We were much amused by a column in the Utah State University’s student newspaper about (traditionally) chick flicks vs. guy flicks.
I had to watch all six hours of “Pride and Prejudice” and she had to watch three “Star Trek” movies. And I swear on my death bed that she got the better end of that trade.
Now, I was nice and had her watch Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn, Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country and Star Trek: Generations. But if she had made me watch all six hours of her movie in one sitting, I was going to break out Star Trek: The Motion Picture, Star Trek V: The Final Frontier and Star Trek: Insurrection. If you got that joke, you are definitely a Trekkie.
*cough* We got the joke.
She admitted that she was pleasantly surprised with how good the nerdy movies were, even complimenting the “soap opera” twist in “The Wrath of Kahn.” However, as hard as she tried, she just could not keep a straight face when I tried to explain why the Klingon Bird-of-Prey couldn’t shoot its torpedoes while it was cloaked.
But it went both ways. I must admit, “Pride and Prejudice” was much better than I thought it would be. I was expecting a “Sleepless in Seattle” or “Titanic”-type of chick-flick. You know, girl meets boy, they fall in love, but live on different sides of the country, boy drowns on a big boat, girl still looks for him on the top of the Empire State Building but finds Cary Grant instead. The usual story.
But “Pride and Prejudice” actually had a relatively decent plot. A really, really long plot, but a good one. It didn’t take long to see why girls like this movie. It has romance, relationships, Colin Firth, soldiers, relationships, Colin Firth, romance, guys in uniform, relationships and, did I mention, Colin Firth?
We are fond of Star Trek here at AustenBlog World Headquarters (we suspect Dorothy of a crush on Data but she denies it) and certainly we do not think such an interest precludes an interest in Jane Austen’s work. In fact, the Editrix was a Star Trek geek long before she was a Janeite. 
