RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,466
Posts: 5,508,918
Members: 25,133
Currently online: 567
Newest member: laibcoms

TrekToday headlines

And The New Director Of Star Trek 3 Is…
By: T'Bonz on Dec 23

TV Alert: Pine On Tonight Show
By: T'Bonz on Dec 22

Retro Review: The Emperor’s New Cloak
By: Michelle on Dec 20

Star Trek Opera
By: T'Bonz on Dec 19

New Abrams Project
By: T'Bonz on Dec 18

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15


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 20 2013, 12:25 AM   #421
Clancy_s
Lieutenant Commander
 
Clancy_s's Avatar
 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

I have another take on the CM undies scenen

the first time I didn't understand why she was asking Kirk to turn around and looking at someone you're talking to is a natural thing to do, I was wanting Kirk to turn back because I wanted to see what she was up to - I was surprised to find she'd stripped off and I thought Kirk was also surprised and after a moments gobsmacked bogglement turned back at her order.

They were in a shuttle with the door open, at least a semi-public space, she wasn't carrying a change of clothing or did I see one in the shuttle and those overalls are meant to go over the regular uniform (yes she was in a dress, but it's short enough to fit under the coverall).

If for some reason I needed to change in a hurry in the middle of a discussion with someone I'd at least say "I need to get changed, please turn around". I think Alice Eve was also of that opinion - she made a comment about her character stripping off in a corridor during a cast and director interview in London. JJ squirmed a bit...

I thought it was there for the titillation alone, to me it's implausible and doesn't say anything convincing about either of the characters to me, which is why it bothers me.
Clancy_s is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 01:07 AM   #422
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

CommishSleer wrote: View Post
Frankly if JJ just cut out the Marcus underwear scene I don't think anyone would have any 'real' complaints about the gender equality of the movie.
The thing is, if it had been Marcus looking at Kirk naked, women everywhere would have been going 'Yeah! You go, girl, he is sexy!' and there would be no objections to it at all, I'll bet. I think that this was done to show that he and Marcus would be more than friendly, and eventually they would be lovers. I chalk this up to North American prudishness more than anything else (although I wish that they had kept the Khan/Harrison shower scene as well, just for balance.
Shaka Zulu is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 01:09 AM   #423
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Prudishness? What do you mean?
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now  
Old June 20 2013, 01:44 AM   #424
M'Sharak
Definitely Herbert. Maybe.
 
M'Sharak's Avatar
 
Location: Terra Inlandia
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
<snip> I chalk this up to North American prudishness more than anything else (although I wish that they had kept the Khan/Harrison shower scene as well, just for balance.
teacake wrote: View Post
Prudishness? What do you mean?
(While we're at it, since a fair portion of the objection to that scene clearly comes from locations in other parts of the world: ) North American? What do you mean?
__________________
The trouble ain't that there is too many fools, but
that the lightning ain't distributed right.
— Mark Twain
M'Sharak is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 02:17 AM   #425
Spock/Uhura Fan
Captain
 
Spock/Uhura Fan's Avatar
 
Location: Where It's At.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Ovation wrote:
Seeing how you conveniently edited out the one portion of my post (in bold, so it would be easy to notice) that also discredits your argument--can't see how he's wrong here.

Here's the part you oh so conveniently cut from the rest of the post: As it was, that scene acted as a further blow AGAINST Kirk's womanizing attitude. He's made to feel uncomfortable and that discomfort demonstrates A) his attitude is not all that acceptable and B) Marcus is confident enough to order him to "Turn around" rather than meekly stand there to be ogled at length. The scene does NOT suggest Kirk's behaviour deserves a frat boy "high five" or "fist bump". If it did, then I'd be the first to complain. (triple highlight now--in case you simply missed it last time)
You assume because you didn’t get a direct response to this portion of your post that you successfully discredited my post. No. Same goes for the other quote you are talking about.

Since you seem to really want a response to your triple highlight double bolded explanation, I will kindly give you one. I didn’t before because there’s an entire thread that has discussed this particular scene ad nauseam, and I gave what thoughts I have, that haven’t changed, there. Forgive me if I didn’t feel like doing a bunch of retreading, but please don’t mistake silence for not having a response.

To your quote above, A) that scene was not played out as a further blow against Kirk’s womanizing attitude. Not at all. I don’t know how that could be when he didn’t even know she was undressing in the first place when he turned around to see what she was doing. As he looked, she seemingly struck a pose, with her body on display, then she told him to turn around and he did, but only after he got a good look (as well as the camera).

Yes, B) she told him to turn around, but she also waited a beat (to my recollection) as he got a good look and, again, she could have been posing for a magazine shoot the way her body was positioned while that beat passed. So, I think he got to “ogle” her well enough, and so did the camera.

I don’t know who said that the scene deserved a frat boy “high five” or “fist bump,” but I do know that it served its purpose in giving mostly male audience members something nice to “ogle,” and it was advertised non-stop. So, it did what it was supposed to do in my view.

Here’s some of what I said on the other thread:
http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=213937&page=2

S/U Fan wrote:
If it was a topless hunk scene would anyone be complaining?
Yeah, but that's the thing. In this movie we didn't get that balance. Last movie, it was Uhura and Kirk (and Gaila) that were in their undies. This movie only showcases Eve's character, and she's posed in such a way that makes it look like she hoped Kirk would turn around and take a picture. Anyway, I guess a shot of a lean, topless, Spock was too much to hope for, lol.



-About Kirk’s Topless Scene-

Oh, I know what scene you're talking about and my response is not really. It's in the dark, extraordinarily blink-and-you-miss-it brief, and you don't see his entire body on "display" like you see Eve's well-lit and ready-for-the-camera bod. So, for me it doesn't count. In ST09, Uhura and Kirk's body exposure was about the same and roughly done in the same way.


Well, I don't know about complaining, I didn't really care much for the film so it's not like I'll be watching it again, but it did seem gratuitous.

Thor and ST09 didn't seem that gratuitous, and I think I already explained my reasoning for ST09. No one also complained about Zoe Saldana's partial nudity in that film for the same reasons, I think.
So, that was page 2, and things went from there.

Even JJ Abrams, who shot and edited the scene, said that he could understand why there are people who think it was gratuitous and that maybe he didn’t edit it quite right. He also said that the scene was meant to display Kirk as a womanizer in that scene, not as a “blow against” it, as you say, and that was his artistic choice. Disagree if you will, but it’s from the horse’s mouth.

Here's the clip from Conan:

http://teamcoco.com/video/conan-high...ng-cumberbatch

Anybody notice how much they brightened up that picture of Kirk? Lol, it was not that bright in the film. Not at all. Anyway, on to the quotes:

JJ Abrams wrote:
The intent was, it’s Kirk. He was always this sort of womanizing character. The idea was to have a beat like that in the midst of all this action and adventure. […]

I don’t think I quite edited the scene in the right way, but to me it was this sort of balance. There’s a scene earlier where he’s not dressed either. So it felt like it was this sort of — it was a trade-off. […]

Some people did feel like it was exploiting her. And while she is lovely, I can also see their point of view.
Then he mentions that they cut the topless Cumberbatch scene that might have provided a better balance of male/female nudity in the film. The clip goes on to show the scene.

As I’ve already said before, I’ll let you have the last word on what you said in the rest of your response post to me because I feel like we’re getting to where we are repeating stuff (or at least I am), and I don’t to argue for the sake of arguing. So, I’ll leave the rest of what you said be unless you really want a response to that too.

(As an FYI, excerpted quotes taken from here: http://www.treknews.net/2013/05/22/j...rbatch-shower/)
__________________
MA'AM. Hot damn, I can dig it.

“The history of men's opposition to women's emancipation is more interesting perhaps than the story of that emancipation itself.” - Virginia Woolf
Spock/Uhura Fan is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 02:40 AM   #426
Santa Kang
Fleet Admiral
 
Santa Kang's Avatar
 
Location: North Pole,Qo'noS
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

mos6507 wrote: View Post
BillJ wrote: View Post
It wasn't Gene, it was advertisers and the studio. Look at how male and white The Cage was.
I'd love to hear you elaborate on how Gene didn't really care about diversity. That would be some very convoluted revisionist history for sure.

I find it hard to believe that the advertisers in the 60s liked the idea of a rainbow cast, interracial kisses, etc... It may make sense today, but not back in the bigoted 60s.
Hard to believe because it doesn't fit your narrative. But if you look at shows being produced at the time, you'll see a few black faces: Barney in Mission:Impossible, Kinchloe in Hogan's Heroes and of course Alexander Scott in I Spy. Shows that predate or are concurrent with the debut of Star Trek.

Also read Solow and Justman's book Inside Star Trek. Pay close attention to the memo from NBC Vice President Mort Werner reproduced on pages 76 and 77.
__________________
Nerys Myk
Santa Kang is online now  
Old June 20 2013, 03:09 AM   #427
Shaka Zulu
Fleet Captain
 
Location: Bulawayo Military Krral
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

teacake wrote: View Post
Prudishness? What do you mean?
M'Sharak wrote: View Post
Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
<snip> I chalk this up to North American prudishness more than anything else (although I wish that they had kept the Khan/Harrison shower scene as well, just for balance.
teacake wrote: View Post
Prudishness? What do you mean?
(While we're at it, since a fair portion of the objection to that scene clearly comes from locations in other parts of the world: ) North American? What do you mean?
I'm saying what I said due to the fact that most of the objections came from North American bloggers (at least the ones I'm familiar with.) Even though now I know that there are others who object as well from abroad, I still think that this is just prudishness on most people's parts.
Shaka Zulu is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 03:13 AM   #428
teacake
Fleet Admiral
 
teacake's Avatar
 
Location: Google's ass cave full of the lush, lush asses they have stolen.
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Oh you originally said:

The thing is, if it had been Marcus looking at Kirk naked, women everywhere would have been going 'Yeah! You go, girl, he is sexy!' and there would be no objections to it at all, I'll bet. I think that this was done to show that he and Marcus would be more than friendly, and eventually they would be lovers. I chalk this up to North American prudishness more than anything else (although I wish that they had kept the Khan/Harrison shower scene as well, just for balance.
So I thought you were connecting your assessment of prudishness to your saying that if it had been Kirk naked everyone would be cool about it.
__________________

"Damnit Spock. God damnit!" Kirk ST:V
■ ■ ■
Janeway does Melbourne
teacake is online now  
Old June 20 2013, 03:14 AM   #429
The Festivus Awakens
Airing Grievouses
 
The Festivus Awakens's Avatar
 
Location: Performing Festivus Miracles
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
The full frontal of Carol in her undies was there purely to titillate.

It was obviously gratuitous but so are many other scenes in other shows and movies that are equally so.
So, everything that was said about multiple levels to the scene was obviously wasted on you then.
Sort of. I have no particular interest in seeing Alice Eve in her undies. The other levels I got just fine.
Well, no, because saying the scene was "purely" for titillation and was "gratuitous" means that you think there were no other levels of meaning to the scene. You can't have one or the other. If there are other levels to it, then it's not gratuitous and it's not purely for titillation.

But I digress - I apologise if I wasn't clear - they didn't have to show her body fully on screen to achieve the same effect. The scene with Marion in Raiders of the Lost Ark is constructed similarly, but Karen Allen didn't flash her boobs because it wasn't actually needed to make the scene work. Subtlelty would have worked, it just would not have titillated as much.
You keep saying things like "full frontal," "show her body fully," and "flash her boobs." Eve did none of those things in STiD. Her underwear was no more risqué than a fairly mundane bikini on the beach.

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
The thing is, if it had been Marcus looking at Kirk naked, women everywhere would have been going 'Yeah! You go, girl, he is sexy!' and there would be no objections to it at all, I'll bet.
Look, I think people are making way more of this scene than it deserves, but you do understand that there's a difference between a woman ogling a man and a man ogling a woman, right? Not just in terms of physical differences, but in terms of the history behind depictions of women onscreen vs. men, and in how a woman would be in a more vulnerable position in that case than a man would.
__________________
Locutus of Bored
The Festivus Awakens is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 08:31 AM   #430
Pauln6
Rear Admiral
 
Pauln6's Avatar
 
Location: Bristol, United Kingdom
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post
Pauln6 wrote: View Post
Locutus of Bored wrote: View Post

So, everything that was said about multiple levels to the scene was obviously wasted on you then.
Sort of. I have no particular interest in seeing Alice Eve in her undies. The other levels I got just fine.
Well, no, because saying the scene was "purely" for titillation and was "gratuitous" means that you think there were no other levels of meaning to the scene. You can't have one or the other. If there are other levels to it, then it's not gratuitous and it's not purely for titillation.

But I digress - I apologise if I wasn't clear - they didn't have to show her body fully on screen to achieve the same effect. The scene with Marion in Raiders of the Lost Ark is constructed similarly, but Karen Allen didn't flash her boobs because it wasn't actually needed to make the scene work. Subtlelty would have worked, it just would not have titillated as much.
You keep saying things like "full frontal," "show her body fully," and "flash her boobs." Eve did none of those things in STiD. Her underwear was no more risqué than a fairly mundane bikini on the beach.
Yes, sorry if you find my loose use of language to be confusing my meaning. The entire SCENE is not gratuitous - it contains some exposition and is intended to cast the first pebble into a potential relationship pool. The full frontal underwear SHOT was "purely" for titillation and was "gratuitous". It was full frontal and was a full body shot but it wasn't a full frontal nude shot. I don't think anybody discussing the scene thinks that it was nude...

The same exposition and frisson could have been shown with the characters walking through a corridor or while Marcus was preparing equipment other than her own.
__________________
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 20 2013, 09:34 AM   #431
The Festivus Awakens
Airing Grievouses
 
The Festivus Awakens's Avatar
 
Location: Performing Festivus Miracles
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
It was full frontal and was a full body shot but it wasn't a full frontal nude shot. I don't think anybody discussing the scene thinks that it was nude...
I don't think they (or you) do either. But I do think you and others have worked yourself into quite a fervor over this scene, and it's reflected in the exaggerated language you use to describe it.
__________________
Locutus of Bored
The Festivus Awakens is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 02:08 PM   #432
CrazyHorse89
Lieutenant
 
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Shaka Zulu wrote: View Post
teacake wrote: View Post
Prudishness? What do you mean?
M'Sharak wrote: View Post

teacake wrote: View Post
Prudishness? What do you mean?
(While we're at it, since a fair portion of the objection to that scene clearly comes from locations in other parts of the world: ) North American? What do you mean?
I'm saying what I said due to the fact that most of the objections came from North American bloggers (at least the ones I'm familiar with.) Even though now I know that there are others who object as well from abroad, I still think that this is just prudishness on most people's parts.
The scene caused a mild controversy pretty much everywhere. And most people didn't object to the exposure of flesh in and of itself. Prudishness has nothing to do with most people's objections.
CrazyHorse89 is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 02:55 PM   #433
SantaSpock
Fleet Captain
 
SantaSpock's Avatar
 
Location: CommishSleer
View SantaSpock's Twitter Profile
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

The Marcus underwear scene was actually an insult to men's intelligence. It's inclusion indicates that men won't like movies unless they have a bit of naked women in it.

JJ obviously respects the intelligence of women more as he felt he didn't need to include the Cumberbatch shower scene to attract the ladies

I have the solution to the problem though.
Men in one ship. Women in another.
Then there'll be no yucky kissing or holding hands or carrying on in either ship. A lot more work will be done. And the Federation will be a lot better off
SantaSpock is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 03:42 PM   #434
Therin of Andor
Admiral
 
Therin of Andor's Avatar
 
Location: New Therin Park, Andor (via Australia)
View Therin of Andor's Twitter Profile
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Pauln6 wrote: View Post
For starters, I thinks it's silly that Keenser is an officer, let alone the assistant chief purely because of he is portrayed and treated in the movies and comics. I suppose one could argue that he's the same as Morn, who allegedly never shut up off-screen...
So mute aliens should be banned from being in Starfleet?

In any case, we do hear Keenser speaking an alien language when Kirk arrives at the complex, and Keenser does say "Me", in English, to Scotty in the 2009 film.

The comics don't really count for movie audiences because they're only bought by about 1% of the audience.
__________________
Thiptho lapth! Ian (Entire post is personal opinion)
The Andor Files @ http://andorfiles.blogspot.com/
http://therinofandor.blogspot.com/
Therin of Andor is offline  
Old June 20 2013, 04:55 PM   #435
Crazy Eddie
Rear Admiral
 
Crazy Eddie's Avatar
 
Location: I'm in your ___, ___ing your ___
Re: Star Trek Into Darkness & The Bechdel Test

Ovation wrote: View Post
As for the Eve scene, there is clearly some intentional titillation. But that's not ALL there is to it. If it were, Kirk would not be made to feel uncomfortable about having looked at her.
Even more importantly, apart from his initial "Well lookit you!" reaction in the shuttlecraft, Kirk never does get around to hitting on her even when he DOES see her in her underwear. She seems entirely disinclined to put up with his bullshit, which is probably why Carol Marcus and James T. Kirk might just work out in the Abramsverse.
__________________
The Complete Illustrated Guide to Starfleet - Online Now!
Crazy Eddie 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 05:06 AM.

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