flamingbluepanda:

flamingbluepanda:

*red alert goes off*

Jim, opening his eyes wide: I’M GONNA BE LATE FOR CLASS

Jim, 10 seconds later: oh wait I’m 33 *goes back to sleep*

*a moment passes*

Jim, suddenly sitting straight up: THE RED ALERT IS GOING OFF

Jim, 6 seconds later: oh wait that’s the captains job *goss back to sleep*

*a moment later*

James Kirk, .2 seconds later, violently vaulting himself out of his bed: I AM THE CAPTAIN

BONUS: Spock who remembers that they’re both on leave and are in fact on a vacation and are simple civilians, laying in their bed: *snore*

This is it. The best post I have ever made. Nothing I do will ever compare to the mental image of a sleep deprived James Kirk vaulting himself out of bed and screeching that he’s a captain while spock sleeps through it all.

thetimetostrikeislater:

trekmemes:

ameliawatsons:

honestly the idea of sarek just like…collecting children is so funny to me because the more children he has, the more ridiculous spock is for never mentioning any of them

like imagine one day spock takes jim to visit his family and jim is like…….spock….there are thirty people here, wtf….and spock is just like yup

broke: spock doesn’t talk about his family bc he’s closed off and weird about it

woke: spock doesn’t talk about his family cos he can’t fucking keep track of how many relatives he has

Kirk: “ You have a (insert relative here)?!”

Spock: “I mean…I guess so.”

unpretty:

pluckyminna:

unpretty:

scifiblogofbullshit:

 I’m having a crisis. The time of Surak was the time of the Vulcan Nuclear War and not during what I assumed would be the Vulcan crusade times with armour and weapons and shit. This changes everything.

If they had the technology to make nuclear weapons then they had figured out how to make other technology like cameras. Computers. Televisions. Which means, Vulcans with their lack of emotional control and Surakian logic were running with our 21st-century technology doing some really crazy and stupid shit.

  Did they leap into trashcans to make their friends laugh? Did they run themselves into poles and walls with segway-like technology? Did some of their governments have to send out a public notice telling citizens not to try to take selfies with wild sehlats like we do with bears?

Did they change the pitches of their sehlat’s cries to make songs like we do with dogs?

according to Spock’s World, surak was the wealthy heir to a vulcan business

then he saw the impacts of an antimatter bomb, had an existential crisis, and drove into the desert to cry

that was where he had his epiphany that vulcans needed to chill, and became so chill that all the other vulcans agreed that being chill seemed like it would solve a lot of problems

surak was a youtube influencer pass it on

he was actually an sjw with a tumblr, still available on Vulcan Archive Dot Org

nimblermortal:

chubbycaptain:

chubbycaptain:

im really losing my shit thinking about vulcan childrens music and television. who could forget such hits as “3 is an appropriate number” and “walking in the street could lead to maiming or death”

the vulcan equivalent of the wiggles is just 3 normally dressed individuals reciting multiplication tables in unison

Speaking as someone with very little knowledge of Star Trek – I’ve seen like three episodes from random versions and I read Spock’s World – I violently disagree with this.

Even before I had such minimal knowledge as I do now, I thought that “vulcan” was a very appropriate word for them. It’s not that they don’t have emotions, if anything they have more than humans, they just run hard and deep, like volcanoes. You don’t want that thing to erupt.

So I imagine vulcan children’s TV is much like Sesame Street. Here is a muppet with anger issues! He spilled his milk and it made him ANGRY!!! Here comes someone dressed in completely normal clothes to say yes, that was indeed unfortunate, but anger is an irrational response to such a thing and not in keeping with the teachings of Surak; let us now explore different forms of meditation as emotional control, one of which includes three normally dressed individuals reciting multiplication tables in unison.

flamingbluepanda:

deannaboi:

fuckyeah-nerdery:

deducecanoe:

myotherblogisatardis:

needsmorestartrek:

noblette:

tos rewatch → shore leave 

That sassy shit-eating grin gets me every time.

Kirk’s squint in the last gif makes me lol forever.

His squint is epic. he knows he’s been gotten good.

He got played.

I like how Spock takes the time to look down at the chart in the second to last gif like he doesn’t know

This moment is nothing but pure gold

partvulcan:

kirkaholic123:

ctenophores:

greenjimkirk:

I’m gonna go ahead and be a film snob and talk about why this is one of my favorite shots from TOS. (I could also say that it’s one of my favorite scenes, because the entire scene actually consists of a single shot.)

image

We don’t see a lot of bald expressions of emotion in film and television, especially if that emotion is fear or sadness or vulnerability. Dramas will give us some tears, but they always cut a way after a few seconds because a closeup of someone crying is deeply uncomfortable and most movies and TV shows aren’t in the business of making their audiences uncomfortable. It just doesn’t sell well.

image

But in this scene the camera never looks away. It follows Spock as he sits down at the table, and it circles him as he cries. But there are no cuts. We don’t even get music to create some distance, make it all a little more palatable; we just hear sobs and mumbled math equations.

image

It’s absolutely excrutiating. It would be excruciating no matter who we were watching, because we are so unaccustomed to seeing unadulterated emotion. And then there’s the fact that it’s a man. And that it’s Spock.

Fifty years later and this is still one of the most daring filmmaking decisions I’ve ever seen on TV (I of course can’t be exactly sure who made it, but I’m assuming it was the director of the episode, Marc Daniels). This shot lasts 1 minute and 45 seconds. We’re in the middle of space and in the middle of a high-stakes episode where the crew is going crazy and the ship is going to blow up or some shit and everyone’s lives are in danger, but we pause 1 minute and 45 seconds to have an uncomfortably human moment with an alien who doesn’t even want to be human, and it’s so awful and amazing.

#this is one of the things that makes me love TOS infinitely more than AOS #because when AOS wants to show that Spock is a deeply emotional being #they make him angry #angry and violent #macho bullshit that doesnt even come close to the raw vulnerability #of Spock sobbing to himself because he never told his mother he loved her #and that was a spock whose mother was still alive!! #it is so much more meaningful to show spock weep than to show him angry #and the thing is #in this episode the virus is supposed to strip them down to their core #and at his core spock is not angry or violent #spock is a terribly vulnerable man #lost and unsure and feeling so strongly and loving so deeply that it moves him to tears THESE TAGS HOLY SHIT @galaxydorks

So true!

Here is an excerpt from Bill’s Star Trek Memories.

As originally scripted, the scene would have begun with Spock walking down a corridor openly sobbing. At that point, we’d cut away and find that another infected crewman has begun frantically running around the ship, slapping graffiti paint jobs all over the walls of the Enterprise. In subsequent shots, we’d find several more crewmen beginning to lose their inhibitions, and just when the pandemonium is beginning to overwhelm the ship, we’d come back to Spock.

Spock is now riding in an elevator, crying. He gets to his floor, and when the doors open, the graffiti guy runs up and paints a big black mustache on Spock’s face. At that point, Spock cries even louder. Leonard continues:

Now, that’s very imaginative, very inventive, very theatrical and very funny, but I felt that it was not really significant or appropriate for Spock. I mean, Spock was crying… but so what? There was no context for it, no discernible root force, no underlying cause for what’s going on. You know, in a strange way, this one-shot extra who’s walking around doing the paint jobs all over the place is a lot more interesting than Spock, who’s weeping. It seemed to me like we were wasting some really strong dramatic possibilities, all for the sake of an easy sight gag.

So I said all of this to John Black, and I also said that what I felt we really need to do her was a scene in which Spock’s basic inner conflict, the human versus the Vulcan, rises to the surface and motivates his tears. I mean this draft of the script found Spock fighting through all this emotion in public, and I felt that would be a terrible thing for Spock, because he’s a very private person.

So I said to John, “I think Spock would look for privacy when he feels the urge to cry. When he can no longer resist his tears, he would probably look for a private place in which to battle it out within himself.”

And John’s reaction was very negative. It was typical producer/writer-under-pressure kind of stuff. “C’mon, leave it alone because I’m working on next week’s script. Shoot it, just shoot it.” This kind of thing. And he complained about hurting the rhythm of the script.”

I’ve got to break into Leonard’s story here to explain that “it hurts the rhythm of the script” is a sort of basic, all-purpose producer’s excuse that’s fed all too often to actors seeking script changes. Good, bad, legitimate, frivolous, it doesn’t matter. If a producer doesn’t want to deal with your suggestions, he’ll probably just tell you that what you’re suggesting “hurts the rhythm of the script.” It’s the TV producer’s equivalent of “the dog ate my homework,” or “the check is in the mail.” It’s just an easy, somewhat plausible excuse that generally has no basis in reality. With that in mind, Leonard’s determination and fiercely protective nature in regard to Spock drove him over Black’s head to Roddenberry.

I called Gene about it, and I told him just what I’d told John. In talking to Gene, I was very careful to be politically supportive of his producer but about an hour and a half later, here comes John Black out to the set. So now I’m feeling, “Ahh, this great!” I’m feeling that someone’s actually listening to me.

And Black was funny, he cam onto the set and said, “Let’s go talk someplace.” We went to my dressing room, and he said, “Okay, tell me your idea again. Daddy says I have to listen to you.” And I had already formulated a basic concept of the scene, so I said, “Look, John, just get me into a room, and write me a half-page, a quarter-page, where you see Spock walk down a corridor and slip inside a door. As the doors close behind him, he’ll burst into this emotional struggle.” And John asked, “Well, what’s this struggle all about?” And I said, “It’s about love and vulnerability and caring and loss and regret, versus C=pi-r-squared and E=m-C-squared. Spock is a scientist, he is logical, and he feels this can’t be happening to him. It’s that kind of struggle. It’s logic versus emotion. It’s rational control versus uncontrollable urge. With that in mind, going behind closed doors will speak to the basic privacy of the character.”

So John wrote that and some other stuff, six or eight lines maybe, and it was exactly what I needed. Spock was now able to slip inside a door, close it behind him, struggle for a moment, then cry. At this point, he would start babbling, and the cause of the internal struggling would become obvious. Problem was, when it came time to shoot this stuff, a whole new set of obstacles had to be overcome. 

Marc Daniels, who was directing this particular episode, came up and asked, “What do you have in mind for this scene?” So, playing director, I said, “Just put the camera here, behind the desk. I’ll come in the door, I’ll walk toward you, I’ll come around, I’ll sit in the chair, and I’ll start this babbling conversation with myself, and I’ll cry. Now, if you’ll dolly around getting closer and closer we can meet at the end of the scene. We can see Spock’s entire breakdown in one long dramatic shot.”

Okay, now it’s five-thirty, I got out to get my ears and makeup touched up, and the time is important because we’re on a very rigid schedule. With overtime being so ridiculously and prohibitively expensive, we’d have to wrap each evening at exactly six-eighteen. Didn’t matter if you were in the middle of a sentence, come six-eighteen, we wrapped.

So now Jerry Finnerman starts to light the scene and it’s obvious that this will be our last shot of the day. I’m in the makeup chair, getting touched up, and now in comes Cliff Ralke, our dolly grip, who was always a very supportive person, and he says, “Excuse me, Leonard, but you’d better get out there, because they’re changing the shot you guys just talked about.”

So now Leonard comes out to the set, and the director has indeed changed the shot they’d just agreed upon. It’s important to note, however, that the reasoning behind this change, though not particularly sensitive to Leonard’s needs, was rational and perfectly valid. You see, as previously discussed, this shot would have entailed a one-hundred-and-eighty degree camera move starting from one side of the set, then slowly dollying completely around to the opposite end. This caused problems because the long, involved shot required a lot of lights and a time-consuming, involved setup that Jerry Finnerman didn’t think could be accomplished without going into overtime. Finnerman discussed this situation with Daniels, and together they decided that the most efficient way to shoot this scene would be in a series of brief cuts, each of which could be lit quickly and with relative ease.

They were going to have Leonard enter in a wide shot, then cut. Next, in a slightly tighter framing, they’d follow him as he crossed the set and sat down. Cut. An even tighter frame would catch the beginning of the speech, and they planned to cut once more, zooming to a close-up as Spock began weeping. This made sense in terms of production efficiency, but Leonard felt this shooting sequence would really damage the dramatic impact of the scene. He continues:

I said, “You’re going to lose the continuity and fluidity of the scene if you shoot it this way. I will not be able to do it as well, and I think the end result will just seem choppy and phony.”

By now it’s five forty-five, and with no time to debate the situation, they got hold Gregg Peters, our first A.D., who was the equivalent of the hatchet man. He was the guy who’d always call the six-eighteen wrap, and we all discussed the situation. Finally Marc Daniels said, “Let’s go for it. Let’s try to get it done.”

Now the lighting crew ran around setting up the shot, and I think it was about six-fifteen when they finally said, “We’re ready.” Marc had me walk through it once, and by now production types were standing around behind the camera, looking at their watches and saying, “He won’t make it. He’ll never do it.” So the tension was really mounting.

So basically I know this has got to be a flawless, one-take thing. Y’know, I’ve got one crack at it before they shut us down for the night. If I were to screw up, we’d almost certainly have gone right back to the cut-and-chop scenario come morning. Anyway, this was the scene that I’d asked for and fought for, and now the logistics of the situation were such that there was absolutely no room for error. There was a lot riding on this, and I wouldn’t have been so adamant in my battling if I hadn’t felt that this scene was extremely important. I felt like it merited my efforts, in that it truly defined, for the very first time, what the Spock character was all about.

Now the lights go on, the cameras roll and we nail it. They get the pan, get the one-hundred-and-eighty-degree dolly shot and the scene was ultimately worked really well in illustrating Spock’s inherent inner conflict. This went directly to the heart of what Gene and I had originally spoken about in regard to the character of Spock. It was an opportunity that I absolutely did not want to miss, and an opportunity to plant a seed in defining a certain edge of the character.

patrexes:

patrexes:

patrexes:

wouldsomebody:

guardianofdragonlore:

T’pose could be a legitimate Vulcan name

@patrexes is this like… legit

vulcan naming conventions are inconsistent, but the surakian tradition is generally two-syllable names, men’s s____k, women’s t’p___. so, yeah, t’pose is a completely reasonable english transliteration of a traditional vulcan woman’s name

to expand on this a little, the original memos actually say that vulcan mens’ names should be five letters, s???k. this is where you get “shrek is a vulcan name” discourse.

however, that doesn’t really scan. vulcan names aren’t meant to be written with the latin alphabet, after all, and vulcan script looks like this —

— if you can find anything that’s clearly a letter here, never mind delineating five of them, you’re a better man than me.

rather, i’d like to suggest the typical transliteration of a vulcan man’s personal name will most likely fit a {C}CVC.vc format, transliterated S[VC.v]k, assuming a traditionally minded family as well as modernity not fucking with pronunciation too much—remember young diot coke, born 1379? her name written today would probably be denise cook.

assume for a moment that surak is a good example of a traditional name; sarek, then, is uncorrupted in modernity. [ˌsʊɹˈʌk] and [ˌsaɹˈɛk], i guess? ipa will be the death of me one day and i’m absolute shit at vowels. but both of these names are S[VC.v]k, if you’ll accept some very ad hoc use of standard symbols.

there are names that don’t fit this model, though. spock; tuvok; stonn. we’ll throw shrek in here too.

tuvok is the easiest one to consolidate, of course: CCVC.vc, and the name [ˌstʊvˈɒk] drops its /s/ over time to simply [ˌtʊvˈɒk]

spock, stonn, and shrek are single-syllable, five-letter romanizations. immediately a problem becomes apparent, though; spock’s romanized /ck/ is the same as what is elsewhere romanized simply /k/ — the generalization of {C}CVC.vc as “five letters” throws off what would otherwise be romanized as “spok”; similarly, stonn is… presumably not displaying gemination, as romanizations typically drop it (see óðinn -> odin or the names of the dwarves in lotr for examples of consonant reduplication denoting gemination being dropped); as such we should probably see his name romanized as “ston”.

spock and stonn, normalized as spok and ston, are both CCVC. shrek is CCVC as well; remember /sh/ is /ʃ/ in ipa. so you have, in order, [spɒk], [stɒn], and [ʃɹɛk].

i would argue that spock and shrek are names which, over time, experienced vowel reduction; they’re not invalid names, they simply aren’t the original forms of them. diot and denise.

spock, then, would be derived from the name [ˌsʊpˈɒk]. the vowel loses prominence until it’s no longer pronounced at all, or only barely pronounced.

possibly this is due to a slight complication of the guidelines; not simply {C}CVC.vc, but {C}C’VC.vc. that is, not [ˌsʊɹˈʌk] but [ˌs’ʊɹˈʌk]; not [ˌsaɹˈɛk] but [ˌs’aɹˈɛk]. [ˌst’ʊvˈɒk] becomes [ˌt’ʊvˈɒk]*, and spock maybe originally was [ˌs’ʊpˈɒk].

see, /p/ really loves turning into /p’/; it probably happens in your speech all the time. so [ˌs’ʊpˈɒk] maybe gets functionally pronounced as [ˌs’ʊp’ˈɒk], and that’s a lot of ejectives in one syllable, so down the line it becomes simply [sp’ɒk].

shrek experiences a similar, but not identical, vowel reduction, with the likely protoform [ˌʃ’ʊɹˈɛk] becoming [ʃ’ɹɛk].

stonn is a bit of an odd case, obviously, as it doesn’t end in /k/ at all. i might argue that it’s diminuitive; like naming your kid joe or joey instead of joseph, you might name your kid [st’ɒn] instead of [ˌst’ɒnˈɛk]. this may be especially common if it’s typical vulcan pronunciation is actually [st’ɒŋ] and indicative of a dialect shifting word-final /k/ to /ŋ/; in a dialect where [ˌst’ɒŋˈɛk] is being pronounced [ˌst’ɒŋˈɛŋ] anyway, fuck your _# /ŋ/, who needs it? thus, stonn still feels complete as a name despite technically being a diminuitive.

*note that ipa /t’/ and the element /t’/ in traditional vulcan women’s names are not the same thing; /t’/ designates what in ipa is written /tʔ/ or /t’ʔ/. t’pose is [tʔpoʊz] or [t’ʔpoʊz] and, structurally, i suppose, C’.CCVC, where women’s names are likely constructed C’.CC{C}V{_C}; that is, T’P[{C}V{_C}], allowing t’pau ([t’ʔpaʊ]), t’pring ([t’ʔpɹɪŋ]), t’pose ([t’ʔpoʊz]).

if none of that made any sense, don’t worry, it’s not you it’s that ipa is the actual worst. the tl;dr is basically,

traditional—that is, common and to some degree often culturally expected—vulcan men’s personal names are usually (but not necessarily always) derived from a pattern where there are two syllables; the stress is on the first syllable, which starts with ejective S or S and another ejective consonant, has a vowel sound, and then ends with another consonant; the second syllable starts with a vowel and ends with a K.

because of certain traits of languages as they change—a tendency for P to become ejective (“pop”), vowels to “weaken” over time, and the last K in a word to often become a kind of N(g) sound—i think it’s reasonable to say that “spock” is the modern version of a name you could transliterate as “supok”, “stonn” is a nickname for “stonek”, and “shrek” is a valid vulcan name but its original form was probably “sharek”.

additionally, because many names follow a pattern that goes “S, vowel, consonant, vowel, K”, a general rule that expects five-letter vulcan men’s names caused spock and stonn’s names to be spelled so that they would have five letters, despite an inconsistency with spelling rules which would in-universe suggest “spok” and “ston”, respectively.