Lindelof On Eve Scene (minor spoilers, hysteria, hyperbole)

[indranee]

For me, the problem lies in the fact that 1) they only showed a second or two of AE naked and Kirk gazing blankly at her, and 2) Cumberbatch actually complained about the fact that they made him build up to the naked chest scene and then cut it.

I call that discrimination and blatant pandering to the male demographics. Although, I'm sure there are many men who wouldn't mind staring blankly at Cumberbatch's naked chest.

*raises hand*

John, yeah, I was gonna PM you if we didn't hear from you

 

[sj4iy]

Do I think we need to ban Barbies? No, I think we need to create a public swell to make sure that the dolls change their shape. I am not asking for women to dress from head-to-toe and have fat dolls to play with. But I think we are putting them in a situation where media images, in combination with other factors, are causing pain.

There is a way. It's called the free market. If you don't like it for your child, don't buy it. Pretty simple.

 

[indranee]

Who says in the future there will be equal numbers between the sexes of admirals?
Factors like women taking career breaks to have children or not serving as long as men in Starfleet is likely to effect promotion.

Also: women and men are not necessarily equally interested in all fields and careers.

But the question is: why did we NEED to see her in her underwear in that scene?

"Need" ?

Okay, "desire"?

 

[RAMA]

I had heard this was the case but when I watched the movie I saw a good representation of races a genders. I think I saw at least 3-4 women in the meeting.

I only saw one, but really wasn't counting heads when watching the movie. I might go tomorrow and I'll definitely pay more attention to the ratio in the scene.

click

I count 5 women (one of the numbered ones is incorrectly labeled though), at least one alien. One of the women is black, and several men.

RAMA

 

[indranee]

Do I think we need to ban Barbies? No, I think we need to create a public swell to make sure that the dolls change their shape. I am not asking for women to dress from head-to-toe and have fat dolls to play with. But I think we are putting them in a situation where media images, in combination with other factors, are causing pain.

There is a way. It's called the free market. If you don't like it for your child, don't buy it. Pretty simple.

THIS.

 

[Ryan8bit]

Sorry, I'm not seeing this "brave women" thing...I see women who are mistreated and used by men for their own whims. He is accurately depicting the horror of the time, yes- but only a few of the main female characters "rise up"...the minor characters get their babies ripped out of their hands and murdered, raped with foreign objects or by their father, and then killed in just about every way possible. And not everyone agrees with your analysis - many people have accused the tv show of showing nudity and sex just for the hell of it, and it's true. Why show the numerous sex scenes with prostitutes? Why have almost every female (over the age of 18 in real life) strip down naked at some point? I watch it and I get over it. Just like I watched Star Trek and I got over it.

I think a big difference between those two is that one is supposed to be archaic, and one is supposed to be like our future (I know it's way off, but still). With both of those come certain expectations. Regardless of expectations for Game of Thrones being archaic, I am pleasantly surprised by the number of strong and well-written female characters on that show. It makes that show very interesting.

And there are probably equal amounts of male nudity, for whatever that's even worth.

 

[MacLeod]

I'm sure this has already been mentioned, but if the scene was Marcus catching a glance at Kirk would the reaction be different?

If it's wrong to show a woman in a scene such as this, then it should also be wrong to show men in a similar scene.

 

[Amaris]

For me, the problem lies in the fact that 1) they only showed a second or two of AE naked and Kirk gazing blankly at her, and 2) Cumberbatch actually complained about the fact that they made him build up to the naked chest scene and then cut it.

I call that discrimination and blatant pandering to the male demographics. Although, I'm sure there are many men who wouldn't mind staring blankly at Cumberbatch's naked chest.

*raises hand*

John, yeah, I was gonna PM you if we didn't hear from you

What can I say? After seeing "Sherlock," I've developed something of a major crush.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Re: Lindelof On Eve Scene

It was a move bad move on Lindelof's part to make the apology. It puts Alice Eve in an awkward position, especially since she still has a lot of promotional work to do for the film as it rolls out around the world. If Lindelof was to make the comments at all, he should have held off for a while.

Yep. Poor woman is going to be asked about this ad nauseum which serves to reduce her role to "the underwear scene". Not exactly what she wanted I'm sure.

 

[ROBE]

Marcus was in her bra and knickers for the same reason the hunk goes topless in the Diet Coke adds.

 

[Belz...]

"Need" ?

Okay, "desire"?

Ok, "need" in that sense.

I think it's mainly because we're humans.

I count 5 women (one of the numbered ones is incorrectly labeled though), at least one alien. One of the women is black, and several men.

RAMA

But how many LGBT people ?

 

[Belz...]

Sorry, double post.

 

[sj4iy]

Sorry, I'm not seeing this "brave women" thing...I see women who are mistreated and used by men for their own whims. He is accurately depicting the horror of the time, yes- but only a few of the main female characters "rise up"...the minor characters get their babies ripped out of their hands and murdered, raped with foreign objects or by their father, and then killed in just about every way possible. And not everyone agrees with your analysis - many people have accused the tv show of showing nudity and sex just for the hell of it, and it's true. Why show the numerous sex scenes with prostitutes? Why have almost every female (over the age of 18 in real life) strip down naked at some point? I watch it and I get over it. Just like I watched Star Trek and I got over it.

I think a big difference between those two is that one is supposed to be archaic, and one is supposed to be like our future (I know it's way off, but still). With both of those come certain expectations. Regardless of expectations for Game of Thrones being archaic, I am pleasantly surprised by the number of strong and well-written female characters on that show. It makes that show very interesting.

And there are probably equal amounts of male nudity, for whatever that's even worth.

Not by far. They barely show a penis unless it's Hodor (because women REALLY want to see that). A man's ass? Sure. Penis? Nope. Absolutely every part of a naked woman? Sure!

The "strong" female characters are rich or powerful, but they still strip down. I do have issues with showing the torture of women...I didn't know a baby killing scene was coming up and almost threw up (having a son the same age as the one who was killed). But I got over the nudity.

My whole point in this conversation is that if people can accept a show like that (which, honestly, goes overboard sometimes), then a two-second scene of a woman covering everything important and not even wearing something as bad as swimsuits these days shouldn't cause such a ridiculous uproar.

 

[TEACAKE'S PLEATHER DOME]

Does gratuitous have to be synonymous with offensive?

 

[Ryan8bit]

Sorry, I'm not seeing this "brave women" thing...I see women who are mistreated and used by men for their own whims. He is accurately depicting the horror of the time, yes- but only a few of the main female characters "rise up"...the minor characters get their babies ripped out of their hands and murdered, raped with foreign objects or by their father, and then killed in just about every way possible. And not everyone agrees with your analysis - many people have accused the tv show of showing nudity and sex just for the hell of it, and it's true. Why show the numerous sex scenes with prostitutes? Why have almost every female (over the age of 18 in real life) strip down naked at some point? I watch it and I get over it. Just like I watched Star Trek and I got over it.

I think a big difference between those two is that one is supposed to be archaic, and one is supposed to be like our future (I know it's way off, but still). With both of those come certain expectations. Regardless of expectations for Game of Thrones being archaic, I am pleasantly surprised by the number of strong and well-written female characters on that show. It makes that show very interesting.

And there are probably equal amounts of male nudity, for whatever that's even worth.

Not by far. They barely show a penis unless it's Hodor (because women REALLY want to see that). A man's ass? Sure. Penis? Nope. Absolutely every part of a naked woman? Sure!

The "strong" female characters are rich or powerful, but they still strip down. I do have issues with showing the torture of women...I didn't know a baby killing scene was coming up and almost threw up (having a son the same age as the one who was killed). But I got over the nudity.

My whole point in this conversation is that if people can accept a show like that (which, honestly, goes overboard sometimes), then a two-second scene of a woman covering everything important and not even wearing something as bad as swimsuits these days shouldn't cause such a ridiculous uproar.

They show as much penis as they do vagina, which is to say none. And the "strong" male characters strip down too. I'm just not seeing Game of Thrones as a a really good comparison for those points.

I agree that the thing with Eve really isn't that big of a deal though, just that comparing it to GoT seems... odd. Apples and oranges really.

 

[sj4iy]

I think a big difference between those two is that one is supposed to be archaic, and one is supposed to be like our future (I know it's way off, but still). With both of those come certain expectations. Regardless of expectations for Game of Thrones being archaic, I am pleasantly surprised by the number of strong and well-written female characters on that show. It makes that show very interesting.

And there are probably equal amounts of male nudity, for whatever that's even worth.

Not by far. They barely show a penis unless it's Hodor (because women REALLY want to see that). A man's ass? Sure. Penis? Nope. Absolutely every part of a naked woman? Sure!

The "strong" female characters are rich or powerful, but they still strip down. I do have issues with showing the torture of women...I didn't know a baby killing scene was coming up and almost threw up (having a son the same age as the one who was killed). But I got over the nudity.

My whole point in this conversation is that if people can accept a show like that (which, honestly, goes overboard sometimes), then a two-second scene of a woman covering everything important and not even wearing something as bad as swimsuits these days shouldn't cause such a ridiculous uproar.

They show as much penis as they do vagina, which is to say none. And the "strong" male characters strip down too. I'm just not seeing Game of Thrones as a a really good comparison for those points.

I agree that the thing with Eve really isn't that big of a deal though, just that comparing it to GoT seems... odd. Apples and oranges really.

People are blowing up as if it were GoT, though, is my issue with it. You'd think she had just suddenly took everything off and started giving him a lapdance by the the sound of it.

But I'm definitely disagreeing about the male/female ratio of nudity in GoT. The Atlantic even complained, saying "I would respect Game of Thrones' sex scenes more if the leads were disrobing as often as the extras, or if the men were exposed half as often as the women." There's even a video compiling every nude scene in GoT. It takes a long time to get to a man.

 

[Count Zero]

I think it's important to see why Marcus is valued. Is it because she is able to deactivate the torpedo, or is it because she looks nice? I think if you asked Jim Kirk that question, he would only come to appreciate her as a member of the crew after he valued how she looked. So she gets in the door, so to speak, because of her looks, not her credentials, and that is a sad commentary on the 23rd century.

No, she gets in the door by presenting orders she falsified. Then, when Spock questions her assignment Kirk argues that she's a weapons expert and therefore a good addition to the crew. That all happens before the scene where we see her in her underwear.

In and of itself, attraction is not a bad thing. When girls get the message that this is the only thing that gives them worth, then I think the culture should examine itself.

Yes but that's not the message that this movie sends. Carol Marcus is portrayed as a capable scientist, a woman with a conscience who even stands up to her own father and a woman who is brave and risks her own life to disarm the torpedo and save McCoy. There is also Uhura. And this movie isn't even particularly progressive on that front.

My problem with your posts on the subject is not that I think there is no problem regarding the portrayal of women in mainstream movies and TV - the Bechdel test alone shows that there is - but rather that you hang an awful lot on this one short scene which may be gratuitous but is harmless.

Context matters. And when Kirk is in bed with two women, it shows him as a womanizer. We are not shown why he is in bed with them, except that he flirts with every pretty face that walks by (the scene with Spock where they talk about the 5-year mission, the scene with Bones talking about the Kobiashi Maru). I don't think that is more than a pop culture representation of James Kirk.

This behaviour of Kirk does bug me, mainly because it seems so out of place even now, even more so in the 23rd century. I know a guy in real life who behaves similarly to Kirk. He's quite successful with that but it makes him look rather ridiculous. I figure that it would be even worse 200 years from now. Accordingly, the audience in the cinema laughed at those Kirk scenes. It does undermine his authority, that's for sure.

Now as a man, I am insulted by these images. I am insulted that I am seen as some drooling frat boy that just wants to see naked women and get drunk all the time. My experience with this movie was that I laughed and muttered "completely useless scene." I wanted to walk out of the theater, and stopped myself, because I knew I would have to pay again to see the rest of it. When we see men's magazines, women are plastered all over them. It's as if I never have a thought that doesn't include naked women. I never want to know how about health or politics or comedy. Someone says "We cater to men," it automatically means beer, pizza, tv, sports, and women. It means I can't watch other popular science fiction without being offended. It means that I cannot watch a comedy about men without seeing those images (Hangover III) or having a stupid Dad that just goes along with whatever the wife says because she bitches a lot and he can't take her incessant whining. If that appeals to you, fine. It doesn't to me. And I avoid things that say "we cater to men" for that purpose. This movie caters to men.

Yes, well, I do see your point and the gender stereotyping is something that bugs me, too, but again, you're interpreting all this into a scene in a movie that doesn't really fit the somewhat one-sided description you're making here.

Most Hollywood blockbusters cater to men, by the way. That's not something that sets this movie apart. In fact, I'd say it's less lop-sided than many others.

 

[Pauln6]

And I avoid things that say "we cater to men" for that purpose. This movie caters to men.

Yes, well, I do see your point and the gender stereotyping is something that bugs me, too, but again, you're interpreting all this into a scene in a movie that doesn't really fit the somewhat one-sided description you're making here.

Most Hollywood blockbusters cater to men, by the way. That's not something that sets this movie apart. In fact, I'd say it's less lop-sided than many others.

If it is less lop-sided than many others that's only because the standards are so appallingly low. It's astonishing that so many Hollywood movies STILL operate 'token female syndrome' or 'the Smurfette Principle' after so many decades of so-called equality. And why assume that male audiences want to see so few women? This is down to the ignorance of the writers and casting people and they all need a slap. And I should be the one who is allowed to administer those slaps.

I've always said that if a movie is set in a scenario where it is logical and sensible for men to dominate the cast, that's fine. I don't expect to see a submarine full of women in a World War II drama. If there isn't a specific reason in the plot for there to be more of one sex than the other, then I expect to see equal numbers of men and women in varied roles throughout the movie. It shouldn't be that hard.

Now point me in the right direction and I'll get slapping.

 

[CorporalClegg]

I say, let the penises fly!

 

[sj4iy]

Context matters. And when Kirk is in bed with two women, it shows him as a womanizer. We are not shown why he is in bed with them, except that he flirts with every pretty face that walks by (the scene with Spock where they talk about the 5-year mission, the scene with Bones talking about the Kobiashi Maru). I don't think that is more than a pop culture representation of James Kirk.

Gee, I wonder where pop culture came up with that:

[YT]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-vKN7ZvmvBw[/YT]

It's almost as if people watched the show and saw him snog every attractive female in the vicinity.