J. Allen wrote:
Is it any more gratuitous than Sherry Jackson's camel toe in What are Little Girls Made Of? Or any more gratuitous than the cat suits worn by Jeri Ryan or Jolene Blalock?
It amazes me how short some Trek fans memories are.
My memory isn't short. This is not 20 years ago or 10 years ago. This is today, and today, he put a naked body in there for NO PURPOSE than to show her off. It served nothing in the story. I complained about Uhura last time around, and I complain about this as well. It's insulting to the movie franchise that they have to stoop this low. It's insulting to the audience, to women, to her specifically, and it is BAD FILM MAKING. He wasted a shot. He wasted a shot in a 180 million dollar movie. He had themes and characters to build, but no, we need a little T&A. It's the kind of hogwash you find in softcore porn, not a movie that wishes to be taken seriously.
If that's what you're finding in softcore porn, you're watching the wrong goddamned kind of softcore porn.
In my world, we call what you saw Alice Eve wearing, "an underwear ad," and you can find them in all the adult gentleman's magazines, like a K-mart flyer, or on a billboard.
The reference to softcore porn was not about how much skin is being shown. It was about the type of film making JJ is engaging in these scenes. It serves no purpose in the story, therefore, we are just looking at her like a piece of meat. Therefore, we are engaging in filmmaking meant to make to make us excited. Hence, softcore porn.
It isn't the amount of nudity, it is the useless, gratuitous shot that does not build character, it does not move the story along, it does nothing for themes of the movie. It is just meant for little 12-year-old boys to pleasure themselves.