|
Y'all are still ignoring the part of that post where he/she points out that every time the prime directive is violated the consequences are shown. I don't know how you can still classify Star Trek as colonial-imperialist. I mean...I guess you could argue that it's folly to think you could explore without having any impact but then you're just arguing against scientific progress and that everyone should just stay home.
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 19:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Considering that the consequences of violating the Prime Directive are usually portrayed "altered path" versus "annihilation," I'd hesitate to say that the text is condemning violating the Prime Directive so much as saying "sometimes you've got to break a few eggs to make a United Federation of Planets." That last sentence is a really unfair way to characterize what's usually shown. They aren't trying to co-opt those cultures into the Federation, they're just protecting them from another outside threat. In STID what Kirk did wasn't protecting them from an outside threat but it was condemned; it was the setup for his character arc of learning humility. When Starfleet do reach out once they've determined the culture is technologically ready, they always give that culture the option of joining. I think you're kind of going out of your way to make it seem like something insidious when it's not.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 19:53
|
|
|
Danger posted:What are the consequences in the film? Kirk was portrayed as doing the noble, human, thing and disregarded those regulations to save the primitive people which would have otherwise been wiped out if not for the help of the "explorers". Of course his mentor saw this in him and made sure that whatever punishment he faced was neutered, the federation needs folks like that. The original series is just blatant about it, perhaps giving some lip service to the notion while Kirk uses native populations to wage a proxy war against his enemies. There was no point in the film where that was portrayed as anything but a bad decision. This is reinforced when Kirk later sees what Spock was trying to do and sacrifices himself.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 19:58
|
|
|
1st AD posted:Sounds like Colonialism to me! Wrong, it's a dilemma that has no analog in our history of colonialism. When I say outside threat, I mean some ill-intentioned alien being, as opposed to a natural disaster. I explained in my post above how in STID their interference in the natural disaster was condemned.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 20:02
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:Yeah, look up the history of European competition over colonial holdings or even Monroe Doctrine and tell me how colonialism was never justified by protection from an "outside threat," like the French or the Belgians or any other imperial power. Hell, you can just look up American intervention in Cuba in the 19th and early 20th century to see it. In a very general sense maybe but I don't see how any of those things are at all similar to anything portrayed in Star Trek.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 20:11
|
|
|
Danger posted:- Star Trek VI, a movie not at all about colonialism. You can cherry pick quotes out of context all day but you're starting to veer away from talking about Star Trek and the mission of Starfleet being inherently colonial, which is what began this discussion in the first place. Also, being about colonialism and being pro-colonial are not at all the same thing.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2013 22:17
|
|
|
I just rewatched WoK last night and between that and reading the discussion in this thread I have an even greater appreciation than I did before for STID. It takes the major elements of WoK and with some clever changes turns them into something relevant to today's world in a way I find quite satisfying. I really want to go see it again now.
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2013 19:26
|
|
|
yronic heroism posted:Possibly. But if I have to sit through a bunch of emoting about what it means to be Han and Luke or they reimagined Wookiees as anything, gonna nerdrage so hard. It would be so hilarious to see Abrams retcon a bunch of crap from the prequels like midichlorians
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2013 19:34
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Now that they've blown off the green babes gag, where do you go from there anyway? Q tricks Kirk into sleeping with a man, Kirk realizes he's gay, we have a queer Kirk, nerd shitstorm ensues
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2013 20:30
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:
Let's examine a hypothetical. Say there were no Prime Directive and any culture that they come across would HAVE to he approached because Starfleet is not allowed to say who is and is not developed enough for this privilege. Say one of those cultures wants something from Starfleet like, say, designs for transport capabilities or warp drive. Starfleet would have to give them these things because to deny them would require a determination about what knowledge they can and can't have, which is infantilizing. Say they use this technology to exploit or enslave another culture. Starfleet cannot intervene because this would be imposing Earth morals upon an indigenous culture. Do you see how this is a problem even though Starfleet had no intention to impose any morals? Do you see how adhering to the Prime Directive solves this problem? Also I'm curious to know how a culture can be infantilized if they aren't even aware alien beings exist and why it matters.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 19:45
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:It's easy, by taking away the culture's agency by making a decision for it - by deciding "for its own good," and it matters the same way any conduct framework matters, in how it governs behavior and what that behavior does. So your suggestion is that Starfleet should contact planets to ask them if they want to be made aware of the existence of aliens? How does that make sense? And how is there an adverse effect in not doing so? My hypothetical relevant because it is designed to carry the implications of your ideological objection to its logical conclusion. I presented one of a multitude of possible dilemmas presented by taking an ideological stance that those cultures should have a say in whether they're "ready" or not. Starfleet has to make a decision one way or another whether to contact other cultures previously unaware of their existence, and the only way to make that decision is by determining whether it would have an adverse impact. The decision by its very nature is a unilateral one.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 20:20
|
|
|
The Warszawa posted:And that decision robs them of their agency. Perhaps that's an unavoidable consequence of exploration, perhaps its not - that's what the film is asking us to grapple with. Starfleet wants to observe, categorize, define, without reckoning with the ramifications of that decision by preaching non-interference. Is observation - especially the type we're talking about here - not its own interference? Since practicing non-interference and not exploring at all have the same effect on autonomous cultures, no, it's not its own type of interference. Just to be clear, I've been talking about Star Trek in general, not just STID. AbramsTrek is really its own beast.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2013 20:47
|
|
|
The new trailer looks great. It looks like a modernized version of TOS and I have faith in the Peggster to have written something at least a little bit interesting and unconventional. Even the alien planet set has a little bit of the charming fakeness of the TOS sets. Then again I mostly liked Into Darkness despite its problems so what do I know.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 20:43
|
|
|
If this exact trailer came out and nobody knew Justin Lin was the director nobody would be complaining about it looking like Fast and Furious. It actually looks remarkably consistent with the previous two films, more so than I thought it would. I don't even like F&F or Justin Lin, I just thought this trailer was very good.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 22:37
|
|
|
Cingulate posted:It's unstable technology, like transwarp. In eternal beta. That's the implicit headcanon. No need to make as much of a thing out of it as saying "WE'LL JUST IGNORE IT". Also a ship is more than a way to ferry people. For example, it's pretty Lmao at you trying to make out Lin telling a film blogger they're just going to ignore it as him issuing a press release and putting it on the poster
|
|
#
¿
Dec 14, 2015 23:16
|
|
|
N: Sulu is officially gay. V: this put a huge smile on my face.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 7, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:In this particular case, I think the actor who asked the film creators not to disservice the character by changing him to fit in with said actor's life is in the right. Don't really get why this matters, are they supposed to consult Takei on every decision they make with his character? Does Takei speak for the entirety of the LGBT community? How do you know Pegg and Lin didn't speak with other LGBT people and get enthusiasm from them for the idea? It's Takei's old character but it doesn't mean that he has the final say on what's appropriate. It's unfortunate that he doesn't like it but that's all it is.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
If he said it's not cool for personal reasons, like he's personally offended by them incorporating his personal life into the character then yeah it's a dick move. However I don't think that's the case, it just sounds like Takei never thought of the character as gay and thinks that they should introduce a new gay character. I agree with Pegg that that would be tokenism and that character would always be thought of as "the gay one that Justin Lin made up." It seems to me that introducing it as an aspect of Sulu's character is the most tasteful way to do it.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 8, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 22, 2024 17:46 |
|
|
Varam posted:That would hold water if Sulu were anything more than the token Asian in the films at this point, but he's not, and so the argument is garbage. He's a non-character, and now he's the token Asian doubling as the token gay. This is an entirely cynical retcon intended to maximize Sulu's minority status because they had no idea what to do with the character and wouldn't dare taint an actual major character with being gay. "Sulu is a token character, also their efforts to remedy this and flesh out his personal life are garbage"
|
|
#
¿
Jul 11, 2016 01:45
|
|