'Star Trek: Beyond' and Gay Sulu

[orangerful]

Has anyone been reading up on the saga of Gay Sulu in the new Star Trek movie? There are some compelling arguments on both sides:

Sulu Is Gay in Star Trek Beyond and It's Not a Big Deal

But George Takei isn't sure sure this was a good idea:

George Takei Tried to Convince the Team Behind Star Trek Beyond to Not Make Sulu Gay

Simon Pegg Responds to George Takei: Adding a New Gay Character to Star Trek Would Have Been Worse

Overall, I agree with Pegg and his take on it. First, this is an AU so anyone who is upset that upset that Sulu is gay can just brush it off as AU and move on. Secondly, creating a character to be The Gay Character, would have just been a token thing and the new character could easily be written out in any stories to follow - you are not going to write out Sulu.

But, this is the problem with reboots. I'm hoping that Bryan Fuller's new Star Trek series will have the diversity that everyone wants. And why can't we just have some GOOD new sci-fi/action/fantasy movies with diversity? How hard is this to do?

It is one more tick in the box of how Star Wars TFA did it right - by incorporating the original characters, you bring in the older fans, but the movies are about a new set of characters and we will probably meet even more people as the stories unfold and who is to say what their backgrounds will be.

Comments

[eowyn.livejournal.com]

I heard about this today. I'm in agreement with you and Simon.

[elisi]

Besides, I don't understand all this talk about 'being closeted'. Did Sulu date women in the originals? MAYBE HE IS BI!!!

Bi people exist, after all.

So yeah, I too shall have to not only disagree with Takei (although I adore him), but also with the strict binaries imposed on the character.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_profiterole_/]

This! I've seen comments mentioning he never had a girlfriend in the original series and I've seen comments mentioning he had girlfriends in the original series, so I don't know what's true. But if he had girlfriends, bi seems more likely than gay, because the timeline changed when George Kirk's ship got attacked by the Narada. Is this enough to change someone's sexual orientation? No way to know for sure.

[elisi]

Also, even people who have always been attracted to only one gender might fall in love with someone of a different gender. It happens. (Like, I have SEEN it happen in front of my very eyes. Straightest woman ever fallen for another woman.)

So Sulu might have identified as straight and then just happened to have fallen in love with a guy. Sexuality is fluid.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_profiterole_/]

There has been a similar discussion in all big franchise fandoms, around #GiveElsaAGirlfriend and #GiveCaptainAmericaABoyfriend for example. I think it is important to have major LGBT characters and not just someone that's going to be on screen for 5 minutes. Though the state of LGBT representation in big franchises is so bad (hi, it's me, Deadpool, and I feel so lonely, wanna join me?) that I would take anything, as long as they don't die (yep, that's a thing that needs to be specified, apparently, based on what US TV made us go through recently).

I suppose the new female character is going to have a major role, so they could have made her LGBT, but I think it has a bigger effect that they went with Sulu. Also, there's not a lot of queer POC representation out there, so it's a good point.

To be honest, I'm quite surprised that George Takei is against it. I'm bisexual and I'm with the straight guys (Simon Pegg and Justin Lin) on that one. Zachary Quinto has talked about it since then and he agrees with them too, though as an actor, I suppose he kind of has to go with the flow. But I think he was sincere because George Takei's point is kind of outdated, I guess.

[c-hrista.livejournal.com]

To be honest, I'm quite surprised that George Takei is against it.

I thought the same thing when I saw his opinion on it, but I chalked it up to his age somehow -- I can't even explain why I assumed that's why he made that decision, it just seemed like such an "old" way of thinking about it.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_profiterole_/]

If Hollywood blockbusters weren't just sequels and reboots these days, I could understand his POV a little more, but that's definitely not the case.

[orangerful.livejournal.com]

I can see where Takei is coming from - I mean, it was his character and he worked with Roddenberry and I'm sure, at the time, it was a big enough deal to have more than one non-white person in the main cast.

BUT this is 2016 and it is still an uphill battle to get Hollywood to include anyone not straight/white/male as a lead, so I think Pegg and Lin made a good choice. And I know they picked Sulu to honor Takei and his activism.

And from what I am reading, I feel like the way it will be in the movie is going to just be a moment - just acknowledging he is married and has a kid the way we would with any other character, except when his partner shows up, it's going to be a man. And I like when it is done that way, that they are not solely defining him as being "The Gay Guy" - like Pegg said, the audience already knows Sulu and like him and this is just another part of him. I mean, if we were friends with Sulu, I doubt the first thing he would say was "Hi, my name is Sulu and I'm gay!" - we would hang out, get to know each other, and it would come up in conversation organically.

I think that can be a problem with a lot of movie/tv show writers - they get so hung up on LOOK I WROTE A DIVERSE CHARACTER that they turn the story into the MY CHARACTER show instead of just showing that being LGBTQ is just normal and every day thing.

[geekslave.livejournal.com]

I've never seen the "Star Trek" tv show, but unless Sulu's sexuality was a huge deal (like even though I've never seen the show I know that Kirk was a player so to say that he was 100% gay all of a sudden would be weird) it doesn't seem like it's that contradictory to the original character. Besides, it's a reboot and there are things that are going to change.

Stacey

[midnightwhisper.livejournal.com]

I totally agree with Simon Pegg on the matter too. I think they made the right call for "introducing" a gay character. And I'm glad they picked Sulu. Because I feel like if it had been an already established character other than Sulu it would have been a similar situation to bringing in a new character that was gay.

[verdande-mi.livejournal.com]

I haven't read much of the discussion, though I have seen it around. I'm happy with the news and think it's wonderful one of the lead characters are gay and I very much agree with what Pegg says to the article you linked to. It's great that it a characher people already know and have fixed ideas about! I also like what Quinto says Here



I hope new series does well in regards to representation. As you say, how fifficult can it be?

[a-phoenixdragon.livejournal.com]

I definitely agree with Simon. And I'm rather sorry that Takei feels this way. I have never thought of Sulu as 'closeted'. Actually, they never really displayed any sexuality for him at all (that I remember), so having him be bi or gay wouldn't break anything for me. Only enhance it, really. I do think Gene was contricted by his time. I actually think he would approve of this and would totally give the nod for it to be done. I'm excited to see the movie and really stoked that Sulu will have a husband and child. That is believable and that is good, forward thinking writing, really. Creating a new gay character would totally have killed it, really. No believability and the focus would have been on 'this character is gay'. Sulu being gay is just 'okay, Sulu has a husband and kid...that's rather cool. YAY Sulu!'

*HUGS*

[kerkevik-2014.livejournal.com]

As I said elsewhere, I'm with George. This is a straight writer, who has been partly responsible for ruining Star Trek for man people, not listening to an LGBT person who made certain acting choices back in the day. A new character, with incidental characters as well, who was queer, would be far better than retconning a character who that gay actor played as straight by choice.

It is exactly the same as 'mansplaining', or white people explaining racism to people of colour (a phrase that, having asperger's I find hard to accept as I am pink (so colour?). I think it would be better if Simon Pegg went back to making rather unfunny movies, and left queer people to create their own characters and write their own histories.

This said I would have been delighted if, when it was revealed that Sulu had a daughter, it had further been revealed that she had two dads. This was not the case, and rewriting the past to suit modern sensibilities only serves to hide that past.

As I said I'm with George.

kerk

[velvetwhip.livejournal.com]

Hmmmm... *is thinky*


Gabrielle

[ragnarok-08.livejournal.com]

I definitely agree with Simon there.

[poniesandphotos.livejournal.com]

I agree with Sean. I think it's really strange that Takei is making such a big deal about this.

[impalalove]

Yeah, I was like, "I don't even know what to agree with" when I heard about this. I'm leading towards Simon's arguments (and you), abut Takei makes some interesting points.

[impalalove]

Ah, there's an update.

[rhoda-rants.livejournal.com]

Welllllllll, I honestly don't see what George Takei's problem is? I think it's gonna be touchy since they went ahead and put this in the press release prior to the movie's release, because now we're all going to be looking for The Evidence that says Sulu is gay in the script, and that can go either way.

HOWEVER. I'm excited about it. It will make this the second Sci-Fi movie I've seen in theaters this year with a major LGBT character, the other being Dr. Okun in Independence Day: Resurgence--didn't see that coming!--and that one suuuuuuuucked. The representation was okay, but super-subtle, like you could make the argument that they're Just Friends. You'd fail, but you could make that argument.

The thing is, Star Trek has always been hailed for pushing diversity in its casting on purpose, to include everyone. It gets clunky and weird sometimes, but if they can pull this off? It will pave the way for so many things. Let people whine about it. And then let the studios see how much money they made and give us more LGBT heroes.

[night-owl-9.livejournal.com]

I can't say I understand why Takei disagrees with this choice :/

[snogged.livejournal.com]

I do think it's important for the LGBT community to be recognized in television shows and movies. My only hope is that Pegg and Abrams are playing this right.

[frelling-tralk.livejournal.com]

Hmm I can't really see why George Takei would issue with it in terms of it being a big deal for the character, I'm wondering if it's more about him feeling insulted that they're going to make a character that he played in the past come out as gay. It could be seen as them only going that way because the actor who played him was gay, with the implication that a gay man can *only* play gay characters?