Here We Go Again: Simon Pegg Says 'Star Trek 2' Villain Is Not Khan
And the debate rages on. After a very reputable Star Trek source said they'd confirmed Benedict Cumberbatch was indeed playing Khan in J.J. Abrams' Star Trek 2, one of the film's stars, Simon Pegg, has now come out and flat out stated that is not the case. Who should we believe? We discuss after the jump.
Thanks to The Telegraph, via Cinemablend, for this quote from Pegg:
It's not Khan. That's a myth. Everyone's saying it is, but it's not. I think people just want to have a scoop. It annoys me – it's beyond the point to just ferret around for spoilers all the time to try to be the first to break them.
Pegg is a self professed film lover just like us and frequents all kind of movie reporting websites. He also understands the game and isn't wrong in saying sites just want to be able to claim they were the ones who had the scoop. In fact, while TrekMovie was the latest site to "confirm" Khan was the villain, Latino Review did it months earlier and in between J.J. Abrams himself said it was not Khan.
It's all very stressful to keep track of and I'm finding it hard to pick a side of this argument. First of all, the sites who've reported that it is Khan are reputable and wouldn't publish the story unless they had it from a very good source, meaning, someone working on the film. On the other hand, there's no reason for Pegg to emphatically lie about it. He could have very diplomatically answered the question by saying, "I'm not at liberty to say but Cumberbatch is great in the film and I can't wait for you to see it." But he didn't. He said "It's not Khan."
However, it's my understanding that Pegg is not allowed to say anything definitive about the film at all and to make such a huge, declarative statement likely means he'll be reprimanded or his publicity team OK'd him to say that.
At this point, I don't know who to believe nor do I care. I think Cumberbatch is great, will be great no matter whom he's playing and trust Abrams and his team to really give us a worthy follow-up to their 2009 film. The identity of the bad guy will not change that.
What do you believe?