Star Trek’s Gender Problem
Star Trek film, directed by JJ Abrams
Didn’t you just love Startrek? Our friend Melissa Silverstein from the fab blog Women and Hollywood was all excited to see it, but had some serious frustrations about the missed opportunity to bring women into the future (as anything other than mothers or sex symbols, that is)…
I went to see Star Trek last night here in LA on a big screen in Culver City. Personally, I prefer to see the big blockbusters during the week cause I hate the crowds. Everywhere I was yesterday in LA people were talking about the movie. It really is a company town.
I was very excited to see the film because I was a trekkie growing up. I think The Wrath of Khan is one of the scariest films ever and I pretty partial to Star Trek IV – The Voyage Home where Captain Kirk (William Shatner) falls in love with the whale researcher played by Catherine Hicks.
I was excited to see it because it was directed by JJ Abrams who did Alias which I still miss, and the film’s writers also are the guardians of Lost Fringe which I am addicted to.
Melissa Silverstein, Women & Hollywood
JJ’s a good director. The pace was fast, there were good effects but I found the story lacking. How many times in one movie can we see Chris Pine as the young Kirk attempt to get strangled. It looked like his eyes were going to pop out.
But I think the film missed a huge opportunity with its women. Maybe I’m spoiled from Battlestar Galactica and I know TV is different from films, but I think they blew a big opportunity by stereotyping women’s roles. What I loved about Battlestar Galactica was that gender didn’t matter and in this film it clearly did. There were a lot of women in miniskirts just walking around. Star Trek has much inter planetary diversity including Kirk’s relationship with an all green woman, yet still can’t get over the gender stereotypes.
A return to the original series of the 60's
The three female characters of significance were insignificant — one gave birth, one was a mother, and one was a girlfriend.
Jennifer Morrison – Cameron from House played Kirk’s mother and her part consisted of her giving birth to the future Captain Kirk.
Winona Ryder played young Spock’s mom (Zachary Quinto) and they had to give her a ton of wrinkles because in real life she is only 6 years old than him. Winona has not even hit 40 and she is already playing a mom. That’s Hollywood.
Star Trek, the young Lt. Uhura
Zoe Saldana had the biggest female part playing the young Lt. Uhura a gifted linguistic specialist who discovers an important signal yet is relegated to window dressing. Why couldn’t they give her something cool to do that showed off her skills? The way they handled the Scotty character was great. Why couldn’t they have handled Uhura better?
I thought it was interesting that they had her character in a relationship with Spock but at times that relationship seemed so out of place and it felt like it was just thrown in to placate women.
The film is a hit. The reviews are stellar. According to the statistics, women bought 40% of the tickets on opening weekend. But, I’m disappointed with JJ and his crew. They usually have so much more respect for women.
Star Trek Official Trailer, click here
Mellisa Silverstein, Women & Hollywood blog, click here
Categories: Comment
Tags: Features, Guest Bloggers, Hollywood, Reviews
Comments (2)
Rachel Millward
May 13th, 2009 at 3:42 pm
Hi there. So, Melissa – having had Starship Enterprise hanging from my ceiling as a girl, I couldn’t agree with you more!! I *loved the film in so many ways, but was so, so disappointed that the future as fantasized in 2009 could look so utterly depressing for women. Thought y’all might like to read this, below, an extract from Henry Jenkins blog, “Five Ways to Start a Conversation about the New Star Trek Film”. The clever man has a clever point.
I’ve read reviews which suggest that the Uhura in this film represents a progressive reworking of the character from classic Trek. I’m not convinced yet, even though I very much liked the actress who played the part. However limited her role might be (“hailing frequencies are open, Captain”), the original Uhura was defined first and foremost by her contributions as a member of the Enterprise Crew. Whatever subtext there was suggesting a Kirk/Uhura romance, it was just that — a subtext — left for fans to infer from a few telling moments in the trajectory of the series, among them, the first interracial kiss on American television — albeit executed under mind control — albeit an implied projection of one or both of the character’s actual desires.
In the new film, Uhura asserts her professional competence but she never really demonstrates it. How does that make her different from many of the female professionals in classic Trek who are introduced in terms of their professional abilities and then reduced to being the girlfriend of the week for one of the primary characters? Here, more screen time is devoted to her but she’s ultimately a love object in some kind of still to be explored romantic triangle between Kirk and Spock. Basically, she’s been inserted into the story to discourage fans from writing slash stories, though most of us won’t have any trouble figuring out how the exchange of women facilitates an expression of homosocial/homoerotic desire.
The classic definition of a Mary Sue is someone who is claimed to have extraordinary mental abilities, who manages to gain the romantic interests of multiple members of the crew, and who manages to have the information needed to save the ship. In way sense, then, is the new Uhura anything other than a Mary Sue figure in the body of an established character? Surely after forty plus years, Trek can imagine a more compelling female character.
To read the complete Henry Jenkins blog, click here:
http://henryjenkins.org/2009/05/five_ways_to_start_a_conversat.html
Alle
June 3rd, 2009 at 9:52 am
It is a fair point that ‘balanced’ representation of gender was not featured in the film. However, I really felt the film was not unfair. It’s not the last Star Trek film in this ‘series’ to be made – it can’t be, just look at the story!
I have no doubts, that women characters will play a more significant role in the future. This really was like an introduction that tried t balance the TOS series with the current evolution of film making, technology, characters and social change.
Afterall, we *cough* no longer have Black Racial Discrimination right? Well I don’t see it! My daughter is the only white girl in our church and only one of a minority in the community. Most of her friends are non white! But then kids are cute and innocent
One could also say that a Transgender representation wasn’t made, or Indian, or Pakastani … but is this relevant?
The film itself was pretty good. It was not depressing to watch (I was depressed and unhappy the 5th time I saw it two nights ago), it really deserves a few screenings, every time I watch it I pick up more and more detail. Maybe it’s too fast for people!
Remember too, behind every great man is a brilliant woman, and so maybe the female representation doesn’t need to be foreground all the time. t just needs to be KEY and CONCISE. Uhura does that when she picks up the transmission from the Klingons. Did you hear about all the Male Admirals jumping all over her discovery? No. Do we need to see her ‘doing it’? No. Because we accept she’s brilliant. Afterall the Lieutenant couldn’t differentiate between the Romulan and Vulcan, right? Typical of a male!
I think there will be a few more films to follow this one. There are time line issues, Romulus and Vulcan issues, Uhura and Spock issues, and so much more!
Lets enjoy the ride! It’s that what we go to and make movies for? Be pretty boring if every film represented every human variation – besides the length!
Leave a reply