Alice Eve Says She’s Proud Of Controversial Star Trek Underwear Scene
Bless her soul. In this world of extreme woke-ness, we definitely need more of her kind.
https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/ali ... ear-scene/
https://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/ali ... ear-scene/
Frankly I find it a silly SCENE to be proud of as basically it DOES just objectify her for the sequence in the name of humor... but that isn't what she's saying. One is free and should be free to be proud of working out and getting their bodies in shape, and in a perfect world frankly wouldn't need to feel ashamed for showing it.
It's ALSO a silly scene to be OFFENDED by. She's not the first female character to be objectified for a scene, many of which have never gone denounced against, nor is there any shortage of men who are objectified for scenes in television and film particularly in recent years with the Superhero stuff. Kirk's a red blooded man and let's not pretend like William Shatner's Kirk was anything else... it's true to the character if nothing else!
I expect if there's any sort of REAL outrage at this sort of thing still, it's somewhat in the vein of the very REAL fear of whether or not the director at the time was being a Harvey Weinstein or a Michael Bay... and at least to the present there's not been any sexual misconduct complaints lobbied at Abrahams and in all things the benefit of the doubt ought be extended lest any kind of evidence show itself. Especially now that the movie industry finally seems to be working out the kinks of this particular form of gender discrepancy anyway, the less tolorated the casting couch becomes then the less and less a scene like this should probably offend anyone outside of just like... you know... the 'prudes'... but the prudes will always be offended by the human body anyway.
Finally, as to the slight to STAR TREK this scene may have represented... well... frankly the Star Trek remakes had done so much outside the traditional Trek wheel box by the time this scene EVER came up that declaring it as something 'untrekish' was an argument absurdly late to the scene. I'm pretty sure the inclusion of Alice Eve's underwear had no impact on the films bottom line either, and that most of the people who have genuine issues with it have much better arguments to present... plus like... it was more faithful to Star Trek than most Star Trek series are! Picard and Discovery are far greater travesties than Alice Eve's underwear ever was!
It's ALSO a silly scene to be OFFENDED by. She's not the first female character to be objectified for a scene, many of which have never gone denounced against, nor is there any shortage of men who are objectified for scenes in television and film particularly in recent years with the Superhero stuff. Kirk's a red blooded man and let's not pretend like William Shatner's Kirk was anything else... it's true to the character if nothing else!
I expect if there's any sort of REAL outrage at this sort of thing still, it's somewhat in the vein of the very REAL fear of whether or not the director at the time was being a Harvey Weinstein or a Michael Bay... and at least to the present there's not been any sexual misconduct complaints lobbied at Abrahams and in all things the benefit of the doubt ought be extended lest any kind of evidence show itself. Especially now that the movie industry finally seems to be working out the kinks of this particular form of gender discrepancy anyway, the less tolorated the casting couch becomes then the less and less a scene like this should probably offend anyone outside of just like... you know... the 'prudes'... but the prudes will always be offended by the human body anyway.
Finally, as to the slight to STAR TREK this scene may have represented... well... frankly the Star Trek remakes had done so much outside the traditional Trek wheel box by the time this scene EVER came up that declaring it as something 'untrekish' was an argument absurdly late to the scene. I'm pretty sure the inclusion of Alice Eve's underwear had no impact on the films bottom line either, and that most of the people who have genuine issues with it have much better arguments to present... plus like... it was more faithful to Star Trek than most Star Trek series are! Picard and Discovery are far greater travesties than Alice Eve's underwear ever was!
Last edited by Femina 2 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Nothing wrong with fan service. Cavill spends nearly 20 minutes shirtless in Justice League and no one bitches about that.
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Everyone gets offended by everything these days. I really don't care about the movie. It's just that everyone is trying to get on the woke bandwagon these days. Many actresses wear revealing clothing to interviews, yet talk about getting offended by showing "too much skin" in movies, which is hypocritical to say the least. It's time we hear from actresses who don't care about getting on the bandwagon is all I'm saying...Femina wrote: ↑2 years agoFrankly it would be a silly SCENE to be proud of as basically it DOES just objectify her for the sequence in the name of humor... but one is free and should be free to be proud of working out and getting their bodies in shape... and shouldn't need to feel wrong for having it and in a perfect world frankly wouldn't need to feel ashamed for showing it.
It's ALSO a silly scene to be OFFENDED by. She's not the first female character to be objectified for a scene, nor is there any shortage of men who are objectified for scenes in television and film. Kirk's a red blooded man and let's not pretend like William Shatner's Kirk was anything else... it's true to the character if nothing else.
Frankly the Star Trek remakes had done so much outside the traditional Trek wheel box by the time this scene EVER came up that declaring it as something 'untrekish' was an argument absurdly late to the scene. I'm pretty sure the inclusion of this particular sequence had no impact on the films bottom line either, and that most of the people who have genuine issues with it have much better arguments to present.
This is one of this cases where I agree with you!
As I said above, this is only a problem if the director is a pervert and the fan service extends beyond the realm of the fantasy of the film and into Harvey Weinstein's pants. So long as all of the crew are on the up and up, all are willing and indeed as Alice Eve protests even PROUD of the work they've done for the scene, it's fine.
Considering there's been some distance from Into Darkness at this rate especially, and sexual misconduct tends to be brought up around this distance from the inciting incidents as well, I think it ALL THE MORE likely we can put this one to bed as anything anyone should be offended by.
The underlying fears that create what many denounce as just 'woke' behavior tend to have a basis in merit that if it's actively bothering you to hear about, probably just means that you have the luxury of being unconnected to the type of situations or behaviors they are complaining about. By which I mean for instance, if you're a male and arguing that a woman should be proud of tits and ass shots because she did a tits and ass shot that once, you probably don't fully understand the subtleties involved of what could have brought her to filming that shot, nor what politics were or were not going on behind the scenes... and even if perhaps they ONCE were, anyone who thinks they should ALWAYS stand by their previous stances on things should take a good long and hard look at juvenile behaviors they may have once possessed that they've grown up enough to have overcome or changed their opinions of. If an actress was proud to show off her boobs forty years ago, and then came to realize twenty years later that she really only did it because of the social pressure of her fellow filmmakers then she is and should be free to change her opinion on how she feels about it.brdiy wrote: ↑2 years agoEveryone gets offended by everything these days. I really don't care about the movie. It's just that everyone is trying to get on the woke bandwagon these days. Many actresses wear revealing clothing to interviews, yet talk about getting offended by showing "too much skin" in movies, which is hypocritical to say the least. It's time we hear from actresses who don't care about getting on the bandwagon is all I'm saying...
Or in other other words, if you find yourself offended by the sillies taking offence at this scene... you're being equally as silly.
*sigh* god damn it. I can just feel this thread is a powder keg right now... did you have to use the term 'woke' y'all know what you're doing.
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Let's not forget that these scenes are part of a story in a visual medium and sets up character dynamics through the story as it progresses.
If a character sees another naked or in his or her underwear in a scene that then changes the relationship of the characters through the movie. It might mean there's a shy smile or a knowing glance between the two in a later scene that speaks volumes because of what's happened. Everyone will rember the naked scene, no one will remember the passing comment or innuendo or ACTUAL ACTING that the scene may have triggered in later parts of the movie. In isolation such scenes may be gratuitous or silly but as part of the narrative they play their part.
If a scene is totally gratuitous and of no intrinsic value to the story then it's up to the actors whether they take that role or not, or fight to get the scene dropped or changed.
I'm not sure you can look back after 20 years and conclude you were pressured into it as memories are inherently unreliable. You can wake up some mornings and feel like doing something, wake up on other days and are totally disinterested in the same activity. 20 years later can you really remember accurately how you felt that day? How many of those memories are merged with dreams or thoughts you may have had over the incident since. Later regret could easily manifest itself as 'I never should have done that' to' I never wanted to do that' to 'They made me do that' and the subconscious then is convinced you were coerced into it whereas you may not have been.
If a character sees another naked or in his or her underwear in a scene that then changes the relationship of the characters through the movie. It might mean there's a shy smile or a knowing glance between the two in a later scene that speaks volumes because of what's happened. Everyone will rember the naked scene, no one will remember the passing comment or innuendo or ACTUAL ACTING that the scene may have triggered in later parts of the movie. In isolation such scenes may be gratuitous or silly but as part of the narrative they play their part.
If a scene is totally gratuitous and of no intrinsic value to the story then it's up to the actors whether they take that role or not, or fight to get the scene dropped or changed.
I'm not sure you can look back after 20 years and conclude you were pressured into it as memories are inherently unreliable. You can wake up some mornings and feel like doing something, wake up on other days and are totally disinterested in the same activity. 20 years later can you really remember accurately how you felt that day? How many of those memories are merged with dreams or thoughts you may have had over the incident since. Later regret could easily manifest itself as 'I never should have done that' to' I never wanted to do that' to 'They made me do that' and the subconscious then is convinced you were coerced into it whereas you may not have been.
How strange are the ways of the gods ...........and how cruel.
I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
Sorry, brief thread hi-jack. Speaking of acting, does anyone else thing that HDTV has allowed really superb actors to stand out more? I just finished semi-binging all three seasons of Westworld on my new 4K TV. Evan Rachel Wood is just astonishing in this series. She can do an incredible amount with barely there facial movements. I doubt television from 20 years ago would even capture some of it.
-
- Veteran Member
- Posts: 319
- Joined: 10 years ago
Good for her. We are, mind and body, products of sexual selection, and should have fun with it.
I don't get what's up with the mainstream narrative these days. It's all "all women are sexy! flaunt it!", until they actually are, and it changes to "no! put it away!". If she was unattractive, the twitterati would be all "yes queen, slay them!". The main deciding factor for whether it's OK to say that a lady is sexy, is apparently whether the lady isn't sexy. It's as if our world is being run by that guy from Sesame Street who lived in a bin.
I don't get what's up with the mainstream narrative these days. It's all "all women are sexy! flaunt it!", until they actually are, and it changes to "no! put it away!". If she was unattractive, the twitterati would be all "yes queen, slay them!". The main deciding factor for whether it's OK to say that a lady is sexy, is apparently whether the lady isn't sexy. It's as if our world is being run by that guy from Sesame Street who lived in a bin.
I generally agree that time passage muddles things... but I definitively don't believe in the philosophy that 'so and so did a thing in the past, thus they must always and forever hold by that thing ever and always!' The indication above was 'if Actress did panty shot, she should be forbidden from complaining about doing panty shots' and to me that's just a whole silly log of hogwash.tallyho wrote: ↑2 years ago20 years later can you really remember accurately how you felt that day? How many of those memories are merged with dreams or thoughts you may have had over the incident since. Later regret could easily manifest itself as 'I never should have done that' to' I never wanted to do that' to 'They made me do that' and the subconscious then is convinced you were coerced into it whereas you may not have been.
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Some sectors of Star Trek fandom have developed bizarre ideas across the decades of what "real Trek" is supposed to be and what "Gene's vision" was. Like the delusion that Star Wars fandom developed that it was all about some highbrow monomyth, heroes' journey bullshit, the Star Trek fandom developed this notion that the franchise had always stood for whatever their own abstract (often ridiculously prudish) idea of utopian progress was. The whole "ZOMG they showed her in underwear" fracas was always bizarre coming from the fans of a franchise built on this:
If the complainers were really all that concerned about sexism, what they would have been offended by in Into Darkness is the fact that Alice Eve's character has almost no impact on the actual story, not that she appears in underwear for a couple of seconds. (Old-timey Star Trek did have some quite brutal sexism going on in its storylines and there would be grounds to say that Into Darkness bears rather too much similarity to that aspect of the original series, but tellingly, most of the complainers didn't notice that.)
If the complainers were really all that concerned about sexism, what they would have been offended by in Into Darkness is the fact that Alice Eve's character has almost no impact on the actual story, not that she appears in underwear for a couple of seconds. (Old-timey Star Trek did have some quite brutal sexism going on in its storylines and there would be grounds to say that Into Darkness bears rather too much similarity to that aspect of the original series, but tellingly, most of the complainers didn't notice that.)
Check out my stories (and in some cases, books):
Amazon
Literotica
Mr. X Homepage (NEW STORiES ADDED 4/8/21)
The complainers are co-alphas. They are neither left nor right. The complainers in woke ideology are merely the church ladies of the past. The ideology to them is meaningless, just the power it wields.
BTW NotUv2 I have never heard oldie star trek fans ever complain about hot chics in star trek films. Nearly all the complaints of people like 7 of 9 and this underwear scene comes from younger next gen type fans. Older fans know Kirk had space herpes. If you watch New Voyagers and Continuing Voyages you'll see this common theme.
BTW NotUv2 I have never heard oldie star trek fans ever complain about hot chics in star trek films. Nearly all the complaints of people like 7 of 9 and this underwear scene comes from younger next gen type fans. Older fans know Kirk had space herpes. If you watch New Voyagers and Continuing Voyages you'll see this common theme.
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
X. People in this thread are agreeing with you. Can you not do the 'woke church ladies' thing again, please? You explain it in the same way in dozens of threads, over and over. Most people on this thread are - broadly - on your side here. Please do not go out of your way to make your position as irritating to agree with as humanly possible.Mr. X wrote: ↑2 years agoThe complainers are co-alphas. They are neither left nor right. The complainers in woke ideology are merely the church ladies of the past. The ideology to them is meaningless, just the power it wields.
BTW NotUv2 I have never heard oldie star trek fans ever complain about hot chics in star trek films. Nearly all the complaints of people like 7 of 9 and this underwear scene comes from younger next gen type fans. Older fans know Kirk had space herpes. If you watch New Voyagers and Continuing Voyages you'll see this common theme.
I'm explaining it so the conversation does not drift into a left/right tug of war. Its important to realize there is this third group who crap on everything regardless of ideology. The rebels, the rioters, the activists, the saviors. This discussion is LITERALLY about do-gooder saviors complaining about a non-issue and how one actress stood up for herself. A NON-ISSUE.Damselbinder wrote: ↑2 years ago
X. People in this thread are agreeing with you. Can you not do the 'woke church ladies' thing again, please? You explain it in the same way in dozens of threads, over and over. Most people on this thread are - broadly - on your side here. Please do not go out of your way to make your position as irritating to agree with as humanly possible.
If you don't want things "brought up" over and over then don't bring THESE issues up over and over. And I can point out you TOO bring things up over and over. Plenty of people bring up the same conclusions in each thread. Femina for example.
And we have those "savior" types here. That one person who keeps turning everything into racism for example.
"What' wrong with this sexy Spider Woman cover" is probably going to illicit the same responses that have always been made by YOU and EVERY person on this forum. Singling me out makes no point.
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
God Damn it.
So let's just NOT forget THAT as well shall we? It's important to realize ALL the groups... ALL of them... okay? We good. Otherwise I agree. It's pretty dumb to just complain at a thing for the sake of complaining... and that entertainment medium is one of the worst sectors of society comprised of this particular behavioral pattern.
If a woman complains that there's too many panty shots in a movie I agree that it's silly to do complain about for the sake of complaining... I also fully agree that yes there ARE people who WILL complain for the 'sake' of complaining... but we do need to bear in mind that there absolutely exist people who complain for more legitimate personal reasons. I.E. perhaps someone who found themselves pressured into a Panty Shot they wish they hadn't done. That's not rebels, rioting or activism to then say 'I regret that I was pressured to do this thing and wish I didn't have to spend the rest of my life worrying if other women are being pressured to do this thing' The fact you're notating the third group presupposes the existence of groups 1 and 2... and we don't get to question the legitimacy of those groups JUST because group three exists... all we can really do is try to deduce which group the speaker belongs to and try to come to our own opinions accordingly until and/or unless further evidence becomes available.Mr. X wrote: ↑2 years agoI'm explaining it so the conversation does not drift into a left/right tug of war. Its important to realize there is this third group who crap on everything regardless of ideology. The rebels, the rioters, the activists, the saviors.Damselbinder wrote: ↑2 years ago
X. People in this thread are agreeing with you. Can you not do the 'woke church ladies' thing again, please? You explain it in the same way in dozens of threads, over and over. Most people on this thread are - broadly - on your side here. Please do not go out of your way to make your position as irritating to agree with as humanly possible.
So let's just NOT forget THAT as well shall we? It's important to realize ALL the groups... ALL of them... okay? We good. Otherwise I agree. It's pretty dumb to just complain at a thing for the sake of complaining... and that entertainment medium is one of the worst sectors of society comprised of this particular behavioral pattern.
Let's be crystal clear here, I don't truck around creating threads for controversy around here right? I'm not the one doing that. I'm not the one putting up stuff like this and inciting the conflict by opening up the topic with all the 'triggering' phrases right up front that bring up the usual scuffles. There's an OBVIOUS unabashed quality to the topic starter just casually chucking out 'woke' like they don't know full well it's absolutely going to call down the fury like it always does, an action that's either misinformed, naïve, or else fishing. I don't go and make threads and begin them like 'Good on these mates! All these racist rednecks today are really harshin' muh vibe!' because I know full damn well that's gonna piss people off and come to nothing and generally isn't fair. I RESPOND if and when I see a statement made I don't believe should stand alone, and/or when I want to chat about some sexy superheroines with someone or else chat about movies and video games in the 'miscelanious' topics and that's about it.If you don't want things "brought up" over and over then don't bring THESE issues up over and over. And I can point out you TOO bring things up over and over. Plenty of people bring up the same conclusions in each thread. Femina for example.
Last edited by Femina 2 years ago, edited 4 times in total.
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
First heard about this Alice Eve thing on The Quartering. Good for her. She still looks fantastic, and reminds me of Natasha Henstridge.
She has a solid career, mostly in Europe but also in the US, which countless ingenues would kill to have.
MOD EDIT. ANY POST THAT MENTIONS MAO, STALINISM, NAZISM AND MARXISM ALL IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH IS UNDENIABLY TREADING ON POLITICAL GROUND. I'VE LEFT THE TOPIC-RELEVANT PARTS IN BUT LET'S LEAVE POLITICAL COMMENTARY AT THE DOOR PEOPLE.
Photos of the Star Trek lovelies are always nice (Nichelle had some nice abs on her, didn't she, back then?) but if someone
would post actual photos of Alice from that underwear scene in question, that would be very nice too, and extremely relevant to the topic.
She has a solid career, mostly in Europe but also in the US, which countless ingenues would kill to have.
MOD EDIT. ANY POST THAT MENTIONS MAO, STALINISM, NAZISM AND MARXISM ALL IN THE SAME PARAGRAPH IS UNDENIABLY TREADING ON POLITICAL GROUND. I'VE LEFT THE TOPIC-RELEVANT PARTS IN BUT LET'S LEAVE POLITICAL COMMENTARY AT THE DOOR PEOPLE.
Photos of the Star Trek lovelies are always nice (Nichelle had some nice abs on her, didn't she, back then?) but if someone
would post actual photos of Alice from that underwear scene in question, that would be very nice too, and extremely relevant to the topic.
That's where we disagree. Those "far leftists" are merely the same people who used religious extremism in the past to be the managers. They were never religious or woke or leftist, they are social managers. Woke is just the new church today, the new power base. Social managers always exist... its evolution. The saviors, heroes, activists... they aren't left or right... they are just vampires (issue parasites) that need to be dragged out of their coffins into disinfecting sunlight and exposed for the fakes they really are.
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Right I've removed the political diatribe from the above posts and it's quoted offspring.
LET'S AVOID SUCH POLITICAL COMMENTARY PLEASE
LET'S AVOID SUCH POLITICAL COMMENTARY PLEASE
How strange are the ways of the gods ...........and how cruel.
I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
I am here to help one and all enjoy this site, so if you have any questions or feel you are being trolled please contact me (Hit the 'CONTACT' little speech bubble below my Avatar).
The religious extremism is, unfortunately, very far from being in the past but I don't disagree that attempts to control people's sexuality are very much cross-spectrum, using either ideology or religion or "anti-trafficking" as an excuse for a more basic drive for control. We've certainly seen a lot of that in various attacks on sites used by sex workers.
In re: the point about the younger fans being the source of the nerdrage in this particular instance, could be. I hadn't noticed a particular pattern in the Trek boards I frequent but it's not like I've done surveys or anything. Pleased to see we're fellow fans of Star Trek: Continues, that's a truly unbelievable fan production.
Check out my stories (and in some cases, books):
Amazon
Literotica
Mr. X Homepage (NEW STORiES ADDED 4/8/21)
You like to talk a lot in an objective voice about a lot of things much more muddled and vague than they are. I do wish I had as much blind zealous certitude in the universe as you do... but it's pretty much fantasy.Mr. X wrote: ↑2 years agoThat's where we disagree. Those "far leftists" are merely the same people who used religious extremism in the past to be the managers. They were never religious or woke or leftist, they are social managers. Woke is just the new church today, the new power base. Social managers always exist... its evolution. The saviors, heroes, activists... they aren't left or right... they are just vampires (issue parasites) that need to be dragged out of their coffins into disinfecting sunlight and exposed for the fakes they really are.
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Yeah they did awesome work and it shows what can be done with a small budget. The CGI is actually pretty good. The New Voyages ones with Elvis Kirk are a bit more absurd. And both series suffer from too many "member-berries" being tossed around. However it shows that an audience can be satisfied with a small budget production.NotUv2 wrote: ↑2 years ago
In re: the point about the younger fans being the source of the nerdrage in this particular instance, could be. I hadn't noticed a particular pattern in the Trek boards I frequent but it's not like I've done surveys or anything. Pleased to see we're fellow fans of Star Trek: Continues, that's a truly unbelievable fan production.
That's why I'm not aligning this with left/right. Its just both can be polarized. Today's Antifa are yesterday's extreme right to lifers blowing up abortion clinics. In nearly all cases its the activists causing the issues, the group they claim to defend is meaningless. Same people, just a new cause to use as their fake moral high ground. Banning porn due to depravity vs objectification is meaningless.... its the same action.I don't disagree that attempts to control people's sexuality are very much cross-spectrum
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
.
Last edited by Mr. X 2 years ago, edited 1 time in total.
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Well, I wouldn't compare Antifa to today's or yesterday's extreme right -- certainly not to today's -- but certainly the distribution of assholes is complex. That's as far as I'll comment for the time being. Have a nice day.
Check out my stories (and in some cases, books):
Amazon
Literotica
Mr. X Homepage (NEW STORiES ADDED 4/8/21)
- Maskripper
- Millenium Member
- Posts: 1092
- Joined: 7 years ago
- Contact:
.....and another thread derails.....
Vist my blog and its Youtube channel:
http://www.maskripper.org
https://www.youtube.com/c/MaskripperOrg
Masked women in action! Superheroines, burglars, villainesses are waiting for you...
http://www.maskripper.org
https://www.youtube.com/c/MaskripperOrg
Masked women in action! Superheroines, burglars, villainesses are waiting for you...
Very true. You could drive fleets of starships through the plot holes in Into Darkness.
Check out my stories (and in some cases, books):
Amazon
Literotica
Mr. X Homepage (NEW STORiES ADDED 4/8/21)
If eve had a bright shinning light behind her the scene would have been far better
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
NotUv2 wrote: ↑2 years agoStar Trek Continues is unbelievably good. Created and starred-in by a prominent voice actor who has experienced quite a bit of
cancel culture himself, but is slowly rebounding back from it.
I still don't see anyone posting the Alice Eve still photos in question. I would think that is the core issue of the topic of this thread.
Above attribution is wrong, @shevek... not that I disagree with it. Something I could have said (except that Vic Mignogna's offscreen problems appear to be his own fault, I mean about the show being good).
Fuck it anyway, let's fix this:
Yes, Alice Eve is awesome. She'd be awesome even if she didn't have an acting part in that movie. Good for her.
Fuck it anyway, let's fix this:
Yes, Alice Eve is awesome. She'd be awesome even if she didn't have an acting part in that movie. Good for her.
Check out my stories (and in some cases, books):
Amazon
Literotica
Mr. X Homepage (NEW STORiES ADDED 4/8/21)
"The sexiness of an outfit is directly proportional to the perceived possibility that a vital piece of it might fall off."
http://www.dangerbabecentral.com 100% Mr. X
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
Twitter https://twitter.com/mrxdbc
Deviant Art http://mrxdbc.deviantart.com/
- batgirl1969
- Millenium Member
- Posts: 2458
- Joined: 14 years ago
.
Last edited by batgirl1969 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
- batgirl1969
- Millenium Member
- Posts: 2458
- Joined: 14 years ago
.
Last edited by batgirl1969 1 year ago, edited 1 time in total.
Hope this does not derail this thread (it's old, after all) but I disagree with this theory. Some aphorisms are indeed timelessly Shakespearean and deserve to be in Bartlett's. This one does not.
Here's why: when Theiss formulated this vis-a-vis Star Trek in 1964, costume fabric options were much more limited than they are today.
Yes, costumes could fall off more easily, but they were also not quite as tight as they are now. Portions of an outfit can now cling or
protrude in ways they simply were not able to yet, in 1964. Also, during that time period of the start of the sexual revolution, titillation
to a large extent was based on how much skin was showing.
I would postulate that a wardrobe malfunction, welcome though it may be, is still not as sexy as a super-tight costume staying on, and
the actress in question exerting herself lasciviously inside it for an extended period of time. That's one reason why the people who buy
Primal Superheroine videos, for example, often prefer for the actress to keep the costume on the whole time.
I think the modern version of this postulate might be:
"The sexiness of an outfit is directly proportional to how much it appears to emulate a second skin" (PG-13 version), "and/or facilitate
both the wearer's and the viewer's attainment of pleasure" (adult version).
Or something close to that. We could workshop it.
xD
A male wrote this law I'm sure of it.
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
- PartsUnknown
- Henchman
- Posts: 84
- Joined: 1 year ago
Good for her, she looked fantastic. The people complaining about that one scene don’t seem to mind that Chris Pine is in his underwear in every film in that trilogy.
Hell, in the OG series most episodes ended with Captain Kirk getting his shirt ripped off. And the women wore super short skirts. Something for everybody! Don’t tell me Star Trek wasn’t sexualized. That’s part of what made it fun and campy.
Hell, in the OG series most episodes ended with Captain Kirk getting his shirt ripped off. And the women wore super short skirts. Something for everybody! Don’t tell me Star Trek wasn’t sexualized. That’s part of what made it fun and campy.
What! I actually drudged this thread up seven hours ago!? Jesus Christ I'm sorry. I must have been drunk or in a state of temporary madness or something?
My stories
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
Origin - http://www.superheroineforum.com/forum/ ... =9&t=26745
Camelot - viewtopic.php?f=9&t=30886
#Canceltwitter
I remember seeing this scene and didn't think it was that risque... you see more on a Victoria Secrets Runway... peeps need to get with it.
That aside, i thought to myself, that with that hair cut and that awesome figure, she'd make a great Power Girl.
Someone should take that photo up there and manip it..
>.>
That aside, i thought to myself, that with that hair cut and that awesome figure, she'd make a great Power Girl.
Someone should take that photo up there and manip it..
>.>
- batgirl1969
- Millenium Member
- Posts: 2458
- Joined: 14 years ago
I agree!! I always thought she would have been the perfect Sue Storm Invisible Woman or The White Queen!!!Kitten wrote: ↑1 year agoI remember seeing this scene and didn't think it was that risque... you see more on a Victoria Secrets Runway... peeps need to get with it.
That aside, i thought to myself, that with that hair cut and that awesome figure, she'd make a great Power Girl.
Someone should take that photo up there and manip it..
>.>
Perhaps that someone is me...
- Attachments
-
- A quick and dirty manip, not perfect but help you see what i see.
- Powergirl where are you looking.jpg (46.91 KiB) Viewed 2641 times
Now that you mention it, she would have made a much better Sue Storm than Jessica Alba.batgirl1969 wrote: ↑1 year agoI agree!! I always thought she would have been the perfect Sue Storm Invisible Woman or The White Queen!!!Kitten wrote: ↑1 year agoI remember seeing this scene and didn't think it was that risque... you see more on a Victoria Secrets Runway... peeps need to get with it.
That aside, i thought to myself, that with that hair cut and that awesome figure, she'd make a great Power Girl.
Someone should take that photo up there and manip it..
>.>
- batgirl1969
- Millenium Member
- Posts: 2458
- Joined: 14 years ago
Can you do here as Sue??? She would be delicious as her!!!! That hair style is Purrrrfect!Kitten wrote: ↑1 year agoNow that you mention it, she would have made a much better Sue Storm than Jessica Alba.batgirl1969 wrote: ↑1 year agoI agree!! I always thought she would have been the perfect Sue Storm Invisible Woman or The White Queen!!!Kitten wrote: ↑1 year agoI remember seeing this scene and didn't think it was that risque... you see more on a Victoria Secrets Runway... peeps need to get with it.
That aside, i thought to myself, that with that hair cut and that awesome figure, she'd make a great Power Girl.
Someone should take that photo up there and manip it..
>.>
Gonna have to decline the request. While not difficult, it would take more spare time than i can afford to indulge in good conscience since i have several other projects I've made commitments to completing first.