RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,351
Posts: 5,502,818
Members: 25,121
Currently online: 685
Newest member: MsMarrielle

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Star Trek Movies > Star Trek Movies XI+

Star Trek Movies XI+ Discuss J.J. Abrams' rebooted Star Trek here.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old September 11 2013, 05:57 PM   #301
Jack Frost
Commodore
 
Jack Frost's Avatar
 
Re: Orci strikes back

BillJ wrote: View Post
Franklin wrote: View Post

Fair enough. But to offer a counterpoint, I thought Kirk was shown to be dead wrong many times in the film. 1. Reckless endangerment of the Enterprise and her crew even if the goal is noble. 2. Blatant disregard for policy. 3. Naively believing at the start of the movie that he deserved the five-year mission. 4. Falling prey to Marcus: "I'm Sorry." 5. Believing that everything will turn out alright in the end because he's Jim Kirk and he doesn't believe in no-win scenarios. Yet, he faces a real no-win scenario. He has to die to save the ship. So, he's wrong many times in the movie. And his realization at the end of the movie is that he's not always right, and he's surrounded by good people that he should listen too. (Think he'll ever blow off Scotty's opinion again?)

Will the wiser for it all Jim Kirk still try to save all endangered pre-warp civilizations he come across during his five year mission? Certainly. That sense of moral obligation is innate within him. Will he do it in the same careless manner as he did on Nibiru? Of course not. Will he stand up and be accountable for doing these things? Yes, and his explanations will stick (just as they did in TOS) even if they enter gray areas of policy.
Great post.
Agreed. Franklin is spot on on all counts. Excellent example of using brain energy for constructive purpose. Salute!
Jack Frost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 06:08 PM   #302
Franklin
Rear Admiral
 
Location: In the bleachers
Re: Orci strikes back

Hober Mallow wrote: View Post
I completely agree. The ideas in the "Future of Trek" forum are painful to read. But that doesn't mean the new films are any good.
"But that doesn't mean the new films are any good, in my opinion." That's better.

Okay... so where's the problem? That's exactly what's happening. Abrams and co. put out their work and the fans are expressing their opinions, both positive and negative.
No one has said there aren't valid negative opinions. No one person or opinion is being criticized solely for not liking the movie or being negative. The reality is, if there are 87 positive remarks for every 13 negative remarks, that seems to favor the view that it was a very well-received movie. I hate Red Lobster (with very good reasons, I'd say), but I must be in a small minority because it's a popular restaurant. So, who am I to disabuse the large group of people who dine there with my very good reasons for not doing it? Why waste my time trying to convince them the food is crap? Live and let live. I'll just drive on by.

Exactly. Talk about entitlement. Some fans think the creators are entitled to the blind acceptance of their work by the fans.
I'm sure everyone who writes for a living is thinking, "From your mouth to God's ears, please," on that one.

It's possible not to give a shit about canon but still not like the Abrams films.
Yep. And?
__________________
Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect. -- Mark Twain
Franklin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 06:14 PM   #303
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: Orci strikes back

Ovation wrote:
Where do "fans" get off thinking their so entitled anyway? That they should be "listened to"? Artists put something out--they hope it will be well received. Audiences hope that what they spend money on for artistic appreciation will be pleasing to them in some way. But neither is "entitled" to anything other than the right to put the artistic endeavour out to the public on the one hand, and expressing an opinion as to its quality on the other.
Hober Mallow wrote: Okay... so where's the problem? That's exactly what's happening. Abrams and co. put out their work and the fans are expressing their opinions, both positive and negative.
The problem lies with something you quoted just below:


JWPlatt wrote:
I agree that "artists are under no obligation to 'listen to the fans.' And I would write the same post knowing I agree with you. I assume then that you disagree with Orci trying to listen to fans. If they want our loyalty, the reality is they are going to have to take our sensibilities into account. To know us they will have to listen to us. Startups (new businesses or franchises) don't have to do that because that's the nature of brilliant innovation - there's someone with their own vision. But once they're successful and popular and want to retain their clientele, they have to listen. But we are under no obligation to like it and not post about our dissatisfaction.
The bolded statements about "have to listen" (or the equivalent) are what's wrong. Artists NEVER "have to listen" to "fans". They can do so if they CHOOSE--but they are under no obligation to do so--whether brand new or simply continuing to work within the creative framework originated by another. Being a "fan" of an existing creative property does not confer extra "rights" to said "fans".


Hober Mallow wrote:

Exactly. Talk about entitlement. Some fans think the creators are entitled to the blind acceptance of their work by the fans.
Bullshit distortion of what I've posted. Creators are entitled to give back just as good as they get when "fans" decide to vomit all over their work in the crassest of ways. If everyone is free to express their views--that must include those whose works are being criticized. The faux outrage at Orci is that he had the temerity to throw back some of the shit being flung at him at the people who were lobbing it by the bucketful. How dare he be so uppity.

The bottom line is all the whining about "having to listen to the fans" represents the unwarranted sense of entitlement by "fans" who are miffed that Abrams and co., in this case, did not put out a Trek film that fit their pre-conceived notions of what "proper Trek" should be. These self-appointed guardians of The Committee for the Way Things Ought to Be believe that "giving the fans what they want" should be the default position of those who work in established franchises (by which they mean themselves--the "true fans"). Some of them go further and suggest that anyone who actually likes the films that did not get committee approval from the "true fans" are somehow lacking in basic intelligence or some other such drivel.

Any viewer is free to complain about the films. No viewer is entitled to be consulted by the filmmakers beforehand to make sure he will be satisfied with result. And "fans" are not "owed" anything.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 06:17 PM   #304
Noname Given
Vice Admiral
 
Location: None Given
Re: Orci strikes back

MrJ wrote: View Post
If Star Trek Into Darkness is getting back to Star Trek's actual roots I would have never been a Star Trek fan to begin with.
Okay by me. You must have gotten into Star Trek with TNG - which, as time went on REALLY DID move away from TOS' roots in a major fashion. GR retconned the hell out of Star Trek as TNG moved forward.
Noname Given is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 06:17 PM   #305
Opus
Commodore
 
Opus's Avatar
 
Location: Bloom County
Re: Orci strikes back

Franklin wrote: View Post
suarezguy wrote: View Post
One of my criticisms against the new films is that, his tactical decision to use Khan aside (maybe), Kirk is portrayed as always being right, rarely internally conflicted and has changed little while Spock is portrayed as growing by becoming more like him and accepting of his style.
Fair enough. But to offer a counterpoint, I thought Kirk was shown to be dead wrong many times in the film. 1. Reckless endangerment of the Enterprise and her crew even if the goal is noble. 2. Blatant disregard for policy. 3. Naively believing at the start of the movie that he deserved the five-year mission. 4. Falling prey to Marcus: "I'm Sorry." 5. Believing that everything will turn out alright in the end because he's Jim Kirk and he doesn't believe in no-win scenarios. Yet, he faces a real no-win scenario. He has to die to save the ship. So, he's wrong many times in the movie. And his realization at the end of the movie is that he's not always right, and he's surrounded by good people that he should listen too. (Think he'll ever blow off Scotty's opinion again?)

Will the wiser for it all Jim Kirk still try to save all endangered pre-warp civilizations he come across during his five year mission? Certainly. That sense of moral obligation is innate within him. Will he do it in the same careless manner as he did on Nibiru? Of course not. Will he stand up and be accountable for doing these things? Yes, and his explanations will stick (just as they did in TOS) even if they enter gray areas of policy.
Well said, Franklin.

We reach, brother!
__________________
Now that I've seen it, and have also had time to mellow, to really think about it, I now find it absolutely, unbearably repulsive in every way except for some of the acting. - about The Wrath of Khan. Interstat, Issue 62: 1982
Opus is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 06:38 PM   #306
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: Orci strikes back

Noname Given wrote: View Post
MrJ wrote: View Post
If Star Trek Into Darkness is getting back to Star Trek's actual roots I would have never been a Star Trek fan to begin with.
Okay by me. You must have gotten into Star Trek with TNG - which, as time went on REALLY DID move away from TOS' roots in a major fashion. GR retconned the hell out of Star Trek as TNG moved forward.
Yep.

As much as TOS was some of the smartest writing of its day, it was still largely a western in tone, set in space: Ride into town, whoo the lady of the episode, shoot up the bad guy, ride out. Now not every episode was that basic. But the philosophy between TOS and TNG are miles apart.
__________________
- SeerSGB -

Last edited by SeerSGB; September 11 2013 at 08:38 PM.
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:25 PM   #307
JWPlatt
Commander
 
Re: Orci strikes back

Ovation wrote: View Post
The faux outrage at Orci is that he had the temerity to throw back some of the shit being flung at him at the people who were lobbing it by the bucketful. How dare he be so uppity.
I'm not sure that it is correct to defend the behavior for which Orci apologized, thereby stating regret for the things you defend, unless the apology was not sincere.
JWPlatt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:33 PM   #308
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Orci strikes back

The basic gist is, if you overreact to troll bait, you lost.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:38 PM   #309
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Orci strikes back

JWPlatt wrote: View Post

I'm not sure that it is correct to defend the behavior for which Orci apologized, thereby stating regret for the things you defend, unless the apology was not sincere.
I don't think the apology was sincere nor do I have a problem with it. There's only so many years you can listen to butthurt fans who take this stuff way too seriously before finally snapping.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:43 PM   #310
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: Orci strikes back

JWPlatt wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
The faux outrage at Orci is that he had the temerity to throw back some of the shit being flung at him at the people who were lobbing it by the bucketful. How dare he be so uppity.
I'm not sure that it is correct to defend the behavior for which Orci apologized, thereby stating regret for the things you defend, unless the apology was not sincere.
Doesn't make him wrong for what he did. Hell, he was a lot nicer than I wold have been about it.

In hind sight he could have seen that he could have handled it different and apologized---again, something the other parties in that shit slinging session have yet to do that I've seen. Or he might have apologized so that people would shut the hell up about it--which is fine too.

I completely understand and applaud what he did. Every so often fandoms need someone to come along and say "Get a life".
__________________
- SeerSGB -
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:50 PM   #311
JarodRussell
Vice Admiral
 
JarodRussell's Avatar
 
Re: Orci strikes back

The difference is he didn't say "Get a Life!" because he didn't like how people were obsessed with his work, he said "Fuck Off!" because he didn't like how they criticized his work.

Abrams & Co did start that fanbase baiting, with all that "Nacelle's Monthly", "Not Your Father's Star Trek", "Fans bash it as fun, watchable" stuff. With that they directly addressed hardcore fans, telling them that their old lame Trek was gone and replaced by new, better, fresh Trek. And now that some of those hardcore fans didn't like their Trek, they get angry. It's hilarious.
JarodRussell is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:52 PM   #312
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: Orci strikes back

JWPlatt wrote: View Post
Ovation wrote: View Post
The faux outrage at Orci is that he had the temerity to throw back some of the shit being flung at him at the people who were lobbing it by the bucketful. How dare he be so uppity.
I'm not sure that it is correct to defend the behavior for which Orci apologized, thereby stating regret for the things you defend, unless the apology was not sincere.
I'm quite certain I am correct to defend behaviour I consider worth defending, regardless of whether the perpetrator of the behaviour agrees. It is MY view that I am offering, after all.

I don't think Orci needed to apologize, nor would I have offered an apology in his place. He is free to do as he wishes. My "defence" is of his right to respond in kind to over the top nonsense from his critics. How he feels about the whole thing is irrelevant to how I view it.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:54 PM   #313
BillJ
Admiral
 
BillJ's Avatar
 
Location: Covington, Ky.
View BillJ's Twitter Profile
Re: Orci strikes back

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
The difference is he didn't say "Get a Life!" because he didn't like how people were obsessed with his work, he said "Fuck Off!" because he didn't like how they criticized his work.
There have been some pretty horrible things said about this creative team over the last five-years. We as Star Trek fans should be ashamed as a group instead of crying about one of the creators backhanding the shitty attitude back at us.

If someone dislikes a movie or TV show to the point they can no longer be civil about it, perhaps they should move on.
__________________
"...the most elementary and valuable statement in science, the beginning of wisdom, is I do not know." - Lt. Commander Data, "Where Silence Has Lease"
BillJ is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 07:55 PM   #314
Ovation
Vice Admiral
 
Location: La Belle Province or The Green Mountain State (depends on the day of the week)
Re: Orci strikes back

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
The difference is he didn't say "Get a Life!" because he didn't like how people were obsessed with his work, he said "Fuck Off!" because he didn't like how they criticized his work.
There is no material difference. He has the right to do exactly as he did. If his "critics" feel free to sling shit, they should have no expectation that shit won't be slung back at them. It's that simple.
Ovation is offline   Reply With Quote
Old September 11 2013, 08:11 PM   #315
SeerSGB
Admiral
 
SeerSGB's Avatar
 
Re: Orci strikes back

JarodRussell wrote: View Post
The difference is he didn't say "Get a Life!" because he didn't like how people were obsessed with his work, he said "Fuck Off!" because he didn't like how they criticized his work.

Abrams & Co did start that fanbase baiting, with all that "Nacelle's Monthly", "Not Your Father's Star Trek", "Fans bash it as fun, watchable" stuff. With that they directly addressed hardcore fans, telling them that their old lame Trek was gone and replaced by new, better, fresh Trek. And now that some of those hardcore fans didn't like their Trek, they get angry. It's hilarious.
ooooh he used the F WORD! My ears! Had I been in his place, I'd left scorched Earth behind me when I went off. The man has dealt with this shit for four years, he admits his snaps every so often when it gets out of hand. So? He's human.

As for baiting the fans: So fucking what? Harlan on fans that rings true more so every day.
__________________
- SeerSGB -

Last edited by SeerSGB; September 11 2013 at 08:37 PM.
SeerSGB is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 05:06 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.