Do you want the Spock/Uhura romance to continue in Trek XII?

[M'Sharak]

NO. I have seen all the "emo-Spock makin' out with the black chick" I ever want to see.

What the fuck does that particular adjective have to do with anything?

Be very careful answering that.

1. I am intrigued that particular moderators take it upon themselves to not only monitor my every word, but also caution me on what and how I should post prior to my posting. I am sure such a moderator will have planned at least 2 versions of warning in preparation for any post. [Pro-active/re-active; poe-tay-toe/poe-tah-toe, eh?]

You make it sound so dramatic and personal-persecution-ish, and you know what? It sounds just as silly coming from you as it does coming from those so-called "haters" you like to go on about.

2. I merely find it curious that the respondent chose to react to only one word in a phrase set apart by quotes. As I also posted: what I saw was mostly physical contact, rather than actual romance between them, hence the phrase I placed in quotes. Any intelligent person who has read my 2,975 prior posts knows I do not participate in bigotry, so I have no need to defend myself now.

Or you could just explain what you meant, using wording which makes it more clear and without the implication A) that Beyond Antares is somehow lacking in intelligence (which is getting unnecessarily personal and is borderline trolling, by the way -- you know better than that, don't you?) and B) that complete familiarity with every one of your 2,975 prior posts should be required in order to understand the meaning of that one particular statement. I probably have read most of yours and you're right, I can't recall any indication of bigotry, yet even so, I thought then and think now that the wording of that statement was unfortunate.

Yes, you did say other things in the post which explained how you didn't believe that we actually saw a relationship--a valid enough opinion by itself--and that you wanted to see Spock get more firmly in control of his emotions. However, those sentiments were weakened, I think, by the inclusion of that first sentence, the purpose of which I don't really understand, if not as a slap. It would have been a stronger post with that one omitted, or perhaps with a simple "no" its place.

Just for fun--rather than climbing up on your high horse over the fact that Beyond Antares chose to use the word "fuck" (which is mostly what I was trying to head off, there, remembering a few things you've said about the use of "coarse language" before) and chose to key on one word in your statement above the others--why don't you simply... you know, answer the question? Why did you elect to use that word, and how did you think it might be taken in that context? Why was it necessary to make color an issue at all?

 

[lightyear]

I say "yes"

as scotty would say: I love this ship. It is exciting.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

Do you want the Spock/Uhura romance to continue in Trek XII?

Oh please God no.

Nip it in the frakkin bud right now and sweep it under the rug as if it never happened.

 

[I-Am-Zim]

Wow. I just noticed the "Emo Spock makin' out with the black chick" comment (I didn't read the entire thread). And all I have to say is...so what? Spock looked Emo. He did. Really. No kiddin'. And Uhura is black. She really is. Just look at her. Seriously, she's a black chick. (oh God, I used the work "black" three times. I'm in sooooo much trouble) Thank you captain obvious. And there's nothing wrong with it. I think the sentence was probably meant as an attempt at humor, hilighting the contrast between the two characters as well as the fact that some of us old school TOS fans really don't want to see bridge officers who are in a relationship serve on the same ship together. It would cause a severe conflict of interest. As well as possible security risks and pose an undue threat to the overall safety of the vessel and its crew. Was the comment ill-advised? Probably. Was it meant as a racial slur or a derogatory comment? Highly doubtful. Unfortunately, in this primitive 21st century society, some people apparently can't take a joke. And that's too bad.

 

[Sector 7]

What the fuck does that particular adjective have to do with anything?

1. I am intrigued that particular moderators take it upon themselves to not only monitor my every word, but also caution me on what and how I should post prior to my posting. I am sure such a moderator will have planned at least 2 versions of warning in preparation for any post. [Pro-active/re-active; poe-tay-toe/poe-tah-toe, eh?]

You make it sound so dramatic and personal-persecution-ish, and you know what? It sounds just as silly coming from you as it does coming from those so-called "haters" you like to go on about.

2. I merely find it curious that the respondent chose to react to only one word in a phrase set apart by quotes. As I also posted: what I saw was mostly physical contact, rather than actual romance between them, hence the phrase I placed in quotes. Any intelligent person who has read my 2,975 prior posts knows I do not participate in bigotry, so I have no need to defend myself now.

Or you could just explain what you meant, using wording which makes it more clear and without the implication A) that Beyond Antares is somehow lacking in intelligence (which is getting unnecessarily personal and is borderline trolling, by the way -- you know better than that, don't you?) and B) that complete familiarity with every one of your 2,975 prior posts should be required in order to understand the meaning of that one particular statement. I probably have read most of yours and you're right, I can't recall any indication of bigotry, yet even so, I thought then and think now that the wording of that statement was unfortunate.

Yes, you did say other things in the post which explained how you didn't believe that we actually saw a relationship--a valid enough opinion by itself--and that you wanted to see Spock get more firmly in control of his emotions. However, those sentiments were weakened, I think, by the inclusion of that first sentence, the purpose of which I don't really understand, if not as a slap. It would have been a stronger post with that one omitted, or perhaps with a simple "no" its place.

Just for fun--rather than climbing up on your high horse over the fact that Beyond Antares chose to use the word "fuck" (which is mostly what I was trying to head off, there, remembering a few things you've said about the use of "coarse language" before) and chose to key on one word in your statement above the others--why don't you simply... you know, answer the question? Why did you elect to use that word, and how did you think it might be taken in that context? Why was it necessary to make color an issue at all?

My, my, my... where to start?
1) The first underlined/bold part. You constantly prove my point by your actions making this statement true: You are not paranoid if they really are out to get you. A look at your previous record of warnings heaped upon me is all the proof needed. I am flattered that you assume you are the moderator in question... a guilty conscience perhaps?
2) This should have been self-explanatory. You are choosing to make it into something else. "I do not participate in bigotry." Why must you say it is not enough? Just leave it there instead of trying to accuse me of something which is untrue?
3) I hate sounding like a broken record, but once again you are trying to make an issue of a non-issue. At no time did I accuse anyone of being less than intelligent. I merely pointed out that ANY intelligent person CAN look at my previous posts and know beyond any doubt that I am not a bigot. I am not sure how that becomes a trolling issue (although I am sure you would try to find a way).

In most countries, including the one in which I reside, a person is innocent until proven guilty. Why you persist in saying, "You must be guilty since you won't say enough to satisfy ME," is beyond all logic. I am reminded of the TNG episode "The Drumhead".
Beyond Antares has never posted that he/she does not take my response at face value. If Beyond Antares wishes to contact me, I am willing to help with any unanswered questions. In fact, our paths cross in other threads without incident and Beyond Antares seems like a nice person. You seem to be the only one who follows me around waiting to point the finger. My personal prohibition towards profanity prevents me from posting my godson's response. He is black and is very offended by your apparent accusations.
Perhaps you should take the advice I have seen moderators give in this situation and "follow it up in PM". Have I not always been willing to discuss our issues in PM? To quote Rodney King, "Can't we all just get along?"

 

[M'Sharak]

A look at your previous record of warnings heaped upon me is all the proof needed.

All two of them, one now expired? Not quite a heap.

Perhaps you should take the advice I have seen moderators give in this situation and "follow it up in PM". Have I not always been willing to discuss our issues in PM?

Your entire post containing the bits quoted here belonged in PM. You know where to get hold of me.

Back to topic?

 

[Spork111]

^^Well, I don't know the history you guys seem to have, but isn't it possible that the inclusion of the word "black" was simply a physical descriptor? I know we live in sensitive times, but if Spock was mackin' on Rand, would "Emo Spock making out with the blonde chick" be inappropriate?

Anyway, back on topic. At the beginning their relationship was the biggest leap in the whole film for me. After a while, I grew to appreciate it. It's certainly well played - especially Zoe's sensitive performance in the elevator. I just hope it doesn't devolve into a string of some high school level pda's (which the transporter room scene came dangerously close to).

It should be remembered that Starfleet isn't quite the military, so it seems natural that regs would be a little more lax. I think it's tougher for Kirk, as the captain, to have a relationship with a crewmember. That being said, if they got somebody like Kristen Bell as Rand, well... I might be willing to go along for the ride. And considering what happened to Grace Lee Whitney, it would be kinda nice if the character got a second chance.

As for Spock/Uhura, I see it as being in a similar key to Han/Leia (minus the petty bickering). It's going to be an ongoing subplot that adds emotional resonance to the main storyline. If they have a moment that goes to the same level as the carbon freezing scene, they've done it. They're both logical, intelligent, sensitive people, and their relationship is promising as long as there is a degree of professionalism on duty.

 

[seigezunt]

I voted "no," only because it skeeved me out a little bit, and didn't seem like "my" Spock.

But what the heck, I'm aboard for the new ride. Let these kids steer. I'd love to see where it goes.

 

[Drewmax]

I voted for Don't Care. I think it was a welcome change to the status quo we were used to in TOS, it is another example proving that this Abramsverse is a new beast with twists and turns each unique and intriguing. If we were to have it in the next film, which I strongly feel we will, I would like it to be down played more, I would feel this way if Kirk has a love interest in the new film. I want Trek to be about discover and mystery, not love and romance. However if we don't get it, then I won't be too upset really, it was nice for what it was, but the writers should really be focusing on more important aspects of the script/story than love and romance.

 

[EJA]

Spock and Uhura? No. That was one of many mistakes the film made.

 

[Mrs_Whatsit]

However if we don't get it, then I won't be too upset really, it was nice for what it was, but the writers should really be focusing on more important aspects of the script/story than love and romance.

Amen, Drewmax! Like the relationship between Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. I know this is only their first story, and I didn't mind the Spock/Uhura thing, but I think the time spent on it shorted time that would have been better given to the Big 3.

ETA: And with this post, I'm a Commander! Hurray!

 

[startrekrcks]

yes the trio relationship developing more that would be great to see.

 

[superdeluxe]

Yes. Honestly, if they just drop it, then it was a waste of time putting it into the first movie.

 

[threeb]

I vote yes, but I would like it to remain as background/subplot like it was in the last movie. I love the idea of S/U as a couple, but I don't want Star Trek to turn into a soap opera or romantic comedy.

 

[ALF]

Yes. Honestly, if they just drop it, then it was a waste of time putting it into the first movie.

Good thing this has never happened before... [cough], Enterprise, [cough].

 

[Vonstadt]

I went with yes, I kinda liked the idea of it. Added some depth to both of the characters and was a part of the whole 'we are goig off in our own new direction' thing.

Relationships happen in real life and they change and alter characters adding a degree of emotional depth and dimensions.

I say go for it, stay the course. No more reset buttons. Be daring what the hell.

Vons

 

[Temis the Vorta]

I say yes but don't go overboard with the relationship we wouldn't want Uhura to then have little tots.

Sure she can! A pack of cute little pointy-eared rugrats. But it should be a flashforward-to-the-future kind of thing. Tots underfoot interfere with the story.

 

[The Comedian]

Star Trek has yet to show a grown-up realistic romance.

I'd say that's definitely going where no Trek has gone before.

Let it continue.

 

[Pauln6]

As long as they don't go the Star Wars route where pregnancy is an illness that prevents you from doing anything worthwhile in the plot apart from dying for no apparent reason.

Sweet Jesus, hang on though - if Leia remembers her mother and yet Padme died just after giving birth can it be that the SW prequels were set in a parallel universe...?

 

[ilovestartrek17]

Nyota and Spock! Yummy.

Why not? Just because it wasn't done in Prime TOS?

Not a good enough reason.