J.J. Abrams Says He Regrets Hiding the STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Khan Reveal; Talks Joe Cornish Directing TREK 3

by     Posted 262 days ago

jj-abrams-star-trek-into-darkness

While this year’s sequel Star Trek Into Darkness was a sizable commercial success and garnered mostly positive reviews from critics, many longtime Trek fans weren’t so keen on director J.J. Abrams’ follow-up.  One of the key criticisms launched at Into Darkness was its heavy riffing on previous Trek film Wrath of Khan, specifically Abrams and Co.’s coyness about the true identity of Benedict Cumberbatch’s villainous character.  The team wanted to keep the film’s Big Bad a surprise until opening weekend, and they went to great lengths to conceal the fact that Cumberbatch was indeed playing Khan.

Abrams is currently knee-deep in pre-production on Star Wars: Episode VII, but he recently spoke frankly about Star Trek Into Darkness, admitting that they probably should’ve been honest with fans by confirming that Khan was in the film.  Moreover, he addressed the possibility of Joe Cornish taking the helm of Star Trek 3.  Hit the jump to read on.

star-trek-into-darkness-benedict-cumberbatchSpeaking with MTV News, Abrams was asked if he regrets withholding Khan’s identity in the months leading up to the release of Into Darkness:

“The truth is I think it probably would have been smarter just to say upfront ‘This is who it is.’ It was only trying to preserve the fun of it, and it might have given more time to acclimate and accept that’s what the thing was.”

The director went on to say that Paramount was also keen on keeping the Khan talk to a minimum for fear of alienating non-Trek fans:

“The truth is because it was so important to the studio that we not angle this thing for existing fans. If we said it was Khan, it would feel like you’ve really got to know what Star Trek is about to see this movie. That would have been limiting. I can understand their argument to try to keep that quiet, but I do wonder if it would have seemed a little bit less like an attempt at deception if we had just come out with it.”

star-trek-into-darkness-chris-pine-benedict-cumberbatch-zachary-quintoThe truth of the matter is that the team was likely in a no-win scenario.  By not copping to the fact that Cumberbatch was playing Khan, the constant side-stepping by Abrams and the cast in pre-release interviews became rather irritating and made for unfair expectations regarding the finished film, but if they had confirmed Cumberbatch was playing Khan, they no doubt would’ve been inundated with endless questions about how their character was different from the original version, the nature of Into Darkness’ ties to Wrath of Khan, and plenty of other questions that they couldn’t possibly answer without ruining the twists and turns of Abrams’ film.

That being said, the big “reveal” of Khan in the context of Into Darkness is still a little befuddling since at that time, the Enterprise crew has no prior knowledge of Khan or his past.  He’s just a mysterious, dark character who happens to have a funny name.

While Abrams won’t be directing the third Trek film, he’s still onboard as a producer and Paramount is working towards potentially beginning production next summer.  Reports have been swirling that the studio has its eye on Attack the Block helmer Joe Cornish to take the reins, and Simon Pegg confirmed as much recently.  Abrams addressed the issue himself, saying it’s not a done deal but it seems likely:

“I don’t know if Joe Cornish is the guy. My guess is that’s up in the air. I adore him and love him and can’t wait to see what he does next. Hopefully it will be Star Trek. Whatever it is, he’s brilliant. Attack the Block was one of my favorite movies of the year when it came out.”

He went on to say that Roberto Orci is working on the script at the moment with two other writers, so expect to hear more news regarding Trek 3 soon.  Watch the full interview below.

jj-abrams-star-trek-into-darkness




Like Us


Comments:

FB Comments

  • mattinacan

    into darkness was a huge let down, JJ can direct but his scripts are terrible.

    • axalon

      Terrible? Oof, you need to watch more movies.

      • mattinacan

        i’ve watched one movie per day since i was 13

      • axalon

        I’m sure I have a cookie around here for you somewhere…

      • mattinacan

        watching my waistline, but thanks

      • axalon

        This made me laugh, well played

      • axalon

        This made me laugh, well played

      • axalon

        This made me laugh, well played

      • axalon

        This made me laugh, well played

      • Jimmy B

        So how old are you? 13? 14? 12?

      • mattinacan

        30

      • Stiggs

        “I’ve watched one movie per day since i was 13″
        He said regretfully…

  • ScratStitch

    Only the worst kind of fans complain when a director doesn’t reveal spoilers. Seriously, Into Darkness was one of the best movies of the year, and has held up repeated viewings very well. Not sure why it’s become “cool” to hate on it so much. :(

    • ScratStitch

      Also, he never “admits not revealing Khan was a mistake” in the interview. What a screwed up, bias headline!

    • mbmarquis69

      When you go to such lengths to protect a spoiler that, in the scheme of the film, is kind of pointless, it makes that obfuscation all the more unnecessary. It would have been better to know he was going to be Khan all along, but then do something completely unexpected with his character. Make him an anti-hero… have him sacrifice himself to save the Enterprise. Play with expectations.

      They lost a tremendous opportunity to do so much more.

      • axalon

        “Make him an anti-hero… have him sacrifice himself to save the Enterprise. ”

        That would have been interesting, would have fit right in with their whole alternate timeline scenario too.

      • mbmarquis69

        Exactly.

    • Farrell

      “Into Darkness was one of the best movies of the year”

      LMFAO.

    • The Flobbit

      STID was a messy, cliched, terribly written, poorly constructed failure of a film.

      • poppincherry

        Well wait until this hack directs Star Wars!

  • eternalozzie

    I liked the movie a lot and it felt like a set up for Khan to come back and share his wrath in another movie. I look forward to the third movie whether Khan is the villain or not.

  • jay

    i liked the movie a lot too, but with that being said i was never a star trek fan until the new ones started in 2009. My father who is a lifelong Star Trek fan thought it was terrible.

    • James VDB

      No. I’m your father!

    • nae

      you are not a fan of star trek then, because jj abrams crap star trek remakes are not star trek and are both terrible.

  • alk

    this will be the first of MANY MANY….regrets both J.J. Abrams and fans of Star Wars will be having….

    • https://about.me/jeff_dickey Jeff Dickey

      Those who say “oh, he can’t possibly make the Star Wars film worse than ST:ID” vastly underestimate his talents. If only creative storytelling were one of them.

  • axalon

    I think the reason some of the fans were a little annoyed at the secrecy was because when asked point-blank during interviews if Khan was the villian everyone involved said “nope, it’s not Khan!”. If they just would have confirmed when asked it would have solved a few problems. It was the persistent denial that got annoying.

    • The Flobbit

      No, it was the bald-faced lying to our f–king faces.

  • Marissa Evans

    Didn’t care for it myself, but more because I’m not into these superhero films and that’s what this felt like. I would love to see a more sophisticated Star Trek as opposed to this new flashy (literally) Star Trek. But I still did like the 2009 one so I do agree with most people when they say this one wasn’t as good.
    As for this Khan business, yes that was incredibly annoying. Why deny it the way they did? People know, so just admit it. It’s like a kid caught with his hand in a cookie jar and still denying he was going to eat it.

  • Marissa Evans

    Didn’t care for it myself, but more because I’m not into these superhero films and that’s what this felt like. I would love to see a more sophisticated Star Trek as opposed to this new flashy (literally) Star Trek. But I still did like the 2009 one so I do agree with most people when they say this one wasn’t as good.
    As for this Khan business, yes that was incredibly annoying. Why deny it the way they did? People know, so just admit it. It’s like a kid caught with his hand in a cookie jar and still denying he was going to eat it.

  • Marissa Evans

    Didn’t care for it myself, but more because I’m not into these superhero films and that’s what this felt like. I would love to see a more sophisticated Star Trek as opposed to this new flashy (literally) Star Trek. But I still did like the 2009 one so I do agree with most people when they say this one wasn’t as good.
    As for this Khan business, yes that was incredibly annoying. Why deny it the way they did? People know, so just admit it. It’s like a kid caught with his hand in a cookie jar and still denying he was going to eat it.

  • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

    I feel that they were setting it up for another future film (maybe 2 or 3 films later) and have Khan return looking more like he did from the Original Series. This was just his introduction (as they did w the show) and it will be the next film that will be about his revenge against the Enterprise. However, I do wish that they did cast Benicio Del Toro in the role even though I enjoyed Cumberbatch’s performance. Enjoyed the film and cannot wait to see what Abrams brings to Star Wars.

  • Kota Lancaster

    I didn’t really like this movie, but I didn’t hate it either. I was surprised to see some people loved it, which I don’t get but whatever, to each their own. I really hope the next one is all original with a new story, not a remake, and it’s a bit more tense than actiony. I still believe they can put out a great one.

    • MEY

      It is not a remake. It can’t be. It shows the (alternative) past of the Khan story introduced in the old Star Trek 2. Here the characters are much younger, for example, we meet the young Carol Marcus who appears in Star Trek 2 (1982) as Kirk’s son’s mother.

      In STID we can see events happened decades before the events of ST 2.

      • Kota Lancaster

        I didn’t mean it was a straight up remake, I’ve seen both movies, but obviously they were trying to recreate a lot of what happened in Wrath of Khan, characters and situations. It just didn’t feel like an original adventure, more like a skewed version of Wrath of Khan.

  • Kota Lancaster

    I didn’t really like this movie, but I didn’t hate it either. I was surprised to see some people loved it, which I don’t get but whatever, to each their own. I really hope the next one is all original with a new story, not a remake, and it’s a bit more tense than actiony. I still believe they can put out a great one.

  • Kota Lancaster

    I didn’t really like this movie, but I didn’t hate it either. I was surprised to see some people loved it, which I don’t get but whatever, to each their own. I really hope the next one is all original with a new story, not a remake, and it’s a bit more tense than actiony. I still believe they can put out a great one.

  • kemo

    I hope the new movie has the pakleds

    • wethrowpie

      We are smart. We are strong. I would love that. Downs kids in space.

    • wethrowpie

      We are smart. We are strong. I would love that. Downs kids in space.

  • kemo

    I hope the new movie has the pakleds

  • kemo

    I hope the new movie has the pakleds

  • YodaRocks

    Wow! Talk of fans being whiny bitches.

  • YodaRocks

    Wow! Talk of fans being whiny bitches.

  • YodaRocks

    Wow! Talk of fans being whiny bitches.

  • Tyler

    J.J. Abrams shouldn’t be so hard on himself, the movie was great. He should just be proud of it as it is and not for what he wishes it could be.

    • Ched Groundheggin

      I think he is just playing the game. Telling people what they want to hear. He has done it before.

  • Tyler

    J.J. Abrams shouldn’t be so hard on himself, the movie was great. He should just be proud of it as it is and not for what he wishes it could be.

  • Solgazer

    He needs to express a few more regrets about that film.
    There are many, many more he should be discussing.

  • Solgazer

    He needs to express a few more regrets about that film.
    There are many, many more he should be discussing.

  • Solgazer

    He needs to express a few more regrets about that film.
    There are many, many more he should be discussing.

  • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

    I will shock the trekkies for sure, but I prefer Into Darkness to Wrath of Khan. The latter was so cheesy. the only two things i really appreciated were shatner of course and the great Montalban.
    Into Darkness just needed a smarter editing. I would have cut the first sequence, which was maybe a great action sequence, but a stupid and Michael Bayish one.

    • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

      If you cut the first scene in the editing room, how would the following events make sense?

      • mattinacan

        the movie doesn’t make sense with or without the opening scene

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        I don’t agree. It wasn’t a great movie, but not that bad.
        that being said, I would have preferred that they deal with another villain, instead of making a remake of wrath of khan.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        I don’t agree. It wasn’t a great movie, but not that bad.
        that being said, I would have preferred that they deal with another villain, instead of making a remake of wrath of khan.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        I don’t agree. It wasn’t a great movie, but not that bad.
        that being said, I would have preferred that they deal with another villain, instead of making a remake of wrath of khan.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Which event would be affected by cutting out this sequence ?

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        Are you referring to the scene involving the volcano? If so that would totally change the film’s story. From Spock’s character arch to showing why the tension between him and Kirk throughout the film.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        I know, but they could have made a better intro to create this tension. Spock is not a humanist. he is almost a Mantat (thinking machine). So why would he sacrifice himself for a bunch of indigeneous strangers?

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        I think Abrams intro to Spock in the 1st film was to show that he was more human than Vulcan in regards to his thinking/emotional range.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Even a human will not offer his life to save a bunch of indigenous savages. Let’s face it.

      • http://www.collider.com/ DNAsplitter

        Some humans may not. Maybe his compassion is what sets him apart from others. I think most people, including myself, would view him as a coward if he was to just beam up out of there without trying at all cost to save those people. It’s why people root for the hero. It’s why people were so upset w the MOS film is that he didn’t show the characteristics of a hero that they wanted to see (I disagreeing as it’s an origin film that shows he is growing into the hero but thats for another debate and also not to compare Spock to Superman). But yea I can see what you are saying as he is suppose to be part Vulcan.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        We all love heroes. Heroes who risk their lives for the others, those who sacrifice their lives for the beloved ones.
        But watching a Vulcan, even though he is half human, insisting to save these people is kind of hard to believe for me. When Spock sacrified himself in Wrath of Khan, at least it was a “logical” decision,

      • Neo

        This kind of thinking is exactly what separates old Trek fans from new JJ trek fans. You can’t even grasp the altruism, goodness, and humanist thinking Gene Roddenberry poured into original Star Trek. By making some second-class pulp-fiction story placed into Star Trek universe, JJ destroyed Roddenbery’s great vision of future of what humanitiy can achieve and what we could become.
        Only thing people like you care about are some CGI with few mediocre memorable quotes, so your petty little brains can be tricked into thinking you are smart.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        I loved the original series when I was young. but let us be honest, the movies were cheap. they used a tv budget. for the special effect. it is obvious. Just compare them to Star Wars Episode IV or Blade Runner.
        To be honest, I thank J.J for his take on Star Trek because he reconcilated me with the Star Trek Universe. I stopped watching them since the first one. The story was so boring. I tried to watch again but I was horribly disappointed by Nemesis.

        I am sure that you gigantic brain will grasp what I said.

      • mbmarquis69

        Kirk’s violation of the Prime Directive is what leads to his demotion. These scenes have a bearing on the plot and it’s important that Kirk end up at a crucial place (the Starfleet meeting) in order to witness the death of an important character.

        Not to mention it created a rift between Kirk and Spock.

        Cutting the opening scene would have made the (already strained) subsequent scenes flat and heavily dependent on exposition.

        (Edit: I’m not a fan of the movie or the script, but I can’t agree that all it needed was a snip snip of the opening scene)

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        In my opinion, would have they started with the diciplinary commitee scene, it wouldn’t have had an impact of our grasp of the story. They summarized what happened on this planet,

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        Kirk is removed from command a couple of scenes later, and viciously reprimanded for his behavior. Likewise there is a tension created between Kirk and Spock over the issue. It establishes Kirk’s story arc as being reckless.

        Now the scene itself could have been a different sequence establishing the themes of the movie, but if you just cut the scene the movie would feel like you’re missing the biggest piece of a puzzle. The movie would just start with Kirk being stripped of command.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        True, but we would have learned what happened between them, since they told Kirk what was the reason of his revocation. Not a big deal for me.

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        You would prefer a movie which starts with people talking about what just happened instead showing what happened?

      • http://thenonessentials.blogspot.com/ Sean Chandler

        You would prefer a movie which starts with people talking about what just happened instead showing what happened?

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Indeed. Sometimes it is better to suggest a thing than going all hat about it.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Which event would be affected by cutting out this sequence ?

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Which event would be affected by cutting out this sequence ?

    • Nerdgasm

      Yeah you are an idiot. As I agree that the scene was 90% fluff there was still enough there to bring the story full circle. I wasn’t a fan of the movie myself but that Scene plays into character archs and is the reason for the relationship between Spock and Kirk. Also is what sets up the disbanding of the crew and then finally Kirk finding a reason to get his ship back and the other bad guy to look at it and go.. Well I can kill this crew to cover everything up because of their track record.

      Now i wouldn’t argue a REWRITE for more spearheaded adn fastly driven story to get rid of that first scene but AS THE MOVIE IS you can’t omit it.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        Now that you called me idiot, may I call you dumber ?
        It’s fair. now it’s square.

  • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

    I will shock the trekkies for sure, but I prefer Into Darkness to Wrath of Khan. The latter was so cheesy. the only two things i really appreciated were shatner of course and the great Montalban.
    Into Darkness just needed a smarter editing. I would have cut the first sequence, which was maybe a great action sequence, but a stupid and Michael Bayish one.

  • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

    I will shock the trekkies for sure, but I prefer Into Darkness to Wrath of Khan. The latter was so cheesy. the only two things i really appreciated were shatner of course and the great Montalban.
    Into Darkness just needed a smarter editing. I would have cut the first sequence, which was maybe a great action sequence, but a stupid and Michael Bayish one.

  • Pragmator

    Here’s the interesting angle no one has looked back on–the original Khan was a vaguely East Indian ethnic-type. Yes, yes, he was played by a Latino, but that’s not where I’m going. Initially, this new Khan was going to be played by Benicio Del Toro, but he walked out on the project early on–for reasons we don’t know.

    But think about that. If this iteration of Khan had ended up being another ethnic “other”, how much Hell would Abrams have caught? Essentially, he would have had a terrorist picture that many would have likely assumed was an allusion to current day issues with Islamic Fundamentalists. I’m not saying that would have been accurate, but it would have been low hanging fruit. Of course, this assumes that the story would have been the same with Del Toro as Khan. Part of me thinks the disjointed plot (and extended development time) had something to do with changing things around after Del Toro left.

    The really interesting question becomes, did Benicio Del Toro’s exit from the project have a large impact on the film? And if not, Abrams ultimately lucked out–otherwise I think he gets crucified by the anti-”fear of the other” crowd by having a non-white actor in the role.

    • Nerdgasm

      He discussed his pull out was because of the marketing for the film and that he would be busy. I don’t know if that was for Guardians of the Galaxy or what. And This is SUCH a far reaching argument for nothing at all and no real argument lays here so I don’t know why you brought it up. And Kahn’s story is very cut and dry I don’t get wher eyou say it was disjointed. You can tell in movies when they move things around, as far as Kahn his story was pretty tight and there is no room for any branching out. I don’t think that his ethnicity had anything to dow tih it just like the original cause like you said two Spanish actors were going to play him and in no way would that have had him look like a terrorist or what the media has painted to be a “terrorist.

      • Pragmator

        Khan’s story is not cut and dry. What was his ultimate goal? To gain the freedom of his hibernating followers, right? Well, what exactly did going to Kronos have to play in this? Why did he put his people inside torpedoes? What caused the rift between him an Admiral Marcus? None of it adds up. Once he says, “I am Khan!” the movie shifts gears completely.

        And as far as the other ideas I attempted to raise, maybe you should read my post again without your deflector shields up. I wasn’t trying to trap or trash, I was theorizing. I’m not inferring that Del Toro left BECAUSE of the script or anything like that. I’m asking whether or not Del Toro leaving affected the story–and if not, whether it was a good thing he left, so as to spare Abrams a potential backlash from people looking for reasons to be outraged.

  • Pragmator

    Here’s the interesting angle no one has looked back on–the original Khan was a vaguely East Indian ethnic-type. Yes, yes, he was played by a Latino, but that’s not where I’m going. Initially, this new Khan was going to be played by Benicio Del Toro, but he walked out on the project early on–for reasons we don’t know.

    But think about that. If this iteration of Khan had ended up being another ethnic “other”, how much Hell would Abrams have caught? Essentially, he would have had a terrorist picture that many would have likely assumed was an allusion to current day issues with Islamic Fundamentalists. I’m not saying that would have been accurate, but it would have been low hanging fruit. Of course, this assumes that the story would have been the same with Del Toro as Khan. Part of me thinks the disjointed plot (and extended development time) had something to do with changing things around after Del Toro left.

    The really interesting question becomes, did Benicio Del Toro’s exit from the project have a large impact on the film? And if not, Abrams ultimately lucked out–otherwise I think he gets crucified by the anti-”fear of the other” crowd by having a non-white actor in the role.

  • Pragmator

    Here’s the interesting angle no one has looked back on–the original Khan was a vaguely East Indian ethnic-type. Yes, yes, he was played by a Latino, but that’s not where I’m going. Initially, this new Khan was going to be played by Benicio Del Toro, but he walked out on the project early on–for reasons we don’t know.

    But think about that. If this iteration of Khan had ended up being another ethnic “other”, how much Hell would Abrams have caught? Essentially, he would have had a terrorist picture that many would have likely assumed was an allusion to current day issues with Islamic Fundamentalists. I’m not saying that would have been accurate, but it would have been low hanging fruit. Of course, this assumes that the story would have been the same with Del Toro as Khan. Part of me thinks the disjointed plot (and extended development time) had something to do with changing things around after Del Toro left.

    The really interesting question becomes, did Benicio Del Toro’s exit from the project have a large impact on the film? And if not, Abrams ultimately lucked out–otherwise I think he gets crucified by the anti-”fear of the other” crowd by having a non-white actor in the role.

  • doctor_robot

    even though i hate that they used the khan character, i found the movie pretty entertaining… not nearly as good as the one before, though. my biggest problem with the movie, was spock screaming, “KKHHAAANNNNNN!!!!”. seriously… that was so bad. what a huge eye rolling moment that was for me.

  • doctor_robot

    even though i hate that they used the khan character, i found the movie pretty entertaining… not nearly as good as the one before, though. my biggest problem with the movie, was spock screaming, “KKHHAAANNNNNN!!!!”. seriously… that was so bad. what a huge eye rolling moment that was for me.

  • doctor_robot

    even though i hate that they used the khan character, i found the movie pretty entertaining… not nearly as good as the one before, though. my biggest problem with the movie, was spock screaming, “KKHHAAANNNNNN!!!!”. seriously… that was so bad. what a huge eye rolling moment that was for me.

  • http://www.scifihistory.net/ E. Lee Zimmerman

    JJ Abrams: the least original guy in Hollywood continues to insist he’s the most original.

    • The Flobbit

      Christopher Nolan: the best blockbuster director in Hollywood is overrated by his most obnoxious fans.
      Joss Whedon: Fans insist he’s the greatest, when he’s really not that special.

      • http://www.scifihistory.net/ E. Lee Zimmerman

        We think alike. Nolan’s films — so far as this viewer is concerned — have never had ‘legs.’ At best, they’re flashes in the pans, albeit poetic ones, but still flashes. I’ve never cared for Whedon; still don’t. I care even less for his fans.

      • The Flobbit

        Woah, woah, woah, Nolan is an minor deity in the Hollywood world. Following? Chilling. Memento? Masterpiece. The Prestige? Genius. Batman? Inspired. The Dark Knight? Riveting. Inception? Mind-blowing.

        My point is that his fans paint him to be the next Kubrick or Hitchcock. He’s not, but he’s brilliant anyways.

      • http://tarek-to-verso.over-blog.com/ tarek

        But of course! He is tha man.

      • http://www.scifihistory.net/ E. Lee Zimmerman

        Following? Predictable. Memento? Boring. The Prestige? Laughable. Batman Begins? Tolerable. The Dark Knight? Bloated. Inception? Never seen The Twilight Zone, eh.

      • The Flobbit

        E. Lee Zimmerman? Ignorant of cinema.

      • http://www.scifihistory.net/ E. Lee Zimmerman

        Actually, I just know what I like, and I rarely follow the herd.

      • http://www.scifihistory.net/ E. Lee Zimmerman

        Actually, I just know what I like, and I rarely follow the herd.

      • http://www.scifihistory.net/ E. Lee Zimmerman

        Actually, I just know what I like, and I rarely follow the herd.

  • NICK НΛRT

    i think its hilarious how many people hate on this film for the inclusion of khan. benedict cumberbatch was GREAT in the role, and i really enjoyed seeing him actually be a super-soldier, which is what they always described him as in the original episode and film he appeared in, but we only ever saw his intellect, not any crazy hand to hand combat action set pieces. i love that he didn’t die at the end and I hope he returns in future films to get his revenge on kirk.

  • Pk

    I rather he got Shane black to direct the next one

    • mattinacan

      please god no, not after IM3

    • ʝoe ßloggs

      Oh boy…here we go. So Khan is not Khan but an alcoholic washed up actor named Steve?

  • paul h

    Fuck those lying hollywood motherfuckers.

    I enjoyed the film on the whole but the after listening to folks on the production say “it’s not Khan” for months on end only to find out is was… made me sick tbh.

  • JK1193

    I completely understand the whole Khan secret. At this point, it’s part of Abrams’ process to not give many details away. What were they supposed to do, spoil the entire thing? And the fact that the fans decided to hate because they felt lied to and taken advantage of? I’m sorry, but I find that fake. Just an excuse to bash people for no reason whatsoever.

    • milo

      What they should have done was admit that it was Khan but not give any other details. It just wasn’t a secret, period.

      • JK1193

        That certainly would have been a respectable root. My big problem is the bullying for the blogging community. Accept the fact that some people like the movie and some don’t and just respect others’ own personal opinions.

  • milo

    I can see not announcing who the character is, but once everybody starts speculating that it’s Khan there’s no point in trying to deny it. There’s a big difference between keeping a secret and having people figure out what the secret is and trying to lie to them. Really “they say it’s not Khan but it seems like it probably is” is worse than knowing it’s Khan.

  • The Flobbit

    JJ Abrams in 2 years: “Well, my one regret is that I should have TOLD fans beforehand that I recast Nick Nolte as Han Solo. And also I should have warned them that I cast Chris Pine as a new character Molo Solo, a charming, blue-eyed, rogueish fighter pilot.”

  • Charles Steak

    Before I saw the movie I just assumed it was Khan. I didn’t even know it was supposed to be a “reveal”.

  • Nadger

    Kind of over JJ. Seems far to keen to blame others for this movie. First it was the rubbish computer game’s fault, now it’s the studios fault for making him move away from the fans. YAWN. Take some responsibility for your own work you loser! Getting worried about Star Wars now….

    • Nadgers

      I didn’t hate it by the way…

  • the truth

    jj abrams is terrible at movies and tv, go away jj.

  • poppincherry

    Reveal of no reveal the movie sucked herpes infected ass hole!

  • Pingback: Benedict Cumberbatch Defends Khan Reveal in STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS; Says It Was Thrilling for Audiences | Collider

  • Pingback: Joe Cornish Will Not Direct STAR TREK 3 | Collider

  • Kpaqu1

    Yeah, that’s why Transformers is an even better movie than Star Trek. It’s all about the box office.

  • lordjim

    most reviewers didn´t find his movies better than the old ones, actually most of them agree that “the wrath of khan” was the best and high ratings for abrams´ versions on rottentomatoes is easily explained:if everybody would agree on a movie to be slightly above mediocre it would get 100 percent.if you don´t like star trek (not everybody has to) what´s even the point in remaking/rebooting it anyway????

Click Here