*st2009

my grandmother hasn’t seen twok in 20 years yet she still remembered who saavik was and the gristly scenes with the ceti eels 

and she couldn’t remember anything other than the fact that there was a guy with face marks “and machines” in st2009, which she saw much more recently

and if that doesn’t explain the difference between the two movies idk what does

i was skimming through the st2009 novelization a few nights ago + adf had the kids that were bullying spock call amanda a whore before they said anything else + spock didn’t react ? but he got really mad when they called sarek a traitor … and i was … so offended … if you think spock would throw punches for his dad before he would for his mother then you are wrong ? spock loves amanda grayson w/ all of his heart but would almost definitely sell sarek to satan for one (1) corn chip 

anonymous asked:

Hey! so I was wondering why you dislike the AOS universe so much? Personally I really enjoyed the movies but i would like to know where you're coming from :)

i’ll copy-and-paste what i said earlier, and add a sprinkling of some stuff i should have said then but didn’t.

in st2009 and Into Darkness, women have no rank stripes on their uniforms; they all appeared to be ensigns (even uhura, a lieutenant). men, however, displayed their rank clearly. however, in Beyond, the problem is fixed and women have rank stripes and are addressed by rank, the same as men are.

in st2009, you have the idea of a womanising kirk, which is not only inaccurate to the original series (here’s another entire essay on that) but insulting to me, y’know, as a woman – it seemed like having kirk sleep with gaila only served to make gaila “the slut” and show her and uhura in their panties. oh, but because we had a shirtless chrispi there too, it’s all equal, right? mmmm, except it’s not, because we all know that straight male viewers (and that movie was made for straight male viewers and straight male viewers only) are gonna jack off to the shirtless green lady and zoe saldana almost-naked. but female viewers are not nearly going to salivate so much over 30 seconds of chris’s chest. why? we’ve not been conditioned to accept the other sex as our toys.

people have said the following about st2009:

“an over-abundantly high emphasis on action & spectacle over story & character, two things Star Trek is almost exclusively known for” (x)

“I genuinely still believe that the 2009 Star Trek is one of the stupidest movies I have seen in my entire life. That movie is awful on almost every conceivable level. The plot, the structure of the film, the characterization, the action set pieces (…) it’s supposed to be a reinvention of characters that you grew up emotionally invested in. And it felt like, well, this is not Star Trek.“ (x)

“The new film’s key plot points — like a fatherless farm boy challenged by an elder to leave his home and venture into space, and an entire planet being destroyed halfway through — were completely derivative of Star Wars.” (x)

my twelve-year-old sister said “i liked [the reboot] at first, but when i saw the old ones, i didn’t like it so much. it’s really different from the old ones, and i didn’t like uhura and i didn’t really like spock and i didn’t really like any of the characters. the uniforms were different also. i just didn’t think they did the characters well enough. and it didn’t even have a plot, except destroy the romulans, y’know.” get rekt by a 12-year-old, AOS.


boy howdy are there problems with Into Darkness too. CAROL MARCUS, okay? and i’m not just talking about the shirtless scene. 

Abrams, the director, didn’t even see the giant objectification in it. he stated “it was a sort of balance. There’s a scene earlier where [Kirk]’s not dressed either, so I thought it was a trade-off.” HE THOUGHT IT WAS A WHAT? He then he showed a deleted scene of benkydonk cumbutt showering. right, because that’s what female viewers want to see??! jesus f. christ! there was no reason to show a woman in her underwear and it made kirk into some sort of peeping tom. like what the fuck. i’d pay Actual Money for the next reboot movie to include some version of the the “a woman?” “a crewman” scene from TOS. also, the scene where kirk wasn’t dressed was just after he had a threesome with two (ALSO NAKED!!) female aliens. and that disgusted me because of how unnecessary it was. i keep coming back to the bra scene, though. like, TOS kirk did have his faults; that’s undeniable. but misogyny was not one of them. 

the only episode (in three whole seasons) where TOS kirk has a one-night-stand was, I think, Elaan of Troyius. but in AOS we have two casual-sex scenes (one of them a threesome) in as many movies. not that one-night-stands are bad, as long as they’re respectful, but they didn’t seem… respectful. i have sincere difficulty making this AOS chris pine character any version of the earnest and sometimes goofy but exponentially more respectful shatner kirk. in Charlie X, he said “You go slow, be gentle. It’s no one-way street — you know how you feel and that’s all. It’s how the girl feels, too. Don’t press.” cut to AOS kirk flirtatiously chirping “HELLO LADIES” at two total strangers at starfleet academy. twice.

in TOS, kirk remembered all the names of all his exes, even ones he hadn’t seen in years. tell me, would st2009/Into Darkness kirk remember the names of all the alien chicks he supposedly banged when he doesn’t even know who Christine Chapel is?

(by the way, why isn’t Chapel in the reboot? too many women? why isn’t Janice Rand there for more than half-a-second of her hairdo running into the transporter room?)

i also disliked how in Wrath of Khan, the movie Into Darkness took all its good moments from, the plot revolved around dr. carol marcus’s wicked-ass invention, the Genesis Torpedo. in Into Darkness, it revolved around her dad, admiral marcus. it was suddenly about a Man. all of star trek was suddenly about Men. not that TOS was a feminist glory – but the point of a reboot is to improve upon the flaws of what came before it, and AOS did not.

there is so much action in the reboot movies, but only in the third one do we see some character, some heart, and some of what I loved about TOS. “we change; we have to, or we spend the rest of our lives fighting the same battles.” “I think you underestimate humanity.” both of those are very, very kirk moments. i know TOS couldn’t have been created in the modern day, for good reasons (period-typical sexism, which is now condemned) and for bad (they had an episode addressing fuckin’ contraception, for pete’s sake, which couldn’t air now because it’s still too ‘controversial’). but i feel like if more of TOS’s thoughtful reasoning had made it into the reboot movies, even in a diluted form, we might have had something really, really special.

instead, we have explosions, brightly-colored warp trails, and carol marcus in a push-up bra.

anonymous asked:

hi! I've always seen ppl saying that jj abrams is a bad person but i never rlly found anything telling why... i was just wondering what he did? i mean honestly i don't know much abt the guy + i could care less abt him i just kinda wanna know. (u don't have to answer if u don't want to! ik u have been getting a lotta stuff like this)

in all honesty i think the ‘fuck you j.j. abrams’ sentiment is essentially the fandom’s pure pissed-off energy at how the reboots have been bigoted (against women in particular). i am not sure – and have never been sure – exactly how much of it is j.j. abrams’s specific fault. in fact, i think a lot of the blame should be on the writers – but i’ll give a general overview of the concerns i’ve seen expressed.

in st2009 and Into Darkness, the two films directed by J.J. Abrams, women have no rank tripes on their uniforms; they all appeared to be ensigns (even uhura, a lieutenant). men, however, displayed their rank clearly. this was probably not abrams’s fault, but in Beyond, a movie he did not direct, the problem is fixed and women have rank stripes and are addressed by rank, the same as men are.

in st2009, you have the idea of a womanising kirk, which is not only inaccurate to the original series (here’s another entire essay on that) but insulting to me, y’know, as a woman – it seemed like having kirk sleep with gaila only served to make gaila “the slut” and show her and uhura in their panties. oh, but because we had a shirtless chrispi there too, it’s all equal, right? mmmm, except it’s not, because we all know that straight male viewers (and that movie was made for straight male viewers and straight male viewers only) are gonna jack off to the shirtless green lady and zoe saldana almost-naked. but female viewers are not nearly going to salivate so much over 30 seconds of chris’s chest. why? we’ve not been conditioned to accept the other sex as our toys.

people have said the following about st2009:

“an over-abundantly high emphasis on action & spectacle over story & character, two things Star Trek is almost exclusively known for” (x)

“I genuinely still believe that the 2009 Star Trek is one of the stupidest movies I have seen in my entire life. That movie is awful on almost every conceivable level. The plot, the structure of the film, the characterization, the action set pieces (…) it’s supposed to be a reinvention of characters that you grew up emotionally invested in. And it felt like, well, this is not Star Trek.“ (x)

“The new film’s key plot points — like a fatherless farm boy challenged by an elder to leave his home and venture into space, and an entire planet being destroyed halfway through — were completely derivative of Star Wars.” (x)

my twelve-year-old sister is no professional literary critic. she saw st2009 and loved it, rated it 10/10. a couple weeks later, i showed her The Voyage Home and a couple episodes of TOS. after that, she told me “i liked [the reboot] at first, but when i saw the old ones, i didn’t like it so much. it’s really different from the old ones, and i didn’t like uhura and i didn’t really like spock and i didn’t really like any of the characters. the uniforms were different also. i just didn’t think they did the characters well enough. and it didn’t even have a plot, except destroy the romulans, y’know.” get rekt by a 12-year-old, AOS.


boy howdy are there problems with Into Darkness too. CAROL MARCUS, okay? and i’m not just talking about the shirtless scene. as it happens, abrams was not the person who wrote that into canon – that was Damon Lindelof, who apologised for the moment with a misspelling of misogynistic. gee, thanks.

Abrams didn’t even see the giant objectification in it. he stated “it was a sort of balance. There’s a scene earlier where [Kirk]’s not dressed either, so I thought it was a trade-off.” HE THOUGHT IT WAS A WHAT? He then he showed a deleted scene of benkydonk cumbutt showering. right, because that’s what female viewers want to see??! jesus f. christ! there was no reason to show a woman in her underwear and it made kirk into some sort of peeping tom. like what the fuck. i’d pay Actual Money for the next reboot movie to include some version of the the “a woman?” “a crewman” scene from TOS. also, the scene where kirk wasn’t dressed was just after he had a threesome with two (ALSO NAKED!!) female aliens. and that disgusted me. like, TOS kirk did have his faults; that’s undeniable. but misogyny was not one of them. the only episode (in three whole seasons) where he has a one-night-stand was, I think, Elaan of Troyius. but in AOS we have two casual-sex scenes in as many movies. i have sincere difficulty making this AOS chris pine character any version of the earnest and sometimes goofy but exponentially more respectful shatner kirk. in Charlie X, he said “You go slow, be gentle. It’s no one-way street — you know how you feel and that’s all. It’s how the girl feels, too. Don’t press.”

in TOS, kirk remembered all the names of all his exes, even ones he hadn’t seen in years. tell me, would st2009/Into Darkness kirk remember the names of all the alien chicks he supposedly banged when he doesn’t even know who Christine Chapel is?

(by the way, why isn’t Chapel in the reboot? too many women? why isn’t Janice Rand there for more than half-a-second of her hairdo running into the transporter room?)

i guess another major problem was that abrams didn’t even like star trek, yet was given the reins to reboot it into your typical sci-fi action sequences with women mostly shunted to the side or given the job of kissing spock to make him seem more loving and human. He said this about TOS:

“Star Trek always felt like a silly, campy thing.”

yikes. not the kind of person i’d hire to reboot the iconic franchise to a worldwide audience.

he continued with “I remember appreciating it, but feeling like I didn’t get it. I felt it didn’t give me a way in. There was a captain, there was this first officer, they were talking a lot about adventures and not having them as much as I would’ve liked.” (x)

he also said “It always felt too philosophical for me.” (x)

call me weird, but star trek’s philosophy is precisely what i love about it, and i think it is so relevant to the modern day – they even addressed fuckin’ contraception, for pete’s sake. if any of TOS’s thoughtful reasoning had made it into the reboot movies, even in a diluted and more uncontroversial form, we might have had something really, really special.

instead, we have explosions, brightly-colored warp trails, and carol marcus in a push-up bra.

beauty-grace-outer-space  asked:

AOS Jimothy.

general opinion: fall in a hole and die | don’t like them (STID) | eh (st2009) | they’re fine I guess | like them! (Beyond) | love them | actual love of my life
hotness level: get away from me | meh | neutral | theoretically hot but not my type | pretty hot | gorgeous! | 10/10 would bang
hogwarts house: gryffindor | slytherin | ravenclaw | hufflepuff
best quality: his loyalty to his crew and his faith in humanity.
worst quality: he’s, at first, a ladies’ man? and i hate it because it’s inaccurate to TOS and also irksome to me, as a female-ish person. i mean maybe it’s just because he’s depressed but boo hoo cry me a river white boy!! i like him in beyond, though, because he is loving and unselfish
ship them with: spock. duh
brotp them with: also spock, actually? because in AOS i think they need to have their friendship more developed and fleshed-out so we can see more of them being more than allies/accomplices.
needs to stay away from: j.j. abrams
misc. thoughts: he redeemed himself so much in beyond!! and i ended up really rooting for him. when he said “i think you underestimate humanity” i honestly felt like we, the star trek fans, had our kirk back. and i am so grateful for that.

anonymous asked:

Oh I meant we'd finally have some spirk in our lives in aos, we have so much of it in tos! I really wish they'd chosen someone other than jarjar abrams to direct the reboots.

SAME SAME SAAAAAAAAAAME but i’m not sure if st2009 was more badly-directed or badly-written tbh

i’ve heard good thinga about Beyond??? so i’m hoping???

youtube

the most beautiful blooper that ever was