Abrams: ‘Star Trek’ Is Movie They Couldn’t Afford In Past + New Trek Banner [UPDATE: Hi Res.] December 15, 2008
by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Abrams, Comics, Star Trek (2009 film) , trackback
In a new interview with MTV, Star Trek director JJ Abrams says that the final cut of the film should be completed very soon. He also talked about deleted scenes, humor, Majel Roddenberry, and more, including what is different about his star Trek movie. UPDATE: Plus we have a high resolution version of a new promo banner from Paramount.
What is new with JJ’s Trek
Go to MTV.com for the full interview, here is an excerpt about what is new in Abrams Trek.
MTV: When you look at the other "Star Trek" films, what are they missing that you wanted to bring to yours?
Abrams: There are a number of things that I think are unique to this movie. There's a level of relevance that I think is really because of the actors playing the part. I didn’t want to just re-create or reset everything, I thought going back to those characters was important. [In previous films] when we met those characters, we met them pre-established. They'd already been working together, they already knew each other. They had this history. And for some reason, the origin of those relationships of those characters was something that probably would have helped me, at least, connect to them and understand why I should care about them and who they were.
So on those fundamental levels, none of the movies have had that before. But on a much more practical level, "Star Trek" has never had the opportunity, nor the resources, to be realized in this way. Things like the ships and the battles and the planets and the chases and the action sequences … and do them in a way that felt thrilling and terrifying and entertaining in a way that the show and the prior movies simply couldn't afford to do. I feel we were able to bring to life, in a way we've never seen before, what it is to be a member of Starfleet. And that's kind of cool.
Abrams Countdown Comment
And on the MTV movies blog was additional comments from Abrams about the upcoming "Star Trek Countdown" comic book. He noted that he has been focusing on finishing the film while Roberto Orci helps with the comic, noting Orci is 'the resident Trekker.' However Abrams did comment about how the Comics include TNG characters of the covers:
I think you just have to see that the key is this world, this universe, is not disconnected from what’s come before.
For more on Star Trek Countdown (including pre-order links and spoilers) CLICK HERE.
JJ and his crew
One last bit of JJ news, a couple of weeks back JJ attended (and presented) at the Children’s Defense Fund 18th Annual "Beat The Odds" Awards, and he brought some of the stars of Star Trek with him. Here is a nice shot of the Star Trek director and some of his bridge crew.
(L-R) Zachary Quinto (Spock), JJ Abrams, Zoe Saldana (Uhura), and Chris Pine (Kirk)
UPDATED: New Star Trek Banner
MTV had an early release of a new Star Trek banner, now Paramount has provided TrekMovie with a higher res version of the banner.
(click for higher res version)
Loading ...
Comments»
first?
good stuff
cool
Interesting to know the budget will affect what the movie will be, and probably, what it will look like ^^
Yawn.
Hopeing some real news becomes available soon.
Suh-weet!
Gotta admit-
reading Orci’s “quantum” explanations (not sure I agree with them) made me consider that an elaborate cop-out had been made; but after seeing this comic cover I am very curious and intrigued.
Question: is that DATA, or B4? Thinking B4.
I presume the story starts before Nemesis…. that looks like Data top right!
I really hope some of those “low budget” Star trek movies that came before get some special edition effects added to them. No, I obviuosly don’t mean Staw Wars:SE effects, but something in line of what Star Trek: The Motion Picture got a few years ago on DVD. Star Trek 5 needs it the most, and I think alot of people would pay money to see Trek V with all new special effects.
Think Nutty Professor.
8… “Star Trek 5 needs it the most, and I think alot of people would pay money to see Trek V with all new special effects.”
Only if they also added an all-new script.
Another picture to colorize?
Get to work guys.
10,
Or we could just delete V from the archive and call it good.
#10. Thorny: “…8… “Star Trek 5 needs it the most, and I think alot of people would pay money to see Trek V with all new special effects.”
Only if they also added an all-new script. …”
I gotta agree with you on the script part. =/
Even if it’d had top-notch effects, ST:V still would’ve been.. not that great.
Hopefully ST:XI will have both good effects AND good acting/writing/directing etc. etc…
So why is JJ presenting an alternate timeline version of the beginning, instead of how it “really” happened (i.e. how it happened in the main timeline)??
Plus: more original Star Trek deprecation in order to validate his own version.
I’d have less confidence in Abrams if he were unwilling to tell the truth about previous versions of “Star Trek.”
8 – Actually, Star Trek 5 is probably the only one that actually needs this.
The visual effects for the rest of the TOS movies hold up very well.
The TNG movies actually are pretty good, although there are some things in Nemesis that are not that great.
When dealing with the Phasen Rift, there is this very green environment, yet the ships are lit by a flat sidelight for most shots.
There needed to be light from the environment, which would have allowed the ships to look like they belonged with the background plates.
Shouldn’t McCoy and Uhura switch places in the banner? I mean it may be an alternate universe , but it still has to be about the big three, right?
I think a few tidbits from the Star Trek V script could be edited out of the film in favor of a few new special effects. I know one quick edit I would love is that stupid scene where Scotty bumps his head. If you need to explain how he got in the sick bed, just add a quick scene of a guy jumping around a corner with a phaser or something. I would rather think he got stunned by someone then banged his head… lol…
As bad as some parts of Trek V was, there was alot of good in it too. It may not be the best film, but it certainly warrants having an effects upgrade the most. Had Star Trek: Remastered only added new effects to the best episodes, would we have been as impressed by it?
Sure, just like McCoy was on the ST:TMP poster instead of Ilia.
Oh. That’s right.
Movie promotion 101: feature the hot chick.
I personally like one poster’s theory that STV was all a bad dream, something in Kirk’s subconscious. If you think about it, it makes sense. The camping scenes bookend the movie, and all of the action takes place after they go to sleep. Kirk has the nightmare that he loses everything – a working ship, his best friend, his crew, control of the situation… when painted in that light, it actually works.
6. It’s gotta b B-4. Data was blown to bits. However, Nemesis very neatly set-up the return of Data (through the download to B-4). My guess by the time of this story…if B-4 is in a Starfleet uniform…Data has “returned.” Talk about a cop-out. Awfully safe writing on part of the Nemesis team. But they also snatch away any hope of real emotional resonance from Data’s sacrifice.
Well, now it’s official: Bones has been marginalized and pushed out of the trinity.
I think that’s the first actual thing that I find disappointing. Perhaps it’s a reluctance to have three white guys in the center of the photo or just the basic ’sex sells’ equation. But Uhura was not at he campfire in Yosemite. She didn’t carry Spock’s katra. And, well, I don’t want to sound like the guy that complains about the angle of the nacelles… but this just doesn’t make sense. Karl Urban is the only pre-existing heartthrob in the cast. I know plenty of women across the demographic board who swooned over him in LOTR.
McCoy/Urban’s character is the most engaging in the trailer, with a line of dialog that’s instantly in the top 10 of Star Trek history, but he’s getting assed by the marketing department.
I’m all for the realignment of the universe and growing Uhura into a three dimensional heroic character… but WTF?
can that banner be considered offical teaser poster no 5? (badge = 1, logo = 2, kirk/spock/uhura/nero = 3, bones, scot, pavel, sulu = 4)
or maybe that is to be the new offical movie poster one sheet?
Chris Pine looks way more Kirk-like with THAT hair style and color than the one they gave him for the movie. Oh well.
Wow! Once again, I see people complaining about the movie even when it hasn’t been released… Clearly, the Trekkies and Trekkers can no longer be relied upon to keep the franchise alive. I hope the general public and open-minded fans (like myself) will buy tickets and get Star Trek going again!
All those canonistas, please remember this is Star Trek’s last chance. There will be no more if this movie fails!
@22…
Tuner, this banner is just stiched together from the earlier pictures, I bet the designer just mixed the portraits together by perspective and optical weight, not by the impact on single characters on the movie…
25 – Take it as a mark of concern, from those who care.
I’m optimistic about this movie, even with the rather interesting Quantum-mechanics argument for things matching up.
I’m glad KO are working on the Countdown comics.
In the interest of perusing IDW’s work, I just read the YEAR FOUR series this weekend and it was incredibly pathetic, undeveloped storytelling. Like, worse than TAS. About half of the illustrators were poorly matched to the subject, with terrible likenesses of the crew.
IDW should have serialized one big narrative instead of doing an episode each issue.
I can’t say I like the illustrations on the cover above, either. Looks nothing like Bana and nothing like the elder Spock in the trailer. Patrick Stewart probably broke out the tweezers when he saw that image.
@19
Then put her in the center – Pine’s hand grabbing at her boob!
Advanced Movie Promotion 102: sex sells!
They’ve done it before and they’ll do it again. It signifies nothing about the relative importance of Bones and Uhura in the movie itself.
I don’t know about this. Mr. Abram’s is basically saying that much of the film will be the same old stuff — planetary trips and space ship battles, but with a bigger budget. That’s all. So, nothing really new here — just a massively bigger budget for more eye candy.
As for his saying the previous TOS -era films did nothing to establish further character development from the TOS TV episodes — I don’t agree at all. At least not for the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triad.
ST:TMP gives fuller back story for Spock, as does Shatner’s ST V for both he and McCoy. As for Kirk’s character himself, nothing in Star Trek canon fleshes him out as a fully human character, with courage, foibles and vulnerability as TWOK and Shatner’s performance therein.
If Mr. Abrams couldn’t see why he should care about these characters from the whole canon of TOS and the six films that emerged them, then I’m not sure what we can expect from the new film that will respect the integrity of these characters who have been known and loved by millions for over forty years. But I for one do not feel that their histories have to be rewritten for the audience to empathize with them.
As Nicholas Meyer once said about them: they, as they are, exude charm in abundance. And that that is a rare quality indeed.
I wish the best of luck to Mr. Abrams and the new cast to bring the same character charm and charisma to this production. I am hoping that they will opt for substance over style: character and story development featured in the foreground and the special effects relegated to the background.
22 get over yourself. This film is about different characters, these arent the same spock, bones and kirk you saw sat around the camp fire. They’re alternates, they havent become a ‘holy trinity’ yet. Other than that, it’s a poster.
Quantum mechanics = lazy writing…..
33. Edwin – December 15, 2008
Quantum mechanics = lazy writing…..
Classical physics = lazy writing
Can we start talking about the sequel yet?! I think they should use a female villain for the next movie, since there has only been one in the movies (Borg Queen; Valeris doesn’t count).
Maybe Dr. Janice Lester. “I’m CAPTAIN KIRK!”
MORE QUANTUM PHYSICS PLEASE IF IT BRINGS ME MORE TREK.
Abrams: ‘Star Trek’ Is The Trek Movie They Couldn’t Afford To Do Before
Me: …’cos all a good movie needs is a shitload of money… and ’splosions… (?)
I kinda feel sorry for the guy that he does not know anything about depth and breadth. He’s that two-dimensional flat man living on the surface of things. Fortunately even Hollywood has better than that.
I know what it is to be a member of Starfleet and I couldn’t be more proud.
@38…
welcome Back Chris!
26. thorsten – December 15, 2008
@22…
I bet the designer just mixed the portraits together by perspective and optical weight,
>Doesn’t really work on that level, either, as Uhura is the only one photographed at a one-quarter angle. So instead of balancing the weight of the faces, she spoils the symmetry. It also has the effect of making her look less professional, less serious. She looks coquettish rather than looking like a Lieutenant and a xenolinguist.
And why can’t they harvest one good photograph of Simon Pegg? He’s a conventionally good-looking guy, but either looks lumpy, crazy or creepy in every shot they use.
34.
Hi Bob…I was about to write hat “classical physics = better storytelling” but I guess I without seeing how you used QM in the film itself, I should not go there yet.
I’m OK with new actors, really, cause I have to be—and this looks like such a great cast.
With QM, is it possible to see a 1701 closer in design to the original Enterprise sometime in the movie?
Spocks Death- OMG! I can’t beleve they killed him!
Datas Death- Hrs of episodes & movies with a great deal of them about or with him in plot. Who cares?
Data was a great character but came to a dead end with development?
Darth “NCC-1701-BAllZ” BAllz
@40…
I agree, Tuber, that was a fast job, and the person who did it had to work with available material. It would have been smarter to shoot the whole crew same style from the front for a fitting reassembly ;))
And yes, Simon looks really strange, and kind of overly softed…
32. Jon – December 15, 2008
22 get over yourself
> Don’t personalize this, jerky. I’m only talking about marketing. Delivering men to theaters in May is not the challenge. Urban has a substantial female audience.
I SWEAR Cho looks like Garret Wang in that shot.
Warning for flaming to Tuber
I’m not a marketing executive, but I learned about marketing movies from one of the most respected marketing executives in Hollywood. That person said, in plain terms: To the extent that men decide whether to see a movie based on cast, it’s based on the Male leads. Women, almost across the board, decide based on cast and also on the Male leads. That’s why Pine, Quinto and Urban are such great choices.
I love Uhura and I think Zoe has a fierceness to her that goes beyond just being a beautiful woman. But no one is going to see the movie or not based on her being on the poster.
“Things like the ships and the battles and the planets and the chases and the action sequences … and do them in a way that felt thrilling and terrifying and entertaining in a way that the show and the prior movies simply couldn’t afford to do.”
Err, JJ, have you SEEN “The Wrath of Khan”?! Mutara Nebula, Reliant, ANYTHING? Don’t tell me THAT wasn’t thrilling, terrifying, AND entertaining!
Am I the only one who never thought Data was such a great character and never understood why he became the “second billing” under Picard for all the movies?? Was he “Number 1″? No. If they wanted him to be, they should have promoted him and demoted Riker.
Cutting room floor.
Please Nutty Professor stupidity go there, now.
Jar Jar Binks antics not needed here.
@47…
a quick and dirty job here, Tuber…
http://thorstenwulff.com/banner.jpg
I just don’t like how Uhuru is pushed to the fore in that banner. The triumvirate of Star Trek has always been Kirk, Spock and Bones. J.J. and/or studio are just trying to sell sex. Pathetic
Orci = For alternate timeline idea in general, was that a decision you guys made, or was that a Paramount mandate (someone on the Star Trek board is implying it)?
I would ask everyone to give this film a chance. This is Star Trek’s last gasp. If you ever want to see another Trek film or TV series, this film HAS to be a massive success with the non-Star Trek audience.
If sucessful, the door would be open for Trek projects that fans are interested in: more canon-friendly stories, 25th century Trek, and so on. And every new fan means more money for Viacom/Paramount/CBS, which means more Trek projects.
Please take a mature and positive attitude toward the film, and give J.J., Bob and crew the benefit of the doubt.
53. Devon – December 15, 2008
Orci = For alternate timeline idea in general, was that a decision you guys made, or was that a Paramount mandate (someone on the Star Trek board is implying it)?
There were no paramount mandates
52. Doug – December 15, 2008
I just don’t like how Uhuru is pushed to the fore in that banner. The triumvirate of Star Trek has always been Kirk, Spock and Bones. J.J. and/or studio are just trying to sell sex. Pathetic
Or maybe diversity
@56…
as a producer, are you involved in the creating of artwork for promotion, Bob?
31 – “As for his saying the previous TOS -era films did nothing to establish further character development from the TOS TV episodes — I don’t agree at all. At least not for the Kirk-Spock-McCoy triad.”
Actually, what he said was that right from the start of the Original Series, the character relationships were pretty much already established.
In the new movie, we get to see the origins of these relationships.
He said nothing about character development after TOS or the Movies.
No mandates from Paramount?…not even ‘make a profit’, which would be a nice change of pace since the last movie.
RE: Uhura v McCoy
Well I have also noted that Paramount have put her more to the forefront in their marketing, but I see that as just showing the cast isn’t a bunch of white guys, which is pretty important for tent pole movies these days.
From the four scene preview I saw, it is clear that McCoy has a very close relationship with Kirk and very good chemistry.
56 boborci
Poster issues are nothing to loose sleep over, but Star Trek is Kirk, Spock, McCoy….the poster should reflect that, the movie should reflect it. Moving Uhura over with Bones next to Kirk, still gives the diversity.
#54 “mature and positive attitude” that is very unfair. Are critical comments immature? I haven’t read anyone say the film is rubbish because no one has seen it. Everyone is entitled to be positive or negative in their views of the limited material made available. It is not comments here that will make the film successful or otherwise it will be at the box office by many people who will never read what is written here.
Nice-looking banner!
And speaking of looking nice… it’s a understatement to say that Zoe looks absolutely AMAZING in that picture.
#56 If its diversity you want, make a Voyager film – I’d go see it. (assuming you’re talking about sex rather than colour)
Star Trek fans will cry over anything, I mean… geez guys, it’s a poster. Do people just sit refreshing the page on this site waiting for something to criticize? It’s the 21st century, pull yourselves out of the sixties.
The kvetchers should go back and look at the posters for all the TOS-based movies and see how often McCoy held “pride of place.” Answer: about once.
Jeez. Go ahead and hold these people to *more* standards that the old Trek would fail by, why don’t you?
I hope that the nutty professor stuff gets left on the cutting room floor, though from what I have previous read its part and parcel of a pretty important scene. Intelligent comedy is great, and I hope to see Pegg deliver a lot. This scene, I’m not so sure about. Yes, I will wait and see, but still sounds a bit pre-school and out of place.
The new Uhura sure is bony, I wish she had some curves like the original… she was more than just a beautiful face!
Zoe, Zowie…. let her have a more prominent role…
Boborci- Just curious, what compelled you to use an alternate timeline? What compelled you to change Kirk’s history?
56. boborci – December 15, 2008
Orci – thank you for your candid answer to my “grown ups vs teenager” questions. Candor is sometimes too lacking when money and career get involved. From what I’ve read thus far, you are a man of integrity.
Sincerely,
C.S. Lewis
Mixing a diversity agenda with a sex sells agenda is not exactly progress. Nichols was a gorgeous woman and she did wear a short skirt, but even through my most politically correct spectacles, I don’t think her hotness was marketed the way we already see happening with Saldana.
And it isn’t just this otherwise badass banner… Urban was excluded from the EW cover and the official One Sheets. It’s like Closettrekker says all the time about canon, ‘addition does not necessarily mean subtraction.’ But in this case, it has.
On the one hand, why mess with the canon triumvirate? On the other, why not feature the guy chicks dig from the insanely popular LOTR trilogy?
Look at the banner: the new triumvirate appears to be Kirk, Spock, and Uhura! She may only be a communications officer, but, thanks to sexism, she will no doubt feature prominently in the new film.
Holy crap, people. I was just kidding about the poster. It really is not that big a deal.
Trek 5 wasn’t all that bad until you get down to the FX. It was spot-on as to the characters except for the Scotty-Uhura strained moments. The FX actually jolt one out of the flow of the movie, especially at the end when there is no sense of a menace whatsoever. As is, it’s better than Insurrection and on a par with Nemesis.
When did narrow ties come back in style? I guess I shouldn’t have let my subscription to GQ expire.
In the Banner Uhura and Bones need to switch places!…duh!
she looks abit like beyonce there
i wonder if beyonce was ever considered ?
well..shes an actress isnt she as well as a singer…and i think she was in the running to play lois when abrams was rebooting superman
I saw someone above saying they hope if there is a sequel that the villain is female. I say if there is a sequel how about a movie based on ” “exploring strange new worlds, new life and new civilizations, to boldly go!”
#71:”Mixing a diversity agenda with a sex sells agenda is not exactly progress”
How about a “don’t be stupid” agenda? That would work for me.
56…diversity just for the sake of diversity is pathetic.
#55 – Thanks for the reply.
BTW, if you see me asking certain types of questions, please don’t think it is out of ignorance. I usually ask these things for confirmation/certain source on certain points I may debating elsewhere. I knew the kid said Tiberious, but some claimed you guys wrote “Siberius” because it was part of the reboot which is why i wrote it. I figured Paramount didn’t mandate an alt. timeline, but the guy elsewhere was making it seem like it was even after I had said that you guys had taken responsibility for changes. He still didn’t buy it (it seems to be the popular thing among *some* Trek fans to make up facts or assume things to validate their negative points as we have seen.) Definite source is always good.
Just explaining my reasoning for asking certain things.
Of course they never had the relationships origins in the other movies as they all assumed you had watched the television shows. The movies were an extension of those shows with a core audience built in. Instead of a Phase II on TV, Paramount wanted to try and cash in on the success of Star Wars and bring Star Trek to the big screen in the form of The Slow Motion Picture(which I sat in my chair in the theater in awe in my yut)…no harm no foul, but to say they never had the money to do that on the big screen is not entirely true given that these movies were made for an audience who already knew the back stories that were established on TV.
Now they are (re)making something, from the beginning, on the big screen for folks who weren’t in that base audience….a Star Trek for Dummies, so to speak. Let’s hope it works….otherwise it may be a very long time before they attempt to bring Trek back in any form.
I wonder if Orci says quantum mechanics as much in his everyday speech as he did in that interview with Anthony? Yes, let me have a quantum mechanics Big Mac and a large quantum mechanics fries and um…yes, a quantum mechanics shake. (will that be all?) quantum yes mechanics(drive around please) thank quantum mechanics you.
If he doesnt say it in every sentence in this universe, 82, I’m sure there is a universe out there where he does. and you do. In fact, there must be a universe out there where the only two words in the language are ‘quantum’ and ‘mechanics’ right? :D
Actually, have read a fair amount about QM, I was thinking….
quantum mechanics = pounding headache
… and I admire anyone who invests the time and gray matter to try to understand it and incorporate it as accurately as possible into a story! Here’s hoping you had all the ibuprofen you needed, Bob!
As for where Uhura/Zoe shows up in the poster, she’s a beautiful woman and a fine actress, and I wouldn’t mind even if they’d put her in front of Chris-Pine-pretending-he’s-Sylar.
Diversity, indeed. Thank you.
And #25 — I couldn’t agree more. The obsessive negative comparison of this thing to Star Wars simply because Abrams admitted to being a big Star Wars fan has been getting on my nerves as much as the whole tired arguments about canon and design changes (we hate the bridge after seeing two pictures, how dare they not do exactly what was done before! [and to ramble greatly, it looks far more viable as the bridge of a starship than anything I’ve seen in Star Trek before… just watch the TNG crew push pictures of buttons on their bridge).
And I quite enjoyed Bob Orci’s comment to Anthony, quite badly paraphrased, that our DVD collections will still exist despite this altered timeline. If I was involved in these films I’d be uttering a few colourful metaphors every time I read all these canon sacrilege /sell-out !! comments.
34. boborci
recycling top gun < lazy writing
“Star Trek for Dummies”
That. Is. Perfect.
I love it.
guys
we got a higher res version of the banner, it is now at the bottom of the article, click to bigify
So now we’re bitching about the order of the photos in the banner? Good God!
Pegg does look kind of funny. Almost dragon ball z-ish.
I love the banner; the black and white artwork really helps the new actors harken more to their classic counterparts. But – NITPICK ALERT – shouldn’t McCoy Kirk, and Spock be the center three?
I love the banner. Karl Urban looks great. Though Simon Pegg looks sort of freaky.
Going to greyscale made Simon Pegg’s mouth look bizarre :/
All I really want to know is who decided on the perm for Chekov?
Is this one of the changes cause by the new timeline or is this one of the things that was left unchanged. I mean did he always have this dodgy looking hair cut when he was a cadet?
If his hair has been left unchanged by the time travel changes then at least it shows the writers are being consistent with his character’s canon because it’s just as bad as his next hair cut the beehive Beatles mop top.
No matter how the timeline unfolds it looks like its Chekov’s destiny to always have bad hair day!
94
;)
58 – In rereading JJ’s comment, it appears that you did give it a closer reading than I did.
I was preoccupied with something else at the time and did not give it as fair or accurate interpretation.
However, I still believe in what I said about character development in the later films, and, of course, we also see their characters evolving and growing over the course of the TOS episodes themselves. That’s what made these characters so compelling as well as charismatic.
they should lose chekov he’s completely useless & no one cares
Classic TOS always depended on the Holy Trinity of Kirk, Spock, and McCoy. I think what’s happening in the Alternate Universe (providing Spock has no goatee, and assuming that we never get any Mirror Universe episodes in the Reboot Canon) is they are making Uhura’s relationship to Kirk as important as McCoy’s and Spock’s in this universe.
Thus, a Foursome instead of a Trinity. Zoe Saldana’s range as an actress is certainly enough to handle this kind of thing. I don’t think that Uhura replaces McCoy as a prime character in relation to Kirk, however.
Nero’s screwing around created some serious fanwank in the fabric of space and time.
Yeah JJ, this worked really well in the pre-quel Star Wars movies you are so fond of. Hmmm. Let’s see, Star Wars started with characters already mid-story and the film was a blockbuster success. The prequels went back to help us get to know the back story of those characters and generally failed to spark interest from a new generation or make the original fans happy. Well, good luck.
Abrams: “In previous films] when we met those characters, we met them pre-established. They’d already been working together, they already knew each other. They had this history. And for some reason, the origin of those relationships of those characters was something that probably would have helped me, at least, connect to them and understand why I should care about them and who they were.”
22. Jeffries Tuber – December 15, 2008
“Well, now it’s official: Bones has been marginalized and pushed out of the trinity.
I think that’s the first actual thing that I find disappointing. Perhaps it’s a reluctance to have three white guys in the center of the photo or just the basic ’sex sells’ equation. But Uhura was not at he campfire in Yosemite. She didn’t carry Spock’s katra. And, well, I don’t want to sound like the guy that complains about the angle of the nacelles… but this just doesn’t make sense. Karl Urban is the only pre-existing heartthrob in the cast. I know plenty of women across the demographic board who swooned over him in LOTR.
McCoy/Urban’s character is the most engaging in the trailer, with a line of dialog that’s instantly in the top 10 of Star Trek history, but he’s getting assed by the marketing department.
I’m all for the realignment of the universe and growing Uhura into a three dimensional heroic character… but WTF?”
Exactly…WTF?
You got all that out of a poster? Next you’ll be pondering why the movie is in black and white.
I mentioned this in another thread; but what movie JJ Abrams talking about?
It has been pretty much established, on this site no less, that this crew is not from the same universe as our crew. This is Trek-on-the-Roof, some other image. Not what he is referencing in this MTV.com story.
The Star Trek episodes JJ may have watched are of a Jim Kirk that served on the USS Republic, and the USS Farragut. The Jim Kirk from that show taught at Star Fleet Academy and introduced Gary Mitchell to that “long hair stuff” as an instructor. The Jim Kirk in that show only met Chris Pike once when Pike was promoted to Fleet Captain.
The Jim Kirk that JJ says was already established when he first encountered Star Trek was in his 30’s when he became Captain but was still the youngest person ever to do so.
I’m not sure what origin story Mr. Abrams thinks he is telling. But it doesn’t sound very familiar what I have known and loved as Star Trek. And I’m very sad about that fact.
86. Red-Shirted Monkey – December 15, 2008
34. boborci
“recycling top gun < lazy writing”
insulting a guest= bad form
and
recycling top gun= assumption with no evidence.
I like this poster.
Sure. Cool poster.
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again:
High production values do not make a poor movie into a good one.
Low production values do not make a good movie into a bad one.
If the writing and acting are good, a low budget won’t hurt it.
If the writing or acting are poor, a high budget won’t help it.
That’s a given.
If I were to idly give a ver lazy optnion, I’m not *especially* wowed by the poster since it’s just a collection of the shots we’ve seen before, but re-arranged.
I don’t think the inividual posters were taken with this layout in mind, otherwise they’d be more symetrical (I can’t spel at 5am) but I mean, it’s just a poster? And we’ve had lots of good posters with these same images so far so I don’t see the problem.
As for Uhura being given a more central role, or any of the cast having more to do, I’m not complaining. I know she looks fantastic, but as long as she’s a strong female character (and if Mr Orci et al haven’t picked up on that then I’m a lumberjack) then all to the good.
What HAS got into people this last few days? :-)
re 100 Xai
I got all that from the marketing across the board.
In Entertainment Weekly, only Kirk and Spock were in EW photo shoot.
The official one-sheets are of Kirk and Spock only.
And here, again, they’ve broken up the triumvirate.
I’d bet good money that John Cho and Karl Urban had higher Q ratings than Zach Quinto and [certainly] Chris Pine before the casting announcement. Come on, Harold and Kumar are the modern day Cheech and Chong. Karl Urban was a significant character in the second highest grossing, Academy Award-winning fantasy epic of all time.
Having thought about it today, I’m reminded of the press kit for the first season of TOS, which included Kirk and Spock posed together, but not the three together. Wasn’t there a TV Guide cover with just Kirk and Spock?
108 – I believe that there was such a cover. Also, the status of the stars of the show is reflected in the opening credits as the Enterprise goes whooshing by after Shatner’s “Space … the final frontier … ” voiceover: only Shatner and Nimoy are listed in the titles in the first season, with De Kelly joining them in the honors for seasons two and three.
The trinity of stars is a later development, owing, I believe, largely to the late Mr. Kelly’s considerable talents as an actor.
109. Brett Campbell – December 15, 2008
“The trinity of stars is a later development, owing, I believe, largely to the late Mr. Kelly’s considerable talents as an actor.”
Amen brother! Kelly’s performance really is flawless. He is missed.
I might also say that Karl Urban’s performance as McCoy (from what I have seen) looks to be greatness as well.
#52 – “I just don’t like how Uhuru is pushed to the fore in that banner. The triumvirate of Star Trek has always been Kirk, Spock and Bones. J.J. and/or studio are just trying to sell sex. Pathetic”
Not to thread jack, but I’m curious how you equate putting a woman in the forefront is “selling sex?” Are you implying something about women.. or?
There are Star Trek posters from the original series which shows Kirk, Spock… and McC…… errr I mean Rand. YES, Rand. She was hardly essential to the show, so why put in there?
108 Jeffries Tuber
You can’t assume anything based on posters and a few production pieces.
22. Jeffries Tuber – December 15, 2008
“Well, now it’s official: Bones has been marginalized and pushed out of the trinity.”
Love the new banner poster. Staggered at the naivety of some people posting here! Surely common sense would tell you that prominent placement of a non-white, female character is essential. Also, what’s with the nasty remarks about lazy writing and so on? Have any of you seen the likes of Alias, among whose greatest episodes were written and directed by the Orci/Kurtzman/Abrams team. Not to mention introducing us to the sexy, badass charms of Jennifer Garner, Rachel Nichols and Melissa George!
As for McCoy, I get the impression he’s got an extremely substantial role in the movie. I am surprised Karl Urban hasn’t been featured a little more prominently in the trailer, though. When I’ve mentioned the new film to a couple of female friends, it’s Karl Urban’s presence that has made them sit up and take notice, because they fancy him rotten!
I think people ought to consider as well that, once this origin story is out of the way, we’re going to get to see lots of cool films about the crew of the Enterprise. If they want, they can even pretend then that the origin film never happened!
Hopes for the future: Jennifer Garner as a Klingon. Merrin Dungey as Guinan (why not have her in the neo-Trek universe?)
Also, I’ll be intrigued to read some novels set in the neo-Trek universe!
@114…
McCoy is very important here, without him Jim Kirk would not have been aboard, and the Enterprise would have been destroyed upon arrival at Vulcan, like the other ships…
Uhura gets important because she is fluent in all flavors of romulanese…
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fa/Star_trek-the_motion_picture.png – Where’s McCoy?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/88/Wrath-of-khan-bob-peak-post.png – Where’s McCoy?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/Star_trek_iv_ver3.jpg – McCoy on the sidelines.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c2/Star_trek_v_ver2.jpg – Where’s McCoy?
So it turns out, after all the crying, that the only poster McCoy gets somewhat equal billing with Kirk and Spock is TUC http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fa/Star_Trek_VI-poster.png
ONCE. So please, get over it that Uhura is up front this time. It doesn’t matter WHATSOEVER. Just something else for the trolls to complain about?
117. Jon
It’s just weirdoes and trolls who are complaining about everything and everything! They’re the equivalent of a guy who bumps into you in a bar and wants a fight. Everything one says will be twisted in order to cause that fight!
Bumping Uhura to one of the main three on the poster was probably deemed necessary to try and make up for the embarassing lack of female characters in the film. This is the 21st century, not the 60s but the writers have ended up with FEWER female characters than the original show! Dreadful.
Putting the positioning into perspective though, don’t forget that Janice Rand was the principal female lead in the original show and had EQUAL billing with McCoy.
When some dodgy stuff behind the scenes led to Grace Lee Whitney being fired, the triumvirate was created. The loss of Rand irretrievably damaged the male/female dynamic in the show, sadly. Uhura and Chapel were too marginal to take up the slack. As it happens, some of Uhura’s larger scenes in the subsequent episodes (e.g. City on the Edge of Forever and the Trouble with Tribbles) were originally intended for Rand.
In the 60s it was a challenge just to keep Uhura in the show but the character was one of the most competent and efficent crew members. Saldana is just being given the chance to put Uhura where she should have been following Rand’s departure.
I shall be mightily annoyed if the writers don’t bring Rand back and give her character a fair chance to shine too. I’m mystified as to why she didn’t make it back into the first film.
JJ is a midget. My life is in ruins
While the advertising may or may not be an accurate reflection of each character’s importance to the film, I don’t think it’s a totally irrational response to think that it might be.
After all, we’ve become used to packaging matching product – heck, there’s even an FDA regulation that says the picture of mixed nuts on the can has to have the same proportion of each nut included inside.
So while we won’t know for sure until May, I really don’t see why it should strike anyone as so preposterous that people’s impressions might be influenced by the advertising being deliberately placed in front of them. Isn’t that what advertising is meant to do?
Banner is weak.
#31—-”As for his saying the previous TOS -era films did nothing to establish further character development from the TOS TV episodes — I don’t agree at all.”
I don’t think that’s what he said.
“[In previous films] when we met those characters, we met them pre-established. They’d already been working together, they already knew each other. They had this history.”—JJ Abrams
I think it is pretty clear that he is referring to the simple fact that there has never been an origin story in a feature film, or even within an original series episode, for that matter. This is the first attempt to depict how the original characters come to know each other, alternate timeline or otherwise.
For instance, in “The Man Trap”, there is no indication from the dialogue that Dr. McCoy is a newcomer to the Enterprise. The familiarity between he and Kirk is apparently already there. Likewise, while the relationship between Kirk and Spock is obviously not as fully developed as it would be later, “Where No Man Has Gone Before” does not depict their initial meeting, and I’m quite sure it does not intend to do so.
#119—”Bumping Uhura to one of the main three on the poster was probably deemed necessary to try and make up for the embarassing lack of female characters in the film.”
Who’s embarassed? You?
“Saldana is just being given the chance to put Uhura where she should have been following Rand’s departure.”
It has been maintained all along that Uhura will be a far more siginficant character than ever before. Even what little we know of the film so far indicates that Kirk is even, at one point, totally reliant upon her to lend credibility to him in order to convince TPTB that he has anything to offer.
“This is the 21st century, not the 60s but the writers have ended up with FEWER female characters than the original show! Dreadful.”
I don’t think that has been established. In fact, it doesn’t add up at all.
STXI:
Uhura
Orion Starfleet Cadet
Amanda Grayson
Winona Kirk
Transporter Chief
And that’s just what we know now.
TOS (recurring female characters):
Uhura
Rand
Chapel
I think your conclusion is rather baseless.
Abrams is creating a reason for his film here.
How many movies have had to give us the frikkin origin stories of their characters in order for us to care about them? Would ‘The Godfather’ have eternally lacked without ‘Godfather II’? I know he points out several times in his answer that it’s *his* personal, subjective take on why the previous stories didn’t satisfy him, but to me the appeal in the TOS films lied in the great relationships the characters AND the actors had- this is what gave them the edge over so many other film ensembles. The success or failure of his film hinges on whether or not he can re-create this with the new cast, and he seems confident, so here’s hoping.
& I have to agree with #121: banner is weeeeak. So far all of the posters have disappeared amidst the flashiness of every theatre I’ve seen them in.
123.
Which is why I beg the question which NO ONE can answer. This is supposed to be an origin movie right? How all the characters came together. What origin? TOS or a new version? This obviously can’t be the origins of the established character’s history in TOS.
Could somebody please edit away Uhura? She really doesn’t fit in there, all the others are from the front view..
# 124. Closettrekker
If they aren’t embarassed, they should be! My comments aren’t baseless; they’re based on the cast list:
Mr. Spock,
James T Kirk
Dr. Leonard ‘Bones’ McCoy
Montgomery ‘Scotty’ Scott
Hikaru Sulu
Pavel Chekov
Capt. Christopher Pike
Captain Robau
Starfleet Academy Chief
Chief Engineer Olsen
Starfleet Medical Tech
Security officer
Sarek
George Samuel Kirk Sr.
12 male starfleet personnel and 2 civilians with speaking roles
Uhura
Unknown Orion
Transporter Chief
Starfleet Doctor
Amanda Grayson
Winona Kirk
4 female starfleet personnel and 2 civilians with speaking roles.
Last time I looked, women make up over 50% of the human population. Last time I looked at Battlestar Galactica I saw something similar to that ratio being reflected in characters of all ranks and backgrounds. That isn’t what I’m seeing for the Star Trek Movie. While I agree that there might be other characters involved that haven’t been revealed yet, what has been revealed so far does not look promising in terms of equality.
I appreciate that the characters hail from the sixties and there are more male characters than female characters to work with but my point is that all the male recurring characters made it into the film including one that there would have been reasonable justification for leaving out until a later film. Only one of the female characters made the cut, and it doesn’t appear as if the vacuum was filled with anybody else either. I genuinely think they should feel embarassed at such archaic attitudes to the female casting and I pray that somebody wises up and gives Janice a shot.
Whoa. This anti Uhura thing here is getting a little crazy, guys.
126
its a different origin story, because nero went back in time, destroyed the kelvin and now things are different (eg the enterpeise being built in iowa and other non-canonical things that have been extensivley discussed on this site already). i know alot of fans may find this ridiculous or annoying or hard to believe or blasphemous but i think if you buy into it or at least try to then you’ll enjoy the film alot more. after all we should be trying to widen our fan base and as far as im concerned jj,bob and alex have my support. cant wait!!!
Tee hee – this is a long-running rant I have about Trek casting every time they do something new. Trek writers seem to be the only sci fi writers that are doing so badly on this. Well, Stargate is quite poor but that is set in a modern day military where the sexual imbalance is justifiable.
TMP didn’t do too badly in fairness – but they kept Janice & Chapel and introduced Ilia and Difalco.
I’m so tired of hearing about what’s canon and what isn’t in this film. Alternate timeline this and that. Guess what, when it’s released and you all go see it, everything you see will become canon, even the non-canon stuff. If they took something from a book that no one considers canon, the book becomes canon.
giggle!
Quantum mechanics = an infinite possibility of storytelling.
It raises the odds of going returning to classic one shotcharacters and adding more stories to their backgrounds.
Look, I know some folks hate the alternate timeline. But, who knows what all will be altered? Some things will remain the same. We know this. We were told this in the 1000 plus post last week.
Maybe the movie will prove to be a great story, as well as huge success at the box office (the two do not always go hand in hand) and a sequel will be made. That means we may see Gary Mitchell as a main character that we–the audience–get to learn more about. It will add to the ultimate fate of Gary Mitchell too. We may see–I mean really see–how this effected Captain Kirk. Or maybe Captain Garth will be mentioned and we will learn something new about him. Canon is great, but sometimes things that once worked don’t work later on. Case in point, Scotty beaming to meet the Next generation crew, only to say that he would believe Jim Kirk had a part in it. Ummmm, but Scotty, you thought you saw him die in the 2290’s…..and why do I know that?
I admit to being a geek who digs retcons when they are done well. It shows to me that writers are using their imaginations to fix things that are or were—well, wrong. There are things that bug me. Like when they refer to World War III in the late 1990s (I miss the 1990s) or Kahn being placed in a sleep state and sent off to space in the 1990s. I realized that the only way to fix problems like these would be to have the timeline altered in some way. If it works there for me, I realized why wouldn’t the altered timeline work for this movie?
There are gonna be some people who aren’t gonna like the movie. They would rather see another Star Trek Next Generation movie, or a movie that takes place after the Next Generation. Hell, I dare say, there are some folks who would rather have a movie in which Picard and Riker sit at a table and talk about their day for two hours. And that would do something for sure for the series. Alienate newcomers and possibly lead to the ultimate end of a frachise. Newcomers won’t show up in huge droves. Folks who either aren’t fans of Star Trek , or people who are young and have never seen the shows and don’t know the history won’t show up because they may realize that they missed years and years of backstories.
There are still some who ask why not just reboot the series all together? Hell, I even said this before. But this wouldn’t please many folks who would yell in protest that this is not their Star Trek. From what I’ve heard so far, by including Leonard Nimoy as Spock into the fray–which requires time travel if you want him in on the action as well as the original crew– the writers, director, producers have come the closet to attempting a win win scenario for this series. And they did this for the fans.
Some have said the altered timeline would change the personalities of the characters. Well, I know I for one didn’t get the memo that the nature vs. nurture debate was over.
This is a simple case of pleasing some of the people some of the time. It can’t have been easy. Of course, I say this right now because of I have read the messages on this webpage, I have read the articles in magazines etc. I thought about what I heard and saw what I have….I think I have been about as skeptic as one could be without being dogmatic about it. Overall, I like what I have heard, and I honestly like what I saw. I hope this turns out to be as cool as I think it could be. And I for one will try to keep an open mind and allow myself to be entertained. I hope that trekmovie will continue to be up for quite some time after the film has been released at the theaters and even after it’s on DVD (I often felt that I need to watch a film more than once to give an honest assessment) That and I’ve been laid off yet again and fear that I don’t have the cash. I really kind of could use a fun action, optomistic film about the future right about now. Or a job….preferably one that I like.
130 Shane
” its a different origin story, because nero went back in time, destroyed the kelvin and now things are different (eg the enterpeise being built in iowa and other non-canonical things that have been extensivley discussed on this site already). i know alot of fans may find this ridiculous or annoying or hard to believe or blasphemous but i think if you buy into it or at least try to then you’ll enjoy the film alot more. after all we should be trying to widen our fan base and as far as im concerned jj,bob and alex have my support. cant wait!!!”
Why do we have to widen the fanbase? Stat Trek has more fans than any other franchise.
I saw some interesting comments from Jim Carrey last night on TV. he was talking about his latest movie and was asked about whether or not he thought it would make as much money as some of his other films. He told the interviewer that he didn’t really expect that every film he made would make the same amount—and that he just does the films and then puts them out there to “find an audience.”
I think that some of us have been perplexed because we believe in the Trek idea and know the fanbase is huge. I just wish I was hearing more comments like that from the current Trek creators instead of “changing things to reach a larger audience.” It just doesn’t add up. At a minimum, all you have to do is write a good TOS story and keep the same gear. The new actors and new take on effects would have been enough to bring all the Trekies back (with their kids and spouses). That’s ultimately where the big bucks would have been. (IMO).
From the start and with all the comments, the creators are distancing themselves from the core audience. I’m baffled. I just feel that if you stayed true to the core, they will come. If you deviate, you alienate. You force the division.
- Indigo remains my favourite Trek color..Warbirds are my favourite Trek ships…i would like to see a remake to D.S.-9..
Of course we won;t know until May, but the more I read the more I get the feeling that this is juat another rehash of the Campbellian monomyth with the name “Star Trek” slapped on it because it’s something people recognize like Band-Aids or Jell-O.
Does this new moviegoing generation need another recycled monomyth movie so badly? Or is it all about the money?
113. Xai – December 15, 2008
108 Jeffries Tuber
You can’t assume anything based on posters and a few production pieces.
22. Jeffries Tuber – December 15, 2008
“Well, now it’s official: Bones has been marginalized and pushed out of the trinity.”
> Funny, Xai: Are you just going to ignore the parts where I said I was talking about marketing? 108 is about assuming things about the movie based on marketing. And I also walked it back a bit by pointing out that some of the 66 marketing featured only Kirk and Spock.
My other point is that they seem to be holding back their two most recognizable actors: Cho and Urban, probable because Pine and Quinto need a more concerted, starmaking campaign.
Have a great day!
The furor over the placing of the “Uhura” and “McCoy” on the poster is a tempest in a teapot. Remember on the posters for “ST:TMP” that McCoy was replaced entirely by Illia. But the triad was in place in the movie.
And just because Uhura gets a meatier well-deserved part in the new movie doesn’t mean McCoy is not the balance between Kirk and Spock that he used to be.
Chill!
I’m trying to sort out how an executive comes to the conclusions they do sometimes, regarding “reboots”.
Perhaps in looking at the different target markets for new movies, they see a need for a youthful action flick with effects, explosions, bras and testosterone. They think they have $xx dollars as a sure thing with the 18-24 crowd. Starting there, they then grab a shelf product to bring in a little bit of an existing fanbase to increase the numbers a bit (in our case they grabbed Trek). Essentially, Smallville in space.
Orci and Kurtzman (not connected to that decision) have of course done what they feel is their best to tie the movie to what came before in an effort to justify any changes to characters, designs or other continuity issues (for anyone left who cares).
The end result is of course a mixed product. Not pure to one direction or another. So the hope lies in the mix. Pleasing both markets or creating a new market that contains a little of both?
My head will now explode.
Oh my God.
It just occurred to me. If this is a change in canon to an altered universe, is there a change IN THE MIRROR UNIVERSE!!!!
Does Spock lose his goatee?
ORCI=What I didn’t quite get about the whole QM multiuniverse bit, is whether it is presented that there are two kinds of time travel that are possible?
A) the kind where you spawn a new parallel universe & the original is unchanged, and
B) the kind where you actually change something, like in DS9 where Gabriel Bell was killed and Sisko assumed his identity and when Sisko returned to the future, the computer bio of Bell showed Sisko’s pic? Also in B would probably be the Guardian of Forever time travel.
(I’ve long called theory A the railroad track time travel since it is like diverting via Y-switch onto a different track)
Also about time travel… if you look at the entire universe as being a 5 dimensional construct that is complete…
Imagine the entire universe as a special role of film that goes from beginning to end… each frame of the special role of film has 3-dimensions instead of the usual 2. The universe is simply moving through the 4th dimen of time.
The 5th axis explains temporal paradoxes where you appear to change something. It would even allow an external God to have created the entire role of film, complete with both causality and temporal paradoxes that appear to be manifestations of free will altering the timeline, since there are multiple timelines that extend along the 5th axis.
If you look at the entire universe as already being temporally complete and essentially static, there is no reason why a coffee cup on your desk might not suddently disappear without apparent cause.
17. Magister Returns – December 15, 2008
Exactly what he said.
#126—”This is supposed to be an origin movie right? How all the characters came together. What origin? TOS or a new version? This obviously can’t be the origins of the established character’s history in TOS.”
At this point it is obvious that it is an altered origin story.
#128—”My comments aren’t baseless; they’re based on the cast list…”
I believe my response was that your conclusion that there is somehow an “embarassing lack of female characters in the film” was baseless, not your comment on the available make-up of the casting list.
“I appreciate that the characters hail from the sixties and there are more male characters than female characters to work with…”
That’s the key. I’m glad you have at least acknowledged that, but you still come off as in support of the notion that this should be “corrected”, instead of merely built upon—as in the case of Uhura’s more significant role, as well as the supplanting of the female yeoman and female nurse by a female doctor and female transporter chief.
“…but my point is that all the male recurring characters made it into the film including one that there would have been reasonable justification for leaving out until a later film.”
I don’t know why Chapel and Rand are left out for sure, but it is only fair to point out that both were (at least in TOS) depicted (professionally speaking) as being more stereotypically female to begin with. Chapel was a nurse, while Rand was a yeoman ( I find it funny now that a female should fulfill the role aboard ship most akin to a secretary). Perhaps that has something to do with it.
They are, in effect, replaced by two more female characters depicted in roles that, in the 1960’s, would have been more traditionally male:
Starfleet doctor
Transporter chief
While I will not argue the lack of “necessity” for Chekov to be aboard, there isn’t any canonical reason he could not. TWOK establishes that Chekov was indeed aboard during the events depicted in the first season episode, “Space Seed”.
I really don’t see why you seem so upset about it. You’ve made these types of comments before on this subject, and I think you’re taking the wrong perspective. The characters were established 4 decades ago, and the only two absent female characters are the two that were depicted in what were stereotypical professional roles in the 1960’s for women. They have been replaced by two female characters in very technical, non-stereotypical roles.
#136—” …the more I read the more I get the feeling that this is (just) another rehash of the Campbellian monomyth with the name “Star Trek” slapped on it because it’s something people recognize like Band-Aids or Jell-O.”
I understand your concern, but let’s be fair. Bad Robot is not the first creative team to determine that the Star Trek characters of the TOS/original films era were “mythological hereos”. Nick Meyer directed TWOK from that very perspective, according to his own commentary on the film’s script. Let’s face it. The ‘Star Trek’ of the Kirk/Spock/McCoy era depicted its heroes as much more “larger-than-life” characters than its subsequent spinoffs did. If they are made more “mythical” in this story, what makes that approach less legitimate than it was for Nick Meyer?
In my view (and this is more or less conjecture), Orci and Kurtzman’s script may lean toward the notion that Kirk and Spock are predestined heroes, and that, no matter what road they take (or how their original paths may have been altered), they still evolve into the same heroes. To borrow from ‘Lost’ (not at all ironically, considering the production company), the Star Trek Universe may, in this instance, find a way to “course-correct” itself.
My hope is that the “course-correction” leads to the start of the historic 5-year mission, with Kirk in command and Spock and Bones by his side.
Maybe the change in timeline will result in the entire Next Gen era not happening and then we can have Kirk assimilated by the Borg…
I am Tiberius of Borg, resistance is futile…
You could have Shatner (without hairpiece) play the Borgified Kirk…
144. Closettrekker
“…the only two absent female characters are the two that were depicted in what were stereotypical professional roles in the 1960’s for women. They have been replaced by two female characters in very technical, non-stereotypical roles.”
Yikes! A receptionist who will probably get to say ‘Aye Sir, Energising’ and a member of the ‘caring’ profession are non-stereotypical roles for women? Your sights are set really, really, REALLY low for the real world let alone science fiction!
I admit, I am a HUGE Rand fan and my comments (which are only half-serious I hope you realise) are influenced by the fact that a lot of character potential was squandered there. Token female syndrome is not something to be applauded even if Uhura deserves to get a meatier role. It worked in Star Wars only because Leia wasn’t wearing a bra. It’s not something that Trek should aspire to… token females – I’m ambivalent on the bra issue…
Tasha Yar was head of security on Enterprise D but did you notice that she was the ONLY female security officer on the ship until season 4? That would be unlawful employment practice in today’s workplace why on earth was it ok in the 24th century?
My criticism would be far more muted if the Captain of the Kelvin or his first officer had been a woman or if the Starfleet Admiral character had been a woman – not exactly hard to do. Number One is another high profile, high ranking female officer who has yet to be confirmed – I am still expecting her to get an appearance but if she doesn’t then they will have exceeded even my low expectations in their treatment of the women.
And, with regards to the pre-existing women, Chapel wasn’t just a nurse, she was a talented research biologist who had studied xeno-archaeology with Roger Korby – her scientific qualifications could be utilised more in a modern Trek. Rand was a military secretary in the sixties version but in a modern Trek we could see a different side to the Captain’s Yeoman – a martial arts expert highly trained in computers, transporters, & security, for example (all of which were alluded to in the earlier series). Ann Mulhall was a pretty cool female character too and as a female engineer/exo-biologist, she’d probably be an even better character to bring to the fore.
Suggesting that they should be written out for being stereotypically girly is like saying that Scotty should be written out for being a stereotypcial Scotsman. All the recurring characters should have been given some respect. The women just need to be updated in the same way as Uhura.
Once again, look to Battlestar Galactica for inspiration here. Unless you are one of those fuddy duddies who thinks that Starbuck should never have been turned into a woman…? ;-)
The point I keep trying to make is that it would be so easy to equalise the sexes in this franchise and yet they are going in the opposite direction, reducing the number of women instead. The sexism problem is quite pervasive in Trek and a lot of people seem to take it for granted. If they’d cast Uhura with a white actress, people would take notice. I’m simply suggesting that failing to equalise the sexes is a slap in the face of the principles that Gene Roddenberry was trying to lay down. And yes, I do think that that is something that they should be embarassed about.
Paul, I’m totally with you on the female front. 3 words for you, buddy:
Lieutenant Marlena Moreau
Paul – totally agree. I always wondered why the admirals and presidents in the previous Trek movies were all guys (except for Janeway, and mostly white, except Morrow and the traitor guy who became Sisko’s dad). Even the alien president in STV was the dad from that 70’s show. Why didn’t they use a woman?
TNG and on casting seemed to be even more whiter/male than the original series (with exceptions of regulars).
Even the new BSG is a lot darned whiter than it should be.
PS. was Admiral Nogura ever specifically mentioned as “he” in TMP (I know, he was male in the novels). Bring in Michelle Yeoh, baby! Yes, I know she’s not Japanese.
137. Jefferies Tuber – December 16, 2008
113. Xai – December 15, 2008
108 Jeffries Tuber
You can’t assume anything based on posters and a few production pieces.
22. Jeffries Tuber – December 15, 2008
“Well, now it’s official: Bones has been marginalized and pushed out of the trinity.”
>” Funny, Xai: Are you just going to ignore the parts where I said I was talking about marketing? 108 is about assuming things about the movie based on marketing. And I also walked it back a bit by pointing out that some of the 66 marketing featured only Kirk and Spock.
My other point is that they seem to be holding back their two most recognizable actors: Cho and Urban, probable because Pine and Quinto need a more concerted, starmaking campaign.
Have a great day!”
You have a great day as well. I’ll include your entire post this time.
You seem to be worried about the ad campaign and dissing McCoy and elevating Uhura.
Last things first.
Star-making campaign? I agree that Urban is recognizable, Cho, not so much. But trying to make Pine and Quinto stars?
They play the two primary parts…of course they will be featured more prominently.
Urban got a one of the primary lines in the trailer, Uhura to my knowledge didn’t speak.
Regarding the Pine / Quinto EW shots… they were to emulate a famous TV Guide shot that featured Shatner and Nimoy. I like DeForest, but he was not in that shot. The story, as indicated by the trailer, is centered on Kirk and Spock.
However, Anthony has seen the JJ previews and has mentioned that McCoy has a very good relationship with Kirk.
As for the positioning in the poster… I didn’t make it and can only guess like everyone else. IMO, besides Kirk and Spock’s position, the rest were put in by what worked visually. The poster is to generate awareness of the film, not necessarily rank the other characters, other than the primaries.
#148: What about Picard’s most frequent boss/nemesis, Admiral Necheyev?
#146—”A receptionist who will probably get to say ‘Aye Sir, Energising’ and a member of the ‘caring’ profession are non-stereotypical roles for women? Your sights are set really, really, REALLY low for the real world let alone science fiction!”
It sounds as if you missed the context of the comparison. Either that, or you chose to ignore it. You implied that the upcoming film had regressed from what was depicted in the 1960’s television series. I did not suggest that female characters in the roles of medical officer and transporter chief were non-stereotypical roles today. Indeed, women have been doctors and technicians for a long time now. What I did suggest was that those would have been traditional roles for men in the time that TOS aired, especially as portrayed on network television.
While the Enterprise may be missing its most famous “nurse” and “secretary” for the purposes of this story, it gains a female in a technical role (transporter chief) in place of what was always a male character in TOS (Mr. Kyle, for example), and a female M.D. assigned to the Enterprise—something which was never depicted during the TOS-era.
As for the absence of “Number One”, I think the story seems to require that Spock serve as Pike’s first officer (at least from what the reports of the reviewed footage would indicate) during the time period where Kirk finds his way aboard. I assume (again, this is derived from the reports) that this is required for dramatic effect in a particular scene (if you read the reviews, then you know the one to which I am referring).
I am also a “Rand fan”, but not because she represented equality among the sexes. I enjoyed her “relationship” with Kirk, and the underlying sexual tension between the two during the 5 year mission. I don’t understand what purpose she would serve in an “origin story” for the primary characters (Kirk, Spock, McCoy) and the most significant secondary characters in the series (Scotty, Uhura, Sulu, and Chekov).
This is not to say that I would not like to see Chapel and Rand in a sequel (for the record, I would have been just fine with Chekov’s appearance being in a sequel as well), but IMO, this story seems to have quite enough going on as it is.
Rand, it seems, was only significant enough to appear briefly in a few of feature films, and Chapel only appeared in one. Conversely—Scotty, Sulu, Uhura, and Chekov appeared in all 6 of the original films. It isn’t difficult to see what made their inclusion more attractive to the writers.
TOS-era Star Tek never revolved around an ensemble. It was really only focused on three characters. While none of those three characters are female, I am willing to bet that there will be plenty of non-speaking female characters depicted in significant positions within Starfleet.
It would never have crossed my mind that there would not be.
“Battlestar Gallactica”? I haven’t seen it since the 70’s. I know alot of Trek fans seem to like it, but I am not a general sci-fi fan, as so many others are. I am just a guy who has been a Star Trek fan for over 30 years. I couldn’t care less about a remake of something I was never interested in to begin with, or how it compares to Trek.
110 & 111 Mang — So sad that Mr. Kelly is no longer with us to see what Mr. Urban does with Bones. But you just KNOW that he would have the most gracious and gentlemanly of the original cast members to support the efforts of the new ones.
#153—No doubt about that.
#134 “Why do we have to widen the fanbase? Stat Trek has more fans than any other franchise. ”
HAHAHAHA! Do you HONESTLY think that?
“I just wish I was hearing more comments like that from the current Trek creators instead of “changing things to reach a larger audience.”
Do you mind posting up any articles where they specifically said “We are changing some of the story to appeal to a wider audience?”
“From the start and with all the comments, the creators are distancing themselves from the core audience. I’m baffled.”
Not sure how you got that other than J.J. and his comments about “Not making this for fans.”
154 – He was truly a classy guy, through and through.
I love the comment he once made about his wife:
“I make the living, but she makes the living worthwhile.”
148. Jack
Actually I agree about BSG being whiter than it should be, although in fairness, it has a more varied racial mix (especially more hispanic actors) this time round. There are are black characters, they’re just a lot lower profile than they used to be. I was really surprised to see that Colonel Tigh was white. And, although I sing its praises about the equality of the sexes, only one of the original female ‘characters’ made it into the new series, which was odd. There are recurring newspaper reporters but for some reason none of them was named Serena, and Cassiopeia would have rocked as the tart with a heart but her role was completely absent – very disappointing when you look at what Firefly managed to do with a friendly prostitute.
SPOILERS: I would have liked to see Dee get more air time as Admiral Adama’s daughter-in-law instead of just Lee’s wife. She had some cool scenes in the earlier series where she told Adama like it was. As the highest profile black character, I think they squandered her a bit. I haven’t seen the final series yet but there are no signs that her role is going to be increased so far. Bummer.
152. Closettrekker
Totally watch BSG. It isn’t great sci fi, it’s great drama. They’ve taken the allegorical roots of Trek and really tanked it. It has some great stuff on the rights and wrongs of terrorism, religious fundamentalism, prejudice, and understanding your enemy. You won’t notice or care whether a character is male or female (except maybe Number 6!), it’s all about their role in the plot. Watch it!
Second – I was talking about the current regime being more sexist in a modern context rather than it being more sexist than the sixties show on a direct comparison. Having female officers on the ship in the sixties was controversial let alone have female engineers and technicians (and we did have a few in the show even then). Gene wasn’t allowed to have a 50/50 split of the sexes (until TMP) because the studio was nervous about implying that too much shagging was going on (hence the 66/33 split). What I mean is that this should no longer be an issue in the 21st century so 50% of the Starfleet characters (outside the main cast) should be female and if not, why not?
I do agree with what you say about Chapel and Rand. They were marginalised in the later films and this has led the younger audience to view them as somehow not being a part of the main cast. Consequently, with so many other characters to fit into the plot, the less well-known characters got bumped, and they just happened to be the girls. It was actually sexist casting at the time of the movies that led to this – white actresses often don’t age as well as a black actress like Nichelle Nichols. Spock and Bones could get away with being craggy in the films – Janice couldn’t, so younger female characters were brought in instead.
While I’m downhearted at the absence of the two women (I would have been happy with cameos and the promose of larger parts in any sequels), the sexist issue for me is about the wider casting. If they used nothing but women for almost all the spare speaking parts of the Starfleet characters, that might just about lead to a 50/50 split. They have failed to do anything like that and have let the gap widen by casting even more men. It may be that the screenshots of exclusively male crew on the Kelvin are just because they haven’t released pictures of the equal number of women on the crew. I’m not hopeful.
Hi Closettrekker (152): ‘This is not to say that I would not like to see Chapel and Rand in a sequel (for the record, I would have been just fine with Chekov’s appearance being in a sequel as well), but IMO, this story seems to have quite enough going on as it is. Rand, it seems, was only significant enough to appear briefly in a few of feature films, and Chapel only appeared in one.’
Agreed. Chapel was never more than a semi-active secondary castmember and Janice Rand was only there for about 12 (memorable) episodes. I’d like to see them appear in a sequel, perhaps with Chapel as a rival Doctor to McCoy and maybe see Rand start as young yeoman and move up the chain of command a bit as the films progress.
I can’t agree with some people’s claims that this film is sexist in its casting. By choosing not to reboot and to keep all the characters the same sex and nationality, inevitably there are a lot of male roles. But we still have a beefed up role for Uhura and there’s Amanda, Winona and some other roles. Plus there’s plenty of room in the sequels for more female characters to appear!
‘“Battlestar Gallactica”? I haven’t seen it since the 70’s. I know alot of Trek fans seem to like it, but I am not a general sci-fi fan, as so many others are. I am just a guy who has been a Star Trek fan for over 30 years. I couldn’t care less about a remake of something I was never interested in to begin with, or how it compares to Trek.’
It’s definitely worth checking out the new version of BSG. I’d argue that its the true sucessor to TOS in its handling of space adventure. It’s a different kind of show, but its one that show the military in a good light and really examines what it’s like for the human race to be ‘out there’ alone. TOS is the only Trek show that made me feel that the crew was really isolated and had to live by their wits and that space was truly vast.
158. Dom
“I can’t agree with some people’s claims that this film is sexist in its casting. By choosing not to reboot and to keep all the characters the same sex and nationality, inevitably there are a lot of male roles.”
For the main cast this is true but not so for the supporting cast. There are still far more men than women in the supporting cast and this makes the imbalance worse.
158. Dom
“But we still have a beefed up role for Uhura and there’s Amanda, Winona and some other roles. Plus there’s plenty of room in the sequels for more female characters to appear!”
If you read some of the novels featuring Uhura it makes you wish that she had been given more chances to shine in TOS & the films. Her big scene in ST3 is one of my favourites but they failed to show (from the novelisation) that Uhura had to stay behind in order to slow down the security response to the theft. Without her, the others would never have made it.
If everybody keeps saying oh well, it’s fine as it is, they can always put in more women in later films, then it will never happen. It hasn’t happened so far. Every show has had a 66/33 (or worse) imbalance of the sexes. I think the closest we’ve ever come was TMP where we had 60/40 including Janice. In her big scene she finally gets to kill someone – you go girl!
#159—”…but they failed to show (from the novelisation) that Uhura had to stay behind in order to slow down the security response to the theft. Without her, the others would never have made it.”
Uhura’s part in the successful theft of the Enterprise and escape to asylum at the Vulcan embassy is one of the more memorable sequences in Vonda McIntyre’s novelization of TSFS to be sure. She is certainly more significant in the book than in the film.
In fairness though, this may be the first Star Trek feature film in which she really gets anything truly significant, beyond putting an over-eager male lieutenant “in the closet” in TSFS. By all accounts, as Dom suggests, the most significant female character from the TOS-era is finally getting her due.
I suppose I choose to look at the “quality”, rather than the “quantity”, with the emphasis being on “how” the female character is being portrayed, as opposed to “how often”.
Who is to say that Starfleet would be comprised of an equal split between the sexes in the 23rd Century? I don’t know how Bad Robot will choose to treat the issue of family units living aboard starships in the pre-TOS and TOS eras, but canonically speaking, this does not seem to be the case. Are we to assume that men in Starfleet do not procreate? This hardly seems to be the case, since George Kirk, Ben Finney, Matt Decker, and Hikaru Sulu seem to have done so. Where are these children being carried to term and reared at a young age, if not aboard starships? Is motherhood less of an important facet of life for females in the 23rd Century?
My point is, that women (even those who choose to serve in Starfleet) are unlikely to stop becoming pregnant, carrying children to term, and caring for their young children. Forget what ’society’ tells them they should or should not do. Will they stop wanting to? If that’s the case, how do human beings continue to multiply, and, in particular, those human beings serving in Starfleet?
With that in mind, it is almost completely unreasonable (IMO) to assume that an equal percentage of women would be serving aboard starships on deep space assignments in the 23rd Century. I would even go so far as to suggest that the ratio is unlikely to be even 60:40 at a given time.
Think of it this way. Even if only 5% of female Starfleet personnel are pregnant at any one time, then the ratio of “active” female officers to their male counterparts would have to begin in favor of the females, in order for the active ratio to be equal.
That’s not sexism, but biological practicality, especially given the established notion that families do not generally live aboard starships in that era. Unless Abrams’ Star Trek directly challenges that notion, I would be skeptical of the probablity of a truly equal number of women serving actively in Starfleet at any one time, given those circumstances. This is not to say that the ratio would not be more equitable than it is today (because certainly it will), but time will not likely change the laws of natural human biology.
…Unless of course, we are all conceived in test tubes and carried to term in artificial wombs.
:)
160. Closettrekker
“My point is, that women (even those who choose to serve in Starfleet) are unlikely to stop becoming pregnant, carrying children to term, and caring for their young children. ”
It is a very good point; we know that families do not often live on starships even in Picard’s time.
However, while It can be used as justification for the imbalance in the sexes this is only if you apply current sexist attitudes to child rearing i.e. this justification is tainted by the sexist notion that fathers in the 23rd century would not want to look after their children as well as mothers. And why we don’t have more older women in starfleet whose children have grown up? Because they don’t look good in a mini skirt?
#161—”…while It can be used as justification for the imbalance in the sexes this is only if you apply current sexist attitudes to child rearing i.e. this justification is tainted by the sexist notion that fathers in the 23rd century would not want to look after their children as well as mothers.”
It is only a “current sexist attitude” if you’re making the assumption that females are somehow being forced into the role of primary caregiver, as opposed to choosing that role for themselves, quite independently.
Now, by no means is this suggestion scientific (to my limited knowledge), but my experience has been that the majority of women (those who are mothers) are primary caregivers because they choose to be. I’m no psychologist, but I have always believed that women are naturally and psychologically predisposed to want that role, perhaps because there is an unmistakable (perhaps even chemical) bond formed (whether one-sided or not) between a mother and child during pregnancy.
I know this. My wife would drive a stake through the heart of any man who tried to take that role away from her. Moreover, I have known very few (if any) mothers who do not take a similar approach, even when their attitude about it before the pregnancy was quite different. Again, I don’t see that as being something that the passage of time would change.
Unless, of course, you choose to embrace the idea that motherly instincts are a myth…I do not, and cannot imagine there being many people who would support that.
” And why we don’t have more older women in starfleet whose children have grown up?”
I think there would be, and those women probably wouldn’t have to wait until those children were completely grown either. That is the reason I used the term “actively” in my post.
Uhura having a larger role doesn’t set off my sexism detector, but (and granted, this is only from what we’ve seen so far, but we’ve seen a good quarter of the film) her role in the new film seems to be a lot more about sex/sexiness for its own sake than it did in the TV show and earlier films.
Be’ll have to wait and see for the final judgment, of course. And for all I know it may be some attempt at the so-called “thong feminism.”* But so far, it just doesn’t sit right.
(* Which I believe is a total crock. personally. But chacun a sa gout.)
Hello guys,
I am from The Netherlands. I’m by no means a Trekkie, but I do love movies. And I do love big franchises like Star Trek. And now I’m gonna sound harsh. But I think the current generation of Trekkies are partially to blaim for the demise of the franchise. Even during the nineties, when sci-fi lovers were offered TWO Star Trek spin-off’s at the same time, they were complaining.
My mottot: I you want to change the course of the Star Trek franchise, get out of your desk chair and start a career within Paramount. It’s useless, senseless to breaking down movies before they have even premiered.
Now something about the franchise itself. If the franchise want to survive, critics should loosen up a bit about the whole continuity thing. It’s exactly this nerdy escapism world, enhanced by stupid books and encyclopedias, that basically halted the run of Trek on both television and cinema.
I can’t speak for anyone else, Gert, but I’m here discussing the new movie – pros AND cons – simply because I find it an interesting topic for discussion. That’s what the comments section is here for, isn’t it? I know that nothing I say here is going to influence Paramount or the opinion of critics or the general public, one way or another, and i suspect everyone else here does, too. It’s just entertaining and stimulating to talk about a topic we find interesting.
Bob Orci wrote :
“Or maybe diversity”.
Christ, now I’ve heard it all….
Christ isn’t in this movie.
Amen, Gert. I’m just here because I can’t get a date. And I don’t have cable.
ps. speaking of diversity, are there any gays in this movie (I’m hoping curly-haired Chekov, did he ever like the ladies in the original series)?
162. Closettrekker
“It is only a “current sexist attitude” if you’re making the assumption that females are somehow being forced into the role of primary caregiver, as opposed to choosing that role for themselves, quite independently.”
I’m just playing Devil’s Advocate. Parenting is a perfectly logical reason to justify why there are fewer women on an exploration ship like the Enterprise but given that we know the Trek future is based on utopian ideals with pretensions of sexual and racial equality, it is equally logical to say that child care could be shared equally so that both parents take time out of exploration duty and there would be no imbalance in the sexes. Even adopting your assumption, its still no definitive reason to justify a sexual imbalance on Earth, outposts, or Starbases where families would exist and both parents could work or not while rearing children in equal measure.
Given that both possibilties are equally logical there must be an additional reason why the writers opted in favour of a reduced number of women in speaking roles. I think that this is evidence of sexist writing and casting.
Actually, I have no problem at all with sexism in sci fi if it is justified within the plot. What I dislike is saying one thing and then subversively doing another.
My question is why Chris Pine is the only one posed as if he’s trying out for David Warner’s role as EVIL in “Time Bandits?”
#167 – We were led to believe he’d be in STV, but it turns out he doesn’t do cameos.
#163—”… her role in the new film seems to be a lot more about sex/sexiness for its own sake than it did in the TV show and earlier films.”
I don’t get that impression at all. What I took from the reviews of the 20 minutes of footage already shown is that Uhura’s opinion is, at one point, more valuable than Kirk’s. It is, in fact, her voice alone which lends credibility to the young Jim Kirk. Is she sexy? Absolutely. Does she show off her bra? Apparently. But she also seems to be a strong character who (thankfully) wards off the young drunken Kirk in a bar. She is unimpressed by his looks, and only begins to pay any attention to him when he demonstrates a bit of intellect.
When I hear “Uhura kicks butt”, I have to believe she is not the stereotypical female (”Oh Captain, I’m afraid”) she was sometimes depicted as in the Original Series.
My favorite Uhura scene was always the defiant scowl she laid upon Khan’s henchman in “Space Seed”, right after he backhanded her across the face. I like the idea that such toughness and courage might now be closer to the surface.
#169—-”…did he (Chekov) ever like the ladies in the original series?”
Afraid so.
“The Apple”, “Way To Eden”, “The Day Of The Dove”, and “I, Mudd” come quickly to mind.
Tee hee – Kirk’s the best candidate for a bi-sexual. He’ll shag pretty much anything. Not quite as bad as Captain Jack Harkness, but almost.
Curses! Darn those sexy, sexy lady hippies/androids. Kirk, hmmm. It would explain the motorcycle.
#25; Yep. a huge lot of vocal folks are just plain spoiled, and the ones who like things generally don’t say quite as much as those with a gripe. It is, in my opinion, a lopsided argument.
Sad thing is that too many fans abandoned TREK just when it was needed most, and ST: Enterprise’s cancellation was the result… just when it was getting really good.
I recall the first two years of STNG were kinda rocky, but the series got better. I think if the fans who have acted so poorly in recent years had done that then, TREK might have ended back in the later 80s.
I sure don’t see how people can judge it so harshly without having seen the finished product. I say give the film a chance…
The Cage and many of the very early Trek stories are just awesome sci fi, even today. The first time I saw the Cage I was blown away at how sophisticated it was.
Sadly, familiarilty breeds contempt. The most highly regarded shows tend to quit on a high but I confess, I want Star Trek to continue. I love the later shows but TOS holds the most special place for me. I’d love it if they told the story of the second 5-year mission between TMP and TWOK in a series or mini-series or series of tv movies.
#173 – Time will tell. I hope you’re right.
In modern Hollywood language, though, “she kicks butt” is used, as often as not, as shorthand for “she does a lot of action sequences in tight clothes, which don’t have much purpose beyond titillating male S&M fantasies.” Also, “strong character” is usually just shorthand for “sassy, wisecracking broad.”
The ”Oh Captain, I’m afraid” sexist stereotype of another generation has mostly been supplanted, but usually only by a new-style sexist stereotype.
I’d like to believe that anything with the name Star Trek on it will try to avoid that sort of thing, but unfortunately it really sells, and the ads aren;t doing anything to reassure me.
Uhura doesn’t have to ‘kick butt’. She isn’t an action heroine nor does she have to be to a decent character. She is an officer so she should be able to to shoot straight and be trained in basic self-defence (instead of smashing pots on heads…sigh) and she should know what happens when a conatainment field collapses (heavier sigh). She doesn’t have to fill all the female roles because they should introduce more than one woman… please!
They had just about sussed that Troi was a starfleet officer by season 7 but if they has left her in a standard uniform and given her a purpose outside being ship’s counselor, like in season 1, it wouldn’t have been such a laborious and embarassing journey for the actress, who is much more one of the lads than Troi ever was.
Fifth Element is a classic example where they took an action heroine and still managed to make an unbelievably sexist film by putting her in a space bikini and using gender stereotyping in all the supporting roles. We have male police officers, male military officers, male pilots, and female air hostesses. The only female military officer was put in as a joke – yeas she’s an officer but she’s ugly because only ugly women can make it in the military (Julie T Wallace is actually quite cool but was deliberately dressing down for the role!). Enjoyable film but do the writers not see how apalling their overall attitude to women can be?
I won’t object if Uhura is made more action friendly, and as the onhly woman it’s inevitable that they are going to put her in space bikinis to try and appeal to the lowest common deominator but I still maintain that Rand is a better fit for the action heroine role.
Retinax…James Tiberius Kirk is allergic to Retinax. I love the very thought of that scene!
The fact that this young new “Kirk” character has a semi-rape scene withe the new “Uhura” denigrates her charater giving it a shade of being “ships whore”. The scence should be delted. Uhura is a classic character of mythic proportion