Benedict Cumberbatch Channeling JOKER & HANNIBAL LECTOR For STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Villain Role

Benedict Cumberbatch Channeling JOKER & HANNIBAL LECTOR For STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Villain Role

Probably Cumberbatch's most in-depth discussion yet about his villainous role in the Star Trek sequel. "He's someone who has extraordinary physical strength, he is someone who is incredibly dangerous as both a physical entity and as a user of various technologies and weapons".

Seems like no one's really buying the notion that Cumberbatch is playing John Harrison in Star Trek Into Darkness. Maybe he'll be a reinterpretation of Harrison by Abrams and maybe he'll be 2013's Miranda Tate [Note: There was an original-series Star Trek crew member named Harrison who appeared in the debut of Khan. Coincidence?]. Below, you can read an interesting morsel from Cumberbatch's conversation about his role and watch the video in full as well.

On how director JJ Abrams pitched the role to Cumberbatch--
"JJ described the role in movie terms as a mixture of Hannibal Lector, Jack in the Shining and The Joker in Batman. There are sorts of levels to pitch in amongst quite a high bar as well to succeed in comparison to. It was a framework to understand this character before I saw the whole script."

What 'John Harrison' brings in terms of threat-level---
"He's someone who has extraordinary physical strength, he is someone who is incredibly dangerous as both a physical entity and as a user of various technologies and weapons. He performs acts of terrorism but he's also a psychological master. He manipulates the minds of those around him to do his bidding in a very, very subtle way. It was a wonderful game of mental chess...."

International STAR TREK INTO DARKNESS Teaser
STAR TREK TV Series To Follow STAR TREK 2?
New STAR TREK 2 Set Photos, A Glimpse Of Sulu,Uhura And Another Vulcan?
This Epicly Bad STAR TREK Fan Film Is The Funniest Thing You'll See All Day!

In Summer 2013, pioneering director J.J. Abrams will deliver an explosive action thriller that takes Star Trek Into Darkness. When the crew of the Enterprise is called back home, they find an unstoppable force of terror from within their own organization has detonated the fleet and everything it stands for, leaving our world in a state of crisis.

With a personal score to settle, Captain Kirk leads a manhunt to a war-zone world to capture a one man weapon of mass destruction. As our heroes are propelled into an epic chess game of life and death, love will be challenged, friendships will be torn apart, and sacrifices must be made for the only family Kirk has left: his crew.

Star Trek into Darkness

Running Time: Unknown
Release Date: May 17 2013 (USA)
MPAA Rating: Unknown
Starring: Zoe Saldana, Simon Pegg, Benedict Cumberbatch, Zachary Quinto John Cho, Peter Weller, Karl Urban and Chris Pine
Directed by: JJ Abrams
Written by: Alex Kurtzman (screenplay), Damon Lindelof (screenplay),Roberto Orci (screenplay), Gene Roddenberry (tv series "Star Trek")

Posted By:
Mark Julian
Member Since 6/8/2011
Filed Under "Star Trek" 12/21/2012 Source: via
DISCLAIMER: is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]
1 2
ToTheManInTheColdSweat - 12/21/2012, 8:32 PM
So he is an evil Sherlock? Got it
AshleyWilliams - 12/21/2012, 8:34 PM
He should be the next Joker.
DaenerysTargaryen - 12/21/2012, 8:37 PM
He's channeling his way into my heart. ;D
DioFoRio - 12/21/2012, 8:38 PM
thought he was playing Robert Smith ?
Reasonnnn - 12/21/2012, 8:41 PM
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 8:54 PM
He's not Khan Mark. Get over it and quit trying to convince eveyone that he is
MarkJulian - 12/21/2012, 8:56 PM
Could care less who he is. Not a Trekkie but enjoyed the first film and looking forward to the second.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 8:58 PM
@Mark- Well in every single Trek article you have been doing, you've been insinuating that he's Khan. Little subtle hinting in all your Trek articles.

FightAs0ne - 12/21/2012, 9:01 PM
An evil Sherlock?

Oh god the horror...
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:02 PM
In any case, I'd say all the khan speculation was something Abrams hoped for. It threw us all off track from the TRUE identity of the villain.

Abrams is a smart man. He knows not to touch or even go near TWOK film.

M3T4LL0 - 12/21/2012, 9:04 PM
LP4 brings up a good point. Not picking sides here but I've noticed it too.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:11 PM

MarkJulian - 12/21/2012, 9:12 PM
What I type in the article and what I type in the comments section are two different things.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:17 PM
@TheRedHood- Yeah and "John Harrison" has the exact same amount of letter as "Gary Mitchell"


Look, we can pick this sh!t apart piece by piece biggest proof, or at least to me is the biggest proof came from Simon Pegg. When he blatantly denied Khan is the villain. Pegg aint a liar, ok? He's a geek just like the rest of us. He used to do the very same things as us.

He's not into [frick]ing with our minds about who this villain really is. Simon Pegg is more about the BARE FACTS. And he FLAT OUT blasted the Khan rumors as "myth"

There is no Khan in this film. MAYBE Cumberbatch is an augment. MAYBE. That's fine with me. But is he actually "Khan" ? THE Khan? No. He is not.

And if I were to be a betting man. My bet is Abrams will never bring Khan into these films. Did you also know that back when Orci and Kurtzman were working on the screenplay for this film, the original idea was to have GARY MITCHELL as the villain.

See? I can pull out coincidences too.

Or...the fact that this guy is a member of Starfleet. Or...the fact he's a white guy.

Or...the fact that in this timeline, Khan IS STILL INDIAN. He was affected by the altered timeline.

Besides, Khan already appeared in the 2009 Trek film. Remember? Nero :)

Nero=Khan. They matched each other in terms of goals, motivations, right down to the classic "Khaaaan/Spoooock" screams.

LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:19 PM
@Mark- Yeah in ALL of your Trek articles you COMMENT that he's Khan. But look above in your ARTICLE-

"Note: There was an original-series Star Trek crew member named Harrison who appeared in the debut of Khan. Coincidence?"

You want Khan in this movie. I get it. But just understand that Khan isn't the only villain in Star Trek.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:21 PM
Oops in my above comment i meant to say Khan was NOT affected by the altered timeline.

MarkJulian - 12/21/2012, 9:23 PM
I've only outright said he's playing Khan in the comments section in 1 article. You're seeming a little fanatical yourself in your belief that he's playing Gary Mithcell. Again I'm not a Trekkie, I could care less. If the name Harrison had some sort of connection to Gary Mitchell, that's what I would've written.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:23 PM
Anyway Mark, I wasn't trying to bully you. But i have noticed...i mean you're one of the junior editors here on should be a bit more subtle...more neutral. Not saying your opinion shouldn't or doesn't matter but if in every article you want to shove down people's throats that he's Khan then you're simply leading the sheep astray and irritating those who want a fresh, new villain or at least one who hasn't even HAD a movie yet.

Just saying.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:28 PM
@Mark- Not just 1 article Mark, you have commented in numerous of your trek articles that the guy IS KHAN.

I get it, you want Khan in this movie. Fine.

As for Gary Mitchell, i could care less if he's in this. I'm only saying Mitchell because he's the better alternative to Khan. Khan already had a [frick]ing movie man. Come on. Gary Mitchell was in like one god damn episode of TOS and then that was it.

Khan was mentioned a few times in "The Next Generation" series and "Enterprise" series and they kept his memory alive by keeping the Eugenics wars mentioned all throughout the different shows.

Time to give Khan a rest.

Personally, i prefer a brand new villain. One that is NON canon. But between Mitchell and Khan?

I prefer the dude that nobody knows about- Mitchell. It gives Abrams a fresh, clean canvas to work off of. With Khan, there are too many problems- hardcore fans will never accept anyone trying to follow in Ricardo Montalban's legendary footsteps as Khan. And if Khan were the villain in this film, it would be unendingly compared to Wrath of Khan...that is a losing battle Mark.

Khan brings too many problems to the plate.

Mitchell is a more...fresh and clean canvas. That or a brand new villain.

Abrams is no fool.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:30 PM
This guy had his day in the sun. This is a new timeline. Time for people to move on.

mgeoff88 - 12/21/2012, 9:41 PM
That is a lot of crazy for one villain. Benedict Cumberbatch does look very evil in the trailers.

I don't know who he is playing, but I do know he'll make an incredible villain.
LP4 - 12/21/2012, 9:41 PM
Now let me be clear IF Khan were to appear in the films at some point (which i kinda doubt) but if he did, that is ...'ok'

What gets me upset is when everyone keeps insinuating that CUMBERBATCH is Khan. That's what i don't want. I don't want Cumberbatch to be Khan. I don't want to see Khan as the main villain in this film.

Now if they wanted to maybe put a post-credits scene of the Botany Bay floating through space, that's fine. That's a nice little tease for the fans and could lead into the 3rd film.

But for THIS film. With THIS actor- Benedict Cumberbatch. I really hope and pray he isn't Khan.

I'm partly against the Khan thing too because we already have General Zod as the villain in Man of Steel. So if they were to bring back Khan as the villain for this movie too. It would just seem like Hollywood has gotten lazy. Lazy to the point where we have to brand, spanken new REBOOTED film universes yet of all the many villains Superman has or the Starship Enterprise has, they seem to only be able to bring back Zod and Khan?


The point of a rebooted universe for a film is to not CLING to the old stuff of the past. Man of Steel wants to cling to Zod (who already had a movie- Superman II) I hope and pray, Abrams is a little more creative and doesn't dig up Khan (who already had a movie- Wrath of Khan) and coincidently both films came out the SAME EXACT YEAR- 1982 LMAO

Ceejay - 12/21/2012, 9:42 PM
Easy way to please a fanboy, make your villain another crazy idiot.

So at some point we're going to get some REAL Star Trek instead of this a-typical Hollywood action movie good guys vs English bad guy shit?
FEJ - 12/21/2012, 9:50 PM
I think he is going to do a great job. I think he can also make a good riddler in the batman movies.
nikoar - 12/21/2012, 9:56 PM
Hannibal Lecter, not Lector.
Scooby - 12/21/2012, 10:11 PM
Bring it Cumber-bitch :P

Can't wait!
DrRockso - 12/21/2012, 11:28 PM
@LP4- he's Khan
Jollem - 12/21/2012, 11:40 PM
i still say he's an evil Q
Thegeekygurl - 12/22/2012, 12:21 AM
@LP4 "I'm partly against the Khan thing too because we already have General Zod as the villain in Man of Steel. So if they were to bring back Khan as the villain for this movie too. It would just seem like Hollywood has gotten lazy."

" The point of a rebooted universe for a film is to not CLING to the old stuff of the past."

This Star Trek is just old stuff from the past. Same characters and premise in new duds. What do you think this Star Trek Reboot is? An original idea? Do you realize how easy it was for them to set up the 1st film compared to even Star Trek Next Gen or DS9?
Abrams Trek was just a rehash. The villain is obviously a renamed Khan with a slightly different backstory.
So even if they give him a new name hes just a recycled villain in a recycled story.

If you dont already realize Hollywood is full of low talent bums, rebooting old films, using comics, novels and even old TV shows to make a quick buck without creating anything new, then you're as bad a detective as Nolan's Batman.

Paramount slaps new paint on Trek and people act like its new. Its a 40 year old idea. A product of a lazy corporation milking an old idea again and again.

Star Trek was a great original idea created over 40 years ago. Now its just a film franchise. Its like a Big Mac, an old idea that sells so they keep making it.
loki668 - 12/22/2012, 2:31 AM
I like the part where Khan raised the genius ape who grew up to take over the world for ape-kind. Are they putting that in the movie;)? Maybe they'll show the Khan who lived on a magical island with his diminuitive sidekick, granting wishes (that teach moral lessons) to people? x)

Maybe he's not Noonien Khan. Maybe he's Ghengis Khan? Maybe he's Shaka Khan?

Remember: Those who Khan, do. Those who Khan't, get banished to Ceti Alpha V.

Lord Loki has spoken
Christuffer - 12/22/2012, 2:41 AM
If nobody dies anytime soon, this might turn out to be our "The Dark Knight" of the new Star Trek series
Jollem - 12/22/2012, 3:14 AM
@SotoJuiceMan - ...prove it
loki668 - 12/22/2012, 4:30 AM
Khan't we all just get along?

Lord Loki has spoken
Zounds - 12/22/2012, 4:59 AM
Ever since I heard Cumberbatch do an Alan Rickman impersonation, I hear Rickman through BC every interview.

On another random note, that STID Japanese one sheet looks pretty cool...because of the Japanese characters.

datNAMEtho - 12/22/2012, 5:40 AM
@Scooby: HAHA!!!
Happy11 - 12/22/2012, 5:46 AM
ENOUGH please why does it matter who the villain is everyone knows what I think that it's definitely not Gary Mitchell or khan. JJ Abrams always does this its just a ploy for us to go and see it.
CaptainAmerica31 - 12/22/2012, 5:53 AM
Agree @ christuffeer this looks like it could be TDK of 2013
NOID - 12/22/2012, 6:17 AM
I'll give JJ and the crew credit for keeping his role a mystery... in this day and age with technology and everyone knowing everything about a movie before its released....

TheAbomination - 12/22/2012, 8:55 AM
It's Khan. Plain and simple.
DioFoRio - 12/22/2012, 9:39 AM
[email protected] mean really salty frozen fish? You could have said they were the cheddar bay biscuits and I would have stopped there ; ) (they are soooooooo goood)
1 2

Please log in to post comments.

Don't have an account?
Please Register.