HUGE Mr Sulu Spoiler

[Newspaper Taxi]

I found Pegg's reasoning on making an established character gay vs. introducing a new gay character pretty convincing. Besides what he mentioned, it's hard enough to split focus on the ensemble cast and the guest characters as it is. Lt. Gayman (Or Lt. Dyke*) would barely get any screen time. Look at what Alice Eve's part as Carol turned into in the last movie -- I imagine this new character's part would be about that size.

(*Disclaimer: I'm a lesbian so I have sienfieldian joke immunity with that word.)

 

[Pauln6]

Honestly, I think George is insecure about the idea that there is a character named Sulu who is gay, and that the man who played the original Sulu, who also happens to be gay in real life, is no longer as distinct a figure, at least in his mind. That's projection and assumption, sure, but it's the only way I can really make sense of his reaction to this news.

He might be worried about receiving directed abuse if he endorses it. That seems like a valid concern for an 80 year old man.

 

[Amaris]

He might be worried about receiving directed abuse if he endorses it. That seems like a valid concern for an 80 year old man.

What directed abuse? He's been an out gay man since 2005. He is an advocate for the LGBT community, and has been for years. He's written a number of books that do focus quite often on he and his husband Brad. He's done TV shows and specials, and he has given interviews to this effect. He would be a gay man who played the original Sulu in Star Trek, explaining that Sulu, in the current incarnation of Star Trek, is gay. Hell, Leonard Nimoy was 77 when he agreed to be in the 2009 Star Trek film. I'm sure there was nerd rage at the prospect of Leonard Nimoy daring to let those posers pretend to be Star Trek. You can't predict nerd rage.

Look, a gay character was going to happen one way or the other. The best choice, when looking at all of the other characters in the main cast, is Sulu. Whether or not Takei endorses new Sulu as gay or not, there will be people angry at him, because assholes are assholes and don't need a reason.

 

[Maurice]

I've yet to run into a gay man, especially those who've lived through the 80s, including myself, who doesn't have at least a tinge of internalized homophobia.

Sadly, then you don't know enough gay men who lived the 80s. I sure as fuck don't have any tinges of that.

 

[Pauln6]

What directed abuse? He's been an out gay man since 2005. He is an advocate for the LGBT community, and has been for years. He's written a number of books that do focus quite often on he and his husband Brad. He's done TV shows and specials, and he has given interviews to this effect. He would be a gay man who played the original Sulu in Star Trek, explaining that Sulu, in the current incarnation of Star Trek, is gay. Hell, Leonard Nimoy was 77 when he agreed to be in the 2009 Star Trek film. I'm sure there was nerd rage at the prospect of Leonard Nimoy daring to let those posers pretend to be Star Trek. You can't predict nerd rage.

Look, a gay character was going to happen one way or the other. The best choice, when looking at all of the other characters in the main cast, is Sulu. Whether or not Takei endorses new Sulu as gay or not, there will be people angry at him, because assholes are assholes and don't need a reason.

I don't know how much negativity was directed at him when he came out or when he married. I have noted that some states in the USA are trying to ignore a ruling of the Supreme Court? That's a fairly rabid and nutty dislike if your politicians are willing to defy the highest court of the land because personal beliefs unsupported by empirical evidence should Trump (pun intended) the law... I'm sure he understands fan ire too given th death theats Nimoy received. I'm not rushing to judge Takei's motives. They may be just as he says. But if he's hoping to side step the shi#storm, he can't exactly say that out loud.

 

[Amaris]

I don't know how much negativity was directed at him when he came out or when he married. I have noted that some states in the USA are trying to ignore a ruling of the Supreme Court? That's a fairly rabid and nutty dislike if your politicians are willing to defy the highest court of the land because personal beliefs unsupported by empirical evidence should Trump (pun intended) the law... I'm sure he understands fan ire too given th death theats Nimoy received. I'm not rushing to judge Takei's motives. They may be just as he says. But if he's hoping to side step the shi#storm, he can't exactly say that out loud.

Then he could have left a neutral comment. Something along the lines of "I wish them the best of luck." Instead, he outright and openly disagreed with their decision, and then backed it up with what he felt Gene would have done, in an interview for all to see.

 

[Pauln6]

Then he could have left a neutral comment. Something along the lines of "I wish them the best of luck." Instead, he outright and openly disagreed with their decision, and then backed it up with what he felt Gene would have done, in an interview for all to see.

True but he was already on record as opposing the change. They should have acknowledged his reservations and said here's why we did this instead of touting it as an homage they already knew he didn't want. Maybe they assumed he'd feel obliged to support the move publicly once it was canon?

 

[Therin of Andor]

Then he could have left a neutral comment.

A neutral comment creates no conversation. I think George was deliberately oppositional partly to encourage debate. If he just said, "Well done Bad Robot", there's no story.

A cynic might say that the Shatner/Takei feud only raises its head each time Shatner plans another world tour or Takei writes a new book. IIRC, Nichelle's controversial comment to Shatner, "But I haven't told you why we all hate you" coincided with her autobiography (and Shatner's first "Memories" book). Doohan's "Why I hate Bill" diatribe coincided/heightened with the release of his biography (cowritten with Peter David). IIRC.

Welcome to Hollywood, where everything has to be controversial to get attention.

instead of touting it as an homage they already knew he didn't want.

But that's not what happened first. The scene just appeared in the movie at the preview and the premiere, and the audiences said, "Wow! A homage to George Takei." Then people began saying to Cho and Pegg, "Wow!" and what were they to reply? "Oh, sorry, it's not a homage to George because he actually disliked the idea."

 

[Grendelsbayne]

The most recommended comment is this one with 278 upvotes by the way:

"The only crime here is a lack of imagination by writers. Hmm- George Takei is gay so let's make the character he played gay. Why not make Kirk gay? That would be progressive."

Kirk is already very clearly not gay. Unless we're expected to believe he was in the closet, which makes absolutely no sense for supposedly utopian/super tolerant society. He could be BI. That could be a thing. But in terms of a specifically gay character, the only real options here are Sulu, Chekov and Scotty, and I don't see either Chekov or Scotty being half as interesting in that light as Sulu can be, since Scotty is basically walking comic relief and Chekov, in true Star Trek fashion, barely even has a part at all (maybe he does more in this movie, I don't know). Plus Sulu has actually been developed as a real badass guy in this universe, and it's nice that the first gay main character in Trek is not only a normal family man but also a guy who can really handle himself and who is probably going to make a kickass captain someday.

 

[Therin of Andor]

Scotty being half as interesting in that light as Sulu can be, since Scotty is basically walking comic relief

Three films hanging around with Keenser...

 

[Guy Gardener]

It's possible all the women we saw Kirk with were pre op trans.

I mean, if you're a man who spends all night talking a girls pants off by being f##king charming, can you really turn back after investing all that effort and time just because she might happen to have a penis?

Logistically, a transsexual/transvestite that you pick up at 9pm, is going to be way prettier than the next available willing woman if you go back to the same bar/night club to see who is still uncoupled and intent on having a sexual dalliance at 2 am, and there's no telling if the next girl you take to the back seat of your car isn't going to still be penis positive either, but really if you plan on being a player who is going to have ongoing sport sex, and you keep consecutively wooing transgendered females by accident, maybe you're going to have to admit to god and yourself that it's not such an accident after all possibly?

 

[Cake]

People are freaking out over Sulu —who barely had any indication of his sexuality before one way or the other— being gay, but you want infamous hetero horndog Captain Kirk to be bi instead? The internet would explode like an AI that Kirk had talked into short circuiting from a logic failure. You know what? That might make it worthwhile.

Of course Kirk would get a much bigger reaction. I also think McCoy or Scott would get more. They went with the most minor main character in the new movie universe to minimize their risk and still create some buzz. That Takei is gay made it also easier for them to choose Sulu. And likely this all will be about one or two little scenes to begin with. It was a chicken move, not bold at all. But they still act and tap themselves on the shoulders like it is still the 90s and they included a make out scene between two men in their film.

By the way give it a week and Sulu being gay is old news. And it doesn't feel like people here have freaked more out over Sulu being gay than other changes the new movies made like Vulcan getting destroyed. And then there was the whole Khan mess and so on.

But that's not what happened first. The scene just appeared in the movie at the preview and the premiere, and the audiences said, "Wow! A homage to George Takei." Then people began saying to Cho and Pegg, "Wow!" and what were they to reply? "Oh, sorry, it's not a homage to George because he actually disliked the idea."

Why not honesty? It is not like everyone don't know now, that Takei is really against it. Trying to sell it as a tribute for Takei, worked at best for a few hours.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

The second quote was not by me.

 

[Shaka Zulu]

Agree entirely. What makes this really quite wrong is that Takei always gave off the gay vibe, especially during that TOS scene. . .half naked, dripping sweat, thrusting his sword around, and generally being as camp as a row of tents. Cho isn't gay, nor does he play Sulu as gay, but now just to be politically correct, fact is being mixed with fiction purely as an excuse to shoehorn homosexuality in to Star Trek, and Cho will probably be told to start camping up his performance just to reinforce the point. I wonder if he's got the "gay voice" down pat yet?

We've already got Quinto who can't hide his sexuality while playing Spock, and TBH, his relationship (such as it is) with Uhura makes me cringe because he simply can't act straight. As far as I'm concerned, Quinto's Spock might as well be gay, and the Uhura thing is just a beard. What's going to be next? Kirk bedding McCoy? Scotty nailing a Tribble for comedy value?

Liberal Hollywood at its worst.

I've no issue with homosexuality being represented in Star Trek. I just don't like the way it's being forced on the audience.

Who the frack is 'forcing' GLBTQ onto you or anybody like you? And is it anything like the 'heterosexuality or else' that everybody in society is forced to endure and has endured for a century and a half of visual & other media, including straight people like myself?

It seems that Star Trek and you just aren't compatible anymore; I'd suggest watching some other sci-fi property/franchise that doesn't have the gay in it that you hate so much, or patronizing the Christian fundie media sphere (itself a separate system within the entertainment industry) and see if there's a Christian fundie version of Star Trek, or a Christian fundie sci-fi show you can watch. There's just one little problem-last time I checked, there was/is no sci-fi media franchise like that, and no Christian one either. So, what will you do?

People are making this way too complicated...

The new Sulu is gay.

The old Sulu probably was not.

There's no reason to try to force explanations as to why original Sulu may or may not have been gay. It shouldn't really matter. And it's not like Sulu's sexuality was an integral part of his character. Other than Kirk, it didn't really matter that much what anyone's sexuality was in the original Star Trek.

This revelation sounds like it will be handled in a fairly subtle way, and will likely have no effect on the overall story.

It was a nice "gift" to Takei, and his reasons for not being happy about it are confusing, but personal, and we should respect them.

Frankly, Star Trek should have had a gay character years ago (and not because fans clamored for it; I am never a fan of 'pandering' to the fans), but because Star Trek has always been about diversity, and showing a future where everyone is included and we all work together.

Unlike many other creative works, Star Trek sadly became more safe over time, afraid to push the envelope. So on this issue, they arrived too late to the party; so late that it really shouldn't be a big deal.

This is nice way to make up for lost time.

When were TPTB behind the franchise going to do this in the past? During the time of TNG, they were in a tight pickle and individual stations would only air the show in a 'family-friendly' slot and expected the show to be equally 'family friendly'. IMHO, if anybody's to blame, the people who set up that situation are, not the production staff and showrunners of the later shows who probably wanted to do this but were afraid of Christian fundies and Christian fundie organizations telling their flock (many of them Trekfans) that Star Trek is now evil and to boycott Star Trek. The people behind the current version of the franchise have rectified this situation now-that's all that matters, and should matter.

To prevent future media franchises from being wrecked like this by the religious and secular right, we need to get as angry as we can and form a counterforce against them when they spew bullshit about GLBTQ people being in media; maybe we can take a leaf from what the religious and secular right does, and set up organizations like One Million Moms/One Million Dads or the AFA (American Family Association) to counter them and tell them where to go. People also need to challenge queerphobia individually online as well and make it clear that it won't be tolerated, anywhere.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Former Paramount Television head Gary Nardino produced Brothers, a sitcom focussed on a gay lead in 1984 for the cable network Show Time.

1980s Americans sophisticated enough to pay for cable were ready for homosexuality on the small screen. Small minded hillbillies and bible thumpers with bunny ears clinging to UHF were not.

TNG was broadcast initially on affiliates as a first run syndication to ma and pa kettle in the boondocks. It was sold for free (ad space kick backs were agreed to.) to inflate the ratings relying on the collateral aggregation of thousands of regional TV stations rather than one Network to find it's viewers.

America is always a lot of different Americas.

 

[Cake]

The second quote was not by me.

Sorry, corrected it.

 

[Rincewiend]

I hope the new tv show has 1 or 2 characters who aren't "straight"...
Maybe a pan- or omnisexual as well, considering all the aliens in the show.

 

[Cake]

As we are speaking about gay characters in Star Trek. 12 years ago they made in Germany a Star Trek parody called (T)Raumschiff Surprise, in which all Enterprise characters were gay. It is still one of the most successful German movies of all times. More than 9 million people saw it in the cinemas. It is currently on place 19 in regards to the most watched movies in Germany between 1966 and today. Beating for example all the Star Wars movies. None of the real Star Trek movies made it into the top 100 by the way. The last two Star Trek movies didn't even get close to 2 million viewers.

http://www.insidekino.com/DJahr/DAlltime100.htm
http://www.insidekino.com/Y/DuellSTChronikB.htm
http://www.trekzone.de/content/dt/n...into-darkness-jetzt-einspiel-rekordhalter.htm

So at least in Germany gay Kirk, Spock, McCoy have easily beaten their straight counterparts in the cinemas.

 

[Admiral Bear]

Kirk is already very clearly not gay.

Not true, according to the self annointed successor to Gene.

"The main thrust for those who aren’t keen on our LGBT Sulu, seems to come down to two things. Firstly, why Sulu? It’s a good point, I mean it could have been anybody: Kirk is a pansexual fun seeker; who knows why Bones got divorced? Nobody said Spock and Uhura were exclusive; Chekov is just permanently horny and let’s face it, there’s more to Scotty and Keenser than meets the eye."

Funny this. I said pretty much all of the above for comedic effect the other day in order to criticise Pegg's actions, and got an infraction for trolling. Two days later, Pegg comes out with the same thing while presumably being quite serious, and everyone thinks he's wonderful.

Now, having typed pansexual in to google, I'm still none the wiser, although I get the impression it's a label made up by some special snowflakes who's sexual proclivities are so off the wall, they feel they need a little name tag all of their own because having gay representation and rights just doesn't cut the mustard. Either that, or just being plain bi-sexual just ain't enough fun.

I'm pretty sure Pegg doesn't know what it means either, considering he's applied it to Kirk, a character who's never shown sexual attraction towards anyone but women. Has Pegg ever watched Star Trek, or is he just making this bullshit up as he goes?

I also notice a large portion of the final paragraph of his latest blog has also disappeared. Having read it yesterday, the removed lines were so obnoxious and deliberately offensive, Paramount have probably told him that even his idiocy had crossed the line.

Also, I see the "George Takei is a homophobe" brigade have turned up here. Always fun to see how quickly the gays turn on themselves at the quickest opportunity. For all the preaching of love and tolerance, and those ever so pretty rainbow flags they like waving around, some of them are just as intolerant as everyone else.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

Not true, according to the self annointed successor to Gene.

"The main thrust for those who aren’t keen on our LGBT Sulu, seems to come down to two things. Firstly, why Sulu? It’s a good point, I mean it could have been anybody: Kirk is a pansexual fun seeker; who knows why Bones got divorced? Nobody said Spock and Uhura were exclusive; Chekov is just permanently horny and let’s face it, there’s more to Scotty and Keenser than meets the eye."

Funny this. I said pretty much all of the above for comedic effect the other day in order to criticise Pegg's actions, and got an infraction for trolling. Two days later, Pegg comes out with the same thing while presumably being quite serious, and everyone thinks he's wonderful.

Now, having typed pansexual in to google, I'm still none the wiser, although I get the impression it's a label made up by some special snowflakes who's sexual proclivities are so off the wall, they feel they need a little name tag all of their own because having gay representation and rights just doesn't cut the mustard. Either that, or just being plain bi-sexual just ain't enough fun.

I'm pretty sure Pegg doesn't know what it means either, considering he's applied it to Kirk, a character who's never shown sexual attraction towards anyone but women. Has Pegg ever watched Star Trek, or is he just making this bullshit up as he goes?

I also notice a large portion of the final paragraph of his latest blog has also disappeared. Having read it yesterday, the removed lines were so obnoxious and deliberately offensive, Paramount have probably told him that even his idiocy had crossed the line.

Also, I see the "George Takei is a homophobe" brigade have turned up here. Always fun to see how quickly the gays turn on themselves at the quickest opportunity. For all the preaching of love and tolerance, and those ever so pretty rainbow flags they like waving around, some of them are just as intolerant as everyone else.

Pansexual very obviously =/= gay. If you really don't know what it is, here's a hint: Pan means 'everything' or 'all'.

As for whether Kirk can legitimately be described that way based on canon? The argument isn't nearly as clear cut as you appear to think, since a huge number of his conquests were clearly alien, which begs the question of whether they really all had standard genitals. Also begs the question of whether it would really bother him if they didn't, since he never seems to put in any effort to find out ahead of time. Not to mention some rather obvious sexual possibilities for the prehensile tails on the cat girls in ST09...