George Takei Marries Gay Lover

Eh..yeah it was just a play on the word....a lot more tame than some of the follow on posts that you wouldn't even call a sense of humour!!

 

Mmmmmm...Yeoman Janice....google it.

 

I'm also surprised Daniel dismisses the entire Trekian universe. There's a rich cultural history there, far deeper than Star Wars. And, has he never heard of the Prime Directive? For shame.

 

Actually, Daniel, that's kinda wrong. I mean, it's obvious you've never seen the show, but still...

I can think of at least one episode where the Klingons and Humans had to work together for a great good, which involved a lot of running around and laughing. I can also think of another where a higher power decreed that humans and klingons would have to learn to live with each other.

I can think of very few, if any, where the klingons could only be dealt with by killing them.

But then, I'm not a fan of Star Trek. I just don't pretend it's the root cause of all evil.

 

That's the one part of your post I agree with Daniel. Normally you seem to talk sense, but I think you've gone overboard.

You clearly took a cynical view when watching ST-TOS, and I made a point of saying that I did not. If I had, I could easily share your point of view.

When I say "the world is a dangerous place" that doesn't mean I'm promoting nuclear proliferation, and that is by no means my "first principle." I just didn't read more into the fighting than a "fight to survive." In Star Trek, the emphasis seemed to me to be about dealing mindfully with potential threats, even when it comes to the evil-doers, the Klingons and Romulans.

Not all conflicts were resolved peacefully, and there was some gratuitous fighting, but this was a corny sci-fi show so fighting aliens was to be expected. In spite of the fighting, I'm still telling you that the message I got from the whole Star Trek franchise (but again, most notably TNG) is that we have the potential as a civilization to outgrow the petty fighting. Compare Star Trek to other sci-fi shows and I think you have to admit that the message is much less about "fighting" than most.

Given your attitude about Star Trek, I have to guess that you don't enjoy almost all television shows and movies... maybe even a lot of books because storytelling in general, but especially in TV and movies, thrives on conflict!

So, no I'm not trying to convince you to like Star Trek, but you seemed to misunderstand my (and others') feelings about it, and misundertsandings breed conflict, so I thought I'd follow Star Trek's example and punch you in the face... I mean share my opinions in a thoughtful way with the hope that we will understand each other better.

 

i agree that execution was lacking, the background music was poor, overly dramatic, the actors not the best, the technology non existent... but the show did break new ground on so many different fronts, it will be admired for decades for that reason alone...

and NOTHING is liked by everyone...as for me??... i loved it...watched each show probably a minimum of 4 times... it was on tv 5 days a week after school just before the evening news. the news was a requirement to be on, (dad controlled tv...at least what little he watched of it) so saw the show for at least 3 years every weekday...never really got tired of it.

the movies were better (some were) more flash, i thought the acting was not as good though. and it seemed like the characters in the movies lost several IQ points... because some of the lines uttered by the characters were incredibly stupid

 

I'll agree with Daniel that all the ST series have a strong undercurrent of social commentary, in common with a lot of sci-fi. Although I never connected romulans to russians or klingons to chinese, I did think that ST was pointing out that aggression can be the basis for a successful civilization. Just not as successful as cooperation over time.

I was most influenced by the Spock character on a personal level. As I grew older I have come to appreciate the recurrent admonitions to respect and recognize the power of diversity. Not bad for TV show.

 

I do not like most television. I think there have been 4 or 5 shows in the history of television that I've thought were worth the time it takes to watch them. I liked Cheers while Shelly Long was in it. Diane Chambers was insane, and Shelly Long was probably a bit touched as well, to play the character so brilliantly. There was a Mexican telenovela called Los Hijos de Nadie ("Nobody's Children") which was a sensitive story about street kids in Mexico City. It may surprise you that I liked Firefly, which lacked the pompous anti-morality of Star Trek, and which had good acting and writing, which ST lacked.

It's not conflict I dislike: It's when it's presented as the only choice within a show that's intended to be an allegory of the real world. I like many vampire and zombie movies, which are full of conflict, because the context is silly or farcical. Star Trek presented itself as an allegory of the real world. I like my movies to be either full-on comedies or all-out adventures without pretense of morality. Stories with morals require a better quality of writing than exists in Hollywood. The likes of Dostoyevsky and Shakespeare did it very well. One can find wonderful writers in books, but very seldom in movies or TV.

I read a lot and I love escapist adventure stories. Again, the conflict in them is not presented as an allegory. It's just escapism. I read more fiction than non-fiction, though at present I'm reading books about mountain climbing. Maybe because of all the conversations on the topic I had with guides and fellow hikers over the summer. Literature has value of its own. I can accept things in a great writer, because of the quality of his or her writing, that I do not accept from a hack writer.

A hack writer + bad actors + a stupid story = trash.

 

Yes, but there were so many ST follow-ons because the trash was obviously recycled -- I thought you liked recycling!

 

Re: George Takei Marries Gay Lover

Whew, I am glad George's lover that he married was gay. Wouldn't that have been embarrassing?

 

+1

Firefly presented the future not as a Utopian dream, but as a Dystopian reality. A relative handful had access to the futuristic medicine and easy life/luxury, the rest lived a dirt-scratching sustenance level of existence.

Probably was canceled by the network due to hitting a bit too close to home.

I especially liked the Train Job episode and the Jaynestown episode. Even though Mal is admittedly a petty thief, when he realizes he stole desperately needed medicine for the town, he returns it, even though the evil crimeboss he did the job for will hurt him, as he did in a later episode

Jaynestown was interesting, the ship hired gun and tough guy is a local hero on a crappy mud planet. He steals money from the local boss, gets hit by antiaircraft, and starts tossing out everything to keep his ship in the air - including the seats, money, and even his accomplice. The indentured “mudders†naturally think the money falling from the sky is Jayne’s Good Deed

How’s that for Dystopian? Most of the labor force is human and indentured, why waste money on a shiny robot if you can have a human slave?

Around a year ago I came across the entire DVD special edition for $20, and really enjoy it. The missing episodes are also on the DVD, and in the order Joss WHedon intended

 

Maybe that's one of the reasons I liked it. ST is a utopia where everything is wonderful and all we need is Star Fleet to keep the bad guys at bay. Firefly's dystopia is much more like the way our economy functions: automation was supposed to free up everybody to work 4 hours a week and have free time for leisure activities; but what really happens is that automation puts people out of work and into menial subsistence jobs.

Is the DVD Special Edition different than the set available on NetFlix (which is the version I watched)?

 

Too true.

Perhaps the headline should read: "George Takei marries Partner of 20 years" (or however many years they've been a couple).

 

When did Firefly run? I missed it, but it sounds interesting.

Tom

 

It ran in 2002. It's on DVD, NetFlix has it, as probably do other DVD sales and rental places.

 

I think Daniel has probably only seen a few episodes of Star Trek...

We're not going to be able to convince you...you obviously feel very strongly on the subject, but the whole point of Star Trek is the exact opposite of what you are accusing it of being. Human morality is at the core of the show's ethos, and while there are enemies, there have to be for there to be conflict, those enemies are meant to explore how human morality deals with warfare and with enemies. Have you ever seen any of the original crew's movies? The Klingons kill Kirk's son in cold blood and there is an entire arc where the Federation chooses to embrace the Klingons when a time comes when many want to deliver them a final blow. Kirk has to deal personally with his hatred of the Klingons in a world where that hatred is no longer appropriate.

Adversaries are reality. We have them now, we'll have them in the future.

Aside from the way the Federation deals with their outside threats, the franchise is about nobility, duty, friendship, loyalty, and sacrifice. Its about people doing things and working for something that is much bigger than them.

Its very hopeful, uplifting, and positive about humanity and the potential of humanity. I'm sorry that you don't get it...

 

I could name every episode of "Firefly" as a favorite. What a great show. And really a cruel joke on us that it only ran for (part of) one season.

Daniel, I'll reveal my bias now. I know a woman who is probably close to your age and I think shares a lot of your views (unfortunately for you, she's married ), but she looOOOoovves Star Trek. I was extrapolating on your personality a little based on someone I know so it surprised me that you don't like ST. I certainly won't try to convince you to like it, but I will offer at least that you're asking for it when you come into a Star Trek love-fest thread and talk about what a bad show it was!

 

That's okay. It's not the first time. :yo: (Though I thought this was a thread about gay rights...) But I think I've said all I have to say about ST. So once again, Congratulations to George Takei, and I hope this news helps the cause of other same-sex couples who want the same kind of recognition and social acceptance that opposite-sex couples get.

 

Not everything has to be about issues and people's rights. The OP wanted to congratulate someone they admired. Follow-on posts did the same - including Jayman (in a humorous fashion). Someone else turned it into a gay rights discussion. Even George Takei might want to just enjoy the moment without having it turned into a gay right's issue.