karl urban on the star trek set

It seems like a no-brainer to suggest that when engaging with your fans online, you probably shouldn’t actively insult them. For example, don’t log on to a popular fansite and start posting comments describing other readers as “shitty fans” and telling them to “f*ck off”. 

Unfortunately, that’s exactly what Star Trek writer Bob Orci just did. 

On September 1, popular Star Trek fansite TrekMovie.com published an editorial titled “Star Trek is broken—Here are ideas on how to fix it.” The article focuses on this year’s Star Trek Into Darkness, which was a moderate box office success but failed to impress most old-school fans. In fact, while the 2009 reboot is still very popular, Into Darkness was recently voted the fandom’s least favorite movie at a Star Trek convention, with Wrath of Khan topping the poll.

Orci (writing as “boborci”, a screenname that has been confirmed as real by TrekMovie.com moderator Matt Wright), first responded with this comment:

“I think the article above is akin to a child acting out against his parents. Makes it tough for some to listen, but since I am a loving parent, I read these comments without anger or resentment, no matter how misguided.

Having said that, two biggest Star Treks in a row with best reviews is hardly a description of “broken.” And frankly, your tone and attidude make it hard for me to listen to what might otherwise be decent notions to pursue in the future. As I love to say, there is a reason why I get to write the movies, and you don’t.”

A little passive-aggressive, but not too bad. Sadly, he didn’t leave it at that, instead going through the comments section responding to fans who criticised Into Darkness—including challenging one person to pitch him a better movie idea. In response to someone who (politely) compared Into Darkness with Raiders of the Lost Arc, Orci wrote:

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!”


Uhura in the Q'onos fight in STID- why she is awesome but double standards suck

So I’ve seen a lot of posts and online articles on how it’s anti-feminist that has Uhura has to be rescued by Khan in STID. “In the end the negotiations failed and she needs to be rescued it’s so sexist!” But let us check some facts shall we?

1. Three Klingon vessels

2. All the men are helpless and are left to rely on her

3. Uhura faces an entire platoon alone with no assurance of survival. Note this is the first time she did this in like 47 years of canon. In TOS it’s always the macho Captain Kirk who faces the enemies!

Then she gets rescued by Khan! The death of feminism! She has to be rescued by a male!

4. The fight left the mighty Captain Kirk beaten, lying like this on the ground with two Klingons about kill him when Khan fired shots and saved his life

5. Uhura is the first to see Captain Kirk down and runs to him. Spock joins her to protect him.

They had to drag him to a safer place

But hahaha nobody remembers that Kirk has to be rescued by Khan, that Uhura actually protected him and that Khan actually rescued ALL OF THEM. But nope! Uhura has to be rescued by a male, so weak of her!

Last fact: In Star Trek III, this is Kirk, Sulu, Scotty, Chekov, McCoy, Saavik trying to save a helpless Spock and one Klingon. Nuff said.