HUGE Mr Sulu Spoiler

[Guy Gardener]

Irony of ironies my favourite Sulu moment (growing up?) is when he flips that hulk twice his size and says "Don't call me Tiny?!"

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

It's not a sexually charged scene.

Or is it?

Sulu presses this dude against a wall, and then throws him to the ground.

Totally innocent.

If Kirk had done that to a woman, they would have been making out for twenty minutes.



Totally innocent.

 

[sojourner]

Sulu had the best casual clothes in that movie.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

This is a big let down for me.. Sulu its part of my imagination for 40 years or so..i never imagined him as gay...what they are doing is ruining a character for making a point..unfortunately this is forced..this is imposed..even Mr george takei that i respect so much..one of my idols is, as far as i know against this.. I have nothing against gays, nothing.. But this is forced. If they want to put a gay character i completely agree... do it...but create a new character.
For me....its with sadness that this is a reason for me not to go to the cinema for the first time to see the upcoming movie.
Its over.

The more times someone mentions that they have nothing against gays and no problem seeing them onscreen, the less I believe them. What is it, like a mantra you have to say to psych yourself up before coming to post the exact opposite opinion? I hope you're able to fool yourself, because you sure as hell aren't fooling anyone else.

How can you respect and idolize George Takei "so much" yet consider such an important aspect of his personal identity to be unimaginable or ruining a character or forced? And how is it forced any more than Kirk's, Spock's, Uhura's, or McCoy's heterosexuality is?

Am I really supposed to buy that you were so invested in this new Sulu's character that a two second scene adding some depth to his background that had never been addressed before in this timeline is going to make you boycott the film, and that it has nothing to do with the fact that that two seconds of background involves the inclusion of an icky gay relationship? Give me a break. At least be honest.

 

[Chekov's Phaser]

Sulu had the best casual clothes in that movie.

You sure it wasn't this??:

 

[sojourner]

Space Pilgrim!

 

[Guy Gardener]

Sulu and the husband are both male, but are we sure if Hiraku's beau is human?

 

[BillJ]

This is a big let down for me.. Sulu its part of my imagination for 40 years or so..i never imagined him as gay...what they are doing is ruining a character for making a point..unfortunately this is forced..this is imposed..even Mr george takei that i respect so much..one of my idols is, as far as i know against this.. I have nothing against gays, nothing.. But this is forced. If they want to put a gay character i completely agree... do it...but create a new character.
For me....its with sadness that this is a reason for me not to go to the cinema for the first time to see the upcoming movie.
Its over.

More room in the theater for me, my family and others that have no problems acknowledging gay people exist.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

You sure it wasn't this??:

Everyone's up at arms about the gays, but THAT pastel Pilgrim pageboy tracksuit travesty was allowed to reach the big screen without a word of protest. Priorities people, priorities.

 

[SalvorHardin]

Everyone's up at arms about the gays, but THAT pastel Pilgrim pageboy tracksuit travesty was allowed to reach the big screen without a word of protest. Priorities people, priorities.

But that tracksuit is what Gene wanted. It was true to his vision!

 

[Locutus of Bored]

But that tracksuit is what Gene wanted. It was true to his vision!

Gene's vision was obviously myopic.

 

[Timewalker]

The more times someone mentions that they have nothing against gays and no problem seeing them onscreen, the less I believe them.

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I want to say a few things about this issue:

I'm someone who has nothing against gays and no problem seeing them onscreen. However, I do think George Takei has a point in saying that HIS version of Sulu was not gay. There are several instances in TOS where Sulu is shown to be attracted to women:

"Mudd's Women"
"The Way to Eden"
"Star Trek: The Motion Picture"

"Star Trek: Generations" (sure, Demora could have been a test tube baby, but why jump to that conclusion just because the actor is gay?)

"World Enough and Time" (fan film, not canon, but it starred George Takei... and in this film, Sulu didn't get his child via adoption, a laboratory, or any other way than ordinary human biology)

The fanfic series linked in my sig - a series I've followed since the 1980s - features Sulu as one of the major characters - more important and nuanced than Kirk, and this version of Sulu is bisexual and ultimately marries an alien woman whose previous husband was a Vulcan. So I think it's safe to say that I don't mind the main characters being bisexual or gay, or I wouldn't have been a loyal reader for the past 30 years. My point is that I understand George Takei's objection, and it's an opinion that shouldn't be dismissed with scorn.

I'm not going to get hysterical and rant that nuSulu has been "ruined." Indeed, he's the only main character in nuTrek that I find tolerable at all. I simply want to say that it's inaccurate to say that there were no instances of Original Sulu being attracted to women, and therefore it's reasonable for George Takei to object to nuSulu being gay. It's a case of not being true to the source material.

You sure it wasn't this??:

There actually was a time a few centuries ago when men wore pink clothing and frilly lace sleeves and ruffles around their necks, and copious amounts of jewelry. Look up the portraits of men from the Tudor/Renaissance period and you'll see that such things were normal male fashion.

 

[BillJ]

I'm someone who has nothing against gays and no problem seeing them onscreen. However, I do think George Takei has a point in saying that HIS version of Sulu was not gay.

People are free to believe whatever they want in regards to Prime Sulu. It is likely the character will never appear again in any live action version of Star Trek. Everyone will have to grow up and acknowledge at some point that Abrams Sulu is gay.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

I know this wasn't addressed to me, but I want to say a few things about this issue:

I'm someone who has nothing against gays and no problem seeing them onscreen. However, I do think George Takei has a point in saying that HIS version of Sulu was not gay. There are several instances in TOS where Sulu is shown to be attracted to women.

But this isn't Takei's version of Sulu anymore.

It's not a matter of disagreeing with making the character gay because you think it was firmly established that Prime Sulu wasn't gay. That's fine, though I disagree with that argument for a number of reasons. It's all the hyperbole surrounding the fact that nuSulu is gay and how that retroactively ruins the character and is an agenda being forced on the audience and how it's such a violation I'm going to boycott the movie. When you (not you personally, just in general) say you have no problem with gays being in the films and then follow it up with a bunch of invective that makes it obvious that you have a really big problem with gays being in the films, it's sort of self-defeating, you know?

That's all I was talking about, not people with general and reasonably made objections based on the depiction of original Sulu.

 

[Timewalker]

But this isn't Takei's version of Sulu anymore.

It's not a matter of disagreeing with making the character gay because you think it was firmly established that Prime Sulu wasn't gay. That's fine, though I disagree with that argument for a number of reasons. It's all the hyperbole surrounding the fact that nuSulu is gay and how that retroactively ruins the character and is an agenda being forced on the audience and how it's such a violation I'm going to boycott the movie. When you (not you personally, just in general) say you have no problem with gays being in the films and then follow it up with a bunch of invective that makes it obvious that you have a really big problem with gays being in the films, it's sort of self-defeating, you know?

That's all I was talking about, not people with general and reasonably made objections based on the depiction of original Sulu.

Well, then it's a good thing for the peace of this conversation that I'm not saying that Original Sulu is "retroactively ruined" by what's been decided for nuSulu. And I think you know by now that I've got a whole list of reasons why I refuse to pay to see any of the nuTrek movies (I've seen them when they've been on TV either free or as part of a service I'm already paying for, for other reasons)... but a gay nuSulu is not one of my reasons why I dislike nuTrek (at least it won't be unless they make any kind of joke about it).

It's unfortunate that so much obviously anti-gay rhetoric is being tossed around here and elsewhere over this. It just seems odd to me that the production people are claiming that they're doing it as an homage to George Takei, when Takei himself doesn't see it that way. After all, there have been many, many instances where the TOS version is suddenly the target for snide memes and lolpics and unfunny "jokes"... and that must be annoying for the actor who strove to make his character as nuanced as possible within the writing and direction he was allowed.

 

[BillJ]

It just seems odd to me that the production people are claiming that they're doing it as an homage to George Takei, when Takei himself doesn't see it that way.

Sometimes you buy someone a present you think they'll love and for some reason, they don't. Life goes on.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Sometimes you buy someone a present you think they'll love and for some reason, they don't. Life goes on.

Bingo.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

Well, then it's a good thing for the peace of this conversation that I'm not saying that Original Sulu is "retroactively ruined" by what's been decided for nuSulu. And I think you know by now that I've got a whole list of reasons why I refuse to pay to see any of the nuTrek movies (I've seen them when they've been on TV either free or as part of a service I'm already paying for, for other reasons)... but a gay nuSulu is not one of my reasons why I dislike nuTrek (at least it won't be unless they make any kind of joke about it).

How many more qualifiers do I have to add before you realize nothing I was saying was about you? You interjected yourself into the middle of a conversation I was having with another poster that dealt with the specific content of his post and yet somehow managed to make it about yourself. Then when I explained again exactly what I was talking about and that it was not about you or anything you said (since you weren't even involved in the discussion when I first posted), somehow you again have taken it as some kind of personal attack or commentary on you. I'm at a loss about what else I can possibly say here, other than I'm not talking about you and don't think you're anti-gay.

 

[Timewalker]

How many more qualifiers do I have to add before you realize nothing I was saying was about you? You interjected yourself into the middle of a conversation I was having with another poster that dealt with the specific content of his post and yet somehow managed to make it about yourself. Then when I explained again exactly what I was talking about and that it was not about you or anything you said (since you weren't even involved in the discussion when I first posted), somehow you again have taken it as some kind of personal attack or commentary on you. I'm at a loss about what else I can possibly say here, other than I'm not talking about you and don't think you're anti-gay.

What's the phrase people use now? Oh, right: WHOOSH!

Everything I said was intended in a neutral tone of voice, and I think that you and I are basically on the same side of this issue.

But now you're accusing me of things I never meant, never wrote, motivations I don't have, and furthermore you're telling that I'm not welcome to post because you weren't specifically talking to me.

I did not think you were attacking me before, but you sure are in the above post.

This is a public board, and if you want to have a conversation with a poster where nobody else is allowed to add a comment, may I recommend using PMs? Last I saw, this is a general discussion about nuSulu, I had an opinion to state, and I stated it. Your permission is not required.

 

[jotap]

More room in the theater for me, my family and others that have no problems acknowledging gay people exist.

You are the one making accusations though. Nothing in my post deserves that answer. What that says about you i ll keep for me.
I have nothing against gays. George Takey is gay and he is against what they are doing to his character.
Just create another characters, Sulu was never portrayed as gay. That is all.
This is just forced. imposed by some political pressure i do not know.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

imposed by some political pressure i do not know.

No.