45

Six Classic Star Trek Enemies We Want To See In Future Movies

Star Trek Into Darkness is finally out, letting everyone judge it for themselves after being the subject of rampant speculation, debate, and name-calling for over a year. Now we can all move on to arguing about the future of the Star Trek franchise. After all, it’s very much unwritten at this point. Director J.J. Abams has signed on to helm Star Wars: Episode VII, and it’s anybody’s guess whether he will also be able to handle Trek 3. So where Trek 3 will go from here is anybody’s guess.

Into Darkness improved over Abrams’ first Trek in every way, but it also skewed the new timeline even further from the Original Series. At this point, it’s clearly a straight-up alternate universe where pretty much anything can happen. And while we’d love to see Trek 3 actually serve up a whole new story and villain, there are also some classic Trek races and enemies we’d love to see enter the new Trek-verse

Klingons Klingons
We’re throwing this one in first because it seems very likely that the Klingons will play a major role in the next Trek movie. While they don’t get much screentime in Into Darkness, tensions between them and Starfleet are at the core of much of what goes down in the latest Trek, and Into Darkness writer Damon Lindelof has hinted that they’ll be a major player the next flick. While the Klingons have shown up in several of the Trek movies over the years, they’ve really only played a major role in Star Trek VI (good) and Star Trek III (not so good). And in The Undiscovered Country, they were in serious decline. It’d be very cool to see a Trek with the Klingons at the height of their power and aggression, whether in an all-out war or some smaller confrontation with the Enterprise.

Pages [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ]

Comments

  • vans

    Where is “Q”????!!!

    • http://www.facebook.com/coreymagin Corey Magin

      Q was the best. Can’t believe it’s not on the list.

      • Zathras

        Q had nothing to do with original Trek. Its about 100 years too soon, and there’s no need to screw up the timeline by bringing in races THAT soon. However, if you like Q, the original series had a character named Trelane, who was for all intents and purposes a Q, and would be a great choice for movie #3.

        • Eric strain

          Star Trek3: Trelane – Behind the Candelabra

          • Emile

            Ha Ha ha! Awesome…

        • Brian Sleider

          In the Novel Q-Squared Trelane is revealed to be a Q.

    • Jesus: version buddha 3.9

      I retract my statement, THIS is the best-case scenario. It would be awesome to see Kirk and Q face off.

      However, I’ve been noticing that in all the media hype, there is less and less mention of the spin-offs. In some cases, it’s like they’re trying to make all Trek post-TOS seem like a mistake.

      Since my statement’s already out there though, I propose that Q be the third-party alien I spoke of that makes the Enterprise fight the Gorn. But there’s so much more possibility here: Q can show them all possible worlds. If this version of Trek is a trilogy, having Q’s powers to show them the nature of their timeline and all others would be a perfect wrap-up.

      • http://sealsofcreation.blogspot.com/ Wicked Horizon

        try reading the books Q Space, Q Zone and Q Strike. Despite his seemingly careless attitude towards humanity, Q is actually humanities guardian; this task was bestowed on him after the Q Continuum had to put “Zero” and a few other rogue alien gods on trial and punish them. There is always room in the Trek Multiverse for more Q.

    • http://www.facebook.com/kyle.baker.5891 Kyle Baker

      Because it’s classic series!!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=827859671 David Wharton

      Yep, as somebody pointed out below, for this one I was sticking to Original Series characters/races.

    • http://www.facebook.com/john.sheffield.984 John Sheffield

      They were specifically sticking to TOS antagonists for the parallel, since the new Trek is either a parallel timeline, or a new timeline taking the place of TOS.

    • Chuck Hunnefield

      There is trouble writing in a character whose only power limit is his/her forbearance It has to be believable, and that is a difficult thing in an action movie.

  • Bmop

    Its Nero, not Nemo! Dammit Jim!

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=827859671 David Wharton

      You don’t know, Nemo might have been a Romulan agent…

      Fixed! That is one of my favorite typos thus far in my career, however.

  • Jesus: version buddha 3.9

    Why do we have to continue with villains? The problem with Abrams Trek to me, and with movie Trek in general is that is usually villain-centric, which seems in the first place entirely antithetical to Roddenberry’s vision of peace.

    The worse possibility is a Cold War type situation in which the Romulans, Klingons, and Federation battle each other in unofficial proxy wars or through each other, creating the sense of paranoia that has already been established with Cumberbatch.

    As it’s Hollywood, and there are proportionately more dollar sign variables than concerns for Trek story / originality / heart, there is one acceptable compromise: Do it Arena-style. I’m not saying a hand to hand fight between Kirk and a Gorn, but the same stakes as were posited in the Arena episode: A third party alien forces the Enterprise and an alien race to fight, and after some fighting for the sake of Hollywood’s money and action-thirst Americans, a resolution is reached when the Enterprise convinces the race that they won’t fight out of principle – just as Luke wouldn’t fight Vader in Return of the Jedi (take note, Abrams!). Who is the alien race they’re forced to fight?The Gorn and Tholians would both be good options as races unexplored in traditional Trek mythology, and the Gorn would even provide Abrams and co with the same familiar treaded ground that they seem to favor destroying with such abandon.

    • http://www.facebook.com/ben.sohawon Ben Adam Sohawon

      “Why do we have to continue with villains? The problem with Abrams Trek to me, and with movie Trek in general is that is usually villain-centric, which seems in the first place entirely antithetical to Roddenberry’s vision of peace.”

      I cannot disagree with this more. It just sounds like straw-grasping. If series Trek is so peace-centric, how do you explain how so many portions were dedicated to the Romulans, the Klingons, the Borg, the Cardassians, the Dominion, Q, Species 8472, and even the Ferengi, the Kazon, the Suleban and the Hirogen? That’s not even counting the many other species just cooked up as enemies for the odd episode.

      Hell, most of DS9 was centred around the escalating conflict between the Federation, the Cardassians and the Dominion.

      • Jesus: version buddha 3.9

        There were always villains out there in Trek TV, but none (or few) of them were ever pure evil in the vein of Emperor Palpatine / Hitler / The Joker. My problem with Abrams Trek is that it’s reducing moral dilemmas to issues of good vs. evil. In Trek TV, there is time for plot lines to develop to give villains redemption.

        It happened time and again with the Borg in the persons of Hugh, Seven of Nine, and Picard himself.

        DS9 may have been about a war, but it was a chance to explore how people can mature through adversity. The Changlings proved to be a xenophobic race who had come to be oppressors precisely because they were themselves an oppressed minority in their own quadrant of the galaxy – DS9 ends with Odo stepping into the Great Link to share with them how they might learn about the error of their ways. Furthermore, the Ferengi were also redeemed in DS9 – Many Ferengi in DS9, even Quark and Brunt and the Grand Negis, at different times become aware of the trappings of greed. What about when Rom forms a union? Nog even becomes a Starfleet officer. Clearly, they’re on their way

        The Hirogen are also dealing with how to move on from violent ancestral ways into new ways of living. Voyager gives them holodeck technology to continue the hunt and so safeguard their culture while not hurting other species – And they take the point further in later episodes to question the notion of suffering in artificial life-forms when it turns out that the holograms are forming a revolution.

        There’s talk of reuniting the Vulcans and Romulans seasons 5-7 of TNG; in these episodes, Spock himself is at the center of bringing the estranged cousin worlds back together.

        The Suleban never got a chance to redeem themselves before Enterprise was cancelled, but they were still used to explore the moral obligations of the first warp ship which had no written moral guidelines, no Prime Directive. And how about the episode with the Suluban prison camp, the allegory-comparison to Islam about not seeing all of one entire RACE as a villain?

        Hell, even the KLINGONS, the ultimate villain of TOS, signed a treaty with the Federation BEFORE Kirk’s crew signed off on their last movie (The Undiscovered Country).

        Part of the reason there’s so much love for Q in this discussion thread is because he was a villain who taught humanity as much as humanity taught him. Sure, he sandwiched the series of TNG with a premiere and finale that put humanity on trial, threatening upon execution of sentencing to annihilate humanity, but it was because humanity had to prove that it was above destroying itself and others. Along the way, Picard’s crew and Q taught each other what it means to be human – If you don’t believe me, go re-watch any episode Q was in (Voyager, too).

        Only in Hollywood and political propaganda do villains actually see themselves as villains. In the real world, the winners write the history and determine who the villains are. Trek has always shown the humanity in villainy and about overcoming the illusions of evil to work toward a better tomorrow.

        • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Rogers/661155056 Daniel Rogers

          the unfortunate thing is the slight trek fans that watch it for either action or just some sci-fi goodness will baulk at a film thats just exploration

          • Mark Wolf

            A movie about exploration? I remember one Star Trek-movie with this theme, it was the first, it was very expensive, most people were disappointed, and the following movie was as different as possible, a strong antagonist, the cast sparkling with chemistry, some plot twists and yes, a memorable space battle at the end. It was “Wrath of Khan”, but with the same words you could describe “Into Darkness”.
            I suppose that trek-fans who don’t watch it for action or sci-fi-goodness do not exist. There are many who claim the wish for a intellectual and philoshical trek, but when you place them in a cinema and show them a NASA-documentary style Trek or a Trek-movie with three people at a table discussing deep moral and philosoophical issues about the human spirit, they would all leave the theatre :-).

          • http://www.facebook.com/people/Daniel-Rogers/661155056 Daniel Rogers

            and i agree some are their own worst enemy i also didn’t say that hardcore or even big trek fans don’t dislike the action of sci-fi goodness i just said the people who go watch it to see an action or sci-fi film with out being attracted to just the name might not like an exploration based one rather than action one would.
            PS i also like NASA space travel exploration stuff lol, and i’m not a massive trekkie i love TOS next gen voyager and even enterprise ds9 was boring shit

        • Mark Wolf

          Abrams trek reducing moral dilemmas to good vs. evil? I must have watched another movie. We had Cumberbatch and Peter Weller and both had believable motivations for their actions.

          I agree abou DS9, but it always astonishes me that in Star Trek they have the Romulans, the Klingons, the Cardassians, the Borg, the Dominion, introduced some other Conflicts like the Tholians, the Gorn, the Tzenkathi, the Breen and so on. War seems no big deal in the idealistiv trek universe.

          When Babylon 5 went to war, they used every opportunity to make clear: There are people dying in this exploding spaceships. There were three wars before B5 started, and they were a big deal. And later the main characters take up arms against a fascistic earth government and this was a crucial moment. The only parallel in trek was DS9s “In the Pale Moonlight”, where we see, that in a military conflict nothig is sacred.

        • nevilleross

          I’m sorry, sir, but Star Trek first and foremost was an action-adventure series, with a metric fuckton of death ad destruction (colonies getting destroyed, ship getting destroyed, planets getting destroyed, space stations getting destroyed, people dying of infections and plagues, space battles aplenty etc.) You and many other fans have very faulty memories, and are just pulling things out of your asses by remembering certain aspects of Star Trek while forgetting others, all being filtered through very rosy glasses; you’re also buying into whatever myths that Gene Roddenberry cooked up about himself and the show. Please try and rewatch the show before you comment again.

    • Wicked Horizon

      The quality of and nature of the antagonist are among the most important factors in determining a story-line. The epic quality of the villain and the struggle are part of what makes the conflict and heroism that much more meaningful.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Aaron-Smith/1340914747 Aaron Smith

      I know what you’re saying, Jesus. The ‘villain-centric’ movies always bothered me, too. The TV shows seem to be more about how races of people interact, and the movies are never set up that way. Even First Contact, which happens to be my favorite movie pre-Abrams, introduced the Borg Queen for no reason. Weren’t the Borg enough on their own? Did they really need a queen? Alice Krige was great, but I’m just making the point that the borg were fine without a specific villain to lead them.

  • http://www.facebook.com/coreymagin Corey Magin

    If Q was on the list I’d vote for him but Klingons come in 2nd.

  • http://www.facebook.com/kyle.baker.5891 Kyle Baker

    I say we need some Tholians. The most we ever saw of them was the mirror Enterprise episode!

  • GornDD

    Clearly, you don’t know classic Trek (TOS) very well at all. After the events in “Arena” and the incident with the Metrons, the Gorn became staunch *allies* of the Federation. Plus they have a deep LOATHING of both Klingons and Romulans.

    They even get a quick shout-out from McCoy in ‘Into Darkness’, who talked about performing a C-section on a pregnant Gorn and delivering octuplets.

    But if we’re going to discuss “enemies”, let’s not forget that V-Ger is still out there somewhere, as well as the “whale probe” from ‘ST:IV’, along with Q, the Borg, and the Dominion.

    If we are going with just TOS enemies, the Doomsday Machine, the Tholians, the Metrons (not really “enemies”, tho), and Gary Mitchell are all good candidates.

    • GornDD

      Oh, and there’s Trelane, who was very Q-like. And Harry Mudd, who gets a quick shout-out in ‘Into Darkness’ (it’s his ship Kirk and crew take to Kronos to capture Khan)

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=827859671 David Wharton

      That’s true, but without going into spoilers, Into Darkness pretty clearly establishes that we can’t assume things are the same as the original timeline unless some specific thing has changed events. Some stuff is just different, period, so there’s no reason to assume anything prior is canon at this point.

      • GornDD

        Well, yes. That’s true, though I’m not sure which point you’re getting at. As far as the Gorn, it certainly would appear from ‘Into Darkness’ that the Fed and Gorn are at least on friendly terms if Bones is delivering Gorn babies.

        And in ‘Into Darkness’ they specifically refer to “the Mudd incident”, and having confiscated his ship.

        (both are minor spoilers at worst, since they don’t reveal any major plot points)

        • JT

          The Mudd incident is covered in the comics that tell the story between the 2009 Star Trek and the 2013 Into Darkness. Mudd is now a woman… and not nearly as interesting.

          • nevilleross

            Actually, ‘Mudd’ is his daughter by a Bajoran woman (check out the obvious nose ridges) except that she doesn’t have the earring.

  • http://www.facebook.com/tyson.sutton Tyson Sutton

    The Nietzscheans! Dylan Hunt represent!

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Craig-Starsky/100001653369536 Craig Starsky

    wait..you mean this ISN’T the Mirror Universe?

  • Wicked Horizon

    try reading the books Q Space, Q Zone and Q Strike. Despite his seemingly careless attitude towards humanity, Q is actually humanities guardian; this task was bestowed on him after the Q Continuum had to put “Zero” and a few other rogue alien gods on trial and punish them. There is always room in the Trek Multiverse for more Q.

  • http://www.facebook.com/travis.peters.16 Travis Peters

    Well I have to say that some of the peoples comments on here about how Gene’s original show was about peace not war I have to agree with that the movies don’t capture that feeling he had, but lets face facts Gene is gone sadly and studios are money machines and are going to do what they want to turn a buck and action is in. That said some episodes and villans I would like to see that were not listed are Trelane, Gary Mitchell, A taste of Armageddon, Garth of Izar, and Operation Annihilate.

    • http://www.facebook.com/travis.peters.16 Travis Peters

      OH and Nomad

  • Zathras

    One word: Trelane.

  • http://2000ah.blogspot.com/ Edward

    Gorn, would love to see the Gorn

  • nevilleross

    For myself, I want to see an adaptation of the novel The Galactic Whirlpool instead, or of a similar novel.

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Troy-Carrington/1328851181 Troy Carrington

    Mirror universe would be epic. But honestly, not one voting poll for the Borg? The Borg would be cool too.
    There are several groups but the Borg and Cardassian/ Bajoran storylines would great also and expandable.

  • http://www.facebook.com/john.sheffield.984 John Sheffield

    I vote Tholians. I heard months ago how, instead of boldly going somewhere new and creative, they were going to reuse old material.

    That is not a spoiler, I didn’t say what.

    Any reasonably good Trek film is going to make a pile of money.

    If they are going to keep reusing old stuff in this “…straight-up alternate universe where pretty much anything can happen…”, then would they please at least use elements that have not been thoroughly explored.

    Hey, lets split the difference:they can remake Star Trek IV and have the Tholians be the ones that get the new Trek gang back to the present so they can pick up the whales.

  • Caleb Ueckert

    All of you forgot the Borg and, because of the different timeline it wouldn’t be to impossible.

  • Garrett

    Trelane! I want to see Trelane!

  • Bob

    See all this in Star Trek Online.