Plot Twist: George Takei is NOT Happy New Sulu is Gay...
Leftists have a habit of mocking anyone who criticizes them for changing the race, gender, or sexual orientation of established characters in the name of social justice (see Jackass Judd Apatow Shames ‘Ghostbusters’ Critics by… Calling them ‘Trump-Supporters’? and Heterosexual Appropriation: Leftists Want Captain America to be Gay?!). So, when it was announced that the new Star Trek: Beyond writers were turning Sulu gay, to pay tribute to super gay George Takei, it's a little surprising to hear criticism for it coming from... super gay George Takei.
"I’m delighted that there’s a gay character," he tells The Hollywood Reporter. "Unfortunately, it’s a twisting of Gene’s creation, to which he put in so much thought. I think it’s really unfortunate."
Takei first learned of Sulu's recent same-sex leanings last year, when Cho called him to reveal the big news. Takei tried to convince him to make a new character gay instead. "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 had enough negative experiences inside the Hollywood closet, he says, and strongly feels a character who came of age in the 23rd century would never find his way inside one.)
"I said, 'This movie is going to be coming out on the 50th anniversary of Star Trek, the 50th anniversary of paying tribute to Gene Roddenberry, the man whose vision it was carried us through half a century. Honor him and create a new character. I urged them. He left me feeling that that was going to happen," Takei says.
A disappointed Takei told Cho to go about his promotional duties, but that he was "not going to change" his mind on the matter.
Credit where it's due here. The point Takei made is the point many of us have been making for... ever: instead of taking the creatively lazy route and changing old characters, create new characters. If you want to have a gay character, fine. That's your prerogative. But do not appropriate an already straight one into a gay one. As Takai points out, that's not really a fair thing to do. It's unfair to both the character (who was always straight) and to the character's creator, who had a vision of who that character was. And should forever be. FYI, this also applies to James Bond being a straight man, not a woman, not a gay man. Leftists in Hollywood take note.
Go ahead and say they did this for anything other than a cheap publicity stunt. Or to score points with the crazy #SJW left who insist on making everything gay. Read Dear Hollywood: Stop Gaying All the Things, Especially Straight Characters...