What I've got is the new releases with the enhanced special effects - I'll comment on these as best I can, shame I haven't got the originals to compare and contrast, but such is life. I put up the "spoiler" just on the off chance that there's someone here that hasn't seen all these a million times - you never know, I suppose.
The Baron said:
All I will say to that is that anyone who geuinely believes that women are "more easily and more deeply terrified, generating more sheer horror than the male of the species" hasn't known the same women - or for that matter, men - that I have.
No, I haven't known the same women that you have, Baron, but I have numbers on my side.
During the years I was a cop, the district in which I worked would officers would routinely be dispatched on call-for-service that went like this:
"The complainant states that someone is ringing the doorbell/knocking on the front door and the complainant doesn't know who it is."
Always the mysterious bell-ringer had departed before the officers arrived at the complanant's house. In fact, most of the time, the complainant knew that the person had gone even before calling the police. But, by gum, the police were needed there, anyway. And as fast as they could get there.
These calls came into the district at a rate of about nine-to-twelve times a week. There were twelve districts, so that would be between 108-to-144 calls of that nature per week for the entire city. For the whole year, that would be approximately 5,640-to-7,690 calls of "Someone is ringing my doorbell and I don't know who it is!"
I, myself, responded to approximately 300 of those type a calls every year. And, mind you, the whole basis for the complainant's call was that the person knocking on the door or ringing the bell was unknown. When I arrived and spoke to the complainant, it was never that the person then tried to force the door or a window, or started walking around the house. The person had simply rung or knocked, then departed.
Here's the thing about this that goes to the statement I made above:
Out of all those "Someone is ringing my doorbell" calls that I answered, during my whole time as a cop, more than six years, only two of them ever came from male complainants. The others all came from female complainants.
A simple thing of someone unknown ringing the doorbell then leaving had these women so upset that they felt they had to call the police. Sometimes, it really wasn't that the person outside was even unknown. Often, I'd ask the complainant what the person looked like, and the complainant would respond, "I don't know. I didn't look out the window to see who it was."
"So," I would ask the complainant in these instances, "how did you know the person ringing the bell was a stranger?"
As I said, I only noted two men calling about this in my whole time as a cop. But, of course, cops compare notes, and all of the other officers in the city had the same experience. Many of them couldn't even remember a time when a man had called about a mysterious doorbell-ringer.
(I also checked with the contacts I still have on the police department, just so this post would be topical. Nothing about these calls has changed; they are virtually all from women.)
So you have an essentially non-threatening situation which, when it occurs to men (except for an insignificant number), they do not call the police, but when it happens to women, they call for the police and when we arrive, are almost always unnerved or even fearful over it. Despite the fact that the "threat" is gone.
This certainly fits the description of "more easily and more deeply terrified" to me.
Now, to be sure, I know ladies with the grit of a regiment of Marines, and if they would have called the police about such a thing, it would be to report, "Someone I don't know just rang my bell and I put three rounds through the door. Would you send a couple of officers over to collect the body?"
But women like that, just as with the men, didn't call us when some unknown person rang their doorbell. They either dealt with it themselves or if the person went away, ignored it.
So, no, Baron, I don't know the women you know, but I knew hundreds of women that got scared enough to yell for the police just because their doorbells rang.
As I said, certainly not all females are like that, but, in general, women do tend to be more fearful and more quickly so, then men. I saw hundreds of examples of it.
Interesting as always, Commander. I do wonder, however, how much of that comes down to women being more willing than men to admit when they're scared. I can only speak for myself, but there have been plenty of times when I've been scared smurfless, but would have been even more horrified to have to make the public admission of it that calling the cops would be.
The Baron said:
27)I love the look on Shatner's face when the tribbles fall on him.
After the avalanche a couple more dribble out. I like to imagine the stangehands off-screen happily throwing them at Shatner.
I wish I'd watched the cartoon series last time I had an opportunity.
The Baron said:
I do wonder, however, how much of that comes down to women being more willing than men to admit when they're scared.
Here again, it goes back to the model I presented.
The males in the same circumstance---"someone is ringing my doorbell and I don't know who it is"---might have felt fear and been unwilling to show it. But that unwillingness led them to making the proper response.
In terms of personal safety, there is no reason to call the police for protection if the only event involved is a possible stranger ringing your doorbell or knocking on your door, then leaving. (I.e., there are no amplifying factors, such as the person is testing your doors and windows to gain entry or continues to lurk about your home.)
Therefore, not calling the police is the more measured reaction.
One thing I've noticed is that when it comes to men and women who are too afraid to do the intelligent thing or the necessary thing in a situation, only women feel that being afraid justifies their failure to take the necessary or intelligent action.
This whole "someone is ringing my doorbell" example I've brought up many times, usually at gatherings, and by the time I get to this point---when I've shown that it's an overreaction to call the police when there was no overt threat and most of the time, there isn't even a description of the person at the door---there are always women present who defend the female complainants. "But they were afraid of who that person might have been!" is the defiant argument. "That's why they called the police, because they were afraid."
In other words, being afraid was a perfectly reasonable justification for overreacting by calling the police. That's what the women claim.
You won't hear a man say that.
Certainly, there are men whose fear causes them to overreact, keeps them from doing the intelligent or necessary thing. But the difference is those men are ashamed of giving in to their fear. They don't consider it a respectable justification.
Again, to reassert, not all women are "more easily and deeply terrified" than men---I've seen some women unhesitatingly square off against opponents twice their size and weight. But in general, they are.
George Poague said:
If movies went back to showing black people rolling dice, eating watermelon and trembling in fear of ghosts, would that please some of the people here?
Who knows, they might call it "refreshingly candid."
Perhaps. If reductio ad absurdum is what one is going for.
Commander, I agree with the Baron, that the comment from that Star Trek episode, is sexist by today's standards. I think that back in the late 1960s, that statement wouldn't raise more than a few eyebrows. I appreciate that your personal experience gives you a different perspective on the matter, but that doesn't change my opinion - I agree with Bob, and disagree with you.
That said, I could not imagine for a moment that your opinion on this would mean that you would ever support - or even wish to see - vile racist depictions of blacks, or any other group, in movies or any other form of entertainment. It is an impossible leap of logic for me, frankly unthinkable.
That's something I don't recall them addressing on these shows - how do the rank and file types join Starfleet?
In the military officers and enlisted all go through training. Sometimes this training will be in different units on the same base. They all could have gone to Star Fleet, just not all trained to become officers. Obviously a Transporter Chief has to have significant training.
I gather Enterprise addressed the issue more directly, but since finding out would most likely involve actually watching Enterprise.
I did watch Enterprise, but thought it had a lot of problems. Not the least of these was that they appeared to have most of the technology that was in the later ships even though it was IIRC two hundred years earlier. This makes it sound like their science was basically stagnant for 200 years.
Stereotypes can be offensive to anyone, regardless of who they are. Even white males, like yours truly, can be offended by racism, sexism, and similar behaviour.
I still don't see the correlation between disagreeing that one line from a television show from the 1960s is sexist, and wishing to see the return of racist stereotypes depicted in popular entertainment.
ELANN OF TROYIUS is a sci-fi variation on "The Taming Of The Shrew". It features France Nuyen (who was in SOUTH PACIFIC !) as a spoiled, ill-tempered brat in a woman's body, wearing revealing, HOT outfits, who has been ordered by her people to marry the leader of her planet's enemies, in order to prevent a mutually-destructive war. Assigned the job of "familiarizing" her with her future husband's culture, is Ambassador Petri, played by Jay Robinson (forever remembered as the Emperor Caligula in THE ROBE and its sequel DEMETRIUS AND THE GLADIATORS).
After Elann stabs Petri in the back for entering her quarters without permission, Kirk decides to take over Petri's job. It's a toss-up which is more dangerous-- having daggers hurled in his direction, or Elann using her tears, which act as a powerful, indelible love potion, to enslave Kirk to her will. She suggests he can use the Enterprise to destroy the enemy planet, so there need be no marriage, and in gratitude, her people will make Kirk ruler of the entire star system. "What kind of a mind could even conceive of such a thing?", he asks, in a half-dazed state.
This episode is actually a stylistic follow-up to JOURNEY TO BABEL. They pick up people at the beginning, spend most of the story travelling to their destination, and are stalked by an enemy ship bent on their destruction, cued in by a spy on board. In this case, the spy is one of Elann's boydguards, who was in love with her and angry when she became engaged to someone else. The enemy ship this time belongs to the Klingons. And for the FIRST time (in production order, anyway), we finally get to see what a Klingon Battle Cruiser looks like! Well, not really. AMT came out with model kits of The Enterprise and The Klingon Battle Cruiser during the summer break between the 2nd & 3rd seasons. AND, blueprints of both ships appeared in Gene Roddenberry's book, THE MAKING OF STAR TREK, which came out about the same time. So I'd seen the Klingon ship in 2 DIFFERENT places, before it ever appeared on the show! As a kid, this gave me the false impression that it had appeared on the show during the 1st or 2nd seasons-- when, it hadn't. Crazy!
To add to the confusion, while filmed 2nd, ELANN was aired 13th!!! And, the Klingon ship appeared in 2 other episodes that both aired before it. In the first of these, THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT, the design was being used by Romulans. So the 1st time TV audiences actually saw the Klingon ship onscreen, it was the Romulans using it. AUGH!!!
Oddly enough, as soon as Kirk falls under Elann's spell, she starts acting much nicer. Perhaps the spell works both ways, and the person who "casts" it also falls under its influence at the same time? As a result, near the end, we actually have more sympathy for her than could have been imagined when it started. Especially as, just like in THIS SIDE OF PARADISE, Kirk's love for his ship over-rides the outside influence.
Fred Steiner wrote new music for this one, most notably that heard during the battle sequence near the end.
I decided to skip THE PARADISE SYNDROME, as I never liked that one. (I hate "amnesia" stories.)
THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT is infamous for having been inspired by the real-life "Pueblo Incident", wherein a US ship was captured by North Korea and accused of spying. Here, Kirk, acting erratically for several weeks, orders the Enterprise into Romulan space, where, within minutes, they're surrounded by 3 Klingon ships-- manned by Romulans, of course. (Legend has it, they couldn't find the prop for the Romulan ship-- or, it got destroyed. And they were too cheap to build a new one. Too bad AMT didn't also put out a Romulan Bird Of Prey model kit, HMMM???)
It's a funny thing. In production order, this comes right after THE PARADISE SYNDROME. In that story, Kirk has amnesia and is missing for MONTHS, during which time he fell in love, got married and was going to have child. But the woman and baby were both killed, he got his memory back, and was totally heartbroken. So seeing Kirk act irrationally, shortly after all that, would have actually made some sense, and been more convincing. But, typical of NBC, this episode was aired just BEFORE the other one, rather than just after it. OY!!!
This has some scenes I find very entertaining. Like when Spock tells the beautiful female Romulan commanding office (Joanne Linville) that Kirk ordered the Enterprise into the Neutral Zone "on his own initiative and his craving for glory." Kirk's response: "You traitor-- I'll KILL you!! KILL YOU!!!!!" Spock continues: "He is NOT sane."
Then McCoy examines Kirk, declares him unfit for duty, at which Spock is ready to assume command. While McCoy then begins ranting at Spock as usual, Kirk tries to attack Spock-- and winds up on the floor, following a very peculiar move on Spock's part. "What did you do? WHAT DID YOU DO?????" "I was unprepared for his attack. I instinctively used-- the Vulcan Death Grip." "Your instincts are accurate as always, Spock. The Captain is DEAD!"
Gee, only 4 episodes in, and already for the 2nd time one of the regulars has been KILLED! Of course, Chekov got better... we can't really believe Kirk is really dead... can we?
Back on the Enterprise, Christine sees Kirk's eyes open, and screams her head off. Yep. It was all an act. And, as Christine puts it, "There's NO SUCH THING as a Vulcan Death Grip!" With her interest in a certain first officer, she'd know. I have to say, this is the 2nd episode in a row where Majel Barrett is showing signs of GREATLY improved acting skill. I never really noticed it before, but she seems to be getting better by leaps and bounds. I bet she was taking acting classes while the show was in production. She seems so much more relaxed and "natural" by this point. Also, they changed her hair so she doesn't look like some LOST IN SPACE android or something.
So, McCoy turns Kirk into a Romulan, Kirk STEALS the cloaking device, Scotty installs it, Spock is beamed back (along with the Romulan Commander, who Spock was in the process of SEDUCING!!!), and after hitting WARP 9 (I thought it couldn't go that fast?) Scotty gets the thing to work, and the Enterprise just... fades away.
D.C. Fontana wrote this, so you'd expect it to be free of continuity problems. But right from the very beginning, I'm bugged by the way they seem to refer to the Romulan Cloaking Device as something brand-new, as if it HADN'T been used extensively in the 1st-season story BALANCE OF TERROR. Perhaps this was an improved version-- one that didn't leave any subtle trails that could be followed, as seen in the earlier episode? They did say near the end that even the Romulans could not track a ship using the Cloaking Device.
I'm curious to know what changes may have been made to this script. From what I read, without Roddenberry in charge of the show, network interference led to a LOT of rewrites over the course of the entire 3rd season. In every case, scripts that started out intelligent were dumbed down, changed, altered, CORRUPTED, and stupidified into near-unintelligibleness. Among the casualties were THE WAY TO EDEN, THE CLOUD MINDERS, and THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT. Apprarently, and this goes all the way back to when this was first-run, the original intent of this story was somewhat different. And a lot of fans were deeply offended that Kirk, The Enterprise, and the Federation, were clearly acting like THE BAD GUYS here. But because they are "the good guys", they were allowed to get away with it. YES, they WERE spying. And the story tells us, THEY WERE RIGHT TO DO SO. But does this conflict with the morality of most previous episodes? And did anyone at NBC, or working on the show, care, one way or the other?
I thought Joanne Linville would have made a GREAT Catwoman. Not only the face, but that voice. WOW.
Alexander Courage was credited this time, and wrote some cool new music, including the staccatto Romulan Battle Cruiser cue, and the more quiet, eerie "Romulan Commander" theme (love theme?).
I think I may have jumped around in my comments from time to time, and if I have mentioned an episode before it was reviewed, or discussed, I appologize. I agree we should take them in order. (But it does seem like there are more possible orders than I was ever aware of. Broadcast....production...and script preparationg. But who knew?!)