‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Official Plot Synopsis – Has the Villain Been Revealed?

Published 1 year ago by , Updated February 15th, 2014 at 4:28 pm,

Star Trek 2 Official Synopsis Star Trek Into Darkness Official Plot Synopsis   Has the Villain Been Revealed?

Fans of J.J. Abrams’ Star Trek series have thus far been thrown precious few bones for Star Trek Into Darkness as far as plot details and spoilers go. Among other things, we still don’t know for sure who Benedict Cumberbatch is portraying. Is it Khan? Gary Mitchell? Or someone else entirely?

Fortunately for fans – which is to say, those fans who enjoy pseudo-spoiling – a newly leaked official synopsis reveals some previously unknown plot details about the sequel. Furthermore, it may lend credence to rumors about the aforementioned villain’s identity.

Check out the synopsis below, courtesy of The Film Stage:

In Summer 2013, pioneering director J.J. Abrams will deliver an explosive action thriller that takes ‘Star Trek Into Darkness.’ When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction. As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.

(FYI: The synopsis was found on Paramount’s official press website, lest anyone doubt its validity.)

There are a few things of particular note here: First, it looks like what remained of Captain Kirk’s family prior to Star Trek 2 will probably be killed by this “unstoppable force of terror from within [Starfleet],” as his crew is referred to as “the only family [he] has left.” Last we checked, Kirk had a mother in the Star Trek reboot – his father, Thor, was killed by Eric Bana – so if Kirk is currently motherless and has a “personal score to settle,” it stands to reason that the bad guy did away with her.

Second, the bad guy is, and I quote, “a one man weapon of mass destruction.” Now, who might that remind you of? Does it start with a “G” and end with an “ary Mitchell”?

If you’re unfamiliar with Gary Mitchell, here’s a refresher for you (courtesy of our very own Kofi Outlaw):

Gary Mitchell appeared in the original Star Trek TV series, in an episode titled “Where No Man Has Gone Before.” It is the third episode in the original series (but was made as a second pilot), and chronicles a tale in which the Enterprise crew discover the record log of a long-lost ship at the (literal) edge of the universe. While there, the Enterprise experiences a strange phenomenon that transforms two crew members – one being Kirk’s longtime friend from the academy, Gary Mitchell – into beings of immense psychic ability. These new powers quickly corrupt Mitchell, who proclaims himself a god; when Kirk and Spock try to strand the power-crazed crewman on a remote planet, it results in a confrontation that claims lives, and forces Kirk to kill his old friend to save the universe.

A godlike, psychic-powered Gary Mitchell – who happened to be a Starfleet lieutenant commander – sounds an awful lot like a one man weapon of mass destruction “from within [Starfleet]” to me.

Gary Mitchell in Star Trek 2 Star Trek Into Darkness Official Plot Synopsis   Has the Villain Been Revealed?

The original Gary Mitchell – not exactly a ‘dead ringer’ for Benedict Cumberbatch

Previously, Karl Urban (Dr. Bones McCoy in Star Trek Into Darkness) let slip that Benedict Cumberbatch was indeed playing Mitchell, but some chalked that ‘revelation’ up to Urban’s tendency to say things just to mess with the press – especially because writer Roberto Orci had expressly said the exact opposite to JoBlo. So, really, who the hell knows?

Perhaps an official confirmation of the villain’s identity is imminent, as 9 minutes of the film will be shown in December on 500 IMAX 3D screens prior to The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey. I guess we’ll just have to Star Trek into patience until that time.

Star Trek Into Darkness hits theaters May 17th, 2013.

-

Follow me on Twitter @benandrewmoore.

Source: The Film Stage

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:
TAGS: star trek, star trek into darkness

149 Comments

Post a Comment

  1. Karl Urban LOOKS Like Gary Lockwood aka: Gary Mitchell.

    • Oh yeah, he does! Ha!

      I never thought that they would use a “famous” character that almost nobody knows. I certainly do, but I am a big fan of that series, (and other Trek). As you probably know, Paramount always feels that the movies must appeal to fans as much s possible, but that since they alone are not nearly enough people to make big money, every single trek movie is intended to be approachable and broad to a much bigger audience. With Khan they had a much bigger likelihood of people knowing who they were dealing with and hopefully caring. This is surprising villain news, but not unwelcome to me at all.

      So, was Benicio Del Toro really up forthe Billy Mitchell role? Even though he seems like such a fit for Khan? And was it a coincidence that they were interviewing swarthy Mexican and Latin type actors, even though they were casting for a previously pale white guy? Is it possible that the script was in a malleable state when they chose the villain identity?

      Finally, if we assume that the end of this movie is intended to in some way set the stage for the third installment, if not directly set it up, then can the writers resist a twist like Khan entering the story? A huge problem with having any “wrath” towards Kirk is that the two have never even met in the new timeline, so outside of utterly reinventing him or trying to remove his personal bitterness from the story, the writers may want to introduce him earlier than in his own movie. I’d be psyched if they made him an ally against Mitchell, who must ultimately be left to the same fate as Mitchell by the same man… Marooned on Ceti Alpha Five. This is, of course, wild speculation bordering on fan fiction. Any thoughts?

      • Plus Khan is not Unstoppable, but Gary Mitchell sure as hell is.

        As such, The only person from within Star Trek, would be Gary Mitchell.

        So most of the signs point to Gary Mitchell, but there could be a twist.

        • Khan, as we saw in Space Seed, was almost POWERLESS in Kirk’s era. Garth, meanwhile, was a legendary admiral, and so he could easily arrange a mass-sabotage that no one would suspect until it was too late.

      • I’m sorry to tell you but the name “Khan” isn’t as well-known as most people think. I got into Trek maybe 10-15 years ago but never really watched the original until maybe 7-8 years ago and up until then whenever I heard “Khan” I always thought Klingon and not a genetically enhanced human. So among Trek-fans he may be the famous but to the casual observer (or new trek-fans) he’s virtually unknown (1 episode and 1 movie doesn’t among to much screentime)

        Granted, Gary Mitchell isn’t any better as far as who’s who in Trek Trivia, but based on the description he does seem a likely candidate.

        How’s this for a theory: Q. Maybe not the same Q we see in TNG-era episodes but thanks to Peter David, Trelene (sorry if it’s misspelled) is considered part of the Q Continuum. Perhaps in this reality the Q notice humanity 100 years earlier than in the Prime universe and infiltrate Starfleet. They realize that Kirk’s gonna be a major player in the further exploration of the galaxy (a scenario that we know they are against from the trial in Encounter at Farpoint/All Good Thing…) so they kill his family trying to get him to give up but instead causes him to go on a revenge mission pushing his command abilities to the max while also providing challenges among the crew on whether they can ultimatly trust Kirk as their captain.

        Again, all random thoughts and theorys. Can’t wait for that Dec 14th Preview!

        • Q are omnipotent, and therefore have no need to kill. Doubt it would be Q.

        • I see your point, but he’s still THE most famous, and more likely to be known or associated with the insider mystique of trek lore. Now if you want to skip that generation and throw in a tng villain, then you are seriously delving into fan fiction territory. By that I mean that it may be a fun conversation, or even a good book to put Q or Section 31 or even the Borg(again) up against Kirk and crew, but It sounds off putting and implausible for the new movie. The characters don’t belong in that era in particular, regardless of easy canon explanations for having any one of them, and the revelation of such a trek-fan centered bit of esoteric villainy might be tough to market. Of course, I’d have said that about Gary Mitchell! Ha! So what do I know? But seriously, none of that is gonna happen. The vaguest reference to S31, like the one line about Admiral Archer, might show up for our sake, but major plot elements have to be more series-neutral or TOS specific at this point I think.

          Crossover material is fan territory, not mass-market appeal for trek lay-persons. If I could start resurrecting forgotten trek then DS9 stuff would leak into the story. Fat chance of that ever happening. Closest to acknowledging that show’s existence that ever happened was the appearance of the Defiant in 8, and the mention of the Dominion War in 9. Not much of a bone to throw for a solid seven years of mythology and continuity.

          • I respect your Opinion, however I have to point out a few things wrong with “Q”, Borg and TNG Soruce Material. It is what ruined The Next Generation.

            1 Q. Here is a race of omnipotent beings, with nothing better to do than interfere with other Races. They take the Enterprise D and have them encounter the Borg as the first time. Then sit back and watch as countless races were assimalated. But Star Trek : Enterprise introduced us to the Borg which totally negates something from 300 years later. FAIL.

            2 The Borg. Unstoppable, scary and…Oh no here comes the Borg..yawn…defeated numerous times.

            3. TNG Movies were so boring and stale, non of them excited me, none of them made me wait for their release. I blame Berman, Piller and Okuda that took the reins of Star Trek and took away the mortality, not to mention taking one of the Greatest Captains in Starfleet and making his death so idiotic and so shameful, it was an insult. Here is the great James T Kirk, who died falling off a Mountain.

            There were many great episodes of TNG, but in the end, it became stale and predictable, you knew they were going to win, they were going to lose, but they always remained the same. I like my Trek with a mortality that makes them want to root for them to win, and feel bad when they lose or someone dies. If someone died in TNG, it was to no effect.

            Rick Berman killed trek for a moment and hence Paramount finally said enough and entrusted the franchise to JJ. So far, so good.

            TNG Movies, you knew the plot, the actors and it held no promise.

            The Biggest threat to the Federation, Starfleet and their universe in whole, is not the Borg, Not Q, None of them, the only Enemy for Kirk and Company, is simply…The Mirror Universe.

            Make that as the Premise, and then we get to see Star Trek at its best.

            • Well you covered a lot of ground there, and most of your criticisms are fair if not dead on. That’s why I can only imagine TNG villains, (or DS9, VOY, ENT for that matter), being in fan fiction. They are a poor fit, even if you like them a lot, and they don’t fit the mass-appeal priority. I would argue that it’s the need to make the movies accessible that has directly stopped the TNG movies from being generally as good as the best episodes. They can’t deliver the same character development or long-culminating story arcs that made any great episodes so memorable. For this reason, Generations was first and foremost a big dissapointment for me, and others. Over the years though, I have stopped expecting the best trek to show up in theatres, adjusted my expectations, and even come to enjoy all the movies for what they are, rather than dislike them for what they are not. They are overblown, shallow episodes of action packed marketability, always more focused on pleasing newcomers than rewarding my decades of intense interest. A sad reality. On the other hand they benefit from a better budget, mores takes, bigger moments, some bold ideas and some fun performances.

              The mirror universe has the benefit of being a simple premise for the uninitiated, but I don’t see why you feel it is the obvious choice for a story. Puzzling. For one thing it has the same problem that you mentioned, it has already been ruined by crappy episodes on multiple series. My favorite show, ds9, is the worst offender, driving the concept into the ground with increasingly absurd premises, pointless plot twists, and insultingly stupid squandering of a ripe concept. Furthermore, if there is one unfortunate commonality among the movie’s storylines, it’s the time traveling and civilization saving that happens so often. Parallel reality fits right in with the stuff that leaves us asking “do these people save everyone everywhere every other time they leave space dock?”. Still, I’d put up with the absurdity so long as its a good movie. First Contact is in that category, and I like it a lot.

              Finally though we have the problem that the last movie just went into parallel reality territory as the crux of the story. Another, different parallel reality raises troubling questions and uncertainty, as well as the sense of retread. Fan fiction territory, again, in my opinion. Actually, I think the comics just sent the “new” crew to the other side. Maybe even with collaboration from the current writers of the films. Not sure about that part, but they DO involve themselves in prequel comics and such.

              I hope we get a great movie, but a great series could be much more compelling. Think how many hours of great stories came out of even the weakest of the series. A lot more than two, spread over four years or so… I miss seeing a new TNG and a new DS9 in the same week! Good times.

        • The books aren’t canon, so its hard to believe that Q would have any relation to Trelane in the movies; rather Trelane was just a child-alien; meanwhile his parents also didn’t act like any of the Q; rather, they supervised him and prohibited him from harming anyone. Not so with Q.

          Also Q is omnipotent, so he wouldn’t be a threat that could be stopped.

          Rather, Q’s only relation to Trelane, is that he was Roddenberry’s inspiration for Q; however that’s as far as it goes, since Q was a fully mature adult alien.

      • My personal Opinion is either Gary Mitchell or Section 31. Section 31 is a sort of the black ops of the Federation and is not bound by Federation law. So…… *shrugs*

        • It would also explain Peter Wellers character. Many don’t know but Peter Weller already played a character in Enterprise. A Martian based terrorist group, called Terra Prime. He is known as John Frederick Paxton.

          Being that it’s J.J. Abrams, I don’t think he’s too keen on changing Peter Wellers character. But I could be wrong.

        • No,Section 31 is a Clandestine Unit with in Starfleet, and do not believe the Charter of the Federation.

          People sometimes forget, Starfleet was its own enity before becoming the Military Force for the Federation.

        • Section 31 wasn’t a rogue operation, however. They didn’t follow the rules, but they certainly were always looking out for the Federation; Section 31 was simply the not-so-pretty side of Starfleet, that was essential to their stopping espionage. For example without Section 31 and their genocidal illness, the Founders would probably have won the Dominion War.

  2. Seriously can’t wait!! Star Trek is one of my favourite movies of the last few years, im sure this will be awesome!

    • Like it’s Gary Khan?

  3. Who cares if Cumberbatch doesn’t look like the guy. He’s still an awesome actor and I think Star Trek Into Darkness will be great!

  4. Seriously. I dont actually care who he is playing. I just want to see his performance.

  5. Well, I like the premise. I’m actually excited to see this. Though the Gary Mitchell character wasn’t shown in the first movie (if he was, I must have missed it) it would be simple to establish the friendship between him and Kirk. Heck, I could imagine a flash back scene where the two of them are discussing about the Kobayashi Maru test and Mitchell is a bit concerned about how he will perform in that test, especially after hearing some rumors that it was impossible to pass it. Kirk, on the other hand, would tell him not to worry because he has a plan to beat it.

    Can’t wait for May 2013!

  6. Let’s not forget that time has been altered by Nero’s appearance into the future. So it could also be Charlie X. My money is still on Khan. Not sure why everyone assumed Khan would be played by a latin actor just because of Montalban. Khan isn’t latin.

    • @ John, even if the time line change, it was still before Kirk and Company discovered the SS Bounty Bay. The time line was in tact at that point. So I am going with Gary Mitchell.

      • BOTANY BAY!

        HMS BOUNTY IS ANOTHER SHIP LOL

        • Mutiny on the Bounty to be exact. :)

          • Knew I could count on you Wally :)

          • Or the Bird of Prey from ST4

    • Good point! He’s from South America, isn’t he? Wasn’t that where he ruled a third of the Earth from in the far off years of the 1990′s? Nonetheless, any return to Khan would likely be a combination of meeting our expectations, (such as hiring a Montalban type guy), and betraying them, (such as making him an ally). The Benicio rumor seemed to suggest a Khan retread in this sense, and yet when the radically different looking Cumberbatch got hired, many people just assumed that this was a “betrayal” of expectations rather than a different character. “What an interesting choice for Khan” many said. I would prefer a more recognizable, and not totally reinvented Khan. Therefor the Del Toro prospect was really cool to me.

      While we are at it though, Gary Mitchell certainly was not at all Latin, and yet they had multiple latin actors read for the villain role… And ended up with a pasty pale Englishman! ?? Hope he’s great.

      • Khan was only one of many dictators who fought in the Eugenics War, which covered most of Asia around 1996.

        The name “Khan Singh” indicates he’s from India, and Lt. McGuivers said he might be a Sikh. Khan believed that he would become the supreme ruler of all the mutant-dictators, but apparently he couldn’t even rule his own crew on Ceti Alpha 5, since the book says that they soon mutinied and formed rival factions.

  7. Abram’s version remind me more of the old Gold Key comic books. It makes little sense to redo the old TV series. The comics are ripe with new characters and movie ideas.

  8. The concept sounds cool. Cumberbatch can definitely carry off the arch villian role and the idea of him being a weapon of mass destruction sounds great. I look forward very much to seeing this.

  9. Sweet, this movie is going to be epic!

  10. *spits milk and cereal on monitor*
    “Last we checked, Kirk had a mother in the Star Trek reboot – his father, Thor, was killed by Eric Bana”

    You killed me and my breakfast with this line. I am humorously slain.

    Besides that, this sounds fabulous. I do love the mind f*ck stories of twisted mental abilities and it destroying people from within. PLUS it seems like these writers love torturing the cast and crew of the USS Enterprise which is always a good thing.

    • and a Hulk at that :p

      • lol yup

    • Would have been Funnier if they said

      “Last we check, Kirk and His Mother, Daughter of Prince Charming and Snow white, along with his Father Thor. In the Star Trek Reboot.”

    • “his father,Thor” is freak’n hilarious!!!!!!

  11. Can’t they come up with something more original? Do we have to re-write old stuff and make it “new” again. Go boldly where no writer has gone before! You have the canvas and the pigments – I have a feeling we’re in for an expensive special-effects stinker this go around – no script.

    • Considering those 3 guys (Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof)aren’t exactly the greatest writers ever, this is almost humorously accurate I’m sure. :D

      B

      • I would say one of them – Lindelof – is one of the worst writers ever.

    • Well the planet Vulcan is GONE. So that’s different.

  12. I think Ben was in a serious rush to write this article. He probably meant, “his father, George (Chris “Thor” Hemsworth)”

    • the “Thor” comment was a joke.. notice that Kirk’s father was also killed by “Eric Bana”, and not “Nero”?

      Personally, I’d have found it funnier if it had said that Kirk’s father, Thor, had been killed by Hulk.

      • or Bruce Banner.

        • Joke perfected by committee! What are the odds? very funny guys.

          • Hey, it’s a good thing that Matt Damon turned down the role, or else Kirk’s father would be Jason Bourne/the guy from Stuck on You….which wouldn’t be nearly as funny. :]

  13. It’s not Gary Mitchell. He was in the prequel comic, that was supervised by the film’s writers.
    This has been stated so many times!

    Why can’t it just be a new character?

    • Because the Time Line was altered, but the characters remain the same.

      as SS Botnay Bay, was already launched and on its course before the events of Star Trek, so therefore Neor Arrival has not effected that part of History.

      • Yeah, this is basically the exact reason I pray it’s not Khan. You CAN’T redo Khan and have even remotely the same impact without having a full 2 movies getting into Space Seed, then years later, revenge, PLUS doubling as an allegory about aging. The Wrath of Khan is untouchable, and I would be very disappointed at this obviously cheap unimaginative cash in tactic. Never mind the fact that Ricardo Montalban absolutely DEFINED that role. It’s like retiring a jersey number for a famous sports figure, then reusing it anyway! :D

        B – who’s been a Trek dork for 32 years. I was 6 years old when I started watching TOS. :D

        • Please, I been a Trek Dork since I was 6..Long before you were a twinkle in your dads eye… :)

          • i’m probably older than either of you. 45 here, and been watching the treks since i was 6 or 7

            • Yup, I’m 38, but I showed the math earlier.

              gg

              B

            • Jeffro…only by a year or less, I will be 45 in Feb.

          • lol seriously? Hey, if the rest of my posts in here didn’t convince you… never mind!!! :D

            B

            • @ Bri, I never doubted you…I am just claiming My DORK Experience over you by a 13 year age advantage.

              Sudden feeling of shame has befallen me.

              Darn. Im old.

              • I’m 34, absurdly familiar with Star Trek, and I can’t remember when I started watching because I was so tiny and confused back then. Now I am tall and confused. The year I came to love TNG was season two, with the episodes “Q-Who” introducing the Borg, and “Time Squared” with the two Picards. When Season three ended on the “fire” cliffhanger I was really, really hooked. I haven’t missed an episode of Star Trek since that day in elementary school. I remember getting a Geordi sticker in my cereal box! I can’t wait to see the extended “Measure of a Man” episode. They took a bad double entendre and made it worse. The measure of a man…extended! Terrible. Cool ep though!

    • I hear ya Doc. You and I have absolutely taken diametrically opposite positions on things in the past (like Nolan Bats for instance, or Giacchinos music), but here we are in complete agreement. Why CAN’T it just be a new character? It won’t be though, my guess. But not because of those IDW books! The vast majority of the filmgoing audience never read them, and they really don’t matter, even though they were kinda cool. I read them all. Ever read the John Byrne ones? Cool stuff.

      My money’s on a recycled character, whomever it turns out to be.

      B

    • But did they do the whole character arc and make him a villain in the comics, or was he just a good guy? This is e crucial question, I think.

  14. Since J.J. Abrams has taken Star Trek into an alternate timeline, There is an older novel he should check out. Anyone who has read Peter David’s “Vendetta” would agree that would make one seriously intense movie, and so much could be done with it also to match it with this new timeline.

    • Oh, if only. Vendetta RULES. The Doomsday Machine plus the Borg absolutely smoked every Next Gen episode or movie! For nearly 20 years now it has always bothered me that the greatest Star Trek writer ever, never got to actually write an episode. We do have B5′s Soul Mates and Where all the Honor Lies, though. Anyway… Vendetta and Q Squared still exist forever in the mind of this Trek geek!

      B

      • Peter David rules, but they aren’t about to make a Kirk versus Borg movie. Sorry. Imzadi two was a really fun read too, with Thomas Riker and the silly Warf/Troi romance given some real storytelling while they carve up the saucer section of the D. It overlaps with that post-Generations era, much like Shatner’s “The Return”, which is also a fun Borg book, written by Trek experts the Okudas…

  15. Sounds Kinky, Im in.

  16. Well Khan was not part of Star Fleet.

    Kirk only enemy from Starfleet would be Gary Mitchell (Not Really an Enemy)and they were best of friends.

    He has a Nemesis in Starfleet in Ben Finney, who was actually the only whom there is a hatred.

    And there was…Finnegan An Upperclassman who always beat Kirk at everything he ever done, as well as play pratical jokes on him.

  17. Bob Orci and IDW created a series of comics that deals with Gary Mitchell as a matter of fact its in the first issue. Its not Gary Mitchell. Orci did say that the villian would be canon. My money is on Khan, Kolos the Executioner, or Garth of Izar.

    Its highly unlikely that its Gary Mitchell. They dealt with that in the comic series and its kind of obvious. Orci said that they did not want to be restricted by the old contiunity. What killed Star Trek was doing the stuff on TV in the movies. I doubt its Mitchell.

  18. Bob Orci and IDW created a series of comics that deals with the adventures of the crew before this film comes out. Gary Mitchell was in the first issue and they killed him off. Its not Gary Mitchell. Orci did say that the villian would be canon. My money is on Khan, Kodos the Executioner, or Garth of Izar.

    Its highly unlikely that its Gary Mitchell. They dealt with that in the comic series and its kind of obvious. Orci said that they did not want to be restricted by the old contiunity. What killed Star Trek was doing the stuff on TV in the movies. I doubt its Mitchell.

  19. Khan ins out of the picture, and here is why:
    “..they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization…personal score…” ~ Synopses

    Khan was never in Starfleet.

  20. First, uh, “detonated” the fleet? Okay. Maybe decimated, but that only means the villain killed a tenth of it. Whatever.
    Second, as I said before Spock is shown in spoiler photos engaged in a fist fight with the villain. Gary Mitchell’s powers are telekinetic when he’s become a serious threat. He would not throw punches. If Spock is immune to some psi power the villain has they may make the fight physical, as Jedi do with lightsabers when the psychic stuff doesn’t work. We know Uhura ends that fight with a phaser, and Mitchell is shown taking rifle blasts to the chest in TOS without reaction.
    Third, as people here already said, Mitchell’s been done in the comics. In the reboot timeline, he’s already finished. Comics are canon.
    I saw a picture of Evil Quinto Spock the other day, and I had the idea maybe the Star Fleet shirt Cumberbatch is wearing in the set photos is actually Imperium. Now though, with this synopsis, I’m guessing he’s Lord Garth. Maybe everyone but Vulcans (who are scarce) and other telepaths are immune to some psi power he has.
    BTW I think the “one man weapon of mass destruction” line is really tacky.

    • Don’t expect logic. It’s Lindelof writing.

      • Logically, we can’t blame Lindelof for everything that’s gone wrong with his earlier work.

  21. After reading it a few times, I think this is going to be boring. It doesn’t sound like an exciting film. “Star Trek’s” main problem was due to recycled concepts, species, characters, etc… Even though the ’09 film was pretty amazing, I just don’t see anything ground breaking.

    Alex Kurtzman, Roberto Orci, and J. J. Abrams have a known track record for making horrible sequels. “Mission Impossible III” and “Tranformers II” were very painful to watch.

    I will wait for the trailer.

  22. Hmm. Yeah, Gary Mitchell is the obvious answer, and it would hit home more considering how close Kirk and Mitchell were. Some people have mentioned Garth of Izar, which, of course, works as well, just in a different light. They weren’t friends, but before Garth went batshit, Kirk admired him greatly. Garth was a hero to Kirk, and one of Starfleet’s greatest tactical Captains.

    It’s true that Q Inspired(this is a joke towards Peter David fans, YOU know what I mean) Gary wouldn’t be throwing punches at Spock until his powers were neutralized, and even then, Spock woulda smoked him, so this doesn’t really gel either. Oh, who knows. I’m so glad we DON’T know. ANYTHING however, is a better idea than reusing Khan. I’m glad they have kept this secret under wraps. I think we may be guessing until release. Cool.

    B

  23. To all the fanboys who blindly insisted, despite all evidence to the contrary, that the villain was Khan, do you finally concede the point?

  24. Hope it’s not khan. His story is a bit to similar to the tone of Nero’s. losing his wife etc..

  25. “his father, Thor, was killed by Eric Bana – ” lolol if you had said “..Eric Bana, Hulk,..”, I may have died lolol

  26. Mitchell’s Power were not stable, as he could be attacked when in his mortal state.
    How he got the powers, we all know the Talosians were partial responsible, and were the ones who can control them.

    Here is the clincher, in a way…Alice Eve, role unknown according to IMDB….Watch all of the TOS Episodes to study for her part. Considering Carol Marcus did not come into account untill TWOK….I would assume she could quite possibly play Elizabeth Dehner…Which would lead to it being Gary Mitchell.

    • I missed the part where the Talosians had anything to do with Gary Mitchell. Their powers were mental illusions, while Mitchell actually affected matter psychically. The Talosians can’t really be in the reboot anyway because they were part of pre-wheelchair Pike’s history.

      • The Clencher? Is that, like, when you’re trying to hold in explosive diarrhea?

      • That was my mistake. I combined a Star Trek Novel with the Talosians. MY BAD!

  27. “Last we checked, Kirk had a mother in the Star Trek reboot – his father, Thor, was killed by Eric Bana”

    It could have said “Last we checked, Kirk had a mother in the Star Trek reboot – his father, Thor, was killed by Eric Bana aka the bad Hulk”

    • Am glad I’m not the only one who doesn’t like that particular hulk movie

      • Easy to see why. The Hulk movie YOU made was soooo awesome.

        • I love the first HulK movie! Great director, amazing use of color, actual restraint and character work in a comic book film, a look at the deeper pathos of Banner, and some inventive sequences strewn throughout. This was an artistic endeavor, whereas the sequel was just a raucous, slam bang action overload of a story that couldn’t even derive depth from its premise or the acting talents of Ed Norton. Not a bad film, but a bit generic and exhausting compared to the quirky original that tanked so badly… Hopefully Hulk has a real future now that Avengers made him marketable again.

  28. I must point out, that even I think it is not Khan, I would have to point out the remote possiblity of it being Khan.

    Star Trek already reference Star Trek Enterprise, as in Soctty using long range transporter to beam “Admiral Archers prized Beagle.” Now the crew of the NX-01 had encountered The Eugenics War outcast, and thus laid the ground work of Khan actually being out there.

    Starfleet already knowing of their existence, might have already found the Botany Bay, as well. It also depends on what Spock Prime has revealed.

    So the chance is out there.

    • No, he is not Khan, and you should stop inciting this idea, as many are so devoted to it, I fear for their emotional states when they learn otherwise. :)

      • ‘an epic chess game of life and death’

        That’s a Khan reference. It’s gonna be Khan.

        • Riker said once that Picard called dealing with the Romulans a chess game. It was like that in the original series, too. Why are you sure that only apply to Khan?

          • A few years back Orci and Kurtzman wrote a Star Trek comics short story drawn by Paul Pope; in it Spock Prime recalls what he learned playing multilevel chess with Kirk and on the next page describes Khan as their greatest adversary. I believe it was foreshadowing, also I think O&K are too big of Trek fans to resist dusting off the character. In fact, what a shadow he’s cast over the series considering how little Khan actually appeared in Trek, yet it’s not like he’s ever been overdone.

            I also am convinced that Peter Weller is playing Garth of Izar.

            • L4YERCAKE, continue to dream all you want, but the villian is not Khan. So far, one actor angrily denounced the speculation that it was Khan, another actor disclosed it is Gary Mitchell, and now, we have this story. Not to mention, Cumberbatch is a skinny white guy, not fitting for Khan Noonien Singh. But obviously, there is no convincing you, until you sit in the theater and see for yourself…

            • That foreshadowing theory is quite a stretch.
              The reason Khan hasn’t been done more is that everyone knows it wouldn’t be as good as TWOK if he were brought back.

              • Whomever the villain is, I have no doubt the movie is gonna be great. Then again, I think I said the same thing about Prometheus. :)

                KHAAAAAAAAN!!!!

      • Gee Jeff, Blame me for everything…sheesh :)

    • Yeah, it’s pretty out there.

    • Cool idea, but it won’t be in the movie. Since Enterprise is the least loved series, sadly, it will not get more than a vague shout out I suspect, at best. Reminding people that the prequel series is now the only show that even exists in this timeline invites the annoyance of the masses who never saw how cool the fourth season was. What old Spock reveals, and why, is crucial. That’s what got me thinking about thawing out the Eugenics folks only to solicit Khan’s assistance in fighting Gary. This shocks the audience with Khan as an ally, and sets him up for the same ambitious downfall he is famous for as fodder for the next film. I am not saying any if this should happen, only that it’s more plausible and irresistible than any characters or stories that exist outside of the original series. Only the fans want crossovers, and as we all know, the movies are not made for the fans. They can’t afford to alienate us, but they need casual movie goers to find the ideas accessible and compelling, so no multi-series story relevance is likely. We are lucky they mentioned Archer in passing. It’s more than Captain Sisko ever got, or ever will, I suspect. Sad but true. Janeway’s irrelevant shoe-horning into trek 10 was pretty weak and pointless, whereas a meaningful cameo, say by the Holographic Doctor in First Contact, is lots of fun for fans. But how do they add characters now without throwing in more alt universe and time travel? Troublesome…

  29. Awesome report! This pretty much tells us it’s Gary Mitchell.

    The report forgot to mention, Kirk’s older brother.

    Also, Star Trek the Original Series liked to stay within a possible futuristic setting and used elements of contemporary science. Therefore where the report says, “a long-lost ship at the (literal) edge of the universe” is wrong. It was at the edge of our galaxy aka the Galactic Barrier. The Original Enterprise crew has never once been to a different Galaxy.

    • Wasn’t the older brother edited out of the reboot, or am I remembering that incorrectly?

      • I don’t remember his older brother being mentioned in the new movie.

        • There was talk of the boy young Kiirk drives past being his brother, and supposedly they thought of that idea, and yet the name of the character was not George, and they failed to make the idea canonically true. I feel like its supposed to be him, but they failed to legitimize it. Was the abusive guy whose car he stole his step-father? Uncle? I forgot, and the movie doesn’t even mention him. They cut his scene early. Dominic Keating tried out for the role. (Mr Reed of ENT.)

          • I’m pretty sure the deleted scenes in the 2009 Star Trek w/ commentary supplemented with issues 5 & 6 of the IDW Star Trek ongoing (a re-imagining of Operation: Annihilate) answer all those questions about Kirk’s brother. I had wondered the same thing, particularly because young Kirk calls the boy on the road ‘Johnny’, if I recall…

Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.


If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it.

Be Social, Follow Us!!