Star Trek films discussion (with links)
I tried to post the following reply to the lj community moviebuffs, but couldn't include the links without it being labeled as spam -so I am referring people to this personal blog entry.
Here is the original discussion which prompted my reply -to my mind, I don't feel that the 'quality' of a film should be or can be entirely divorced from any other issues surrounding it.
-------------------------------------
"Still, I don't think you can judge "The Motion Picture" based on something Rodenberry put into the novelisation."
Wow. Um, okay, I don't think I ever implied that I judged the FILM based on this. There is a difference between the film and the franchise, which is what I was referring to. Rereading my text above, I also don't see *WHY* you would assume I had such a nonsensical reason for disagreeing with you. So thank you for that -I clearly stated that I found it too slow and boring.
As for the insertion into the novelization, I'll try to come up with the reference (it was in a text by academic Henry Jenkins, the same who wrote 'Textual Poachers').
"What other homophobia was there? Since so far the only example you've given is a single novelisation. Is there any reference to it in the movies or the series itself?"
Regarding the lack of gay representation in Star Trek however, here is a reference: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/01/brannon-braga-talks-gay-star-trek
Does this satisfy you? I could also continue by the franchise's frequent issues brushes with misogyny: 'Into Darkness' has a notable and completely gratuitous scene which was the source of many complaints (which, I acknowledge, the producers later apologized for), where Carol Marcus flashes the audience in her bra and panties for no reason whatsoever, really. And lest you accuse me of prudishness, let me state that I have no difficulty with nakedness and the human body. What annoys me is the objectification of human beings for commercial or other purposes, which 99.99% of the time winds up being objectification of WOMEN.
"If the only problem with "Star Trek: Into Darkness" was that the villain had been whitewashed then certainly that would still be regrettable, but that still wouldn't have caused me to mark it down as much I have. It seems rather ridiculous that, having kept so many things from "Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" exactly the same, the race of Khan should be one of the few things they decide to change."
With regards to race, the Star Trek franchise is not the first nor the last to whitewash. It is a huge issue which should not be minimized -I would point out that my response did not only deal with the notion of rating films. I also don't believe I said anywhere that I thought 'Into Darkness' was inherently bad, its quality was just not the point I was trying to make.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=4991235&page=1&singlePage=true
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/uncategorized/racebending/
http://www.examiner.com/article/does-hollywood-white-wash-the-casting-of-asian-characters-movies
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/12/why_hollywood_keeps_white_washing_the_past/
Here is the original discussion which prompted my reply -to my mind, I don't feel that the 'quality' of a film should be or can be entirely divorced from any other issues surrounding it.
-------------------------------------
"Still, I don't think you can judge "The Motion Picture" based on something Rodenberry put into the novelisation."
Wow. Um, okay, I don't think I ever implied that I judged the FILM based on this. There is a difference between the film and the franchise, which is what I was referring to. Rereading my text above, I also don't see *WHY* you would assume I had such a nonsensical reason for disagreeing with you. So thank you for that -I clearly stated that I found it too slow and boring.
As for the insertion into the novelization, I'll try to come up with the reference (it was in a text by academic Henry Jenkins, the same who wrote 'Textual Poachers').
"What other homophobia was there? Since so far the only example you've given is a single novelisation. Is there any reference to it in the movies or the series itself?"
Regarding the lack of gay representation in Star Trek however, here is a reference: http://www.tor.com/blogs/2011/01/brannon-braga-talks-gay-star-trek
Does this satisfy you? I could also continue by the franchise's frequent issues brushes with misogyny: 'Into Darkness' has a notable and completely gratuitous scene which was the source of many complaints (which, I acknowledge, the producers later apologized for), where Carol Marcus flashes the audience in her bra and panties for no reason whatsoever, really. And lest you accuse me of prudishness, let me state that I have no difficulty with nakedness and the human body. What annoys me is the objectification of human beings for commercial or other purposes, which 99.99% of the time winds up being objectification of WOMEN.
"If the only problem with "Star Trek: Into Darkness" was that the villain had been whitewashed then certainly that would still be regrettable, but that still wouldn't have caused me to mark it down as much I have. It seems rather ridiculous that, having kept so many things from "Star Trek: Wrath of Khan" exactly the same, the race of Khan should be one of the few things they decide to change."
With regards to race, the Star Trek franchise is not the first nor the last to whitewash. It is a huge issue which should not be minimized -I would point out that my response did not only deal with the notion of rating films. I also don't believe I said anywhere that I thought 'Into Darkness' was inherently bad, its quality was just not the point I was trying to make.
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=4991235&page=1&singlePage=true
http://herocomplex.latimes.com/uncategorized/racebending/
http://www.examiner.com/article/does-hollywood-white-wash-the-casting-of-asian-characters-movies
http://www.salon.com/2011/08/12/why_hollywood_keeps_white_washing_the_past/