Nah, I always hated that episode as well. Also always hated The Omega Glory.
Abrams: ST is silly and ridiculous
- Thread starter I am not Spock
- Start date
Nah, I always hated that episode as well. Also always hated The Omega Glory.
From watching him, no doubt. "Extravagant" is a polite word for his acting.
The thing with him is, he is capable of fantastic and moving acting performances along with cringe inducing overacting embarrassments, often within the same episode or movie.
From watching him, no doubt. "Extravagant" is a polite word for his acting.
The thing with him is, he is capable of fantastic and moving acting performances along with cringe inducing overacting embarrassments, often within the same episode or movie.
Quite true. "Naturalistic," though, is not a particularly good characterization even of his best. Everything is theatrical, even the silences.
I ignore it now, but I've seen every single TOS episode multiple times, because sometimes even bad TOS is better than nothing. Meanwhile, I guess I will just have to live with your disapproval - as laughable as it is.
(Oops, there I go again finding everything silly!)
Why not? Let's visit Dictionary.com again, shall we?
fan (noun)
an enthusiastic devotee, follower, or admirer of a sport, pasttime, celebrity, etc.
Please note that "enthusiastic devotee, follower" precedes the "or admirer". Not "and" admirer. By definition, a wholly positive opinion, or even mostly positive opinion is not required.
No, that's not what you said. You said "Campy is deliberately making something silly". Camp is not about deliberately making something silly, but it is about making something stylized, mannered and/or exaggerated - just as the definition said.
Yep - and he's pretty much always campy.
I refer you to his forced recitation of verse while tap dancing around Kirk's head in Plato's Stepchildren. Stylized, mannered and exaggerated.
Exactly! Now you're getting it. They very self-consciously made it artificial to create a sense of a different era.
Please, please, please show me a single picture of a 60s chick with her hair arranged in a beehive with a Girl Scout potholder weave in front.
Heath Ledger's entire performance is artificial and self-conscious. Not only is the bat costume artificial and self-conscious to the audience, within the story it is artificial and self-conscious. Bruce Wayne self-consciously created an artificial persona using the bat costume. Is it camp? Not to us right now. Will it come across as camp 40 years from now? Maybe. Because the cinematic styles of various eras are often absorbed in a knowingly amused way by the creators of later eras.
I'll say it again. Star Trek did not intend to be camp, but it is part of the very era from which the definition of camp was created - and it is part of it.
No, they're not at all. Steve Martin doing the King Tut song and while he dances like an Egyptian hieroglyph is trying to provoke a laugh. Dorothy Parker saying "You can't teach and old dogma new tricks" is provoking knowing amusement. One is a sight gag, based on silliness. The other requires references and provokes a smile at its play on words.
Actually, I'll give you that one. The space hippies are not camp. They are full out, unadulterated silliness with no apologies.
Actually in Greek art, Apollo would never be shown with an off the shoulder gold lame minidress. He'd usually be naked.
There's drama and there's overacting/ mugging at the camera. There's dramatic music and there's music Eddie Murphy can easily turn into a hilarious joke.
Sorry - I really love that bit.While I know it's terribly trendy to bash on Berman (in fact I just did a google search on him and when I typed in his name the prompt that popped up was "Rick Berman sucks"
), the man produced and created DS9 and oversaw what is pretty universally considered the best two season of TNG - the 3rd and 4th. So, yeah, there was a lot of Berman's Trek that I did like. The guy eventually lost his chops, but that happens to the best of them.I mentioned several silly things. The fact that you responded thusly:
to "green-haired, silver-bikined warrior women", well, I... I just don't know what else to say.
Nonsense again. I thrill to the cutting back and forth to the bridges of the Romulan ship and the Enterprise in Balance of Terror. I quote regularly Kirk's speech in Return to Tomorrow for its inspirational qualities. I think Devil in the Dark may be one of the most affecting looks in all of science fiction at difference and tolerance and understanding.
But I do think the silver bikini chick is hilarious.
Yeah, we dealt with your incorrect definition of the word fan above.
Oh, I so call a Godwin.
(Just in case anyone is not familiar:
"Godwin's Law applies especially to inappropriate, inordinate, or hyperbolic comparisons of other situations (or one's opponent) with Hitler or Nazis or their actions." From Wikipedia)
wow this debate is getting heated. maybe we all go the new experience when it opens and argue it out over a few warp core breaches lol.
The fact that people are on here argueing this so passionatly, must surely meant that you all big fans. no point argueing otherwise!
The fact that people are on here argueing this so passionatly, must surely meant that you all big fans. no point argueing otherwise!
3D Master
Rear Admiral
And how do you BECOME and enthusiastic devotee, follower? By hating more than half of what you follow? I think not.
Which would make it silly, but hey, let's ignore the obvious.
Nope, he isn't.
No, it isn't. If that is stylized mannered, and exaggerated and thus silly and campy EVERY SINGLE ACTING PERFORMANCE EVER is silly, exaggerated and mannered. And thus EVERYTHING is camp.
Your arguments get ever more ridiculous.
Making every single piece of science fiction EVER, including 2001, Babylon 5, Dune, and what not camp.
Which is obviously utterly ridiculous.
I don't have to.
And you're wrong. Camp is only that which is DELIBERATELY made to be camp. Your inability to handle something made earlier than your time, makes YOU the problem, not the original production.
And I have to congratulate you on being so utterly stubborn you relegate The Dark Knight to "camp".
I repeat: which is the same thing.
The moment you're going into minute details in order get your right, you should pretty much quit and realize you lost your argument ages ago.
Which still doesn't make the entire show silly. The same way other shows that had comedic episodes don't turn into comedies.
That would be a statue. Trust me, when he got up on stage, the actor portraying him wasn't naked.
Also, I wasn't talking about Greek art, your conveniently trying to circumvent the point. I was talking about all other portrayals of Greek, their gods, including the Greeks themselves. Demanding that Apollo in Star Trek is silly, makes them ALL silly. It's the same problem as above. The only way to make Star Trek silly over and over, is to demand every singly creation ever made that is not contemporary is silly. Which ironically enough, is just plain silly.
There's drama and there's overacting/ mugging at the camera. There's dramatic music and there's music Eddie Murphy can easily turn into a hilarious joke.
You also find every single period piece ever created silly, and every single SF production ever made "campy". Which should pretty much tell anyone about your level of "humor".
Yeah, you proved me right.
Yeah, it's problematic when I'm right. You're going to have to try and remove it, without engaging the point. You tried it, and failed.
I'm sure there are a variety of ways to become an enthusiastic devotee of something. But allowing for diversity does not seem to be a strong suit of your points.
I think our problem here is one of semantics. You seem to be insisting that the words "silly", "campy" and "exaggerated" be used interchangeably. The only place the words intersect without fail is that exaggeration is a necessary part of camp. However, not all things which are exaggerated are camp. In reference to the thread topic, Star Trek contains both camp and silliness, but they are not always the same thing.
Yesh, well, we'll just have to agree to disagree here. I'm pretty much of the opinion that someone else voiced - Shatner has the unique ability to encompass camp and moving drama within the same scene, sometimes within the same sentence.
No, because there are degrees of exaggeration. You also have to take into account aesthetics. Brando can tear his shirt and scream Stella without it being campy, but put a guy in blue eyeshadow, prosthetic pointed ears and capri pants while he delivers a pained emotional scene surrounded by people in togas and you're definitely more in the realm of camp.
No, it's not really utterly ridiculous. Many people would place all of filmed SF in the camp category for just that reason. For instance, here's a fun article that begins:
"Ever since the first cheesy monster or goofy robot leered out from the cover of a pulpy magazine, science fiction has struggled to shake off a certain tinge of campiness."
21 Ways to Eradicate Campiness from Science Fiction
Or if you want something a little more academic, here's an exhibit at the University of New Haven, entitled "Where Art Meets Camp: Sci FI Movie Poster Exhibition"
A mature and eloquent response is yours, sir. You said that the hairstyles of TOS were "not that far off" from real styles, and I assumed you had some proof to back that up. Seems not.
Now, come on. When did I say I couldn't handle something made earlier? I mentioned that aesthetics of earlier eras are often incorporated into camp, which is entirely true. I've said I can acknowledge Trek's limitations and still love it. And I wasn't aware that there was a "problem" here that could be laid down to either me or the original production. All I'm seeing is a difference of opinion. Are you really so self-aggrandizing that someone holding a different opinion from you strikes you as a problem?
From my earlier post regarding The Dark Knight, "Is it camp? Not to us right now." Again, while camp involves artificiality and self-consciousness, artificiality and self-consciousness do not automatically make something camp. It has to do with a variety of other factors as well, which was my point when I described the artificiality of the things in The Dark Knight and then specifically said it was not camp. At least at the moment. Camp is a moving target.
So, to you, there are no subsets of humor at all?
Not much for shades of gray, are you?
I wasn't aware providing examples to illustrate an argument was "going into minute details". I thought it was just, you know, providing examples.
And actually I'm not trying to win an argument so it's pretty impossible for me to lose one. I'm having a good time talking about Star Trek with other fans.
I didn't say the "entire" show was silly - I said TOS contains silliness. In fact I have been at pains to show that I think the entire show had many different aspects. But you are ignoring that just as you are ignoring the distinctions between definitions and between kinds of humor.
When Apollo appeared as a character in a play, say in Euminedes by Aeschylus, he would have been portrayed by an actor who also portrayed several other characters, and he would have been designated by a changing of masks. Sicne one actor was playing many parts, the characters would wear the same clothes and I guarantee you those clothes were not an off-the-shoulder minidress.
You keep trying to say I'm wrong by some weird transitive property (Apollo in Trek= silly, therefore all Apollos=silly, therefore I'm an idiot because obviously all Apollos aren't silly) that involves making grand generalizations that completely ignore the subtleties of things I'm talking about so that you can repeat your same simple points over and over and again.
"Trek NOT silly. Trek NOT campy." If that's really all you've got, this discussion is going to cease to be at all interesting.
Wow - could you tell me something you actually do find funny?
I will thank you not to put words into my mouth. Again.
You know, randomly announcing to everyone that you're right doesn't really make it so.
It's a more than fair observation, and since camp is difficult to define at best (I pulled the Dictionary.com definition, but back in 1964 Susan Sontag wrote an entire essay on what camp means, which is generally considered the birth of the concept), we could probably discuss it for days and not have anyone agree on what it is.
Re: The Dark Knight and camp.
I'm sorry, but there's something inherently campy about any story about a guy who dresses up as a giant bat to fight crime. It's just an inherent element of the story. That doesn't mean that it dominates the story, but it's certainly present as one element.
Just like there's always something inherently campy about people who dress up in pajamas and fly in spaceships and fight giant amoebas and guys with bumpy foreheads and evil cyborgs named after a contraction of the English term for "cyborg."
I'm sorry, but there's something inherently campy about any story about a guy who dresses up as a giant bat to fight crime. It's just an inherent element of the story. That doesn't mean that it dominates the story, but it's certainly present as one element.
Just like there's always something inherently campy about people who dress up in pajamas and fly in spaceships and fight giant amoebas and guys with bumpy foreheads and evil cyborgs named after a contraction of the English term for "cyborg."
You know, just the other day I was telling my gf about how a scifi board debate that gets ultra heated will eventually end up with Hitler being mentioned. I think I need to send her this link to prove I was right. 
I'm 50 years old, and have been a fan of TOS since it premiered in 1966.
Or so I thought.
It turns out that the last 42 years of my life has been a lie. I thought I liked Star Trek. Thought I enjoyed it. But I now know that's not really the case. Because even as a child, I felt that TOS was a bit campy at times. In fact, that perceived campiness is one of the things I thought I enjoyed about the show.
But 3D Master has proven that it's impossible to enjoy camp. He's proven that a wry smile of understanding is absolutely no different that gales of derisive laughter. That I can't truly appreciate something, and find that thing to be silly, at exactly the same time.
Presumably, my belief that Spock was cool, and that the Enterprise was aesthetically pleasing, was completely negated by the fact that, even at 8 years of age, I thought most of the alien costumes were goofy, and that I... acknowledged.. that Shatner... had an unusual acting... style.
If only I'd encountered 3D Master sooner, I could have spared myself of all those years of wasted enjoyment.
Or so I thought.
It turns out that the last 42 years of my life has been a lie. I thought I liked Star Trek. Thought I enjoyed it. But I now know that's not really the case. Because even as a child, I felt that TOS was a bit campy at times. In fact, that perceived campiness is one of the things I thought I enjoyed about the show.
But 3D Master has proven that it's impossible to enjoy camp. He's proven that a wry smile of understanding is absolutely no different that gales of derisive laughter. That I can't truly appreciate something, and find that thing to be silly, at exactly the same time.
Presumably, my belief that Spock was cool, and that the Enterprise was aesthetically pleasing, was completely negated by the fact that, even at 8 years of age, I thought most of the alien costumes were goofy, and that I... acknowledged.. that Shatner... had an unusual acting... style.
If only I'd encountered 3D Master sooner, I could have spared myself of all those years of wasted enjoyment.
Funniest post I read in a while. Thanks for the laugh.
3D Master
Rear Admiral
Oh, grand.
Just when you thought films like The Dark Knight actually meant that the SF genre's stigma that it's ridiculous meaningless escapism that has nothing to say about anything, and is only enjoyed by moronic nerds is gone...
Self-proclaimed SF and Star Trek nerds themselves claim it's exactly that. Hallelujah!
Somebody shoot me now.
Just when you thought films like The Dark Knight actually meant that the SF genre's stigma that it's ridiculous meaningless escapism that has nothing to say about anything, and is only enjoyed by moronic nerds is gone...
Self-proclaimed SF and Star Trek nerds themselves claim it's exactly that. Hallelujah!
Somebody shoot me now.
Uh, what the hell are you talking about?
It's like you're responding to posts that don't actually exist. And then over-reacting to these non-existant posts.Rod extraction team, please report.
I don't get what's so overly negative about camp to begin with. Heck, the whole thing started BECAUSE of a new appreciation and approach to art making itself.
As for the SF genre's stigma of meaningless escapism and nothing more, I'd like to point out that NINETEEN of the top 20 highest-grossing films of all time (unadjusted for inflation) are sci-fi and/or fantasy. If there's some sort of stigma about Sci-Fi, the money coming it ain't showing it. Is it escapism? Sure. But who's suffering from this "stigma?"
Dibs.
From where I'm standing, you're the one who has the problem with camp, not us. No one here has said that if something is camp, it must be meaningless escapism that has nothing to say about anything and is only enjoyed by moronic nerds.
Hell, one of the best examples of camp I know of, Tony Kushner's Angels in America plays, Millennium Approaching and Perestroika -- and, yes, Kushner himself has described them as camp -- is also an example of a deeply intelligent, sophisticated work of art that has a LOT to say about our society. Hell, it won a Pulitzer Prize!
Camp does not equal bad or stupid. At all. And no one's said or implied that it does other than you.
For my money, camp is like anything else: When it's done badly (1997's Batman & Robin), it's painful, but when it's done well (the Adam West Batman, or Angels in America or The Dark Knight or Star Trek), it's WONDERFUL.
I think he beat you to it.
Similar threads
