tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7877371347086447490.post2143542807519050881..comments2024-03-28T20:37:08.491+11:00Comments on The Audient: "Our Zod" and "our Khan"Derek Armstronghttp://www.blogger.com/profile/13750747272647975591noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7877371347086447490.post-14084592420867301852013-07-03T10:19:31.638+10:002013-07-03T10:19:31.638+10:00I would be remiss not to make note that Khan origi...I would be remiss not to make note that Khan originated in the original <i>Star Trek</i> episode, "Space Seed", where he was also played by Montalban. That was the Khan that Cumberbatch was portraying; not the white-haired psycho obsessed with killing James T. Kirk from <i>The Wrath of Khan</i>. I know this sounds like Trekker semantics, but it really is important for making sure that you compare and contrast - and judge - Cumberbatch against the proper Montalban performance.<br /><br />Zod, of course, first appeared in <i>Adventure Comics</i> #283, dated April 1961. He's a little different, though, since he's appeared so sparingly on the screen. (<i>Trek</i> connection: In the 1988 Ruby Spears <i>Superman</i> cartoon, Zod was voiced by Rene Auberjonois, who played Odo on <i>Deep Space Nine</i>.)<br /><br />As for your actual thematic point, I don't feel as possessive of Khan or Zod as you do. I think part of that is because I know there was a Khan and a Zod before I came along, or before <i>The Wrath of Khan</i> and <i>Superman II</i>. And part of it is, growing up a comic book reader, I'm not fazed by multiple incarnations of characters and continuities, etc.Travis S. McClainhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15774869483357940473noreply@blogger.com