Star Trek Beyond

[tgreco]

I replied to the bits that I thought were justified replying to and weren't just a rambling, whiny mess.

Exactly what information presented, and then clarified do you consider to be the whiny mess part?

If you're trying to say that I'm some sort of bigot, or homophobe, you're sorely mistaken. I'm a big supporter of gay rights, and the gay community, and have been for a very long time. And not in the passive, I put rainbows on my facebook profile way. So if your assumption is that I'm offended by a gay character, you're completely wrong.

What I see, with Beyond, is a film that had a slashed budget, a slashed marketing budget, and they're trying desperately to get noticed.
I see a July littered with under performing bombs... like ID42, and soon most likely Ghostbusters, and quite possibly Beyond.

I see a marketing department trying to heighten their visibility using social media, and social issues, justifying it with the "Trek is progressive and inclusive" mantra.

I'm sure when they wrote that scene(which can easily be edited out for foreign markets like Russia, where you can be fined or imprisoned for "public displays for non-traditional sexual relations"), and then sent out the press release, the last thing they expected was GT to say "what are you doing to this character? This isn't what Gene envisioned."

And I'm sure that Pegg never expected anything but thunderous applause for changing the character. I'm not saying it should or shouldn't be a token character. I am saying that they were making an attempt to get GT to help them promote the film, precisely because of his social media presence. They chose Sulu for a reason. And it wasn't with noble intensions. It was for marketing reasons. If he plugs the film, great! If he doesn't like it... well then we've generated headlines for a couple of days before the opening.

What I REALLY see is George Takei saying "Don't use my LGBT activism to promote your crappy little film", and making Pegg have to write his silly rambling "we didn't want it to be a token character" response.

 

[Jeyl]

Yeah so now that he would be able to have a gay character, why wouldn't he?

Not to mention that with the threat of cancellation becoming more and more certain, instead of pushing the envelope to it's fullest, he used Star Trek's last Season 2 episode to make a back-door pilot for another show. Hard to sell the idea of a creator walking a tight rope when they're so willing to jump off of it.

 

[Jeyl]

What I REALLY see is George Takei saying "Don't use my LGBT activism to promote your crappy little film", and making Pegg have to write his silly rambling "we didn't want it to be a token character" response.

Well, if that's George's opinion on how he feels about this take of NuSulu, I'm disappointed in it. We have both the actor, writer, director and producers standing by their decision of having Sulu be gay, and George finds that disappointing.

:O

Star Trek has done it George! It's finally here! He even has his own gawddang TV Spot!

50 years George. 50 years it took for a main member of a Star Trek crew to be gay. If you want to say that doing this to honor you is bad form, sure. Go ahead. I can understand that point. But don't smack it down for Gene Roddenberry's sake. The man has been gone for nearly 25 years and Star Trek has changed drastically since than and a lot of it for the better. Of all the visions Gene Roddenberry had of Star Trek, changing Sulu's orientation doesn't even register on my bothersome list.

 

[Bryancd]

George's entire critique is predicated on how GR chose to present the character in 1966. This isn't HIS Sulu, he created the archetype of Sulu and now 50 years later that character gets a new spin. So what? Why is this even an issue?

 

[KrangPrime]

some of us old farts, as takei is one of them, obviously feel that you shouldn't change a character if he's worked so well for 50 years.

it's as simple as that..if you can't make him interesting as he is, get outta the franchise.

don't tug on supermans cape. don't turn him asian, or gay, just wait. keep him the way he's worked so well, and your comics will sell just swell... second verse.

 

[The Wook]

George's entire critique is predicated on how GR chose to present the character in 1966. This isn't HIS Sulu, he created the archetype of Sulu and now 50 years later that character gets a new spin. So what? Why is this even an issue?

Bryancd, JD, NeoRutty, Jeyl, et al....I think you guys would defend and embrace a new Bond movie in which James was now gay.

The Wook

 

[Bryancd]

Bryancd, JD, NeoRutty, Jeyl, et al....I think you guys would defend and embrace a new Bond movie in which James was now gay.

The Wook

Kirk yes, Sulu no. I would have an issue with Kirk being gay as it is so contrary to the characters hedonism. Same with Bond, it's part of the appeal. Sulu is a blank slate.

 

[Bryancd]

some of us old farts, as takei is one of them, obviously feel that you shouldn't change a character if he's worked so well for 50 years.

it's as simple as that..if you can't make him interesting as he is, get outta the franchise.

don't tug on supermans cape. don't turn him asian, or gay, just wait. keep him the way he's worked so well, and your comics will sell just swell... second verse.

I'm a 47 year old fart and don't get so precious over fictional entertainment characters.

 

[The Wook]

I would have an issue with Kirk being gay as it is so contrary to the characters hedonism. Same with Bond, it's part of the appeal.

You're pretty cool sometimes, Bryancd.

 

[JD]

Exactly what information presented, and then clarified do you consider to be the whiny mess part?

Nothing needs clarification. The latter, mostly here, here and here.... oh, and the worst of it, here.

- - - Updated - - -

Bryancd, JD, NeoRutty, Jeyl, et al....I think you guys would defend and embrace a new Bond movie in which James was now gay.

The Wook

Meh.

I'm sure you'd be picketing it with your pals from the Westboro Baptist Church.

 

[KrangPrime]

Kirk yes, Sulu no. I would have an issue with Kirk being gay as it is so contrary to the characters hedonism. Same with Bond, it's part of the appeal. Sulu is a blank slate.

Ahh, so it's OK so long as they explain that he was straight before, right?

But, that doesn't stop hollywood. Kirk is too important a character to change much. however, if Scotty was shown in the last series to have a wife and family, that won't stop modern hollywoods 'progressivism' from changing him. and eventually, if the audience showed them that they'd ACCEPT a major change in a MAJOR character like that, Kirk wouldn't be safe from it either.

For now, If Kirk wasn't so important, mark my words, he'd be on the chopping block for revisionist history too.


my version of old farts just respect what works. you don't change what works. for some of us, that's an end of story.

want to try something new? create something new.

usually the only reason they change something is for un creative reasons. to bring in a new audience, make iris and wally black. to reach more people who otherwise wouldn't have cared? make sulu gay. want to shake up a 45 year old franchise? the Klingons are no longer the main villains. nope. now it's the robustians from planet robust who hate kirk for sleeping with all their women with a war that goes on for 40 years. the robustians are 3 feet tall and have fur all over their bodies like house cats. boom. that'll bring the franchise new life...


sometimes, things just don't NEED change, or progression or updating. be happy with what you got, or create something new that works with established history. that's what i believe in. otherwise you get match game with a baldwin as host and a rosie odonnel sitting in brett summers chair.

no thank you.

I'm a 47 year old fart and don't get so precious over fictional entertainment characters.

odd thing to say on a place like rpf ;o)

 

[The Wook]

I'm sure you'd be picketing it with your pals from the Westboro Baptist Church.

Lol...I see we can agree on something, JD--those people are wackjobs!!

The Wook

 

[Bryancd]

@NeilT it's called the Replica PROP Forum. I joined in 2002 to make lightsabers, not argue about Hikaru Sulu's sexuality.

 

[tgreco]

George's entire critique is predicated on how GR chose to present the character in 1966. This isn't HIS Sulu, he created the archetype of Sulu and now 50 years later that character gets a new spin. So what? Why is this even an issue?

When Patrick Stewart read for his role, he was originally supposed to wear a hair piece. When Gene wanted him without the hair piece, some one asked, "Wouldn't they have found a cure for baldness in the 24th century?"

To which Gene responded, "In the 24th Century they wouldn't care."


That's EXACTLY what's wrong with it. Sulu is gay... in the 23rd Century they wouldn't care.

But the fact is, you wouldn't have known about it until after you went and saw the movie. They wouldn't have put out a press release about it. They would have just done it, and not patted themselves on the back about it.


They would have normalized it, by not making a big deal about it. Not blasting it to the world in an super-charged, over-hyped storm, for what will wind up being probably less then 5 seconds of screen time.

 

[JD]

When Patrick Stewart read for his role, he was originally supposed to wear a hair piece. When Gene wanted him without the hair piece, some one asked, "Wouldn't they have found a cure for baldness in the 24th century?"

To which Gene responded, "In the 24th Century they wouldn't care."

That's EXACTLY what's wrong with it. Sulu is gay... in the 23rd Century they wouldn't care.

If you read how this is revealed in the film, it's handled very much that way. No one cares - except a few whiny fanboys.

But the fact is, you wouldn't have known about it until after you went and saw the movie. They wouldn't have put out a press release about it. They would have just done it, and not patted themselves on the back about it.

They didn't release a press release. John Cho made a comment in an Australian newspaper. There have been statements issued afterward.

They would have normalized it, by not making a big deal about it. Not blasting it to the world in an super-charged, over-hyped storm, for what will wind up being probably less then 5 seconds of screen time.

They're not the one's making a big deal about it - folks like you are.

 

[Bryancd]

When Patrick Stewart read for his role, he was originally supposed to wear a hair piece. When Gene wanted him without the hair piece, some one asked, "Wouldn't they have found a cure for baldness in the 24th century?"

To which Gene responded, "In the 24th Century they wouldn't care."


That's EXACTLY what's wrong with it. Sulu is gay... in the 23rd Century they wouldn't care.

But the fact is, you wouldn't have known about it until after you went and saw the movie. They wouldn't have put out a press release about it. They would have just done it, and not patted themselves on the back about it.


They would have normalized it, by not making a big deal about it. Not blasting it to the world in an super-charged, over-hyped storm, for what will wind up being probably less then 5 seconds of screen time.

No, they wouldn't care in the 23rd Century but apparently we do in the 21st as this thread demonstrates. And using it as a marketing piece or "gimmick" isn't offensive and from what I have heard this isn't a major plot point of the film so again I ask, who cares?

 

[tgreco]

You're right... it's not like I was going to see this steaming pile of garbage anyway.
Enjoy!

 

[Bryancd]

You're right... it's not like I was going to see this steaming pile of garbage anyway.
Enjoy!

But that's a shame as you clearly are a franchise fan, give it a chance, I'll send you the $10 for a ticket.

 

[astroboy]

some of us old farts, as takei is one of them, obviously feel that you shouldn't change a character if he's worked so well for 50 years.

it's as simple as that..if you can't make him interesting as he is, get outta the franchise.

don't tug on supermans cape. don't turn him asian, or gay, just wait. keep him the way he's worked so well, and your comics will sell just swell... second verse.

I completely agree with you.

Except that in this verse, the enterprise was built on earth, it is also a submarine, and people can beam onto a ship while it's in warp. And remember that time that khan beamed from Earth to Kronos?

They have pissed on so much of te franchise. Where was george then?

Sent from my SM-N910W8 using Tapatalk

 

[tgreco]

But that's a shame as you clearly are a franchise fan, give it a chance, I'll send you the $10 for a ticket.

While I appreciate your generous offer, save your $10. I'm voting intentionally with my wallet.

Beyond looks like a bungled mess on par with Joel Schumaker's handling of Batman.
I can be a fan of Batman, and hate Batman Forever, just like I can be a fan of Trek, and hate the JJverse.

You and I went round and round on Into Darkness. You enjoyed it., I thought it was crap. You won't have to argue with me on this one, cuz I really won't be seeing it... and, I don't mean I'll wait for the Redbox or Netflix... I mean I won't watch it. Just like I haven't watched Revenge of the Sith, or the Force Awakens.