[DevilEyes]

Originally Posted by horatio

Nothing wrong with a small referrence or a short appearance, I just questioned Paul's suggestion to bring a sexistic character like Rand back unchanged just to have more females in the main cast (anyone sees the contradiction?) or even let her substitute Chekov (other job, same name?).

Rand's character was hardly a triumph of feminism, was she?

And she was a yeoman, so I'm not sure why she would be there. If she had been Pike's yeoman - Pike was absent from the ship for most of the movie. Too many things happened too fast in the movie anyway, there was hardly even time to explain everything or develop main characters like McCoy; introducing another one would only take up screentime. Besides, if they had introduced her and have her meet Kirk, they would have to acknowledge their attraction, which would just unnecessairly complicate the movie and dillute the storyline of this movie.

There was at least one other woman on the bridge, though - a background role, played by an actress who seems vaguely familiar, probably from a TV show. Why wouldn't she be given a bigger role in the next movie? Not every supporting character has to be from TOS.

Chekov was clearly in the movie because 1) they did not know if there was even to be a sequel, and 2) they wanted to get all the main crew in their TOS roles by the end of the movie. Chekov is uusally thought of as the member of the core 7, even though he did not join the show till season 2.

I don't get the suggestions to drastically change Rand's job or personality, then what's the point of calling her Rand? It's not like they made Spock an engineer, Uhura a medical doctor, or McCoy a communications officer. They did not change anyone's profession.

[Samuel]

New character = free hand.

Unfortunately all the major ship-function roles are already taken. You would have to create a new one. Since the two women people keep bringing up are set in their parts they have limitations on what they can do. Rand is Kirks assistant, so she will generally be bound to that part unless she does things outside of her normal duties. That works fine for a one-off special circumstance in a movie but thats all. Same with Chapel.

Maybe a part analagous to a Data in rank and position. I guess he plays the science officer in terms of what he normally does but thats not his title. And of course Spock is already there unless you want to take away that function and turn him into a Riker. I wouldnt.

I'm unsure how you can add a new bridge officer because I dont exactly know what else there is except security or another shift. But of course we already had a female security officer. To be significant enough it has to be someone Kirk could say "you have the bridge" to. As it is some people have a problem with Chekhov... and he actually is a bridge officer. Neither Rand nor Chapel could believably fill that role.

Actually, the concept of a 'night shift' opens the door to several such parts. There is Scotty to consider as well and things do get a little bit more crowded. But in the end if a new character is added I would prefer a new and strong command-level character %100 on par with the existing bridge crew.

[Samuel]

Oh and another thing did occur to me. Since believability seems to be very important... again Chekhov comes to mind... would an engineer who albeit is very smart but has no command experience whatsoever be put in charge of a huge ship? If the answer is no then another will have to fill that role when Kirk and Spock are off the ship on one of their many adventures.

[hen88]

Well - the new enterprise bridge has at least twice as many stations as the original one. I don't think it would be too hard to make her a bridge officer. She could man the engineering station while Scotty is down at engineering.

[Pauln6]

Originally Posted by DevilEyes

Rand's character was hardly a triumph of feminism, was she?

And she was a yeoman, so I'm not sure why she would be there. If she had been Pike's yeoman - Pike was absent from the ship for most of the movie. Too many things happened too fast in the movie anyway, there was hardly even time to explain everything or develop main characters like McCoy; introducing another one would only take up screentime. Besides, if they had introduced her and have her meet Kirk, they would have to acknowledge their attraction, which would just unnecessairly complicate the movie and dillute the storyline of this movie.

There was at least one other woman on the bridge, though - a background role, played by an actress who seems vaguely familiar, probably from a TV show. Why wouldn't she be given a bigger role in the next movie? Not every supporting character has to be from TOS.

I don't get the suggestions to drastically change Rand's job or personality, then what's the point of calling her Rand? It's not like they made Spock an engineer, Uhura a medical doctor, or McCoy a communications officer. They did not change anyone's profession.

Only Ann Mulhall and Number One were triumphs of feminism and neither of them made it into the film either. Most other women in TOS were over-emotional and really bad at their jobs. Uhura was amazing but rarely got to do anything.

Plus, none of the new portrayals are carbon copies of the old; Uhura has none of the original's michievousness and Scotty is a buffoon. I was merely suggesting that in a modern, feminist context, the captain's yeoman could double as his personal security guard. This would be for comic relief more than anything else - trying to dissuade him from getting in on the action or 'protecting' him from alien tarts.

I don't think their relationship should be taken beyond a few longing looks and fans of TOS would understand the subtext along with all the other 'in-jokes'. They could also build on her relationship with Sulu to give him something to do other than sit at the helm.

She was also a transporter technician assigned to engineering and a comms officer but as captain's yeoman she has a reason to be on the bridge that doesn't interfere with the others and is better placed than Uhura to get in on the action. They really need to get a woman in on the action. I'm rather sick of the all-male security teams - it is maddeningly sexist and has to stop!

[Samuel]

Hmmm... on combat vessels there is a middle ranking officer always running everything about the defensive systems. I like this kind of idea better than a second to Scotty. Otherwise its little different than Chapel who is a second to McCoy. Something where she is at the top of whatever job and answers directly to whoever is running the show.

[hen88]

Originally Posted by Samuel

Hmmm... on combat vessels there is a middle ranking officer always running everything about the defensive systems. I like this kind of idea better than a second to Scotty. Otherwise its little different than Chapel who is a second to McCoy. Something where she is at the top of whatever job and answers directly to whoever is running the show.

Wouldn't that be a security/tactical officer? I think that would be a great idea. But it would constitute a substantial reinterpretation of Rand's character. But I don't think yeomans have much place in the new Star Trek universe. It's time to see more strong female characters that have no romantic connections to any of the male characters. It would be great to see a female captain in the next film.

[Elizadolots]

Originally Posted by DevilEyes

There was at least one other woman on the bridge, though - a background role, played by an actress who seems vaguely familiar, probably from a TV show. Why wouldn't she be given a bigger role in the next movie? Not every supporting character has to be from TOS.

Chekov was clearly in the movie because 1) they did not know if there was even to be a sequel, and 2) they wanted to get all the main crew in their TOS roles by the end of the movie. Chekov is uusally thought of as the member of the core 7, even though he did not join the show till season 2.

I don't get the suggestions to drastically change Rand's job or personality, then what's the point of calling her Rand? It's not like they made Spock an engineer, Uhura a medical doctor, or McCoy a communications officer. They did not change anyone's profession.

I agree that there is no reason to just use TOS characters...in fact, given the wholesale destruction of most of the graduating class at the academy...I'm thinking a lot of those who eventually made their way to the Enterprise didn't survive the battle. In fact, for the next movie to succeed, I think it has to step outside the box a bit more and give us people from this reality.

I also agree about why Chekov was in the movie...face it, he's in all the movies. He was even in Generations. Given that there is a substantial fan base for Star Trek that was not obsessed with the series (we have ardent, vocal fans here who have not seen all of the episodes...makes for lots of fun in debates) I think Chekov was absolutely necessary.

I'm not sure anyone has suggested a radical change in either personality or job for Rand. She could easily be in a middle ranked position (Yeoman is not a career, it's a temporary assignment) and her not lusting after Kirk wouldn't be a change in personality...she might have someone in this timeline she loves so not be interested. Maybe I'm weird, but I never really defined Rand as "Kirk's love interest". Initially, she was Sulu's Yeoman. Then, when she got assigned to Kirk she was bossy, brusk, and efficient just as someone in that position should be.

Originally Posted by Samuel

Oh and another thing did occur to me. Since believability seems to be very important... again Chekhov comes to mind... would an engineer who albeit is very smart but has no command experience whatsoever be put in charge of a huge ship? If the answer is no then another will have to fill that role when Kirk and Spock are off the ship on one of their many adventures.

At least in this current movie, believability was pretty meaningless...I mean, how many times was Chekov left in charge while the ship was in a dangerous situation? And, one time, he left...sort of shouting out "you have the Conn" to someone...we didn't know who....

Originally Posted by Pauln6

Only Ann Mulhall and Number One were triumphs of feminism and neither of them made it into the film either. Most other women in TOS were over-emotional and really bad at their jobs. Uhura was amazing but rarely got to do anything.

Plus, none of the new portrayals are carbon copies of the old; Uhura has none of the original's michievousness and Scotty is a buffoon. I was merely suggesting that in a modern, feminist context, the captain's yeoman could double as his personal security guard. This would be for comic relief more than anything else - trying to dissuade him from getting in on the action or 'protecting' him from alien tarts.

I don't think their relationship should be taken beyond a few longing looks and fans of TOS would understand the subtext along with all the other 'in-jokes'. They could also build on her relationship with Sulu to give him something to do other than sit at the helm.

She was also a transporter technician assigned to engineering and a comms officer but as captain's yeoman she has a reason to be on the bridge that doesn't interfere with the others and is better placed than Uhura to get in on the action. They really need to get a woman in on the action. I'm rather sick of the all-male security teams - it is maddeningly sexist and has to stop!

I like the idea of her being "personal assistant/security"....that would rock. (maybe she could fulfill the dreams of Fan Fic authors and pull a deadly weapon out of that hair!) I also agree that Sulu is sort of a natural choice for at least friendship. It would be too weird with Chekov....Sulu's a grown up capable of behaving himself in the presence of an attractive person.

If "Yeoman" were redefined as "responsible for the personal security of the Captain" in this reality (why not?) then she would just about automatically get to go on away missions (why wasn't she doing that in the current movie? Because it was an emergency and niceties like "personal security" weren't available).

In that context, I'd like to offer up Kristen Bell for the Rand character....she's perfectly capable of portraying "smart and strong and brave" while exuding "sexy youthfulness".

[Samuel]

Originally Posted by hen88

Wouldn't that be a security/tactical officer? I think that would be a great idea. But it would constitute a substantial reinterpretation of Rand's character.

Youre right it would. Which is why I didnt in any way have her in mind for the role.

"Security" would be internal. "Tactical" would be a better description but the word just doesnt have a ring to it. But it all does begin to sound like a Worf type role. Probably in actual use two different people would serve these functions since they are different jobs. But its only a movie hehe.

[hen88]

Originally Posted by Elizadolots

If "Yeoman" were redefined as "responsible for the personal security of the Captain" in this reality (why not?) then she would just about automatically get to go on away missions (why wasn't she doing that in the current movie? Because it was an emergency and niceties like "personal security" weren't available).

In that context, I'd like to offer up Kristen Bell for the Rand character....she's perfectly capable of portraying "smart and strong and brave" while exuding "sexy youthfulness".

Kristen Bell is great. I went to college with her, and it's been great seeing her grow into a strong, intelligent actress. She also has a bit of a dark edge to her, which would be an interesting quality to add to Rand.