RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 138,412
Posts: 5,360,054
Members: 24,630
Currently online: 439
Newest member: DasGeneral


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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old June 26 2013, 11:54 PM   #31
Clancy_s
Lieutenant Commander
 
Clancy_s's Avatar
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
Gep Malakai wrote: View Post
Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
I'm still not getting the outrage over seeing Marcus in her undies.
I think at least part of it is the way they shot the thing – that low camera angle and full frontal pose really gave the shot a pervy vibe. You'll note that the two Caitians in Kirk's bed earlier in the film and Uhura's disrobing to change in ST'09 haven't generated nearly as much discussion, IMO because they were staged far more naturally and so didn't call attention to themselves.
I agree.

I think the pose was intended to show that Marcus didn't really care that Kirk was looking at her but it also came out looking as you say 'pervy'.
It's not the look of it that bothers me but the set up; in ST09 Gaila was making out with Kirk and Uhura was in her quarters, just off shift , with only her room mate there (as far as she knew when she started stripping) - both IMO good reasons for their undress. Whereas Carol getting her kit off in the middle of a discussion with Kirk seems forced.

I' ve read a number of attempted explanations, btw but none I find especially convincing.

I still don't think it is sexist but I do find it exploitative and poorly written.
Clancy_s is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 28 2013, 01:49 PM   #32
Photoman15
Fleet Captain
 
Photoman15's Avatar
 
Location: The sunny shores of Trenzalore
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Come on. The scene was IRONIC because we, the viewers know that soon Kirk will be knocking her up (maybe) and now, she doesn't even want him to see her in bra and panties.
__________________
I refuse to put a signature here!
oh...uh...ummm
Photoman15 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old June 30 2013, 06:16 AM   #33
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

CaptainDave1701 wrote: View Post
So why are we giving credit to the opinion of Sheldon Cooper's mortal enemy here....

As for what he thought was wrong with the film perhaps he should he should dissect his own body of work in The Next Generation. He is somewhat the Jar Jar Binks of that era.
He did say that he loved the movie; he just didn't like seeing Alice Eve in her bra and panties.

And, he's hard on himself in the Memories of the Future book and podcast.
Shaka Zulu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 9 2013, 08:01 PM   #34
Hober Mallow
Commodore
 
Location: The planet Terminus, site of the Encyclopedia Foundation on the periphery of the galaxy
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

mos6507 wrote: View Post
The ship was under water because it served the plot of the movie.
You have it backwards. The plot of the movie was constructed in order to rationalize a "cool visual". It's the George Lucas school of thinking, which is fine for SW, but out of place in Trek.
Yep, that's exactly it, but it's not just the Georege Lucas school of thinking, it's how all action movies are made nowadays. The setpieces come first (cool visuals and action scenes, plotted like mini-movies), then a story is built around that. It's annoying as hell, but it's not just Abrams and Star Trek guilty of it, it's all of Hollywood.
__________________
"Beep... beep!" --Captain Pike
Hober Mallow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10 2013, 08:10 PM   #35
xvicente
Commander
 
xvicente's Avatar
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Charles Phipps wrote: View Post
I don't mind throwing sex into the mix and appreciate it, actually, because sex is amongst what separates Star Trek from Star Wars
Not really. In Star Wars, 100% of the female characters wore a golden bikini.
__________________
-----------------------------------------------------------

I am here to talk about Star Trek and chew bubble gum.
and I'm all outta bubble gum.
xvicente is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10 2013, 08:17 PM   #36
Tribble puncher
Commander
 
Tribble puncher's Avatar
 
Location: Lexington, KY
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Kevman7987 wrote: View Post
Enterprise is Great wrote: View Post
If it can survive in space why not underwater? I just don't get this objection other than people just do not like seeing the ship underwater for whatever reason.
JamesRye wrote: View Post
Yup- and there is a precedent. Voyager went through fluidic space!

I don't get why people had a problem with the big-E under water either. They couldn't beam through the atmosphere, so they went through the atmosphere to the middle of the ocean (where no one would see them) and then moved a bit closer to the land masses.

simples
I don't understand this either. My Star Trek Micro Machines survived many a mission in the bathtub without any sort of damage.
Also, The Original 1701 flew through the cytoplasm (or is it protoplasm) of a giant space aomeba....
Tribble puncher is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 10 2013, 10:06 PM   #37
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Tribble puncher wrote: View Post
Kevman7987 wrote: View Post
Enterprise is Great wrote: View Post
If it can survive in space why not underwater? I just don't get this objection other than people just do not like seeing the ship underwater for whatever reason.
JamesRye wrote: View Post
Yup- and there is a precedent. Voyager went through fluidic space!

I don't get why people had a problem with the big-E under water either. They couldn't beam through the atmosphere, so they went through the atmosphere to the middle of the ocean (where no one would see them) and then moved a bit closer to the land masses.

simples
I don't understand this either. My Star Trek Micro Machines survived many a mission in the bathtub without any sort of damage.
Also, The Original 1701 flew through the cytoplasm (or is it protoplasm) of a giant space aomeba....
SPOCK:
Readings coming in now, Captain.
Length -- approximately 11,000 miles.
Width -- varying from 2,000 to 3,000 miles.
Outer layer studded with space debris and
waste. Interior consists of ... protoplasm,
varying from a firmer gelatinous layer to a
semifluid central mass. Condition ... living.
__________________
Dinosaurs are just really, really big chickens.
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old July 11 2013, 02:42 AM   #38
Set Harth
Rear Admiral
 
Set Harth's Avatar
 
Location: Gallifrey Falls
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

xvicente wrote: View Post
In Star Wars, 100% of the female characters wore a golden bikini.
Which looked surprisingly good on Mon Mothma.

Aunt Beru, not so much.
__________________
"In the future... do I make it?"
"No."
Set Harth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 20 2013, 07:16 PM   #39
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
I hope Wil Wheaton was embarressed by the 'firm boob' scene in INS.

That was his 'mother'

Still I think he does have a point about Marcus' intelligence. She was Spock's scientific peer in TWOK. I hope she has more scientific things to do in the next movie.
If she's in the next movie.
Shaka Zulu is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 20 2013, 07:23 PM   #40
Noname Given
Vice Admiral
 
Location: None Given
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

With all due respect to the OP - he did leave out one BIG comment by Mr. Wheaton:

The short version is: I loved it. I think it’s my favorite Star Trek movie ever, and I can’t wait to see what this crew does next.
^^^^
I think that speaks volumes over any nit-pick comments he may have made in analyzing aspects of the film (which I and many fans do, while still believing the film in question is a good one.)
Noname Given is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 03:42 PM   #41
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Enterprise is Great wrote: View Post
If it can survive in space why not underwater? I just don't get this objection other than people just do not like seeing the ship underwater for whatever reason.
Put the ISS or a Space Shuttle under water and see what happens.
__________________
lol
l
/\
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 03:54 PM   #42
serenitytrek1
Commander
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

Wow...this thread is still on?

Most people say Will went easy on the film. However I think he was been genuine about how awesome he believes the film was.
serenitytrek1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 21 2013, 11:08 PM   #43
Noname Given
Vice Admiral
 
Location: None Given
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
Enterprise is Great wrote: View Post
If it can survive in space why not underwater? I just don't get this objection other than people just do not like seeing the ship underwater for whatever reason.
Put the ISS or a Space Shuttle under water and see what happens.
^^^
bad analogy as if you also try to accelerate either beyond the light barrier (IE to warp speed) - I doubt they'd survive that either.
Noname Given is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 12:34 AM   #44
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

serenitytrek1 wrote: View Post

Most people say Will went easy on the film.
Which people say this? Link?
__________________
Dinosaurs are just really, really big chickens.
M'Sharak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old August 22 2013, 01:27 AM   #45
serenitytrek1
Commander
 
Re: Wesley Crusher reviews Star Trek Into Darkness

M'Sharak wrote: View Post
serenitytrek1 wrote: View Post

Most people say Will went easy on the film.
Which people say this? Link?

O sorry, some of the links was in the comments below the article he wrote about the film in his own blog.
serenitytrek1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 07:50 AM.

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