Recommended Posts

i don't think so, they aren't going to repeat the past movies. if anything they will do nods.

Who said anything about repeats? We didn't really get the Khan backstory unless you watched the classic TV shows. I mean, technically, we are repeating the cast of the Enterprise and supporting characters anyways. ;)

Too soon for Khan IMO, they'd have to build up his story from the start which star trek II didn't have to do because it wasn't that long after TOS and fans knew his backstory. So I agree that it'd be hard to just throw him in as the bad guy unless you really rush things. If the movies keep doing well at the box office I can easily see them doing more than 3. If that's how it turns out it'd be easy to IMO, use Khan as the bad guy in movie 3 and 4. One movie is the whole backstory and character building and then the next one wraps it all up like the original STII movie did.

  • Like 1

Too soon for Khan IMO, they'd have to build up his story from the start which star trek II didn't have to do because it wasn't that long after TOS and fans knew his backstory. So I agree that it'd be hard to just throw him in as the bad guy unless you really rush things. If the movies keep doing well at the box office I can easily see them doing more than 3. If that's how it turns out it'd be easy to IMO, use Khan as the bad guy in movie 3 and 4. One movie is the whole backstory and character building and then the next one wraps it all up like the original STII movie did.

Except that this is a whole new generation for the reboot of Star Trek. I mean outside of the baby boomers and most Gen X'ers, how many of the newer generations even know about Khan?

I just think JJ is teasing us that Benedict is Khan but he will turn out to not be

Howso? I think he has been taken out of context. He said something akin to "The next movie will be totally like a Khan type film"

What I took that to mean was "Let's take a small character from a one-off episode and make an amazing story out of it".

Except that this is a whole new generation for the reboot of Star Trek. I mean outside of the baby boomers and most Gen X'ers, how many of the newer generations even know about Khan?

Except that this is a whole new generation for the reboot of Star Trek. I mean outside of the baby boomers and most Gen X'ers, how many of the newer generations even know about Khan?

None or very few but you still can't rush his character development into one movie unless it's 2hrs or something long. I honestly don't know who the bad guy is in this but whoever it may be they need to take a good chunk of time to work his character up and at least build the whole revenge bit up. If you rush that then it'll just seem weak and cliche.

IT'S GARY MITCHELL!!! Sweet lord, if I am wrong you can hold me to this and I will eat a stick of deodorant on youtube! LOL

I agree with you. I think it is Gary Mitchel too. In the teaser trailer you see him wearing a Starfleet Uniform. Khan never ###### a Starfleet uniform as he was never found anywhere near Earth. I think Gary Mitchel is the man.

IT'S GARY MITCHELL!!! Sweet lord, if I am wrong you can hold me to this and I will eat a stick of deodorant on youtube! LOL

definitely, although I'm still hoping Gary Mitchell might go out and get like a dream team of the best villains in Star Trek to attack Starfleet :)

My 2 cents on who it is :)

Okay, so I'm pretty certain it is Gary Mitchell.

Note: I put spaces in the http's bellow so they wouldn't auto create links and show through the spoiler tag.

1. In the Cannon Star Trek comics that are based in the prime universe Gary Mitchell gets his power in a similar way as in TOS. See Bellow

"In the comics, Dr. Dehner is not on board. She is said to have withdrawn her request for a transfer to the Enterprise after learning McCoy is on board. The two were apparently an item at some point, and it wasn?t a friendly breakup. So, since there?s no Dehner, Kirk is instead saved by Spock, courtesy of a surprise neck pinch on Mitchell (we?ll just set aside the logic of a sneak attack on a psychic?). Kirk then shoots Mitchell with his phaser, killing him." - h t t p://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/star-trek-comic-rule-gary-mitchell-star-trek-darkness-villain.html

2. In one of the few leaked photos they show Benedict Cumberbatch's character getting the Vulcan death grip, maybe filiming a flashback scene to give us a bit of the comic back story?

see h t t p://nerdbastards.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/StarTrek022712-thumb-550x385-84716.jpg

3. All the other reasons people think its him.

Right now, more evidence points to Gary Mitchell than Khan Noonien Singh. But for some reason I have a feeling that we might see Khan in the movie. Gary Mitchell supposedly died in 2265 and Khan was discovered in 2267.

Right now, more evidence points to Gary Mitchell than Khan Noonien Singh. But for some reason I have a feeling that we might see Khan in the movie. Gary Mitchell supposedly died in 2265 and Khan was discovered in 2267.

Since the first movie changed the timeline aren't events pushed forward a few years already? What I mean is that iirc Kirk didn't become captain till the full 9 year thing as stated in the first movie (or was it 7 years? gah I forget now), but in the movie he became captain in the 3 years he bet he could do it in. That to me means we've just moved things up a bit so I dunno if the dates from the original timeline can apply.

I don't think it's Khan either but I think they can use him as the bad guy in the 3rd. Unless they want to hold off and do something else after this one.

Right now, more evidence points to Gary Mitchell than Khan Noonien Singh. But for some reason I have a feeling that we might see Khan in the movie. Gary Mitchell supposedly died in 2265 and Khan was discovered in 2267.

I think we are going to see Khan at the end of the credits, to give us a peek at things to come in the 3rd film.

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • All these CEOs got the biggest boners thinking about firing employees for AI. Turned out it was just a wet dream.
    • And the fact that the majority of people from Poland are white European Christians while the people you are complaining about in post after post are not is just a coincidence... Every sentence in your post I am replying to is racist nonsense. None of it is actually based on any facts whatsoever. All immigrants are seeking a better life too. It's literally the only reason they would risk everything and leave their homes, families, and homeland. They are working and contributing to the economy too, as you even admit. They get the same benefits your partner did AND that YOU are eligible for as well. That is one of the key things of the EU and a mark of a civilization. That is the definition of a society where everyone is given a chance, treated equally and fairly, and is judged by the content of their character, not their different skin color or which version of ignorant superstitious nonsense their parents lied about as children. Racists around the world said the same things about the Irish and Jews and Poles (like your partner) and...every other immigrant movement over the centuries. What's your family's heritage, by the way? Were your ancestors lied about with racist fearmongering crapola by self-entitled locals the same way as you are now? If someone like that said the same things about all people from Poland, like your partner, would they be right? Or would you want them to judge your partner based on who they actually were, not where they just happened to come from?
    • Again, this is an irrelevant attempt to attack the messenger. The truth does not require any justification.
    • Removed the blue and underline as you did not post a link. This would also  be considered spamming.
    • Why it's almost impossible to produce a smartphone in the United States by Hamid Ganji If you look at the back of some Apple products, you can see the famous phrase “Designed by Apple in California, Assembled in China.” This phrase appears on products from one of the largest smartphone brands in the United States. These products are designed in the U.S., but their manufacturing takes place in China, India, Vietnam, or even Brazil. But why can’t Apple, as one of the largest American tech companies, produce its iPhones on U.S. soil? The idea for this topic came to me after the Trump Foundation launched a smartphone called the T1 and claimed that it was designed and built with American values in mind. However, this claim did not last long, as it was revealed that Trump’s phone was actually a rebranded HTC U24 Pro, with only a gold case and minor internal component changes. You see? Even a phone that is supposed to represent American values is manufactured in China. With a gross domestic product (GDP) exceeding $32 trillion, the United States is currently the world’s largest economy, while China ranks second with around $20 trillion. On the other hand, the United States is by a wide margin the global leader in various technological fields, and American companies spend hundreds of billions of dollars annually on research and development. From Apple and Google to Microsoft, Lockheed Martin, Boeing, and others, American tech and industrial giants lead their foreign competitors in many sectors. The United States also has no shortage of smartphone brands. Apple, Google, and Motorola are among the major brands in the smartphone market, collectively holding a significant share. However, the vast majority of their products are manufactured outside the United States. So why is it that the world’s largest economy, home to the most advanced technology companies and industrial powers, cannot produce a smartphone on its own soil? Let’s explore this question together. Even threats to impose tariffs won’t work After Trump entered the White House as the 47th President of the United States, his administration adopted strict tariff policies. One of these policies was the imposition of a 25% tariff on smartphones manufactured outside the United States. Trump said he “had a little problem” with Apple CEO Tim Cook over producing smartphones outside the U.S. So he thought that threatening a 25% tax on imported phones might force Apple to bring manufacturing back to the United States. “I have long ago informed Tim Cook of Apple that I expect their iPhones that will be sold in the United States of America will be manufactured and built in the United States, not India, or anyplace else,” Trump wrote on Truth Social. Image via The White House Although Apple currently manufactures some of the iPhone’s chips in the United States with TSMC's help, it still shows no willingness to shift full iPhone production to the country. At the time, renowned Apple supply chain analyst Ming-Chi Kuo wrote on X, “In terms of profitability, it’s way better for Apple to take the hit of a 25% tariff on iPhones sold in the US market than to move iPhone assembly lines back to the US.” However, manufacturing a smartphone in the United States is not as easy as it might seem, and many technical and economic barriers are involved. The lack of necessary manufacturing hubs There is a clear reason why many companies prefer to manufacture their products in China. China has established itself as the main global manufacturing hub for international companies, and over the past few decades, large contract manufacturers have emerged there, allowing companies like Apple to outsource production. One such example is Foxconn, which also manufactures some Apple products in India. Building the infrastructure required to produce smartphones in the United States would require tens of billions of dollars in new investment. Factories would need to be built, essential manufacturing equipment would have to be installed, and, most importantly, a skilled workforce capable of operating these systems would need to be recruited and trained. The United States currently lacks the core infrastructure needed to manufacture smartphones, and for this reason, many companies prefer to outsource production to Chinese contractors rather than spend tens of billions of dollars to build that infrastructure, which is significantly more economically efficient. Additionally, building such infrastructure in the United States could take up to a decade, ultimately leading to a significant increase in the product's final price for consumers. Shortage of trained labor in the U.S. compared to China Decades of serving as a global manufacturing hub have allowed China to build a massive talent pool in the production sector that is almost unmatched worldwide. Today, if a company chooses to manufacture its products in China, it can be confident that the workers involved in production have years of experience in their respective roles and are capable of producing high-quality goods with minimal errors. Even if we assume that tens of billions of dollars were invested in building smartphone manufacturing infrastructure in the United States, finding skilled workers would remain highly challenging. Apple CEO Tim Cook visiting the iPhone 6 assembly line in China in 2014. Image: Tim Cook on X In a 2015 interview on CBS’s 60 Minutes, Tim Cook said the main reason Apple isn’t producing in the US is a lack of skills. "China put an enormous focus on manufacturing, in what you and I would call vocational kind of skills. The US over time began to stop having as many vocational kinds of skills. I mean you could take every tool and die maker in the United States and probably put them in the room that we're currently sitting in. In China you would have to have multiple football fields,” Cook said. Also, in 2017, at the Fortune Global Forum in Guangzhou, Cook once again emphasized the importance of highly skilled Chinese workers. “China has moved into very advanced manufacturing, so you find in China the intersection of craftsman kind of skill, and sophisticated robotics and the computer science world. That intersection, which is very rare to find anywhere, that kind of skill, is very important to our business because of the precision and quality level that we like. The thing that most people focus on if they’re a foreigner coming to China is the size of the market, and obviously, it’s the biggest market in the world in so many areas. But for us, the number one attraction is the quality of the people,” Apple CEO said. Higher labor costs in the United States Producing almost any product in the United States is more expensive than in many other countries, and one of the main reasons is the higher cost of labor in the U.S. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, median weekly earnings of full-time workers in the United States were $1,235 in the first quarter of 2026. Meanwhile, the average annual salary in China's private sector in 2025 was RMB 71,590 (US$9,961). In many parts of the world, the weekly wage of an American worker is equivalent to several months of income. Another important factor to consider is that in the United States, the workforce capable of working on a smartphone assembly line is highly specialized and therefore commands higher-than-average wages. According to an estimate by Bank of America, producing an iPhone in the U.S. is technically possible, but “iPhone cost can increase 25% purely on higher labor cost in the U.S.” However, this 25% increase applies only if final assembly is performed in the United States while components are still sourced from China or elsewhere. In this case, the price of a base iPhone would rise from $799 to around $1,000. But in another scenario, if Apple were to produce the required components for the iPhone within the United States, production costs could increase by more than 90%. Trump’s dream for a “Made in the USA” iPhone might never come true In a free-market capitalist economy, one of the primary responsibilities of any CEO is to maximize profit. Using Apple as an example, Tim Cook’s role is to maximize the company’s profits so that it can fund research and development for new products and invest in areas such as artificial intelligence, while also keeping shareholders satisfied. Therefore, it is entirely understandable that Apple would choose not to bring its manufacturing back to the United States and instead keep production in countries where labor is cheaper, and products can be manufactured at a lower cost, thereby maximizing its profit margins. What is your opinion about manufacturing smartphones in the United States? If you are an American citizen, would you be willing to pay hundreds of dollars more for a smartphone made domestically in the USA? Let us know in the comments.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Conversation Starter
      jessse3334 earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • Reacting Well
      JuvenileDelinquent earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • One Month Later
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      Excellence2025 earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Week One Done
      flexorcist earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      506
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      196
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      153
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      72
    5. 5
      FloatingFatMan
      65
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!