Gorrath said:
I would say that his nationality is important because it is an established part of his backstory.
I think that depends. It's established, but does it really mean much in the context of his backstory?
He's a genetically engineered super being who conquered much earth but was later deposed. He's Indian because his parents were Indian.
Like, Magneto's backstory from X-Men was in a death camp, this is established. But he doesn't necessarily need to be Jewish to be in such a camp. (albeit this change is not visual)
Although, I can understand that it would annoy people who identify with the character because of their background. Like if Indian Star Trek fans would have preferred it for Khan/Harrison to be more explicitly Indian. And as a Jewish born guy, I think it's cool that Magneto is Jewish.
AetherWolf said:
Cumberbatch was originally cast as John Harrison, a completely original character. Early on in filming the script was modified and Khan was written in, and the story's focus was taken away from the terrorism/Harrison plot.
http://movies.yahoo.com/blogs/the-reel-breakdown/check-star-trek-writers-planting-easter-eggs-tribbles-215642312.html
A poor decision on the production, if you ask me. The entire structure of the plot was effected.
That's unfortunate. I understand that it would have been riskier of them to do an original character, but it seems kind of pandering now that it was simply a decision to have the character be Khan. People were already a bit worried when it was revealed that Damon Lindelof (who helped write Prometheus) was involved.
kamay said:
I think it was more trying to cast a "hot, in" actor rather than purposely making the character a honkie.
Casting Cumberbatch does come off as that (I think he's a good actor though). It would depend when he was cast as per what AetherWolf said.
Idocreating said:
They can't even pull the alternate universe excuse on this one, the changing point is way after Khan is ever born.
There was also apparently issue over whether or not Khan would have been that violent at the time in the new film (as he is only particularly vengeful after Kirk drops him on the planet). They argued that his personality did that work for them.
Gatx said:
erttheking said:
It was either that or have a person with brown skin blow things up, and fly an aircraft into buildings in a major populated city...yeah I can see why they'd be hesitant to do that.
In order to get to that oh so perfect colorblind future, at some point it's going to have to be okay to cast any race in any role, good or bad. But of course we're far from there yet so yeah, you need to be wary of those unfortunate implications.
Of course, there are times when you can never escape it. Like that one Jewish woman who saw Drive and took offense that one of the villains was mentioned to be Jewish.
Well we did have the thing with what's his name in Thor who guarded the rainbow bridge. While there are differing opinions it's going obviously going to be uglier arguing one side than the other because you end up siding with racists and white supremacists. On the PC meter it's definitely more acceptable to have a non-white actor in a traditionally white role than it is the other way around.
Just laying it out makes it confusing.
1. People who are diehard fans of the source material ("make your own movie if you're gonna change the race of the character." , "I'll just see the movie as another continuity")
2. People who just want to keep things simple and authentic ("if Johnny Storm is black, his sister should be black")
3. People who are likely fans, but don't mind as long as it doesn't hurt the source material (reactions to the "official" ending of the I Am Legend film)
4. People who don't give a shit.
and then.....
5. Racists who will make a ruckus about anything they can. (the Thor thing)
6. People who are ambiguously racist, but take issue with the casting of a foreign actor because they see it as "appeasing the diversity crowd" or "betraying the race" (which it may or may not be, but you'll never convince them that the actor may have been chosen because he was you know... good).
Idocreating said:
They can't even pull the alternate universe excuse on this one, the changing point is way after Khan is ever born.
There was also apparently issue over whether or not Khan would have been that violent at the time in the new film (as he is only particularly vengeful after Kirk drops him on the planet). They argued that his personality did that work for them.
