Discussion in 'Star Trek Movies: Kelvin Universe' started by Xavier_Storma, Feb 7, 2013.
Well that is a shame Clegg you fail to understand what that means.
Real women do not need to be confrontist to make a point or to make themselves heard.
Taut and rigid characters like Seven and Kira would fail at the first hurdle, mainly because 99.9% of women you'd see in every day life would not talk or behave that way in any situation.
Unconvincing characters and performances are a real no-no for big movie like Star Trek.
Well... neither do real men, you know? Unless 'real' there is some normative claim, rather than meaning 'non-fictional'. ST09's Uhura is sensual (I guess... it's not the first word that springs to mind, but whatever) but she's hardly quiet. And certainly confrontational when the situation calls for it.
Define 'best'. Your favourites? Sure. Most popular? Maybe not. Some popular female roles of the last fifteen years of cinema: The Bride (not quiet, very confrontational, definitely highly-strung), Trinity (very confrontational), Hermione Granger (not quiet, hardly sensual, quite highly-strung) Hit Girl (the antithesis of quiet and epitome of confrontation) Katniss Everdeen...
And what about Ripley? One of the most iconic and enduring female characters in cinema, almost unquestionably the most so in SF. Does Ripley speak loudly through being quiet and sensual? I don't think you can make any objectively persuasive claim of the kind you seem to be making.
Trek hasn't traditionally had much truck with how people, regardless of gender, would talk or behave in real life. How many guys do you know IRL who've delivered even one Kirkian sophomoric monologue about the virtues and vices of the human condition, never mind do it regularly?
Real women can be and do whatever they want.
Of course they can do what they want.
The point I am trying to make is the hardcore fancination of characters like Kira and Seven what with their relentless confrontational, 'tough-chic' and stiff personas, this is an example of how not have female characters on the big screen.
It is unconvincing, unlikable and unappealing and causes needless attrition to the viewer.
You just don't need that sort of mediocrity in a reboot that was supposed to save Star Trek.
Ripley in Alien is a perfect example of a strong lead female character, leagues above anything Kira and Seven can achieve combined.
She doesn't squark or throw tantrums to be heard. Your very own example proves my point.
It is just your relentless sentimental bias from watching DS9 and VOY that makes you fail to differentiate successful Hollywood movie characters to mediocre ones from TV shows that got cancelled.
So, your argument essentially is that "strong women" are off-putting, because men can't handle women who don't just roll over and meekly accept everything the big, strong men tell them to do?
Do you realize how sexist that sounds?
No, it wouldn't have.
I've been a fan of TOS since 1966. Love Abrams's version.
Is that what he's saying?
Does it? I had a lot of the same problems with many of the female characters, particularly on DS9. "Tough chicks" as conceived by an all-male writing staff can indeed result in stiff and implausible characters. Then there were the "lipstick lesbians" of DS9's version of the Mirror Universe, who seemed to exist mainly because someone wanted to see Kira put the moves on Dax. "Intendent Kira" represented the conflation of homosexuality with general wickedness on a nearly Harkonnen level. Are you sure there's no stereotyping or sexism going on there?
No it wouldn't have been as successful, general audiences would've seen it as just another Trek spin-off. The core product is TOS and TNG, to focus dollars elsewhere is just counter-productive.
The more crews you introduce the more watered down the product becomes. Besides, why introduce another crew when the TOS gang are largely unexplored outside of Kirk and Spock?
Not sexist at all.
Pointing out that hammy gritted teeth acting and stiff body posture is not a convincing example of a strong female character. Which is what the performances of Kira and Seven are guilty of.
Seven was just eye candy. I liked the way Kira was written for the most part, I just couldn't stand Nana Visitor.
I'm not sure what he's saying, because he started off talking about how "real women" behave and painting with an extremely broad brush.
See, I can't argue with that, because you articulated a fair criticism. I agree that that was some pretty egregious stereotyping.
But anh165's original point was made so broadly as to denigrate all strong female characters, not just ones written or portrayed poorly.
LOL yeah, Ripley's always quiet. Even when she's arguing with Paul Reiser about his bad calls. Never wears a uniform, either. Ya sure showed me!
Was never a huge fan of either of those shows, especially not Voyager. Try again? I'm not making any kind of case for Kira or Seven, I'm not particularly fond of them. It's your asinine twaddle about 'quiet and sensual' women being greatly preferred in other media that I'm taking issue with.
I understand plenty, like how backpedaling from a thoughtless and tasteless broad generalization makes one look unsavory.
I'd like them do the opposite of the Avengers and split the crew up into their own solo adventures. This is the first time we've had a group of Trek actors who can and have headlined their own films and I'd love it if they capitalized on that to build the Trek brand and further develop the characters. In particular, Pine's Kirk and Quinto's Spock could each definitely carry a big budget film on their own, perhaps with Urban and Saldana costarring. But every one of them has the chops and recognition factor to at least open a smaller budgeted film- perhaps reuniting down the line Avengers style in a big Star Trek film on the Enterprise.
Thank goodness this didn't happen.
I look forward to Into Darkness then the third movie and possible animated show and I also look forward to the TNG reboot and potential nuTOS/TNG crossover movie
TNG reboot gonna be great.
You can bet that some exec at Paramount has already greenlit TNG movies in the future. Post Abrams.
The only thing you seemed to understand is the judicious use of insidious forum troll posting.
There is no broad generalisation, just a very specific swipe at poorly written and poorly acted female characters like those in DS9 and VOY, the sort of TV movie, direct-to-video quality that anyone with a creative mind would never put to the big screen.
Some of you chaps can defend poorly written and poorly acted female characters till the cows come home, at the end of the day all those high profile movies feature instantly engaging female characters , this works better than the irate and contentious women you find in DS9/VOY.
A good comedian should never have to explain their own jokes, same as a good singer on stage doenst need to be a total attention seeking try hard, you either have it in you to engage the viewer or you do not.
Yes I suppose my point was expressed as poorly as how Seven and Kira are written and acted.
I can live with that.
Janeway sucks but they can use the name cause it's cool and make a new character alongside TOS and TNG people. Then they go search some ultimate thing together all in the third movie. They should go big with the exploration adventure as there's been a lack lately.
Separate names with a comma.