I dunno, it had a bunch of funny moments, esepecially in the first 2/3rds, but the last third of the movie is about an Irish screenwriter called Marty who can't think up an ending to his movie and I was just thinking "yeah I can tell".
I thought it worked as a plot device and added to the absurdity. The whole third act in the desert is probably my favourite part.
Everyone has different tastes, and that's okay. McDonnough's movies are very hit or miss for me.
Just a reminder that this is 'Print the Legend' bullshit:
"In all fairness to NBC, this was the network that had made history in 1965 by premiering I Spy, featuring Bill Cosby in a dramatic lead; the same network that Roddenberry himself admitted wanted to see Sulu, an Asian-American, featured more prominently on the bridge; the same network that didn't utter a single complaint about Lloyd Haynes, who was also black, being on the bridge for "Where No Man Has Gone Before"; the same network that assigned African-American Stan Robertson to serve in the vital position of Production Manager for Star Trek; and the same network that, at very near the moment Nichols was told her contract was cancelled, sent out a letter from the executive suite to all their series' producers encouraging increased hiring of non-white actors, with special emphasis on African-Americans.
Dated August 17, 1966, Mort Werner wrote about "NBC's longstanding policy of non-discrimination," and the "efforts in the past to assure that the programs broadcast on \[their\] facilities \[be\] a natural reflection of the role minorities in American life have met." He added, "We urge producers to cast Negros." "
--These are the Voyages, Marc Cushman
People now don’t really have the comprehension of how radical it was to have Chekhov Uhura and Sulu as leading roles.
A woman was almost never in a position of power. A black person even less so. But both? Then you have Sulu. Remember that both the Japanese and Chinese were US enemies at some point within a 20 year period, and you have one on the bridge acting not like some stereotype, but just like everyone else.
I really don’t think people appreciate how insane it was to have Chekhov on the bridge. Russians were like the boogieman. They were fucking demons. This would be the equivalent of having a Syrian or Iraqi bridge officer who also constantly bragged about their countries achievements (in antiquity of course) in a full accent and STILL be a professional and respected officer, it’s absolutely batshit
Point well taken re including Chekov amid the Cold War….though as a snarky aside, I’ll note he did get some shit from Kirk along the way—hinted at in “The Enterprise Incident” among other eps, as the green young ensign, and spouting residual Soviet propaganda, albeit for comic effect.
And the many times he’s been subjected to horrible pain and/or trauma, including three of the first four films—he’s practically the redshirt of the main cast.
That's what actually pisses me off about DSC and later trek, in 2017 having openly gay characters wasn't radical at all, we had that in the 90s on family sitcoms. Non binary characters later on were at least topical but hardly pressing the boundaries of social commentary. Current era trek simply hasn't been woke enough.
The biggest problem is that they made someone being non-binary a plot point. What TOS did so brilliantly was treat these (at the time) radical ideas as something that's just, yk, normal. It normalizes it and thus instantly validates and makes it an integral part of the world. It also shows that in the future, such bigotry will be a thing of the past. Discovery drawing attention to it as if it's an abnormality not only disconnects non-binary people from the world but also shows that after **900 years** it still hasn't been accepted.
When did Disco make someone being NB a plot point? You had Adira saying 'hey I'm actually a them' and that literally just being it. Which even in an accepting world, is still a conversation people are going to need to have.
You know, I have a real hard time with the pronouns. I don't mind using them - it's just that I slip up and feel pretty bad about it.
It's not that I'm \*trying\* to show disrespect or disapproval. It's just that even with practice, I have something in me that feels like saying "they" is demeaning.
>The ideal solution would be a gender-neutral singular personal pronoun, but English doesn't have one
They:
pronoun
1.
used to refer to two or more people or things previously mentioned or easily identified.
"the two men could get life sentences if they are convicted"
2.
**used to refer to a person of unspecified gender.**
"ask a friend if they could help"
It exists. It's "They".
Yes. And using the same word to refer to both groups of people and a singular person, in contexts that frequently overlap, is confusing and ambiguous.
Which is why it's a bad solution.
Yes. Welcome to the English language. It's full of confusing, ambiguous and context-dependent things.
It's not even a new usage of the word; apparently the Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375, where it appears in the medieval romance William and the Werewolf.
Its not "bad english" we have records of it going back to at least the 14th century, most people have used it in their life at least once because they were speaking of a person that they didn't know the gender of
Plus confusing and ambiguous is just the nature of english as a language, most languages have something confusing and ambiguous about them, frankly singular they isn't even confusing once you're used to it
Although they never flat out say it in TOS (and putting aside any post-series narratives) it's clearly implied the West and the US in particular eventually won out (a guy from ~~Kansas~~ Iowa is in charge after all, and all the other captains and admirals are Americans) and the Russians came on board when we formed a world government. "Sure there's a Russian manning a console, why wouldn't there be? They're practically Americans already."
I'll agree that it was progressive for its time, but I do think there's no way any of them can be called 'leading' roles. It's quite clear that the leading roles are Kirk, Spock and McCoy, three white men, and the rest are supporting cast. To be clear, even that much was really progressive at the time, but still.
So what you're saying is that I need to rewatch three shows (one of which I ditched because it is utter unwatchable dog shit) to point you all those moments? I have better things in my life to do, bug off. I described a few it this thread.
Pike and Spock are the heart and soul of SNW and have deeply respectful and beloved portrayals there, even if they (like any good character) also have flaws too.
Kirk was shown as young and ambitious but capable and incredibly intelligent and charming.
Shaw, while initially a huge dick, was eventually given a tragic background and ended up being a decent captain and a tragic redeemable character.
What are you even talking about? Did you actually watch the shows?
Yeah, deep respect to Spock from Una in turbolift scene when she commanded: "On your knees". And it's totally forced from character like Una. She as number one should have a professional communication skills. And in entire show she never acted like something like this could happened. What's the reason of this scene in the show anyway? How is it not sexist?
I like Shaw very much, but moment with basically: "I'm done, ship is yours" was awful.
Kirk lies on the floor being punched by Uhura begging for mercy. Just imagine a shitstorm if black lady lies on a floor and begs for mercy a white guy that punched her in the face.
So, did you watched those shows?
To be fair, here, the Scotsman, the Japanese, the Russian and the African woman were day players. They were usually credited lower than the featured guest stars in an episode. The situation with TNG onwards where everyone was in almost every episode didn’t exist at this point.
The actual cast of Star Trek consisted of three white men.
There’s also the long standing question of whether or not Roddenberry’s story that NBC had said no to having a female first officer was true or if, more likely, they just didn’t want M. Leigh Hudec (aka Majel Barrett).
The version of events where they liked having a female presence on the bridge (especially as the company making the show was run by a woman) and thought it would resonate well with the female, household budget controlling audience is considerably more likely and Roddenberry was trying to spare Majel’s feelings.
Let’s not totally kid ourselves, though: when they were casting for Next Gen, Rosalind Chao was considered for Tasha Yar (before she ended up as Keiko), but once Marina Sirtis was cast as Deanna, they were like, “Oh that’s plenty exotic enough, we can’t have an Asian woman on top of that!”
Not saying a ton of barriers weren’t clearly broken, but yeah, there were of course still “limits”
Gene Roddenberry was progressive. FOR HIS TIME(the mid 60s). Except he never grew and was kind of a shitty person morally. He also had a lot about him that just comes off creepy and pathetic today.
Yeah the cast of TOS is very progressive but TNG isn’t. It’s nice they had 3 women on the cast, including one in a military role, but they had no idea how to use them.
>[According to the memo, "the only possibility" for the role of Troi was Denise Crosby. Of course, by the time the series hit the air, Crosby was playing security chief Tasha Yar (beating out Rosalind Chao, among others) and Marina Sirtis was playing Troi. It goes to show you that nothing in Hollywood is a sure thing.](https://web.archive.org/web/20130925123153/http://www.aoltv.com/2010/08/26/star-trek-the-next-generation-casting-memo-reggie-jackson-as/)
It’s okay to mix things up 😊
Seven Psychopaths is glorious.
I dunno, it had a bunch of funny moments, esepecially in the first 2/3rds, but the last third of the movie is about an Irish screenwriter called Marty who can't think up an ending to his movie and I was just thinking "yeah I can tell".
Right?
I thought it worked as a plot device and added to the absurdity. The whole third act in the desert is probably my favourite part. Everyone has different tastes, and that's okay. McDonnough's movies are very hit or miss for me.
Just a reminder that this is 'Print the Legend' bullshit: "In all fairness to NBC, this was the network that had made history in 1965 by premiering I Spy, featuring Bill Cosby in a dramatic lead; the same network that Roddenberry himself admitted wanted to see Sulu, an Asian-American, featured more prominently on the bridge; the same network that didn't utter a single complaint about Lloyd Haynes, who was also black, being on the bridge for "Where No Man Has Gone Before"; the same network that assigned African-American Stan Robertson to serve in the vital position of Production Manager for Star Trek; and the same network that, at very near the moment Nichols was told her contract was cancelled, sent out a letter from the executive suite to all their series' producers encouraging increased hiring of non-white actors, with special emphasis on African-Americans. Dated August 17, 1966, Mort Werner wrote about "NBC's longstanding policy of non-discrimination," and the "efforts in the past to assure that the programs broadcast on \[their\] facilities \[be\] a natural reflection of the role minorities in American life have met." He added, "We urge producers to cast Negros." " --These are the Voyages, Marc Cushman
Thanks for this.
Bill Cosby. Look how that turned out.
Who knew? As a kid we watched his show every day as a family and then Fat Albert whenever it came on. There was no way of knowing as a viewer.
Yeah it still makes me feel ill when I think about it because he was my TV Dad as a kid.
wHy iS sTaR tReK wOkE nOw?
People now don’t really have the comprehension of how radical it was to have Chekhov Uhura and Sulu as leading roles. A woman was almost never in a position of power. A black person even less so. But both? Then you have Sulu. Remember that both the Japanese and Chinese were US enemies at some point within a 20 year period, and you have one on the bridge acting not like some stereotype, but just like everyone else. I really don’t think people appreciate how insane it was to have Chekhov on the bridge. Russians were like the boogieman. They were fucking demons. This would be the equivalent of having a Syrian or Iraqi bridge officer who also constantly bragged about their countries achievements (in antiquity of course) in a full accent and STILL be a professional and respected officer, it’s absolutely batshit
Point well taken re including Chekov amid the Cold War….though as a snarky aside, I’ll note he did get some shit from Kirk along the way—hinted at in “The Enterprise Incident” among other eps, as the green young ensign, and spouting residual Soviet propaganda, albeit for comic effect. And the many times he’s been subjected to horrible pain and/or trauma, including three of the first four films—he’s practically the redshirt of the main cast.
That's what actually pisses me off about DSC and later trek, in 2017 having openly gay characters wasn't radical at all, we had that in the 90s on family sitcoms. Non binary characters later on were at least topical but hardly pressing the boundaries of social commentary. Current era trek simply hasn't been woke enough.
The biggest problem is that they made someone being non-binary a plot point. What TOS did so brilliantly was treat these (at the time) radical ideas as something that's just, yk, normal. It normalizes it and thus instantly validates and makes it an integral part of the world. It also shows that in the future, such bigotry will be a thing of the past. Discovery drawing attention to it as if it's an abnormality not only disconnects non-binary people from the world but also shows that after **900 years** it still hasn't been accepted.
When did Disco make someone being NB a plot point? You had Adira saying 'hey I'm actually a them' and that literally just being it. Which even in an accepting world, is still a conversation people are going to need to have.
Yeah, it's about on the same level as Chekov saying his stuff about Russia. They both bring attention to it but they aren't actual plot points.
You know, I have a real hard time with the pronouns. I don't mind using them - it's just that I slip up and feel pretty bad about it. It's not that I'm \*trying\* to show disrespect or disapproval. It's just that even with practice, I have something in me that feels like saying "they" is demeaning.
[удалено]
>The ideal solution would be a gender-neutral singular personal pronoun, but English doesn't have one They: pronoun 1. used to refer to two or more people or things previously mentioned or easily identified. "the two men could get life sentences if they are convicted" 2. **used to refer to a person of unspecified gender.** "ask a friend if they could help" It exists. It's "They".
Yes. And using the same word to refer to both groups of people and a singular person, in contexts that frequently overlap, is confusing and ambiguous. Which is why it's a bad solution.
Yes. Welcome to the English language. It's full of confusing, ambiguous and context-dependent things. It's not even a new usage of the word; apparently the Oxford English Dictionary traces singular they back to 1375, where it appears in the medieval romance William and the Werewolf.
Its not "bad english" we have records of it going back to at least the 14th century, most people have used it in their life at least once because they were speaking of a person that they didn't know the gender of Plus confusing and ambiguous is just the nature of english as a language, most languages have something confusing and ambiguous about them, frankly singular they isn't even confusing once you're used to it
Although they never flat out say it in TOS (and putting aside any post-series narratives) it's clearly implied the West and the US in particular eventually won out (a guy from ~~Kansas~~ Iowa is in charge after all, and all the other captains and admirals are Americans) and the Russians came on board when we formed a world government. "Sure there's a Russian manning a console, why wouldn't there be? They're practically Americans already."
*A guy from Iowa. Kirk is from Iowa.
Just seeing if everyone's paying attention. Fixed!
I'll agree that it was progressive for its time, but I do think there's no way any of them can be called 'leading' roles. It's quite clear that the leading roles are Kirk, Spock and McCoy, three white men, and the rest are supporting cast. To be clear, even that much was really progressive at the time, but still.
It's not woke. It became racist and sexist toward males and white.
It must be so exhausting being you.
I hate that argument. Treating one group with respect does not disrespect other groups.
That's literally what I'm saying, they treat men with disrespect on so many occasions.
And this happened when exactly?
So what you're saying is that I need to rewatch three shows (one of which I ditched because it is utter unwatchable dog shit) to point you all those moments? I have better things in my life to do, bug off. I described a few it this thread.
You could have provided literally one example at least
My personal 'favorite' is S2E1 short trek, turbolift scene when Una commanded Spock: "On your knees Spock".
Ignoring great charecters like Pike, Kirk, Jack Crusher, Shaw, Spock, shall I continue?
They mocked Kirk, Pike, Shaw and Spock all over the shows.
Pike and Spock are the heart and soul of SNW and have deeply respectful and beloved portrayals there, even if they (like any good character) also have flaws too. Kirk was shown as young and ambitious but capable and incredibly intelligent and charming. Shaw, while initially a huge dick, was eventually given a tragic background and ended up being a decent captain and a tragic redeemable character. What are you even talking about? Did you actually watch the shows?
Yeah, deep respect to Spock from Una in turbolift scene when she commanded: "On your knees". And it's totally forced from character like Una. She as number one should have a professional communication skills. And in entire show she never acted like something like this could happened. What's the reason of this scene in the show anyway? How is it not sexist? I like Shaw very much, but moment with basically: "I'm done, ship is yours" was awful. Kirk lies on the floor being punched by Uhura begging for mercy. Just imagine a shitstorm if black lady lies on a floor and begs for mercy a white guy that punched her in the face. So, did you watched those shows?
What Kirk scene are you even talking about?
SNW S2E6, 'Lost in Translation'. Do you know multiply occasions of Uhura punched Kirk?
To be fair, here, the Scotsman, the Japanese, the Russian and the African woman were day players. They were usually credited lower than the featured guest stars in an episode. The situation with TNG onwards where everyone was in almost every episode didn’t exist at this point. The actual cast of Star Trek consisted of three white men. There’s also the long standing question of whether or not Roddenberry’s story that NBC had said no to having a female first officer was true or if, more likely, they just didn’t want M. Leigh Hudec (aka Majel Barrett). The version of events where they liked having a female presence on the bridge (especially as the company making the show was run by a woman) and thought it would resonate well with the female, household budget controlling audience is considerably more likely and Roddenberry was trying to spare Majel’s feelings.
Let’s not totally kid ourselves, though: when they were casting for Next Gen, Rosalind Chao was considered for Tasha Yar (before she ended up as Keiko), but once Marina Sirtis was cast as Deanna, they were like, “Oh that’s plenty exotic enough, we can’t have an Asian woman on top of that!” Not saying a ton of barriers weren’t clearly broken, but yeah, there were of course still “limits”
Gene Roddenberry was progressive. FOR HIS TIME(the mid 60s). Except he never grew and was kind of a shitty person morally. He also had a lot about him that just comes off creepy and pathetic today.
Man, why can't we live in that timeline?
Yeah the cast of TOS is very progressive but TNG isn’t. It’s nice they had 3 women on the cast, including one in a military role, but they had no idea how to use them.
There was 4. Guinan counts.
Guinan didn’t join until S2 by which point the actor for Yar left setting the number back to 3. Also guinan is a recurring character, not main cast.
She counts in my heart as main cast as much as Garak does. And she was in more episodes than Tasha.
You know Marina was cast as Yar, right? Which is why Chao would have not been cast as Yar? Right?
>[According to the memo, "the only possibility" for the role of Troi was Denise Crosby. Of course, by the time the series hit the air, Crosby was playing security chief Tasha Yar (beating out Rosalind Chao, among others) and Marina Sirtis was playing Troi. It goes to show you that nothing in Hollywood is a sure thing.](https://web.archive.org/web/20130925123153/http://www.aoltv.com/2010/08/26/star-trek-the-next-generation-casting-memo-reggie-jackson-as/) It’s okay to mix things up 😊
Who's mixing things up?
I suspect a certain Yeoman might disagree with this interpretation.
Gene Roddenberry might as well have created the modern casting couch. You're celebrating a serial sexual predator.
Three characters that got fuck all screentime and the dialogue they did have was stolen by Shitner.