StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Bleeding Cool

Star Trek Beyond To Reveal Hikaru Sulu As Gay
Posted July 7, 2016 by Erik Amaya
27 Comments Forum Old Forum
AddThis Sharing Buttons3755
STBSuluStar Trek is known for being fairly progressive, but has yet to have a prominent gay character in its fifty year film and television history.

In 1996, it was said that Neal McDonough‘s character in Star Trek: First Contact, Lieutenant Hawk, was intended to be the first gay character in the series, but both producers and the actor deny it was ever planned.

Now it seems the Hikaru Sulu of the Kelvin Timeline will be revealed as gay in the upcoming Star Trek Beyond. The Sydney Herald Sun (via Towleroad) reports that the character will be seen with both a daughter and a same-sex partner in the film. According to actor John Cho, the decision was made by director Justin Lin and writer Simon Pegg in honor of the first man to play the part, George Takei.

“I liked the approach, which was not to make a big thing out it, which is where I hope we are going as a species, to not politicize one’s personal orientations,” added Cho. Of course, in some places, showing Sulu with in a same-sex relationship and a family unit could still be a revolutionary act.

In the original timeline, Sulu was presumed straight, though there is little evidence either way in either the original series or the first six Star Trek features. In the seventh film, Star Trek Generations, Sulu’s daughter, Demora, was revealed, but it is always possible he raised her with a same-sex partner.

Star Trek Beyond opens on July July 22nd.

Interesting, even though Takei has always stated that his Sulu was straight. But hey, I'm cool with it.

Umm. Spoiler in title there?

Seems kind of pointed to have it be Sulu because his original actor was gay. And I hope it's not hamfistedly done but otherwise cool.

Yeah, there's no reason the character's sexuality has to match the actor's. It would be more interesting and less predictable if it was someone other than Sulu.

But an openly gay major character is a first for Star Trek, isn't it? About damn time. And there's no real reason it shouldn't be Sulu out of the current main cast. Especially since Uhura, Spock, Kirk, and McCoy have all been established as being in heterosexual relationships in the reboot timeline as well (well, unless the ex-wife McCoy referred to was actually a man, which I suppose is possible).

I believe Takei, some time after coming out himself, insisted his character was hetereosexual.

If the reveal is true, there's going to be a great many Trektards who are going to be screaming like stuck pigs over this. If anyone's familiar with all the ignorant shit from Trekkies over a gay Peter Kirk in a fanwork, he should have no trouble predicting the reaction to this.

Especially, when one of them, in the YT comments for "Blood and Fire"(before comments were finally disabled)flat-out said Takei betrayed the fandom by being out with his homosexuality.

On the other hand the parts of the fandom writing masses of slash fiction will be very happy.

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:I believe Takei, some time after coming out himself, insisted his character was hetereosexual.

If the reveal is true, there's going to be a great many Trektards who are going to be screaming like stuck pigs over this. If anyone's familiar with all the ignorant shit from Trekkies over a gay Peter Kirk in a fanwork, he should have no trouble predicting the reaction to this.

Especially, when one of them, in the YT comments for "Blood and Fire"(before comments were finally disabled)flat-out said Takei betrayed the fandom by being out with his homosexuality.

Is it just me or are many diehard Trek fans actually political conservatives? Which is odd when the ideology of the show is supposed to be the exact opposite.

Though Star Wars had the same backlash when The Old Republic gave a gay option for characters. And recently Rouge One had a backlash that it was anti-white, in that of the main heroes, only Felicity Jones was white. In particular there are no white men, except for the bad guy. Though as one would expect, these issues are irrelevant to almost all of those who watch the movies. Happily, including most of the fans.

I can also sort of understand the objection here. Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

Adam Reynolds wrote:Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

Was Sulu ever shown in a hetrosexual relationship ?

Mirror universe Sulu doesn't count, as that's a different character.

As for why change it, why not ?
Do you have an objection to Star Trek acknowledging that gay people exist ?

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:I believe Takei, some time after coming out himself, insisted his character was hetereosexual.

If the reveal is true, there's going to be a great many Trektards who are going to be screaming like stuck pigs over this.

Funny you should mention that. I was just now reading an article about how George Takei isn't happy about the change and thinks it's disrespectful to Roddenberry: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/g ... k_20160707

Adam Reynolds wrote:I can also sort of understand the objection here. Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

The immediate response is "inclusivity". There was no gay character in the TOS, so they would have to change an existing character. It would be almost easier if Kirk kicks back the covers and there's a girl... and a boy or two.

Adam Reynolds wrote: Is it just me or are many diehard Trek fans actually political conservatives? Which is odd when the ideology of the show is supposed to be the exact opposite.

Though Star Wars had the same backlash when The Old Republic gave a gay option for characters. And recently Rouge One had a backlash that it was anti-white, in that of the main heroes, only Felicity Jones was white. In particular there are no white men, except for the bad guy. Though as one would expect, these issues are irrelevant to almost all of those who watch the movies. Happily, including most of the fans.

I can also sort of understand the objection here. Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

Uh, there are a few distinctly white guys in Rogue One. The Rebel generals, for two. Granted Alan Tudyk isn't actually visible onscreen in person (he voices a robot character) but that's something as well. Diego Luna is Hispanic (Mexican? Argentinian?), but he doesn't necessarily *not* look Caucasian. Hispanics are a little weird as far as race goes, 'Hispanic' being more of a cultural thing than a racial thing...

Nevertheless it really doesn't matter, I honestly haven't seen that much backlash on Rogue One regarding its characters, but perhaps that's more because I haven't ventured into that all that much.

As for Sulu.... well. Zach Quinto is gay, portraying a straight character. I want to say there have been a few characters on Trek before, probably DS9 or VOY but maybe ENT, who were gay as well. Checking Memory Alpha, we even had a case of sex-changing, but it amounted to basically cross-dressing plus a temporary switch (Quark up to some shenanigans or other, Dr Bashir gives him a fancy shot, and that's about all it takes apparently). Most cases of same-sex attraction are apparently between aliens or a case of gender-switching. It seems that apart from the conventional heterosexual relationship, Trek has largely stayed away from anything beyond that slice of the spectrum apart from the occasional stirring of the pot for either dramatic or comic effect.

So frankly, I think it's about time. Is it a bit contrived? Sure, but with nu-Trek, what isn't.

bilateralrope wrote:

Adam Reynolds wrote:Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

Was Sulu ever shown in a hetrosexual relationship ?

I want to say that in one Trek episode, the one where they were subjected to some kind of mind-altering substance, Sulu did come on to Uhura. I'm probably mixing that up with the Mirror Universe episode though. More likely it was mostly because Kirk was the only one really allowed to have relationships on that show.

Elheru Aran wrote:

bilateralrope wrote:

Adam Reynolds wrote:Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

Was Sulu ever shown in a hetrosexual relationship ?

I want to say that in one Trek episode, the one where they were subjected to some kind of mind-altering substance, Sulu did come on to Uhura. I'm probably mixing that up with the Mirror Universe episode though. More likely it was mostly because Kirk was the only one really allowed to have relationships on that show.

So we have one instance of possible heterosexuality while a character is under the effect of a mind altering substance. I'll take that as proof of heterosexuality for the sake of argument. For the rest of the time Sulu's sexuality didn't matter.

Which means that making Sulu gay is a very minor change.

bilateralrope wrote:

Elheru Aran wrote:

bilateralrope wrote:
Was Sulu ever shown in a hetrosexual relationship ?

I want to say that in one Trek episode, the one where they were subjected to some kind of mind-altering substance, Sulu did come on to Uhura. I'm probably mixing that up with the Mirror Universe episode though. More likely it was mostly because Kirk was the only one really allowed to have relationships on that show.

So we have one instance of possible heterosexuality while a character is under the effect of a mind altering substance. I'll take that as proof of heterosexuality for the sake of argument. For the rest of the time Sulu's sexuality didn't matter.

Which means that making Sulu gay is a very minor change.

(emphasis mine)

Exactly. It really shouldn't be as much of an issue as it is here. Takei's beef with it, apart from it not being what Roddenberry "intended" for whatever that's worth (bearing in mind that Roddenberry already made waves with an interracial *kiss*, leave alone anything like an actual relationship... aliens were totally fine though. Go figure) seems to be more that it's simply not handled well the way they did it in the movie, and I can see his point. But that said, it's the 23rd century. A person being gay there shouldn't lift *any* eyebrows among their peers. Sulu suddenly going "oh yeah I'm gay" is a bit peculiar in that context.

Again... Nu-Trek isn't very well done. This shouldn't surprise anybody after the last two movies. I do agree with Takei to a certain extent that Sulu, as an established heterosexual character, doesn't *need* to change that orientation. But if they're going to change anybody, might as well be a repeating supporting character, I suppose, rather than an one-off guest appearance or whatever.

Elheru Aran wrote:I want to say that in one Trek episode, the one where they were subjected to some kind of mind-altering substance, Sulu did come on to Uhura.

Shirtless, swashbuckling, and waving his sword around, too.

And that's also the source of IMHO one of the funniest have-to-think-about-it characterisation lines in TOS — Sulu, half-cosplaying as D'Artagnan (shirtless, remember) grabs Uhura and calls her "fair maiden". She replies "sorry, neither" just before she introduces his anatomy to the toe of her boot.

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:I believe Takei, some time after coming out himself, insisted his character was hetereosexual.

If the reveal is true, there's going to be a great many Trektards who are going to be screaming like stuck pigs over this. If anyone's familiar with all the ignorant shit from Trekkies over a gay Peter Kirk in a fanwork, he should have no trouble predicting the reaction to this.

Especially, when one of them, in the YT comments for "Blood and Fire"(before comments were finally disabled)flat-out said Takei betrayed the fandom by being out with his homosexuality.

Takei has weighed in on this announcement, and apparently he isn't very happy about it:

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/asian-ameri ... ek-n605626

Less than one day after actor John Cho revealed to an Australian newspaper that his "Star Trek Beyond" character, Hikaru Sulu, is gay, George Takei (who originated the role of Sulu in the 1966 "Star Trek" television series) is weighing in, calling the news "unfortunate."

"I'm delighted that there's a gay character," Takei told The Hollywood Reporter on Thursday. "Unfortunately, it's a twisting of Gene's [Roddenberry, the creator of the "Star Trek" series] creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it's really unfortunate."

Takei also told The Hollywood Reporter that Roddenberry, who he called a "strong supporter of LGBT equality," always approached the character of Sulu as heterosexual, and that the only reference in the "Star Trek" universe to Sulu's family is a daughter who was conceived through a "one-night stand with a glamazon."

Image: Star Trek: The Star Fleet Academy Experience Preview
Actor George Takei attends the Star Trek: The Star Fleet Academy Experience Preview at Intrepid Sea-Air-Space Museum on June 30, 2016 in New York City. Michael Loccisano / Getty Images
Takei's response follows Cho's interview with the Herald Sun, an Australian-based newspaper, where he discussed the decision by "Star Trek Beyond" writer Simon Pegg and director Justin Lin to show Sulu with a same-sex partner and a daughter — a decision, Cho said, was a nod to Takei.

"I liked the approach, which was not to make a big thing out of it, which is where I hope we are going as a species, to not politicise one's political orientations," Cho told the Herald Sun while promoting the film, which is scheduled to be released in the U.S. on July 22.

RELATED: Sulu Will Be Married and Gay in 'Star Trek Beyond': Report

According to The Hollywood Reporter, Cho told Takei about the decision to show Sulu with a same-sex partner last year. Takei said, during his conversation with Cho, that he urged the film's team to reconsider. "I told him, 'Be imaginative and create a character who has a history of being gay, rather than Sulu, who had been straight all this time, suddenly being revealed as being closeted,'" Takei said.

"He was a strong supporter of LGBT equality," recalls Takei, now 79. "But he said he has been pushing the envelope and walking a very tight rope — and if he pushed too hard, the show would not be on the air." Alas, the show was canceled the following season anyway.

Edited to fix link.

OH MY GOD TAKEI'S FAN RAGE RAARRRRRRR!!!!

How dare they change a beloved character from original imagining. Or is it only racist to think that way when white/straight people do it?

U.P. Cinnabar wrote:Especially, when one of them, in the YT comments for "Blood and Fire"(before comments were finally disabled)flat-out said Takei betrayed the fandom by being out with his homosexuality.

People making such comments can go sit on a cactus and rotate in place. I wish to god people would learn to distinguish between the actor and the character.

Adam Reynolds wrote:Is it just me or are many diehard Trek fans actually political conservatives? Which is odd when the ideology of the show is supposed to be the exact opposite.

Eh, not really - stop and think about it. During the 1960's when TOS debuted homosexality was illegal in many/most areas and society viewed them about the same as child molesters (I'm old enough to remember this, and with a lesbian older sister we got some up front experience with the prejudices of the time). There are a still a lot of fans from that time around (like me) and while, in the 1960's, they might have been liberal as all get out it's now 50 years later and what was once seen as liberal is the new conservative.

Plus, there are always haters out there - still plenty of people who hate women, blacks, Asians, etc.

I can also sort of understand the objection here. Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

There wasn't a chance in goddamned hell there would be ANY openly gay characters in TOS. Having Kirk kiss Uhuru was borderline scandalous, and they still had to portray it as coerced between the two characters. Which even I as a child thought was bone-stupid give the first officer was a cross species hybrid but apparently a green-blooded Space Elf banging a White Earth Woman was easier for society to accept than two human beings of differing skin color smooching. Which, by the way, it was. TOS pushed the limits with the occasional inter-racial thing and/or half-humans (remember, there were still states where it was illegal for black and white people to marry while TOS was on the air).

Now, the pushing-the-edge thing is portraying homosexuality as something perfectly ordinary. That, and it really is a nod to Takei to make the current Sulu gay. NOW it is possible to have a gay main character. As noted, Kirk, Bones, Spock, and Uhura have all been established as hetero, so that leaves Sulu, Scotty, Chekov... and that's about it for Gay Bridge Crew.

I can kind of see Takei's point about the original character. He put three years of effort into portraying Sulu in TOS, two years with the animated series, plus the time spent in the movies. He wasn't playing a closeted gay man, he was playing a heterosexual man. If Beyond portrays him as having recently come out of the closet I can sort of see his objection. On the other hand, if it's treated as Sulu having always liked men rather than women I don't have a problem with it. Really, there was nothing in TOS that in hindsight would rule out "homsexuality is as normal as heterosexuality" type of gay character because in most storylines the matter would simply have never come up.

The current showrunners are going to go in a somewhat different direction than Roddenberry would have. Takei is certainly allowed to agree or disagree. But, to be honest, while Roddenberry had some very good ideas he also had some real stinkers, too. TNG got better after Roddenberry was "retired" to more of a backseat rather than main creative force. I realize that's heresy for some people but that's how I see it.

To be fair, Sulu's mirror-universe version is straight (feminine wiles work on him) and the way he behaves toward Uhura in one of the first episodes... uh, the one where people go crazy because of a weird polywater exposure or something... suggests he's straight. There may be a few other instances, not sure.

So I think Takei is entirely justified in proclaiming that his character was straight, and not just because he should know. Heck, a gay man born in 1937 probably knows all about acting like a straight version of himself. In 1965 it'd probably have been more effort for him to play a gay guy than a straight guy, even if playing a gay guy wouldn't have got him in trouble.

Broomstick wrote:People making such comments can go sit on a cactus and rotate in place. I wish to god people would learn to distinguish between the actor and the character.

I really don't think it's, as much as it is another case of fanboy entitlement, the mentality that the actors somehow owe the fans their first-born, or their last drop of blood. They want Takei to keep himself closeted and miserable living a lie for their benefit, just as Beatles fans wanted John Lennon to stay in a loveless marriage and not sing so much about politics, just to please them.

And, those fans can't stand the truth that their idols owe them absolutely dick.

(what do you have against cacti anyway? I'd just as soon prefer they sodomize themselves repeatedly with a rusty razor)

Simon_Jester wrote:To be fair, Sulu's mirror-universe version is straight (feminine wiles work on him) and the way he behaves toward Uhura in one of the first episodes... uh, the one where people go crazy because of a weird polywater exposure or something... suggests he's straight. There may be a few other instances, not sure.

You're thinking about "The Naked Time," from early in the first season of TOS(same episode where Scotty has to cold-start the warp engines in 30 minutes or less, or the E-Nil is toast). And, of course, there's that scene from ST V, where Chekov and Sulu are following Klaa's female first officer around like a pair of puppies, though I would think Takei and Koenig both would just as soon want to forget that particular scene...and, that particular movie...

In 1965 it'd probably have been more effort for him to play a gay guy than a straight guy, even if playing a gay guy wouldn't have got him in trouble.

Given that the first gay main character didn't appear in American television until the series Soap in the late 1970s(the sitcom Maude featured gay characters in the two-part episode "The Gay Bar"* several years earlier), that is a fair point.

* where Conrad Bain's character, Arthur Harmon, first utters the infamous homophobe slogan "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve," which I thought was kind of ironic.

Patroklos wrote:OH MY GOD TAKEI'S FAN RAGE RAARRRRRRR!!!!

How dare they change a beloved character from original imagining. Or is it only racist to think that way when white/straight people do it?

Nice try at trolling, asshat.

Personally, I think that over-adherence to old continuity in a reboot is foolish regardless of who's doing it or why, but I don't really much care one way or the other weather Sulu specifically is gay. Although I do think an original gay character couldn't hurt.

As to your insinuation of a double standard- is there any evidence that Takei personally is in anyway inconsistent on this issue?

Elheru Aran wrote:(bearing in mind that Roddenberry already made waves with an interracial *kiss*, leave alone anything like an actual relationship... aliens were totally fine though. Go figure)

Incorrect, if you're referring to the kiss between Kirk and Uhura. That was in the third season episode "Plato's Stepchildren." Roddenberry had left the series at the end of the second season, and the show killer Fred Freiberger had been brought on as executive producer in his place. So the inter-racial kiss was not Roddenberry's doing.

Adam Reynolds wrote:Is it just me or are many diehard Trek fans actually political conservatives? Which is odd when the ideology of the show is supposed to be the exact opposite.

Yes. And, to be quite honest, though Paramount and Roddenberry both tried to spin the show's ideology as opposite the jingoism it actually supported, it was the movies by Harve Bennett and Nicholas Meyer which actually promoted the ideas the orignial series was purported to have promoted.

Though Star Wars had the same backlash when The Old Republic gave a gay option for characters. And recently Rouge One had a backlash that it was anti-white, in that of the main heroes, only Felicity Jones was white. In particular there are no white men, except for the bad guy. Though as one would expect, these issues are irrelevant to almost all of those who watch the movies. Happily, including most of the fans.

It should be irrelevant. But, people are dumbasses.

I can also sort of understand the objection here. Sulu was portrayed as straight in the original series, why is that now changing?

Why shouldn't it? It's an alternate universe.

The Romulan Republic wrote: As to your insinuation of a double standard- is there any evidence that Takei personally is in anyway inconsistent on this issue?

Takei's inconsistancy or lack there of is irrelevant. It is YOUR inconsistency based on the race of the critic that is the issue.

Patroklos wrote:

The Romulan Republic wrote: As to your insinuation of a double standard- is there any evidence that Takei personally is in anyway inconsistent on this issue?

Takei's inconsistancy or lack there of is irrelevant. It is YOUR inconsistency based on the race of the critic that is the issue.

You will provide quotes demonstrating an inconsistency on this issue on my part or withdraw the accusation and concede.

Your snide little insinuation of hypocrisy was also very clearly directed at Takei, not at me, based on your wording. And if it was directed at me, then it was divorced from the content of the post to which you were replying.

You will provide quotes demonstrating an inconsistency on this issue on my part or withdraw the accusation and concede.

Are you completely un-selfaware? Here is you claiming that criticism of the new ghost busters movie must be because of misogyny vice a actual love of the source material:

On the other hand, its pretty clear that this is another film that internet nerds have decided to hate before it came out.

And while I can't say anything about your personal reasons, I do think a lot of that is probably due to the gender changes, plus the usual knee-jerk anti-reboot crowd.

Gender instead of orientation change, but same general idea. Are you willing to level the same criticism at Takei?

our snide little insinuation of hypocrisy was also very clearly directed at Takei, not at me, based on your wording. And if it was directed at me, then it was divorced from the content of the post to which you were replying.

No, it very obviously is not directed at Takei. The point, which the exaggerated caps and exclamations make clear, is to make fun of the usual reaction of people like yourself that any criticism of a change of character is a fanboi nerd rage. I personally find Takei's reaction to be appropriate. He is an actor, and when given a character to play he invested his heart and soul into it and made it come alive as the creator of that character wanted it to be. This character happened to be straight, so that's what he delivered. So to assume changing the character to reflect the totally irrelevant fact that Takei is gay to somehow honor him is a bit insulting. As if that's whats important about him in this context, not his time and effort to bring Sulu alive on screen as he portayed him as a talented and dedicated actor. Nope, just make him gay, thats OBVIOUSLY what Takei wants. Because, you know, he is gay. SO SIMPLE!

Its so stupid because we already know Takei is pretty happy with Kims reboot version already. Probably because Cho himself has put time and effort into the character as a talented actor as a fitting tribute to Takei's original performance. I know, HOW ODD!

The second part is that criticisms of character changes like race or orientation are generally attributed to misogyny or homophobia or whatever as the quote above shows you doing. I find it odd this boards (but now specifically you) reaction is usually to spit roast such opinions but oddly I observed nothing of that sort in this case.