|
Post by Gnom on Apr 10, 2002 16:51:35 GMT -5
For the first time in a too-long time, I actually put a Trek tape in my VCR last night. I meant to watch The High Ground, but never got further than The Hunted... The great James Cromwell playing a prime minister of a planet X and wearing one of those infamous one-piece suit-like jumpsuits that people in the 24th century, civilians and Starfleet alike, seem to be so fond of... Why? I mean, that's 24th century, people are supposed to be evolved and freed themselves of all sorts off inconveniences... Then why jumpsuits, probably the most impractical pieces of clothing ever inventedby a man? And it's not just the practical values but esthethical too: the thing hardly suits a hearty, grown-up man. While I understand the excitement a hearty, grown-up female wearing a catsuit creates in the opposite gender, have you ever thought of this: You're Ensign Estrogene, on an away mission on a deserted planet with arctic climate. You're in the middle of nowhere when you suddenly feel the nature calling. You're wearing your standard one-piece jumpsuit uniform [and probably something on top of it too, just to make the matter worse]... What are you going to do...?
|
|
|
Post by UltimateTrekker on Apr 11, 2002 7:39:56 GMT -5
The idea was to show these uniforms in a different way, as if they'd gotten beyond zippers and snaps (even though most of the jumpsuits have obvious zippers)
But, in 1986, it just wasn't quite there. Remember we have hindsight.. things have changed in 15 years.
And (BTW) the ACTORS hated them as well. Frakes first comment to Bakula was about how lucky he was to have a nice costume.
|
|
|
Post by StolenThunder on Apr 11, 2002 12:35:41 GMT -5
But some of the uniforms are sooo coool! I want one!
|
|
|
Post by Christina on Apr 11, 2002 14:12:48 GMT -5
I think the point is that nature NEVER calls in C24.
Or if it does, those suits are *ahem* designed to deal with such basicness...............
|
|
|
Post by Peter_Pevensie on Apr 12, 2002 7:40:48 GMT -5
I think the point is that nature NEVER calls in C24... "Don't you people from the twenty-fourth century ever pee?" ;D
|
|
|
Post by StolenThunder on Apr 12, 2002 13:08:04 GMT -5
Well, I don't know about you, but "I'm not detecting any leaks"...
|
|
|
Post by Christina on Apr 13, 2002 3:52:06 GMT -5
As some wit said, way back in the sixties,
"It gives a whole new meaning to 'waste extraction' ! "
An offshoot of transporter technology perhaps? No more need for potty training! ;D
Enough already.
|
|
|
Post by StolenThunder on Apr 13, 2002 4:12:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Gnom on Apr 13, 2002 5:07:00 GMT -5
The idea was to show these uniforms in a different way, as if they'd gotten beyond zippers and snaps (even though most of the jumpsuits have obvious zippers) But, in 1986, it just wasn't quite there. Remember we have hindsight.. things have changed in 15 years. Yup, but not that much... It's only [?] sixteen years, and what we're talking about is jumpsuits! ...and pockets, yes. I think we have the spandex jumpsuits to thank for the Picard Manouvre: during the first two seasons, whenever Patrick Stewart sat down, you could see the uniform neck practically crushing his Adam's apple. Poor guy probably couldn't get a peep out of his mouth before yanking it down...
|
|
|
Post by StolenThunder on Apr 13, 2002 5:21:56 GMT -5
It's only [?] sixteen years, and what we're talking about is jumpsuits! That's a very long time, I'll have you know...
|
|
|
Post by Gnom on Apr 13, 2002 6:09:18 GMT -5
Aww, hush and sthingy up yer corn flakes, boy!
|
|
|
Post by Christina on Apr 13, 2002 6:31:32 GMT -5
*wonders what word got replaced by sthingy in the last post......*
Anyhoo, the topic is jumpsuits and why Trek Wardrobe people assume they are the Future of Clothing.
Answer - because they are not in common usage today. Other than as overalls for the working man.
And the catsuit in particular has this strange image of being alluring. Dunno why, as once you're in one it's a struggle to get out again!
|
|
|
Post by Gnom on Apr 13, 2002 6:36:43 GMT -5
* wonders what word got replaced by sthingy in the last post......* S-p-o-o-n. My innocent mind has never quite grasped what's so profane in that...
|
|
|
Post by Christina on Apr 13, 2002 6:39:48 GMT -5
Ah. it's the p-o-o-n part that causes the trouble. Some rude American slang IIRC
|
|
|
Post by Gnom on Apr 13, 2002 11:36:16 GMT -5
Ah.
*refrains from further commentary*
|
|