Star Trek: Beyond

[Venkman]

Let's not forget Scotty killed Bakulas beagle which is why he was in frozen hell planet.

Well shit, all this time I never realized that connection.

I only ever watched like three episodes of Enterprise though. Wasn't for me.

I'm excited for Beyond. Because I'm an easy sell

[Merusk]

George Takei isn't happy that they made Sulu gay, even though it's a direct nod to him.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-takei-reacts-gay-sulu-909154

[01101010]

George Takei isn't happy that they made Sulu gay, even though it's a direct nod to him.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-takei-reacts-gay-sulu-909154

He's not happy with the twist on Sulu. Some of us aren't happy with a lot of the twists they have been taking with New Trek. So I take this with a grain of sand.

[Venkman]

Yea. What surprises me is that Pegg didn't think to maybe say something to Takei ahead of time. Maybe he didn't think he needed to. But considering a) Takei is still alive and well; and, b) very out there regarding LGBT issues, you'd think from a purely public relations angle alone, a courtesy note woulda gone out ahead of time, maybe even floating the idea by Takei.

I'm sure he has zero say over how his character is handled contractually. But perceptually, he's vocal, liked, and coulda been a good ambassador for the idea or explained behind the scenes the potential issues with it.

[satael]

George Takei isn't happy that they made Sulu gay, even though it's a direct nod to him.

http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/george-takei-reacts-gay-sulu-909154

He's not happy with the twist on Sulu. Some of us aren't happy with a lot of the twists they have been taking with New Trek. So I take this with a grain of sand.

I think it would be an interesting twist for a Star Trek tv-series where it might come in to play in a few select episodes on how some aliens or cultures react to it. In a movie where it's just a small gimmick (in all likelihood) it just seems NuTrek(tm).

[Merusk]

Yea. What surprises me is that Pegg didn't think to maybe say something to Takei ahead of time. Maybe he didn't think he needed to. But considering a) Takei is still alive and well; and, b) very out there regarding LGBT issues, you'd think from a purely public relations angle alone, a courtesy note woulda gone out ahead of time, maybe even floating the idea by Takei.

I'm sure he has zero say over how his character is handled contractually. But perceptually, he's vocal, liked, and coulda been a good ambassador for the idea or explained behind the scenes the potential issues with it.

They did talk to him ahead of time. Twice. Both times he said it was a bad idea with the implication it's gimmicky. It's in the article. 

[Khaldun]

It's curious. Takei says that he thinks it's disrespectful to Roddenberry's intent, which is a head-scratcher unless Roddenberry really felt that people in his perfect future were all straight. It's possible: he was basically a dirty old man and probably would be accused of harassment if he were still around today. I don't think Sulu was ever established on-screen as having a wife or even a girlfriend--he didn't really get any character arcs at all until the films, when he got to be a captain. The characters who had actual romantic subplots in TOS and the films that established them as straight that I recall:

Kirk, infamously so. Constantly.
Spock, quite a few.
Uhura, we at least see what her ideal male companion would look like (in The Man Trap).
Scotty, a couple of bad girlfriend episodes that make him seem pretty hapless and a bit desperate sexually. I think maybe the TNG episode where he's brought out of storage implies he had a wife?
Chekov, has at least one ex-girlfriend that I recall.
McCoy, a couple of bad romantic arcs and in the animated series they established he had an ex-wife and daughter.

The Generations film I think established that Sulu had a daughter but nothing more about the circumstances.

Takei apparently would rather they add a new LGBT character, which feels more like tokenism--a new character in these films is just going to be a redshirt in some way.

[Merusk]

Takei mentions in the interview he had a discussion with Gene during what I ssume to be the Stonewall movement timeframe and Gene nixed it as far too controversial. I take it that's where George is coming from. Having a character you've portrayed for 50+ years changed in such a way after you had a direct conversation with the creator about it probably does feel like pandering.

I'm of the view that tokenism and pandering are worse when you subvert original characters rather than developing new ones, though.

[Speedy Cerviche]

To boldly go where no fanservice has gone before

[Khaldun]

Well, think of all the things they've done to shift the Kelvin-timeline characterizations.

Spock has an active relationship with Uhura. Plus Vulcan is blown up and he has a duplicate from another dimension.
Kirk is considerably stupider than he was in TOS.
Chekov is more of a scientific wunderkind.
Scotty is all kinds of different.

McCoy is about the only one who is really the same.

Plus the ship's interior technology is wildly different. Including having many lensflare projectors.

Making one of those characters gay doesn't strike me as any less or more of an issue than giving Scotty a little alien mascot friend or whatever.

[HaemishM]

There was an article on Geeks of Doom where he basically says that since NuTrek is an alternate timeline of OldTrek, having Sulu be gay NOW means he was gay THEN as well - and apparently at some point, it is established OldTrek continuity that Sulu has a daughter from a one-night stand with a Gamalazon. Meaning Sulu would have had to be gay, then turn hetero later which is counter to the whole idea that you are born gay and kind of offensive to gay people. I get where he's coming from. Most people who see NuTrek won't know about the daughter though so I'm not sure it's going to bother them.

[Trippy]

Simon Pegg's response to George Takei:

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2016/jul/08/simon-pegg-defends-gay-sulu-after-george-takei-criticism

Excerpt:

He’s right, it is unfortunate, it’s unfortunate that the screen version of the most inclusive, tolerant universe in science fiction hasn’t featured an LGBT character until now. We could have introduced a new gay character, but he or she would have been primarily defined by their sexuality, seen as the ‘gay character’, rather than simply for who they are, and isn’t that tokenism?

Justin Lin, Doug Jung and I loved the idea of it being someone we already knew because the audience have a pre-existing opinion of that character as a human being, unaffected by any prejudice. Their sexual orientation is just one of many personal aspects, not the defining characteristic. Also, the audience would infer that there has been an LGBT presence in the Trek Universe from the beginning (at least in the Kelvin timeline), that a gay hero isn’t something new or strange. It’s also important to note that at no point do we suggest that our Sulu was ever closeted, why would he need to be? It’s just hasn’t come up before.

[Merusk]

There was an article on Geeks of Doom where he basically says that since NuTrek is an alternate timeline of OldTrek, having Sulu be gay NOW means he was gay THEN as well - and apparently at some point, it is established OldTrek continuity that Sulu has a daughter from a one-night stand with a Gamalazon. Meaning Sulu would have had to be gay, then turn hetero later which is counter to the whole idea that you are born gay and kind of offensive to gay people. I get where he's coming from. Most people who see NuTrek won't know about the daughter though so I'm not sure it's going to bother them.

Yep, that's another part of my beef with it.. BUT it's a little more convoluted. Because I think about stupid things far deeper than I should.

Because the characters all, it is assumed, have the same parents and similar backgrounds as the originals some parts of them will remain immutable. Kirk still has an authority problem. Spock was still picked-on when young. Scotty is still brilliant. Uhura is still a brilliant linguist. Chekov is a remarkable wunderkid. Sulu is a badass space pilot.

However, because Sulu gay now when he wasn't before you're also making a statement on the nature of homosexuality. That it's a choice, or something that can be altered by things 'not going just right.'  Without realizing it Pegg has played into a very right-wing narrative on the nature of sexuality and human personality.

And it bugs me, a lot, that he both doesn't realize it and because doing it just to do it IS pandering. His intent is good-natured but still misguided. The way you right an injustice isn't by saying, "BOOM, EQUAL," and waving flags saying, "look we fixed things!" It's dismissive to the problem and ignores that it's a problem you felt you had to do it in the first place.

[HaemishM]

Plus, making it Sulu feels like they did it BECAUSE Takei is gay not because it felt like it should be for that character. Why not make Uhura finally realize she's gay and that's why she breaks up with Spock? Or that Kirk is gay? Or Chekov?

It does feel like pandering.

[Venkman]

They did talk to him ahead of time. Twice. Both times he said it was a bad idea with the implication it's gimmicky. It's in the article. 

Eh, come on, it's not like I read past the headline

(my bad)

But to your followup:

Yep, that's another part of my beef with it.. BUT it's a little more convoluted. Because I think about stupid things far deeper than I should.

Because the characters all, it is assumed, have the same parents and similar backgrounds as the originals some parts of them will remain immutable. Kirk still has an authority problem. Spock was still picked-on when young. Scotty is still brilliant. Uhura is still a brilliant linguist. Chekov is a remarkable wunderkid. Sulu is a badass space pilot.

However, because Sulu gay now when he wasn't before you're also making a statement on the nature of homosexuality. That it's a choice, or something that can be altered by things 'not going just right.'  Without realizing it Pegg has played into a very right-wing narrative on the nature of sexuality and human personality.

Kirk's parents were both alive in OldTrek while his father was killed in NuTrek. Spock's mother was alive until dying of old age in OldTrek, but she died on Vulcan in NuTrek. Scotty recklessly transwarp'd an admiral's dog in NuTrek, never showing that level of recklessness in the original series. As far as I can tell, they haven't said anything about Uhura's musical talent in NuTrek, which could be there or not.

Basically, the new cast has some of the snapshots of the original, but the origins are all different.

We don't know anything about Sulu's heritage in NuTrek. We therefore can't make the leap that "badass space pilot" means the same as it did in the 1960s.

Multiculturalism means something different each generation. It's all context. 150 years ago, it meant Italians getting along with Germans in the US. Nowadays it means realizing people are different even when it's not obvious by skin color or accent. In the 1960s, I'm guessing the cultural assumption was that pilots were guys were heterosexual women chasers.

Roddenberry was a visionary, but we can forgive him if is breadth of vision then doesn't match the idea of "visionary" today. Takei is probably right that Sulu being gay doesn't match The Vision(tm). But that was 50 years ago, when having a Russian weapons officer was considered wierd.

[Khaldun]

I am not sure that "sexuality is something you choose" is a necessarily right-wing narrative *if* you celebrate all the choices that people make. This was something that a lot of queer activists actually argued in the 1990s before "it's genetic and it is destiny" became orthodox dogma that provided  a way to shut mouthbreathing right-wing shitheads up. I can easily see a Star Trek future where one of the things that's awesome about it is that people are polymorphously perverse and fuck whatever they want to fuck without fear of anyone thinking less of them. People besides Kirk and Riker. That would actually be consistent with the post-racial future that Trek usually shows--where ethnic and racial background is just an interesting human detail about a person, not ever in any way something that the government or society hassles them for.

[Margalis]

Plus, making it Sulu feels like they did it BECAUSE Takei is gay not because it felt like it should be for that character.

THIS is the problem.

Have some balls and make Kirk gay if you want a gay guy.

Takei is an actor. The idea that a character played by a gay actor must necessarily be gay themselves is so misguided - acting is pretending. Gay people should be able to play straight characters without the implication that the character is gay, and straight people should be able to play gay characters. Alec Baldwin is a raging liberal but on 30 Rock he played a conservative - acting!

Reading between the lines, it seems like Takei likes the character he played, the job he did playing him (and specifically portraying a macho straight guy as a gay man), and is proud of this personality he brought to life, and now he's being told "well you're gay so the character is gay now too." It really diminishes the skill of the actor to bring a character different from themselves to life - which is their entire job!

It also plants in people's minds that any character played by a gay person is secretly gay and is going to be retconned as gay later, which ultimately probably isn't good for gay actors.

This strikes me as a classic case of guy trying too hard to prove he's progressive and down with "the gays", over the objections of the primary gay person involved. "Pipe down gay guy, a straight guy is talking for / over you!"

It's cool that he floated the idea I guess, but the idea that it "honors" a guy who is opposed to it is inane. This seems much less about honoring Takei or being inclusive and more about Pegg trying to collect "woke bae" accolades.

[Khaldun]

Honestly, again, Sulu is the only TOS character who never has an on-screen heterosexual romance, except in the Mirror Universe. So if you're going to make a TOS character have been gay all along, he's the only one you can do that to without actually contradicting the canon version of the TOS character. All we know in terms of on-screen information is that he has a daughter, and in the Trek future I am sure gay men can adopt kids or have surrogates just like in 2016. What was said off-screen, even by Roddenberry, is basically fan-fic, and if we go by that, then Kirk and Spock are gay lovers etc. :)

[eldaec]

At this point even Star Wars has a more coherent canon. Trek's canon started falling apart long before JJA.

Star Trek canon continuity is no longer a thing.

In most franchises this sort of thing would bug me, but in the case of Trek it is more fun watching the internet get upset about it.

[jgsugden]

Sulu had grabby times with females while, effectively, under the influence of drugs.  He was clearly hetero in ToS based upon that element... if you care about a few seconds of screen time from a ToS episode in this argument.  I certainly don't.

Regardless, they're making too much of this issue.  I get everyone's position, but if Takei (Japanese American) and Cho (Korean American) can both play the character, we're already pretty far down the road of not being controlled too tightly by the original series fine details.  Sexuality of the character was not a defining element in either series, so they can retcon all they want as far as I am concerned.

[Evildrider]

All them Asians look the same amirite? 

[BobtheSomething]

All them Asians look the same amirite? 

Reminds me of Tony Shaloub playing a Korean actor playing a Chinese character.  Galaxy Quest continues to be relevant.

[Margalis]

Honestly, again, Sulu is the only TOS character who never has an on-screen heterosexual romance, except in the Mirror Universe. So if you're going to make a TOS character have been gay all along, he's the only one you can do that to without actually contradicting the canon version of the TOS character.

I get this argument, but continuity with the TOS isn't something I care about and I'm not sure the makers of the new movies care about it either. I understand the logic that if being gay is not a choice then in this universe gay characters should still be gay and straight characters should still be straight, but to me the Nu Trek movies are basically a parallel universe with all bets off. To be honest I don't really understand what the relationship is supposed to be between TOS series characters and the Nu Trek characters - divergent timelines, alternate reality, "lol who cares", etc.

My problem with Sulu being gay has nothing to do with continuity, which is why I say have some balls and make Kirk gay. My problem is that the idea that a character played by a gay actor must themselves be gay is damaging. And if you ask a dude and he says no then respect his wishes - otherwise why bother asking?

[Khaldun]

Ok, I agree with that: making the character gay because the actor is--despite the actor saying he doesn't care for the homage--that's pandering.

At the least making Kirk bi would kind of make sense--it would just reinforce the character's reputation for hitting on anything if the situation calls for it.

[Furiously]

Just got back from seeing it with the son person.  This was a much more ensemble approach than the past two. Justin Lin really knows how to make each person get enough screen time.  The plot was not overly complicated, and it was pretty fun. The actors did all seem a bit....weary and tired of their 5 year voyage.

[Khaldun]

This is:

Way better than Into Darkness, which isn't just bad but stupid.
Can't evaluate vs. the first reboot film, whose virtue is not so much as a story as it is as a reboot.

It is better than most of the bad TNG films.
Some of the bad TOS films.

It's...inoffensive? Watchable? Forgettable but digestible? The sort of thing that if you were bored or hot or whatever and you paid money to see you would go, "Eh, that was ok" and then a day later would be like "I think I saw that, but I don't really remember it".

It uses a late-film plot twist to try and give an antagonist who has almost no personality or backstory up to that point some meaning and to tie him into the main character arc, in a very tortured way that doesn't really make up for the ADHD inability to actually focus for a while on establishing the bad guy and his situation. There is stuff that you can tell Lin said "I HAVE TO HAVE THIS" aka a thing with a motorcycle that the scriptwriters obligingly found a tormented way to pay off. There are a couple of accidentally melancholy things about Chekov.

It's fine. It's not great. No one will be angry or especially happy about this unless they're wound too tight about Star Trek or way too generous about everything.

[Hawkbit]

Yeah, was fun. It was good, not great. I'll at least remember parts of this movie, whereas the last one I literally could only remember Cumberboosh is in it. Good summer action film.

[Merusk]

It's forgettable, but not nearly as much as Ghostbusters was. 

The usual quick references to TOS here and there. I enjoyed the Glowing Green Space Hand reference, myself. The wife laughed loudly at the weapon they used to defeat the baddies while I rolled my eyes. Futurama did the classical music joke better.

For being featured so prominently in the marketing and trailers, the girl (I forget her name) was a pretty meh character. I guess it's just because she was a hot white alien. She and her 'storyline' could have been pulled and not really affected the movie much. That's not a good thing.

Props to the score composer. The music is original, but pay attention when Kirk is in melee with the main baddie. You have real and definite aural callbacks to the old "da-da-da da-da da-da daaa-da da-da" fight music of TOS. Nice touch.

I feel like there were some scenes cut due to runtime. I have a very strong suspicion about
I had a good time watching, but I wouldn't say it had any soul. With the sendoff to Nimoy and Anton's death it feels like the series should end, though I'm sure it won't.

[Margalis]

Is this movie about anything?

I saw someone post on Twitter a speech Ryker makes in a TNG episode (I think it's Ryker) about a person who comes from a sexless society but feels she is female. Star Trek, to me, is about philosophical themes, a vehicle for classic SF explorations, etc.

My problem with the previous Nu Treks is that they were just about shooting at stuff. Which is fine, but not what I want from Trek. Is there something to this movie over than action / adventure?

That's one reason I have a soft spot in my heart for Star Trek 5, even though it's a pretty terrible movie.

[Merusk]

There is Otho g to this Trek but action. There is some brief introspection about death but it's not a theme.  Your criticism of Nu Trek is the same I have but its what Paramount is going to turn it into. 

Which for me is why it feels like it's time to retire the series. It's wholly generic and interchangeable with any other recent scifi action movie and relies entirely on fond memories of the old series for any weight. You can feel the test screening audience and marketing comments as you watch all of them.

All sizzle, no steak.

If you can accept this you'll be entertained until your next white bread experience.

[Khaldun]

It is not really about anything. There is the vaguest hint of it being about a motivation to remain on the Enterprise for Kirk and Spock, and there's a sort of vague tip of the hat to all the times Kirk said to some alien or lunatic admiral or superbeing that the human race had started to go beyond its violent past or that the Federation was peaceful etc. That's about it.

The core cast and surviving crew are remarkably nonchalant at the end about losing 200+ shipmates.

The Kelvin universe also continues to puzzle me in that the Enterprise's "five-year mission" in this timeline evidently takes it to none of the places that the Enterprise went in the previous timeline, or so it feels.

[Margalis]

There is Otho g to this Trek but action.

There is what now?  

Anyway, I'll catch it one video some day then. I'm really curious about the Star Trek TV show. I've been listening to a Star Trek: TNG podcast (don't mock me) and it's getting me irrationally excited for a new Star Trek show, even though I should know better than to get my hopes up.

[Furiously]

This article is never more true.....http://www.theonion.com/video/trekkies-bash-new-star-trek-film-as-fun-watchable-14333

[Margalis]

Check out the score titles:



Apparently this composer does this regularly with his scores.

[Khaldun]

That's Giacchino's schtick. He called the track in the first movie where Kirk's father dies, "Nailing the Kelvin". He does it for other soundtracks.