• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Pegg's Scotty: Just Say No!

I don't know why people hate Pegg as Scotty so much. I think he did a fine job. I just didn't like his annoying Jar Jar type sidekick.
Where is everyone drawing the Jar-Jar comparrision for Keenser? I've honestly not seen it, and am curious as to how everyone else is seeing it.

To quote Llyod Benson..

"I know Jar-Jar Binks, I worked with Jar-Jar Binks---Jar-Jar Binks was a friend of mine and you sir, Keenser, are no Jar-Jar Binks."

The only thing unbearable about Jar-Jar was his voice. If Lucas had just stuck to the plan----and dubbed another voice over Best's performance---all would be well. If only Lucas had used Captain Tarpals voice for Jar Jar or even Ed Asner! Darn it all! I noticed in the Clone Wars cartoon they took the edge off a bit. Oh well.
 
The only thing unbearable about Jar-Jar was his voice. If Lucas had just stuck to the plan----and dubbed another voice over Best's performance---all would be well. If only Lucas had used Captain Tarpals voice for Jar Jar or even Ed Asner! Darn it all! I noticed in the Clone Wars cartoon they took the edge off a bit. Oh well.

I dunno If I can agree with that one. I know this is controversial, but IMO Jar-Jar's dialogue, personality and the attitude of other characters toward him were highly reminiscent of the sort of racist stereotypes seen in movie serials of the 1930s. I'm not saying Jar-Jar was actually intended as some sort of crypto-racist symbol; more likely, Lucas was trying to recycle the stock characters he enjoyed as a youth into something more politically acceptable (same goes for the "Foo Man Chu" Trade Federation.) But as far as I'm concerned, he missed the mark by a mile.

Say what you will about Keenser, but I suspect you're not going to catch him getting his big giant lips caught in a repulsor beam, doing pratfalls, or being told "the ability to speak does not make you intelligent."
 
Jar-Jar won the Battle Of The CGI Toy Advert Things by being clumsily lucky. And for that alone, I want to symbolically kick Lucas right up his chin. Twice.

Compared to that, Keenser is The Man. But small. And craggy.

And Pegg is great. Again. Yeah!
 
Cut new Scotty some slack! He's stranded on an ice planet with no food, a guy from the future turns up, tells him he's going to invent trans-warp beaming, shows him how and then gets him to beam onto the Enterprise at warp with this other guy. Scotty then materialises in the reactant tube, gets out from there to be surrounded by security guards. They get marched up to the bridge when the guy he's just beamed on with proceeds to goad the captain into attacking him and nearly strangling him.

I don't think Scotty had time to draw breath and have a sensible thought in the entire movie. The next one, that's where we'll see him holding the Enterprise engines together with spit and baling twine.


That's not entirely fair. At no point did we see him being unprofessional while he was working. Sure he's funny, but while he's working he concertrates hard and gets the job done very well.

He's still cleaning reactant out of his ears with a towel, but he's paying enough attention to follow Chekov's plan for getting to Titan.

He did save the Enterprise from falling into the black hole.
Score two for good points made. :techman:

And this:


Okay, once and for all, here's the perfect reason for having Jar-Jar in the movies, as well as the perfect defense of the character::rolleyes:


Who else could have been the Han Solo figure? You know, it might have helped things considerably if Qui-Gon had run into a sassy, wisecracking Gungan instead of a bumbling innocent. I think Jar Jar Binks would have been much more popular if he mouthed off with his opinion that the Force is a load of crap, and called Qui-Gon a damn idiot for betting their ship on Anakin. That could have been interesting, but believe it or not, I actually like Jar Jar the way he is. Lucas was going for something different with Jar Jar, tapping into the mythological archetype of the wise fool. In ancient legends and stories (King Lear being a good example), there's a fool who tags along with the heroes, getting in the way and annoying everybody, but his innocence and good heart ultimately provide the heroes with some crucial insight or assistance that saves the day.

Jar Jar Binks is the wise fool. Yes, he's annoying. Supremely, ultimately annoying. But repeat after me: HE IS SUPPOSED TO BE. If everybody in the movie loved him and thought his wacky antics were adorable and precious, that would suck. But take note: they don't. Nobody likes Jar Jar. For Pete's sake, his own people banished him because he was so damn aggravating. Critics accuse Lucas of sticking Jar Jar in the movie purely for kiddie appeal, and yet the kid in the movie doesn't even like him. Anakin only bothers to speak to Jar Jar once, to warn him away from his podracer's energy binders, and steers clear of the Gungan the rest of the time. Only Qui-Gon seems to see any worth in Jar Jar's existence, and whatever it is, he keeps it to himself.

Ultimately, Jar Jar is directly responsible for setting in motion the entire third act of the movie. When all seems lost and dark, he inspires Queen Amidala to shed her dependence on the ineffectual bureaucracy of the Republic, and he gives her the courage to go back and fight for their home planet, on her own terms. He is the liaison who facilitates an alliance between the Gungans and the Naboo. He doesn't manage to lead his troops to victory over the battle droid army, but he does his best. Jar Jar the fool is indispensable to the plot, and a fine character. Okay, I could do without him saying "Ex-squeeze me," but nothing's perfect.
The Real Jar Jar
...is pretty much the way I've always viewed Jar-Jar Binks. He's supposed to be the buffoon/the wise fool; that's his function in the story. I've never understood the hatred expressed by some toward the character.

As to whether anyone in Star Trek is a Jar-Jar figure: I say no, I don't think there is one. Scotty (with Keenser doing setup) provides comic relief but is not limited to that, and there's no hint that Keenser (also a Starfleet engineer) is not himself competent at what he does; we just don't get to see very much of him amongst all of the other goings-on.
 
I have to agree with M'Sharak. I don't get the Keenser=Jar Jar thing either.


J.
 
It would take a lot more from Keenser for that to be an apt comparison. Poor little guy only has one line, doesn't he? As opposed to Jar Jar, who just won't be quiet... :brickwall:

Regarding Jar Jar's role as the fool archetype: the fool in King Lear was tolerable to me (King Lear being my favorite of Shakespeare's works, even) because he was witty and shrewd; he didn't seem quite so ostentatious as Jar Jar. Of course, that may because I think of King Lear in written form rather than performed on stage as Shakespeare intended. What irritated me about Jar Jar was the silly baby talk and slapstick kind of stuff. It's okay once or twice, but it just became exhausting after awhile. :) Interesting article, though. I'll keep it in mind if I ever watch Episode I again.

Keenser was only in a couple of scenes, and I thought he was rather cute. He loves his Scotty, bless him!
 
It felt more like he was playing a Scottish Simon Pegg than he was playing Montgomery Scott

That's exactly the problem. I don't give a flip about Simon Pegg and I'm not interested in seeing him in Star Trek. I'd rather watch that guy Montgomery Scott, being someone who actually does belong in Star Trek, but who sadly looks to be gone forever. If I wanted to see a Simon Pegg movie, I could just rent one from Netflix.

Sure, the writing was off target too, but Pegg's performance was self-indulgent and just plain lazy, and even if the writing hadn't sucked, his performance still would have been completely wrong. Maybe the guy is incapable of actually acting, so he just does his standard schitck over and over, and it is a very standard comic schitck, dating back decades before any of us were born.

It doesn't really matter anyway. If that was the best they could do, I would have preferred they just forget a character named Montgomery Scott ever existed rather than stink up an otherwise very good movie.
 
^ I liked his role, and I haven't seen much of Simon Pegg's work. To me, he embodied Scotty. I don't want him to change.


J.
 
I like Simon Pegg but I was disappointed. Of all the cast I thought Pegg overplayed it. Sure his character is more comical in this but I just didn't find it funny nor did I think it was anything even close to the Scotty we knew.
 
The new Scotty fits in just right for the target audience.

The original Scotty was not nearly so comical as I've seen him described on this board. He was a pretty serious guy....not even close to the new version.

I agree..I've heard this time and time again how Scotty was the comic relief of TOS..and I think to myself...really he was? On occassion yes...but in no way would I describe his character as "funny"...

I can excuse Pegg's coked up caffeinated version of Scotty because I'm chalking it up to this is how he was when he was younger.

I saw Scotty as quite believable as a much younger Scotty. The serious scenes were pure Scotty Prime. The funny stuff didn't hit quite the same notes as Scotty Prime but I had no trouble with that either because nuScotty is a lot younger.

The only thing I had some trouble with was his different accent but that faded quickly. Might that be part of what bothers some people without them realizing it?

The comic relief came from what happened to Scotty and his reactions. It's not like Scotty was telling fart jokes.
 
Last edited:
^ But it was, saul. Classic Scotty had many moments. Hell, classic Scotty got drunk on screen.


J.
 
sometimes i think i am seeing a movie from a different reality then other people saw
:)

i just didnt see the above.
"standard comic schitck" there were just comedic moments and moments were a bit of levity was used to relieve tension yeah but there were serious moments that pegg was on target too.

but, did scotty have some comedic moments.. yes but so did the tos scotty.
would scotty speak up and defy authority in tos.. oh yeah..
heck at least they didnt explore scotty as trouble magnet especially were it involved women.

an explosion that a woman played a part in gets scotty severly injured.
to keep from getting into a funk about women kirk takes him out to an alien nightclub.
of course the woman gets murdered by jack the ripper.
i mean who else can get involved with a woman only to have apollo the greek god chasing after her too and then another love be possessed.

it is almost amazing some woman wasnt involved in new movie's scotty tale of woe
about how he came to be on delta vega.
;)
 
Nae means 'not', rather than 'no' anyway.

I should add a rider that it can mean 'no' in context but not as a negative on its own. No Scot would say 'nae' as the opposite of 'aye'. They would say 'no', or 'nah' or 'naw' but never 'nae'.

Pedantically yours

Doris
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top