|
This all seems like overthinking it to me. It's not like we ever got to know Sulu very deeply - maybe he's a bi guy? Hell, I'm not sure when Sulu was supposed to have been born, but the Sulu in the new movies may literally not be the same guy Takei portrayed. Suppose he has a different mother, or a different sperm fertilized the egg... (But yeah, probably the best way to have handled it would have been to do it with another character)
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 17:37
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
Cheesus posted:In this particular case, I think the actor who asked the film creators not to disservice the character by changing him to fit in with said actor's life is in the right. Don't really get why this matters, are they supposed to consult Takei on every decision they make with his character? Does Takei speak for the entirety of the LGBT community? How do you know Pegg and Lin didn't speak with other LGBT people and get enthusiasm from them for the idea? It's Takei's old character but it doesn't mean that he has the final say on what's appropriate. It's unfortunate that he doesn't like it but that's all it is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
Sulu was just the safest character to make gay since half of Star Trek-aware populace already associates him with gay. Like, no matter what Sulu and Gay are irrevocably intertwined already in peoples' minds. So what if original Sulu was intended to be into women? If sexuality is indeed no big deal in the future, is it a big stretch to say that the changes in the timeline caused him to meet a male partner instead of a female and that's just the way it is?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
There's no coincidence at all to why that particular character was chosen to be gay. In that light, it's a pretty dick move to do it when the guy whose life you're basing it off of says it's not cool. Like, making Scotty or McCoy gay would have the same positive effect without the negative of "oh this is just George Takei again".
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 19:49
|
|
|
If he said it's not cool for personal reasons, like he's personally offended by them incorporating his personal life into the character then yeah it's a dick move. However I don't think that's the case, it just sounds like Takei never thought of the character as gay and thinks that they should introduce a new gay character. I agree with Pegg that that would be tokenism and that character would always be thought of as "the gay one that Justin Lin made up." It seems to me that introducing it as an aspect of Sulu's character is the most tasteful way to do it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 20:01
|
|
|
Sulu whispers that he is gay in Mudd's Women when some crewman is all smitten by the girls. Sulu is like "well back to work" and then the word filter.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
It's a bit rich for the production to cite tokenism when so far all we've seen of Cho's Sulu is that he is once again at the helm of the Enterprise, seems vaguely serious, and can wield a future-samurai sword.
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2016 21:15
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Like, making Scotty or McCoy gay would have the same positive effect without the negative of "oh this is just George Takei again". I would imagine they would fear the marketing backlash against making literally any other pre-existing character gay. Because of Takei, Sulu is like literally the only guy people wouldn't get upset about.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
This whole discussion feels like some marketing team for the movie is high-fiving themselves to make something controversial out of absolutely nothing for more marketing upon said movie.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 00:53
|
|
|
Even if you never mention it, people get outraged. Remember Paranorman? That little line towards the end that the big hunk guy is gay? Parents lost their poo poo and I don't even think that was brought up ahead of time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
computer parts posted:Like, making Scotty or McCoy gay would have the same positive effect without the negative of "oh this is just George Takei again". Sulu is the only TOS character never to face female love interests shown.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:40
|
|
|
MikeJF posted:Sulu is the only TOS character never to face female love interests shown.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 01:59
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:Except implied by an Asian-looking daughter. Gay men can have daughters today. Why couldn't they in the future?
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 02:39
|
|
|
Just as an FYI, Beyond had its premiere in Sydney yesterday so spoilers are going to be hitting the Internet soon.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Wow I didn't realize the time zones were that far ahead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
Cheesus posted:In this particular case, I think the actor who asked the film creators not to disservice the character by changing him to fit in with said actor's life is in the right. This is really interesting because days before this was announced I was reading on Memory Alpha that Takei urged Roddenberry to make Sulu a gay character back in '66, but Roddenberry explained to him with all the other battles that he was fighting with the show this would be the one that cancels it and prevents them from making progress in so many other ways. Takei understood and let it go for the time being. I also don't buy your idea that this is some grave insensitivity to the LGBT community, considering one of Pegg's castmates is an outspoken homosexual advocate who probably would have been consulted for his thoughts on the matter too - and has since come out defending the decision with a counterpoint that what Takei has said.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 14:47
|
|
|
I still think there's an argument to be said that Sulu was gay in the original timeline. I mean, Takei's main objection is that his character would have lived a false life as a closeted gay man in the original timeline and he hates that.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 14:52
|
|
|
It's not the biggest deal but yeah, since the only reason they did in the first place was as an homage to George Takei, and George Takei himself explicitly told them he didn't like it.....they probably should have just not done it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
"OK, I'm down with machines that replicate matter yet still somehow allow humans to retain a self of sense or soul as though they were the exact same person that was disintegrated moments ago, but SEXUALITY IS A SPECTRUM?! NOPE" Sulu bi, so what.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
wait until you see the shot in uhura's quarters where there is a black lives matter poster on her wall next to a vintage peace sign and a bunch of vaguely progressive space poo poo
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 19:52
|
|
|
Mulaney Power Move posted:wait until you see the shot in uhura's quarters where there is a black lives matter poster on her wall next to a vintage peace sign and a bunch of vaguely progressive space poo poo wow it's Gabriel Bell's iPhone
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 20:16
|
|
|
interspecies sex will be the new progressive hurdle but what do you represent that with? a bunch of rainbow flags in a fibonacci spiral is my guess.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
MonsieurChoc posted:I still think there's an argument to be said that Sulu was gay in the original timeline. I mean, Takei's main objection is that his character would have lived a false life as a closeted gay man in the original timeline and he hates that. Maybe in the mirror universe, but Sulu the character was mostly ambiguous about his personal life. We didn't see him fall in love with crewmembers like Scotty, have an ex-wife like McCoy, or old flames that joined creepy space cults, like Chekov.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 22:15
|
|
|
korusan posted:Maybe in the mirror universe, but Sulu the character was mostly ambiguous about his personal life. We didn't see him fall in love with crewmembers like Scotty, have an ex-wife like McCoy, or old flames that joined creepy space cults, like Chekov. That's exactly what I'm saying though. Sulu could have been an openly gay (or bi) crewmember and nothing would change.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 22:55
|
|
|
Oh! My bad. I must have misread you. That's completely true, and a nice reminder of what Star Trek was really all about. Just like the multiracial crew in the 60s it's the kind of thing that can be mentioned if necessary, but doesn't need a lot of fanfare. The truth is that no matter what the 'Sulu is gay' thing would be brought up after the movie is out, and part of attaining the kind of future like in the show is having homosexual families normalized. There's so much yammering nowadays about making a movie with Indiana Jones or James Bond being a woman and the idea is lauded but taking an existing character and saying he's gay when nothing really says otherwise is somehow a bad thing because the old actor doesn't like it. It's not meant to be insulting, and I believe it's possible that George might wrong about creating some new character to "fill" that role. To me that's akin to just having a "gay character" as opposed to a character who happens to be gay - it might read mostly the same on paper but the former sounds more like a cheap cop out idea in conversation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 10, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
They should just have Kirk come out as bi. The dude is down to gently caress aliens, but you're telling me he isn't down to gently caress males who are at least of the same species? Come on.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Cnut the Great posted:They should just have Kirk come out as bi. The dude is down to gently caress aliens, but you're telling me he isn't down to gently caress males who are at least of the same species? Come on. I don't know about that but I'm pretty sure Kirk would have no problem loving a clone or mirror version of himself.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
korusan posted:To me that's akin to just having a "gay character" as opposed to a character who happens to be gay - it might read mostly the same on paper but the former sounds more like a cheap cop out idea in conversation. This is pretty much the stated reason Simon Pegg gave for making this choice, and I agree.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
korusan posted:To me that's akin to just having a "gay character" as opposed to a character who happens to be gay - it might read mostly the same on paper but the former sounds more like a cheap cop out idea in conversation. That would hold water if Sulu were anything more than the token Asian in the films at this point, but he's not, and so the argument is garbage. He's a non-character, and now he's the token Asian doubling as the token gay. This is an entirely cynical retcon intended to maximize Sulu's minority status because they had no idea what to do with the character and wouldn't dare taint an actual major character with being gay.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
Maybe Sulu has more depth in this movie we haven't seen yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:27
|
|
|
Varam posted:That would hold water if Sulu were anything more than the token Asian in the films at this point, but he's not, and so the argument is garbage. He's a non-character, and now he's the token Asian doubling as the token gay. This is an entirely cynical retcon intended to maximize Sulu's minority status because they had no idea what to do with the character and wouldn't dare taint an actual major character with being gay. "Sulu is a token character, also their efforts to remedy this and flesh out his personal life are garbage"
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
korusan posted:To me that's akin to just having a "gay character" as opposed to a character who happens to be gay - it might read mostly the same on paper but the former sounds more like a cheap cop out idea in conversation.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 08:07
|
|
|
A True Jar Jar Fan posted:Maybe Sulu has more depth in this movie we haven't seen yet. Hahaha
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 09:21
|
|
|
Jose Oquendo posted:I don't know about that but I'm pretty sure Kirk would have no problem loving a clone or mirror version of himself. This actually happened in possibly the best of the films (barring of course the one with the whales) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZazcliCXii4 quote:That would hold water if Sulu were anything more than the token Asian in the films at this point, but he's not, and so the argument is garbage. He's a non-character, and now he's the token Asian doubling as the token gay. This is an entirely cynical retcon intended to maximize Sulu's minority status because they had no idea what to do with the character and wouldn't dare taint an actual major character with being gay. Later this is followed up with an exchange about how he could get used to the captain's chair. This shows he's a man of ambition, and provides for us an insight as to how a Star Trek character who isn't Kirk could one day be captain. When we examine his description from the aborted Phase II series (which itself is a fascinating thing to read about), we see some of his younger self's character traits line up with how that character would have grown from the original TV series Sulu: quote:"Ship's helmsman, played by actor George Takei. Mixed Oriental in ancestry, a Lieutenant Commander, Japanese predominating, Sulu is very Occidental in speech and manner. In fact, his attitude toward Asians is that they seem to him rather "inscrutable." Sulu fancies himself more of an old-world "D'Artagnan" than anything else. He is a compulsive hobbyist; like all "collectors," he is forever giving his friends a thousand reasons why they, too, should take on the same hobby. The Golden Gael fucked around with this message at 14:13 on Jul 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:01
|
|
|
I like the notion of Sulu as a Japanese guy who is obsessed with Western culture and will not shut up about his Euraboo hobbies.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 14:41
|
|
|
Wanting to be D'artagnan is a cool and relateable character trait. Who wouldn't want to be D'Artagnan?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 15:19
|
|
|
It's kind of cute how much 23rd century pop culture reveres pre-1960s culture, as opposed to being forward thinking about what would still be relevant in the future. Then again, Sulu could just be a fan of the 2011 "classic". And I guess Kirk listened to Beastie Boys 200 years after they'd be cold corpses.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
Star Trek characters actually caring about high culture stuff like classical music or theater, and Star Trek characters actually inconveniencing themselves because they held strong philosophical ideals, wasn't always executed that well but at least it was more interesting than creating yet another banal sci-fi action franchise. I'll admit I recently checked out some old Next Gen episodes and they're basically unwatchable now but at least they were trying. Abrams Star Trek doesn't have any real connection to that old 20th century tradition of speculative, forward looking science fiction. It's just Mission Impossible in space, which is (or ought to be) boring as gently caress for anyone old enough to have graduated High School.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2016 22:17
|
|
|
Is it really forward thinking if it's just "the same thing, but in space"? Like (eg) Interstellar's ending posits that humanity goes backward into an idyllic 1950s atmosphere, just in a tube this time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 6, 2024 05:10 |
|
|
Helsing posted:Star Trek characters actually caring about high culture stuff like classical music or theater, and Star Trek characters actually inconveniencing themselves because they held strong philosophical ideals, wasn't always executed that well but at least it was more interesting than creating yet another banal sci-fi action franchise. I don't really see how that describes it at all. Star Trek has always worked best when it appeals to the taste of the time. In the 60s it was more like television theatre, which was the style back then. In the late 80s TNG spearheaded tropes that were different from the original series after trying to emulate it for a while, and that kind of thing resonated with television audiences - the two part cliffhanger summer is of particular note. DS9 responded to the demand for a grittier kind of science fiction, which served it well through the mid 90s. These Star Trek movies have been a product of the Obama years, being released near the beginning, middle, and end of his two terms. Successful cinema of these last few years is able to blend action with story - and though it has its problems (like all Star Trek has had, since the beginning) it generally succeeds at what it needs to do. Not all Star Trek is cerebral conversations around tea - some of the best episodes and movies have focused more on the emotionally gripping rather than intellectual discourse/hard science.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2016 03:24
|
|