Why? So they stop throwing plameek soup at you.Well perhaps with more Vulcan's serving in Starfleet, perhaps some details did come out to explain why your Vulcan crew might need a few days off every seven years.
Why? So they stop throwing plameek soup at you.Well perhaps with more Vulcan's serving in Starfleet, perhaps some details did come out to explain why your Vulcan crew might need a few days off every seven years.
Just making the point that Kirk "high-fiving" the Vulcans if Spock and T'Pring had public sex is something that would be seriously out of character for TOS Kirk.Oh Jesus. What does nuTrek have to do with this discussion?Maybe the immature jackass Kirk of nuTrek would have done that...![]()
It plays into the notion that Kirk is a womanizing horndog. Which was part of Kirk's reputation to the public at large long before Abrams or even Meyer got their hands on Star Trek.Just making the point that Kirk "high-fiving" the Vulcans if Spock and T'Pring had public sex is something that would be seriously out of character for TOS Kirk.Oh Jesus. What does nuTrek have to do with this discussion?Maybe the immature jackass Kirk of nuTrek would have done that...![]()
I have no idea where the poster got the notion of Kirk high-fiving anyone, and thought it could be from the Abramsverse, since that Kirk is a great deal less mature than TOS Kirk.
It plays into the notion that Kirk is a womanizing horndog. Which was part of Kirk's reputation to the public at large long before Abrams or even Meyer got their hands on Star Trek.
It plays into the notion that Kirk is a womanizing horndog. Which was part of Kirk's reputation to the public at large long before Abrams or even Meyer got their hands on Star Trek.
The same public referred to "Dr. Spock" and laser weapons.
And Abrams is an idiot. He's like a Berman who never got a regular job. The Kirk as Don Juan thing has been debunked repeatedly.
Yes, the public gets stuff wrong. Mostly because their perceptions aren't based on actually watching the show and hearing things second hand.It plays into the notion that Kirk is a womanizing horndog. Which was part of Kirk's reputation to the public at large long before Abrams or even Meyer got their hands on Star Trek.
The same public referred to "Dr. Spock" and laser weapons.
And Abrams is an idiot. He's like a Berman who never got a regular job. The Kirk as Don Juan thing has been debunked repeatedly.
What's the solution then?
- What would make most sense would be for Vulcan culture to not betroth kids at the age of seven,
Stonn probably was bonded as a child, but there are a few possible reasons why he still wasn't bonded as an adult. First, the girl could have died and Stonn's parents didn't bond him to anyone else. Second, it's possible that the girl's family decided, for some reason, to have the bond severed (a kind of pre-pon farr divorce which would be facilitated by a healer). This would make sense if the girl's family intended to move permanently off-planet, or if they just decided Stonn wasn't good enough. Of course, Stonn's family could have been the ones to decide to sever the bond. Third, maybe nobody thought Stonn was good enough for their daughter!Apparently Stonn wasn't bonded as a child, since he was available as an adult for T'Pring, so the practice of child bonding isn't universal.What's the solution then?
- What would make most sense would be for Vulcan culture to not betroth kids at the age of seven,
And what's the point of bonding anyway, if the woman is free to choose someone else? Did T'Pring's bonding just not take? If she had married Spock and then carried on with Stonn when Spock was gone, would she have been snubbed on Vulcan, or is that business as usual?
Lots of unanswered questions. The Vulcan part of the story to me is interesting, but secondary. The central part is the irony of the two friends being forced to fight to the death for the possession of a woman neither of them really wanted.
Yeah, I wonder where we've seen this behaviour before. For example, people talking how ST09 and STID sucked donkey balls well before seeing them...Yes, the public gets stuff wrong. Mostly because their perceptions aren't based on actually watching the show and hearing things second hand.The same public referred to "Dr. Spock" and laser weapons.
And Abrams is an idiot. He's like a Berman who never got a regular job. The Kirk as Don Juan thing has been debunked repeatedly.
If only Kirk had knocked out Spock in the first round. The look on T'Pring's face when Kirk, to keep diplomatic relations kosher, brings his new Vulcan bribe up to the ship. How's that for you, little miss only three possible outcomes.
I'll leave the rest to Eddie Murphy
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tPjTqx18ISU[/yt]
That's true, but if you're recreating original characters based not on the originals but on public perception, aren't you just making parodies or caricatures?Whether or not it has been debunked, it is still the perception that the general public has had of the character for the last forty-plus years.
That's true, but if you're recreating original characters based not on the originals but on public perception, aren't you just making parodies or caricatures?Whether or not it has been debunked, it is still the perception that the general public has had of the character for the last forty-plus years.
And some people insist on holding grudges because some of "the public" might not like the same things they like. I did see the 2009 movie. It was crap (in my opinion, of course). I intend to see the other movie as well. I'd be happy if it was any better, but I'm not really expecting much.Yeah, I wonder where we've seen this behaviour before. For example, people talking how ST09 and STID sucked donkey balls well before seeing them...Yes, the public gets stuff wrong. Mostly because their perceptions aren't based on actually watching the show and hearing things second hand.The same public referred to "Dr. Spock" and laser weapons.
And Abrams is an idiot. He's like a Berman who never got a regular job. The Kirk as Don Juan thing has been debunked repeatedly.
There are some parodies that are quite good. The best ones are respectful of the original source material, yet can be bitingly satirical and funny.I've seen the tallies that have been done that shows Kirk didn't sleep with every woman he encountered but that doesn't mean he was never something of a ladies man. He definitely had a non-platonic eye for members of the opposite sex.That's true, but if you're recreating original characters based not on the originals but on public perception, aren't you just making parodies or caricatures?Whether or not it has been debunked, it is still the perception that the general public has had of the character for the last forty-plus years.![]()
Well, he was a Gene Roddenberry character, after all...I've seen the tallies that have been done that shows Kirk didn't sleep with every woman he encountered but that doesn't mean he was never something of a ladies man. He definitely had a non-platonic eye for members of the opposite sex.![]()
Wow. Not even once? I mean, wow. That's really something.I've never made the "Mr./Dr." mistake, however. Not once.
Wow. Not even once? I mean, wow. That's really something.I've never made the "Mr./Dr." mistake, however. Not once.
We use essential cookies to make this site work, and optional cookies to enhance your experience.