Orci talks about Star Trek 3

Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies XI+' started by Enterprise is Great, Jun 26, 2014.

  1. mos6507

    mos6507 Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2010
    The crew were given a uniforms from Trek II onward that cleverly obscured the steadily expanding waist-lines that most of them were dealing with. Nichelle was not obese but she was chunkier than she was in TOS (and even TMP) and definitely not in the sort of shape you'd want to be for a strip-tease. This is probably why, as they filmed the scene, they tried to hide her middle and focus on flashing her legs.

    I also think it's no particular badge of honor for a woman to be put into a strip-tease scene whether they can carry it off or not. It's objectification.

    Exactly. Uhura as a character was much better served when she threatened the transporter operator in Trek III.

    The strip-tease is a low-brow Looney Tunes way of having the characters try to get out of a jam. It's just bad writing.
     
  2. seigezunt

    seigezunt Vice Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Feb 2, 2007
    Location:
    Delta Vega
    The mystery box re Khan was such a disaster, I am happy to see they may step away from that approach. But I also worry about going too much the other way. Didn't script leaks result in earlier movies having worse returns?

    Or was that just because they were crappy? :-)
     
  3. xavier

    xavier Commander

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2014
    many stuff in STID is bad writing.:confused:
     
  4. Dennis

    Dennis The Man Premium Member

    Joined:
    Dec 30, 2013
    Location:
    Under the Great Blue Sky
    Exactly so.

    Whatever they did obviously has made Trek accessible to a general audience, because these movies are the most successful Trek productions ever.
     
  5. borgboy

    borgboy Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2005
    I'm not defending the Uhura fan dance as strong feminist writing, but I think it's believable that someone would find Uhura's fan dance appealing. She is a lovely woman at any age, and sex appeal isn't limited to the young and thin.
     
  6. Pauln6

    Pauln6 Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Jul 24, 2009
    Location:
    Bristol, United Kingdom
    I'm happy with a lack of technobabble but that doesn't excuse replacing it with blatantly incorrect real science. Do a little bit of research guys. My friend's 7 year old was pointing out scientific howlers. That's just embarrassing.

    Mind you, he also asked why in XMen DoFP they built stuff out of breakable plastic instead of durable non-ferrous metals. Of course the answer is that Magneto can manipulate non-ferrous metals but then the question becomes why can he do that but not manipulate other non-ferrous substances and the whole Marvel logic starts to collapse.
     
  7. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    So the science is fictions?

    Hmm...
     
  8. Joel_Kirk

    Joel_Kirk Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Location:
    In the Joel Zone, identifying as Sexually Fluid.
    Maybe.

    But, I guess the Carol Marcus strip-tease and the Uhura fan-dance didn't really move the plot along in a clever way....so it can be argued that both were objectification.

    I can agree with that.

    :techman:
     
  9. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    There are howlers in most Trek episodes over all five series. Should we blush at those, too? At best, Trek has always been loosely based on real science. Very loosely. So why be so harsh this one time? It's an imaginary world with its own imaginary physics. Same as "Star Wars" or any other franchise in that genre.

    "Gravity" wasn't supposed to be science fiction per se, but there were tremendous howlers in it. If a movie trying to portray something as more or less true to life can blatantly violate simple rules of physics, then let's give Trek some slack.
     
  10. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Are there any quite like the cold fusion one?
     
  11. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    Genesis. Genesis trumps everything. That is the most far-fetched piece of science ever created in the Trek world. If we can buy Genesis, we should have no problem buying cold fusion or even red matter, for that matter.
     
  12. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    The point was not about farfetched science though. It was about taking an existing science term and applying it wrongly to something. I can't think of too many deliberate instances of that in prior Trek because they used technobabble instead. I'd prefer that, and red matter is fine by me.
     
  13. Franklin

    Franklin Rear Admiral Rear Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2006
    Location:
    In the bleachers.
    Meh. For all we know, the term "cold fusion device" was short-hand for something more technical or it was descriptive of what the device did: flash-freeze things and fuse them together.

    Technobabble was an attempt to have one's cake and eat it, too. Try to sound scientific when what is being said is seventy-five percent or more pure nonsense and could sometimes grind a story to a halt. Technobabble was no different than saying "cold fusion device," I'd say, except it used a lot more words.
     
  14. Ryan8bit

    Ryan8bit Commodore Commodore

    Joined:
    Oct 22, 2004
    Location:
    St. Paul, MN
    Red matter, Genesis device, etc, aren't really that many words. And there is a difference. One is deliberately made up, the other is taken from something real and used wrongly.
     
  15. Commishsleer

    Commishsleer Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Apr 19, 2013
    Location:
    CommishSleer
    What about the Nexus?
    Or even all the god-like beings in Star Trek?
     
  16. BillJ

    BillJ Fleet Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Jan 30, 2001
    Location:
    Per Ardua
    This is what I figured was going on. Even if they did just get it flat wrong, it's no skin off of my rear. :shrug:
     
  17. Alex1939

    Alex1939 Captain Captain

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2008
    Just like the Phantom Menace made Star Wars accessible to a general audience, because it was the most successful Star Wars production EVA!
     
  18. CorporalClegg

    CorporalClegg Admiral Admiral

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2001
    Location:
    Land of Enchantment
    Not really. There's only about 120m that separates TPM and Star Wars, and they came out 20 years apart.

    In adjusted, Star Wars is almost twice as high.

    OTOH, ST09 is the most successful in both actual and adjusted.

    So I'm not really sure what your argument is.
     
  19. Nerys Myk

    Nerys Myk The Real Me Premium Member

    Joined:
    Nov 4, 2001
    Location:
    Down in the tube station at midnight
    When was Star Wars not accessible to the General Audience? SW has got to be one of the most accessible/popular franchises ever across several media platforms.
     
  20. Smellmet

    Smellmet Fleet Captain Fleet Captain

    Joined:
    Aug 5, 2013
    Location:
    Yorkshire!
    I never thought Genesis was any more far fetched than most things in Trek. Re-arranging molecules so they form life is no worse than the thing that has been used in nearly every episode and movie of trek for 50 years - the transporter.