They know that my backdoor only opens to let shit out.Originally Posted by Seanny One Ball
They know that my backdoor only opens to let shit out.
oh nevermind, you already pointed out you are homophobic.
You answered your own question. It's my choice to not agree with homosexuality. It's just not for me. At least I'm not out there beating people up because they're gay, it's just not my cup of tea. I personally prefer having sex with a woman. Am I not allowed to disagree or not like something and still be somewhat respectful about it?
Nobody is having a go at Takei for being homosexual you fool. Furthermore he isn't speaking his mind about the character he originally played he is speaking his mind about an alternate version of the character. The multiverse is beyond my limited Star Trek knowledge but modern Sulu isn't "his" he didn't have a single thing to do with it beyond disliking him for being gay.
Actually, I've never seen an entire episode of the original Star Trek, so I should probably just shut the fuck up. Going after Takei for giving his two cents is bullshit, though.
So all you're saying then is that you're hetero?
I also know that there are a few gay posters here on rajah and I don't say disrespectful things because of that. I'm pretty sure beer-belly was being funny, but I wouldn't say something like that.
I don't think you understand what the fuck you are talking about. You can't disagree with something yet somehow simultaneously be fine with it. That makes no sense. You are basically either saying "I have no problem with it but I am straight myself" and just have no idea what the word "disagree" means or you a bigot in denial like one of the many cavemen who claim to be "fine with poofs as long as they keep it away from me".
Takei some sort of untouchable deity or something?
A hetero with no clue how to word a simple sentence.
Here, let me be clearly rude and vulgar just for you, I'm straight, I prefer to stick my dick in pussy and not have a dick in my ass. Is that better?
Right, just didn't understand the use of the word 'disagree' in all of that.
Why not consult with him before making the decision? What would an open dialogue hurt?
They did, and he actually thought it was a bad idea.
Then they're just changing shit to earn social brownie points. It had nothing to do with "honoring" Takei.
Jesus H...
It's funny that the gay man who originally played the character is the one that's being labeled out of touch.
They made a decision that had an heir of convenience to it but it wasn't a bad one. They could have picked another character that had no romantic backstory tying them to heterosexuality but in the end what real qualifiable reason could George Takei have for being against it? It is such a non issue.
Next thing you know he'll be called a self hating gay.
No it's funny that the gay man who played the original is so out of touch. What's the problem George?
The character Takei played wasn't gay. That's his problem with it.
He's out of touch because he doesn't agree with changing the character's sexual preference?
Does Sulu being gay in Star Trek Beyond add anything to the story?
They didn't ask Takei for permission. They essentially told him what they were going to do. He said he'd prefer a whole new gay character introduced. They (Pegg primarily) said they didn't want to introduce a gay character for the audience to recognize simply as the token gay. That an established character could go on being said established character, continuing on with said character's history, abilities, and whatnot ... now just gay instead.
Should it have to?
It's a departure from the original character, so... maybe.
Ah, so they made Sulu the token gay.
It added to the representative Star Trek universe. So, ok.
He didn't become less than Sulu.
I've explained all of this already. You clearly have no interest in catching up and you blatantly havent followed the discussion so I'm not going to repeat myself.
What did it add?
You didn't get the words I used?
Pegg's logic is flawed. A new gay character would be considered a token, but a gay Sulu wouldn't be?
It had to be a character with no sexual history in the new film canon though and there are only so many crew with ambiguous backgrounds so it was him, Chekov or Scotty to pick from really I think. Doesnt Bones mention an ex wife in the first one? Uhura, Spock and Kirk were all out.
Not sure how you consider Sulu all of a sudden a token character. He's always had a legitimate role in the crew.
Gay Sulu makes sense as much as gay Chekov or Scotty. Adding an entire character just to tick a box is obviously a greater token gesture. Again it shouldn't generate this much discussion but it's hard to resist.
I'm saying making him gay could be seen as him being the token gay character.
If someone wants to all of a sudden see him that way, their prerogative. Like I said though, he's no less Sulu now than before, which is of course in no way a token character.
I don't know, I think changing a widely known character like that seems like a bigger token gesture.
You know, I'm not going to like Sulu any more or any less than before, so I guess it shouldn't matter.
Couldn't agree more.
Watching him catch up is like watching a race with one snail. You start off frustrated and end up cheering the little bugger on.
I think most of my friends probably feel the same way.
I think we should make every character George Takei has ever played gay...
It would be the best retroactive typecasting ever...
He'll love it...
It's not like George Takei can play straight characters anyway...
He's gay! We can build him a big gay box and put his career in it...
And then we can jump out at him and yell "Surprise! Your... characters are gay now!"
I think he'll be totally stoked...
JJ Spock has a raging case of the not-gays. He's all about the brown sugar.
Why does anyone think this matters at all?
It shouldn't matter, it's a gay man, a person, it's not a character trait nor a story point and neither it should be. It's just showing life off the ship.
The right that Star Trek fanboys think they have to ensure nothing should be changed about their beloved nonsense is so stupid and infuriating. If you don't like it don't watch it. Simple.
Or do as I do: realize all the old episodes and movies I loved are right over there on the shelf and I can watch them whenever I want.
Only major thing that sets me off is when they directly remake something, ala Wrath of Khan/Into Darkness.
Just saw Beyond. Liked it a lot. My nitpick is that I'd rather they revealed information about the villain mid-movie rather than right before the end.
Watched the film over the weekend. It was a really fun flick. It was a paint by numbers story, but done well. It was worth my money. I look forward to the next one.
Saw it last night, really enjoyed it.
Marked out for Elba as the baddie, Urban definitely stole the show. Jaylah was badass, curious to see where they go with her character in future films.
Rumor has it that at the TV upfronts, we will find out when Discovery is set. Newest rumor is after Voyager.
I have the feeling she may end up like Carol Marcus and wasted in a one off showing.
do you not know what 'token' means here? sulu was previously established and was going to be featured despite his sexuality. introducing an entirely new character to the series whose whole reason for existing is so he can be gay is the definition of a token character. sulu isnt a token gay character, he's now just a character that is gay.
How does token not work in the context of what I was saying?to·ken
adjective
done for the sake of appearances or as a symbolic gesture.
"cases like these often bring just token fines from the courts"
synonyms: symbolic, emblematic; perfunctory, slight, nominal, minimal, minor, mild, superficial, inconsequential
"token resistance"
(of a person) chosen by way of tokenism as a representative of a particular minority or underrepresented group.
"she took offense at being called the token woman on the force"
I watched Beyond last night. It was pretty bad. Not Into Darkness bad necessarily but it was probably Warp 8 on the 'meh' scale.
I'm ok with the Sulu suddenly being gay thing now that I realise that it was probably done solely to give his character anything for the entire film. The rest of the cast all got something to do or say, poor Sulu had 'being gay'.
I didn't even realise he was.
I enjoyed beyond though.
exactly. i cant get my head round why it would bother anyone or think it makes any difference at all.
TAPS AFF!
Beefy seems to have real hate for these fairly innocuous Star Trek films. It's quite bizarre.
I'm hardly being scathing. It's a 6/10 bland, instantly forgettable action film. As I said it wasn't bad like Into Darkness was.
I enjoyed the 2009 film.
I also didn't say that Sulu being gay bothered me or that it made a difference. I'm saying that it looked to me like it was put in because they didn't have anything else for Sulu. Every other character got something to do during the film.
How was he obviously gay in the film? It really did go straight over my head.
he put his arm round another man.
TAPS AFF!
It was pretty quick I guess. When they got to the Yorktown station he was met by his Partner and their kid (they showed them again later during the attack but if you missed the first bit with them in then you wouldn't have noticed the second bit). It was pretty inoffensive.
Oh I thought they were his parents.
You thought a grown man and a child were his parents?!
I guess since it's Star Trek, it could have been an alien that looked like a human child, but that would have been fucked up.
inoffensive is a strange word to use here.
TAPS AFF!
I wasn't focusing fully, I saw some people met him coming off the ship and I assumed it was his parents. I'm sure there were more than two people. Or was this the second time he got to the station at the end?
If you're looking for an excuse to get offended maybe.
Hmmmmmmmmmm. I think you hate Asian gays.
Pretty sure they did that in the series didn't they?
There was an Original Series episode where they were on a planet that was identical to Earth except people got younger as they got older.
Star Trek: Discovery creator Brian Fuller has spilled some exciting beans on the new show ...
Female lead who is not captain
Set in the prime timeline 10 years before Kirk becomes captain
Story will be serialized having to do with a previously discussed yet unexplored event in the history of Starfleet
+ Robots
+ Time Travel
+ Amanda Grayson
Will not be confined to network restrictions on language, sexual content, violence, etc. Still weighing options there.
link
Come the fuck on January.
If there was a Star Trek series with language, sex, nudity and violence, then I would watch it. But the decision they will make will be to be the same as the rest of the series.
So, Starship Troopers.
Deep Space Nine was at times as 'gritty' as Star Trek is ever likely to get. Did you ever watch that?
Source: BBC
Because the programme will be shown on CBS's on demand platform, it will not be "subject to broadcast standards and practices" usually seen on network TV. Fuller said it would allow a "broader spectrum" of content including "slightly more graphic content" and profanity.
Yeah I've watched pretty much all of the series' handful of times, some more than others. I always quite enjoyed them all, just could never get into consistently watching them.
Production starts in 2 months and will air in January 2017?
Is it normal for a show to start production so close to air date? Especially a sci-fi show set in space. Would have thought they'd need a good few months for post production.
Not a fan of the prequel idea. I am hoping this is the studio mandated series and we get the post-Voyager one next.
If it predates TOS but comes a bit after Enterprise, I wonder what the chances are that they'll mess up the timeline in the first episode.
That's ok though... something something temporal cold war
Oh fuck not that shit again..
A prequel to what?
Just ignore him. He'll tire himself out.
TOS.
But this isn't necessarily leading us into TOS, like a prequel would purposefully do. This just happens to be on a timeline a bit before that of TOS, just like we've had series' all over this timeline now.
Starship Troopers is nothing like Star Trek save for the fact it's set in space and alien planets.
It does rule though. I bought the third one the other day just cuz it was there for £0.99 and yet I still feel I overcharged.
Better tits though.
Yapped on this before but I've been hoping for something dark set in the future about one generation after voyager. I don't care who the primary baddies are but I want the show to start off with the Enterprise on fire. So it isnt even a question as to who is winning the war. Right off the bat it should be clear the Federation is in serious fucking trouble.
I want the captain to be the star and an anti hero. Somone who makes it clear right away that he was pressured into doing this job. When crew members try to call him Capt...he cuts them off. Tells them to call him Jim. Then at the end of the episode I want there to be a communication from the captain's mother. "I'll take it in my ready room" he'll say and then he goes into his unkempt quarters and lights up the display and we see old ass Kate Mulgrew. Of course his mom is Janeway! She was terrible at being in charge and so is this guy. But he has some amazing skills when it comes to combat and right now that's what the Federation needs. She will give him this pep talk and he will just shut off the monitor cutting her off mid sentence and pour himself a drink.
I've thought on this a little bit.
Janeway should be the chef.
Nope. Riker again.
Tribbleborg...
The Borg have become one with Tribbles...
FUCK! I just checked and that's already a thing...
I hate when that happens...
any one want to answer this.
TAPS AFF!
It's not unheard of.
George Takei on a Zero G Flight...
Oh my
It has already been delayed until May 2017.
http://www.theverge.com/2016/9/14/12...layed-may-2017
Even hearing that they are still in the process of casting sounds like they still have a lot to do in 9 months.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
