RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,373
Posts: 5,356,649
Members: 24,626
Currently online: 580
Newest member: Nostromov

TrekToday headlines

The Gene Roddenberry Project Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Moore: No Deep Space Nine Regrets
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Pegg Star Wars Rumor
By: T'Bonz on Jul 30

Borg Cube Fridge
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Free Enterprise Kickstarter
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Siddig To Join Game Of Thrones
By: T'Bonz on Jul 29

Sci-Fried To Release New Album
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek/Planet of the Apes Crossover
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Star Trek into Darkness Soundtrack
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28

Horse 1, Shatner 0
By: T'Bonz on Jul 28


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools
Old June 16 2013, 12:10 AM   #256
Locutus of Bored
Furfallin'
 
Locutus of Bored's Avatar
 
Location: Huntington Beach, California
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
I'm still disturbed by Riker vaporizing Yuta in The Vengeance Factor instead of taking one of the numerous non-lethal options available to him (like say, beaming up her intended target --Fat Road Warrior-- instead of Riker beaming down).
That was a split-second decision of saving the life of one of the leaders of a planet that's a Federation member from being murdered in cold blood, who was probably going to die after she'd accomplished said murder. Nothing sexist about it at all, from my POV.
Nor from mine, which you'd know if you hadn't deleted the very next sentence in the post where I mentioned that what troubled me about the scene had nothing to do with her being a woman.

Franklin wrote: View Post
It's purely moot, but I guess what I wonder is if the writers would have been wary of a negative audience reaction to having Khan kill a female Admiral Marcus with his bare hands. As a character, I think Khan was despicable enough to actually do it, but the feeling on this board is that it would've been distrubing to the audience, and I agree. But that begs a question. If Adm. Marcus had been cast as a woman, how differently would that bridge scene between Khan and Marcus need to be played out?
Since they didn't show it actually happening and just showed the reaction shot from Carol, it's possible they might have left it as is. The various CSIs and NCISs and other examining the evidence type procedurals don't seem to shy away from showing the gruesome aftermath of murders against men or women any more, and movies haven't hesitated to show a villain actually breaking a woman's neck (the scene that popped into my head was John Malkovich in In the Line of Fire), though they are a little less quick to explicitly show the whole bullet through the forehead thing than they are with male characters. They'll show the aftermath from the less gruesome entry point view, but it's still fairly rare to show it actually happening.

Yeesh, that post went to a morbid place, didn't it?
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Last edited by Locutus of Bored; June 16 2013 at 12:25 AM.
Locutus of Bored is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 12:15 AM   #257
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
In a genre like Star Trek, if you have numbers you end up having substance. It will self correct.
No it won't.

Because the genre Star Trek belongs to is "science fiction," a genre whose literary tradition is replete with damsel-in-distress subtropes who are raped and/or murdered by antagonists at a really disturbing rate.

If you double the number of women on the Enterprise you merely double the chances of Kirk having a threesome with two or more of them. That is pretty much the OPPOSITE of what we're looking for here.

Why do you view gender equality in the franchise as a conflict?
Because you keep insisting that it is something to strive for and complaining when they do it. Clearly you prefer quantity over quality, which in science fiction often defeats the purpose.

Look at it this way: a director produces a string of movies with an all-white cast and two black characters who are either pimps or gangsters. The public complains that blacks are under-represented in his movies, so he makes a film that features two white cops and forty black gang bangers.

Quantity over quality, right?
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 12:22 AM   #258
Pauln6
Commodore
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Paired with her husband, they sort of cancel each other out and he's a more prominent character...
Where literally every scene he's involved in and slightly more than half of his lines have something to do with Amanda.

In which case you'd be hard pressed to prevent her from being written out of the movie altogether, since there's no real reason for "The Captain's Yeoman" to have any meaningful lines that couldn't be attributed to Spock, Uhura, Carol or Bones.

I'd still be happy if she appeared.
No you wouldn't. Especially since you wouldn't notice that she DID appear if she didn't have any lines, especially so if she died three minutes after her first silent appearance.

Nonsense. There are quite a few supporting male cast members. Just use the women instead. Simples.
And they did. Very prominently, in fact.

Lol - I'm willing to bet that they had more than enough actresses auditioning, just not that many role for them to fill.
You know better than that. "Extras" are cast based on a broad set of qualifications, but gender isn't one of them. If they had majority females auditioning for those roles, there'd be a majority of females in the background of the crew.

You're implying that female actresses have a tendency to gravitate towards science fiction/action films despite the fact that you have to know, on some level, that this is not the case. If women are under-represented in this regard, it's primarily because of the lack of desire to BE represented.
Yeah I've already said I give Amanda a pass because she represents more than 'just' Spock's mother. I meant in terms of numbers parental characters cancel each other out because they come in pairs. Sarek is more prominent because he's still breathing.

I can think of many ways that Rand could contribute and not one of them is asking the Captain to look at her legs. I don't think a person's rank determines how much they should be allowed to contribute to a story. That's bonkers. Chief O'Brien did fine, regardless of where his rank was fluctuating that week. And, a few Russian jokes aside, nothing Chekov does particularly screams TOS Chekov in either movie, yet there he remains. I do however think rank is significant to the way in which a character contributes to the story and leaving newly qualified cadets in charge of the ship or engineering is a bit silly.

I don't think they'd have ANY difficulty filling the numbers if the parts were there. I was surprised at the number of women who attend Star Trek conventions and if I recall correctly, Rosario Dawson was really keen to get a part. Heather Langenkamp apparently appeared as an alien extra. A lot of women love Star Trek. I think on some level you know that to be true. And btw you might not want to ever repeat any of that stuff to a woman. I think they might be insulted at the suggestion that they stick to 'women's issues'.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 12:30 AM   #259
Pauln6
Commodore
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
In a genre like Star Trek, if you have numbers you end up having substance. It will self correct.
No it won't.

Because the genre Star Trek belongs to is "science fiction," a genre whose literary tradition is replete with damsel-in-distress subtropes who are raped and/or murdered by antagonists at a really disturbing rate.

If you double the number of women on the Enterprise you merely double the chances of Kirk having a threesome with two or more of them. That is pretty much the OPPOSITE of what we're looking for here.

Why do you view gender equality in the franchise as a conflict?
Because you keep insisting that it is something to strive for and complaining when they do it. Clearly you prefer quantity over quality, which in science fiction often defeats the purpose.

Look at it this way: a director produces a string of movies with an all-white cast and two black characters who are either pimps or gangsters. The public complains that blacks are under-represented in his movies, so he makes a film that features two white cops and forty black gang bangers.

Quantity over quality, right?
LOL - erm - don't repeat any of what you just said there either.

But I'm astonished that you think the writers are so narrow-minded that they would have to re-write Cupcake to be a damsel in distress if he were a she. Nothing about Cupcake requires him to be a man at all. The framework of NuStarbuck was taken from the original and she was a fascinating character.

Had a quick thumb through the recurring cast of NuBSG as an after-thought. They ended up with roughly 70 men and 43 women, although the number is misleading since at the bottom of the list you have a large number of characters, mostly male who only appeared twice.

What is more interesting is the balance of the top twenty characters - 11 men and 9 women. Big shock - it can be done. I wonder how they managed to source so many actresses? ;P
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631

Last edited by Pauln6; June 16 2013 at 12:47 AM.
Pauln6 is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 01:05 AM   #260
beamMe
Fleet Captain
 
beamMe's Avatar
 
Location: Europa
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
But I'm astonished that you think the writers are so narrow-minded that they would have to re-write Cupcake to be a damsel in distress if he were a she. Nothing about Cupcake requires him to be a man at all.
And you would have had no problem with the bar fight in ST if Cupcake had been a woman, and Kirk calling her "Cupcake" out of the blue?
beamMe is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 01:17 AM   #261
Locutus of Bored
Furfallin'
 
Locutus of Bored's Avatar
 
Location: Huntington Beach, California
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
That's why you have the black girl in miniskirts still acting basically as the receptionist (and love interest), but nothing more substantial.

...

Hoshi, the receptionist again.
That you think nuUhura and Hoshi were doing nothing more than "basically acting as receptionists" indicates to me that you're not willing to discuss this from any kind of rational perspective and are just looking to cast aspersions.

Hoshi was a professor teaching xenolinguistics and the preeminent expert in the field on the entire planet, which is why Archer recruited her. She refined and developed the algorithms which allowed for the universal translator to work so smoothly later. She acted as a de facto diplomatic and cultural affairs officer (along with "T'Boob," who you equally dismissed so casually) to advise Archer on how to deal with alien ambassadors and species during first contact situations. She overcame her debilitating fears and remained a key member of the crew throughout the mission and countless dangerous situations, even after returning to Earth and having a chance to change her mind before going on what appeared to be essentially a suicide mission. But no, just a receptionist.

Uhura was fluent in three(?) important enemy alien languages as a cadet, was shown to be able to gather key intelligence on foreign powers like the Klingons by listening to their long range communications (which is how she learned about the Narada showing up), was able to step into the job when the dedicated officer couldn't speak Romulan, went on dangerous away missions to exploding volcanoes and the Klingon homeworld where she tried to resolve the situation through diplomacy at great risk to herself, risked her life to save Captain Kirk's by beaming down to a high-flying, fast-moving garbage scow to try and stun Khan and take him alive. But again, just a receptionist.

I have to ask. What kind of badass receptionists do you work with?

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Actually, it was Winona's absence FROM THE MOVIE after giving birth that led to that criticism. It was the absence of her as a discernible influence compared to her dead husband i.e. the lack of respect to her as a character.
Kirk's whole motivation in the film, and what made him different from his PrimeVerse counterpart, was that he had no strong parental figures in his daily life until Pike came along and pointed him on the right path, which is why he risked his life, fought authority, wandered about aimlessly in his home town without a clear goal, and always felt that he was living in his father's shadow. Mom was probably distraught from the death of her husband and buried herself in her work and was always off on deep space assignments for Starfleet. The uncle Kirk stayed with while she was gone was an abusive asshole. His father was dead. This made nuKirk even more rebellious, carefree, and risk-taking than PrimeKirk.

What you're asking for here is for them to dramatically alter the entire motivation and narrative structure of nuKirk's early life in order to better serve a less than secondary character who we knew little about even in the original universe. You're so concerned about respecting c-level fictional character's equal time that you're willing to sacrifice the entire driving force of the chief protagonist's early life and dramatically alter events in order to do it. That's not putting the writing first. That's filling out a spreadsheet to make sure everyone gets a fairer distribution of time onscreen; how it affects the story be damned.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

Last edited by Locutus of Bored; June 16 2013 at 01:39 AM.
Locutus of Bored is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 02:23 AM   #262
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Yeah I've already said I give Amanda a pass because she represents more than 'just' Spock's mother. I meant in terms of numbers parental characters cancel each other out because they come in pairs.
"Numbers" means jack in this context. Between the two of Spock's parents, Amanda is the more prominent character; her influence guides Spock's career, her death is a galvanizing moment in Spock's character development, and the desire to avenge her death is the catalyst for Spock's friendship with Kirk.

Sarek is almost ancillary to this development; you could have replaced him with Sybok and nobody would have noticed.

I can think of many ways that Rand could contribute and not one of them is asking the Captain to look at her legs.
So have Rand be the one who walks past Kirk and mutters "We have a bulkhead breach" without looking at him. Make that her only line in the movie, blink-and-you'll-miss-it, instantly forgettable.

But if that's what you're going to do with Crewman Rand, what is the point of making it Crewman Rand? If you're going to invent an actual named character with depth and background, you need to USE that character in a meaningful way. Otherwise it's just a supernumerary with a funny back story.

I don't think they'd have ANY difficulty filling the numbers if the parts were there.
Considering we're talking about extras, the parts are there. Casting directors generally do not care who fills in the background spaces and do not specifically aim for a set ratio of men to women.

I was surprised at the number of women who attend Star Trek conventions...
I was not, considering the conventions had considerably less than a 50/50 ratio.

And btw you might not want to ever repeat any of that stuff to a woman. I think they might be insulted at the suggestion that they stick to 'women's issues'.
When women stop complaining to me about how acting is a male-dominated profession, I'll stop repeating it.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 02:33 AM   #263
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

I notice you didn't address the overall issue. Trading quality for quantity is a net loss, not a net gain. Your reference to BSG is particularly poignant:

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
But I'm astonished that you think the writers are so narrow-minded that they would have to re-write Cupcake to be a damsel in distress if he were a she.
If Cupcake was a woman than it wouldn't have mattered at all because he had only two lines in the entire movie. That's not a prominent or meaningful role; more quantity vs. quality.

Your complaint is essentially that this movie lacks an appropriate quantity of female characters. Quantity, however, is irrelevant, as it could just as easily be achieved by adding a lesbian threesome as both of the prominent female characters are well-developed and dynamic personalities. It makes no sense to start randomly replacing extras with female parts just for the sake of having female parts; the same balance of quantity could be easily achieved by setting Kirk and Pike's conversation in a nudie bar.

Nothing about Cupcake requires him to be a man at all. The framework of NuStarbuck was taken from the original and she was a fascinating character.
Cupcake is NOT a fascinating character, male OR female. Ergo, switching the gender makes no difference whatsoever.

OTOH, NuStarbuck is variously portrayed as a misanthropic malcontent and high-functioning alcoholic with a severely overclocked libido. It isn't actually the gender reversal of the original character so much as the FUSION of two original characters; basically, the prostitute in the flight suit. A similar thing happens with Commander Cain, where just for the lulz they trot out a steamy lesbian affair with Cylon #6 who then goes on to get raped by just about everybody (remember I mentioned that earlier? It's not accidental).

Funny thing: science fiction is very comfortable with lesbian relationships (which are played mostly for titillation) or sexual assault (also played partly for titillation). OTOH, how many openly gay male characters exist in sci-fi? Related question: how many sci-fi novels, films or movies have ever depicted male-on-male sexual assault? Last question: who, other than a complete baddass like John Barrowman, could EVER get away with playing an openly gay character?

It's almost as if science fiction enjoys a predominantly male-dominated AUDIENCE.

I wonder how they managed to source so many actresses?
Filming in the U.K..

Why do you suppose the ended up casting Alice Eve as Carol Marcus?
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 03:25 AM   #264
Clancy_s
Lieutenant Commander
 
Clancy_s's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Cupcake is NOT a fascinating character, male OR female. Ergo, switching the gender makes no difference whatsoever.
Not to his lines, but IMO it does to his actions and thus to his role in the story - he needs to be very physically formidable. You could come up with a female character that was but she'd be much further from the norm, for that I'd want some backstory, in a film that had little room for character development. I'd rather they gave Carol more to do. YMMV

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
OTOH, NuStarbuck is variously portrayed as a misanthropic malcontent and high-functioning alcoholic with a severely overclocked libido.
I'm one of the few who preferred the original BGA - as I saw him malcontent and high-functioning alcoholic with a severely overclocked libidoalso applied to the male version of Starbuck.
Clancy_s is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 12:05 PM   #265
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
That's why you have the black girl in miniskirts still acting basically as the receptionist (and love interest), but nothing more substantial.

...

Hoshi, the receptionist again.
That you think nuUhura and Hoshi were doing nothing more than "basically acting as receptionists" indicates to me that you're not willing to discuss this from any kind of rational perspective and are just looking to cast aspersions.

Hoshi was a professor teaching xenolinguistics and the preeminent expert in the field on the entire planet, which is why Archer recruited her. She refined and developed the algorithms which allowed for the universal translator to work so smoothly later. She acted as a de facto diplomatic and cultural affairs officer (along with "T'Boob," who you equally dismissed so casually) to advise Archer on how to deal with alien ambassadors and species during first contact situations. She overcame her debilitating fears and remained a key member of the crew throughout the mission and countless dangerous situations, even after returning to Earth and having a chance to change her mind before going on what appeared to be essentially a suicide mission. But no, just a receptionist.

Uhura was fluent in three(?) important enemy alien languages as a cadet, was shown to be able to gather key intelligence on foreign powers like the Klingons by listening to their long range communications (which is how she learned about the Narada showing up), was able to step into the job when the dedicated officer couldn't speak Romulan, went on dangerous away missions to exploding volcanoes and the Klingon homeworld where she tried to resolve the situation through diplomacy at great risk to herself, risked her life to save Captain Kirk's by beaming down to a high-flying, fast-moving garbage scow to try and stun Khan and take him alive. But again, just a receptionist.

I have to ask. What kind of badass receptionists do you work with?
What you listed above is basically the technobabble version of character development. When you show that quote to someone who doesn't know Star Trek, you'll get a "what the hell do I care" reaction. That she teached xenolinguistics or developed universal translator algorithms or that she is fluent in three languages is just background information noise, you could replace it with something else and it wouldn't add or take away anything. What matters is what they do, and what they do isn't much.
When they are not acting as damsel in distress, they are the love interest, and when they are supposed to be strong women, they run around in skintight catsuits or miniskirts.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is online now  
Old June 16 2013, 02:28 PM   #266
Pauln6
Commodore
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
I notice you didn't address the overall issue. Trading quality for quantity is a net loss, not a net gain. Your reference to BSG is particularly poignant:

Your complaint is essentially that this movie lacks an appropriate quantity of female characters. Quantity, however, is irrelevant, as it could just as easily be achieved by adding a lesbian threesome as both of the prominent female characters are well-developed and dynamic personalities. It makes no sense to start randomly replacing extras with female parts just for the sake of having female parts; the same balance of quantity could be easily achieved by setting Kirk and Pike's conversation in a nudie bar.
I'm advocating BOTH quality and quantity. We should have both. And the fact that you've jumped into sexualising the female characters so readily is symptomatic of the problem. It is possible to have two women on screen even if they aren't in bed together... It's also worth pointing out that a significant number of women that are shown in these moves are already shown in sexualised roles.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
Nothing about Cupcake requires him to be a man at all. The framework of NuStarbuck was taken from the original and she was a fascinating character.
Cupcake is NOT a fascinating character, male OR female. Ergo, switching the gender makes no difference whatsoever.
That's part of my point. If it makes no difference then half of cupcake type characters might as well be female. There's no genuine reason not to do it.

OTOH, NuStarbuck is variously portrayed as a misanthropic malcontent and high-functioning alcoholic with a severely overclocked libido. It isn't actually the gender reversal of the original character so much as the FUSION of two original characters; basically, the prostitute in the flight suit. A similar thing happens with Commander Cain, where just for the lulz they trot out a steamy lesbian affair with Cylon #6 who then goes on to get raped by just about everybody (remember I mentioned that earlier? It's not accidental).
LOL. Ok, now you are really giving away your true colours. Starbuck really didn't have that much sex throughout the series actually and some of that was down to her being self-destructive - deliberately hurting Lee becase she was pushing him away and most of it was with her husband. In many ways she's a more extreme version of NuKirk, who in just two movies has had sex with as many partners. The fact that you've lumped in a sexualy active woman with a prostitute while Kirk gets the thumbs up as a ladeez man speaks volumes.

And actually, Cassiopeia only had sex with one man in the original series and she didn't even charge. I was rather disappointed she was missing from NuBSG (although elements of her found their way into Six such as Gina's relationship with Cain).

Further, the close reationship with Cain with Gina was added in as a way to justify one of the reasons why Cain went so batsh*t crazy and sanctioned the abuse. I don't recall anything steamy though - one dinner party? Either I was't paying attention or you might have dreamed that part. Again, the use of language is telling.

The rape scenes were intended to be troubling. In the same way that the suicide bombings were meant to be troubling. The writers were deliberately subverting our expectations. The Cylons were the western world moving in, destroying or subverting pre-existing culture wth their new-fangled mono-theistic religion. The victims began losing their humanity, killing innocents indiscriminately, and dehumanising them (a lot of women get raped by soldiers al over the world). It was disturbing but the wider message was compelling.

Clancy_s wrote: View Post
Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
OTOH, NuStarbuck is variously portrayed as a misanthropic malcontent and high-functioning alcoholic with a severely overclocked libido.
I'm one of the few who preferred the original BGA - as I saw him malcontent and high-functioning alcoholic with a severely overclocked libidoalso applied to the male version of Starbuck.
Lol - very good point. That concisely illustrates the double standard that applies equally to NuKirk, although Kirk's problems pale compared to NuStarbuck.

OTOH, how many openly gay male characters exist in sci-fi? Related question: how many sci-fi novels, films or movies have ever depicted male-on-male sexual assault? Last question: who, other than a complete baddass like John Barrowman, could EVER get away with playing an openly gay character?
They had a gay relationship in the Nubsg webisodes although I don't thnk it was all that relevant to the plot.

Crazy Eddie wrote: View Post
I wonder how they managed to source so many actresses?
Filming in the U.K.. Why do you suppose the ended up casting Alice Eve as Carol Marcus?
Well now if you are suggesting that UK dramas have a better record at casting more women, and older women, in more prominent roles, then I agree but only slightly. But compared to the USA as a whole, I'm sure we have a lot fewer actresses. I think somehow Hollywood can manage with the increased numbers.

I wish more people would approach the opposing argument with as much blunt vigour. We'd win it a lot sooner!
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631

Last edited by Pauln6; June 16 2013 at 03:42 PM.
Pauln6 is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 04:33 PM   #267
Locutus of Bored
Furfallin'
 
Locutus of Bored's Avatar
 
Location: Huntington Beach, California
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
That's why you have the black girl in miniskirts still acting basically as the receptionist (and love interest), but nothing more substantial.

...

Hoshi, the receptionist again.
That you think nuUhura and Hoshi were doing nothing more than "basically acting as receptionists" indicates to me that you're not willing to discuss this from any kind of rational perspective and are just looking to cast aspersions.

Hoshi was a professor teaching xenolinguistics and the preeminent expert in the field on the entire planet, which is why Archer recruited her. She refined and developed the algorithms which allowed for the universal translator to work so smoothly later. She acted as a de facto diplomatic and cultural affairs officer (along with "T'Boob," who you equally dismissed so casually) to advise Archer on how to deal with alien ambassadors and species during first contact situations. She overcame her debilitating fears and remained a key member of the crew throughout the mission and countless dangerous situations, even after returning to Earth and having a chance to change her mind before going on what appeared to be essentially a suicide mission. But no, just a receptionist.

Uhura was fluent in three(?) important enemy alien languages as a cadet, was shown to be able to gather key intelligence on foreign powers like the Klingons by listening to their long range communications (which is how she learned about the Narada showing up), was able to step into the job when the dedicated officer couldn't speak Romulan, went on dangerous away missions to exploding volcanoes and the Klingon homeworld where she tried to resolve the situation through diplomacy at great risk to herself, risked her life to save Captain Kirk's by beaming down to a high-flying, fast-moving garbage scow to try and stun Khan and take him alive. But again, just a receptionist.

I have to ask. What kind of badass receptionists do you work with?
What you listed above is basically the technobabble version of character development. When you show that quote to someone who doesn't know Star Trek, you'll get a "what the hell do I care" reaction. That she teached xenolinguistics or developed universal translator algorithms or that she is fluent in three languages is just background information noise, you could replace it with something else and it wouldn't add or take away anything. What matters is what they do, and what they do isn't much.
When they are not acting as damsel in distress, they are the love interest, and when they are supposed to be strong women, they run around in skintight catsuits or miniskirts.
Well, that's a convenient out for your completely discredited position, but it's about what I expected given past discussions.
__________________
My name is Ozymandias, king of kings: Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.
Locutus of Bored is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 05:15 PM   #268
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
but it's about what I expected given past discussions.
I aim to please.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is online now  
Old June 16 2013, 08:10 PM   #269
YellowSubmarine
Commodore
 
YellowSubmarine's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
What you listed above is basically the technobabble version of character development. When you show that quote to someone who doesn't know Star Trek, you'll get a "what the hell do I care" reaction. That she teached xenolinguistics or developed universal translator algorithms or that she is fluent in three languages is just background information noise, you could replace it with something else and it wouldn't add or take away anything. What matters is what they do, and what they do isn't much.
When they are not acting as damsel in distress, they are the love interest, and when they are supposed to be strong women, they run around in skintight catsuits or miniskirts.
What relevance does it have that we've chosen to use Star Trek terminology on a Star Trek forum? Where is the technobabble in being an expert in foreign languages, speaking a great deal of them, having the knowledge and expertise to train or tune a complicated translation computer program, being a critical translator in diplomatic missions under extreme stress and overcoming one's own fears in face of great danger? A non-Trek fan can understand that just fine me thinks. People have the remarkable ability to catch what's happening on screen outside of explicit dialogue and images of legs, boobs, muscles and bloodshed. That's a dishonest way to dismiss the accomplishments of the characters. Why do you wish to ignore everything they've actually done?
__________________
R.I.P. Cadet James T. Kirk (-1651)
YellowSubmarine is offline  
Old June 16 2013, 10:54 PM   #270
Pauln6
Commodore
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

YellowSubmarine wrote: View Post
JarodRussell wrote: View Post
What you listed above is basically the technobabble version of character development. When you show that quote to someone who doesn't know Star Trek, you'll get a "what the hell do I care" reaction. That she teached xenolinguistics or developed universal translator algorithms or that she is fluent in three languages is just background information noise, you could replace it with something else and it wouldn't add or take away anything. What matters is what they do, and what they do isn't much.
When they are not acting as damsel in distress, they are the love interest, and when they are supposed to be strong women, they run around in skintight catsuits or miniskirts.
What relevance does it have that we've chosen to use Star Trek terminology on a Star Trek forum? Where is the technobabble in being an expert in foreign languages, speaking a great deal of them, having the knowledge and expertise to train or tune a complicated translation computer program, being a critical translator in diplomatic missions under extreme stress and overcoming one's own fears in face of great danger? A non-Trek fan can understand that just fine me thinks. People have the remarkable ability to catch what's happening on screen outside of explicit dialogue and images of legs, boobs, muscles and bloodshed. That's a dishonest way to dismiss the accomplishments of the characters. Why do you wish to ignore everything they've actually done?
TOS had a habit of bigging up the women as highly qualified and then using them as sex objects e.g. Ann Mulhall, Carolyn Palamis, Christine Chapel, Marlena Moreau etc. Uhura really stands out, Charlene Masterson was pretty cool, Helen Noel walks the line, and most of the yeomen don't even pretend to be highly qualified. I do have a soft spot for Miranda Jones though - far more interesting than a betazoid and she managed to resist Kirk's charm.
__________________
Star Trek/Babylon 5/Alien crossover www.youtube.com/user/pauln6

Other Worlds Role Playing Game
http://rpg.drivethrustuff.com/produc...ducts_id=97631
Pauln6 is offline  
Closed Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

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 +1. The time now is 12:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.