recognized of Star Trek villains.
I loved the movie, and when Khan introduced himself as his true self was a great moment in the movie. But I think if they would have marketed Khan they would've gotten an extra 20 million in the box office. He is the biggest and most recognized of Star Trek villains.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:14PM on 05/20/2013
I think it was posited right from the moment Benicio del Toro was mentioned as a possible candidate for the role that the character was probably Khan. I think Benedict Cumberbatch did an absolutely riveting job of playing the character, but I'm still a little torn on the missed opportunity to have an actual Bollywood actor portray the villain.
I think it was posited right from the moment Benicio del Toro was mentioned as a possible candidate for the role that the character was probably Khan. I think Benedict Cumberbatch did an absolutely riveting job of playing the character, but I'm still a little torn on the missed opportunity to have an actual Bollywood actor portray the villain.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:53AM on 05/21/2013
You do know Bollywood is in India and Benicio del Toro is Puerto Rican , right?
You do know Bollywood is in India and Benicio del Toro is Puerto Rican , right?
5:11AM on 05/21/2013
Yes, I do - I was not referring to Benicio del Toro as a Bollywood actor. What I meant was, it would have been great if Abrams and co. had actually gotten an Indian actor to portray an Indian character from the beginning. I know lots of people were pulling for Shah Rukh Khan to play Khan.
Yes, I do - I was not referring to Benicio del Toro as a Bollywood actor. What I meant was, it would have been great if Abrams and co. had actually gotten an Indian actor to portray an Indian character from the beginning. I know lots of people were pulling for Shah Rukh Khan to play Khan.
+5
9:05PM on 05/20/2013

extra.......

The funny thing was when I was watching it and the reveal came, half the people in the audience was all like "OOOOOOOOOOO" seriously, you can hear it.
The funny thing was when I was watching it and the reveal came, half the people in the audience was all like "OOOOOOOOOOO" seriously, you can hear it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:31PM on 05/20/2013
Cumberbatch's identity hadn't been spoiled for me before seeing the movie, but any idiot with a barely functioning cerebral cortex could have figured it out. I've never seen Space Seed; my primary exposure to Trek was through TNG and DS9 (and all the theatrical releases, obviously). Even knowing that it was more than 90% likely that Cumberbatch was going to be Khan before going in, I still enjoyed the movie.
Cumberbatch's identity hadn't been spoiled for me before seeing the movie, but any idiot with a barely functioning cerebral cortex could have figured it out. I've never seen Space Seed; my primary exposure to Trek was through TNG and DS9 (and all the theatrical releases, obviously). Even knowing that it was more than 90% likely that Cumberbatch was going to be Khan before going in, I still enjoyed the movie.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:03PM on 05/20/2013
I knew deep down it was khan, what confirmed it is when he took out all those Klingons and took all those punches and was like "Bitch Please"
I knew deep down it was khan, what confirmed it is when he took out all those Klingons and took all those punches and was like "Bitch Please"
+2
8:20PM on 05/20/2013
as a response to IAmJack600, i could of swore that robocop told kirk that he exploited khan intelligence becuase of the events of the first film. i could be wrong, but if im not.
as a response to IAmJack600, i could of swore that robocop told kirk that he exploited khan intelligence becuase of the events of the first film. i could be wrong, but if im not.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:18PM on 05/20/2013
I support the writers. I thought the twist was great and was written into the storyline very well. Even though your were kind of expecting it to be Khan, it was still satisfying when it was finally revealed in the film.

It's just amazing how much people are hating on the twists in Iron Man 3 and Star Trek. I give the films major credit for taking such huge risks with their characters and storylines even though said risk may come with a backlash.
I support the writers. I thought the twist was great and was written into the storyline very well. Even though your were kind of expecting it to be Khan, it was still satisfying when it was finally revealed in the film.

It's just amazing how much people are hating on the twists in Iron Man 3 and Star Trek. I give the films major credit for taking such huge risks with their characters and storylines even though said risk may come with a backlash.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
7:51PM on 05/20/2013
I like the Khan twist for three reasons.
One, Lindelof is right. The audience experiences the big reveal with the characters. Otherwise, the audience knows about Harrison's true identity alrighty, and viewers are a little bored and removed waiting for the Enterprise crew to catch up.
Two, would you rather watch a Star Trek with villain John Harrison or with KHAN! I was pleased when the arch-villain was revealed. The choice respected tradition for a Star Trek II. Khan is a grander bad guy than
I like the Khan twist for three reasons.
One, Lindelof is right. The audience experiences the big reveal with the characters. Otherwise, the audience knows about Harrison's true identity alrighty, and viewers are a little bored and removed waiting for the Enterprise crew to catch up.
Two, would you rather watch a Star Trek with villain John Harrison or with KHAN! I was pleased when the arch-villain was revealed. The choice respected tradition for a Star Trek II. Khan is a grander bad guy than some dude named John Harrison.
Three, Alex is right. The Internet spoils too many kick-ass movie surprises before we enthused fans get to see them. On a film's release date, I want to unwrap the present for the first time. I don't want to peak inside the box. I don't want discussion to rattle the box so that the surprise is ruined. Many moviefans like to be surprised. And, in that way, both Black and Abrams provided us genre fans a recent gift.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
3:57AM on 05/21/2013
The studios don't mind the internet spoiling movies because they want people there on opening night so they don't get spoiled by people who have already seen the movie. It kills us people living overseas not being able to talk about Iron Man 3 or Star Trek 2 until the rest of you have seen it though.
The studios don't mind the internet spoiling movies because they want people there on opening night so they don't get spoiled by people who have already seen the movie. It kills us people living overseas not being able to talk about Iron Man 3 or Star Trek 2 until the rest of you have seen it though.
7:33PM on 05/20/2013

ALTERNATE TIMELINE? Noooope.

Listen, a lot of you people are shrugging off the Khan thing as "Well, it's an alternate timeline." -- What you're all forgetting is that the alternate timeline began when Kirk's Father encountered Niro when Kirk was born. Every moment up until that point was, in theory, exactly the same as the original timeline. Therefore, as Khan was frozen with his followers back in 1997, his story should remain exactly the same and he should in fact be Indian -- particularly with such a heavy sounding
Listen, a lot of you people are shrugging off the Khan thing as "Well, it's an alternate timeline." -- What you're all forgetting is that the alternate timeline began when Kirk's Father encountered Niro when Kirk was born. Every moment up until that point was, in theory, exactly the same as the original timeline. Therefore, as Khan was frozen with his followers back in 1997, his story should remain exactly the same and he should in fact be Indian -- particularly with such a heavy sounding Indian name!!
"Alternate Timeline" doesn't solve the problem because the alternate timeline has no effect on the events that transpired before it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:31PM on 05/20/2013
Yeah but the fact that he was unfrozen and used by admiral Marcus is a decision that WOULD have been affected by the alternate timeline. In this movie, he was still frozen at the same time he had been originally. The time at which he is unfrozen is fair game for alteration, however.
Yeah but the fact that he was unfrozen and used by admiral Marcus is a decision that WOULD have been affected by the alternate timeline. In this movie, he was still frozen at the same time he had been originally. The time at which he is unfrozen is fair game for alteration, however.
9:50PM on 05/20/2013
Stop kidding yourself. The first movie rebooted everything. The time traveling Eric Bana was just an excuse to reboot the entire series which they did extremely successfully. Stop clinging to the past where Khan was an Indian played by a mexican guy.
Stop kidding yourself. The first movie rebooted everything. The time traveling Eric Bana was just an excuse to reboot the entire series which they did extremely successfully. Stop clinging to the past where Khan was an Indian played by a mexican guy.
9:52PM on 05/20/2013
He probably changed his appearance to become Harrison and blend in better with Starfleet
He probably changed his appearance to become Harrison and blend in better with Starfleet
11:06PM on 05/20/2013
He could have been literally ANYONE else and it would have the exact same level of impact as it did with him being Khan. He could have been John Harrison and it would've been fine -- he would've been a new and interesting villain -- with ties to Khan and the other enhanced humans if necessary, etc.

@spiderfan11 -- Yes, agreed, but that should have no effect on his race. Totally, Khan gets a different story because he's revived at a completely different time -- but there's literally no
He could have been literally ANYONE else and it would have the exact same level of impact as it did with him being Khan. He could have been John Harrison and it would've been fine -- he would've been a new and interesting villain -- with ties to Khan and the other enhanced humans if necessary, etc.

@spiderfan11 -- Yes, agreed, but that should have no effect on his race. Totally, Khan gets a different story because he's revived at a completely different time -- but there's literally no reason he's suddenly a super pale white british guy with the full name: Khan Noonien Singh -- That's just lazy fan service. The only reason he's Khan at all is just so fanboys can go "Oh boy, Khan's my favourite!" --

@Benny_D -- Yeah, thanks, not retarded - I get that "they rebooted everything" -- but that really shouldn't alter someone's race. "Stop clinging to the past" -- Sorry, just trying not to be a racist fuck and being okay that just anyone can be replaced by white people. Half of my offense to it is I have a really good Trekkie friend who is Indian and it bothered the crap out of him. How often do Indian people get GOOD roles? What they did was the laziest thing they could possibly do.

n_curz69 -- Possibly, and I would have been totally cool with that if they addressed it. I really wanted one of the crew to point out how un-Indian he was, given his name.
7:29PM on 05/20/2013
I knew who the character was before I went to see the movie, since it has been spoiled to me here (along with The Mandarin's plot twist in Iron Man 3). The way the story went, I actually wouldn't mind if they told the viewers who he is from the start, but man I wished that they didn't retread old grounds with the plot. Ultimately, John Harrison is still pretty much a one dimensional villain.
I knew who the character was before I went to see the movie, since it has been spoiled to me here (along with The Mandarin's plot twist in Iron Man 3). The way the story went, I actually wouldn't mind if they told the viewers who he is from the start, but man I wished that they didn't retread old grounds with the plot. Ultimately, John Harrison is still pretty much a one dimensional villain.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-4
7:04PM on 05/20/2013
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I think I can debunk Lindelof's logic like this: Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine in the prequel movies. We knew who they were before the prequels started. Granted, those movies were crap, but knowing who the "villains to be" are ahead of time was not one of the bad things about those movies. In fact, that was one of the big draws. Seeing the villains origins was a big thing to be curious about. They could have approached Khan the same way. Sure, we already
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I think I can debunk Lindelof's logic like this: Darth Vader and Emperor Palpatine in the prequel movies. We knew who they were before the prequels started. Granted, those movies were crap, but knowing who the "villains to be" are ahead of time was not one of the bad things about those movies. In fact, that was one of the big draws. Seeing the villains origins was a big thing to be curious about. They could have approached Khan the same way. Sure, we already knew Khan's origins from the original episode and Wrath of Khan, but did they ever really delve into the motives behind his creation before Into Darkness?
Somebody needs to pack Lindelof into a circus canon, and shoot him into the moon.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:55PM on 05/20/2013

Meh...

The plot "twists" didn't bother me one way or the other. I knew what the story was going into it and enjoyed the movie despite Lindelof! Like the scene from Wrath of Khan, Shatner should scream Lindeolfs name and not Khan. The guy just annoys me now with his "clever" writing.
The plot "twists" didn't bother me one way or the other. I knew what the story was going into it and enjoyed the movie despite Lindelof! Like the scene from Wrath of Khan, Shatner should scream Lindeolfs name and not Khan. The guy just annoys me now with his "clever" writing.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:52PM on 05/20/2013

Meh...

The plot "twists" didn't bother me one way or the other. I knew what the story was going into it and enjoyed the movie despite Lindelof! Like the scene from Wrath of Khan, Shatner should scream [link]"
The plot "twists" didn't bother me one way or the other. I knew what the story was going into it and enjoyed the movie despite Lindelof! Like the scene from Wrath of Khan, Shatner should scream [link]"
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:43PM on 05/20/2013
All that dialogue Khan gave to bring the characters up to speed seemed to go in one ear and out the other for me. It was long and difficult for me to follow. I would've preferred no secret twist and have his past revealed visually early on.
All that dialogue Khan gave to bring the characters up to speed seemed to go in one ear and out the other for me. It was long and difficult for me to follow. I would've preferred no secret twist and have his past revealed visually early on.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:32PM on 05/20/2013

Lindelof

I really enjoy his writing, but he does defend his work a lot. Your work should speak for itself. Don't try to explain it afterwards. Trek's marketing made perfect sense. Let the audience know who's the bad guy, but not exactly which bad guy. Why explain those choices? Also, he listens to the people who hate his work over the people who love his work. I do enjoy the mystery of Lost and Prometheus. The flaws, at least in my opinion, don't come down to the withholding of information. I
I really enjoy his writing, but he does defend his work a lot. Your work should speak for itself. Don't try to explain it afterwards. Trek's marketing made perfect sense. Let the audience know who's the bad guy, but not exactly which bad guy. Why explain those choices? Also, he listens to the people who hate his work over the people who love his work. I do enjoy the mystery of Lost and Prometheus. The flaws, at least in my opinion, don't come down to the withholding of information. I love the idea of theorizing. Take Prometheus (Spoilers). I believe everything we need to know is there. I love the idea of David turning. I theorize that his interaction with green goop (may have effected him in some way). I think that's fun, but then you haven scientists that want to interact with a strange life form and can't find their way out of place they pretty much have maps for. Now, that's stupid. I can go on and on with Prometheus. There's a lot of good with a lot of bad, and the bad doesn't come down the theorizing for me.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:31PM on 05/20/2013

SPOILERS below.

I don't understand who INTO DARKNESS is meant for. If it is for non-Trek fans, then why put such an emphasis on Khan? New fans have no idea who he is. Nor would they understand what past (or would it be future) events Nimoy is alluding to in his pointless cameo, let alone the ripped off scenes from WRATH OF KHAN late in the film.

Meanwhile, re-telling the story of Khan in a cookie-cutter way would only piss off devoted Trekkies like myself (and I adored JJ's reboot). So who the hell is this
I don't understand who INTO DARKNESS is meant for. If it is for non-Trek fans, then why put such an emphasis on Khan? New fans have no idea who he is. Nor would they understand what past (or would it be future) events Nimoy is alluding to in his pointless cameo, let alone the ripped off scenes from WRATH OF KHAN late in the film.

Meanwhile, re-telling the story of Khan in a cookie-cutter way would only piss off devoted Trekkies like myself (and I adored JJ's reboot). So who the hell is this film really meant for? I guess it doesn't matter as the majority of opinion is positive. I think the film's title is a reference to the audiences because it seems most people are in the dark.

Lindelof's claims that the film is meant for non-fans just confirms that they got lazy with the direction of this sequel. After doing such a terrific job rebooting the franchise in a way that allowed new audiences to enjoy the franchise while pleasing and respecting longtime fans like myself, and developing a creative way for the filmmakers to be allowed to take the series in any direction they wished, why would you--in a universe as infinite as STAR TREK--decide to attempt to retell the single most beloved story in the franchise's 47-year history in a more condensed form?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
8:50PM on 05/20/2013
I grew up watching the movies and half watched TNG, DS9 and Voyager as a kid. I loved the 2009 reboot so much that I watched Star Trek (every series and every movie) in chronological order starting with Enterprise and ending on Voyager. It took 17 months and was trying at times but I felt rewarded by Into Darkness and I consider it the best Star Trek movie to date. So I guess this movie was meant for people like me, who respect the old Trek but prefer the Bad Robot version.
I grew up watching the movies and half watched TNG, DS9 and Voyager as a kid. I loved the 2009 reboot so much that I watched Star Trek (every series and every movie) in chronological order starting with Enterprise and ending on Voyager. It took 17 months and was trying at times but I felt rewarded by Into Darkness and I consider it the best Star Trek movie to date. So I guess this movie was meant for people like me, who respect the old Trek but prefer the Bad Robot version.
9:43PM on 05/20/2013
Into Darkness isn't for real Trek fans who can see through the bullshit and it isn't for non-fans who won't get the references. It's a failure of a film meant for no one. Simple as that.
Into Darkness isn't for real Trek fans who can see through the bullshit and it isn't for non-fans who won't get the references. It's a failure of a film meant for no one. Simple as that.
11:01PM on 05/20/2013
Sadly for you, Oh-dae, the movie is actually quite successful and appeals to both fans and non-fans. It's a great reboot of the franchise that gives the series the epic scale and shot of energy it has needed for years. It sucks you can't enjoy it, but I can't say I feel bad for you, considering I am with majority who think it's great.
Sadly for you, Oh-dae, the movie is actually quite successful and appeals to both fans and non-fans. It's a great reboot of the franchise that gives the series the epic scale and shot of energy it has needed for years. It sucks you can't enjoy it, but I can't say I feel bad for you, considering I am with majority who think it's great.
11:04PM on 05/20/2013
@Halloween: Who cares. Seriously, who gives a flip. It's a good movie. People like it. No one cares if it's true to Trekkie standards. A good movie is a good movie and Into Darkness is an incredibly entertaining and well made Star Trek movie that carries the Trek spirit but is also exciting and fresh. If you can't get over the fact of what they did with the story enough to just enjoy the film, then I can only feel bad for you.
@Halloween: Who cares. Seriously, who gives a flip. It's a good movie. People like it. No one cares if it's true to Trekkie standards. A good movie is a good movie and Into Darkness is an incredibly entertaining and well made Star Trek movie that carries the Trek spirit but is also exciting and fresh. If you can't get over the fact of what they did with the story enough to just enjoy the film, then I can only feel bad for you.
12:10PM on 05/21/2013
@Freeden, I would agree wholeheartedly with you if you were referring to Abrams' 2009 reboot, but INTO DARKNESS is a complete mess of a film, Trek fan or not. As time passes, I believe people will really come to see that. As a Trek fan, I managed to look past my disappointment with the unimaginative decision to revisit Khan until the... "derivative" third act kicked in. And in the days following having seen the film, my mind has done nothing but torn the entire film's weak plot apart.

Mark
@Freeden, I would agree wholeheartedly with you if you were referring to Abrams' 2009 reboot, but INTO DARKNESS is a complete mess of a film, Trek fan or not. As time passes, I believe people will really come to see that. As a Trek fan, I managed to look past my disappointment with the unimaginative decision to revisit Khan until the... "derivative" third act kicked in. And in the days following having seen the film, my mind has done nothing but torn the entire film's weak plot apart.

Mark my words, INTO DARKNESS will not have the kind of staying power Abrams's wonderful 2009 reboot will have. I hope the next one is better, whoever ends up making. I'll put five bucks down right now on Matt Reeves.
+3
6:24PM on 05/20/2013
Wow who cares if they lied about it? Get over it, the movie kicked ass.
Also Khan was white because the super good actor they got to play him was white. Once again get over it.
Wow who cares if they lied about it? Get over it, the movie kicked ass.
Also Khan was white because the super good actor they got to play him was white. Once again get over it.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:22PM on 05/20/2013
In this day and age of rampant spoilers and spy set photos I applaud anyone who's trying to attempt any levels of surprise or secrecy, even when they're awful (cough*Mandarin*cough*). I loved Into Darkness and I don't think the misdirection at the villain hurt the film at all, I feel like they should've gone one step further and did a better misdirect, tell everyone it was Gary Mitchel or Charlie X so that people would stop trying to figure out who the villain was. And I hope they reprimanded
In this day and age of rampant spoilers and spy set photos I applaud anyone who's trying to attempt any levels of surprise or secrecy, even when they're awful (cough*Mandarin*cough*). I loved Into Darkness and I don't think the misdirection at the villain hurt the film at all, I feel like they should've gone one step further and did a better misdirect, tell everyone it was Gary Mitchel or Charlie X so that people would stop trying to figure out who the villain was. And I hope they reprimanded whoever it was at Entertainment Weekly that leaked the Khan info a couple of months ago. I think from now on filmmakers who have a really good movie with a ton of surprises should just give out cool misdirected information, enough to get the "internet crowd" into the theater but way beyond what we expected for the better so we keep coming back.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:01PM on 05/20/2013
Had no problem with the film and I knew the storyline going into it. It's an alternate universe/timeline. At least Khan was still a badass and didn't get the Mandarin treatment.
Had no problem with the film and I knew the storyline going into it. It's an alternate universe/timeline. At least Khan was still a badass and didn't get the Mandarin treatment.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
-16
5:52PM on 05/20/2013
If you went to see Star Trek not knowing who the bad guy really was.....You might be a dumb ass.

If you went to see Star Trek not knowing who the bad guy really was.....You might be a dumb ass.

Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+1
5:46PM on 05/20/2013

It doesn't matter whether or not the characters know...

Because they STILL don't really know him, they fought him, picked him up, then Khan told them a bunch of stuff, then they fought. That's it. What do they REALLY know about him?
Because they STILL don't really know him, they fought him, picked him up, then Khan told them a bunch of stuff, then they fought. That's it. What do they REALLY know about him?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:38PM on 05/20/2013

There's a difference between keeping a secret and lying

I wouldn't have mind if they had never told who he was but repeatedly saying "it's not Khan" is where I draw the line. If the secret is out, the secret is out; deal with it.

Oh, and I don't buy the alternate timeline as an excuse for the whiteness of Khan. No one else changed race, why did he?
I wouldn't have mind if they had never told who he was but repeatedly saying "it's not Khan" is where I draw the line. If the secret is out, the secret is out; deal with it.

Oh, and I don't buy the alternate timeline as an excuse for the whiteness of Khan. No one else changed race, why did he?
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
9:12PM on 05/20/2013
He had vitiligo, same as what Micheal Jackson had!
He had vitiligo, same as what Micheal Jackson had!
4:07AM on 05/21/2013
Ricardo Montalbán wasn't Indian either. Benedict Cumberbach doesn't look like Ricardo Montalbán but I had no problem believing that he could have been Indian. Perhaps the lighter skin color was a side effect of being frozen for centuries.
Ricardo Montalbán wasn't Indian either. Benedict Cumberbach doesn't look like Ricardo Montalbán but I had no problem believing that he could have been Indian. Perhaps the lighter skin color was a side effect of being frozen for centuries.
5:34PM on 05/20/2013

ever notice that...

Damon Lindeloff has to defend his writing choices A LOT? Like all the time? Maybe, just maybe, if everything you write pisses off your target demographic, you're making bad writing decisions and you should reevaluate your choices. Stop trying to be clever all the time and just write a solid story that makes sense. Stop trying so hard to "blow everyone's minds" all the time. You've proven time and again that you're not good at it. Still, Lindeloff is not altogether a TERRIBLE writer. So stick to
Damon Lindeloff has to defend his writing choices A LOT? Like all the time? Maybe, just maybe, if everything you write pisses off your target demographic, you're making bad writing decisions and you should reevaluate your choices. Stop trying to be clever all the time and just write a solid story that makes sense. Stop trying so hard to "blow everyone's minds" all the time. You've proven time and again that you're not good at it. Still, Lindeloff is not altogether a TERRIBLE writer. So stick to your writing strengths and stop ruining everything by trying to make it all deep and thought provoking, or trying to throw everyone with a twist. If I wanted shitty plot turns and themes that aren't nearly as captivating as the writer thinks they are, I'd watch a Shyamalan film.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
+14
5:14PM on 05/20/2013
Tired of people having to defend their work. just like Shane Black just let your work say what you have to say dont have to back it up with excuses or defend it. people dont like, so what they dont like it
Tired of people having to defend their work. just like Shane Black just let your work say what you have to say dont have to back it up with excuses or defend it. people dont like, so what they dont like it
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
5:00PM on 05/20/2013

Meh

This probably isn't the place to say it-- but I do think trying to fight two years of internet speculation and guess work is bound to piss people off no matter what the eventual outcome. Really, if he wasn't Khan some people would have been pissed off that Khan wasn't included. Basically you need to decide if you are a fan of the films or of internet gossip.
This probably isn't the place to say it-- but I do think trying to fight two years of internet speculation and guess work is bound to piss people off no matter what the eventual outcome. Really, if he wasn't Khan some people would have been pissed off that Khan wasn't included. Basically you need to decide if you are a fan of the films or of internet gossip.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:51PM on 05/20/2013
Don't you fucking touch Star Wars, Lindelof.
Don't you fucking touch Star Wars, Lindelof.
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
6:45PM on 05/20/2013
I strongly concur!
I strongly concur!
4:50PM on 05/20/2013
I wish they would have explained why Khan was white...
I wish they would have explained why Khan was white...
Your Reply:



Please email me when someone replies to my comment
4:51PM on 05/20/2013
alternate timeline
alternate timeline
4:51PM on 05/20/2013
Not the same Khan.
Not the same Khan.
6:11PM on 05/20/2013
I loved this movie and I still feel like that's a legitimate question that NO ONE has bothered to answer.
I loved this movie and I still feel like that's a legitimate question that NO ONE has bothered to answer.
7:28PM on 05/20/2013
@KyleG and @DeejayForte -- The alternate timeline began when Kirk's father's ship was destroyed, but everything that happened prior to that experience should remain the same. Khan and his followers were frozen in 1997, long before the events that altered the timeline.
@KyleG and @DeejayForte -- The alternate timeline began when Kirk's father's ship was destroyed, but everything that happened prior to that experience should remain the same. Khan and his followers were frozen in 1997, long before the events that altered the timeline.
4:11AM on 05/21/2013
Ricardo Montalbán wasn't Indian either. Benedict Cumberbach doesn't look like Ricardo Montalbán but I had no problem believing that he could have been Indian. Perhaps the lighter skin color was a side effect of being frozen for centuries.
Ricardo Montalbán wasn't Indian either. Benedict Cumberbach doesn't look like Ricardo Montalbán but I had no problem believing that he could have been Indian. Perhaps the lighter skin color was a side effect of being frozen for centuries.
View All Comments

Latest Movie News Headlines


Top
Loading...
JoBlo's T-Shirt Shoppe | support our site... Wear Our Gear!