I know it seems unheard of that people would continue to donate to something, when it seems obvious to others that they shouldn't be donating anything anymore (or maybe even anything at all).
But that is society. Many times we act before we think, and while we are all guilty of it at one time or another, some are guilty of it more often than others.
Think about the Nigerian bank scams and other things that we see in our email boxes and know better of. But then you wonder, "Why do they keep trying? Do people really fall for this?" And the answer is yes, they do. Watch "Judge Judy" sometimes or "The People's Court" and you will see this happening over and over and over again.
Just this past week, for example, a woman sued a guy over the cost of renting a ZipCar to take from Pittsburgh to Atlanta. Now, if you're familiar with ZipCars, you know they are meant to be local, short-term rentals. Instead of just going to Enterprise or Budget and getting a car for like $50 a day plus gas, the ZipCar charges were more than $1,000. For a single weekend trip. They could've bought an old used car to take, and that would make more sense.
Then there was another rental car situation where a mother let her adult daughter use her credit card to rent a car, and bring her kids from Connecticut to South Carolina. Instead of the daughter returning the car, however, she lived in it for about 70 days, and claimed her mother had OKayed it. But that made no sense, because the cost of the rental went over $3,000. and for that much, her mother could've paid a deposit and at least two months rent on an apartment for her (which would've lasted a lot longer and been more comfortable than sleeping in a car).
But it happens. We get sold on something, but then don't think of the financial side. It's like those extended car warranties that these companies try to push. My 82-year-old father was convinced to buy one, and then he mentioned it to me. The total cost of this warranty was more than the car value itself. In order for him to use this halfway cost-effectively, he would have to get a new transmission, a new engine and well, a new car. In fact, I told my dad if he was going to spend as much on repairs as he was with the warranty, he should just get a new car.
These people aren't stupid. Like I said, they see something they like, and they don't think it through. They don't want to ask questions.
And the fact is, a lot of the general fandom doesn't understand how filmmaking works. They don't understand about copyrights. They probably really believe that, as a fan, they can do whatever they want with Star Trek, as if Gene meant this creation to be a gift from him in the heavens to fans below.
You tell them that it's obscene to spend $300,000 on studio space, and they don't even understand — even when you point out that they could've easily done it for a third of the cost, and had plenty of money left over to pay Tony Todd's alleged salary demands, with money left over for even more sushi.
Then we are told it's none of our business. Let them spend their money they way they want to. But it's not their money. It's not like Peters and Burnett are bankrolling this using their own money. If so, go to town. That was my argument with the Galileo prop — if you want to use your own money to basically create a replica, go to town. But don't ask fans to fund such a silly thing for you.
They are using fan money for this, and asking fans for more and more. And because these fans want to see Star Trek, they will pay whatever it takes to make it happen.
I was at the very first Star Trek convention Jeri Ryan was a guest at. I think only two episodes of her as Seven of Nine had even aired at that point, and this was a Vulkon somewhere in the Tampa Bay area. She had her glove and her eye prosthetic from the show, which had since been replaced. Right there on the stage, she auctioned it for charity, without warning, and sold both for about $2,200 total.
People are passionate about what they like, and are not afraid to spend money to support it. And many can afford it, but many also cannot. Whether they can afford it or not, I think anyone who exploits that passion (and I don't mean "exploit" in the negative sense, but in the more literal sense) needs to make sure they deliver what they promise. Period.
That is the biggest thing that upsets me about this Axanar thing, even ahead of the copyright infringement. But the infringement is there, in my opinion. They funded their commercial studio from the donations for their fan film. They collected salaries. They traveled around the world attending conventions.
But the one thing they haven't done with all that money yet? It's make a movie. I keep hearing excuses as to why it's not done ... but those are just excuses. You have a ton of money, you have an experience indie director -- why on Earth can't you get the movie done, or at least cast?
It makes me wonder what this whole scheme is about. And makes me question the true intentions of what would be done with this money. Not making any accusations, of course, but just expressing my opinion on what this whole thing is all about.
But that is society. Many times we act before we think, and while we are all guilty of it at one time or another, some are guilty of it more often than others.
Think about the Nigerian bank scams and other things that we see in our email boxes and know better of. But then you wonder, "Why do they keep trying? Do people really fall for this?" And the answer is yes, they do. Watch "Judge Judy" sometimes or "The People's Court" and you will see this happening over and over and over again.
Just this past week, for example, a woman sued a guy over the cost of renting a ZipCar to take from Pittsburgh to Atlanta. Now, if you're familiar with ZipCars, you know they are meant to be local, short-term rentals. Instead of just going to Enterprise or Budget and getting a car for like $50 a day plus gas, the ZipCar charges were more than $1,000. For a single weekend trip. They could've bought an old used car to take, and that would make more sense.
Then there was another rental car situation where a mother let her adult daughter use her credit card to rent a car, and bring her kids from Connecticut to South Carolina. Instead of the daughter returning the car, however, she lived in it for about 70 days, and claimed her mother had OKayed it. But that made no sense, because the cost of the rental went over $3,000. and for that much, her mother could've paid a deposit and at least two months rent on an apartment for her (which would've lasted a lot longer and been more comfortable than sleeping in a car).
But it happens. We get sold on something, but then don't think of the financial side. It's like those extended car warranties that these companies try to push. My 82-year-old father was convinced to buy one, and then he mentioned it to me. The total cost of this warranty was more than the car value itself. In order for him to use this halfway cost-effectively, he would have to get a new transmission, a new engine and well, a new car. In fact, I told my dad if he was going to spend as much on repairs as he was with the warranty, he should just get a new car.
These people aren't stupid. Like I said, they see something they like, and they don't think it through. They don't want to ask questions.
And the fact is, a lot of the general fandom doesn't understand how filmmaking works. They don't understand about copyrights. They probably really believe that, as a fan, they can do whatever they want with Star Trek, as if Gene meant this creation to be a gift from him in the heavens to fans below.
You tell them that it's obscene to spend $300,000 on studio space, and they don't even understand — even when you point out that they could've easily done it for a third of the cost, and had plenty of money left over to pay Tony Todd's alleged salary demands, with money left over for even more sushi.
Then we are told it's none of our business. Let them spend their money they way they want to. But it's not their money. It's not like Peters and Burnett are bankrolling this using their own money. If so, go to town. That was my argument with the Galileo prop — if you want to use your own money to basically create a replica, go to town. But don't ask fans to fund such a silly thing for you.
They are using fan money for this, and asking fans for more and more. And because these fans want to see Star Trek, they will pay whatever it takes to make it happen.
I was at the very first Star Trek convention Jeri Ryan was a guest at. I think only two episodes of her as Seven of Nine had even aired at that point, and this was a Vulkon somewhere in the Tampa Bay area. She had her glove and her eye prosthetic from the show, which had since been replaced. Right there on the stage, she auctioned it for charity, without warning, and sold both for about $2,200 total.
People are passionate about what they like, and are not afraid to spend money to support it. And many can afford it, but many also cannot. Whether they can afford it or not, I think anyone who exploits that passion (and I don't mean "exploit" in the negative sense, but in the more literal sense) needs to make sure they deliver what they promise. Period.
That is the biggest thing that upsets me about this Axanar thing, even ahead of the copyright infringement. But the infringement is there, in my opinion. They funded their commercial studio from the donations for their fan film. They collected salaries. They traveled around the world attending conventions.
But the one thing they haven't done with all that money yet? It's make a movie. I keep hearing excuses as to why it's not done ... but those are just excuses. You have a ton of money, you have an experience indie director -- why on Earth can't you get the movie done, or at least cast?
It makes me wonder what this whole scheme is about. And makes me question the true intentions of what would be done with this money. Not making any accusations, of course, but just expressing my opinion on what this whole thing is all about.
