Star Trek Beyond (ST:XIII)

[carrrnuttt]

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nhtsa-i...-gearshift-fiat-chrysler-jeep-grand-cherokee/

That link has a CBS video from March that shows you how exactly drivers can end up picking a wrong gear. It's just sad that Anton was likely too busy to have seen it or heard about the recall. It could have saved his life.

 

[BillsCarnage]

That just suxx. Cars are not supposed to be that complicated.
The Darwin award is usually the first thing to pop in my head when I hear of accidents like this. I am a well known ass....and now I feel it.
Suxx for the kid,...and really suxx that Chrysler released a vehicle like that.

I've got a 2015 GC and am well aware of the shifter issue - it's been discussed a lot on some of the Jeep forums. The recall has only been announced, but the resolution is supposed to be coming later in the year.

Most of the posts I've read by people complaining are usually when they've been distracted or are in a hurry. There are 800k+ GC's affected yet only 41 incidents that caused injury and this could be the actual first death related. So is that a fault of the mfg or operator error?

I will say I've experienced it twice and both times are when I was in a hurry trying to put it in park. However, before my foot touched the ground to get out I could tell the vehicle was still rolling slightly. The whole thing lasted maybe 2sec. So even if it was still rolling what in the world was he doing that he ended up pinned between the Jeep and the brick wall???

 

[carrrnuttt]

I've got a 2015 GC and am well aware of the shifter issue - it's been discussed a lot on some of the Jeep forums. The recall has only been announced, but the resolution is supposed to be coming later in the year.

Most of the posts I've read by people complaining are usually when they've been distracted or are in a hurry. There are 800k+ GC's affected yet only 41 incidents that caused injury and this could be the actual first death related. So is that a fault of the mfg or operator error?

I will say I've experienced it twice and both times are when I was in a hurry trying to put it in park. However, before my foot touched the ground to get out I could tell the vehicle was still rolling slightly. The whole thing lasted maybe 2sec. So even if it was still rolling what in the world was he doing that he ended up pinned between the Jeep and the brick wall???

There's 41 documented injuries, but hundreds more incidents reported. From my CBS link:

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is now investigating more than 850,000 vehicles. Most are 2014 and 2015 Grand Cherokees equipped with e-shift. Government investigators found it "...is not intuitive and provides poor tactile and visual feedback to the driver, increasing the potential for unintended gear selection." That investigation claims reports of 121 crashes, resulting in several people being hospitalized.

And the fact of the matter is, even one injury that can be attributed to a lack of design foresight is one too many.

Here's a comment from another forum I go to from someone who happens to be in Industrial Design:

It quite literally breaks the first rule of usability, which is "visibility of system status." You cannot tell what gear the car is in by looking at the physical location of the stick. Just...WHY? WHY IS IT A NEW FANCY FEATURE??? They BROKE it trying to make it fancy. Who the eff cares if it's spring loaded, even my skinny minny mother can change gears on a regular car.

He also wasn't pinned against just a "brick wall." He was pinned against a mailbox next to a gate. It's quite easy to assume that he quickly got out to A) check his mail or B) open the gate.

 

[Shaggy]

Damn that is sad to hear.

 

[Covert Rain]

Damn that is sad to hear.

Agreed. Especially, since it's starting to look more and more like he got out of his car, put it in park so he could open his gate to get out or check his mail. Not knowing that the vehicle was rolling towards him. Just horrible way to go getting crushed like that. You can see in the photos how hard the car hit the gate denting it.

 

[Shane]

http://www.tmz.com/2016/06/19/star-trek-anton-yelchin-dead/

Anton Yelchin, Chekov from the Reboot movies, including this died today

Apparently he got out of his car while the engine was running and in neutral in his driveway which had a steep incline, and got pinned between the car and a block mailbox attached to a security fence. Friends found im dead and the engine was still running. Wow. Sad.

How the hell can you get behind your car while in neutral on a "steep incline" as soon as you stepped out it would start rolling backward?? Maybe he realized and tried to run behind it to stop it?? Either way crazy...

 

[carrrnuttt]

How the hell can you get behind your car while in neutral on a "steep incline" as soon as you stepped out it would start rolling backward?? Maybe he realized and tried to run behind it to stop it?? Either way crazy...

Did you read everything else underneath the post you quoted?

 

[Brian in Mesa]

It never takes the Internet very long...

Spoiler

You must be registered for see images attach

 

[Shane]

Did you read everything else underneath the post you quoted?

Yes

 

[BillsCarnage]

There's 41 documented injuries, but hundreds more incidents reported. From my CBS link:

Out of 800k+ vehicles. Even if you triple that the percentage is minuscule in the big picture.

And the fact of the matter is, even one injury that can be attributed to a lack of design foresight is one too many.

If that were the case we'd have literally nothing man made. Engineers and designers can't account for the actions of billions of people. No planes, boats, staplers, you name it. Heck who was the knuckle head who made paper so thin you can get a paper cut?? That's ridiculous thinking.

Here's a comment from another forum I go to from someone who happens to be in Industrial Design:

It quite literally breaks the first rule of usability, which is "visibility of system status." You cannot tell what gear the car is in by looking at the physical location of the stick. Just...WHY? WHY IS IT A NEW FANCY FEATURE??? They BROKE it trying to make it fancy. Who the eff cares if it's spring loaded, even my skinny minny mother can change gears on a regular car.

Obviously that person has never driven a GC with this shifter because otherwise they'd notice that the selected gear is lit up on the shifter and displayed on the dash.

He also wasn't pinned against just a "brick wall." He was pinned against a mailbox next to a gate. It's quite easy to assume that he quickly got out to A) check his mail or B) open the gate.

That's exactly what I was saying. It's been discussed a lot on two Jeep forums and those with the issue - not some speculating industrial designer - who have actually described their scenario were almost always in a hurry. Conceivably this could have happened in any type of vehicle.

So if you're in a hurry and you need to get out to check something, but the vehicle is still rolling is that a fault of the designer or operator error? Oh, and let's not forget about this contraption called the parking brake.

It's an freak and unfortunate accident that likely could have been prevented. Like Stout said, it's likely going to be an unfortunate Darwin incident

 

[Covert Rain]

Not sure any of the above matters. At the end of the day, quality assurance failed for a number of people. Often the manufacturer will conduct a recall to avoid that number from skyrocketing over a period of time. Recalls are just not about the documented incidents so far but the potential number of incidents that will likely occur. That's why sometimes the manufacturer will not issue a recall but simply recommend the vehicle come in for repair. It's based on risk assessment and the likelihood for the incident to keep occurring and causing injury or death.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

Not sure any of the above matters. At the end of the day, quality assurance failed for a number of people. Often the manufacturer will conduct a recall to avoid that number from skyrocketing over a period of time. Recalls are just not about the documented incidents so far but the potential number of incidents that will likely occur. That's why sometimes the manufacturer will not issue a recall but simply recommend the vehicle come in for repair. It's based on risk assessment and the likelihood for the incident to keep occurring and causing injury or death.

"A new car built by my company leaves somewhere traveling at 60 mph. The rear differential locks up. The car crashes and burns with everyone trapped inside. Now, should we initiate a recall? Take the number of vehicles in the field, A, multiply by the probable rate of failure, B, multiply by the average out-of-court settlement, C. A times B times C equals X. If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one." - The Narrator, Fight Club

 

[carrrnuttt]

Obviously that person has never driven a GC with this shifter because otherwise they'd notice that the selected gear is lit up on the shifter and displayed on the dash.

The GC isn't unique in this. I owned a BMW X5 and most other newer BMWs have a similar, self-centering shifter. The MASSIVE difference between the two is, when I mess up and leave my X5 in neutral and open the door, the safety feature kicks in and immediately puts the car in park. If you have a specific need to be outside the car and have it neutral (like when towing), you have to use an override key to do so.

And no, in a car with about a trillion bits of light flashing everywhere, a quarter-inch flash of light shouldn't be the barrier between life and death. If you aren't going to go by the design principle "visibility of system status," then at least mitigate it like BMW and other manufacturers have done.

I know you want to stress personal responsibility, but have you ever looked for a pair of keys or some other bauble that you SWORE up and down you set in the exact same place you "always" set it, but it seemed to have grown feet and walked away? Think of that moment of cloudiness and then imagine that's you saying "I swore, I saw it go to P!" as someone you may or may not know is being crushed by your car. By your measure, you will have to be charged with some kind of manslaughter charge for that.

 

[Brian in Mesa]

George Takei Reacts to Gay Sulu News: "I Think It's Really Unfortunate"

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-takei-reacts-gay-sulu-909154

Speaking exclusively to THR, the actor, and LGBT activist says the 'Star Trek Beyond' development for his character is out of step with what creator Gene Roddenberry would have wanted.

In the summer of 1968, George Takei attended a pool party at the Hollywood Hills home of Star Trek creator Gene Roddenberry. The actor, then 31 and famous for his role as Hikaru Sulu, helmsman of the USS Enterprise, swam up to his boss and "had a conversation with him, a very private one. I was still closeted, so I did not want to come out to him."

Nevertheless, Takei — who announced he was gay in 2005 — was fully attuned to the gay equality conversation gaining momentum at the time. He felt it was a topic worth exploring on the socially minded science-fiction series, which had previously tackled issues like the Civil Rights movement and the Vietnam War through keenly observed allegory.

But the show had recently seen its lowest ratings ever, with an episode featuring TV's first interracial kiss between Captain Kirk and Lieutenant Uhura, which NBC affiliates in the South refused to air. While sympathetic to his star's pitch, Roddenberry felt he was in no position to take those kinds of risks.

"He was a strong supporter of LGBT equality," recalls Takei, now 79. "But he said he has been pushing the envelope and walking a very tight rope — and if he pushed too hard, the show would not be on the air." Alas, the show was canceled the following season anyway.

But Star Trek has lived long and prospered for studio home Paramount, spawning six TV series and 13 feature films. True to its title, the latest big-screen outing, Star Trek Beyond, has gone where none have gone before: Star John Cho — who assumes the Sulu mantle for the third time in the reboots — has told Australia's Herald Sun that the character is revealed to be gay.

The idea came from Simon Pegg, who plays Scotty in the new films and penned the Beyondscreenplay, and director Justin Lin, both of whom wanted to pay homage to Takei's legacy as both a sci-fi icon and beloved LGBT activist.

And so a scene was written into the new film, very matter-of-fact, in which Sulu is pictured with a male spouse raising their infant child. Pegg and Lin assumed, reasonably, that Takei would be overjoyed at the development — a manifestation of that conversation with Roddenberry in his swimming pool so many years ago.

Except Takei wasn't overjoyed. He had never asked for Sulu to be gay. In fact, he'd much prefer that he stay straight. "I’m delighted that there’s a gay character," he tells The Hollywood Reporter. "Unfortunately, it’s a twisting of Gene’s creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it’s really unfortunate."

Takei explains that Roddenberry was exhaustive in conceiving his Star Trek characters. (The name Sulu, for example, was based on the Sulu Sea off the coast of the Philippines, so as to render his Asian nationality indeterminate.) And Roddenberry had always envisioned Sulu as heterosexual.

 

[mojorizen7]

At the risk of attracting the PC attack dog police....i'll simply ask. Why?
I have the same response to the decision to cast Idris Elba(a fine actor) in the role of the Gunslinger in the upcoming Dark Tower film. Why?

These aren't decisions made in the name of the art itself, which is unfortunate IMO. Oh well.

 

[oaken1]

At the risk of attracting the PC attack dog police....i'll simply ask. Why?
I have the same response to the decision to cast Idris Elba(a fine actor) in the role of the Gunslinger in the upcoming Dark Tower film. Why?

These aren't decisions made in the name of the art itself, which is unfortunate IMO. Oh well.

I agree.... bowing to pc pressure...trying to mold society....and ruining a franchise that has been loved by fans for 5 decades.... I do kinda think the "tip'o'the hat" to Takai is cool of them.... but I am really gettin' sick of Hollywood messing with characters that have been firmly established...the creator had a vision, and that vision is what they should stick with.

 

[BillsCarnage]

Let's hope this is not a preemptive strike to distraction for a bad movie.

 

[AzStevenCal]

I agree.... bowing to pc pressure...trying to mold society....and ruining a franchise that has been loved by fans for 5 decades.... I do kinda think the "tip'o'the hat" to Takai is cool of them.... but I am really gettin' sick of Hollywood messing with characters that have been firmly established...the creator had a vision, and that vision is what they should stick with.

And since historically the "creators" all had basically the same un-diversified vision, the failure to include people of color, women, homosexuals etc. would just go on forever. I'm often annoyed by the "token" whatever too but until it stops feeling like a token, it appears to be necessary. Although I'll admit, I was pissed when they turned one of my comic book heroes gay (The Rawhide Kid).

 

[oaken1]

And since historically the "creators" all had basically the same un-diversified vision, the failure to include people of color, women, homosexuals etc. would just go on forever. I'm often annoyed by the "token" whatever too but until it stops feeling like a token, it appears to be necessary. Although I'll admit, I was pissed when they turned one of my comic book heroes gay (The Rawhide Kid).

okay....which color did Roddenberry leave out of Star Trek?
I realize some of society raised a stink when Kirk kissed Ohura...but he slept with orange chicks, green chicks, and purple chicks...just off the top of my head...I think there was also one with four eyes in there somewhere..... Roddenberry was by no means "undiversified"

I also hate the "Token".... but changing characters that have been societal icons for fifty years is an abomination...if the gay community wants to have characters and superheroes who are gay then they should write them

characters of varying sexualities should evolve organically within the scope of the story and have their own identities.

 

[AzStevenCal]

okay....which color did Roddenberry leave out of Star Trek?
I realize some of society raised a stink when Kirk kissed Ohura...but he slept with orange chicks, green chicks, and purple chicks...just off the top of my head...I think there was also one with four eyes in there somewhere..... Roddenberry was by no means "undiversified"

I also hate the "Token".... but changing characters that have been societal icons for fifty years is an abomination...if the gay community wants to have characters and superheroes who are gay then they should write them

characters of varying sexualities should evolve organically within the scope of the story and have their own identities.

Roddenberry went as far as the times allowed, I see no reason to not take it a step further given the current social clime. I have no doubt that Gene would have done just that eventually although not necessarily with this particular character.

And you and I have far different opinions on "abomination".

 

[Stout]

Roddenberry went as far as the times allowed, I see no reason to not take it a step further given the current social clime. I have no doubt that Gene would have done just that eventually although not necessarily with this particular character.

And you and I have far different opinions on "abomination".

Well, Roddenberry told Takei that he wasn't taking the character that direction, and Takei very respectfully came out against this decision. I think they should have checked with him first and, had they done their homework, they might have stuck to Rodenberry's vision--as they should have.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Well, Roddenberry told Takei that he wasn't taking the character that direction, and Takei very respectfully came out against this decision. I think they should have checked with him first and, had they done their homework, they might have stuck to Rodenberry's vision--as they should have.

Yeah, I read that but I think that's some careful wording by Takei. He also mentioned that he didn't want Gene or anyone to know he was in the closet and that Gene felt there was a line he couldn't cross as far as social issues go at that moment in time. And I know that there's long been the concern that gay actors could end up pigeon-holed into JUST gay roles.

 

[Stout]

Yeah, I read that but I think that's some careful wording by Takei. He also mentioned that he didn't want Gene or anyone to know he was in the closet and that Gene felt there was a line he couldn't cross as far as social issues go at that moment in time. And I know that there's long been the concern that gay actors could end up pigeon-holed into JUST gay roles.

Oh yeah, those were huge concerns back then, and still are some today. I thought I read that he did eventually come out to Gene when he asked if he would make Sulu gay.

 

[AzStevenCal]

Oh yeah, those were huge concerns back then, and still are some today. I thought I read that he did eventually come out to Gene when he asked if he would make Sulu gay.

I'll admit to some confusion on that point myself but it seemed to me that Takei was suggesting that they include a gay character (his or whoever's) without actually admitting he was homosexual.

 

[Covert Rain]

I hate token type decisions but I also hate that as soon as they add women as the heroes or make a character gay the assumption is it's PC.

Look, I respect GT comments but this is a essentially a reboot. I love the original Trek but I also loved TNG, DS9 which all moved on from Gene.

Honestly, Simon doesn't seem like the kind of writer or artist that does things just to be PC. Unless I read somewhere the studio forced him to do so, I think it was a creative decision.