• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sonequa Martin-Green is Your DSC Star

She also said this though: "This iteration of Star Trek is going to have a different take than the others in the Star Trek canon". So it sounds like it will be even "rawer and grittier" than DS9. I really hope they won't turn Star Trek into Battlestar Galactica. That would be horrible. They already tried the same with Stargate and the result was this mess called SGU. "Raw and gritty" tend to be used as descriptions for kind of dark series, in which the characters are very flawed, often to the degree of becoming unlikeable, and which don't have an optimistic tone or much humour in it. I really hope DIS won't be like this. They already ruined Stargate with their obsession of making everything "rawer and grittier". I hope Star Trek won't be the next victim. There is nothing wrong with making a lighter series.

SGU wasn't bad because it was "rawer and grittier", it was bad because it was slow paced and had boring storytelling. Also the characters weren't very likeable. I liked BSG, I adore DS9 and I hope DSC will be "rawer and grittier", while also staying inside the established realms of Star Trek regarding Canon (not design-wise, just pimp it up) & philosophy. The story being dark, doesn't mean, that the vision of the future can't be generally positive. Bad things do happen to good people...
 
^ I really liked how cold and alien things were in SGU but I can understand where it fits uncomforably into the Stargate franchise.

With all this hubbub about names I just recently realized she says her name SA-NEAK-WA where I assumed it was SHA-NEAK-WA and have to keep reminding myself that it's not.

It will be kind of weird seeing her on Discovery after Walking Dead but I guess Bakula was familiar as well. Most of the other series I mainly associated the lead with that particular role and for better or worse they were defined by it.
 
The complaints on social media of her name are numerous. Mostly men of course. They're afraid she's going to be "Trans" and threaten bathroom privileges as we know them.
 
I would have thought that would be a big no-no, similar to blackface and white washing.

Although Mia Sara did it on ER over 20 years ago, and Famke Janssen played a trans woman in Nip Tuck a few years after that... Paula Marshall played a trans woman in Two and a Half Men, maybe 5 years ago?

I guess that America is taking their time about this.
 
The story being dark, doesn't mean, that the vision of the future can't be generally positive. Bad things do happen to good people...

Exactly. Just like on TOS. It was a set in a future you would actually want to live in, where humanity had made significant progress since our time, but exploring the final frontier was still a risky, often dangerous business where happy endings were not always guaranteed.

Sorry about that, Vina, Gary Mitchell, Nancy Crater, Edith Keeler, Charlie X, Lenore Karidian, George Kirk, Richard Daystrom, Captain Decker, Miramanee, all you redshirts, etc. :)
 
There's not much evidence that they do.

Maybe not the rich celeb kids with awkward names. They live in luxury and likely know a bunch of other celeb children with ridiculous names personally. But normal kids with ridiculous names likely will have to live with jokes about their names. Or with reactions like: "Is that REALLY your name?", "What were your parents thinking?"

I also think that Adolf Hitler Campbell might get some other problems, when he is grown up. No doubt some might assume, that he is a Nazi and won't want to hire him because of that. Or even if they don't believe this, they might still not want someone with that name working at their company, because customers might get offended. After all that one supermarket already refused to make a cake with his name on it for his birthday. This is how the family got known in the first place. Then the news about him went around the world. And now when he googles his name, he will get tons of hits about his family and not positive ones. I don't think he is happy about this.
 
Having a female and minority with a male name as "the" lead character for a flagship series is already a major step.
Is it? How to Get Away with Murder and Jane the Virgin are both current shows with minority female leads, and I'm not sure there's really a stigma/prejudice to overcome with odd name choices. It might be a first for Star Trek, but women of colour are no stranger to lead roles (albeit not nearly enough lead roles so I still fully applaud the casting). A trans lead on a major show? Now that would be a step forward. Not that I remotely think that's what's happening here, Fuller just loves to give female leads boy's names.

SGU wasn't bad because it was "rawer and grittier", it was bad because it was slow paced and had boring storytelling. Also the characters weren't very likeable. I liked BSG, I adore DS9 and I hope DSC will be "rawer and grittier", while also staying inside the established realms of Star Trek regarding Canon (not design-wise, just pimp it up) & philosophy. The story being dark, doesn't mean, that the vision of the future can't be generally positive. Bad things do happen to good people...
Agreed, SGU's problem wasn't the darker tones. SG-1 had some pretty intense and grown-up moments at times. In its first season it had a plotline about a girl who was going to be an unwilling suicide bomber after her whole planet was wiped out by a plague, that's pretty dark. The problem with SGU was that it had no idea what it wanted to be about, most of the characters were either horrible or 'meh' and by the time it settled down and got going, it was too late, the audience were gone.

There's not much evidence that they do.
They have tried to do research into this and while some studies have pointed to effects (both 'positive' and 'negative') of having unusual names, the overall picture is that it either makes no difference at all, or any difference it makes is completely swamped by the effect of having the sort of parent who would call you Hitler McHitlerface in the first place. Ultimately a child's name is not going to be a major influence in itself. And as my wife will attest, having a traditionally male name can provide advantages at overcoming sexist assumptions.

More interestingly, there is a class link to names in the UK, which raises questions about whether certain names make people think of you as a certain class and therefore attribute you a certain level of social or financial success, and whether what we are seeing is correlation or causation.
 
Last edited:
They have tried to do research into this and while some studies have pointed to effects (both 'positive' and 'negative') of having unusual names, the overall picture is that it either makes no difference at all, or any difference it makes is completely swamped by the effect of having the sort of parent who would call you Hitler McHitlerface in the first place. Ultimately a child's name is not going to be a major influence in itself. And as my wife will attest, having a traditionally male name can provide advantages at overcoming sexist assumptions.

That's what I'd expect, yeah.

From all accounts, the parenting problems in the Campbell household run a lot deeper than nomenclature.
 
Is it? How to Get Away with Murder and Jane the Virgin are both current shows with minority female leads, and I'm not sure there's really a stigma/prejudice to overcome with odd name choices. It might be a first for Star Trek, but women of colour are no stranger to lead roles (albeit not nearly enough lead roles so I still fully applaud the casting). A trans lead on a major show? Now that would be a step forward. Not that I remotely think that's what's happening here, Fuller just loves to give female leads boy's names.

It is. How to Get Away with Murder and Jane the Virgin are small, comparatively lower budgeted niché television series that live from conflicts in unusual character interactions and need to be "risky" and audacious. Star Trek Discovery will be the centerpiece prestigé show of an entire network, super expensive to produce and aiming for mainstream appeal. Science fiction is expensive.

It's the difference between Zoe Saldana being able to headline her own little action movie Colombiana, but as soon as she's starring in one of the big-budget blockbusters (Avatar, Guardians of the Galaxy, Star Trek), the lead of each movie is the straight white male.

Don't underestimate how risky producers view it for a minority, female character to lead their prestige show. This IS an important milestone, even if it may not be the "first ever on television".
 
Colombiana was meant to be reasonably big. It was originally meant for Natalie Portman.

It's lack of impact and success was not by design.
 
You wouldn't like the statement "Trans folks are extremely hysterical" - so how about dialing it down a notch. IMHO it verges on trolling.

You're a moderator - how about you moderate?
How is it trolling? Masculinity is a social construct, not a group of people. You aren't born masculine, you learn it due to social pressure. If you lived in another part of the world or a different time period you would have an entirely different concept of being a man.
 
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say that, regardless of what character she's playing, Sonequa Martin-Green probably wasn't cast in Star Trek because her ring fingers are a millimeter longer than her index fingers.
No pun intended?
It's the difference between Zoe Saldana being able to headline her own little action movie Colombiana, but as soon as she's starring in one of the big-budget blockbusters (Avatar, Guardians of the Galaxy, Star Trek), the lead of each movie is the straight white male.

Don't underestimate how risky producers view it for a minority, female character to lead their prestige show. This IS an important milestone, even if it may not be the "first ever on television".
I'd actually be interested in a Star Trek sequel starring Zoe Saldana as Captain Uhura. Her performance in Beyond certainly justifies it, IMO
 
I won't accuse you of being obtuse... you understood my point though. Rewording "Transgenderism lends itself to being hysterical" - and my point is that you wouldn't like that. As such, it is the definition of trolling.

"to make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them."
 
I won't accuse you of being obtuse... you understood my point though. Rewording "Transgenderism lends itself to being hysterical" - and my point is that you wouldn't like that. As such, it is the definition of trolling.

"to make a deliberately offensive or provocative online post with the aim of upsetting someone or eliciting an angry response from them."
I don't think you understand what I'm talking about.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top