Trek Writers Honored At Charity Ball
1 min read
Star Trek into Darkness writers Alex Kurtzman and Roberto Orci were honored Saturday at the Chrysalis Butterfly Ball.
Chrysalis is a Los Angeles-based “nonprofit organization dedicated to creating a pathway to self-sufficiency for homeless and low-income individuals by providing the resources and support needed to find and retain employment.”
$1.4 million was raised at the event, held at a private Mandeville Canyon estate, for programs to help the homeless of Los Angeles.
In addition to Kurtzman and Orci, Josh Lieberman, Katherine Pope, and Chrysalis client Johnny Gutierrez were honored at the Chrysalis Butterfly Ball.
Over a dozen celebrities, including J.J. Abrams and Chris Pine, attended the event.
About The Author
A couple of leftists, who made a leftist TREK. No thanks.
I’m curious now to see what you consider to be properly rightist Trek.
He liked Insurrection up until the end when the bad guys won.
A lot of people didn’t like Insurrection. Try again.
Who said anything about “right?” In Darkness is a leftist TREK. Abrams, Pegg and Cumberpatch have said so. Why the angst about the truth?
Alright, let’s try this again. What do you consider to be not-leftist Trek?
Plus, you missed J(nM)’s joke entirely.
I got the poorly contrived “joke.” Again, I am not looking for right or left, but when you have the Director, and the actors coming out in the open and say yes, this is a statement movie from the Left, then I have a problem with it.
It’s finally sunk in that I am the one being obtuse here (thus explaining the bumps).
While Trek in general has always leaned predominantly to the leftward side to one extent or another, Star Trek Into Socialism was made with a stated intent to do so. D’erP.
I guess… except that military interventionism is classically a leftist notion, for the most part…
I mean, I think it’s been pretty clear that I’m not a fan of STD, but it’s not because it’s any more leftist than anything we’ve ever seen.
What part was more leftist than anything Roddenberry did and did very openly under the mantle of liberalism?
When the American government can collect your data without a warrant or active oversight, can then use that data to target individual American citizens on American soil for Death By Drone, and, simultaneously, are trying to restrict access to guns, and use the IRS as a political tool hmmmmm, I’m thinking a poorly executed Khan story featuring a nutcase warmonger isn’t at the top of my list for leftist concerns… Particularly, as I said above, when it’s usually the leftists that involve us in those wars… which suggests their story didn’t even work as leftist propaganda…
Garbage, Dog Poo.
Care to elaborate? Or is this ALL you’ve been reduced to since you can’t actually bring me low with reason?
I think you’re replying to the wrong person if you want those questions answered. I was merely acknowledging that I finally got that Uzimodem’s point was that the director and others stated flat out that this movie was a platform to make a political point, not that it was more left-inclined than any other Trek.
Oh, I understand… I’m replying generally to this train of thought…
I’m just saying that it’s not overly effective if it’s meant to be leftist. Far more wars are started by interventionist liberals than any conservatives… They had to come up with the term “neo-con” because they aren’t really conservatives, but Wilsonian has such a taint, like Hoover to liberals… The point being, even if they were attempting to slant the movie to the left, it wasn’t really, was it? What part, other than the modern caricature of the warmongering right, is leftist? And, since that’s not really true, what other part was leftist?
And, even if it is leftist, and even if they stated they wanted it to be leftist, isn’t the government encroachment into our civil liberties a more pressing priority than a fictional Khan story?
Mostly rhetorical questions, but if anyone wants to take a stab at how STD was leftist, I’m all ears… er… eyes…