posted
Not to mention Khan's obsession is rather far removed from simple evil. He does not pursue cruelty and torture or even Genesis as ends. He is not working to conquer the Federation. Ultimately, he isn't even trying to kill Kirk, but to best him, and to do so on Kirk's own terms, namely starship commanding. Here's a revenge movie in which the two parties never stand in the same room together.
Your points strike me, for the most part, as just silly, and Lee is absolutely right. Many of them apply to not just Star Trek in general, but movies in general. Why are the ships so apparently close to each other? Well, why can we even see them at all? But more than that, most of them have nothing to do with the plot at all. Since when aren't the heroes of a film the only people who can handle the events of that film? Since when in Star Trek couldn't they beam anywhere they wanted? (And who says they beamed over at all, if we're going to descend to such depths.)
quote:Small reason was there to doubt, then, that ever since that almost fatal encounter, Ahab had cherished a wild vindictiveness against the whale, all the more fell for that in his frantic morbidness he at last came to identify with him, not only all his bodily woes, but all his intellectual and spiritual exasperations. The White Whale swam before him as the monomaniac incarnation of all those malicious agencies which some deep men feel eating in them, till they are left living on with half a heart and half a lung. That intangible malignity which has been from the beginning; to whose dominion even the modern Christians ascribe one-half of the worlds; which the ancient Ophites of the east reverenced in their statue devil; - Ahab did not fall down and worship it like them; but deliriously transferring its idea to the abhorred White Whale, he pitted himself, all mutilated, against it. All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick. He piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart's shell upon it.
quote:Originally posted by MMoM: Of course you could, but the point is that you should not have to. It shows a lack of creativity and careful planning on the part of the writers and director if the fans have to invent ways for the plot to make sense.
Actually the point is that if the story is good enough, you tend to look past little incongruities such as, there are no such things as Starships, or energy weapons would probably have invisible beams--that sort of thing.
quote:...Take Khan as The Evil VillainTM, for example. Evil VillainTM-type characters are a ridiculous and hackneyed Hollywood movie plot device in general, but turning Khan into one was an especially stupid move.
*cracks knuckles* Here we go.
First off: I seriously hope you're not arguing that having an antogonist in the story is a hackneyed Hollywood movie plot device.
quote:...In "Space Seed" (TOS), Khan was cunning and ruthless, but not evil and hateful for the sake of being so.
Khan is NOT just some generic Evil Villain�. All those Moby Dick references aren't in there accidentally. Khan's singular purpose is to destroy Kirk. Not merely to kill him, for this would not be enough, he must break Kirk's spirit entirely, conquer the very idea of Kirk. His obsession is not applied arbitrarily: Kirk had abandoned Khan and his people in a paradise which not long after (via some iffy planetary cataclysm) became a hell. Which alone might have been forgivable, understandable perhaps, but no rescue ever came for them. No one came to see what sort of fruit might come of the seed they'd planted. And so Khan watched his people die, many of them horribly agonizing deaths afflicted as they were by the Ceti Eels. Even the beautiful Ms. McGivers-- possibly the only thing he still held that could have tempered his anger was forced to suffer this gruesome end. And so Khan's hatred for the man responsible for his impossible fate sharpened, forged in the demonic fires of what had been his paradise, any softness long ago eroded by his dead planet's poisoned winds.
The choice of Khan specifcally was no less arbitrary. He's not some unrecognizable character chosen at random (from, say, a race of warriors) come to have some nefarious (or god forbid, politically motivated) beef with our protagonist. And like any good antagonist he's there in part to reflect our hero. Disregarding the centuries he spent in cryogenic suspension, he and Kirk are of a similar age. Both are cunning warriors and capable leaders. But where now-Admiral Kirk has grown pudgy and soft, promoted to piloting a desk, listless as to his purpose, Khan has been finely honed, sharp-minded, focused and literally rippling with strength. Aghast after the initial volley has crippled Kirk's ship, the viewscreeen reveals the well-muscled, impossibly virile Khan standing ready to receive Kirk's capitulation. The glasses Kirk must wear to call up the prefix code are only one further humiliation for the aging Admiral. Who else could so vividly embody Kirk's counterpoint? Perhaps a feisty cloud _4 A.U.s across?
quote:...For all the lip service that his genetically-engineered intellect gets paid, we really see nothing of it. There's no depth or reason to the character.
You're right. We don't get to hear any of the haiku he's composed in his spare time scraping out an existence for himself and his people on that horrible rock. We don't even see him winning a tri-D chess-match against Spock, (ooh, maybe that would make for a more compelling climax!). He does figure out how to deprive Enterprise of power in just a few hits and not long after it is revealed that he somehow through his blinding vengeance recognizes the important potential of a device like genesis. But more than this, Montalban's smoldering portrayal more than adequately conveys the intense intellect alluded to in the script.
quote:...He's just a nemesis for Kirk, and the great bulk of the plot is just constructed as an excuse to bring the two of them into conflict.
Are you reading what you're writing? Of course he's a nemesis for Kirk and the bulk of the plot IS written to bring them into conflict. That's sort of the point. The B story here would of course be Genesis. As we all know Genesis is a technology to take something lifeless and infuse it with life. Is it any wonder that these two aging men, one concerned at his own decrepitude, the other hollowed out by vendetta and hate, might both be questing for such a thing? When you've watched the movie a few times, you may be able to discern the ways in which this ties into a central theme. Add to this the idea of Carol Marcus and the son Kirk didn't know he had. As he says in the film, "My life that could have been and wasn't." Again you may notice the ways this might tie into a theme or two.
I'm not going to get into the incongruities you point out because I see them as secondary considerations to what for me constitutes some of the finest story-telling in sci-fi ever. All of it was done in service to the story. I'm not going to engage in some debate as to which is better, TMP or TWOK because, well that way lies silliness. But I do think you're really giving Khan short shrift. And I think most of your reasons for doing so are spurious and not very well thought out.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
quote:Small reason was there to doubt, then, that ever since that almost fatal encounter, Ahab had cherished a wild vindictiveness against the whale, all the more fell for that in his frantic morbidness he at last came to identify with him, not only all his bodily woes, but all his intellectual and spiritual exasperations. The White Whale swam before him as the monomaniac incarnation of all those malicious agencies which some deep men feel eating in them, till they are left living on with half a heart and half a lung. That intangible malignity which has been from the beginning; to whose dominion even the modern Christians ascribe one-half of the worlds; which the ancient Ophites of the east reverenced in their statue devil; - Ahab did not fall down and worship it like them; but deliriously transferring its idea to the abhorred White Whale, he pitted himself, all mutilated, against it. All that most maddens and torments; all that stirs up the lees of things; all truth with malice in it; all that cracks the sinews and cakes the brain; all the subtle demonisms of life and thought; all evil, to crazy Ahab, were visibly personified, and made practically assailable in Moby Dick. He piled upon the whale's white hump the sum of all the general rage and hate felt by his whole race from Adam down; and then, as if his chest had been a mortar, he burst his hot heart's shell upon it.
"Jean-Luc, BLOW UP THE DAMN SHIP!"
-------------------- "Bears. Beets. Battlestar Galactica." - Jim Halpert. (The Office)
posted
To me, this is almost starting to sound like a TV Trek vs. Film Trek argument. Those 500+ hours of televisual Star Trek have spoiled us in providing the kind of character development and character exploration that you're just not going to get in the 20-odd hours of filmed Star Trek.
In respects of the Big Bad, TMP's V'Ger is more like many of the series antagonists - presented as the enemy, and then as events play out we come to learn why it's the enemy, and that really it's all down to circumstances, and a lack of communication/understanding, and that in the final analysis it's really not that different from us in what it wants. The same could be said for the Cardassians, or the Klingons, or just about any of the other major opponents our (assorted) heroes have faced.
By contrast, Khan is presented straight-off as the enemy, and that's just about it. His motivation is touched on, but we're left to fill in the gaps for ourselves, as Balaam has just done. We're dealing with one person, not a race or a gestalt entity like V'Ger is (being a combination of basic NASA programming and a mysterious machine civilisation), and that person is obsessed, probably insane, and totally intractable. Whereas TV Trek can take the time to, in effect, have them all sit down on beanbags (to use my wife's favourite phrase about Trek) and work things out, with Khan they don't have that luxury - he needs to be taken out before more people die.
And that's what's always going to happen in the format of a Trek movie (although Insurrection combined the two in having both the obsessed, probably insane and totally intractable baddie, and also the opposing race who turned out to be just like - literally, in fact - their foes). TMP was a Roddenberry film and he was always prone to let the message override the entertainment. So, yes, TMP is closer to the spirit of Trek - but so was TNG season 1, and that way lies crewmen in skirts.
quote:By contrast, Khan is presented straight-off as the enemy, and that's just about it. His motivation is touched on, but we're left to fill in the gaps for ourselves, as Balaam has just done.
Wherein lies the main problem with his charcter: motivation. Almost no viewer of STII knows anything about the original appearance of Kahn (hardcore Trek fans are really in the minority of that movie's audience) and other than "we were left to die by your hero" it's just left hanging- worse still, NO ONE even fucking ASKS why Kahn wants Kirk dead! Kirk says "I know why!" when Terrell tries to explain to Kirk (and the audience!) Kahn's motivations. Everybody else just calls Kahn a "madman". Obviously Kirk knew all about Kahn's plight and did nothing- this should have been touched on- mabye making the movie about redemption for old mistakes (with David there, it would have been a recurring theme).
In any other action movie, Khan would have been the hero out for revenge and Kirk the military creep hat left him and his beautiful wife to die...
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
posted
The contrasts of Kirk & Kahn don't stop with the age, leadership, and abilities. There is also the Father/Son dynamic.
First there's Kirk, who has never even SEEN his son and has nothing to really pass on to him. This further magnifies the feelings of age and regret in Kirk. As he says "there's a madman out there trying to kill me and you show me a son that would be glad to help him". But, through all the hardship and losses they endure in a short time, a respect is born between the two. They become reconciled individuals through their ordeal. Their relationship as father and son evolving to one of man to man. From this, each can take pride in the accomplishments of the other.
Then there is Kahn, who has kept his son (Joaquim) alive on a hell planet. For all his abilities and intelligence Kahn says it best "While I, on the other hand, are in a position to grant...NOTHING". This is a great wound to his pride. Kahn was all about his LEGACY. His followers worshipped him as a god among men, including his own son who has seen him keep his people alive through years of hell. Then with the sudden appearance of Reliant, they are presented with a miraculous opportunity to free themselves and truly create a paradise of their own. Except for Kahn's pride. It is his pride that drives him to hatred. So blinded has he become that even when presented with the facts by his son he cannot see past his hatred. "He tasks me....he TASKS ME". Kahn had the opportunity to give the son who worshipped him an absolute paradise where he would eventually rule but instead chose a legacy of vengeance. The destiny of his son was decided by his pride. Even his son's dying words served as an accusation: "Yours.... is the....superior...intellect...". At that moment Kahn faced the realization of the death of all that he held dear, his people, his son, his legacy. And yet, all that was left in him was his hatred. "I shall avenge you".
End the end Kirk who rued letting go of his son's destiny was able to be reconciled with him while Kahn who commanded his son's destiny cost him everything.
-------------------- There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Yah... there was nothing in "Space Seed" to indicate he's got a kid, so you're likely implying that he's the child of Kahn and his wife, born on the planet after being exiled. But that was only 15 years prior to TWoK. Joaquin looks fairly mature for a 15 year old.
posted
I dont think Kahn has a kid- the younger members of his crew were probably just defrosted after they made planetfall and the 'ol "genetic engineering" thing might have slowed their ageing process a bit too.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
posted
True, but he was one of those geneticaly thingambob'd augment's, so he could have matured faster. Or it could be that Harve Bennett et al didn't give a toss.
Either way, there was more of a connection between Khan and Joaquim than between Khan and the other baddies. And I don't mean superman loving.
-------------------- I have plenty of experience in biology. I bought a Tamagotchi in 1998... And... it's still alive.
Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
WizArtist II
"How can you have a yellow alert in Spacedock? "
Member # 1425
posted
I think it was the "OFFICIAL NOVEL" then that stated he was the offspring of Kahn & McGivers. As GB stated above there is definitely more of a connection.
-------------------- There are 10 types of people in the world...those that understand Binary and those that don't.
Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
posted
Even if Joachim is not the fruit of Khan's loins, the parallels with David are still there.
I feel compelled to point out that while I have above elaborated on Khan's motivations, that I am not pulling this out of my ass. It's all right there in the script, vividly and hauntingly delivered by Montalban to the captive audience of Chekov and Terrell in Khan's introductory speech.
quote:Originally posted by Jason Abbadon: Wherein lies the main problem with his charcter: motivation. Almost no viewer of STII knows anything about the original appearance of Kahn (hardcore Trek fans are really in the minority of that movie's audience) and other than "we were left to die by your hero" it's just left hanging- worse still, NO ONE even fucking ASKS why Kahn wants Kirk dead! Kirk says "I know why!" when Terrell tries to explain to Kirk (and the audience!) Kahn's motivations. Everybody else just calls Kahn a "madman"...
Technically, the lines are "...He blames you for the death of his wife." And "I know what he blames me for." This after Terrell relates what happened to the Regula Station's crew "He... tortured those people... He went mad. He slit their throats. He wanted to tear the place apart..." Although he's under the sway of the Ceti Eel squeezing his brain, it's clear this respectable Starfleet officer has never witnessed this level of barbarity. I would argue that in addition to underlining Khan's motivations, this is Terrell's vain attempt to explain why all of this is happening.
I remember when we were much younger, my sister insisting that Khan was insane because he thinks that "hurting" Kirk is worse than "killing" Kirk. Give the kid a break. She was, like, 8. I had a difficult time explaining it to her then, and twenty years later it's still not an easy thing to put into words. His motivation isn't madness, it's wrath: terrifying, anti-rational, unquenchable, all-consuming wrath. Its very existence defies explanation, understanding.
It's a darker aspect of man and as such makes the perfect counterpoint to the enligtened, egalitarian society of Starfleet. When Terrell glimpses that darkness, he cannot help but be changed by it. I would argue that the genius of Montalban's performance is that we get to see the engines of this malice turning. For example, the way he pounces on the information that Kirk has become an Admiral. It should be apparent to anyone, even those who never saw the TOS episode that these men share a colored history.
Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged
posted
I agree with what Sol and bX have said, and I would add more but I think they've summed it up perfectly.
Of course, if the statement is "TMP is better than TWOK" and everyone's argument is based around "TWOK" is much better than you think, it's interesting to note that the flip-side ("TMP is much worse than you think") hasn't been touched on. If it wasn't so late I might offer something more useful than "it's really, really, really boring", but I can't.
-------------------- Yes, you're despicable, and... and picable... and... and you're definitely, definitely despicable. How a person can get so despicable in one lifetime is beyond me. It isn't as though I haven't met a lot of people. Goodness knows it isn't that. It isn't just that... it isn't... it's... it's despicable.
Registered: Mar 1999
| IP: Logged
posted
Pacing is part of what kills TMP- lots of "people sitting talking in a lounge" scenes really kill any built up tension of Earth's potential destruction. The ultra-bright lighting does not help much either (this is toned waaay down in TWOK and gone to idiotic levels in Generations). Also, the changes in scenery of TWOK help break up the story, whereas TMP suffers through just a few (on-ship) sets until the very end. TMP also suffers from there not being any villan to be intrested in- V'Ger is like fighting a tidal wave- it's just this incomprehensible force to be dealt with, but you cant get any satisfaction from it's defeat/destruction like you can with Kahn or the klingons.
I still say Kirk's a total scumbag for leaving Kahn's gang there; and yeah, it's aparant he knew all about the star going nova. I wonder if Spock knew? McCoy would have insisted on a rescue mission.
-------------------- Justice inclines her scales so that wisdom comes at the price of suffering. -Aeschylus, Agamemnon
Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
Printer-friendly view of this topic