Before we get into the latest chapter of the "Who Is Cumberbatch In Star Trek 2" game, let's hear what producer J.J. Abrams has to say about the matter. MTV News' Josh Horowitz grilled Abrams on the "Star Trek Into Darkness" villain controversy:
Abrams (emphasis mine): "...this character, all speculation aside, will be really compelling, not because of any connection to anything past, but because of who he is and what he brings to it."
And apparently the character has a name: "John Harrison." Which doesn't sound a lot like "Gary Mitchell" to me, nor than it does "Khan". Over at Access Hollywood, Benedict Cumberbatch flat-out denied he was playing Khan (well, except for the part where he refused to memtion Khan by name), and echoed Abrams' sentiments about the value being far more in the character himself -- not just a guessing-game about names or call-outs to previous iterations of the franchise:
"I play a character called John and not that other name. It’s interesting. Speculation is speculation and that’s all fun. I play John Harrison who’s a terrorist and an extraordinary character in his own right."
So should we take the fact that this character is named "John Harrison" and "not that other name" at face value? Is there no Khan in "Star Trek Into Darkness"? Should we put this Gary Mitchell thing to rest along with our campaign to make Adam West Batman in the Tim Burton movie?
But where's the fun in that?