So what? Atheists are a minority too, and they abound in Trek's future.
New Fuller Interview; Season 1 = 13 (Serialized) Episodes
- Thread starter Frontier
- Start date
As I just observed in another thread, STAR TREK characters have been running into lost loves, developing crushes on other crew members, and being seduced by sexy aliens with ulterior motives for fifty years now. If TREK can handle straight characters being straight, it can handle gay characters being gay, while updating STAR TREK for the 21st century.
Actually, it's rule 1-33
I agree with this. Let people be people.
Does that mean we will see more religious people from Earth too?
It seems that my words are being intentionally misinterpreted. I drop my case. Carry on!
TNG was fully under Gene's leadership when David Gerrold's concept of a gay Starfleet officer was ridiculed and dismissed.
Hopefully so, it would be a part of the overall diverse culture I would enjoy seeing.
If they use the Breen, I'd like to see them use the multi-species interpretation of the Breen that David Mack and others have used in the novels.Forget about all these calls for earthbound diversity. I want to see a Breen on the bridge.
The CW Superhero shows have been good with this, there is a gay characters on Arrow and one on Flash neither act feminine or anything.
I doubt that homosexuality was part of Gene's utopian vision, rather given his womanizing ways, outright orgies were the way of the utopian future. In any case, an enlightened utopia WAS what Gene was envisioning, and like it or not, homosexuality being an acceptable thing is the direction society is heading. There are others responsible for interpreting Gene's vision, and so long as there's good story-telling and logical progressions of humanity, I'm in. Homosexuality isn't a deal-breaker either way, although I'm always happier when there's also a female with big hoo-hahs.
When fifteen people all "intentionally misinterpret" your words in the same way without any prior coordination, perhaps the problem doesn't lie on their end. Just a thought.
You could have just said "I drop my case" and left it at that without trying to blame everyone else for simply reading what you plainly wrote.
Here's another interview with Fuller from the same awards show.
He talks a bit about DS9 and its influence on the new series.
He talks a bit about DS9 and its influence on the new series.
The gabble of all these people being interviewed at once gives the impression of watching battery chickens speed-dating. 
Hell, in the 50s they designed cars to look like spaceships, so why not the reverse?
His words fill me with hope for the series. (I was already pretty full, but there's always room for more.)
Maybe I'm watching a very specific subset of shows, but my impression has been that this particular practice has already fallen by the wayside some time ago. The only recent show I'm personally aware of that has a somewhat over the top example would be Orphan Black, whereas I can think of several recent shows with gay characters that absolutely don't fit that description at all (Game of Thrones, Orange is the New Black, The Walking Dead, Fear the Walking Dead, Jessice Jones, Outlander, the Flash, Gotham, How to Get Away with Murder, Agents of Shield, etc). And Felix (the Orphan Black character) is still pretty toned down in comparison to, say, Lafayette from True Blood (which was created almost ten years ago) and pretty much worlds apart from Jack on Will and Grace (which was almost 20 years ago).
And I'd guess that's about where it should be, since some people clearly are feminine/masculine in that way, so elminating that type of character entirely wouldn't really be any better than ignoring the people who aren't like that.
These have been so casual and under the radar I literally forgot about them entirely. I had to look up the characters online to remember that, yeah, Sarah had that LoT episode where she flirted with the nurse all the time, and that the Police Chief in central city is married to a guy.
Last edited:
I may be in the minority here...but I absolutley HATE that this is going to be pure "arc format"...a big part of why I like "TV Star Trek" is having lots of different stories on lots of different worlds. Although on the other hand..I would be more then okay with a "Doctor Who Style" "Soft Arc"...where there is an ongoning threat or riddle to solve that gets continued a bit each episode but the episodes themselves are pretty much standalone. Or might this be what they are actually going for?
The show is long-cancelled now, but I really liked Max from Happy Endings.
I don't think that arc will equal that every single episode will deal with that arc. They could deal with it like Enterprise Season 3, that they were in the Expanse to search for the Xindi but we got episodes without any connection to the arc or little connection.
That's what I'm assuming. Other than the time between TUC and TNG, which Fuller has told us will not be the setting, there's not much elsewhere that makes much sense to go but forward.
Fuller said 'we’re going to see the transporter beams, we’re trying to cultivate distinct looks for all of those things that are unique to our version of Star Trek and carry through the themes we love seeing in fifty years of Star Trek, but doing a slightly different approach.'
THe only other place is between ENT and TOS but that would be a real step backward - he clearly wants to move forward. Also he taked about returning cast members so I presume he mean TNG era people?
THe only other place is between ENT and TOS but that would be a real step backward - he clearly wants to move forward. Also he taked about returning cast members so I presume he mean TNG era people?