‘Star Trek 3′: Roberto Orci Wants to Direct

I agree. I'm confident because Abrams has given Orci his support for the Director's chair. If J.J. really is confident in Orci's abilities, or maybe knows something we don't, then I'm okay with it. I've liked J.J.'s work so far, so I'm going to have to walk on faith, just a little bit.

 

He didn't tell fans in general (which to anyone else still harping on this, this is getting extremely exaggerated and almost ridiculous.) He was engaged in a debate in that ridiculous and idiotic article on TrekMovie.com some guy who wrote called "Star Trek Is Broken." He responded to someone in the comments section with this:

Exact quote:
"“STID has infinetly more social commentary than Raiders in every Universe, and I say that with Harrison Ford being a friend. You lose credibility big time when you don’t honestly engage with the FUCKING WRITER OF THE MOVIE ASKING YOU AN HONEST QUESTION. You prove the cliche of shitty fans. And rude in the process. So, as Simon Pegg would say: FUCK OFF!”"

That's literally it. Nothing more, nothing less. Maybe a tad overboard, but extremely hypocritical to use that as an argument against him when some of the fans have said far worse and even more irrational things towards these guys and other fans in general simply because they do not agree with the direction of the new films.

 

I thought it was hilarious, myself. Yeah, it was rude on his part, but considering the person to whom he responded, it was more tit-for-tat than straight up offense. Orci seems to know his own mind, and he's not apologetic about anything that might cause butthurt amongst some of the fans, and that's bound to lead to friction. Of course, I'm fine with that, too. Fans can be entitled twits, and some of them need to be verbally knocked on their asses.

 

I thought it was stupid as hell (like an ostensible chef reacting to a critical palate by demanding his customer go in the kitchen and whip up a better meal), hugely unprofessional and unintentionally revealing of a certain amount of insecurity.

Not that Orci is the first writer to Fail At the Internet or anything -- I think Anne Rice, Orson Scott Card and Dan Simmons are still the top three contenders for that prize -- but it's the most spectacular public flame-out I can ever remember seeing from a screenwriter / producer, and an illustration of the principle that someone who can't handle fan criticism should not be on forums.

 

I find it refreshing and I like the fact that he's passionate enough about the work to defend it.

 

Emily Asher-Perrin at Tor.com explains the train wreck succinctly.

 

This.

I was far more disappointed when he later apologized. He had nothing to apologize for. People are entitled to criticize. They are NOT entitled to have that criticism respected or to be free from rebuttal. Frankly, I'm amazed at the overall restraint showed by those in art and entertainment generally, given all the histrionic behaviour and hyperbolic levels of crap lobbed at them everyday.

 

He was part of the team trying to sell a product to the people he was engaging with on that forum. He didn't have the latitude to go on defensive rants the way random fans on the Intertubes are wont to do.

 

No. This "explanation" is just another demand that anyone who gets criticized should just politely sit by and take it. Frankly, that's bullshit. Did Orci choose the best set of vocabulary to respond? That is subject to debate and even criticism. But to argue he should just absorb criticism (very weak criticism at that, in this particular instance) silently like a good little altar boy? No.

 

Actually it isn't. But it is an explanation of how and how not to react professionally to criticism, and a quite correct one, and yes, it means that if you're about to get in an out-and-out fight with your fans, you get up and walk away from the keyboard. It's not a particular mystery why this is the case.

 

What do you think about we have a writer who is director at the same time? Have you ever heard that two heads think better than one? Of course, Orci will receive personal help and advice from Abrams, but Orci is free to take decision. Will he do the right thing? external shots, final cut postproduction, ... That is my doubt.
But, I will keep my fingers crossed for him.

 

As a first time director, Orci likely won't have control over the final cut of the film.

 

I'm not a great fan of Orci's response and agree that he should have walked away. But I suppose the guys/gals on TREKMOVIE.COM were getting a bit of a thrill to be interacting with one of the writers of Trek in a light-hearted tone.
I just think they should have spoken to him with a bit of respect. And since some of them cannot, then no fans get to interact with him. Who misses out?

To be fair to the people on TREKMOVIE.COM ,they weren't sure that it was Orci but once the joker that inspired his comment learnt that it was, he/she complained about their hurt feelings, which was funny.

 

And exactly how many dollars did Paramount lose? Five? (Ok, maybe ten, IF he doesn't apologize.)

Again, those who fling shit should be prepared to get it thrown back at them. It won't necessarily happen, but the instigators should NOT expect immunity because they're "fans". It's not as if NOT throwing it back gives the target any respite anyway.

 

It has nothing at all to do with "immunity" or dick-measuring with "the instigators," or for that matter "the morons." (Although a mindset that sees any criticism as "flinging shit" would certainly be a liability -- that's kind of over the top.) It's about the professional respect a creator owes themselves and their work, not to mention the other people on their team.

(It's also hard to see, frankly, how Orci got to feel backed into such a corner. FWICS it's not as though he has any shortage of supporters, fans, boosters and even outright bootlicks on Trekmovie.com. )

 

Yeah, that sums it up well. You do not release a piece of media to the public and then start cussing out the people who don't like your work. That's psychotic. I can't believe that anyone can defend Orci's remarks.

To those defending Orci, have you ever made of fun of or insulted Indiana Jones IV, The Star Wars Prequels, Mass Effect 3, Transformers, or anything else? Would it be okay if George Lucas or Michael Bay or whoever wrote you an angry letter calling you a child acting out against his parents, a piece of shit, and ending by telling you fuck off every time? Cause that's what Orci did.

 

I especially love the beginning of his statement:

This is just hilariously arrogant. He may run the official Star Trek at the moment, but that doesn't make him the "parent" of any Star Trek fan. If he actually meant what he said, his idea of his relationship with the audience is pretty messed up. His whole "I am a generous god" attitude... oh my... And when he continues with

Oh fucking wow. Maybe next time when he isn't happy with a steak in a restaurant, the cook should reply with "There is a reason why I get to cook and you don't." Or when he gets a hair cut. Or a car repair. Or a tooth fixed.

I wonder how he reacts to criticism from professionals. Would he ever tell one of the actors to fuck off when he absolutely wasn't happy with a part of the script? Or make comments like "that's why you aren't a writer".

 

I've both insulted and made fun of the flubs Orci made doing Star Trek. The difference is that I don't act like he raped my childhood. It's about perspective.

Why would I care?

 

The writing is the key problem with the newest Star Trek film series, and the worst thing you could do is put the people responsible, or rather one of the people responsible, directly in control. The director and cast is what really helped Star Trek (2009), which I did like. I thought the plot did have problems, but I could forgive it because I think it did everything rather well. It balanced story and plot points with references, and most of the references were in the background that only fans would notice. I think it was a difficult job which was very well done.

The key problem with Into Darkness is that it did what bad remakes/sequels/etc always do, which is confuse references with plot. Hell, the entire movie was just one giant reference to Wrath of Khan. There were useless scenes, the plot wasn't explored, the characters weren't explored and had no weight, none of the plot points had weight, and the list goes on. It was just "here's Khan" with very little else done to make anything matter because, again, it dropped references and confused it as creating plot. And I did find the social commentary hamhanded (if you're going to do something like that, either make it more abstract to make the point allegorically, or take it by the gonads and say "you know, this is a lot like when they had drones strike during the War on Terror"; either be abstract in such a way that the audience is removed from reality and then forced to realize its own actual reality, or make it totally direct in a way that confronts the audience). And I found that social commentary undercut by not having the gonads to have Khan be Indian; if you're afraid to tell the story, then just don't tell it and do something else. And it was a special effects popcorn movie; you're not going to get any social commentary when you've made it just that.

I watched Into Darkness with very high hopes, and they were completely dashed. Into Darkness was so bungled a film that it made me dislike 2009 Star Trek, which was a film that had won me over despite doubts; that's how powerful that suck-ness was.

So I really have no faith if Orci directs, whatsoever.

 

No. Two sequences weren't the entire movie.

The movie's approach wasn't direct enough for you? Did you expect them to actually say something like what you wrote?