If it's crap ... We'll tell you
There has been a veritable cyber tempest of rumors surrounding the identity of the villain in J.J. Abrams' 'Star Trek 2.' We of course have the see-saw of dubious "Khan"formations, but it's starting to look like that's about as possible as seeing tribbles in the next movie. All we really know is that Benedict Cumberbatch will be playing whichever villain character they decide upon. Now it looks as if Karl Urban is stoking the internet fires by seemingly letting slip the identity of our baddie. He says (of Cumberbatch)...
"He’s awesome, he’s a great addition, and I think his Gary Mitchell is going to be exemplary."
Who's Gary Mitchell? Diehard Trekkers will remember him as Capt. Kirk's former comrade who obtains telekinetic powers and turns on the Enterprise crew in the episode "Where No Man Has Gone Before." So of course the question we must ask is, do we believe Urban? They've been exceedingly tight-lipped about practically everything related to this production so far so it seems strange that Urban would just mindlessly blurt out the identity of the villain in the interview. Urban is also a really funny guy and may very well have just been messing with everyone. Now, just for a moment, let's assume that he's telling the truth and that Gary Mitchell (worst villain name ever) is our bad guy. The knee-jerk reaction is to gripe at the underwhelming decision to go with this character. Let us not forget however, that it was the decision to go with an obscure, one-off villain from the original series that gave us 'Wrath of Khan.' Personally, I think Urban's joking, but even if he's not, I know Abrams, Orci and Kurtzman, and Cumberbatch will make the most of Mitchell.
What do you guys think? Is Urban on the level here? If so, what do you think of Gary Mitchell being the villain?