Benedict Cumberbatch’s Star Trek Role Revealed And Nimoy Will Be Back As Spock

fb share tweet share

This is probably a pretty big spoiler, so if you don’t want to know anything about the next Star Trek movie, you may want to stop reading right now. On the other hand if you’re looking for a really good reason to skip it entirely, read on.


It has now been confirmed that Benedict Cumberbatch is indeed playing Khan Noonien Singh in the next Star Trek movie. This has been widely rumored since the beginning of the film’s production but when confronted with fan outrage over this creatively bankrupt decision, JJ Abrams (as he often does in these situations) flat out lied and said the whole thing was a false. Well it’s not.

The story has been confirmed by Trek Movie where they also discovered that we’ve been lied to about Leonard Nimoy’s involvement in the film. Everyone has been adamant that Nimoy will not return to reprise his role as Spock, but various sources have now confirmed that Nimoy is in. Even Leonard has sort of confirmed it, tweeting that he’s been spending time with JJ Abrams and replacement Spock Zachary Quinto.

Having Nimoy back is great, but obviously, remaking Khan is not. It seems useless at this point to launch into another explanation of why doing Khan is such a horrible idea. You either get it or you don’t. Abrams, clearly doesn’t. We’ve been over this. The whole point of rebooting Star Trek in 2009 was so that they could tell new and exciting stories without the burden of existing cannon, but now they’re simply using the rebooted universe as an excuse to reuse characters that have already been done. If you’re as pissed off about this as we are, I suggest fueling up your rage on this article from our archives.

We don’t know exactly how they’ll use Khan in this new, knockoff story. Apparently he has somehow transformed from an Indian character into the world’s whitest white guy. This story won’t be a retelling of the original series episode “Space Seed” which was Khan’s first appearance in the Trek universe. Since this timeline is also set many years before the events of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, presumably they won’t be simply redoing that story either… though don’t put it past them to do that in some future sequel. After all it seems clear that they aren’t ever going to, you know, come up with anything on their own.

It’s a dark, dark day for Star Trek. The franchise that used to be about exciting new ideas is officially cashing in on the name recognition of well-known characters to get your dollars. Maybe it’ll be fun but I’m not sure it’s still really Star Trek.


  1. bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbb says:

    i thought the 1st movie would suck when i heard about the alt. timeline, nimoy in script, and the destruction of vulcan, those things sounded horrible to a star trek fan. give abrams a chance here.

  2. Derek says:

    Gene is rolling over in his grave. Frankly I’m shocked Nimoy has as little respect for the franchise as he apparently does to do this.

  3. Mary says:

    It’s an alternate universe. Having an alternate Khan is just the same as having an alternate Spock, Kirk, and all the rest of them. Get over it. Either buy into the premise that they gave us in the first movie or just watch reruns of Nimoy and Shatner. And sure Abrams lied. None of us needed to know. If Abrams answered all the pointed questions that fans asked, he might as well hand over the script.

    • JT says:

      Exactly. It’s just the same… as what they’ve already done.

      • Mary says:

        So decide: either you buy the reboot or you don’t. But you should have made that decision in 2009. Freaking out about “how dare they” in 2012 is a tad late.

        • JT says:

          You forget that the sold the reboot as a way to do “new” and “fresh” stories in the Star Trek universe. If you bought into the reboot, you bought in to them doing exactly the OPPOSITE of what this is.

          • Mary says:

            They are doing new, fresh things, with alternate universe versions of the same characters. Nobody said it was going to be totally different. Because if they did that, there’d be plenty of people whining about how they don’t like all these new things and how Star Trek just isn’t the same without the Classic villains…..

  4. Daniel says:

    I loved the 2009 Trek, and thought they did a fantastic job on it, I am not going to bash this movie until I see it. Abrams has alot of respect for the genre and I do believe he want’s to do it justice. Let’s be REAL honest here, this was a DEAD franchise 4 years ago….stone cold dead, so it’s reincarnation MUST be something different, and yet familiar enough to recognize, the first Trek film did just that and was still current enough to grab today’s youth into it, I expect the same here.

  5. RS says:

    Seriously… for all we know this could have nothing to do with Ceti Alpha 6.. The Genesis project or the Reliant.. Though he is bringing Khan into play.. doesnt always mean we get a remake.. it could be a completely different plot involving one of Kirks deadliest opponents. Being in a new timeline gives JJ a perfect opportunity to make the legend of khan Noonian Singh much deadlier than the first and second go around. Also remember that Spock died because of Khan.. that should be an interesting story to the new kids.

    • JT says:

      Is that better though? Simply rewriting things that have already been written? I don’t see how.

      • jammindude says:

        …and how are they rewriting things that have already been written? I don’t see how that’s even possible. Nothing in this timeline has been written. People don’t stop existing, but they take completely new courses. By its very nature…NOTHING in this timeline has been written yet. It’s the perfect “blank slate”…NOTHING has been done before. EVERYTHING is completely untouched. From the moment the timeline shifted, this reboot has been a entire field of fresh snow without a single footprint of any kind.

        • JT says:

          You’re lost in inter-dimensional politics. Look at it from the view of the audience, not a character in a fictional universe.

          • jammindude says:

            I would have to close my mind to do so. What’s important is *the story*…not where the story has it’s genesis.

  6. Abraxis says:

    Whew, now that I’ve got THAT out of my system.

    Josh Wheedon had an interesting thing to say regarding comic book inspired films but I think it also translates as a rule for established Franchises as well.

    ‘It’s capturing the essence of the comic and being true to what’s wonderful about it, while remembering that it’s a movie and not a comic. I think Spider-Man, the first one particularly, really captured [the spirit of the comic]. They figured out the formula of oh, tell the story that they told in the comic. It was compelling, that’s why it’s iconic, but at the same time they did certain things that only a movie can do [but] were in the vein of the comic.

    I think you see things like The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, where they just threw out the comic, or Watchmen, where they do it frame for frame, and neither of them work. You have to give the spirit of the thing and then step away from that, and create something cinematic and new.”

    Seem’s like the accountants have lowered the shields on the new Trek Film. A pity but that’s showbiz.

  7. I still can’t believe they even revamped the show, Star Trek has been failing for a while now and with this they are just putting more nails into the coffin. Why they have to redo classic episodes I don’t know, don’t they have any imagination to make up new stories. For me they pretty much Killed Star Trek the day the did the last one, fancy rewriting all the history of Star Trek, no TNG, DS9 or Voyager or any of the films though don’t mind loosing Insurrection and Nemesis, they were really bad.

  8. jammindude says:

    Shocked at the outrage really. I’ve been a ST fanboy for over 30 years…and I honestly do not understand why everyone is ticked. Khan did not cease to exist in the new timeline…Gary Cox’s books outline the timeline of Khan’s life in quite an interesting way. There are *BRAND NEW* and interesting ways in which Khan’s character could have been altered/changed by the new turn of events. Kirk and Khan’s relationship will be completely new and completely uninhibited by the old canon’s “baggage”…this is a totally new, blank slate relationship that could go in any possible direction. Khan is just an interesting character that still *exists* in the current timeline. I for one, am curious to see how different this timeline’s Khan turned out.

    • JT says:

      Why not do brand new and interesting things with brand new and interesting characters though?

      • jammindude says:

        Because the people didn’t cease to exist…and the characters themselves are interesting. How did the change of events change the person we know as Khan? What life events altered his outlook? You know the “what if” series of Marvel Comics? (one example was “What if Spider-Man joined the Fantastic Four.”) Everyone LOVES those comics. How is this entire timeline any different?

        • JT says:

          That logic makes no sense. So if someone hasn’t ceased to exist they must make the next movie about him? No. You have a choice. This is a DIFFERENT UNIVERSE as you point out. You can do something different. You can tell stories about different places, characters, and people.

          Yes, the characters are interesting. Does that mean we have to run them into the ground until they are no longer interesting?

          New ideas. Boldly go.

          • jammindude says:

            New ideas can involve immersing yourself (suspension of disbelief…something *every* story attempts) in the story’s universe. Doing so involves an open mind. You’re in *this* universe…not the other one. So what is everyone up to in *this* universe? I have no idea. The story writer can go in any direction.

          • JT says:

            Apparently what is in this universe is exactly the same stuff from the other one.

          • jammindude says:

            Well…since events did not change until the moment of Kirk’s birth…that means the Eugenics Wars *STILL HAPPENED*. They were completely unaltered. A major world player…a major part of *this* universe’s history is still frozen in space. And from the moment he wakes up, a MAJOR event in his life is altered, and he becomes a completely different character. This Khan will NEVER meet a 30+yr old Kirk who was raised by his father. Nor has he ever been abandoned on a dead planet by Kirk. Those two major events will NEVER happen in this Khan’s life. That changes EVERYTHING. We have absolutely no idea whatsoever how a newly unfrozen Khan will react to a 20 something “punk” Kirk who was orphaned.

  9. Jeremy says:

    Wow, presumptive much? Of course the story will be completely different. But it’s the same cast and crew that made the fantastic 2009 Trek, so I think it’s safe to assume it’ll be kickass. Anyway, this is a reboot – a fresh take on EXISTING characters, not a whole new franchise. I have some more upsetting spoilers for you – they’re not just rehashing Khan: I hear Kirk, Spock, McCoy, Uhura, Chekov, Sulu and Bones will be in it too!! That’s right, instead of telling exciting new stories, they’re re-using old characters! omg!!11!!1

    • JT says:

      Completely different except for the part where they’re reusing a villain that’s already been used before. So… not completely different at all.

      • jammindude says:

        That villain doesn’t exist any more than Shatner’s Kirk exists. So actually…this Khan will be every bit as different as the new Kirk was from the old one. In many ways, this is a *completely* untouched relationship that has NEVER HAPPENED before.

        • JT says:

          If he’s going to be completely different why are we calling him Khan? Let’s just use a different name then.

          Whether or not this relationship has happened before in this universe, we have WATCHED THIS RELATIONSHIP BEFORE. You can do all the cannon calesthenics you want but we’ve already seen this relationship unfold which means that this is not new or original.

          • jammindude says:

            I have seen Space Seed and Wrath of Khan many, many, MANY times…so much I could quote them. But I have *NEVER* “WATCHED THIS RELATIONSHIP BEFORE”…

          • JT says:

            You have seen the relationship between Kirk and Khan before. These are the SAME CHARACTERS. They may be slightly modified and played by different actors, but if they are completely different then there would be NO POINT in calling them Kirk and Khan.

            They are variations on the same character. It’s like drinking Coca-Cola but insisting that you’ve never had a drink of soda before, just because you’ve never had Pepsi.

          • jammindude says:

            Not really…not anymore. For example. If my father had died when I was 5, I would be a *completely different* human being, with a *completely different* outlook on life, and on a *completely different* path….but my name would be *EXACTLY* the same…as would some of my basic personality traits. But my current wife (whom I love dearly) would not be married…and indeed, might even LOATHE one another if we met. Who knows? That’s what story writers are for.

          • JT says:

            Wrong. If your father died when you were 5 you would NOT be a completely different person. Much of what makes you, you, is genetics. Another part was established early in life before you turned 5. So while you would be different in some ways, you’d be the same in others.

            But let’s say for the sake of argument what you’re asserting is true. It would NOT apply at all to Khan. The Trek reboot timeline only skewed from the original timeline when Kirk’s father was killed by Nero. By that time Khan is already adrift in the Botony Bay. He would in NO WAY be changed or impacted by the change in the timeline. He would be exactly the same person he is, in Space Seed, in the new timeline, whenever he’s unfrozen aboard the Botony Bay the first time.

            We’re getting EXACTLY the same character.

          • jammindude says:

            Ok…fair enough. Maybe the same starting point from Space Seed…but NOTHING like the one from Wrath. And from the moment he is rescued *under different circumstances* than Space Seed, his life alters course, and he becomes an entirely new character. We get to see what the Space Seed Khan would have done under *COMPLETELY* new and different circumstances. That’s a great starting point if you have good writing. (as the first movie did)

          • JT says:

            A better starting point would be coming up with new ideas of your own. I mean if your goal is really to go somewhere different, why are you starting out somewhere familiar? It’s just wrongheaded.

          • jammindude says:

            Because pretending that the events before Kirk’s birth *never happened* is just as wrongheaded. This universe was EXACTLY the same as the old one…until the point of Kirk’s birth. At that moment, everything changed…but the history up to that point is identical. The Eugenics Wars still happened. And Khan is still a *very major* player in this universe’s history, and the Botany Bay is still floating in space waiting for something to happen. This Botany Bay will never be rescued by a 30 something Kirk who was raised by his father. That event will never happen. He will now be rescued by an entirely different person whom he has never met.

  10. gospyro says:

    And this is a surprise? JJ Abrams is an ass (and that’s exactly where he needs to stick his lens flares), and the writers of the ‘first’ movie were just plain lazy. It saddens me to say this, but I hope this movie bombs so bad that it finally puts Star Trek out of it’s slow and painful death that it is suffering. Paramount NEVER has had a clue what Star Trek was or is about, and obviously neither does Abrams or any of the writers of the last film and I’m assuming this next film… which I will NOT be seeing unless it turns out that this next film is the story of how the last film was all a bad dream and never really happened. My Abrams and his people live short and destitute lives.

  11. Micheal says:

    @Rov I am a fan of Star Trek of all series even the movies. I am fine with this story so far it’s laid out. Come on they introduced Brent Spiner is Enterprise as the creator of Khan’s super-human species. I still love the idea now if they introduce TNG characters that is when I will be upset

    • JT says:

      Brent Spiner wasn’t playing Data though in that Enterprise episode. He was playing a completely different character. It’s a bit different.

      Besides, I’m not sure we should really be using Enterprise as a measuring stick of quality. It was the series that killed the franchise and resulted in this reboot in the first place.

      I’m not sure why you’d only get mad if the introduce TNG characters, the same standard should really apply here.

  12. Ranger Zarkon says:

    They can just tan the poor beggar. I mean, carefully, since he’s actually a ginger. Perhaps toast him slowly and feed him a great deal of vindaloo…I mean, then he could be Khan.

    • JT says:

      So you’re suggesting that Bennedict Cumberbatch play Khan in blackface? Somehow I doubt they’d get away with that. On the other hand no one seems to mind that they’ve made him a white guy, straight up, which is kind of strange. So maybe the world would be fine with that too.

      • BigDaddy7777 says:

        Has anyone ever noticed or cared that most planets in sci/fi whether 100 0r 100,000 years in the future are mostly anglo / saxon

  13. I think it’s appropriate that Khan is coming into the picture. You could argue that “new timeline, new enemies” but why would you? This is, in many ways, just like the crew of the Enterprise coming together. Think of it as the timeline doing whatever it can to fix itself. I’m also interested in seeing how Khan is different. Cumberbatch’s skin color is of no consequence to me. I never saw Khan as Indian genetically. Just as someone who adopted that aura. Besides, he was originally played by Ricardo Montalbán, who is Mexican.

    • JT says:

      You would because you have new ideas of your own. Because you’re creative and you have something to say beyond “I want your money.”

  14. Ian Watson says:

    Just enjoy it for what it is, a space cowboys and indians minus John Wayne

    The first reboot film was well slated but turned out better than expected, just because someone is Indian does not make them brown as you can have white Indians, white Egyptians (Pharaohs were one such example).

    Whether or not the actor is up to shadowing the original Khan remains to be seen

    • JT says:

      Maybe but we’ve already see Khan and he IS brown. That makes this casting race bending of the highest order.

  15. Scott McDaniel says:

    I find it odd to believe that anyone is crying out about quality of movies from the same series that brought us The Voyage Home, The Undiscovered Country, Generations, First Contact and Nemesis. You know, most of the movies in the series?
    Dark dark day, indeed! THE HUMANITIES!

    • JT says:

      Your point would have made more sense if you hadn’t listed 3 really good movies. Maybe you don’t like them, but the consensus disagrees with you.

  16. Andrew Reese says:

    We don’t really know what Nimoy is doing. Maybe he’s just doing the Space..voice over again or a recording. Although with the big William Bell spoilers on Fringe too it seems he is bored with retirement.

  17. Matt says:

    Heavy on stylization, light on content: the JJ way. Don’t expect any memorable Khan quotes, deep moments, events you can discuss. Expect a ton of “pew pew pew” lazer fights and that’s about it.

  18. baby fart mcgeeziaks says:

    Ehh… I’m not thrilled about it from the originality stand point, but I don’t think it ruins the movie either. If anything I more question the wisdom of a pasty Brit as a genetically engineered Punjabi super man. A Mexican guy pulled it off but I had always hoped that if they did redo Khan they’d get an actual South Asian, if not a Sikh to play him. Instead we get Limey Limeston.

  19. Oh dear, JJ Abrams has caught Moffatitis, a mental condition that makes the sufferer single mindedly want to destroy great scifi franchises, named after patient zero, Steven Moffat.

  20. Ben Finney says:

    First of all, Star Trek: Nemesis and the 2099 reboot both blatantly stole their plots from Wrath of Khan- it’s as if Hollywood no longer recognizes any other plots for the films. Second of all, I’m all for the new movies going back thru the original series episodes for possible story lines, but it’s crucial they end in a different manner. However, Khan needs to sit on the bench for a few movies; after all, “Space Seed” was late in the first season. The day I first saw the 2009 reboot, it occurred to me that the filmmakers should remake “Where No Man Has Gone Before”. Why? Well, it was one of the series’ pilots, and so a good place to start. It’s a very different plot from the tired Khan formula. And finally, it gave us a whole number of regular bridge personnel who showed a lot of potential as characters, but who got killed off (Mitchell, Dehner, Lee, Kelso, etc.). What if they remade this story, but it ended differently? What if, say, Chekov got killed instead of Mitchell? Suddenly, this variant timeline becomes very different from the original. That’s the kind of creativity these films need to embrace.

  21. Mr. Obnoxious says:

    Are you high? Not only is “Space Seed” one of the better episodes of TOS, not only is “Wrath of Khan” the best of the movies (well, at least until “First Contact” came out, and even then, they’re tied at #1) and saved the franchise, but Cumberland would make a great Khan. I’m not the biggest JJ Abrams fan, but he did a great job on the first movie–I HATE reboots, but he made it watchable–he’s got writing talent to spare, and there’s so much you could do with a character like Khan. That, plus the fact I will watch anything with ol’ Benedict in it, makes me hopeful. And remember, the idea of exploring brand new ideas in the Star Trek universe is what led to the horror known as “Enterprise”…

  22. JK says:

    Batman has the Joker. Superman has Lex Luthor. I supposed that Khan is most well known villain to James Kirk (not counting the Klingons.) Actually, I rather see a Klingon villain.
    I wish they did a remake of “Where No Man Has Gone Before” episode.

  23. sparrowlord01 says:

    The First movie was screwed up enough to turn me off on the whole franchise. Gene Roddenderry is probably rolling over in his grave about this. Khan should never be messed with because when compared to Ricardo Montalbon, this new guy is going to look like a complete waste of space. I really wish they would stop messing around and get back to the high quality original trek that people fell in love with and stop trying to kill it… J.J. Abrams is one of the most notorious “Re-Imagining” offenders out there…

  24. James Kovach says:

    To be fair, Ricardo Montoban didn’t exactly look Indian, either.

  25. Um, small but possibly important point: Where exactly did Trek Movie get their info? If it was from JJ then isn’t there the possibility that he, “as he so often does in these situations” flat out lied to them too? Plus, even if it is true, it’s not like it’s the first time. Has there ever been a version of Superman without Lex Luthor, whether in TV, film, comic or book form? Batman without The Joker? Doctor Who without the Daleks? Flash Gordon without Ming? The list goes on and on, like it or not, to have a truly great hero, you must have a truly great villain and in Star Trek terms, that’s Khan.

    Holmes without Moriarty? (Sorry, couldn’t stop myself…)

  26. gamesinner says:

    That about sums up Hollywood as a whole today.

  27. I see nothing wrong with using Khan in this new re-imagined universe. Yes, he’s a character we all know and love from our old Trek days. Yes, it can be called lazy to “reintroduce” a character instead of creating all new characters. But Khan is integral to Kirk’s growth, as he was by and large one of Kirk’s most formidable foes and had a great impact on how Kirk evolved as a captain. Just this time Kirk is more seat of the pants then his original iteration due to him not being raised by his father and also not being born in a nice safe environment back in Iowa, but in the heat of battle itself. I think the thought of Khan just being brought in is causing too much of a knee-jerk reaction. It doesn’t matter if he’s been done before, he hasn’t been done THIS way, in THIS universe, so it is NOT the same. Unless you’ve already read the script and it follows either the movie or his 1st appearance in TOS, you cannot say it’s the same. And for anyone to insist that it’s the same without script in hand is arrogant and close minded. Let them make the movie. Go watch it. If you don’t like it, then you just wasted $20 bucks for yourself on movie night. If you did like it, then hey, thank Abrams and Co. for providing you with a good time. Either way, anyone freaking out over this needs to get a grip. Freak out over something tangible and real, not about a movie that hasn’t even been made yet. And if you hate it so much and think they don’t know what they’re doing, then go make it your damn self. Put up or shut up. Geeze. Let’s go back to being fans instead of fanatics.

  28. Geoff Muir says:

    “you either get it or you don’t”

    ah….you clearly don’t. alternate timeline. so the obvious place to start the new timeline is where the old (movie) timeline started. with Khan……the first Nemesis.

  29. Jack Brown says:

    Star Trek hasn’t been Star Trek since Abrahms took over. It’s gone and won’t be the same again. With the alt timeline, everything we watched in the original series, DS9, The Next Generation and Voyager may not even happen. Or happen differently. So what was the point in telling all those stories if you are simply going to disapprove them. I’m sorry but it was a lazy way to free himself from continuity issues. He could have done a lot better. I’m not saying its a bad film (2009 Star Trek) but it should not be allowed to bear the Star Trek name. And technically (as a script supervisor) there is a flaw in their whole idea that means their alt timeline is too impossible to believe.

    My rage with the new Star Trek is that it pays no respect or homage to all those years of loyalty us countless Trekkies showed.

    A very displeased and unimpressed Trekkie.

  30. outland196 says:

    Thank you for reviewing the entire movie in advance! We no longer have to wait for them to actually film and release it now! 😉 Seriously, you and some of the other posters sound silly complaining about speculation. Wait for it, then complain away if it’s deserved……

  31. armadillo says:

    I completely agree: Give me Tholians!

  32. The Khan thing could have been ok if they didn’t use Cumberbatch. Because either they’re going to change the entire narrative and reimagine Kahn as a white British guy OR (and this would probably be worse), they’re going to put him in makeup and pretend he’s whatever ethnicity Kahn was supposed to be (Indian? Arab?). I love Benedict Cumberbatch as Sherlock, but not sure even he can pull this off without ruining it. But who knows – I thought I’d hate the last one and ended up loving it, so hope I’ll be proven wrong again.

  33. fmondana says:

    Wait a second. Did you hear that? It’s the sound a bunch of geeks make when repeating something themselves.

    Anyone else remember how we heard for 2 years that the new Trek was going to be the worst thing ever?

    The idea here is to be able to tell the old stories in a new way. I’m all for waiting to see the flick before I pan it.

  34. Mick Doherty says:

    “Existing cannon”? Hehe. Unless we are re-booting the phaser banks to 17th century earth style, I think you man “canon”!

  35. Okay. I have one thing to say about this. Benedict Cumberbatch, the Cumberlord, can do no wrong! No matter what they do with the character it will be amazing because he is in the role! The first movie was amazing! I’m sure the second one will be good too! Give it a chance. You can’t exactly judge a movie that you haven’t even seen a trailer for yet…

  36. Tribbles. I demand TRIBBLES

  37. Karsus says:

    I’d love to see a newer, more dangerous Khan. They need to bring a bit of Sherlock’s intelligence into it. If they were going to do a sequel, there are few characters in TOS’ timeline that are more interesting than Khan.

  38. MikeTen says:

    It would be a nice tist if Benedict Cumberbatch wasn’t Khan but one of his followers (maybe his second in command from Wrath of Khan) with Khan getting killed or not unfrozen. Or maybe Abrams is really screwing with us and the villian is Garry Mitchell. Eiter one would explain why Spock’s nerve pinch didn’t work.

  39. Will Kaufman says:

    I want the Cheron back. Maybe Khan could be a Cheron.
    Seriously, though, Cumberbatch is awesome in Holmes, and I think he and Abrams deserve to be given a chance. Star Trek is the one thing Abrams has done that hasn’t pissed me off — I actually thought Nimoy-Spock’s explanation of the time travel situation, where he gave Abrams license to do whatever the hell he wanted with the story, was hilarious. I laughed out loud, and it was moment that I think was meant to be taken with a wink and a nod. At the very least, the revitalization of the franchise has given us a non-post-apocalyptic setting, which is truly refreshing. I do hope time travel doesn’t play a role in this film, but I’m psyched to see what Abrams comes up with, and what he can do with an actor like Cumberbatch. At least he’s not playing Bela Oxmyx…or a holodeck Dr. Moriarty. And if Abrams had come up with an entirely original script, all the haters would be hating on him for ignoring the rich canon.

    • fish says:

      I’m also trying to bring back the cheron I’ve also been working on something
      instead of black-and-white,, how about black and pink;;; women,,,, using part of the old series;; M. trying to bring it up to date for the next generation….
      won’t that we had story to tell,,,I’ve been working on it,,, for a couple years….
      if only I can bring people together”” and put up the show;;;; I’m also working on a script,,,,,

  40. Alec says:

    IF HE REALLY IS PLAYING KHAN, This cumberbatch fellow doesn’t look at all threating to me. Actually he has a more clowinish look to him. I really hope he’s not Khan, if he is…oh man…they could’ve casted someone else that looks more meancing.

  41. Adam says:

    We got an hour long relationship builder in the 70s. Some people who didn’t watch the series before ever seeing the wrath of kahn has no idea how these two met in the first place so seeing an expansion of that would be cool. And again I will defend this as not neccessarly being an alternate timeline since we have no idea of the impact of the destruction of Vulcan on TNG universe. We never see a back story in any way shape or form as to how this crew got together and how Kirk became captain after Pike. I mean the first of episode of the series had Spock in a court martial hearing helping his former captain and friend get to a planet where his disabilities would no longer matter. Far from the friendship that Kirk and Spock would eventually share through the series and movies. He is met with anger resentment and distrust till he is cleared of those charges. And again the 2009 movie reffrenced Kirks cheating on the kobiashi maru and how he doesn’t believe in the no win scenerio. The credit he got for original thinking showed leadership qualitites which made hiim excellent for command. So please the timeline can’t be considered 100 percent alternate just because a planet is destroyed by a villian from the future. So this would be an extension of the space seed episode and it would clear up the Kahn’s statement in wrath of kahn when he said he never forgets a face to checkov when checkov was not in the episode hell not yet on the show when that episode aired