New short documentary about TOS and Star Trek Continues featuring the STC cast and crew:
https://vimeo.com/128757503
https://vimeo.com/128757503
Our Star Trek: The 50 Year Mission
- Thread starter BoredShipCapt'n
- Start date
And it focuses on that show that ran for 3 years, no real mention of the feature films, TNG, DS9, VOY or ENT bar the end
I added this to the "Continues" page at Star Trek Reviewed, http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/27.html
The filmmakers were given access to the STC studio during filming of the upcoming episode. They did this on a $2,000 budget, so STC was all they were able to document.
They probably did mean "Star Trek Continues," since they were just independent filmmakers who got permission to interview the STC participants on set. The film isn't a STC production.
Not sure if it makes a difference, but this film was made by Star Stuff Productions (I think that's the name), not by Trek Continues.
I saw it as a promotional video supporting Star Trek Continues, and as such it qualifies under my very broad definition of a 'review' of Star Trek Continues. I have many links to discussions about fan films and fan filmmakers by third parties, hence the "Reviewed" part of the title of my website, "Star Trek Reviewed."
If you examine the page linked, you will find dozens of links to discussions and films by others about both specific STC films and STC generally.
I considered leaving it out altogether on the possibility it was a paid advertisement for STC, which often behaves like a commercial enterprise rather than a not-for-profit fan film group.
If the filmmakers truly intended this to be a tribute to TOS rather than STC, it is my opinion that they failed. I saw the film as a tribute to STC, implying that STC is the true continuation of TOS, in contrast to other Pro Trek or other Fan Trek.
You may protest that my evaluation is unfair. My evaluation may indeed be unfair. Your protest will not be the first one I ever get, and probably not the last.
Well, mentioning the vast landscape of other fan projects or showing some bits of them wouldn´t have cost them a dime. I´m sure all other projects would have welcomed them as well.
The way it is it just feels like a 10 minute Vic M./STC promo - which is of course fine, but then I would advertise it as such and not "this documentary film explores the people who create Star Trek today and their quest to get it right." - which would include a lot more people.
I have to agree with Barb there...
Not protesting, just pointing out that it's merely a fan film about a fan film. I'm not part of either STC or Star Stuff, so it's no big deal to me.
Man, the politics of fan films! 
Perhaps you should take up the mantle and convince the various groups to cooperate for just such a project?
Perhaps you should take up the mantle and convince the various groups to cooperate for just such a project?
If you are interested in the history of Star Trek Fan Films, here are 12 early efforts: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/204.html
Given the subject of this thread, you might want to pay particular attention to (G).
However, I put the time for (G) at 1973-75, the source of which is now lost; Vic recently posted information indicating he was probably currently 58, which would make these films earlier, perhaps as early as 1967-1970. That would put (G) in a contest for the earliest Star Trek Fan Films.
Given the subject of this thread, you might want to pay particular attention to (G).
However, I put the time for (G) at 1973-75, the source of which is now lost; Vic recently posted information indicating he was probably currently 58, which would make these films earlier, perhaps as early as 1967-1970. That would put (G) in a contest for the earliest Star Trek Fan Films.
It was very nicely produced, and as a Star Trek Continues fan I'm always happy to get a god look behind the scenes.
However, as a backer, I can't help but feel a little disappointed.
The Kickstarter campaign marketed this film as The Anatomy of a Starship, a mini-documentary that would "break down the conception, construction, operation and functionality of the Enterprise; all while capturing a real Star Trek production."
That would have been something new and unique. This, on the other hand, mostly feels like a retread of many of the platitudes we've heard over and over again about how wonderful and inspirational Star Trek is. And, as others have mentioned, it feels rather like an ad for Star Trek Continues.
I'm sorry to be so negative, and I would like to congratulate the creators on a well-made production. It's just not the production that I signed up for.
However, as a backer, I can't help but feel a little disappointed.
The Kickstarter campaign marketed this film as The Anatomy of a Starship, a mini-documentary that would "break down the conception, construction, operation and functionality of the Enterprise; all while capturing a real Star Trek production."
That would have been something new and unique. This, on the other hand, mostly feels like a retread of many of the platitudes we've heard over and over again about how wonderful and inspirational Star Trek is. And, as others have mentioned, it feels rather like an ad for Star Trek Continues.
I'm sorry to be so negative, and I would like to congratulate the creators on a well-made production. It's just not the production that I signed up for.
Very nice compilation, I'll definitely check some of these out. Given the title of the documentary, I was hoping it would include a retrospective with some commentary, interviews, and snippets from the early efforts as well as the current productions.
Thanks for sharing.
I am working on a TOS documentary myself (no idea when this will be ready).
1115
This production was not affiliated with us at all (aside from the fact that one of our co-producers was given "co-producer" credit on it as well, because he facilitated them having access to our sets). Certainly not a "paid advertisement" by any stretch.
Really? That's an... "interesting" assertion. In what way have we operated as a "commercial enterprise"? That would be illegal.
We've registered with the IRS as a non-profit; the company makes no money from sales or exhibition of the episodes, which are given away for free online; and (unlike some fan films) the executive producers pay themselves $0 in salaries for their work.
Really? That's an... "interesting" assertion. In what way have we operated as a "commercial enterprise"? That would be illegal.
We've registered with the IRS as a non-profit; the company makes no money from sales or exhibition of the episodes, which are given away for free online; and (unlike some fan films) the executive producers pay themselves $0 in salaries for their work.
All the information I've seen on the subject says that Vic is 52 and first started watching Star Trek around 1971 at age 9.
