If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tor.com)   If you're a writer for Star Trek Into Darkness, it's probably best to stay off a message board discussing how Star Trek Into Darkness sucked. It just won't end well for anyone   (tor.com) divider line 170
    More: Dumbass, Star Trek, Bob Orci, Raiders of the Lost Ark, message boards, Cowboys & Aliens, Wrath of Khan, transformers films, Simon Pegg  
•       •       •

4743 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 08 Sep 2013 at 8:51 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



170 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-09-08 03:53:59 AM  
i1182.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-08 04:59:03 AM  
i1190.photobucket.com
 
2013-09-08 08:02:26 AM  
Well, someone need to break out the "I was playing the Mirror character from Season 2, Episode 4" defense quickly.
 
2013-09-08 08:39:48 AM  

Ennuipoet: Well, someone need to break out the "I was playing the Mirror character from Season 2, Episode 4" defense quickly.


Or try the old "my wife typed it" claim. That never fails.
 
2013-09-08 08:56:54 AM  
It didn't suck!

It just wasn't very good.
 
2013-09-08 09:01:04 AM  
Maybe this is naive of me, but do you think these writers ever check the internet and fan forums, etc, before writing these movies to get ideas of what the fans DO want?

For example, there are many videos out there of how the Star Wars prequels could have been good.

Many very different, but all involving the same characters, and all infinitely better than The Phantom Menace.
Now, I know George Lucas ain't gonna listen to ANYONE, but I would think after all these years, Star TREK writers would say "These internet fanboys seem to know their stuff!  Maybe we could "leak" a story treatment idea to find out what we're doing wrong?!"
 
2013-09-08 09:01:41 AM  
I liked it. There I said it. The actually plot could have worked in just about any time period.
 
2013-09-08 09:05:27 AM  
Regardless of the quality of the film this writer is a pompous assbag.
 
2013-09-08 09:06:05 AM  
Hilarious.  I agree with Orci on most of those points and I love the fact that he finally got in the Trekkies' faces over their stupid complaining.

Because, bear in mind, these weren't normal fans.  These were Trekkies, and they deserve little consideration or concern.  They walked into ID wanting to hate it and then did just that.

And the article's author makes it clear that he's as equally dense as the Trekkies.  He's practically on the fainting couch over the fact that Orci got rude with a few rude neckbeards.

Keep up the good work, Bob.
 
2013-09-08 09:12:53 AM  

Infernalist: Hilarious.  I agree with Orci on most of those points and I love the fact that he finally got in the Trekkies' faces over their stupid complaining.

Because, bear in mind, these weren't normal fans.  These were Trekkies, and they deserve little consideration or concern.  They walked into ID wanting to hate it and then did just that.

And the article's author makes it clear that he's as equally dense as the Trekkies.  He's practically on the fainting couch over the fact that Orci got rude with a few rude neckbeards.

Keep up the good work, Bob.


Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.
 
2013-09-08 09:13:20 AM  

SpdrJay: It didn't suck!

It just wasn't very good.


This, I guess. When I talk about STID it sounds like I hated it but... I was just disappointed it pissed away the potential for a great story mostly by shoehorning in the ending of  Wrath of Khan in a completely uninspired way and then they flip out the Deus ex Machina/Peter Pan ending to keep Kirk in the series. Anyone who writes professionally should be ashamed to use such cheap, lazy tricks.
 
2013-09-08 09:15:56 AM  

Infernalist: Hilarious.  I agree with Orci on most of those points and I love the fact that he finally got in the Trekkies' faces over their stupid complaining.

Because, bear in mind, these weren't normal fans.  These were Trekkies, and they deserve little consideration or concern.  They walked into ID wanting to hate it and then did just that.

And the article's author makes it clear that he's as equally dense as the Trekkies.  He's practically on the fainting couch over the fact that Orci got rude with a few rude neckbeards.

Keep up the good work, Bob.


I'm an old school Trekkie (as much as someone born in 1979 can be) and I really liked the first Abrams movie, I was looking forward to this.

There were awesome (or at least fun) parts of the film but overall it underwhelmed me.
 
2013-09-08 09:22:53 AM  

Infernalist: Hilarious.  I agree with Orci on most of those points and I love the fact that he finally got in the Trekkies' faces over their stupid complaining.

Because, bear in mind, these weren't normal fans.  These were Trekkies, and they deserve little consideration or concern.  They walked into ID wanting to hate it and then did just that.

And the article's author makes it clear that he's as equally dense as the Trekkies.  He's practically on the fainting couch over the fact that Orci got rude with a few rude neckbeards.

Keep up the good work, Bob.


You forgot to name drop Harrison Ford, Bob.
 
2013-09-08 09:24:28 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Infernalist: Hilarious.  I agree with Orci on most of those points and I love the fact that he finally got in the Trekkies' faces over their stupid complaining.

Because, bear in mind, these weren't normal fans.  These were Trekkies, and they deserve little consideration or concern.  They walked into ID wanting to hate it and then did just that.

And the article's author makes it clear that he's as equally dense as the Trekkies.  He's practically on the fainting couch over the fact that Orci got rude with a few rude neckbeards.

Keep up the good work, Bob.

Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.


No True Star Trek fallacy?
 
2013-09-08 09:25:49 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Infernalist: Hilarious.  I agree with Orci on most of those points and I love the fact that he finally got in the Trekkies' faces over their stupid complaining.

Because, bear in mind, these weren't normal fans.  These were Trekkies, and they deserve little consideration or concern.  They walked into ID wanting to hate it and then did just that.

And the article's author makes it clear that he's as equally dense as the Trekkies.  He's practically on the fainting couch over the fact that Orci got rude with a few rude neckbeards.

Keep up the good work, Bob.

Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.


This.
 
2013-09-08 09:26:03 AM  
www.blu-raystats.com
 
2013-09-08 09:27:56 AM  

buntz: Maybe this is naive of me, but do you think these writers ever check the internet and fan forums, etc, before writing these movies to get ideas of what the fans DO want?

For example, there are many videos out there of how the Star Wars prequels could have been good.

Many very different, but all involving the same characters, and all infinitely better than The Phantom Menace.
Now, I know George Lucas ain't gonna listen to ANYONE, but I would think after all these years, Star TREK writers would say "These internet fanboys seem to know their stuff!  Maybe we could "leak" a story treatment idea to find out what we're doing wrong?!"


No, because if you listen carefully, the fanboys don't present a coherent idea of what they want. Each one has a different image in their minds eye of how it should be, and each is ready to go to war to defend that vision.
 
2013-09-08 09:29:21 AM  
 
2013-09-08 09:37:23 AM  
I want to see Borg Tribbles.
 
2013-09-08 09:43:33 AM  
Tyrone Slothrop: Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.

Which Star Trek?

The campy 1960s original series?  TNG?  DS9?  Voyager?  Enterprise?  The early movies that were about as deep as a dog's water bowl?  Or the later movies that were side-features of the main TV storylines?

Star Trek is not a cohesive whole that sits well within one single genre.  The new movies make a big point to retcon everything by establishing a split timeline, so canon is out the window.

Harp on the objective quality of the new movies all you want - everybody should.  But to claim they aren't Star Trek, because either the characters are acting "out of character", or because the new movies are more action-oriented, is just pure bullshiat (those are the two main complaints I've heard).  The characters in the new movies *can't* act out of character, by definition, since they are *new* characters following their different timeline.  The movies are not any less Star Trek for their action, seeing as older Star Trek series and movies had plenty of that as well.  I will concede the point that the older ST movies and series used action to serve the slower-paced story elements, so it wasn't just gratuitous explosions all the time (of course, neither are the movies).

People are being more concerned with the new movies not being closer to TNG or DS9 in tone, than they are for the new movies' fitness within ST as a whole.  The new movies fit perfectly with the campy old "not-even-close-to-actual-sci-fi" series, but with a bigger budget and more angst (the angst is just a part of our current culture).

What we're seeing with the "fan" backlash, is that some people are upset that the movies don't conform to their personal interpretation of what makes something "Star Trek".  Remember: ST didn't start out as a show for nerds.  It was a sit-com/soap, set in space.
 
2013-09-08 09:46:31 AM  
Okay, Orci, when is the Fringe movie?
 
2013-09-08 09:48:41 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.


I'd like to expand on this a little. Obviously Star Trek means different things to different people, but for me, it was always about scientists, engineers, and doctors IN SPACE. It made being a nerd sexy and cool. And Captain Kirk was the embodiment of every nerd's dream. Not only was he brilliant, but he was also a leader who commanded respect. And got the girls, of course.

I remember watching the original Star Trek in syndication in the 80s when I was a kid. In the oft-maligned Gorn episode Arena, Kirk defeats a physically superior opponent using chemistry and physics. I haven't seen that episode since I was about 7 or 8, but I still remember it vividly. In The Doomsday Machine, Kirk saves the day with ENGINEERING. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

Contrast that with the new movies. Now it's more like frat boys IN SPACE. With the exception of McCoy and maybe Sulu, the main characters remind me of the stupid douchebags I generally avoided in high school. And yeah, we're told that they're all smart scientists and engineers and whatnot, but we're not really shown it. Not in a good way, anyway. If it's done at all, it's done in a really ham-fisted way.

The pinnacle of this, for me, was when in Into Darkness Kirk saves the day not by using is brilliant mind or technical skills, but by kicking the warp drive.

And that's why I don't like the new moves so much. They're serviceable action movies, but they just don't feel like Star Trek movies to me. I know a lot of people disagree, and that's because Star Trek means something different to them. And I think that's great. No matter what happens in the new movies, the Star Trek I grew up with will always be there. So it's all good.

But I think it's the trekkies who more or less feel like me who are the ones whining and complaining on the internet. And honestly, I think it wouldn't have hurt for the writers to listen a little. You can still have a compelling action movie, but just add a little more interesting science and engineering in there.

/I wouldn't credit it entirely to Star Trek, but I did grow up to be a doctor (PhD in chemistry) who works in the engineering department of a university and also does cancer research
//I just don't see the new movies inspiring anyone in the same way
 
182
2013-09-08 09:51:41 AM  

Tarl3k: http://www.theonion.com/video/trekkies-bash-new-star-trek-film-as-fun - watchable,14333/

The onion with another perfect summation of the truth...


damn.
 
2013-09-08 09:54:15 AM  
I enjoyed the movie while I was watching it, but when thinking back about it there were a few things that didn't make sense to me:

1. Why bring back Khan to make weapons and ships? He's two centuries behind the times. What was his great contribution? A larger, more automated warship? Neat, modern navies are working on that now. Guided missiles with explosive warheads? Neat, Nazi Germany had that technology.
2. Why did that one captain/admiral blow up himself and his comrades? After getting Khan's blood he should have called up Starfleet and told them "Hey, there's this crazy guy that wants me to blow myself up and everyone in the office. Beam my family up to a starship to protect them while we go hunt him down."
3. Apparently Starfleet headquarters has no shielding, air defenses, and thinks its a good idea to meet in front of open windows.
4. Why did Khan use guns/phasers to attack the meeting of the captains? Why not fire a missile or a rocket? Boom, one missile and everyone's dead in the explosion. It's a lot faster than trying to gun everyone down. I thought he was supposed to be a super genius.
5. Why did Spock mind meld while Pike was injured? Shouldn't he be giving him medical attention?
6. So the Federation and Khan have a transporter that allows them to transport from Earth all the way to the Klingon homeworld. Why not just beam over bombs to the Klingon homeworld and destroy their infrastructure, shipyards, factories, orbiting vessels, etc with complete impunity?
7. What exactly was Marcus' plan? The Enterprise gets caught violating Klingon territory and attacking their planet and gets destroyed. If anything, that gives the Klingons a reason to go to war. The Federation leadership would know they are in the wrong and might give into Klingon demands to ensure peace. Other powers in the region might also side/sympathize with the Klingons.
8. So Marcus has one new warship. The captain/first officer meeting at the beginning of the film was supposed to be of all starship captains. There looked like there were 20 people in the meeting so that's 10 starships which really aren't even designed to be warships plus Marcus' ship. Enterprise is supposed to get destroyed leaving 10 ships in total. Is that really enough ships to wage an interstellar war?

Ya, I know - no fun at parties. Most movies I'm fine with perceived inconsistencies but sometimes they really bug me.
 
2013-09-08 09:57:00 AM  
http://badassdigest.com/2012/09/14/10-best-moments-in-star-trek-histo r y/

This bit from the article, talking about the death of Spock, sums it up best. "It takes decades to earn a scene like this."

Abrams and company are only thinking about earning at the box office. And yeah, they've been doing that, but only on the back of a fictional universe that did everything it could to be true to itself artistically, first and foremost.
 
2013-09-08 09:58:50 AM  

because I care: But I think it's the trekkies who more or less feel like me who are the ones whining and complaining on the internet. And honestly, I think it wouldn't have hurt for the writers to listen a little. You can still have a compelling action movie, but just add a little more interesting science and engineering in there.


This. The recent movies are just mindless action adventures with a Star Trek paint job, like "Die Hard in Space." JJ Abrams and crew just don't give a fark. They know if actual Star Trek fans biatch too much about continuity or characterization, they can always claim that their movies take place in an "alternate Star Trek universe" but that's really just an excuse for sloppy, shiatty writing.
 
2013-09-08 10:01:14 AM  
I didn't like the movie because it made no goddamned sense.

And though it's been a while since I watched the original Trek, but I don't remember these characters being so cosmically stupid.
 
2013-09-08 10:03:52 AM  

OtherLittleGuy: Okay, Orci, when is the Fringe movie?


Given that Abrams, Orci and co. created that series I'm sure they understand it better and could do a decent job... assuming they don't reboot the universe yet again.
 
2013-09-08 10:07:01 AM  

because I care: Tyrone Slothrop: Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.

I'd like to expand on this a little. Obviously Star Trek means different things to different people, but for me, it was always about scientists, engineers, and doctors IN SPACE. It made being a nerd sexy and cool. And Captain Kirk was the embodiment of every nerd's dream. Not only was he brilliant, but he was also a leader who commanded respect. And got the girls, of course.

I remember watching the original Star Trek in syndication in the 80s when I was a kid. In the oft-maligned Gorn episode Arena, Kirk defeats a physically superior opponent using chemistry and physics. I haven't seen that episode since I was about 7 or 8, but I still remember it vividly. In The Doomsday Machine, Kirk saves the day with ENGINEERING. I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

Contrast that with the new movies. Now it's more like frat boys IN SPACE. With the exception of McCoy and maybe Sulu, the main characters remind me of the stupid douchebags I generally avoided in high school. And yeah, we're told that they're all smart scientists and engineers and whatnot, but we're not really shown it. Not in a good way, anyway. If it's done at all, it's done in a really ham-fisted way.

The pinnacle of this, for me, was when in Into Darkness Kirk saves the day not by using is brilliant mind or technical skills, but by kicking the warp drive.

And that's why I don't like the new moves so much. They're serviceable action movies, but they just don't feel like Star Trek movies to me. I know a lot of people disagree, and that's because Star Trek means something different to them. And I think that's great. No matter what happens in the new movies, the Star Trek I grew up with will always be there. So it's all good.

But I think it's the trekkies who more or less feel like me who are the ones whining and complaining on the internet. And honestly, ...


Trekkies tend to get autistic about irrelevent minutiae which clouds the convo but THIS THIS THIS THIS THIS
 
2013-09-08 10:09:19 AM  

Tyrone Slothrop: Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.


Okay.  Star Trek had some great episodes, sure.  But there were some pretty silly ones as well. And the TOS movies are very hit or miss.

I guess what I'm saying is I think people seek to return Star Trek to a pedestal that it was never on in the first place.
 
2013-09-08 10:12:27 AM  

PanicMan: Tyrone Slothrop: Trekkies want a Star Trek movie. They've been getting generic syfy action movies with characters named after Star Trek characters.

Okay.  Star Trek had some great episodes, sure.  But there were some pretty silly ones as well. And the TOS movies are very hit or miss.

I guess what I'm saying is I think people seek to return Star Trek to a pedestal that it was never on in the first place.


Not unfair but it feels like Abrams etc. are aiming for making DS9 the later seasons and all we're getting is Voyager after they stopped giving a damn and accepting fan scripts (some were awesome most were meh).
 
2013-09-08 10:12:41 AM  
The new movies are undeniably pretty andthey are entertaining (as long as you actively refuse to think about anything that happens in them at all).

That's nothing new for Star Trek fans. Most Star Trek movies are pretty terrible, or just okay. The problem is that the new movies aren't trying to be great movies that people want to watch over and over. They are just trying to capture the most eyeballs for that opening weekend, and deliver enough entertainment so those people show up for a viewing of the sequel. No one actually cares about the plot or the characters. They are just a medium for Abrams to deliver some beautiful visuals.

In another 30 years when people are making new Star Trek movies, no one is going to care about stepping on the Abramsverse. They will still be compared to Wrath of Khan and Undiscovered Country.
 
2013-09-08 10:28:35 AM  

buntz: Maybe this is naive of me, but do you think these writers ever check the internet and fan forums, etc, before writing these movies to get ideas of what the fans DO want?

For example, there are many videos out there of how the Star Wars prequels could have been good.

Many very different, but all involving the same characters, and all infinitely better than The Phantom Menace.
Now, I know George Lucas ain't gonna listen to ANYONE, but I would think after all these years, Star TREK writers would say "These internet fanboys seem to know their stuff!  Maybe we could "leak" a story treatment idea to find out what we're doing wrong?!"


The things is, most Internet fanboys do not know their stuff. The ones who do almost universally go pro. At most they only know what will appeal to them, and perhaps not coincidentally, most of this will not appeal to anyone else.

And therein lies the problem. Even if you ignore the fans, they will continue to buy -that's why they are fans- but no franchise can survive on fanboys alone. Fanboys can appeal to existing fans, but by and large they are incapable of drawing in new fans, and new fans are what every franchise needs.
 
2013-09-08 10:30:08 AM  
Oh someone actually admitted writting that?
 
2013-09-08 10:34:28 AM  
For what it's also worth I still haven't forgiven Damon Lindelof for  Prometheus and I know he worked on STID too... I really, really want that guy tossed into the Phantom Zone.
 
2013-09-08 10:36:28 AM  

DoomPaul: I enjoyed the movie while I was watching it, but when thinking back about it there were a few things that didn't make sense to me:

1. Why bring back Khan to make weapons and ships? He's two centuries behind the times. What was his great contribution? A larger, more automated warship? Neat, modern navies are working on that now. Guided missiles with explosive warheads? Neat, Nazi Germany had that technology.


He's really smart. A genius in any field is one that understands its key fundamentals any why they work and how to re-think implementation instead of just adding + 5% to the next tech release. They aren't born being physics masters they pick it up. This guy (breed) can do that and do it fast.

2. Why did that one captain/admiral blow up himself and his comrades? After getting Khan's blood he should have called up Starfleet and told them "Hey, there's this crazy guy that wants me to blow myself up and everyone in the office. Beam my family up to a starship to protect them while we go hunt him down."

 He was just a tech grunt in a facility. Pure blackmail. If you go to the cops, I'll kill your family and I'm watching you. Same as any dramatic scene. Why does a dad try to save his daughter while killing dozens on a mad dash freeway race - because his crotchfruit is more important than a strangers. Just go with it.

3. Apparently Starfleet headquarters has no shielding, air defenses, and thinks its a good idea to meet in front of open windows.

 I'm sure they've been a little lax living in a perfect society and a new 'Patriot Act' is now in place.

4. Why did Khan use guns/phasers to attack the meeting of the captains? Why not fire a missile or a rocket? Boom, one missile and everyone's dead in the explosion. It's a lot faster than trying to gun everyone down. I thought he was supposed to be a super genius.

 More fun?

5. Why did Spock mind meld while Pike was injured? Shouldn't he be giving him medical attention?

 He knew he was dead/unsaveable. He did the mind thingy to see what he 'felt/experience' like since Kirk was blasting him for not having any emotions.

6. So the Federation and Khan have a transporter that allows them to transport from Earth all the way to the Klingon homeworld. Why not just beam over bombs to the Klingon homeworld and destroy their infrastructure, shipyards, factories, orbiting vessels, etc with complete impunity?

 Welcome to Trek world. Obviously, it would be a very short movie.

7. What exactly was Marcus' plan? The Enterprise gets caught violating Klingon territory and attacking their planet and gets destroyed. If anything, that gives the Klingons a reason to go to war. The Federation leadership would know they are in the wrong and might give into Klingon demands to ensure peace. Other powers in the region might also side/sympathize with the Klingons.


Marcus wanted war on his terms not a surprise attack by the Klingons who he was convinced were moving that direction. Once things started the 'why' because pointless. Remember proof of WMD?

8. So Marcus has one new warship. The captain/first officer meeting at the beginning of the film was supposed to be of al ...


These were the ones in the sector. Also, Starfleet isn't a war navy. Marcus wants it to move that direction and his plan is for that. He's not out to kill Klingons out of some hatred of them he wants the Federation to be a superpower and not a science fair and using them as the reason. Once the war stars they can start pumping out warships and no one will raise an eyebrow. Classic propaganda.

Yes, you're no fun at parties. You're the d-bag that has to find something wrong and point it out to people so they think you're awesomesauce.

It's a Star Trek movie. It did pretty good making an entertaining story. No need to go all supernerd and pick it apart any more than any other film.
 
2013-09-08 10:42:13 AM  
As I love to say, there is a reason why I get to write the movies, and you don't.

A series of blowjobs
 
2013-09-08 10:42:28 AM  

swaxhog: It's a Star Trek movie. It did pretty good making an entertaining story. No need to go all supernerd and pick it apart any more than any other film.


I mean it was fun in the theatre but the laziness of the writing did take away from my enjoyment, and be honest, this wasn't any sort of  Die Hard. No one but nerds enraged about "their Star Trek" will recall this movie was made decades later.
 
2013-09-08 10:42:50 AM  
The film has received positive reviews, with critics calling it "a riveting action-adventure in space". Into Darkness has an 87% approval rating on Rotten Tomatoes (based on 242 reviews), with an average score of 7.5 out of 10. The site's consensus reads, "Visually spectacular and suitably action packed, Star Trek Into Darkness is a rock-solid installment in the venerable sci-fi franchise, even if it's not as fresh as its predecessor" On Metacritic the film has a score of 72 out of 100 ("generally favorable"), based on reviews by 43 critics. It received an average grade of "A" from market-research firm CinemaScore.

So most people seem to think it was a decent movie. Unless of course you sleep in your bed at night in a blue & black unitard, with pointy ears on.
 
2013-09-08 10:48:31 AM  
I find Jar Jar Abrams's apologist ten times more shrill and defensive than Trekkie neckbeards.
 
2013-09-08 10:59:18 AM  

buntz: Maybe this is naive of me, but do you think these writers ever check the internet and fan forums, etc, before writing these movies to get ideas of what the fans DO want?

For example, there are many videos out there of how the Star Wars prequels could have been good.

Many very different, but all involving the same characters, and all infinitely better than The Phantom Menace.
Now, I know George Lucas ain't gonna listen to ANYONE, but I would think after all these years, Star TREK writers would say "These internet fanboys seem to know their stuff!  Maybe we could "leak" a story treatment idea to find out what we're doing wrong?!"


Are you kidding, about a million of the things wrong with the Prequels are things that Lucas thought the fanboys would love. Boba Fett is the template for stormtroopers!  A billion Jedi whoopin and a whompin everything with an inch of it's life. Yoda kicking ass. etc etc.
 
2013-09-08 11:02:58 AM  
If Bob Orci is guilty of anything, it's believing that the money he's being paid is an indicator of his quality as a writer.

But the way that the entertainment industry works (and this is true in TV, in comics, and in movies) is that your ability to get paid as a writer is directly proportionate to your ability to work on a successful project.

You can toil for years on indie arthouse sort of stuff that's critically acclaimed and never get a paycheck that doesn't have to be augmented with freelance work. Or, you can be lucky enough to work on something that hits big and then live the easy life being brought in to work on heavily-funded projects that require "big name" writers. (You might get script doctored later if reshoots are required, but if the movie still makes money, you'll still get credit.)

Under this system, guys like Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman aren't so much good as they are lucky. A basic level of competence is required, but they're not auditioning for these jobs. A producer comes in, hires the initial team and then asks them who they want to bring onboard for the screenwriting. They attach their friends or the people they WANT to be their friends (e.g. novelists or writers from the comic book industry), and as long as these writers have the credentials to warrant inclusion, they're golden.

This same logic is how hacky writers like Damon Lindelof keep getting work. It has little to do with talent. The most talented writers only get into the entertainment industry if they're recognized for their genius in other arenas first and are lucky enough to catch the eye of someone in the industry who's got a big enough name to bring them along.
 
2013-09-08 11:11:31 AM  

Fano: Are you kidding, about a million of the things wrong with the Prequels are things that Lucas thought the fanboys would love


No, I know!  He didn't ASK the fanboys what they would love, he's an out of touch old man who THINKS thats what the fanboys would love.  I was saying if you read some online story treatments (some) they're fantastic!  I'm not saying these writers should go online and ASK people to write the stories for them.

I was asking do you think they go online, anonymously, and simply read fan stories for ideas!!

Lucas believes men & women in love talk the way he wrote Episode 2.  What would he know?

But you think if someone like him took some of that script and leaked it online "anonymously" just to see the reaction, he'd have a better idea.
 
2013-09-08 11:15:30 AM  

secularsage: If Bob Orci is guilty of anything, it's believing that the money he's being paid is an indicator of his quality as a writer.

But the way that the entertainment industry works (and this is true in TV, in comics, and in movies) is that your ability to get paid as a writer is directly proportionate to your ability to work on a successful project.

You can toil for years on indie arthouse sort of stuff that's critically acclaimed and never get a paycheck that doesn't have to be augmented with freelance work. Or, you can be lucky enough to work on something that hits big and then live the easy life being brought in to work on heavily-funded projects that require "big name" writers. (You might get script doctored later if reshoots are required, but if the movie still makes money, you'll still get credit.)

Under this system, guys like Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman aren't so much good as they are lucky. A basic level of competence is required, but they're not auditioning for these jobs. A producer comes in, hires the initial team and then asks them who they want to bring onboard for the screenwriting. They attach their friends or the people they WANT to be their friends (e.g. novelists or writers from the comic book industry), and as long as these writers have the credentials to warrant inclusion, they're golden.

This same logic is how hacky writers like Damon Lindelof keep getting work. It has little to do with talent. The most talented writers only get into the entertainment industry if they're recognized for their genius in other arenas first and are lucky enough to catch the eye of someone in the industry who's got a big enough name to bring them along.


that's an interesting opinion.  lol
 
2013-09-08 11:27:43 AM  
1. I really enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness, up until the moment where Spock cried "KHAN!" That was a bit too mirror for my tastes, and kind of over repeating the point that this is an "alternate universe" Trek. We just got that with the Kirk dying scene. No need to have Spock shout Kirk's line from TWOK to cement it in case we didn't get it. Now, I know they were trying to communicate that Spock was so upset that his emotions were taking over, but having him shout Khan just didn't seem to fit. I think him just roaring in anger, without using words, would have been very effective as it seems like raw emotions have taken command so strongly that he can't even put together words to communicate what he feels.

2. My first question mark, and pretty much the only one I really had before the "KHAN!!!" scene was when it was revealed that Cumberbatch was Khan. I was really hoping they weren't going to go that route, but Cumberbatch was so much fun to watch that I quickly forgave it.

That's pretty much it. Beyond that and the 72 photon torpedoes I thought it was a great idea and was really turning into a great Star Trek film.

Orci had no right to react like he did. If he was that upset he should have hit the gym to work it all out.
 
2013-09-08 11:30:46 AM  

Mid_mo_mad_man: I liked it. There I said it. The actually plot could have worked in just about any time period.


You should watch this: http://youtu.be/6B22Uy7SBe4
 
2013-09-08 11:36:48 AM  
 
2013-09-08 11:58:46 AM  

Infernalist: secularsage: If Bob Orci is guilty of anything, it's believing that the money he's being paid is an indicator of his quality as a writer.

But the way that the entertainment industry works (and this is true in TV, in comics, and in movies) is that your ability to get paid as a writer is directly proportionate to your ability to work on a successful project.

You can toil for years on indie arthouse sort of stuff that's critically acclaimed and never get a paycheck that doesn't have to be augmented with freelance work. Or, you can be lucky enough to work on something that hits big and then live the easy life being brought in to work on heavily-funded projects that require "big name" writers. (You might get script doctored later if reshoots are required, but if the movie still makes money, you'll still get credit.)

Under this system, guys like Bob Orci and Alex Kurtzman aren't so much good as they are lucky. A basic level of competence is required, but they're not auditioning for these jobs. A producer comes in, hires the initial team and then asks them who they want to bring onboard for the screenwriting. They attach their friends or the people they WANT to be their friends (e.g. novelists or writers from the comic book industry), and as long as these writers have the credentials to warrant inclusion, they're golden.

This same logic is how hacky writers like Damon Lindelof keep getting work. It has little to do with talent. The most talented writers only get into the entertainment industry if they're recognized for their genius in other arenas first and are lucky enough to catch the eye of someone in the industry who's got a big enough name to bring them along.

that's an interesting opinion.  lol


Actually it's how the entertainment industry (and really any creative/artistic industry runs); you can't objectively say this guy is a good writer and this other guy is crap, so it's all entirely subjective and driven by relationships. One of the reasons I work in IT despite my education being more media centered.
 
2013-09-08 12:02:36 PM  

Faith Logic Passion: 1. I really enjoyed Star Trek Into Darkness, up until the moment where Spock cried "KHAN!" That was a bit too mirror for my tastes, and kind of over repeating the point that this is an "alternate universe" Trek. We just got that with the Kirk dying scene. No need to have Spock shout Kirk's line from TWOK to cement it in case we didn't get it. Now, I know they were trying to communicate that Spock was so upset that his emotions were taking over, but having him shout Khan just didn't seem to fit. I think him just roaring in anger, without using words, would have been very effective as it seems like raw emotions have taken command so strongly that he can't even put together words to communicate what he feels.

2. My first question mark, and pretty much the only one I really had before the "KHAN!!!" scene was when it was revealed that Cumberbatch was Khan. I was really hoping they weren't going to go that route, but Cumberbatch was so much fun to watch that I quickly forgave it.

That's pretty much it. Beyond that and the 72 photon torpedoes I thought it was a great idea and was really turning into a great Star Trek film.

Orci had no right to react like he did. If he was that upset he should have hit the gym to work it all out.


Personally I felt having Leonard Nimoy as Spock Prime make an appearance was a huge mistake given how unlike Montalban Cumberbatch was (and frankly how white he is despite playing a character with a very central Asian name), agree? I wouldn't have minded if Cumberbatch had played like one of Khan's lt. generals and old school Khan is still out there, frozen and wandering through space.
 
2013-09-08 12:02:51 PM  
"This is an industry built on perception rather than facts, run by businessmen who only understand numbers and don't have a clue of what's good and what isn't. So the key is to be perceived as good by being associated with the biggest and best numbers. Meaning that if you have no talent, you can BUY credibility, in essence creating the illusion of quality by expending the most money." - Duckman, on the movie industry.
 
Displayed 50 of 170 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report