Is Disney finally ditching WOKE politics?

[CharlesPhipps]

Well. Let's see. He was cast out of dozens of actors to play the part. In this day and age, do you not think there would have been fans who thought he was cast because he was black? Then think back then, he was the first black person to be in command of a ship or station in Trek. Do you not think there was fans who thought it was because of 'being woke'?

Now, of course all of that is forgotten because he did such a great job in his role and DS9 arguably is the best Trek.

And he was cast in part because he was black because they wanted to make a black captain for all the reasons shown in the "Benny" episodes.

The funniest thing I ever read was people asking, unironically, when Star Trek had gotten so "social justice-y"

[McAvoy]

Well. Let's see. He was cast out of dozens of actors to play the part. In this day and age, do you not think there would have been fans who thought he was cast because he was black? Then think back then, he was the first black person to be in command of a ship or station in Trek. Do you not think there was fans who thought it was because of 'being woke'?

Now, of course all of that is forgotten because he did such a great job in his role and DS9 arguably is the best Trek.

And he was cast in part because he was black because they wanted to make a black captain for all the reasons shown in the "Benny" episodes.

The funniest thing I ever read was people asking, unironically, when Star Trek had gotten so "social justice-y"

TBH, I am fuzzy on the begginings of DS9. But I do know they did look at many actors before going with Avery Brooks.

Do you have anything that can support that assertion?

[GreyICE]

Yes, DS9 chose to have a black captain. It was a conscious and deliberate choice. They did read white (male) actors, but their primary choice was to have a black actor. A white person was only going to be cast if Berman couldn't find a black (male) actor who he felt could play the role. So yes, all things being equal, a black actor was going to be cast over a white actor if the two were of identical skill.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M81exAPqTAs

Of course everyone who complains about that is a hypocrite, because there's an egregious case of affirmative action in Star Trek captain casting. A role handed to an actor without any serious consideration of alternatives, simply for who they were. No screen testing, no competition, just pure unvarnished favoritism.

I refer, of course, to the casting of Scott Bakula as Captain Archer, a role written and designed for him and him alone according to B&B. It's pure favoritism of the worst sort. Yet somehow the usual suspects only complain when someone black is cast, even if they had to compete with dozens of other actors to get the part. Somehow it's not the egregious casting of Bakula as show lead with no alternatives considered that's the huge, glaring example of favoritism. I wonder why?

[CharlesPhipps]

Why would it be a bad thing to want to make a statement with a black captain?

[McAvoy]

Why would it be a bad thing to want to make a statement with a black captain?

Or is there a statement to even make?

[Makeshift Python]

I guarantee you if DS9 was actually an upcoming show in 2020 there would have been a small but vocal fanbase derogatorily referring to Sisko as "Captain Affirmative Action".

Except Sisko is a perfect example of normal (aka not woke or affirmative or anything). Sisko is a human being that just happens to have dark skin. (and Sisko is my favorite captain).

And Star Trek is not owned by Disney..........yet

Of course in the very first episode he's chosen by godlike beings to be their emissary that the Bajorans would go onto revere. And later on he's revealed to be the son of one of the gods, ending with him joining them to become a god himself.

Nothing special about that.

That said, Sisko rules.

[CharlesPhipps]

Why would it be a bad thing to want to make a statement with a black captain?

Or is there a statement to even make?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Far_Beyond_the_Stars

This episode says so.

Some people kind of like it.

[GreyICE]

I guarantee you if DS9 was actually an upcoming show in 2020 there would have been a small but vocal fanbase derogatorily referring to Sisko as "Captain Affirmative Action".

Except Sisko is a perfect example of normal (aka not woke or affirmative or anything). Sisko is a human being that just happens to have dark skin. (and Sisko is my favorite captain).

And Star Trek is not owned by Disney..........yet

Of course in the very first episode he's chosen by godlike beings to be their emissary that the Bajorans would go onto revere. And later on he's revealed to be the son of one of the gods, ending with him joining them to become a god himself.

Nothing special about that.

That said, Sisko rules.

Well in TNG the godlike being showed up to pick someone... and picked Wesley Crusher.

In the godlike being faceoff, we have:


vs:



Traveler gets made fun of a lot at godlike being parties.

[Ordo]

https://screenrant.com/star-wars-rey-obi-wan-kenobi-granddaughter-original-plan/?utm_source=SR-FB-P&utm_medium=Social-Distribution&utm_campaign=SR-FB-P&fbclid=IwAR25ys6YlY-UrRfEMV43CGCURq3jqayn61l-YVcBiGd8g4GWjcGNcmjufbg

Yeah....Disney/Lucasfilm being 'woke' was never the problem....just bad writing and planning. I mean how is Daisy supposed to get into the mind of her character when things keep changing? How is the audience supposed to form an attachment when the things we thought were true are shown to be irreleveant in the very next film.

Seriously....this is flat out embarrasing, and this is coming from someone who once trusted Kathleen Kennedy. I had thought (after Rogue One and even Solo to an extent) that she was trying to balance creative freedom in her writing/director team staying true to what Star Wars was...at this point if that was indeed her goal she has failed miserably. The things Daisy and John have talked about should never have happened. You don't keep changing things like a character background in the middle of production....and you certainly don't do it at least three times over the course of a trilogy. You also try to misdirect audiences by showing only one person with a Lightsaber on a bunch of billboards and posters when the truth is that the other character is going to be the Jedi of your trilogy.

No wonder John and Issac have little interest in coming back...after seeing this dumpsterfire up close I wouldn't want to be involved with Lucasfilm again either.

The really infuriating thing to me is....between The Mandalorian and The Final Season of Clone Wars it's clear that there are some competant story tellers at Lucasfilm....they just weren't working on the flagship Saga movies where they were desperatly needed.

[Riedquat]

And he was cast in part because he was black because they wanted to make a black captain for all the reasons shown in the "Benny" episodes.

The funniest thing I ever read was people asking, unironically, when Star Trek had gotten so "social justice-y"

They were quite some way in to the run. At first, and for quite a while, Sisko was just the guy in charge of DS9. Maybe it was less the case in the USA, and it was never 100% irrelevant here either, but there was a time where people gave rather less of a crap about what colour someone's skin was, so there was less suspicion about there being any more motive for casting other than "that actor's right for the part." No messages, no "Look how progressive we are!", no more interested in skin colour than eye colour. Which is how it would be in the Trek universe anyway.

Like I said it never really got quite to that point, but we've gone backwards since (unfortunately there are plenty of fools calling that retreat progress though).

I guarantee you if DS9 was actually an upcoming show in 2020 there would have been a small but vocal fanbase derogatorily referring to Sisko as "Captain Affirmative Action".

Oh wait, that shit actually happened in 1993. Because fans CAN be toxic regardless of any era's political climate.

Because even then there was the suspicion. Unfortunately things have shifted so that suspicion is more likely to be true now. The supposedly "progressive" types have done a great job in creating separation, distrust, and bigotry.