Monday, September 26, 2016 • Morning Edition • "Better than Bleeding Cool by that much."

The Outhouse - The Greatest Comic Book Forum

Comics news, comic book reviews, feature articles about comics, interviews with comic creators, plus the greatest comic book and pop culture discussion in the Outhouse forums!

Advertisement

'Star Trek Into Darkness' Writer Damon Lindelof Apologizes for "Gratuitous" Underwear Scene

Hey you! Reader! Want to be a part of the GREATEST COMIC BOOK AND GEEK COMMUNITY on the web?! Well, they're not accepting new members, but we'll take anyone here, so why not sign up for a free acount? It's fast and it's easy, like your mom! Sign up today! Membership spots are limited!*

*Membership spots not really limited!

The Old Doctor

Postby The Old Doctor » Tue May 21, 2013 3:40 pm

Punchy wrote:I think it's just the case that a woman in their underwear is automatically sexualised, but a man is underwear isn't.

It's the male gaze, and also years of societal pressures, and probably to do with curves being more visually appealing than flat male chests.

It's nothing to do with Star Trek, it's society as a whole.


Men - Autosexual.
Women - Sexicons.

The Old Doctor

Postby The Old Doctor » Tue May 21, 2013 3:42 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:
For a straight man, I am extremely gay.


Well, the proof there is your present avatar.
User avatar

DoctorStupid

Inhouser

Postby DoctorStupid » Tue May 21, 2013 3:50 pm

I could have sworn that I saw a chick with half her clothes torn off in the officers meeting on the ground after the place got all shot up. Does anyone else remember seeing that?
User avatar

holtom2000

dINGO

Postby holtom2000 » Tue May 21, 2013 3:58 pm

I thought it was great for me at any rate
User avatar

guitargod694

cheese

Postby guitargod694 » Tue May 21, 2013 4:17 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:
For a straight man, I am extremely gay.


Unnecessary prepositional phrase is unnecessary.
User avatar

sdsichero

2k11 Outhouse People's Champion

Postby sdsichero » Tue May 21, 2013 4:59 pm

DoctorStupid wrote:I could have sworn that I saw a chick with half her clothes torn off in the officers meeting on the ground after the place got all shot up. Does anyone else remember seeing that?


Serving coffee

I'm kidding!

PDH

penile prisoner

Postby PDH » Tue May 21, 2013 8:14 pm

I have no problem with sexualising and objectifying men and women to titillate the audience - there is absolutely nothing wrong with this whether or not it 'serves the plot' whatever that means. Heck, I don't have a problem with straight-up porn and think society's attitudes towards it is pretty repressive in general.

That being said, when you do something like that you are basically saying, 'we're not that bothered about the female audience,' which again is fine. There's no reason that every film needs to cater to men and women in equal proportions and there are plenty of movies that are basically unwatchable for straight men, so if you want to make a film pandering to male nerds, go for it.

But I actually don't think this is that film. I really don't. Let's not confuse Star Trek the television series for male nerds with Star Trek the movie starring Chris Pine, Benedict Cumberbatch and Zachary Quinto, the Hollywood movie for young people. These male actors do have pretty huge female followings, especially Cumberbatch. Honestly, if they were going to do the fan service thing it's a coin flip whether that means, er, 'servicing' the male fans or the female ones.

So maybe either include a few scenes for the chicks as well or just give the whole thing a wide berth for everyone's sake.

Having said THAT, I also think that generally speaking everyone needs to grow some thicker skin. Whatever your goals are, getting offended doesn't help you achieve them.

And finally, having said various other conflicting things, I should also add that the scene was pretty crap and made me laugh when I watched it. The pretext was just so flimsy that it actually did affect the integrity of the narrative. It was like, 'OK, now I'm going to be naked for no reason, DON'T LOOK! JUST A WOMAN IN HER UNDERWEAR NOTHING TO SEE HERE!' I normally think people are exaggerating when they talk about scenes throwing them out of movies because they seemed tacked on or whatever but I genuinely see where they're coming from with this. It totally came out of nowhere.
User avatar

Herald

Regular-Sized Poster

Postby Herald » Tue May 21, 2013 8:36 pm

PDH wrote:That being said, when you do something like that you are basically saying, 'we're not that bothered about the female audience,' which again is fine. There's no reason that every film needs to cater to men and women in equal proportions and there are plenty of movies that are basically unwatchable for straight men, so if you want to make a film pandering to male nerds, go for it.

But I actually don't think this is that film. I really don't. Let's not confuse Star Trek the television series for male nerds with Star Trek the movie starring Chris Pine, Benedict Cumberbatch and Zachary Quinto, the Hollywood movie for young people.


:?

If "pandering to male nerds" is supposed to mean "female fanservice galore!", then all the previous Star Trek TV series owe us quite a bit of that, especially Next Generation and DS9! Quick, Troi and Jadzia, bend over several more times!

Frankly, this movie sounds more like it's pandering than what we got out of those shows...

And finally, having said various other conflicting things, I should also add that the scene was pretty crap and made me laugh when I watched it. The pretext was just so flimsy that it actually did affect the integrity of the narrative. It was like, 'OK, now I'm going to be naked for no reason, DON'T LOOK! JUST A WOMAN IN HER UNDERWEAR NOTHING TO SEE HERE!' I normally think people are exaggerating when they talk about scenes throwing them out of movies because they seemed tacked on or whatever but I genuinely see where they're coming from with this. It totally came out of nowhere.


...as you seem to mention. :P

PDH

penile prisoner

Postby PDH » Tue May 21, 2013 8:49 pm

Herald wrote:
:?

If "pandering to male nerds" is supposed to mean "female fanservice galore!", then all the previous Star Trek TV series owe us quite a bit of that, especially Next Generation and DS9! Quick, Troi and Jadzia, bend over several more times!


Frankly, this movie sounds more like it's pandering than what we got out of those shows...



...as you seem to mention. :P


I'm not really sure what you're saying here.

My point was that the audience for the TV series is not necessarily the same as the audience for the movies, so even if the audience for the TV series was mostly male it might not be the case that the audience for the movies is. I would guess it's still probably mostly male but not quite to the same extent as the series.
User avatar

Herald

Regular-Sized Poster

Postby Herald » Tue May 21, 2013 9:44 pm

PDH wrote:
I'm not really sure what you're saying here.


You sounded like you are equating "pandering to male nerds" with "featuring nearly-naked women!" Also, you said that the Trek TV shows pandered to male nerds. If these are the case, then there sure are some missing scenes in all the Trek TV episodes I watched! (And frankly, I demand that they be restored! :groucho:)

In addition to that, you claimed that this movie was NOT pandering to male nerds... yet this movie DOES have the "nearly-naked women!" that you claim is "pandering to male nerds". And you even mention just how ridiculously gratuitous the scene in question is! By your definition, that is a contradiction.

My point was that the audience for the TV series is not necessarily the same as the audience for the movies, so even if the audience for the TV series was mostly male it might not be the case that the audience for the movies is. I would guess it's still probably mostly male but not quite to the same extent as the series.


The TV series may have aimed for male nerds (it's debatable), but the movie certainly aims for a more general audience.
User avatar

S.F. Jude Terror

OMCTO

Postby S.F. Jude Terror » Tue May 21, 2013 10:21 pm

Damn Herald is trying to get some heat back after his cowardly defeat by PDH the other day.
User avatar

Herald

Regular-Sized Poster

Postby Herald » Tue May 21, 2013 10:33 pm

S.F. Jude Terror wrote:Damn Herald is trying to get some heat back after his cowardly defeat by PDH the other day.


Still deluding yourself into believing that an uninformed statement by someone who admitted that he's never even seen the show in question requires a response, I see. :P
User avatar

sdsichero

2k11 Outhouse People's Champion

Postby sdsichero » Tue May 21, 2013 10:36 pm

Cat-Scratch wrote:
Men - Autosexual.
Women - Sexicons.

Cats = T-Word
User avatar

john lewis hawk

Founder of The Outhouse

Postby john lewis hawk » Tue May 21, 2013 10:48 pm

"Look!! We have this attractive blonde in her underwear for a while for no apparent reason!! Get the lube and kleenax ready, boys!!"
User avatar

GOSD

Everybody lies!

Postby GOSD » Wed May 22, 2013 7:59 am

God, people are so fucking annoying these days. :roll: :smt011

As Cat pointed out, there was a woman at the table. I think there was another as well. Does this idiot, Felicity Day know that JJ consistantly has strong women in ALL of his shows and movies?

What a fucking dope. :roll:

So, the blond was in her underwear. Whoa! Time to throw women back into the kitchen....
:roll:

Poor Damon.

leave a comment with facebook


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: FaceBook [Linkcheck], Fysh, GiveWarAChance, Google [Bot] and 66 guests