‘Star Trek Into Darkness’ Viral Clip and Image – John Harrison Threatens Kirk

Published 2 years ago by , Updated June 14th, 2014 at 11:31 am,

The crux of Paramount’s marketing for Star Trek Into Darkness to date has been Benedict Cumberbatch as the mysterious antagonist John Harrison (assuming that’s his real name…), and that continues today with a newly-released image and viral clip that features the character making a not-so-thinly veiled threat against young Captain Kirk.

It comes as little surprise that the viral promo doesn’t include any new footage not shown in previous clips – including the final theatrical trailer that dropped this week – but Harrison’s monologue does a nice job setting up the personal challenge Kirk must face to truly earn his stripes as Captain of the U.S.S. Enterprise, and it continues to position Cumberbatch as the Joker to Chris Pine’s Batman (as our Kofi Outlaw observed in his editorial about the Dark Knight influence on Into Darkness).

Director J.J. Abrams has likewise emphasized that there’s a method to Harrison’s “madness,” as he previously informed Total Film (via Digital Spy):

“[Nero] was just a raging, vengeful lunatic. All he wanted to do was destroy Vulcan, Earth and the Federation… He had backstory, but was kind of irrational.

“The beauty of Benedict’s [John Harrison] is that he’s completely rational. He’s someone that you can have conversations with. You couldn’t sit down and talk to Nero – he’d bite your head off!”

Check out the latest Star Trek Into Darkness image below (via MTV):


star trek into darkness cumberbatch harrison 570x379 Star Trek Into Darkness Viral Clip and Image   John Harrison Threatens Kirk

Those with good memories, you might recall the first Star Trek Into Darkness set photos were taken during the filming of the scene depicted above, where Harrison exchanges blows with Spock (Zachary Quinto) and Uhura (Zoe Saldana). The sustained secrecy around scenes like that is part of the reason so many are looking forward to this one with great (nay border-line feverish) anticipation.

Star Trek into Darkness stars Chris Pine, Benedict Cumberbatch, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana, Anton Yelchin, Bruce Greenwood, John Cho, Karl Urban, Alice Eve, Peter Weller and Simon Pegg. It is directed by J.J. Abrams, who drew from a script written by Alex Kurtzman, Damon Lindelof and Roberto Orci.


Star Trek Into Darkness opens in theaters (regular and IMAX 3D) on May 17th, 2013. Select IMAX 3D theaters will open May 15th.

Source: Yahoo! Movies, MTV

Follow Sandy Schaefer on Twitter @feynmanguy
Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


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. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. This is in my top 3 movies to see this year. Can’t wait!

  2. He menitons “…ere of legend..” or something. Though I don’t think JJ would do this again, but I wonder if Harrison is from the future, taken this quote and the brief glimpse of that massive dark colored federation ship.

    Most likely not, but it got me thinking.

    • I think he says ‘The heir to legend’.

      “Heir” definition: A person legally entitled to the property or rank of another on that person’s death.

      Since Pike was basically permanently disabled in the 1st movie, I believe this is referencing Kirk ‘inheriting’ command of the ‘legendary’ Enterprise.

      • I think “heir to legend” is talking about his father George Kirk who was captain of the Enterprise (regardless of how long for). And his father is famous for sacrificing himself to save his ships crew.

        • I think you’re off base since George Kirk was never stationed on the Enterprise. He was first officer of the USS Kelvin and became Captain of that vessel for just a few minutes, between the time the actual Captain was killed by Nero, and before the ship was destroyed.

          • Oops, sorry about that. Forgot it was the Kelvin and not the Enterprise. But I still think “heir to legend” MIGHT BE referencing him being his father’s son, because he was famous for his sacrifice.

          • Yeah he’s talking about Kirk’s father. His father is famous in Starfleet for his actions before the Kelvin was taken down, and Kirk himself is famous as the baby who was saved by his father’s sacrifice.

  3. This movie is going to be epic…. Cumberbatch is an excellent actor and i can’t wait for this movie to come out.

  4. I think whoever is heading up Star Trek Into Darkness’s marketing is doing a great job in building excitement for the film without giving away much about what’s actually going to happen.

  5. “Heir to legend” could be referring to his father, or maybe…just maybe…could be referencing what Kirk is in the unaltered timeline. Depending on where “John Harrison” is actually from: possibly the Mirror Universe or the future we’re familiar with. Depending also on how much time has elapsed between the 2009 movie and this one, the “heart of the Enterprise, the overly-confident leader, fuelled by bravado” statement might make more sense from the point of view of someone who’s already seen what Kirk WILL become. Pure speculation…

    • I’m actually quite hacked off by Abrams’ dismissal of Nero as “just a vengeful lunatic…He had backstory, but was kind of irrational”. Yeah, exactly, and that was precisely why he turned out to be a third-rate villain and a complete waste of Eric Bana’s acting abilities. If Abrams knew that from the beginning, why the blue bloody hell did he pursue that line of non-characterisation instead of providing himself (and we the audience) with the leeway for a potentially classic antagonist?

      • I understand your point…Big Dentist… but something had to explain the “rewind” and not take too much away from the actual introduction or re-introduction to the new original characters… (which was never done in the original series)… that was the true genious of Abrams… finding a way to keep us “lifelong” fans and capture new ones.

        I expect Abrams will deviate from the past Trek stories in future films, unless he finds ways to improve on the past storylines…

  6. What I am about to propose is perhaps a far out theory…
    Listen carefully to Harrisons voice. Listen to even his inflections of speech. His mannerisms. They all scream Picard to me.
    Now look at his ship – its a probable version of the Enterprise D. Is it possible that this change in the timeline has created a Picard that has turned evil for some reason… revenge perhaps?
    OR…. a Picard that is not evil but merely trying to protect “his ” future from being destroyed.

    • No offense but if it DID turn out to be Picard it would completely ruin it for me. Personally I found TNG & all of its various spin offs to be self absorbed derivations on the original & classic series. As far as I’m concerned (And apparently Abrams & crew agree with me or they wouldn’t have rebooted ST so completely with ONLY the original characters & none of the pale imitations that Rick Berman & crew offered up) not only were the various Next Generation clones redundant they were all purposely insulting at every opportunity to the original show that they never could have existed without. Look at “Relics” for example where Scotty was reintroduced into TNG. He was presented as a dottering old fool & far inferior to Geordi La Forge. The schmucks that wrote “Generations” (Where they thought that they were cute by abysmally killing Captain Kirk off a bridge alright but not a starship bridge, an old rusty bridge. Har har har.) Ron Moore & Brannon Braga couldn’t even remember that the only time that they’d ever written anything for Scotty had been “Relics” written by Moore which had Scotty coming out of his transporter loop thinking that Kirk had brought the Enterprise to rescue him only to THEN place him aboard the Enterprise B & having him witness what he believed to be Kirk’s death (Which actually worked far better dramatically than the later & infinitely stupid bridge death)prior to going into the loop in the first place! It just goes to show their arrogance & stupidity. So no thank you if Jean Luc Picard, the most overrated & wimpy Starship captain ever turns out to be the villain of this much anticipated sequel then it’ll completely ruin it for me. As far as I’m concerned if it isn’t Khan, then they’re going to have to work overtime in the film to get me to like it.

      • hmmm- a couple of things- Roddenberry created Next Generation. So if you didnt like the show (and I for one didnt like most episodes either) you can blame Roddenberry and not Rick Berman and the rest. They have more than enough garbage to be actually blamed for. Berman may have produced but Roddenberry created. While I didnt like Picard at first, his character actually improved or aged well as the years went on. I think Patrick Stewart actually grew into the role and became less wimpy in the later years.

        My problem with Khan– IT’s BEEN DONE. And frankly It’s been done GREAT. So why ruin it? Picard – not done- and keep in mind – this can be a rewritten Picard – not the wimpy STNG Picard you are remembering.

        How many times have I seen a poll asking who would win in a battle- Kirk or Picard? or who was the better Captain Kirk or Picard. Well we can get an answer. Kirk VS. Picard? better still – Kirk VS evil Picard …. A Picard with no remorse? James T Kirk vs. that Jean Luke Picard? Delicious! That will kick ass! and we know that Kirk will win and restore the future- just like he will beat Khan, Charlie X, Gary Mitchell etc. Why? because he’s James Tiberius Kirk. And more importantly because we just paid $15 to see him win ($17 in 3d). And JJ wants our $17 again.

        Guaranteed Synopsis- Spoiler alert… dont read any further if you don’t want to be spoiled… Villain tries to destroy earth (or universe). Pompous Kirk takes on Villain. We eat Popcorn and watch Kirk and company get ass kicked. We eat more popcorn actually thinking Kirk is gonna die. Kirk pulls out his last minute win and says something cutesy like “I couldn’t die – I wasn’t alone, I always knew I was gonna die alone” attitude. The Enterprise is saved, Earth is saved,the friggin Klingons are even saved. Everyone’s happy (except for the Klingons who apparently don’t like to be saved), even the popcorn manufacturer is happy.. and JJ Abrams makes Star Trek 3.

        • While Gene Roddenberry may have technically been the original creative force behind The Next Generation consider two things please. First his health wasn’t good even at that point which is why Rick Berman was able to position himself so well for the takeover that took place once the great bird of the galaxy finished kicking the bucket that he was already tapping even as TNG debuted. The second point of consideration is that sacrosanct lionization aside Roddenberry was already an extremely minor advisor on the ST films because of his increasingly wimpy tree hugging & out of touch views. (One particularly good example is his complaint about Kirk’s shooting of the Ceti Eel that came out of Chekov’s ear with his phaser & his disgusted expression thereafter. “My Jim Kirk would have studied that lifeform not destroyed it in disgust!” he complained to anyone that would listen. When the time came to attempt TNG what creative force there was left in Gene Roddenberry thought to right all past wrongs in one fell swoop so the show would both reflect his NEW view (I defy anyone to look at the original ST & NOT get that Starfleet was a military as well as a scientific organization) that Starfleet was ALL about the exploration, colonization, having whole families aboard their starships, etc, while at the same time eliminating not only the macho swagger that Starfleet had acquired in the ST films over which he had very little say following the critical failure of ST:TMP but also the leading man battle that had developed in the original series by William Shatner & Leonard Nimoy feuding over who got more lines. No THIS time would be different he reckoned. THIS time there would be no single star, not even two of them. He would spread it out & make TNG the ensemble piece that he not only felt like focusing on at that point but it’d also help come contract negotiation time. And if that didn’t work he had a failsafe built in by having a plan to replace the bridge crew on the Enterprise every 5 years or so working in new characters while rotating out the old. (Needless to say this never happened.) TNG as envision by Gene Roddenberry would be a place & time with no conflict, no hatred, no money, no sickness or disease, no religion, (Roddenberry was an avid atheist as evidenced by his constant trips to the “Insane child as God” formula where Trelayne/Q/ etc all reflected Roddenberry’s view of the Almighty) & as practically anyone but Roddenberry could see absolutely no excitement in this utopian universe either! So no wonder that creatively castrated series creator Gene Roddenberry created in his final years a captain in stark contrast to the young dynamo James T. Kirk. His Jean Luc Picard would be a seasoned man, a man of peace & reason, diplomacy, art, & tact. Subtlety & words would be his tools rather than fists & phasers. Just as the woman chasing young go getter Kirk was a reflection of the younger Gene Roddenberry the “peace at all costs” seasoned diplomat Picard was a reflection of the older one.

          Finally the Kirk vs Picard argument was the very reason that TNG idiots (Berman & company)felt that they HAD to kill off Kirk in the first Next Generation feature because who would want to watch the old bald peace machine rather than the shoot first & ask questions later alternative IF they had a choice?! They had to eliminate the choice, & THEY DID. Unfortunately Shatner’s hubris didn’t (or couldn’t more likely) imagine that they would actually LEAVE Kirk dead. Hadn’t Spock been brought back from the dead? Why not Kirk too, he no doubt reasoned to himself. Unfortunately for him & Kirk fans that was never in the cards because TNG schmucks had NO love for Kirk or any of the original crew. They were simply a means to an end & after they had suckered Shatner into playing the death scene that the brilliant old ham just couldn’t resist (Even though he had to share it with Patrick Stewart like he didn’t deserve to die alone as he had always known that he’d do) then the only game in town was THEIR game. It was Picard or nothing as captain of the Enterprise. So all this being said do I look forward in any way to a rebooted/re-envisioned/re-tooled Picard, maybe with a cool black trench coat kicking butt & taking names? ABSOLUTELY NOT. Too much time has been wasted already on that lamo in my not so humble opinion. As far as Khan having been done before & to perfection already I’ve heard that argument before & frankly it makes no sense. We’ve seen Klingons before but nobody groans when we see them again. Same with the borg, the Romulans you name it. Or to get more specific what Sherlock Holmes fan goes “NOT MORIARTY AGAIN!”??!! Great characters, specifically great villains are hard to come by & Khan is the single greatest villain in ST history who we’ve seen a whopping total of TWO times already yet I’ve heard endless complaining like we’re already on his twentieth appearance. “Give us a NEW villain!” they cry! LIKE NERO? The ONLY weak points of 2009s Star Trek was the weak ORIGINAL villain as played by Eric Bana & that Shatner wasn’t in it. Coming out of the theater then I though “In the next one they COULD have both Khan & Shatner! Unfortunately Shatner won’t be in it (Which is tragic.) but I’ve still got my hope up that they’ll give us the great villain that the 2009 film lacked in…KHHHHHHHAAAAAAAAAAAAAANNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!

  7. I’m a big Star Trek fan from the original series, to the current alternate universe reboot deal I own comics etc so I’m saying this from the mind of someone who thinks he knows a tad about Star Trek, so bare with me here but if and I say if the rumours of Kahn being the big bad of the film then I have this strange feeling that the third film will follow the third film of the original film runs. What I mean is beyond the first film, I have a nagging feeling that the new series of films will take the plots of the older films and just redo them. I’m not really sure what to think if I’m right about this.

    I ask that if there is anyone who feels the same might be on the horizon.

    • In a general thematic sense there may be SOME similarities but I really think that the use of Khan as the antagonist in this new ST 2 is more of an exception to the rule than the rule itself. Honestly without stretching how many honest similarities can you find between ST:TMP & the 2009 Star Trek? They’re COMPLETELY different in my opinion. Your theory is an interesting one but I don’t personally believe that it’s true.

      • Tha ks for a serious reply. Was dreading a reply with insults and u might just be right. But still I will have to wait until the third film to see if my theory pans out but I hope I’m wrong. And I realise now and hit myself for not realising it sooner but Kahn is a clear choice as he is one of the more well know characters in Star Trek. Although if Spock dies in this one, then my theory will get stronger.

        • Well I won’t share certain MAJOR spoiler information that I’ve came across regarding the identity of the villain & the fate of Spock as you mention but what I WILL say is that “ST 3:The Search for Spock” was one of the weaker films in the franchise & just as it would have been foolish for J.J. Abrams & company to model their 2009 ST film on ST;TMP it’d be similarly foolhardy to base their third film on such a weak effort. They’d be sabotaging their own franchise by doing so. You’re very welcome btw for the respectful response. I reason with those that will reason & respect intelligence highly. Opinions will always differ but as long as we can respect each other & not confuse opinions with empirical facts then we as a species can get along. Unfortunately ego gets in the way of many & so you have countless ideologues arrogantly proclaiming how right they are & how wrong everyone else is. The truth as it were is usually in the middle in my experience.

      • I agree with Eric. The reason STID may include Khan is not because JJ Abrams is copying ST:TWoK, but simply because Khan is such a great villain that he is worthy of another (altered, for the alternate universe) appearance. I don’t feel like it forebodes any slavish following of the original movies’ plot lines.

        Whether or not one agrees with Abrams’ vision for Star Trek, one has to agree that he’s no dummy. At the very least, he’s doing what he and many others feel is right for the franchise. He wouldn’t have been given the reigns to both Star Trek and Star Wars if he didn’t have the best interests of the franchises in mind. And it certainly would not be in the best interest of Star Trek to simply copy the first run of films. I believe he’s got a lot more than that up his sleeve.