Star Trek Beyond (ST:XIII)

[mojorizen7]

I hate token type decisions but I also hate that as soon as they add women as the heroes or make a character gay the assumption is it's PC.

Look, I respect GT comments but this is a essentially a reboot. I love the original Trek but I also loved TNG, DS9 which all moved on from Gene.

Honestly, Simon doesn't seem like the kind of writer or artist that does things just to be PC. Unless I read somewhere the studio forced him to do so, I think it was a creative decision.

It seems to me that the point of contention here is not about creating strong female leads, leading black men, gay and/or lesbian characters in film and art. I'd like to think that we're all way beyond that.

The problem i have is using the art that has already been created by an artist in the past(and adored by millions through generations) and CHANGING the art to fit into the present using gender, race and sexual orientation just because as a society, we've moved on to a more diverse culture and it's okay now to do that. It is okay. Great. Go create that universe and try to sell it.

It's a reboot. I get it. Creative license etc etc. Plot changes, modernize a 30 year old universe. That's cool...but this type of thing is NOT about creative license in the name of the art. It's political whether you want to admit it or not. It's about money and expanding your audience at the expense of the original vision.

 

[Covert Rain]

It seems to me that the point of contention here is not about creating strong female leads, leading black men, gay and/or lesbian characters in film and art. I like to think that we're all way beyond that.

The problem i have is using the art that has already been created by an artist in the past(and adored by millions through generations) and CHANGING the art to fit into the present using gender, race and sexual orientation just because as a society, we've moved on to a more diverse culture and it's okay now to do that. It is okay. Great. Go create that universe and try to sell it.

It's a reboot. I get it. Creative license etc etc. Plot changes, modernize a 30 year old universe. That's cool...but this type of thing is NOT about creative license in the name of the art. It's political whether you want to admit it or not. It's about money and expanding your audience at the expense of the original vision.

That's your opinion. As I stated SP doesn't strike me as being PC or doing things for the sake of just the money.

I think it's a creative choice. It's only political for those that typically sit on the other side of the topic.

 

[oaken1]

That's your opinion. As I stated SP doesn't strike me as being PC or doing things for the sake of just the money.

I think it's a creative choice. It's only political for those that typically sit on the other side of the topic.

question....what creatively speaking,...has the change added to the role?

 

[mojorizen7]

That's your opinion. As I stated SP doesn't strike me as being PC or doing things for the sake of just the money.

I think it's a creative choice. It's only political for those that typically sit on the other side of the topic.

Yeah we definitely disagree on the "Why."

I will say this though in reference to the co-writer S.Pegg making(or not making) decisions like this...there are about nine different producers on this film.

 

[Covert Rain]

Yeah we definitely disagree on the "Why."

I will say this though in reference to the co-writer S.Pegg making(or not making) decisions like this...there are about nine different producers on this film.

That's why I said above....unless the studio made them do it. IMO, if this purely came from SP, I think it was a creative decision.

Also, I don't think the original Star Trek would have turned out the way it did if society and TV was more modern back then. I mean using aliens for Kirk to get it on with was a parallel for interracial relationships which were too touchy of a subject. I have no doubt Gene if he could have back then would have gone much further than the "kiss" if he could have.

 

[Chaplin]

Couple things:

- Simon Pegg has since said it was meant to be a "tribute" to Takei

- The episode where Kirk kisses Uhuru is one of the lowest rated in the shows history. And considering the ratings of that show, that's saying something.

- And it wS the 60s. How much envelope could be pushed?

 

[Chaplin]

question....what creatively speaking,...has the change added to the role?

It certainly makes the character more interesting. Seriously, other than physical appearance, what did Sulu the person offer in the scheme of things other than being Asian?

 

[oaken1]

It certainly makes the character more interesting. Seriously, other than physical appearance, what did Sulu the person offer in the scheme of things other than being Asian?

Interesting? How so? I do not agree..
Sulu in this Star Trek is more than Asian,...he is a bona fide badass...the character that had nothing beyond an accent and youthful exuberance was Chekov

 

[cardfaninfl]

Couple things:

- Simon Pegg has since said it was meant to be a "tribute" to Takei

- The episode where Kirk kisses Uhuru is one of the lowest rated in the shows history. And considering the ratings of that show, that's saying something.

- And it wS the 60s. How much envelope could be pushed?

Simon Pegg wanted to honor Takei, and without speaking to him, assumed George would simply accept this privilege. Good call. I'm sure Pegg did not intend for his "tribute" to be considered a slight (by Takei) toward a man's creation that George respected, but that level of false-consensus rarely works out.

'Plato's Stepchildren' was an episode in the final season marred with production cuts, comparatively poor storytelling, and a day/time slot move that ensured the majority of it's core demographics would not tune in. Not one for conspiracy theories, but the thought that the network was doing everything they could to kill this series has teeth. The correlation of 'the kiss' and low ratings has less teeth.

Envelopes pushed in the 60s? Hmmm, off the top of my head:

- Civil Rights Acts
- Numerous civil disturbances against war, criminalization of drugs, right to privacy, etc.
- Feminist movement that led to reforms on reproduction rights, hiring, pay, harassment, domestic violence, gender-neutral and non-sexist verbiage, etc.
- Kerner Commission for the President finding clear institutionalized racism, and severely scrutinized police department's actions/behavior/policies/mindset toward black communities

Considering we are still battling the same issues, perhaps you are right and not much envelope pushing was done.

 

[Chaplin]

Simon Pegg wanted to honor Takei, and without speaking to him, assumed George would simply accept this privilege. Good call. I'm sure Pegg did not intend for his "tribute" to be considered a slight (by Takei) toward a man's creation that George respected, but that level of false-consensus rarely works out.

'Plato's Stepchildren' was an episode in the final season marred with production cuts, comparatively poor storytelling, and a day/time slot move that ensured the majority of it's core demographics would not tune in. Not one for conspiracy theories, but the thought that the network was doing everything they could to kill this series has teeth. The correlation of 'the kiss' and low ratings has less teeth.

Envelopes pushed in the 60s? Hmmm, off the top of my head:

- Civil Rights Acts
- Numerous civil disturbances against war, criminalization of drugs, right to privacy, etc.
- Feminist movement that led to reforms on reproduction rights, hiring, pay, harassment, domestic violence, gender-neutral and non-sexist verbiage, etc.
- Kerner Commission for the President finding clear institutionalized racism, and severely scrutinized police department's actions/behavior/policies/mindset toward black communities

Considering we are still battling the same issues, perhaps you are right and not much envelope pushing was done.

Come on. The civil rights movement was in full force at the time, so it wasn't subversive, certainly in the Hollywood community. But homosexuality? That was taboo WAY more than racism was at that time. So yes, it was pushing the envelope.

 

[Covert Rain]

Simon Pegg wanted to honor Takei, and without speaking to him, assumed George would simply accept this privilege. Good call. I'm sure Pegg did not intend for his "tribute" to be considered a slight (by Takei) toward a man's creation that George respected, but that level of false-consensus rarely works out.

'Plato's Stepchildren' was an episode in the final season marred with production cuts, comparatively poor storytelling, and a day/time slot move that ensured the majority of it's core demographics would not tune in. Not one for conspiracy theories, but the thought that the network was doing everything they could to kill this series has teeth. The correlation of 'the kiss' and low ratings has less teeth.

Envelopes pushed in the 60s? Hmmm, off the top of my head:

- Civil Rights Acts
- Numerous civil disturbances against war, criminalization of drugs, right to privacy, etc.
- Feminist movement that led to reforms on reproduction rights, hiring, pay, harassment, domestic violence, gender-neutral and non-sexist verbiage, etc.
- Kerner Commission for the President finding clear institutionalized racism, and severely scrutinized police department's actions/behavior/policies/mindset toward black communities

Considering we are still battling the same issues, perhaps you are right and not much envelope pushing was done.

It absolutely pushed the envelope. So much so the script was written so that Kirk and Uhura kiss was done against their will to make it more acceptable. NBC shot alternate takes without the kiss which would probably have been used if it wasn't for Shatner purposely screwing up those takes so they couldn't be used.

Even today studios are getting attacked for Lesbian and gay kisses!!

 

[Stout]

Couple things:

- Simon Pegg has since said it was meant to be a "tribute" to Takei

- The episode where Kirk kisses Uhuru is one of the lowest rated in the shows history. And considering the ratings of that show, that's saying something.

- And it wS the 60s. How much envelope could be pushed?

Well duh, of course it was the lowest rated, considering affiliates in the south banned its airing lol

 

[Cheesebeef]

At the risk of attracting the PC attack dog police....i'll simply ask. Why?
I have the same response to the decision to cast Idris Elba(a fine actor) in the role of the Gunslinger in the upcoming Dark Tower film. Why?

These aren't decisions made in the name of the art itself, which is unfortunate IMO. Oh well.

The idea that Elba was cast for any reason other then he's a ridiculously killer actor is lunacy. He's not a box office draw and that's the only thing that truly matters to the bean counters running studios. I mean... questioning Elba being cast in anything outside of a biopic of George Washington is really out there.

I mean, are you also complaining that Scarlett Johansen was cast in Ghost In The Shell?

 

[Cheesebeef]

question....what creatively speaking,...has the change added to the role?

it actually gives him a life outside of sitting in a chair.

I don't get why this stuff gets people so pissed... but then are oddly silent when a white person is cast in roles specifically written for minorities in comics, tv shows, etc.

 

[oaken1]

it actually gives him a life outside of sitting in a chair.

I don't get why this stuff gets people so pissed... but then are oddly silent when a white person is cast in roles specifically written for minorities in comics, tv shows, etc.

Sulu already had a life outside his chair in the original show, he had a wife and kid..... I guess he kinda still does...

I love old westerns, but as a native I do find it pretty funny seeing all those white guys in war paint..... but in all honesty there really are not that many native actors...more now,...not so many in the fifties

These things upset me for one reason only...it is pandering...and it is unnecessary.... there are hundreds of talented gays in Hollywood...writers, producers, actors, directors....if they want gay characters in film, create them... trust me...this is nowhere near as upsetting as some idiot trying to make Captain America an undercover hydra agent...would like to kick that schmuck in his teeth two or eight times.

 

[mojorizen7]

The idea that Elba was cast for any reason other then he's a ridiculously killer actor is lunacy. He's not a box office draw and that's the only thing that truly matters to the bean counters running studios. I mean... questioning Elba being cast in anything outside of a biopic of George Washington is really out there.

I mean, are you also complaining that Scarlett Johansen was cast in Ghost In The Shell?

McConaughy is the clear box office draw, not that it has anything to do with it in this case. One could draw comparisons from this materials lore to Tolkien's LOTR films except that it's only been brewing for about 40 years instead of 80.
These are fantasy works of art....for better or worse politically. You do understand the parallels between the two i hope.

Peter Jackson's LOTR films were a huge success(as you know) but they also took alot of poo for being "too white" and "the type of stuff black people don't like." Sounds like a dumb thing to talk about but it is true...in the real world when having real conversations i mean. IMO that's okay. Leave it alone.
You've seen that stuff i'm sure, right? I can provide several links if you like.
This casting was about an attempt to expand the audience at the expense of the art and pandering as oaken1 said.

I know nothing about that Johansen film. Why didn't they cast a young black actor in the role of Frodo Baggins? Why not reboot Superman again and cast a freckle-faced red-head? Why not cast Diego Luna as Capt Kirk in the reboots? Because it doesn't suit the art and the lore. I'm not making this up.

 

[Chaplin]

Sulu already had a life outside his chair in the original show, he had a wife and kid..... I guess he kinda still does...

I love old westerns, but as a native I do find it pretty funny seeing all those white guys in war paint..... but in all honesty there really are not that many native actors...more now,...not so many in the fifties

Um, what? Sure there were Native American actors back then. Studios wanted recognizable actors though in all the major roles--hence the white men in war paint. However, watch many old John Wayne movies and while the "chief" was normally a white man, most of the supporting Natives were played by Natives.

 

[Chaplin]

McConaughy is the clear box office draw, not that it has anything to do with it in this case. One could draw comparisons from this materials lore to Tolkien's LOTR films except that it's only been brewing for about 40 years instead of 80.
These are fantasy works of art....for better or worse politically. You do understand the parallels between the two i hope.

Peter Jackson's LOTR films were a huge success(as you know) but they also took alot of poo for being "too white" and "the type of stuff black people don't like." Sounds like a dumb thing to talk about but it is true...in the real world when having real conversations i mean. IMO that's okay. Leave it alone.
You've seen that stuff i'm sure, right? I can provide several links if you like.
This casting was about an attempt to expand the audience at the expense of the art and pandering as oaken1 said.

I know nothing about that Johansen film. Why didn't they cast a young black actor in the role of Frodo Baggins? Why not reboot Superman again and cast a freckle-faced red-head? Why not cast Diego Luna as Capt Kirk in the reboots? Because it doesn't suit the art and the lore. I'm not making this up.

I would love for you to post references to someone calling LOTR "too white". That is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. They were based on books and were pretty faithful. Are you saying that Tolkien was a borderline racist because he didn't include minorities in his books -- even though, other races could be considered "minorities", except they all had light skin. Boo hoo. That is taking PC WAY too far.

 

[oaken1]

I would love for you to post references to someone calling LOTR "too white". That is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. They were based on books and were pretty faithful. Are you saying that Tolkien was a borderline racist because he didn't include minorities in his books -- even though, other races could be considered "minorities", except they all had light skin. Boo hoo. That is taking PC WAY too far.

lol...yeah...with few exceptions Orcs are not "white"

 

[oaken1]

Um, what? Sure there were Native American actors back then. Studios wanted recognizable actors though in all the major roles--hence the white men in war paint. However, watch many old John Wayne movies and while the "chief" was normally a white man, most of the supporting Natives were played by Natives.

didn't say "none"...said "Not many".... being an "extra" does not really count as being an actor IMO....one kinda needs at least a line or notable screen action

 

[mojorizen7]

I would love for you to post references to someone calling LOTR "too white". That is one of the most ridiculous things I've ever heard. They were based on books and were pretty faithful. Are you saying that Tolkien was a borderline racist because he didn't include minorities in his books -- even though, other races could be considered "minorities", except they all had light skin. Boo hoo. That is taking PC WAY too far.

I agree with you it is ridiculous because it's art adapted from books. It's not racist so(movie studios and writers) need to leave it alone and don't try to start pandering this stuff to fit into the social climate of 2016. The Dark Tower series which i read twice is the same thing. The Gunslinger is a tall, thin white man with blue eyes. Detta Walker is a racist black woman. That's how it was written.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/lifestyles/chi-030112epringsrace-story.html
http://www.avclub.com/article/emthe-hobbitem-fires-casting-director-for-thinking-48362
http://stuffblackpeopledontlike.blogspot.com/2009/07/32-lord-of-rings-trilogy.html

 

[Covert Rain]

I just don't care that the race of an actor doesn't match the books, comic books or whatever. When I hear that something is being adapted I automatically assume creative license is going to occur. I just want it to be a good actor regardless of race.

The only time this matters to me is if it's a historical documentary or film based on actual events.

 

[Stout]

My view is, if the demographic of the character is important--the sex, the size, the race, etc--then that shouldn't be broken. I can understand that fans of Jack Reacher were mad because the character is based on massive size, though I didn't care because I didn't read the books. Peter Dinklage could never play Andre the Giant in a biopic. Casting Clancy Brown as Frederick Douglass would be unacceptable, as would casting Denzel Washington as George Washington. Will Smith couldn't play Tank Girl. And so on, and so forth.

 

[Covert Rain]

My view is, if the demographic of the character is important--the sex, the size, the race, etc--then that shouldn't be broken. I can understand that fans of Jack Reacher were mad because the character is based on massive size, though I didn't care because I didn't read the books. Peter Dinklage could never play Andre the Giant in a biopic. Casting Clancy Brown as Frederick Douglass would be unacceptable, as would casting Denzel Washington as George Washington. Will Smith couldn't play Tank Girl. And so on, and so forth.

Comparing Dinklage to Andre is over the top. However, if someone is two inches difference, 50 lbs lighter but a good actor? Andre it is. Simply don't care.

 

[Stout]

Comparing Dinklage to Andre is over the top. However, if someone is two inches difference, 50 lbs lighter but a good actor? Andre it is. Simply don't care.

Well, of course. Some people say size, race, sex, etc, never matter, which is ridiculous. The comparison is for them.