Is he, or isn't he Khan? That was the question on every Trekker's mind leading up to the release of Star Trek Into Darkness. Despite the denials, bold-faced lies, and misdirection on behalf of the cast and crew of the movie, John Harrison does in fact identify himself as Khan midway through Into Darkness. Personally, I have mixed emotions about this reveal. Not because I feel that Khan was so amazing that he should never be used again or that the series should stick to all new characters or because I don't think that Benedict Cumberbatch was great in the movie (he was!) but because the characterization just doesn't mesh with Khan as depicted in his appearance in the Original Series episode "The Space Seed" or its cinematic follow-up Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan.
Perhaps a flaw with the movie as a whole and the conception of the John Harrison character is the fact that the movie seems to have been written with an eye on the Internet. Judging by their months long disinformation campaign regarding the plot and villain of this movie, Abrahms and company are very conscious of audience expectations and the role of the Internet leading up to a blockbuster's release. Also, Abrahms seems to suffer from a compulsive need for secrecy and it almost seems like Star Trek Into Darkness was partially written in order to create cryptic marketing materials that play with audience expectations. Cumberbatch himself may have been a piece of stunt casting designed to throw people off, "They'll never guess this pasty Englishman is playing Khan!" The movie and the marketing for the movie seem preoccupied with playing a tired shell game about with the villain's identity which seems to go along with every filmmaker trying to copy ideas and concepts from Christopher Nolan's Batman movies such as temporary captures or dramatic identity switcharoos (Skyfall is a good example of this, in which they threw in an extra name for the villain apparently just to check off that box on their Nolan checklist.) For a franchise that has been reinvented to get away from being a fanwank, these filmmakers seem to have spent an inordinate amount of time baiting fans about the film's villain. The way that this character is handled perhaps prevents Into Darkness from being the best of the Star Trek movies.
I understand that this alternate universe is somewhat it's own thing but clearly great pains were made for crew of this new Enterprise to at least be recognizable as their Original Series counterparts. Chris Pine and Zachary Quinto as Kirk and Spock both do a wonderful job of evoking their classic characters in subtle ways and Karl Urban is pretty eerie as Bones. Obviously some consideration was made with those characters to keep them true and recognizable, so why does Khan, perhaps Trek's most iconic villain, neither look nor sound (nor behave) anything like his classic characterization? Is it possible that he's actually not Khan after all?
Khan Noonien Singh was first introduced in the classic Star Trek episode "Space Seed" in which the Enterprise comes across a derelict ship containing seventy-two crypods. We then learn that it is a penal ship from the late 20th Century housing war criminals from Earth's "Eugenic Wars." In Star Trek lore, this was a war fought in the 1990's between genetically augmented tyrants, the foremost of which is Khan Noonien Singh. Once unfrozen, Khan attempts to hijack the Enterprise with the assistance of a historian who has fallen for him. He is narrowly thwarted and Kirk exiles him and his crew to a remote, uninhabited world.
We later meet him in Wrath of Khan when he succeeds in hijacking another Federation ship to exact his revenge on Kirk for exiling him to that world which later fell victim to a natural disaster. By this time, Khan has lost many of his people, including the former Enterprise crew member who became his wife, and he is crazed with vengeance. Instead of escaping to fight another day, Khan is focused on exacting vengeance on Kirk. We meet other remnants of the Eugenics Wars on Enterprise, which is set before classic Star Trek and they are as volatile and violent as Khan.
In Star Trek Into Darkness, the prison ship is not found by the crew of the Enterprise but by another Federation ship and it happens off screen. "Khan" is reawakened and recruited into Starfleet's secret intelligence agency, Section 31 as an agent and weapons designer. There's no mention of the Eugenics Wars or his 1990's pedigree (they don't find a pager or a Jane's Addiction CD on him). He is simply referred to as being from "300 years ago," as though challenging the audience to do the math. For many people that equation looks like:
FUTURE - 300 = STILL FUTURE
As opposed to the arrogant and mercurial Khan of the past, this character is cool and calculating. His overwhelming characteristic is one of overpowering intelligence. While it is not fair to exactly compare him to the iconic Wrath of Khan version of the character who was older and had suffered far more, he doesn't quite match up to his "Space Seed" characterization either, who's vanity and arrogance allowed him to make several tactical missteps that cost him control of the Enterprise.
As Khan had previously been played by Mexican actor Ricardo Montalban, there have also been cries of whitewashing but I'm not sure that's valid since the character's ethnicity has always been ambiguous. He is referred to as an Indian Sikh in "Space Seed," yet he spoke with a Spanish accent. I'm more bothered by the fact that he neither looks nor sounds anything like his classic character and I find his Britishness a little distracting (although he is not the only inexplicably British character in the movie).
But what if he is not really Khan? After all, we have only his word for it. Sure, Admiral Marcus calls him Khan also but does he really know? There's no scene like there is in "Space Seed" where the crew Googles Khan Noonien Singh and looks at a picture of him. It's interesting that John Harrison's fist target is actually a data archive. Perhaps it contained rare historical information about Khan that he wanted to eliminate in order to continue using that identity.
So then, who is John Harrison really? Maybe he's Joachim, Khan's second in command on the Reliant who bears more than a passing resemblance to Benedict Cumberbatch. Joachim seemed to possess good tactical skills or at least a bit of common sense when he tried to talk Khan out of destroying their ship in order to pursue the Enterprise. True, he didn't get to do much Wrath-ing but it's hard to shine when your boss Khan Noonien Singh.
If they ever need to recast the role in a future movie this would be a terrific way out and there would be the excitement of seeing a more traditional Khan. And then J. J. Abrahms could say, "I told you he wasn't Khan!" Moreover, if the real Khan is actually in one of those cryotubes that could put Harrison's actions and motivations into a whole new perspective. Perhaps his overriding motivation was to find and and reawaken Khan. Or perhaps John Harrison was just a distraction to lead the Federation away from Khan who is now loose in the galaxy planning god knows what?
But if John Harrison is actually Khan, I have to disagree with the way the movie ended. At the end of Into Darkness, "Khan's" plan to reunite with his crew is foiled and he is defeated by Spohura and put back to sleep. Maybe he thinks that he fellow augments have all been destroyed. Maybe. When and if he wakes up, he'll certainly have a grudge against Spock and the Enterprise crew but it will be the anger of having his plan thwarted, which is pretty weak on the villain scale. I mean, it's no reason to start quoting Moby Dick. At the end of "Space Seed," Khan's plan is also thwarted but he's pretty cool about it. He's looking forward to having his own planet and things are looking good. Of course, they go to shit pretty fast and he loses his wife and many of his people scraping by for years on a desolate rock. He has a lot of time to be pissed off have his hatred build. That's a lot better than being put into storage.
Maybe the sequel will be called The Stuffy Indifference of Khan.























