doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Feel free to send it to me via PM if you can handle doing so without an audience to goad you on.
Star Trek: Axanar
- Thread starter Linnear
- Start date
- Status
Feel free to send it to me via PM if you can handle doing so without an audience to goad you on.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
No. But it's an example that highlights how especially egregious and pointless the use of a pew pew pew space battle was employed in that particular fan film.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
EDIT: I'm pointing out that the space battle in "Blood and Fire" was needless and excessive, serving no purpose whatsoever. What is it you're trying to say?
Last edited:
The opening space battle was pointless and shoehorned. The damage the Enterprise sustained didn't amount to anything other than a line about having a "busted wing." The Klingons didn't add anything to the drama of the situation other than sitting around watching TV. It served no purpose to the story, the theme or the character drama other than to be an "exciting!" teaser. Well, there are a dozen other ways to create a dramatic cold open — this was not one of them.
Its a Star Trek version of a History Channel style historical documentary. So of course its just going to be hearing characters talking about stuff that is supposedly so great and brilliant and not seeing any of it.
That was becuase they were going to convert the ship into the Phase 2 version, then didn't as part of making a cheap shot at the JJprise, then changed their minds coincidentally about the time Star Trek Continues showed up.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
...and yet, this is what some people say constitutes "the greatest" Star Trek fan film ever? Sorry, I have to disagree. It's certainly very pretty to look at but as I said, that's about all there is to it. It's all sizzle and no substance. The frosting looks good but the cake just ain't there.
One of the most frustrating things about being a Phase II fan since the beginning has been watching, for the past, oh, six years or so, as it struggles to figure out what it wants to be. This example in particular highlights that struggle. I'm very glad they've returned to form with the excellent "Mind-Sifter" and hope they continue to produce films more in that vein than some of their previous outings like "Blood and Fire," "Enemy: Starfleet" or "Kitumba."
A few responses more generally. I'm not going to quote exactly which comment or line I am responding to, but if you read this whole thread, I don't think my comments will seem to come out of thin air.
1) When a major Trek figure like George Takai takes an interest in a fan film, new or old, dozens, if not hundreds of people who have not seen many (or any) fan films will watch that one and declare that it is the 'greatest one of all time.' I find it curious that the hard heads who post here regularly take these comments seriously enough that they feel the need to address why they disagree with them. Half of these people have seen a few films with friends filming themselves clowning around in Trek uniforms, and that's all they are comparing it to.
2) When 'event' fan films happen, some people who have never heard of or watched a fan film watch the event film and become open to watching other Star Trek Fan films. Fan Trek is not a zero sum game. Rather, one great fan film raises audience interest for other fan films. Newbies for one film or film series are potential newbies for all. Rather that being annoyed by those proclaiming Film XYZ 'the Greatest Fan Film of All Time" consider asking them why they think it's better than... e.g., TTI, WEAT, Lolani. Consider using the comment as an opening to lead them to try more.
3) There has clearly been a massive turnover at Phase II. I hope that the new team gets their act together and stabilizes the situation. Then I hope they use their collective wisdom to produced great fan Trek. And I hope some people who are feeling neglected (you know who you are) can hold it together and understand that the production group is in confusion and transition.
1) When a major Trek figure like George Takai takes an interest in a fan film, new or old, dozens, if not hundreds of people who have not seen many (or any) fan films will watch that one and declare that it is the 'greatest one of all time.' I find it curious that the hard heads who post here regularly take these comments seriously enough that they feel the need to address why they disagree with them. Half of these people have seen a few films with friends filming themselves clowning around in Trek uniforms, and that's all they are comparing it to.
2) When 'event' fan films happen, some people who have never heard of or watched a fan film watch the event film and become open to watching other Star Trek Fan films. Fan Trek is not a zero sum game. Rather, one great fan film raises audience interest for other fan films. Newbies for one film or film series are potential newbies for all. Rather that being annoyed by those proclaiming Film XYZ 'the Greatest Fan Film of All Time" consider asking them why they think it's better than... e.g., TTI, WEAT, Lolani. Consider using the comment as an opening to lead them to try more.
3) There has clearly been a massive turnover at Phase II. I hope that the new team gets their act together and stabilizes the situation. Then I hope they use their collective wisdom to produced great fan Trek. And I hope some people who are feeling neglected (you know who you are) can hold it together and understand that the production group is in confusion and transition.
Last edited:
That might have been their intentions, but what does that actually have to do with the story being told? How does the battle fit into the theme or drama of the episode, other than being flashy VFX?
Honestly, they could've upgraded the ship without needing a battle damage to explain it, as it ended up being anyway.
Reaction to fan-trek is in large part a litmus test of the actors. This is probably more important even than the script or the production values. It takes a certain minimum amount of photogenics, charisma, and skills to make a watchable actor, and most non-actors, no matter how passionate their fandom for Trek or how deep their pocketbook to fund their own shows, can't measure up. At best you have to judge these productions on a very generous sliding scale. When a production is almost all pro actors except the lead, it's hard to continue doing that, because the contrast is so glaring.
Whether it's reasonable for Peters to insist on being the lead, that depends on what his ultimate objective is. If in the end most people respond by saying that he was the weakest link, then if his objective was to earn some sort of critical respect, then he's sabotaging his own work and he should only produce. Witness Cawley voluntarily stepped away from the Kirk role in favor of an actor with pro credits. That takes a certain amount of humility. (IMHO, Cawley was more watchable than Broughton's Jack Carter in Farragut.)
In any drama, the more important special effects are writing, acting, and editing. JMHO.
James Cawley is a professional entertainer. He is one of the leading Elvis Tribute Acts here in the Northeastern US. You may or may not have liked him in the role of Captain Kirk, but most people's problems with him weren't lack of acting ability, but that he has to keep his naturally light brown or blonde hair dyed black for his paying gig. He is also a person who would clearly have a full life if he woke up tomorrow and decided to never have anything to do with Trek again. He will have MORE control over Phase II by employing Brian Gross as Kirk, not less. This move will also enable him to continue to produce Fan Trek long after people would have looked at him and said, "he's gotten too old for the role."
Not every professional actor is a Hollywood Leading Actor. Somebody mentioned that the camera 'loves' some people. The Captain in Project Potemkin is a professional actor, too. But being a good actor or even a great stage actor may not translate fully onto the screen. I think he does a great job, but I he would not stand out in a positive way in that Axanar crowd of top Hollywood talent. In short, I think Alec Peters is doing a good job, but suffers the same way a local prom queen would when placed next to the five most beautiful women in Hollywood... where she might be cast as the 'ugly' girl.
There are plenty of bad actors in these productions. I'd rather not name them. I would rather just point out that not all good actors could survive in Hollywood. I didn't see any poor acting in Prelude to Axanar.
James Cawley is a professional entertainer. He is one of the leading Elvis Tribute Acts here in the Northeastern US. You may or may not have liked him in the role of Captain Kirk, but most people's problems with him weren't lack of acting ability, but that he has to keep his naturally light brown or blonde hair dyed black for his paying gig. He is also a person who would clearly have a full life if he woke up tomorrow and decided to never have anything to do with Trek again. He will have MORE control over Phase II by employing Brian Gross as Kirk, not less. This move will also enable him to continue to produce Fan Trek long after people would have looked at him and said, "he's gotten too old for the role."
Not every professional actor is a Hollywood Leading Actor. Somebody mentioned that the camera 'loves' some people. The Captain in Project Potemkin is a professional actor, too. But being a good actor or even a great stage actor may not translate fully onto the screen. I think he does a great job, but I he would not stand out in a positive way in that Axanar crowd of top Hollywood talent. In short, I think Alec Peters is doing a good job, but suffers the same way a local prom queen would when placed next to the five most beautiful women in Hollywood... where she might be cast as the 'ugly' girl.
There are plenty of bad actors in these productions. I'd rather not name them. I would rather just point out that not all good actors could survive in Hollywood. I didn't see any poor acting in Prelude to Axanar.
I agree with pretty much everything Barb says here.
The problem with judging Prelude to Axanar is that it's not a film in itself. It's a preview, an extended trailer, for what's in the pipeline. A review of a trailer is, in my view, an exercise in futility. At the same time, fans' praising the completed film by the trailer is wishing on a star.
We don't know what the story of the film is yet. We don't know how much action, or sitting around talking about action, will take place.
Critiquing a film based on a sneak peek is like putting in a bid on a house because you bought a lottery ticket. My opinion, of course. YMMV, whatever.
The problem with judging Prelude to Axanar is that it's not a film in itself. It's a preview, an extended trailer, for what's in the pipeline. A review of a trailer is, in my view, an exercise in futility. At the same time, fans' praising the completed film by the trailer is wishing on a star.
We don't know what the story of the film is yet. We don't know how much action, or sitting around talking about action, will take place.
Critiquing a film based on a sneak peek is like putting in a bid on a house because you bought a lottery ticket. My opinion, of course. YMMV, whatever.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
(Sorry Maurice. Inspiration struck and I felt like making that threadbomb.)
I have no doubt they were paid -- SAG/AFTRA union law would require that they'd have to be, wouldn't they?
...which sort of puts a pin prick in Barb's little balloon/point, but she's also not wrong that the stunt casting does deliver more viewers.
To clarify (since it was my review from two weeks ago that set off this latest resurgence of discussion), I did not review the entire film based on the "Prelude to Axanar" teaser. I reviewed the teaser itself, and my review, admittedly also took in to account all the heaping helpings of praise that it has garnered over the past four months since its release and in doing so I tried to take a step back -- from the be limelight of glory the teaser has awarded itself and from my own personal dealings with Alec Peters and his supporters to fairly, accurately and as to consider from a closely critically constructive view what the film is.
I will not apologize for not adopting some untarnished idealistic opinion of the film simply because there's a ton of people who did love it or because Alec sends a gang of bullies to rush over here to try to drown out my one singlular perspective on the teaser.
But you are right -- it's foolish to judge the finished film solely on the teaser, which is why I took great pains to only comment on the content of the teaser in my review and nothing else.
Last edited:
That's fine and all, but didn't you criticize the trailer for not showing you how the story would end? I don't remember the exact wording, and I can't be bothered to look it up, but it seemed to me that you had passed judgment on the story before "reading" the ending. That was my takeaway, and if I'm mistaken you have my apology.
Regardless, it was not necessarily your review I was referring to in my previous post.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
