Orci strikes back

He's an "immature 40-year old arrogant privileged pissant" for speaking up in defense of his creation, but it's completely fair for people to tear him and his creation down without any care or restraint whatsoever? They can say and claim whatever they want, even if it isn't true, and he's supposed to say nothing?

That's a double standard.

 

Think about We (as in fans) set the rules of the game. If we're going to act like cunts, we can't expect the production members to act to a higher standard. We want a higher standard, then we need to step up and show it.

Funny old world, if we trashed each other the way Orci and Co. get trashed in another other forum but TNZ, we'd all eat warnings and bans. But level it against a member of one of the production teams it's all cool.

 

I wonder how many ads have been served on the pages of this thread. Or others where STID might offer an Amazon link. Orci seems good for business.

 

The forum would seriously suck if they also censored talk regarding public figures. I like being able to call Orci a douchebag or Obama a tosser. A good forum has as few rules regarding opinions that can be expressed as possible.

 

... by telling his detractors to "FUCK OFF". Yeah.... What was I saying?

 

So what's your excuse? You've said everything he did and then some.

Who are you to get to decide this? Why shouldn't he get to go out and enjoy the forum discussions as much as anyone or mix it up in an online argument? It's like the idiotic idea that celebrities shouldn't be allowed to speak out about their political opinions. Why, because they're famous they forfeit all rights to actively promote a favorite cause as much as you or I?

I don't agree with the idea that you shouldn't criticize a movie or a script until you've made a successful one yourself, but I can understand getting frustrated and saying it after getting annoyed at a thousand armchair experts thinking they know better than you how to make a successful film.

But that's a far cry from disparaging someone's status in life. I read the entire argument between him and (primarily one other guy) on TrekMovie, and I don't recall him mocking their status in life. He just questioned what their alleged expertise was based on. Maybe I missed it though. Do you have an example you can post along with the page link and comment number?

As distasteful as it can sometimes be, I wouldn't want to see that prohibited (within limits). It would be a nightmare to enforce and would be way too limiting to discussion.

 

There's a difference between opinion and personal insult and attack. Calling the man a Douchbag, would be a personal attack.

Hey, if you can call him a arrogant pissant...When in Rome. Fans want polite interaction, they need to be polite too.

 

STID is a major success. He shouldn't need to ride to defend his work because it's strong enough as is. I've said it before and I'll say it again the franchise seems to be on a one note direction with the previous 3 films being TWOK-esque in their delivery and execution. STID to me seems like an epic piece of fanfiction Orci, Lindeolf and Kurtzman wrote together. To live out their childhood dreams of remaking Khan.

Fanfiction is the only word I can come up to explain why Orci is so vehemently defending this film. People called Cowboys and Aliens, Transformers 1 and 2, the Lost finale garbage but he didn't seem to take criticism of those nearly as personal as he is his TWOK valentine to himself.

 

Nice editing.

What was I saying?

Oh yeah - Your stance is a double standard.

 

They worked hard and worked their way up through the business to put themselves in that position. How dare they?

 

Yeah, I can think of plenty of reasons why they would find themselves on a Trek website.

They are fans too!

We have plenty of folks on here who have contributed to the creative direction of Trek - writers, production designers, etc. And they have never had a problem telling someone to bang off when they don't know what the hell they're talking about.

 

It's not meant to be an insult on their creative liberty, just and observation from a conscientious objector. They rebooted the franchise and on their second time out of the gate redo the most iconic villain of Star Trek. It's like if Abrams revived Darth Vader in Episode VII, because of his renowned reputation as Star Wars' greatest villain. There are rumors that Disney wants to revive Vader btw.

I still have the Entertainment Weekly from 2009 where Orci and Kurtzman talk about rebooting as a way to free themselves of 40+ years of continuity. STID pays homage to much of continuity of the primeverse. It has a been there/seen that feel to it. Except this time you're seeing it with new faces and $175,000,000 budget.

 

I enjoy the privilege of calling out public figures and would rather be allowed to do that, but it strikes me as hypocritical that membership on a forum bestows protection from ad hominems. So if a public figure like Orci wants to protect himself from abuse, just become a member of the forum and suddenly the rules change. It doesn't exactly seem fair to the public figure.

 

People seem to think that Orci, Kurtzman and Lindelof had free rein to do whatever they wanted and I'm pretty sure that simply isn't the case. They had to create a script that satisfied both Abrams and Paramount.

If I'm not mistaken, the change to Khan happened pretty late in the game and that may have been forced upon them by either Abrams or Paramount or both.

So the "they wrote the script so we're going to treat them like shit" doesn't actually take into account what may have been happening behind the scenes. So it seems pointless to waste time and energy tearing down the writing team (though it's pointless anyway).

 

What does that mean though? They always have the option of doing a Dark Times film. Or does it mean bringing him back from the dead in the sequels, in some nonsensical way that craps all over ROTJ? I think Lucas still has enough involvement, however limited, to head that one off at the pass. There are still ways they could use the character that would make sense, though. But it sounds like obvious rumormongering by the usual suspects in the fanboy community...

 

Or we could generally act like adults and focus on criticizing the work and not call the creative people names.

I find it absolutely fucking hilarious that people go on about how they got into Star Trek because of its philosophy then pretty much ignore that philosophy because they don't like a movie.

 

Orci isn't a twat because his stories are full of holes. Plenty of nice people are bad writers. He's a twat because of how he carries himself in interviews. His explanation for why Khan is white in STID is one of the most obnoxious, embarrassing quotes in Trek history.

 

Because I'm not a public figure and I didn't write the movie. That's my excuse. And I don't believe I ever told someone to fuck off. I may use colorful metaphors, but they're not directed.

 

So you're free to act like a child because you aren't a public figure?

 

Quote or link?