Star Trek JJ Abrams the Savior of Trek or Harbinger of Doom to Trekkies? Or simply a matter of perspective?

Boards
/ Movies

JJ Abrams the Savior of Trek or Harbinger of Doom to Trekkies? Or simply a matter of perspective?

OtakuJo

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 16220

Report this Feb. 09 2012, 7:34 pm

Quote: /view_profile/ @

>I think if they were going nude they would have done it in the Gaila/Kirk bedroom scene in ST09. I mean really do you believe that Kirk and Gailia would have been clothed in that situation? They've already censored themselves in that scene.

Kirk & Gaila?

http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/Gaila_%28Ferengi%29

Yikes.

(sorry. I know-- same name different characters --but that was such an irresistable gag, and I think I'm going to have to work pretty hard to get that particular image out of my head.)

________________________________

I hear what you're saying about gratuitous nudity. I don't think it's a deal-breaker for me but that's true it doesn't advance the story and can get a little tiresome. Still I think it's one of those "judge it when it happens" issues.

Have you ever danced with a Tribble in the pale moonlight?

AtoZ2

GROUP: Members

POSTS: 1274

Report this Feb. 11 2012, 5:29 am

In the real world people have sex.

It was not below Gene Roddenberry to touch on sexual subjects or USE scantly clad females with beutiful bodies to grab the audiances attention...or for that matter USE males in the same way. In fact he fully embraced this idea and pushed it to the limites as much as he could get away with at the time. The worklds different now, Roddenberry probably would have been even more extreme.

And honestly, even ST09 was light on the subject, hopefully there will be more scenes however brief in the next film.

But since they will likely be aiming for a PG13 rating, I wouldn't expect any thing too extreme.

"Thank Pitch Forks and Pointed Ears"