Okay, now they're just playing with us.
Ever since the big screen "Star Trek" reboot became a smash hit last summer, fans have been on the edge of their seats awaiting news about the sequel J.J. Abrams and co. are planning to roll out in 2012. Thanks to Badass Digest, we now have some inside information on the plot of that sequel... only that information comes in the form of a multiple choice guessing game.
Damn you Abrams!!!
There is some solid information in the report, so let's start with what we do know: Khan Noonian Singh will not be featured in the movie. Khan, of course, is the titular character who headlined the first "Star Trek" film sequel back in 1982, "Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan." Played by the legendary Ricardo Montalban, sporting well-oiled prosthetic pectorals, Khan, who had first appeared back in the original series, became an instant fan favorite and thus has been the center of numerous rumors claiming he will make a re-appearance in the current reboot.
That now appears to have been quashed. But Badass is reporting that, according to their source, the villain of the piece will indeed be a classic "Trek" character from the show's original late-60's run, with one asterisk: the movie won't have a "traditional villain type" at all.
So what does that mean, exactly? Well, it suggests this will be a more character driven story, perhaps featuring an antagonist with personal ties to the Enterprise and the crew, or at least someone who is not necessarily evil but simply misguided or who uses methods incompatible with the Federation's Prime Directive.
And luckily (?) Badass has also provided us with a list of potential candidates, one of whom, we are assured, will actually be the bad guy of the film. They are: Harry Mudd, Trelane, Gary Mitchell, the Talosians and the Horta, each of whom starred in an episode (or multiple episodes in the case of Mudd and the Talosians) of the original show.
Frankly, we're hoping it's Harry Mudd, who is essentially a comedic space pimp. But whoever the villain ends up being, we know one thing for sure: Abrams sure seems to be having fun screwing with us.
And we wouldn't want it any other way.