B5TV.COM. Babylon 5 forums Babylon 5 message for the fans from Claudia Christian Babylon 5
Old May 15th 09, 19:30   #51
for the one
Ambassador
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Pacific Northwest
Posts: 296
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chilli View Post
One movie comes to mind here.

Star Trek. .. which does not have no female skin, but does have more male skin than female skin. While we get a glimpse at Uhura's underwear, Kirk is in his undies throughout the whole scene.

I can, also, off the top of my head, think of several other movies that have more male nudity than female nudity, or only male nudity.

The Piano
Goodbye Lenin
American History X



I've heard this point before, and love it dearly.

The 1970s looked futuristic beyond the classic series.



Indeed it did - with the key difference that Enterprise actually did suck in this respect. The decon chamber - zuh??

I'm not sure I would call Enterprise's handling of sexuality misogynistic. I'd mostly just call it 12.

fortheone responding- Your line Chilli :
"I've heard this point before, and love it dearly. The 1970s looked futuristic beyond the classic series."

It appears you love my line dearly because of it's counterdiction? Actually in retrospect, I think you misunderstand what is being said here, (I'm smiling while I'm writing this response, to your response and in a chipper mood by the way). You see the '60' classic Star Trek Enterprise ship was not as fancy and didn't have quite as high tech a look. The ship in the new movie was far more advanced and closer to the Motion Picture movie technologically. Which by the way I explained away do to the Sulliban, Xindi & Borg time line interferances, so it is not a rant. Chilli I awesome, (and I could be wrong), your laughing because you think that calling something in the past 'futuristic' is funny and an oximoron. But actually it's a 60s show and a 70s movie, based largely on the distant future yet to be. So my statement is still solid, but I'm glad you found it humurous. Heeeee hah hah heee.

I do have to agree on your decon chamber comment Chilli, that was an obvious attempt to show very sexual situations on the 'Enterprise' show. Also the 'Enterprise' 2000's series actually showed T'Pol totally naked leaving very little to the imagination behind a bedding sheet in one episode and sex in a shower in another, (with commander Tucker). Sooooooo yeah Enterprise pushed many lines hard core. Much more so then the classic series or any of the others for that matter. Save maybe DS9s alternate universe episodes.

Just a point of interjection here: Why did the 90's feminists have such a huge problem with the mini skirts on the original 60's show? I found it made the women look quite sexy not cheap. Aren't they going a little over board? SHIELDS UP!!!


Chilli & Galahad what is the deal with Hollywood's male nudity 80's-2000s? Movies like: The new X-Men 'Wolverine Origins', Full Mounty,The Piano, Goodbye Lenin, American History X, Innerspace, Demolition Man, Terminator movies, etc... This is rediculous, thank God I didn't take my Nephew or Nieces to see Wolverine, dang.....

Chilli your qoute to Darth Librarian "I'm not sure I would call Enterprise's handling of sexuality misogynistic. I'd mostly just call it 12."
In large part the frirst season of 'Enterprise' was spent largely distrusting T'Pol but that I feel was because she was Vulcan not so much her sex. But other episodes did bring in sexual contact with women that ended badly like the episode Rajiin and Unexpected. http://www.startrek.com/startrek/vie....html?season=1
http://www.startrek.com/startrek/vie....html?season=3
Just food for thought.


***Heh what's up Galahad long time no see!!!***
__________________
"You have always been here."- Kosh

CCC CCC CCC
CCCCC CCCCC C
CCC C CCC C C
C C C c
C CCC C
C C

CCCCCCCCC cccccccc
CCCCCCCCC cc
CCCCCCC CC

ccccc
ccccc
cccccccc
cccccccc
(My version of a 8 bit Atari 2600 Terminator)

Last edited by for the one; May 17th 09 at 06:52. Reason: Tranfer of qoute to this local
for the one is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 09, 23:27   #52
Chilli
High Treason Prevention Officer
 
Chilli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 7,497
Send a message via ICQ to Chilli Send a message via MSN to Chilli
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

All the wank formerly found in this thread is now in the Rants forum. Any new wank to enter this thread will go there too.
__________________

Chilli is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 09, 23:47   #53
crazyhorse
Anarchist
 
crazyhorse's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 2,888
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

Even wanking over Uhura?
__________________
‘It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom - for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.’
Extract from the Declaration of Arbroath, 1320.

"me and other folk were just tryin tae get the boot in and some other guy banjoed him"

John Smeaton 2007

"You know why they're on the Internet don't you? Cos you wouldny speak to them in the fecking pub!" - Billy Connolly
crazyhorse is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 15th 09, 23:52   #54
Galahad
First One
 
Galahad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Alcester, Warwickshire, UK
Posts: 3,783
Send a message via MSN to Galahad Send a message via Yahoo to Galahad Send a message via Skype™ to Galahad
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyhorse View Post
Even wanking over Uhura?

Could this thread be the first to be snipped and sent packing to two different forums in a single night.... I sense a swift transportation to NC-17 on the horizon.
__________________
We live for The One, we die for The One

"We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Visit NiCK'S SANCTUARY
Galahad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th 09, 03:32   #55
Alluveal
Psi Cop
 
Alluveal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Posts: 1,643
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

On Spock...

Spock is very logical, but they play up the "child of two worlds" bit. They have a great scene where he is bullied by some other Vulcan kids (which in and of itself was pretty funny,) but he obviously struggled with his half human/half Vulcan self.

I've always considered Spock (and most Vulcans) to be logical and devoid of emotion to a certain extent. I think there is always a button somewhere you can really push and get a reaction, but in doing so, you're waking the dragon, so to say. I've never considered Vulcans to be incapable of emotion, but rather they repress it in order to keep that dragon "caged." I remember watching episodes in which Spock was pushed/pressed or otherwise manipulated into emotional feeling and he was a force to be reckoned with.

Considering that this likely took place before the series (on the canon-timeline,) Spock probably hadn't fully embraced his Vulcan side yet, so the humanity in him slips out, but you also see him realizing that logic might be the best road for him. I don't want to really say too much (don't want to ruin things!)

I honestly can't think of anyone who could have pulled off younger Spock in the same way Zachary Quinto did. He really nailed it, imho. And I recall seeing him at a convention where fans asked him if he watched Leonard Nimoy's version. He said, "no, I've talked to Leonard and we both kind of agree that it might be best to bring another's interpreation of Spock to the big screen." As it turns out, it's a damn good interpretation, imho.

Anyway, sorry for rambling! I still do hope you go see it on the big screen.

As for all the physics . . . I have to go with Captain Mal here. "Need you to use captain dummy talk, Kaylee..."
Alluveal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th 09, 04:45   #56
for the one
Ambassador
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: The Pacific Northwest
Posts: 296
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

What is wanking Chili, Crazy Horse and Galahad?
__________________
"You have always been here."- Kosh

CCC CCC CCC
CCCCC CCCCC C
CCC C CCC C C
C C C c
C CCC C
C C

CCCCCCCCC cccccccc
CCCCCCCCC cc
CCCCCCC CC

ccccc
ccccc
cccccccc
cccccccc
(My version of a 8 bit Atari 2600 Terminator)

Last edited by for the one; May 16th 09 at 05:01.
for the one is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th 09, 06:46   #57
Alluveal
Psi Cop
 
Alluveal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Fort Collins, CO, USA
Posts: 1,643
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

wanking = masturbating...
Alluveal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th 09, 07:12   #58
Recoil
First One
 
Recoil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Chicago, IL
Posts: 8,016
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

Quote:
Originally Posted by for the one View Post
Hello everyone it's For the One,
I haven't dipped into this area of the pool in a while, I hope it's warm.
The Star Trek movie: I personally give the movie 5 stars. I thought Karl Urban as Bones McCoy (who played Eomer in The Lord of the Rings) did the most amazing 'spot on' performance of the docter I've ever scene. WOW! If he doesn't get a oscar nod for that performance there is no justice in this world, seriously.

In case if anyone in the world is wondering I am a Trekie, GEEKS UNIT!!! But no I don't dress up in those costumes and makeup. I was born in 1968 and I was raised on the reruns of classic Trek. I tried very hard to keep a open mind when I went to see the new film. WAY MEGA COOL MOVIE BY THE WAY!!!!

I noticed immediately that many Trekkies will see some very major continuity issues, but all you Trekkers out there don't get your shirt in a knot.
I can explain it all away easy enough. Okay here we go.
The continuity issues are as follows, followed by a brief explaination:
1.) The ship looks almost like Star Trek The Motion Picture in many ways, some what futuristic beyond the classic series.
2.) The warp engine sounds different.
3.) The warp is different.
4.) The hand weapons are dual use laser gun/phasers.
Now all of these are easy to explain away:
>The Sulliban War introduced technology we weren't suppose to have yet, due to being from way in the future beyond Next Generation even.
>The Borg tech left on Earth also inspired a much more accelerated rate of technological advancement.

Now for the not so easy to explain away.
1.) Christopher Pike is too old. In 'Managerie' & 'The Cage', Pike is obviously a young man. Also In 'Minagerie', a obviously older then the recent film 'Spock', is with a young Pike, hmmmm.
>To explain this obvious owps the writers could at the end of a new Star trek tv or film series run; have Pike find a fountain of youth. Only to end up being horribly scared in time for the 'Minagerie' episode. BUMMER....
2.) San Francisco yards orbiting Earth was were Enterprise was built not on the surface.
>The Sulliban War may have altered this, for safety reasons they may have constructed this new advanced prototype on the surface.
3.) The first Enterprise Captain was Robert April not Christopher Pike despite popular belief.
>Do to the recent time travel Romulan events, Captain Pike was picked over Captain April to man the new Enterprise.
4.) Why doesn't Spock just go around the sun and save Vulcan and his mom.
> Who knows maybe he thinks he's getting to old to fight such powerful foes.
Maybe he's affraid of altering time even further creating a even worse time parodox,
who knows. I'm sure if it's allowed to have a spin off, Vulcan while eventually be brought back, so everyone with a big hole in their heart can breath easy again.

THERE SEE, WITH A LITTLE CLEVER WRITING IT'S ALL FIXED. NO CONTINUITY GAPS!!! All is well in the world. Like I said THE MOVIE ROCKS, GIVE IT A CHANCE, all you Trekies out there. This thing can work. Go see it, embrace the fun.

***Darth Librarian: I'm with you I love Star Trek VI, I also love Star Trek II & Kahn is still the best baddie.
However, when you said that, "Nero was hardly Khan", I think it's important to understand were the director is coming from here. The director was probably trying to achieve a new approach. The bad guy in the new Star Trek is the every day man, the guy next door. Ordinarily he would have probably been a nice guy.
***SPOILER ALERT***
Then his whole world is ripped apart and everyone he loves; and a kind of maddness, fueled by rage and the desire for vengence takes over. He's not a real warlord, just a Romulan Captain who lost his family & home world. Thus he seems very passive at first after his initial attack on the USS Kelvin Federation warship, almost like he had appeased his rage and now he was calm again. The meeting with the Captain of the USS Kelvin reignites his fury when the Cpt. says,"Who are you to attack a Federation Vessel?" Bringing out the beast within the once docile man. He's just a man in pain, who just so happens to be in a very powerful ship. Just food for thought. PEACE OUT.
Without sounding too harsh, there is NO NEED to explain why the Enterprise, Warp, the Transporters, and Phasers look different. Its a reboot. A relaunch. A fresh coat of paint on an old franchise. They get to change physical appearances without an explaination from cannon.

And FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, PLEASE don't try to explain these changes by using Star Trek: Enterprise. Have you no soul?

__________________
The Operative: "Do you know what your sin is?"
Malcom Reynolds: "Aw hell, I'm a fan of all seven... but right now, I'm gonna have to go with Wrath."
Recoil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th 09, 10:06   #59
Galahad
First One
 
Galahad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Alcester, Warwickshire, UK
Posts: 3,783
Send a message via MSN to Galahad Send a message via Yahoo to Galahad Send a message via Skype™ to Galahad
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alluveal View Post
On Spock...

Spock is very logical, but they play up the "child of two worlds" bit.
I think that might be important for future productions though. Due to events in the film, Spock has much stronger reasons for being polarised. On the one hand he has the need to preserve what remains of the one world... and yet on the other hand he has discovered an earlier appreciation for the home he still has. He has also lost the most influential part of his human heritage. So I think deep down in his repressed emotions he realises how important both sides of his cultural background are to him.

Quote:
I honestly can't think of anyone who could have pulled off younger Spock in the same way Zachary Quinto did. He really nailed it, imho. And I recall seeing him at a convention where fans asked him if he watched Leonard Nimoy's version. He said, "no, I've talked to Leonard and we both kind of agree that it might be best to bring another's interpretion of Spock to the big screen." As it turns out, it's a damn good interpretation, imho.
I believe Pine and Urban in particular took a similar approach (although obviously Urban couldn't talk to Kelly).

Quote:
As for all the physics . . . I have to go with Captain Mal here. "Need you to use captain dummy talk, Kaylee..."
Incidentally, I've heard two theories given about the supernova that attempt to reconcile it with physics. There's one that is in the Trek prequel comic that mirrors my own idea (that it wasn't just the magnitude of the explosion that threatened the galaxy but the nature of the energy released...that it was causing a chain reaction in local stars that specifically threatened the Romulan Star Empire).

Quote:
In Star Trek: Countdown, the official comic book prequel to Star Trek, the star which went supernova and destroyed Romulus was called the Hobus star. It is explained that the Hobus supernova was unlike any previously seen: as the supernova grew, it converted mass into energy, which increased its power and allowed it to expand. As a result, its threat reached beyond the Hobus system and potentially the entire galaxy.

The other theory is that the threat to the galaxy was more political than literal... as the Romulan Star Empire was going to suffer most at the hands of this event, the thinking was it could cause them to act out of fear/spite and take on the Federation to level the playing field.

Combining these two ideas makes it a little more plausible.
__________________
We live for The One, we die for The One

"We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth."

Visit NiCK'S SANCTUARY

Last edited by Galahad; May 16th 09 at 11:23.
Galahad is offline   Reply With Quote
Old May 16th 09, 13:08   #60
Chilli
High Treason Prevention Officer
 
Chilli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Vienna, Austria
Posts: 7,497
Send a message via ICQ to Chilli Send a message via MSN to Chilli
Re: Star Trek (SPOILERS)

Quote:
Originally Posted by for the one View Post
What is wanking Chili, Crazy Horse and Galahad?
Nothing of any interest, recently. No idea what is wanking Crazyhorse or Galahad.
__________________

Chilli is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 23:50.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.5
Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
©2001 - 2018 B5TV.COM