|
Post by szaleniec on May 29, 2009 13:43:45 GMT -5
Does a political screed about a film belong here or over in Entertainment? Mods, feel free to move this post. According to James P. Pinkerton of Fox News, in an article that's one of the crazier things I've seen come out of Fox (think about that statement for a moment), the message we should take from Star Trek is that military imperialism with a side order of fundamentalism and Zionism is the way forward. I would have submitted this column to the main page, but it's too hard to find one short excerpt that sums up its utter brain-melting insanity. So here it is. The guy seems to be shoehorning Star Trek into every standard neocon talking point, as though he's on a mission to make Gene Roddenberry spin in his grave so vigorously he knocks the Earth out of its orbit. Apparently if Israel has deflector shields, then Iran will think twice before committing suicide by attacking a client state of the world's only superpower. Yeah.
|
|
|
Post by Vene on May 29, 2009 13:54:48 GMT -5
Wow is that full of stupid.
Also, this bugs me Um, idiot, for a force field to even have an influence on the physical, it must be physical. Granted, it appears to be more energy based, but virtual is not the correct term at all.
He also seems to be bawing that scientists are lazy bastard and he wants a teleporter and warp drive NOW. Just like a spoiled kid.
Oh hell no, if there is one place we don't need those kooks it's in technological and scientific fields.
I though he wrote more fantasy. I realize that sci-fi and fantasy are similar, but the Narnia series is not where you want to go for technology.
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on May 29, 2009 13:55:21 GMT -5
Uh.....
Gene Roddenberry was cremated and shot into space, there is no spinning in his grave. Although I haven't seen the movie, I know the director was not interested in Roddenberry or the original series. Also being in charge of Lost, makes me think I might wait for the video before I bother putting cash out for it.
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on May 29, 2009 13:57:03 GMT -5
Uh..... Gene Roddenberry was cremated and shot into space, there is no spinning in his grave. Point taken. How the fuck did I forget that? OK, read that remark as being even more figurative than I intended.
|
|
|
Post by peanutfan on May 29, 2009 14:12:38 GMT -5
Wobbling in his orbit?
Anyway...
Has anyone really questioned that the Federation as presented is an idealized socialist state? Everyone has the necessities of life, so everyone is free to pursue only those things that interest them; a citizen's worth is measured by their contribution to the society rather than their wealth.
|
|
|
Post by antichrist on May 29, 2009 14:21:10 GMT -5
That was the original Roddenberry idea, money didn't even exist and anything you wanted could be poofed into existence (as long as computer knew what the hell you were talking about). Can anyone shed light about the federation in the movie?
|
|
|
Post by Bezron on May 29, 2009 14:35:10 GMT -5
The Federation doesn't really seem to be present in this movie, except as an academy and military force. They may address it in later movies, but this one was all about the action and establishing a new Kirk/Enterprise timeline.
|
|
|
Post by ironbite on May 29, 2009 15:16:32 GMT -5
So basically a Fox news style idiot is taking things from Star Trek he really shouldn't be?
Ironbite-excuse me I'm gonna go find a way to hang myself with a wireless mouse.
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on May 29, 2009 23:20:09 GMT -5
Why don't these people understand the difference between the science fiction in an old TV series and the real science going on in labs everyday?
|
|
|
Post by renaissanceblonde on May 29, 2009 23:29:58 GMT -5
Because reality has a liberal bias?
|
|
|
Post by Dr. Waldorf X on May 30, 2009 0:50:52 GMT -5
Dammit Jim, its a movie, not a message!
|
|
|
Post by askold on May 30, 2009 4:11:40 GMT -5
Most of that article sounded like an 10year old kid who has just seen the movie: "OMG they got lazer beams and photon torpedoes! Wouldn't it be cool if we had stuff like that! ZOOM BOOM POW!" Well actually he says: "Why doesn’t the U.S. have such safekeeping, peacekeeping technology? Maybe the answer is that our leaders have not had enough faith. That’s right, not enough faith. They didn’t see that the futuristic techno-wonders depicted in sci-fi were signs. They didn’t see that these wonders were advance indicators of miracles that could be, if only we could envision them–and then get to work building them." But praying for an laser cannon just sounds kinda silly. By the way, am I the only one who wishes that this guy would read about warhammer 40k. I mean the inqusition would probably seem like a good idea to him. And since he mentions that all knowledge comes from god and seems to believe scientist need more faith, then what would be better than techpriests who worship technology... Because reality has a liberal bias? ;D
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on May 30, 2009 7:47:39 GMT -5
Even in the new movie, we as humans serve alongside members of other races proudly. I don't know if that's what conservatives want, since they're so concerned about borders. "can we trust Vulcans with our secure information?"
|
|
|
Post by szaleniec on May 30, 2009 9:12:18 GMT -5
They'd be worried that their captain was a secret Klingon.
|
|
|
Post by katz on May 30, 2009 14:09:43 GMT -5
Even in the new movie, we as humans serve alongside members of other races proudly. I don't know if that's what conservatives want, since they're so concerned about borders. "can we trust Vulcans with our secure information?" And in the newest film, Kirk shows his acceptance of other species despite his rural upbringing with his willingness to bang a green chick.
|
|