Kirk & the Orion cadet- was it appropriate? Indecent? Cool?

[Nerys Myk]

That's fine..we can agree to disagree. I would just like to see Star Trek NOT follow society so much that it incorporates all that sex. Sex is in about every show and movie out there, I'd like to see Star Trek to be different. And what is wrong with Disney stuff? High School Musical movies broke records. There is nothing wrong with doing things without sex if done correctly, it can be very profitable.

Star Trek and sex have been together since the 60s. From Vina's dance with Pike in "the Cage" to Gaila's romp with Kirk in Star Trek 09. Its part of the package. Sexualy advanced Deltans, Bisexual Bajorans, Skinny dipping Betazeds and naked Vulcans have always populated the show. It has usually reflected society as well. Its not so much the future as it is a funhouse mirror version of the present.

 

[soot]

I'm not a parent and I don't think like a parent, but isn't the scene we're discussing the one that was in just about every trailer? If it was tame enough to put in the trailers, it can't be that objectionable, can it? I personally can't imagine an age where I'd be concerned about a kid seeing two people kissing in their underwear, at all. In my world, that's not very explicit. If you don't know what sex is, this scene wont tell you.

I do have to agree with this, though:

Kirk and Orion seemed natural. Uhura stripping seemed more gratuitous. I KNOW it's her bedroom, ok -- it just seemed like something that was bound to get into the trailer and titilate adolescent males. "Dude, this movie rocks!!" It seemed kind of cheap is all.

I mean, I can't say I minded per se, but it was a little insulting. Unlike the sexual content in the rest of this scene, which served to establish characterization in a fun and playful way, Uhura undressing just served to get another set of knockers on screen. It's a small thing, but it was also nothing but pandering.

 

[Chrisisall]

Star Trek and sex have been together since the 60s.

Holy s**t, check THIS out, Star Trek G-Rated peeps!!!:

A Tokyo based film company, Shocksuo, is preparing a release of Star Trek (2009) in association with Paramount Pictures of a version of the movie which will include photo-realistic CGI henti (Japanese animated pornography) scenes between the characters of Kirk and the Orion slave girl character that will be available in non-region format on DVD this November. When asked to comment, Paramount spokesman Brisco Campbell replied, "We wanted to see some sugar, baby."

 

[Chrisisall]

Uhura undressing just served to get another set of knockers on screen. It's a small thing,

That's kinda mean, don't you think?

 

[soot]

Uhura undressing just served to get another set of knockers on screen. It's a small thing,

That's kinda mean, don't you think?

Oops. Sorry, Zoe!

 

[The Castellan]

Nothing in any Star Trek movie is beyond PG-13. Most of it is G or PG at this point. I think you're a little preoccupied with thinking specific scenes might be rated higher than they actually are. And for that matter, you should pretty much be able to discuss or make graphics for anything as long as it isn't utterly pornographic. As long as it isn't nudity, most R rated films aren't even going to be a problem with graphics. Kirk and Gaila in their underwear are safely PG-13 and not even badly so. Titanic was PG-13, if you'll remember (and as a 10-year-old girl at the time, I didn't know a single other 10 year old who hadn't seen it several times in the theater--that was the most ignored PG-13 ever put on a movie).

13 is a little less strict than you seem to think. And I won't even get into what the average 13 year old is comfortable watching and what they understand. Most kids watch PG-13 and R rated movies long before they're supposed to. Sleepovers with 8 year olds usually ended up with watching horror films like Stephen King's It. LOL. When it comes to kids trying to prove who is the least scared, the more nightmarish, the better. I can't tell you how many times I pulled out Night of the Living Dead on my friends. It's the same with young kids hitting puberty and being intrigued by adultness. I vividly remember that "tween" period. It's about the period where kids start branching out into more than just kiddie movies.

When discussing things, I think you'll find that the things you've objected to are not outside of what can be discussed on most PG-13 boards. Also, you have to be 13 or above to even legally sign-up on most messageboards. 90%+ of everyone here is probably an adult.

Thank you. You spoke a perfect post, there.
I myself, at age 9, and probably much earlier, watched movies like Robocop, Aliens, James Bond films and I was just fine. Same with video games.

American children don't see enough bare breasts. They're culturally deprived.

Best phrase I have ever heard. Thou art the next Socrates.

If all that was in there it would have had a rating restriction to a certain age group, limiting their exposure.

~11 year old The Castellan slipping out of the theater at the end of the R-rated film he snuck into.~: Certain what restricting whom now?

I'm not a parent and I don't think like a parent, but isn't the scene we're discussing the one that was in just about every trailer? If it was tame enough to put in the trailers, it can't be that objectionable, can it? I personally can't imagine an age where I'd be concerned about a kid seeing two people kissing in their underwear, at all. In my world, that's not very explicit. If you don't know what sex is, this scene wont tell you.

I do have to agree with this, though:

Kirk and Orion seemed natural. Uhura stripping seemed more gratuitous. I KNOW it's her bedroom, ok -- it just seemed like something that was bound to get into the trailer and titilate adolescent males. "Dude, this movie rocks!!" It seemed kind of cheap is all.

I mean, I can't say I minded per se, but it was a little insulting. Unlike the sexual content in the rest of this scene, which served to establish characterization in a fun and playful way, Uhura undressing just served to get another set of knockers on screen. It's a small thing, but it was also nothing but pandering.

And what fine knockers they be.

 

[M'Sharak]

American children don't see enough bare breasts. They're culturally deprived.

Best phrase I have ever heard. Thou art the next Socrates.

Careful -- you'll give Dennis a swelled head.


(Also, you'll want to use the Multi-Quote function instead of triple-posting, as a rule. I'll fix this one.)

 

[Lightinspire]

That's fine..we can agree to disagree. I would just like to see Star Trek NOT follow society so much that it incorporates all that sex. Sex is in about every show and movie out there, I'd like to see Star Trek to be different. And what is wrong with Disney stuff? High School Musical movies broke records. There is nothing wrong with doing things without sex if done correctly, it can be very profitable.

Star Trek and sex have been together since the 60s. From Vina's dance with Pike in "the Cage" to Gaila's romp with Kirk in Star Trek 09. Its part of the package. Sexualy advanced Deltans, Bisexual Bajorans, Skinny dipping Betazeds and naked Vulcans have always populated the show. It has usually reflected society as well. Its not so much the future as it is a funhouse mirror version of the present.

But in the 60's it was not as prevalent as today..they did not show people in their underwear or stripping down to a bra, etc..why does Trek have to change with the times of more sex, etc..there is enough of that on TV..why can't Star Trek be different? That scene had nothing to do with the movie, it was just something to slip in a sexual scene. We have enough of that junk on TV and in the movies now. Would you want your 6 or 10 year old grandson/daughter go see someone on screen who is just after sex with someone they find attractive? That is all the Kirk and Uhura, Orion woman scene was. It had nothing to do with the story except to bring it out face to face how Kirk was, have sex with whomever looks good without a conscience.

 

[NileQT87]

I think you missed the fact that Kirk was with Gaila to get access to her computer clearance to alter the Kobayashi Maru and it was in this scene where Kirk overheard that Uhura had intercepted a Romulan transmission.

It had a whole lot to do with the plot.

 

[number6]

^ Which is true to Kirk's character.

Go back and answer my question about issues on creation, science etc..

Where do you draw the line and why would you bring a 6-10 year old to see a PG-13 movie anyway?

 

[Mereope]

I can think of several reasons that I wouldn't take one of the youngest members of my family to see the movie. The PG-13 rating would've been the first reason.Along with:

1. The light and soundshow that was the destruction of the Kelvin.
2.The death by sharp pikey thing impalement of Badass Capt. Robau.
3.The bloody barfight.
4. The multiple deaths on the drill platform of death: burning, impalement, and semi-defenestration.
5.Torture scene involving ugly bug shoved down Pike's throat.
6.More bloody fisticuffs with Kirk.
7.Too much loud noise and special effects.
8.Massive abuse of the laws of physics. (Okay, that one's a personal quirk)

Implied sex scene with two consenting adults? Brief depictions of attractive people in their undies? Compared to the violence and possibly scary scenes of the others, that wouldn't have even gotten my attention. But I imagine that whoever rates movies would include that with the others,(except #8) and therefore gave it a PG-13 rating.

Kirk just having sex? That's practically canon. Including implied sex with a pleasure slave, implied sex with a robot, and multiple times of no shirt, and ripped shirts, and torture- and that's just in TOS.

Trek without sex has never existed, although it's never been graphic. And even if that scene was excised by magic elves, I still wouldn't let the little kids see it. All of reasons 1-7. But if it had been a squeaky clean, G-rated unoffensive movie, I would have only seen it once, not multiple times.

There are venues that have increased their profitability by becoming family-friendly, but I know of one event that shut down because of that. A PG-13 event that tried to appeal to everyone and failed miserably. Deservedly -they didn't know their audience. Trek is like that. It was never meant for kids, even if kids do like it. I'm not a child, and everything doesn't need to be made with them in mind. Clearly Trek was not meant for them.

 

[Jeri]

(sharp pikey thing = teral'n. Resume your disorder...)

 

[Greg Cox]

But in the 60's it was not as prevalent as today..they did not show people in their underwear or stripping down to a bra, etc..why does Trek have to change with the times of more sex, etc..there is enough of that on TV..why can't Star Trek be different? That scene had nothing to do with the movie, it was just something to slip in a sexual scene. We have enough of that junk on TV and in the movies now. Would you want your 6 or 10 year old grandson/daughter go see someone on screen who is just after sex with someone they find attractive? That is all the Kirk and Uhura, Orion woman scene was. It had nothing to do with the story except to bring it out face to face how Kirk was, have sex with whomever looks good without a conscience.

Again, have you seen a James Bond movie? Or COLOSSUS: THE FORBIN PROJECT? Or BARBARELLA? I remember plenty of scantily-clad people and sexual innuendo back in the sixties. And TREK has always been pretty racy by the standards of its time. And that scene in the new movie? It's not even pushing the envelope these days.

No offense, but you sound like you want STAR TREK to be something different than it's always been, and to turn back the clock to the 1950's . . . at least where STAR TREK is concerned. Sorry, STAR TREK is product of the Swinging Sixties, and the new movie is aimed at 21st century teens and adults. If you think it's too much for your kids, let them watch SPONGEBOB or HANNAH MONTANA or LOST IN SPACE reruns. Don't expect a PG-13 franchise to go strictly G-rated after forty years of doing the opposite. Why should STAR TREK have to neuter itself after all these years? Because of impressionable six-year-olds? That's never been the target audience.

And who says Gailia wasn't having a good time, too? She seemed just as enthusiastic about the encounter as Kirk. Again, all I saw was two consenting adults, old enough to attend Starfleet Academy, enjoying each other's company. That's what adults do sometimes, even in the 23rd century.

Who says Kirk (and Gaila) have to be celibate just because they're in Starfleet?

The very notion would make Gene Roddenberry's head explode . . .

 

[Chrisisall]

And who says Gailia wasn't having a good time, too?

She was smilin'.

 

[Lightinspire]

^ Which is true to Kirk's character.

Go back and answer my question about issues on creation, science etc..

Where do you draw the line and why would you bring a 6-10 year old to see a PG-13 movie anyway?

Creation,Science, etc..has nothing to do with morality..of course all this junk about something being millions of years old, etc gets on my nerves because the means they use to date things have been flawed in so many ways but that is not going to be widely broadcasted..morality is something different...why does Trek have to change with the times? If the times show sex why does Trek have to change with it? Continually restricting access by doing all that is not good. I wouldn't bring a child that young to see a pg 13 rated movie..that is my entire point..if you want to reboot trek and get a newer audience than the older fans you need to appeal to them so making movies with them being included in the target audience.

 

[soot]

It had nothing to do with the story except to bring it out face to face how Kirk was, have sex with whomever looks good without a conscience.

In other words, it helped establish Kirk's character. Since Kirk is the main character, I'd say that's pretty important to telling the story. It's not something the plot pivots on, but if we stripped every non-pivotal element from any movie it would be reduced to a three or four sentence summary.

If you prefer G rated movies, that's fine, but there's really nothing inherently bad about telling stories with a wider palette than that allows.

 

[Chrisisall]

If the times show sex why does Trek have to change with it? Continually restricting access by doing all that is not good.

Ummmm... since when is sex "not good"?
Kirk was and always will be an intergallactic hush puppy.
If you want to compare, the new Galactica was absolute porn. Please, let Kirk get his kissy-feely on in the face of REAL PG-13, won't you?
Kids know about this stuff. My Wife asked my Son to close his eyes during that sequence, LOL, I would not have. He would have closed them anyway. Ever see Speed Racer? It's the Spridal Syndrome. We all grow out of it!

 

[Nerys Myk]

^ Which is true to Kirk's character.

Go back and answer my question about issues on creation, science etc..

Where do you draw the line and why would you bring a 6-10 year old to see a PG-13 movie anyway?

Creation,Science, etc..has nothing to do with morality..of course all this junk about something being millions of years old, etc gets on my nerves because the means they use to date things have been flawed in so many ways but that is not going to be widely broadcasted..morality is something different...why does Trek have to change with the times? If the times show sex why does Trek have to change with it? Continually restricting access by doing all that is not good. I wouldn't bring a child that young to see a pg 13 rated movie..that is my entire point..if you want to reboot trek and get a newer audience than the older fans you need to appeal to them so making movies with them being included in the target audience.

That first sentence has me wondering what metal you might be using for a hat. conspiracy

Star Treks "morality" has always been of a loose nature. You have watched the show, correct? The women often wore clothes that would be called shocking even if it was underwear. There's more skin in the typical TOS episode than this movie. More sex and sensuality too.

Star Trek is hardly pushing the envelope with the "sex" in this film. Its sex scenes are rather tame as things go these days. With a PG-13 rating they could have done "worse". As Greg Cox pointed out many films in the 60s had scenes of this nature. Looking at my copy of Dr. No from 1962 I see its been retro-rated PG. Honey Ryder's scenes with Bond are probably "hotter" than anything in this film. Heck I can recall seeing Bond films and Matt Helms film with my Dad back in the sixties. I was under the age of 10 at that time. They didn't scar me too much Anyone recall when there was a "M" film rating?

 

[Mereope]

James Bond, let's see what we have without ANY visual evidence...

Pussy Galore
Honey Ryder
Plenty O'Toole
Holly Goodhead

Gee whiz, I remember Altaira in her birthday suit, discussing "biology" with Commander Adams- sometime in the 50's- in a micro-mini.

I believe there's a movie out now for that might be appropriate for a certain age-group/demographic. G-Force ! I haven't seen it, but I doubt there'd be anything in it objectionable- sex or science wise. Although - talking gerbils may be a problem for some

 

[Chrisisall]

Anyone recall when there was a "M" film rating?

There was a... dubious flirtation with that rating, if memory serves.