What is Star Trek and its future?

[wulfio]

My only point is that Trek has done it before.

That was not the argument that dude was making, so it's irrelevant as a rebuttal. That statement doesn't belong in that particular debate. I don't care to weigh in on the topic. But I recognize that most of the people in this debate are not debating the same thing, so I thought I'd point it out so you all don't get dizzy.

It's like me saying the "the sky is blue", and then you saying "but dirt is brown".

 

[Warped9]

Send in the clones.

 

[Campe]

My only point is that Trek has done it before.

That was not the argument that dude was making, so it's irrelevant as a rebuttal. That statement doesn't belong in that particular debate. I don't care to weigh in on the topic. But I recognize that most of the people in this debate are not debating the same thing, so I thought I'd point it out so you all don't get dizzy.

It's like me saying the "the sky is blue", and then you saying "but dirt is brown".

It seems to me to be completely relevant.

The argument here seems to be to be the objectifying women in the Trek reboot films by putting them in scantily clad costumes. In that regard how is Carol being in her underwear any different than showing Droxine in some sort of weird cross halter? In the grand scheme of thing, there's no reason for either. But it seems to me that Droxine's clothing is completely ignored because of the time that episode was produced.

It's called precedent. It doesn't make it right. It doesn't excuse it. Personally, I think (despite the fact that I think its wonderful that sex is still represented in the 23rd century regardless of the timeline) that in either case its not NEEDED to tell a story.

 

[Warped9]

My only point is that Trek has done it before.

That was not the argument that dude was making, so it's irrelevant as a rebuttal. That statement doesn't belong in that particular debate. I don't care to weigh in on the topic. But I recognize that most of the people in this debate are not debating the same thing, so I thought I'd point it out so you all don't get dizzy.

It's like me saying the "the sky is blue", and then you saying "but dirt is brown".

It seems to me to be completely relevant.

The argument here seems to be to be the objectifying women in the Trek reboot films by putting them in scantily clad costumes. In that regard how is Carol being in her underwear any different than showing Droxine in some sort of weird cross halter? In the grand scheme of thing, there's no reason for either. But it seems to me that Droxine's clothing is completely ignored because of the time that episode was produced.

It's called precedent. It doesn't make it right. It doesn't excuse it. Personally, I think (despite the fact that I think its wonderful that sex is still represented in the 23rd century regardless of the timeline) that in either case its not NEEDED to tell a story.

Actually there is a distinction. Droxine's costume was exactly that: a sample of what an alien high-born woman of her age might wear on Ardana in mixed company. Carol Marcus in STID was clearly in her underwear for no reason but to titillate for that one moment. She didn't have to be shown in the midst of changing except they wanted to show nuKirk ogling her in her skivies. She certainly wasn't going to parade around that way throughout the rest of the film.

It's context and intent.

 

[Campe]

Well, I agree to disagree.

 

[Warped9]

Well, I agree to disagree.

No probs. I'm not excusing Droxine's costume as it, too, was meant to draw the eye. But the context is different. She represents an alien culture who might have different perspectives on sexuality than humans. And while some might find it too revealing a similar case can be made for some things that are worn by women today on the street. Today a woman can comfortably wear a halter top in public. But by the the standards of generations past she'd be considered half naked.

You don't even have to look to the past. Just look at some other cultures existing today. Try to imagine that same Western woman in snug jeans or shorts and a halter top on the streets in the heart of Egypt. She'd be lucky if all she got was arrested.

 

[Nerys Myk]

My only point is that Trek has done it before.

That was not the argument that dude was making, so it's irrelevant as a rebuttal. That statement doesn't belong in that particular debate. I don't care to weigh in on the topic. But I recognize that most of the people in this debate are not debating the same thing, so I thought I'd point it out so you all don't get dizzy.

It's like me saying the "the sky is blue", and then you saying "but dirt is brown".

I've no idea exactly what Austiod's argument was, beyond not being "feminst".just some confusing blather about context and interaction.

 

[OpenMaw]

It's rather disappointing this thread got side tracked for half it's length by discussion of titillation. I was rather enjoying the hypotheticals of what Trek is...

...Unless Trek is really just an elaborate way to get women half naked and I never knew. Someone should have clued me in.

 

[Warped9]

...Unless Trek is really just an elaborate way to get women half naked...

THAT'S IT!!!

I knew we could figure it out.

 

[Campe]

By Jove! I think he's got it!

 

[Nerys Myk]

It's rather disappointing this thread got side tracked for half it's length by discussion of titillation. I was rather enjoying the hypotheticals of what Trek is...

...Unless Trek is really just an elaborate way to get women half naked and I never knew. Someone should have clued me in.

Two words: Gene Roddenberry.

 

[fireproof78]

My only point is that Trek has done it before.

That was not the argument that dude was making, so it's irrelevant as a rebuttal. That statement doesn't belong in that particular debate. I don't care to weigh in on the topic. But I recognize that most of the people in this debate are not debating the same thing, so I thought I'd point it out so you all don't get dizzy.

It's like me saying the "the sky is blue", and then you saying "but dirt is brown".

I may be mistaken, but my initial impression of the argument was that Abrams Trek was the most egregious violation of titillation for titilation's sake in Trek.

If I'm error, I apologize for bringing up an irrelevant argument. However, my reading of Trek's history is an idea of less clothing on the females, especially as emphasized by Theiss.

Beyond that, I think GR envisioned a more open sexual atmosphere in TOS than was initially realized. There are subtle hints at it within "The Cage" and other episodes, as well as TMP's famous "Oath of Celibacy" with Ilia. As an aside, that scene confused me for years.

But, back to the point, Trek never seemed shy about women in less clothing, regardless of if it made sense to the story.

Back to the original topic, one aspect of sci-fi's current trend is "darker and grittier." That, to me, is a delicate line to walk, because Trek was always about optimism about humanity and the ability for human to overcome challenges and move past some of the more petty issues that were a part of the culture at the time (racism, nuclear war, among others).

Optimism needs to be at the core of any new Star Trek series. I've seen lots of interesting pitches, and would love to see them developed. Just not 100% certain they would fit in Trek.

It's rather disappointing this thread got side tracked for half it's length by discussion of titillation. I was rather enjoying the hypotheticals of what Trek is...

...Unless Trek is really just an elaborate way to get women half naked and I never knew. Someone should have clued me in.

Two words: Gene Roddenberry.

Three words: William Ware Theiss

 

[Warped9]

Back to the original topic, one aspect of sci-fi's current trend is "darker and grittier." That, to me, is a delicate line to walk, because Trek was always about optimism about humanity and the ability for human to overcome challenges and move past some of the more petty issues that were a part of the culture at the time (racism, nuclear war, among others).

Optimism needs to be at the core of any new Star Trek series. I've seen lots of interesting pitches, and would love to see them developed. Just not 100% certain they would fit in Trek.

In TOS there are indeed some genuine dark moments even by today's standards.

In "The Enemy Within" the evil Kirk's attempted rape of Janice Rand is pretty dark and intense. And yet there was no graphic violence in the depiction. Today you might push a scene like that just a bit further and filmed right (so to speak) it could still come across quite dark and disturbing.

Another chilling scene even without any violence seen whatsoever was in "And The Children Shall Lead" when Kirk and Spock realize they've just beamed two security men out in to space while in warp flight. Those men died instantly and it's damned chilling just to imagine the final thoughts of those men when they materialized in vacuum.

Matt Decker describing his crew calling for help as the planet wrecker is beginning to slice up the planet and Decker, now alone, is helpless to do anything with his ship a broken hulk. It's all in William Windom's performance and the accompanying music that plays with the viewer's imagination and sells the scene.

The transporter accident scene in TMP is another dark and edgy scene.

Those are just off the top of my head.

Dark and edgy doesn't have to be on the graphic level of Game Of Thrones. It's a matter of situation and execution. Alien stands as one of the great SF/horror films and yet you never really see the xenomorph tear someone apart. Light and shadow and sound and staging as well as suggestion is used to great effect, and except for the chest burster scene we see very little graphic violence. The film deftly plays with our imaginations.

 

[Taylirious]

Combine it with Transformers for a mega cash grab!

 

[wulfio]

Dark and gritty is so silly to me. You add 2 parts irrational disputes between protagonists, 1 part series spanning angst with a romantic lead, sprinkle in a few untimely deaths, add heaping spoons full of melodrama, make sure to end every episode with a montage of your cast being reflective while an acoustic version of a popular song with a lower BPM is overlayed over the episode, and you have the ingredients for a dark and gritty hit.

I really hope Star Trek does not go down this path, and instead looks to break the mold rather than follow suit.

 

[mos6507]

If I'm error, I apologize for bringing up an irrelevant argument. However, my reading of Trek's history is an idea of less clothing on the females, especially as emphasized by Theiss.

The difference is that Theiss used to put women in revealing clothing that was meant to be presented as "normal" within the universe. The actresses are asked to spend all of their screentime in those miniskirts and backless dresses. There's not a lot of slack-jawed "male gaze" going on (besides the Orion dancing numbers maybe). When the gels and filters come out, Kirk is falling in love and staring into the actress' eyes, and the camera focuses on closeups. It's pretty old-fashioned. The T&A is there, and if you want to fixate on it, you can, just as much as you can find something to fixate on while watching an otherwise harmless old Gilligan's Island or I Dream of Jeannie episode. But the story doesn't grab you by the collar and scream "HEY GUYS! LOOK AT THIS! FAN-SERVICE!"

The Carol Marcus striptease did just that. It came out of nowhere for no other reason than to give the audience something to gawk at. Pretty much the very definition of exploitation.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

^^ That style of animation, aimed at kids and based on the Academy idea.

I need an Advil...several.

You need to watch more anime and give up your preconceived ideas of what it is.

 

[Warped9]

^^ That style of animation, aimed at kids and based on the Academy idea.

I need an Advil...several.

You need to watch more anime and give up your preconceived ideas of what it is.

Not interested.

 

[Warped9]

Rewatching The X-Files I find myself thinking some of its atmosphere would be neat in a new Trek series. Particularly the "monster of the week" type elements where unusual and extreme phenomena and scenarios are investigated. That could fit in nicely with exploring the unknown and help regain that sense of being far, far out on the frontier.

Dark and gritty is so silly to me. You add 2 parts irrational disputes between protagonists, 1 part series spanning angst with a romantic lead, sprinkle in a few untimely deaths, add heaping spoons full of melodrama, make sure to end every episode with a montage of your cast being reflective while an acoustic version of a popular song with a lower BPM is overlayed over the episode, and you have the ingredients for a dark and gritty hit.

I really hope Star Trek does not go down this path, and instead looks to break the mold rather than follow suit.

Too true and well said.

 

[wulfio]

X-files/twilight zone could be interesting. You could certainly do that on the frontier. I'd go for that for sure. When Trek went creepy I always enjoyed it. I could see it also providing an excellent opportunity to really push the characters to the limit and test their core values(trek values) in every episode, rather than all those "look how silly these aliens are" that we used to get a lot of. You'd need some sort of arc in there since it's pretty much required, but man I can see that being an amazing show.

That's very original and I don't think I've seen anyone else pitch that idea.