|
I've totally heard about Spock/Kirk fic. I haven't read any, but I've heard the rumors... I've seen that documentary, "Trekies" (can't remember if that is the title) but if they can talk about obscure Yar/Data pairings (and, okay, that was actually part of an episode, but for me it always felt kinda like a "No, really, I'm serious" ep) then ya know Kirk/Spock hasta be out there. It must be true! I heard it on the Internet!
|
Wasn't there a fan fic tradition of creating homoerotic Star Trek literature? I recall hearing that Kirk really let Spock have what fer. I'm completely serious. It was a thing. I'm really hoping someone backs me up on this or I'm just going to look unbalanced.
Yeah yeah... more unbalanced.
They had a TON of "Kirk/Spock as lovers" fan service fiction over the years. You're not crazy (about this, anyway).
Jester, Ubermench, HD... thanks for the quick back-up. :)
|
|
Discarding savage and primitive superstitions and abrahamic cults was the only way the world could be united. There are no christians in trek because the species outgrew the need for fairie tales and blood spilt for illusions.
And I supose that the belief that we all just sprung up outta the muck and evolved into physicaly inferior creatures is more beleivable?
Please don't go insulting other peoples beliefs just because you don't share them...but I digress from this threads actual topic...apoligies to all.|
|
I would however be intrested in hearing the behind the refusal to include a gay character.
Uptight Christian population (a subset of the total Christian community) > GLBT population. Not hard to figure out. Abrams' job is to make Paramount money, not make a point.
This is ignoring that there wasn't a "core" gay character in ToS anyway. I'm sure even a percentage of the GLBT community would nerdrage over "canon" being changed. Nerdrage is funny like that.
This would be on the assuption that "Hollyweird" gave a crud about offending anyones beleifs much less that of us..."Uptight Christians".
Wich is something that I really don't beleive.(how many movies are made that do just that)I'm sorry that the OP feels so hurt by this and if it was done out of bigotry then it's wrong... but MAYBE if done out of a lack of reason to develop a gay character...it's just bad breaks at that point.
Moorluck, Hollywood picks their fights. If they got funky with Star Trek, it would hurt the bottom line, and this movie looks expensive. The general attitude of the creative talent does drive corporate's decision making, by and large. While the actors, writers and directors gleefully talk cash shit about Christians and conservatives, the bean counters note that EVERY ANTI-IRAQ film put out (In the Valley of Elah, whatever that Redford movie was) BOMBED at the box office. Also, The Chronicles of Narnia (pro-Christianity) > The Golden Compass (anti-Christianity) by 4+ to 1 at the box office. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe grossed over production costs, The Golden Compass grossed less than half of production costs. Both cost the same to make. You think Hollywood bean counters aren't aware of this?
Sean Penn doesn't drive Hollywood, money does.
|
|
Moorluck, Hollywood picks their fights. If they got funky with Star Trek, it would hurt the bottom line, and this movie looks expensive. The general attitude of the creative talent does drive corporate's decision making, by and large. While the actors, writers and directors gleefully talk cash s~!& about Christians and conservatives, the bean counters note that EVERY ANTI-IRAQ film put out (In the Valley of Elah, whatever that Redford movie was) BOMBED at the box office. Also, The Chronicles of Narnia (pro-Christianity) > The Golden Compass (anti-Christianity) by 4+ to 1 at the box office. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe grossed over production costs, The Golden Compass grossed less than half of production costs. Both cost the same to make. You think Hollywood bean counters aren't aware of this?
Sean Penn doesn't drive Hollywood, money does.
You make some valid points and I do get what you're sayin' just not sure if thats the reason behind it...BTW I didn't get any anti-christian message outta Golden Compass, maybe I should start goin' to my churchs midnite bigotry meetings more often. :)
|
|
You make some valid points and I do get what you're sayin' just not sure if thats the reason behind it...BTW I didn't get any anti-christian message outta Golden Compass, maybe I should start goin' to my churchs midnite bigotry meetings more often. :)
Moorluck, Hollywood picks their fights. If they got funky with Star Trek, it would hurt the bottom line, and this movie looks expensive. The general attitude of the creative talent does drive corporate's decision making, by and large. While the actors, writers and directors gleefully talk cash s~!& about Christians and conservatives, the bean counters note that EVERY ANTI-IRAQ film put out (In the Valley of Elah, whatever that Redford movie was) BOMBED at the box office. Also, The Chronicles of Narnia (pro-Christianity) > The Golden Compass (anti-Christianity) by 4+ to 1 at the box office. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe grossed over production costs, The Golden Compass grossed less than half of production costs. Both cost the same to make. You think Hollywood bean counters aren't aware of this?
Sean Penn doesn't drive Hollywood, money does.
The message is toned down in the movie, but it is readily apparent in the books. The Christian Right know about the books, so they didn't support the movie.
I don't disagree that there are several reasons they don't have an openly gay character, but, trust me, the possibility of losing a considerable number of movie goers just to make a point wasn't going to fly with the investors and accountants.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Good point. ST was never "All in the Family" - they never tackled social issues head on. The most direct they got was when Kirk/Picard would play Aesop at the end of an episode (and sometimes those pithy speeches of his had nothing to do with the mayhem preceeding them). They did it indirectly, through symbolism, allusion and alienation (pun!).
In fact, I would take some consolation (maybe) in the fact that as a vehicle for social change Trek has always really done it without expressly pointing it out to the audience, it's more subversive than an overt premise really and I kinda dig that.
Which is exactly one way that science fiction can do it that other genres cannot do as successfully. They can create situations which, while not 'real', allow for the examinations of values and beliefs about tolerance, compassion, responsibility, and rights in the ethical abstract and then applied to real world social issues. Our personal 'real world' biases can be set aside and our principles can rise past them.
|
|
Fair enough HD.I wasn't sayin that wasn't the reason it was done just tryin' to see the whole picture before I cast judgment.Trust me I fully accept that Hollyweird drives on cash flow and they will almost allways side with their pocketbooks just pointin' out in the past they've made some movies that "offend"
|
|
Fair enough HD.I wasn't sayin that wasn't the reason it was done just tryin' to see the whole picture before I cast judgment.Trust me I fully accept that Hollyweird drives on cash flow and they will almost allways side with their pocketbooks just pointin' out in the past they've made some movies that "offend"
Oh, they have, don't get me wrong, but a lot of those movies were budgeted to allow for the target audience to be large enough to make money. They've made some serious blunders, though, so they're not as likely to take any chances with a movie with a huge budget that needs wide acceptance just to break even. (Most movies don't see a profit until DVDs are released these days, but they need to get close to even or better in gross receipts in the B.O. to make DVDs mostly profit, though).
|
|
Fair enough HD.I wasn't sayin that wasn't the reason it was done just tryin' to see the whole picture before I cast judgment.Trust me I fully accept that Hollyweird drives on cash flow and they will almost allways side with their pocketbooks just pointin' out in the past they've made some movies that "offend"Oh, they have, don't get me wrong, but a lot of those movies were budgeted to allow for the target audience to be large enough to make money. They've made some serious blunders, though, so they're not as likely to take any chances with a movie with a huge budget that needs wide acceptance just to break even. (Most movies don't see a profit until DVDs are released these days, but they need to get close to even or better in gross receipts in the B.O. to make DVDs mostly profit, though).
Sounds like you know more about this than I do and I wasn't taking into account how much was spent on the films making... eh ya learn somthin' everyday.
|
|
Sean Penn doesn't drive Hollywood, money does.
So true. The LA Times prints the weekend box office receipts in the Business section.
The larger the budget for a film, in general, the tighter reign there will be on all aspects of the production, and the more mainstream the film. Small budgets mean you tend to get more splatter/sex/politics, because the studios aren't risking as much.|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
I was a communications major at U of Texas, Radio Television and Film (RTF) focus. We took classes on this stuff.In that case I would hope that you know more than I do about this...all I've ever been good at was killin' things...don't exactly give me the same credentials.
Do tell?
* dials 9 1 ... keeps fingers poised over other 1 *
|
|
I was a communications major at U of Texas, Radio Television and Film (RTF) focus. We took classes on this stuff.In that case I would hope that you know more than I do about this...all I've ever been good at was killin' things...don't exactly give me the same credentials.Do tell?
* dials 9 1 ... keeps fingers poised over other 1 *
It's Ok... my current line of work is pest control, hunted as a kid and was a sniper in army for a couple a' years(and I don't wanna discuss that) so no need to call Old Smokey on me.
|
|
I was a communications major at U of Texas, Radio Television and Film (RTF) focus. We took classes on this stuff.In that case I would hope that you know more than I do about this...all I've ever been good at was killin' things...don't exactly give me the same credentials.
Learning to kill things in the Army paid for the above. I'm multi-dangerous :)
|
|
It's Ok... my current line of work is pest control, hunted as a kid and was a sniper in army for a couple a' years(and I don't wanna discuss that) so no need to call Old Smokey on me.I was a communications major at U of Texas, Radio Television and Film (RTF) focus. We took classes on this stuff.In that case I would hope that you know more than I do about this...all I've ever been good at was killin' things...don't exactly give me the same credentials.Do tell?
* dials 9 1 ... keeps fingers poised over other 1 *
Well, pest control and Army sniping aren't unrelated fields.
Welcome back, bro :hugs:
|
|
It's Ok... my current line of work is pest control, hunted as a kid and was a sniper in army for a couple a' years(and I don't wanna discuss that) so no need to call Old Smokey on me.I was a communications major at U of Texas, Radio Television and Film (RTF) focus. We took classes on this stuff.In that case I would hope that you know more than I do about this...all I've ever been good at was killin' things...don't exactly give me the same credentials.Do tell?
* dials 9 1 ... keeps fingers poised over other 1 *
Well, pest control and Army sniping aren't unrelated fields.
Welcome back, bro :hugs:
*gratitude*
Are there two guys hugging in here?
I won't ask, and I won't tell.
|
|
You make some valid points and I do get what you're sayin' just not sure if thats the reason behind it...BTW I didn't get any anti-christian message outta Golden Compass, maybe I should start goin' to my churchs midnite bigotry meetings more often. :)
Moorluck, Hollywood picks their fights. If they got funky with Star Trek, it would hurt the bottom line, and this movie looks expensive. The general attitude of the creative talent does drive corporate's decision making, by and large. While the actors, writers and directors gleefully talk cash s~!& about Christians and conservatives, the bean counters note that EVERY ANTI-IRAQ film put out (In the Valley of Elah, whatever that Redford movie was) BOMBED at the box office. Also, The Chronicles of Narnia (pro-Christianity) > The Golden Compass (anti-Christianity) by 4+ to 1 at the box office. The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe grossed over production costs, The Golden Compass grossed less than half of production costs. Both cost the same to make. You think Hollywood bean counters aren't aware of this?
Sean Penn doesn't drive Hollywood, money does.
The message is toned down in the movie, but it is readily apparent in the books. The Christian Right know about the books, so they didn't support the movie.
I don't disagree that there are several reasons they don't have an openly gay character, but, trust me, the possibility of losing a considerable number of movie goers just to make a point wasn't going to fly with the investors and accountants.
It specifically attacks the Catholic Church which is why I did not let my son read it even though it was on his book list from school.
|
|
Ok, so every show/movie/band/play/comic book/RPG/whatever MUST have at least one each of the following, or it is a sin to watch:
A gay character.
A black character.
A woman character.
A Hispanic character.
An atheistic left-handed lesbian Eskimo character. (extra points for naming the reference)
An Indian character (both South Asian and native American)
An East Asian character.
A Muslim character.
A Jewish character.
A Buddhist character.
A pagan character.
A vegan character.(Did I miss any?)
The villain must be played by a White male Christian character (as they are the only group allowed to be completely vilified by the PC crowd).
Hmmm, looks like I'll have plenty of time to catch up on naps...
So what you are looking for is a Creole-Indian Lesbian fanatic Vegetarian who worships in the Church of converging Faiths? Iw would just be happy if Startrek conformed to the Population ratios of Earth in its recruitment posture. 1/6 Indian, 1/6 Chinese, 1/12 North American, 2/6 African, 1/6 Other Asian...
Oh and as seems increasingly popular with Holywood the Villain is Played by an Australian. So If the Villains are Australians...What does that say for the future? Australians are the Villains and Canada is US occupied Territory?
As a serious point, i really would like to see more more atheists characters in american television.
|
|
Funny, I don't recall seeing hardly any TV characters reference their religion on American TV, and I watch it every day. And I'm pretty sure House is an atheist, considering how much contempt he shows religious characters on that show.
Why do people only think their lifestyle or belief system is valid if it's shown in an entertainment media? Seriously, I don't see any Sicilian pagan recovering addict ex-military fiscally conservative socially liberal near sighted 30-something wise-ass D&D playing characters on TV.
Maybe I should protest or something.
|
|
Funny, I don't recall seeing hardly any TV characters reference their religion on American TV, and I watch it every day. And I'm pretty sure House is an atheist, considering how much contempt he shows religious characters on that show.
Why do people only think their lifestyle or belief system is valid if it's shown in an entertainment media? Seriously, I don't see any Sicilian pagan recovering addict ex-military fiscally conservative socially liberal near sighted 30-something wise-ass D&D playing characters on TV.
Maybe I should protest or something.
Yeah!! And where pray tell are the Irish/Native American lapsed Baptist RPGing ex-Army boxing southern comic book reading sci fi watching married fathers of 3!!... or am the only one?
|
|
Oh, yeah, I forgot ex-Army...
Naw ya' got ex-military in there.
But on a side note has anybody else noticed a tendency to make almost all dads on shows one of the following:
1.Big fat dummys who would be lost without their beautiful brilliant wife.(most sit coms)
2.Distant prics who bang their kids friends/girlfriends/anything that moves.(alot of OC type shows) or...
3.The sherif(i.e. Veronica Mars)
I mean as a father should I be offended by this or do I have better things to worry about.
It isn't about feeling 'valid', it is about media being representative.
|
|
It isn't about feeling 'valid', it is about media being representative.
I wasn't meaning to belittle you, but there have been a few open athiest on TV, House I'm pretty(?) sure has expressed a dislike of religion, Capt. Mal Reynolds from Firefly had no use for religion,and I'm pretty sure that the bucha aldulterous women on Desprate Wives ain't been ta church in while either! (kidding!)
|
|
It isn't about feeling 'valid', it is about media being representative.
Representative of what? They represent what gets them paid. Entertainment isn't a democracy, it's a business. 0.4% of Americans identify as "atheist". Frankly, in a nation of well over 300 million, less than a million people are a "non-market". If every atheist in America were to boycott anything because atheism isn't well represented, advertisers and producers would yawn and go about their day. While 15% of Americans claim "no religion", only 1.6% identify themselves as agnostic or atheist. 85% identify themselves as religious.
So, why should any producer go to bat for less than 2% of the market, at the risk of potentially alienating 85% of the market? See my "Golden Compass" example, above. People in the media have a tendency not to support projects that gross less than half of their total budget.
And, since "representative" is what you want, I can guarantee that 0.4% of the characters on American television are atheists. What you want is OVER representation. And to that I say, tough, get over it.
Edit: GLBT people make up somewhere between 7% to 12% of the total American population, so they actually represent a "market" in the eyes of the bean counters, which may be why GLBT characters are well represented in the entertainment media. That doesn't mean producers and
studio executives are going to make sure every movie has a gay character, especially movies and shows with a broad market appeal (like, um, Star Trek), but GLBT characters are definitely well represented in other productions.
You want things to change? Show them the money, and not the chump change 900k people represents...
But on a side note has anybody else noticed a tendency to make almost all dads on shows one of the following:1.Big fat dummys who would be lost without their beautiful brilliant wife.(most sit coms)
2.Distant prics who bang their kids friends/girlfriends/anything that moves.(alot of OC type shows) or...
3.The sherif(i.e. Veronica Mars)I mean as a father should I be offended by this or do I have better things to worry about.
It's the swinging pendulum. Back in the 50s and 60s, fathers were sage-wise family patriarchs. I would submit that's just as unrealistic.
On the other hand, #3 may just reflect the enormous number of cop/law enforcement shows out there right now.
|
|
But on a side note has anybody else noticed a tendency to make almost all dads on shows one of the following:1.Big fat dummys who would be lost without their beautiful brilliant wife.(most sit coms)
2.Distant prics who bang their kids friends/girlfriends/anything that moves.(alot of OC type shows) or...
3.The sherif(i.e. Veronica Mars)I mean as a father should I be offended by this or do I have better things to worry about.
It's the swinging pendulum. Back in the 50s and 60s, fathers were sage-wise family patriarchs. I would submit that's just as unrealistic.
On the other hand, #3 may just reflect the enormous number of cop/law enforcement shows out there right now.
True enough but at least back then the mother was portrayed as a good mom a good wife with attractiveness and good virtue.It was a reflection of the times that the "father knows best" and even the he was sometimes a hapless sort of fellow (i.e.Bewitched) And please understand I'm not endorsing the mentallity that women are only good for being pretty cooks.I don't get offended by current TV dads just somthing I've noticed.
|
|
To the OP:
I think THIS is what you're looking for.
LOL. Funny. But you should really put a NSFW spoiler next to the link, Snorter.
Loved Capt. Picard's face in the last scene!
|
I'm sort of torn over the new incarnation. Abrahms keeps saying all they have done is "ratchet up the adventure" but to me it seems more like they have missed the point of Star Trek amid all the explosions.
I'll probably see it and turn off my brain if warranted, but I'm not expecting something remotely like TOS.
|
|
I'm sort of torn over the new incarnation. Abrahms keeps saying all they have done is "ratchet up the adventure" but to me it seems more like they have missed the point of Star Trek amid all the explosions.
I'll probably see it and turn off my brain if warranted, but I'm not expecting something remotely like TOS.
Like I said earlier in this thread, Roddenberry is dead, anything special about Star Trek died with him. It'd just another sci-fi franchise now, and no amount of nerdrage is going to change that, frankly.
Jal:
I think kids who get saddled with goofy names should get to punch their parents in the nose when they turn 18...
If that's the case, there are a lot of plastic surgeons in Hollywood who should look forward to some wallet-fattening rhinoplasty in the future.
Penn Jillette's daughter: Moxie CrimeFighter
Jason Lee's son: Pilot Inspektor
Nicholas Cage's son: Kal-el
Shannyn Sossamon's daughter: Audio Science
Gwynneth Paltrow's daughter: Apple
I swear, it's like some infectious airborne disease that causes insanity...the only time I've ever heard of a non-celebrity who gave worse names to children was a woman here in town that was arrested for child neglect when police discovered her three daughters locked in her car outside a seedy motel at 3am, when she was inside partying in one of the rooms. Her daughters' names: Champagne, Chardonnay, and Chablis.