Slashdot Mirror
George Takei To Play Star Trek's Sulu Again
Tycoon Guy writes "TrekToday reports that George Takei has agreed to play Hikaru Sulu in an upcoming episode of the fan series Star Trek: New Voyages. He's the second actor from the original Star Trek series to come onboard; another episode will feature Walter Koenig as Pavel Chekov. And here's what really makes this news great: Takei's episode will be written by none other than David Gerrold, the SF writer who also brought us Star Trek's Tribbles."
He was AWESOME last week on Stern as the announcer - I wish him well. 68 years old, just came out of the closet and then goes on The Howard Stern Show after a decade of ribbing... George Takei is Okay. RIP Rein LaBlanche.
This
im a fan of the series... but have you seen these things... acting worse than.... well, the original series.
;)). But as I like TOS (although I wouldn't be stupid enough to pay for it, and only know one person who is stupid enough), and for free entertainment, New Voyages isn't too bad for a lazy night. I could do worse watching Ballroom bloody Dancing.
Thanks for that commentary Mr. Shatner. But I have to disagree. I'd say the acting is about equal to the original series (which isn't saying much
A) It keeps the community alive and series continuity going
B) Its just a good feeling that the older actors are willing to go back after all this time. Its a warm, fuzzy feeling.
John Lim (Hikaru Sulu in New Voyages) playing the character formally played by actor George Takei, was reportedly pissed. "It's obviously an anti-Chinese thing," he noted. Takei maintained that Sulu was indeed Japanese and not Chinese and that Mr. Lim was just miscast from the beginning.
. jpg
Lim suggested he was still open to reprise his role as Sulu in an upcoming New Voyages episode in which a future Sulu (Played by Takei) would meet his younger self in a time warp created by a worm hole.
http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/images/cast/lim
Sunny
Be my Friend
The Final Fun Queer!
Sorry, that's bad. But I couldn't help meself.
I'll get me coat.
But as a person who preffered Star Trek TOS it is a pretty decent effort. They really try to recreate the feel of the original series.
The acting is... adequate? Passable. Yeah that is it, it is good enough.
If you like cheesy stuff and are fan of the old series give this a try. It won't be the next big thing but I seen far worse. That norwegian star trek/babylon 5 "comedy" for one.
At least this is in a proper language.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Star Trek didn't go anywhere, boldly or not, with this. Takei just came out in the last few months. Good for him, but it's not really shocking world news. When I heard this for the first time, I didn't freak out, I didn't applaud him. It was just another outing. It was at best some interesting tidbit.
Now, what have been really shocking or whatever it might have been, was if the creators of the original series knowingly and purposely hired Takei because he was gay and dedicated a episode to this aspect.
Star Trek shouldn't be applauded because they unknowingly had a gay helmsman, they should be remember for the other civil rights movement, such as having a character Uhura on board.
Now if he had come out during the first run of the series, it might have had an impact, in light of the show, in those years. Now, the original series is 30 years old.
I've heard from other sources that Paramount let them do this as long as they make no money from it. No Money period. Thats not just a profit, thats no income. As soon as they could be taking money from paramount, they get a call from the lawyers. I think thats why they dont even offer the episodes on dvd, because they would get have to charge, and then be stopped. So its costing them money probably. Which is why theres no money to hire other actors. It appears it's all just for love..
I've got terrible images of the Enterprise causing multiple pile-up driving at half the speed limit the wrong way down a space-highrway, as Sulu misses the one way signs due to his cataracts ...
Hire?
You seem to be under a misapprehension. Those shows aren't a commercial venture. They're community theater.
-jcr
The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
What made TOS standout was its aspriations. It wasn't an apparatus designd to make money with minimal risk, it was a labor of love. As such things are it was more than occasionally a bit embarassing but there at least was no question that each and every episode had deep significance to someone at least.
When Roddenberry died, the franchise lost its soul, and became an imitation of itself. It went all calculatd and post-modern, constantly self-aware of itself as a medium. TOS on the other hand was authentic; it was sincere and earnest to the point of painfulness. Case in point: later series used sex appeal, dressing their anatomically improbable female stars in cat suits to appeal to a young male demographic. When Roddenberry dressed Yeoman Rand in a skirt that wouldn't have made a decent dinner napkin, he was making an true sincere and un-selfconsious statement. TOS didn't try to be sexy, it was sexy. It practically raised sexiness to the level of a personal philosophy.
TOS embodied an authentic personal vision of a future of complete liberation: political, economic, gender role and of sexual. Maybe it's naive; maybe it's unacheivable; but it's worse to have no vision.
g
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
A gay man... acting?
I mean, ya, so what if the gay actor stereotype has been around since man invented fire... Star Trek was the first show to beam a gay man.
"Things are more moderner than before- bigger, and yet smaller- it's computers-- San Dimas High School football RULES!"
Paramount provided the original blueprints of TOS' sets.
In return, Paramount has borrowed a number of props from NY, including the Helmsman's pop-up console.
All in all, I think it could be profitable for Paramount.
Takei coming out was one of those well, geeze of course kind of moments. The big question is why he wasn't a blip on anybody's gaydar screen before. I always thought he kind of stood out, but I couldn't quite put my finger on why.
That said, the actors and the characters are two different things. Having a gay actor (especially a closeted one) play a straight character doesn't count as tackling gay issues. Star Trek in its later editions flirted with lesbian allusions, but so does a lot of porn that is intended for consumption by straight males. It's the idea of masculinity that is the third rail of culture. Most people treat it as too dangerous to go near.
I don't think male homosexuality had a place in Roddenberry's fantasy life. Judging from what he wrote about some of the Kirk-Spock fan fic, I don't think he liked the idea, although I think he was polite and careful not to dismiss the idea of people having gay Star Trek fantasies. Just not with his characters.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
TOS is dead. TNG is maybe dead. ENT is certainly dead. But people like Star Trek, and a new series would be welcomed by the audience, if it was good enough. The problem is not that the world is tired of Star Trek, the problem is that the last Star Trek series were not that good as the first ones (TOS and TNG). I agree with those guys at startrek.com that it is time for a new Star Trek series, in the style of TNG, with new actors and a new ship, set 20-30 years after TNG. Most of the galaxy is still unexplored!
I like David Gerrold, and I've enjoyed some of his recent "lighter" SF books including his Dingilliad trilogy, but c'mon, the guy needs to get a move on and finish the next installment of his masterwork, A Method For Madness. I'm still trapped in the Amazon, wondering what happens next in the War Against The Chtorr.
Star Trek shouldn't be applauded because they unknowingly had a gay helmsman, they should be remember for the other civil rights movement, such as having a character Uhura on board.
What makes me sad is the fact the people have pointed this out... because I never gave it a second thought. I guess it's actually important... the simple fact that they bought all these people together in a situation where it simply was no big deal.
This is a tad off topic but I recently watched the Warner Brothers banned 11 cartoons. Some of these I actually saw as a kid living in the south... and at the time I would have seen them I had no idea they were attempting to poke fun at african americans... I just assumed there were cool cats and cool dogs in a city called Harlem who were big on skat and jazz. Watching them now makes me feel rather ill. I had to ask my self whether I wanted to archive them or not... but without things like this... big names in Warner Brother's animation... creating these strongly racist cartoons because it again was "no big deal"... without these things people like Martin Luther King, Jr. would have had nothing to complain about... and women like Whoopi Goldberg who grew up with Sherly Temple reruns wouldn't have been excited to see Star Trek and exclaim, "Momma, there's a black lady on tv... and she ain't no maid".
So yes... I feel ashamed when I have to think about the fact that "I love Lucy" of all things was groundbreaking... a mixed marriage between I presume an Irish Catholic and a Cuban-born musician. I feel even more ashamed when I have to think about the fact that Star Trek featured the first African American woman who wasn't a maid. But I can feel some pride in the fact that much was accomplished over a period of 40 years... though i'll be another 40 years before we as a people trully understand that we share a planet.
There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
Shatner said this on Jimmy Kimmel's show (which is why nobody heard it) when asked if he had known, back in the '60s, that Takei was gay:
"Of course I knew... he kept setting his phaser on fabulous!"
When Roddenberry died, the franchise lost its soul, and became an imitation of itself.
Oh, hell, here I was warming up for a good old fashioned Kirk vs. Picard/ST:TOS vs. ST:TNG flamewar, sharpening the standard set of knives, but my boss just e.mailed me that he needs the project summary reports and '06 projections by 4:00 today, rather than next Thursday, so I just don't have time for it today. Too bad... that argument is always fun.
Slashdot editors, could you please repost this story on Monday, so we can have this argument next week? Thanks.
The man who does not read good books has no advantage over the man who cannot read them. - Mark Twain
I hear people say this stuff all the time about Roddenberry. "The franchise lost its soul" and so on. Pure crap. The problem is that everyone remembers the good episodes from TOS in years 1 and 2 and forgets the bad ones from year 3. _Spock's Brain_ anyone? TOS was going downhill badly in season 3 and Roddenberry didn't care. In fact, he is responsible for some of the low points in TOS history, such as the episode where Spock first talks about "infinite diversity in infinite combinations" (IDIC), which was little more than a badly disguised way to sell some IDIC trinkets and pocket some cash. Roddenberry was often all about the money, which is something his fans overlook.
:-) is so revered by some here.
To be blunt, the first year of _The Next Generation_ is terrible. Have any of you seen those episodes recently? They are often appallingly bad. Folks, the truth is that TNG didn't get better until Roddenberry started having less and less to do with it and it hit its peak after he died. For those of you who really liked _Deep Space Nine_, the series would have been absolutely impossible in that form had Roddenberry lived, since he would have strenuously objected to the religious aspects of the show. He was very proud of being an atheist and although it's kind of subtle in TOS and just below the surface in TNG, he viewed the future as a place where religion had no place. Given the general hostility in Slashdot to religion, no doubt that plays some role in why "Saint Roddenberry"
Wandering the galaxy bringing self-righteous Federation "enlightenment" to the universe with bombastic speeches isn't exploration--it's hubris and arrogance.
Trek writers needed to spend some time exploring the concept of "character development." They might have learned that real characters EVOLVE over time (and Rikers's expanading waistline doesn't count).
Not that chracter development matters much when all your characters are stock and one-dimensional to begin with. You'd think that, in all that technobabble, they would have picked up the term "multi-dimensional" at some point.
-Eric
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
he needs the project summary reports
Don't you hate TPS reports?