Star Trek LogoThe Internets is all abuzz this morning with some “Star Trek 2″ spoilers, though personally I don’t really think they’re that big of a deal, but whatever, this post still gets the SPOILER tag anyway in case there are some of you out there trolling the ‘net but, at the same time, are trying to avoid “Trek 2″ spoilers.


So, J.J. Abrams’ super duper secret untitled “Star Trek” sequel. (This movie is so super duper secret, it doesn’t even have an official title yet! Dang, now that’s super duper secret!)

We already know that “Sherlock’s” Benedict Cumberbatch will be playing a villain in the film, and that previously rumors surfaced of Khan would bring the villainy to the Trek sequel. Well, 2 + 2 = 4, right? Turns out, it all makes sense now — Cumberbatch is, indeed, playing Khan.

Benedict Cumberbatch and Zachary Quinto on the set of Star Trek 2 (2013) Movie Image

Via TrekMovie:

A few outlets have also reported (including today’s AICN) that this villain was Trek’s most famous bad guy – the exiled Eugenics War leader Khan Noonien Singh (originally played by Ricardo Montalban). TrekMovie has also confirmed this with a number of sources so we no longer consider it to be a rumor. Khan is back in 2013, however sources indicate that the film is not a rehash of “Space Seed,” the original Star Trek episode where Kirk and crew first encounter the genetic superman from the past.

I mean, does that really spoil anything for you? Now you know what Cumberbatch’s character is called. I kinda figured that’s basic information 101 for movies, isn’t it?

Leonard Nimoy in Star Trek (2009) Movie ImageAnd finally, two more pieces of news about the sequel that I still don’t consider big spoilers, but some of you may disgaree:

Leonard Nimoy will indeed return as Future Spock (Zachary Quinto is playing the younger version). Word is, Nimoy’s role has already been shot and he’s done, which doesn’t speak very much for the appearance being very meaty.

Also, those pesky rough and tumble Klingons will be making their first official appearance in the Abrams Trek universe in the sequel. I say first “official” because they originally had a subplot in the first Abrams Trek movie, but were deleted. I bet they didn’t like that one bit.

Author: Nix

Editor/Writer at Likes: long walks on the beach and Kevin Costner post-apocalyptic movies. Dislikes: 3D, shaky cam, and shaky cam in 3D. Got a site issue? Wanna submit Movie/TV news? Or to email me in regards to anything on the site, you can do so at nix (at)
  • LionHeart

    I’d say that last bit counts as meaty news myself.

  • tomerik

    why can’t they tell a fresh story ??? Hated the idea of back to kirk and spock in the first film. But then they geniously “changed” the timeline so the next movie could start fresh. A hole new direction for our enterprise crew. But NOOO.. Let’s get Khan back. What a shame…..

    • Dedpool

      Just cause you’re using charatcers that have been on screen before doesn’t mean we’re getting a rehash. As amatter of fact they just said it’s not a rehash of Khan’s first appearance. After the first movie everything is up for grabs. We will see familiar characters, worlds and such but with new stories and situations, but of course they will pay some homage to the original. Much like the “Ultimate” universe of comics for Marvel, and the new “Thundercats” cartoon.

  • Dedpool

    Yay! More future Spock! He doesn’t need a meaty role, just showing up is enough. Still wish they would’ve put Kirk’s cameo in the original. It was actually very well written and heartfelt.

  • Nathan L Williams

    Just because the Villain is named Khan doesn’t mean it will be the same Khan from the original series. I’m betting other then having the same surname this will be a different character. In other words an Abrams “in joke” just like Admiral’s Archer’s Dog was.