BREAKING: Official Fan Film Guidelines Issued

[Warped9]

Having listened to this podcast it appears there is a lot more flexibility than initially believed, although there could still be some sticking points.

There was a lot of emphasis on these being guidelines rather hard-and-fast rules. There is also a window for these guidelines to be revised as some things might not work as envisioned.

 

[USS Intrepid]

I agree with Randy's interpretation on this. As far as I'm concerned, my own efforts can easily be compliant moving forward. And much of what we've already produced is already largely complaint.

 

[Warped9]

My take away on the guidelines.

The runtime is a key to distinguish fanfilms from official productions. They also don't want arc based stories spread over multiple installments. I don't think it precludes sequential stories with recurring characters, but the stories should be self-contained. They aren't going to police runtimes to the second and minute.

You need to have a title that conveys the idea of it being connected to Trek, but not have Star Trek in the title except where you include a subtitle saying “A STAR TREK FAN PRODUCTION." Keep your credits short to maximize screen time.

You can't use existing footage from an official production. Everything has to be original from scratch. You also can't recreate an existing scene.

If you buys props, costumes, etc., they have to be official licenced items or make your own. Stay away from bootleg merchandise.

Anyone previously or currently connected to official Trek is off-limits as far as participation is concerned.

You can crowdfund up to $50,000 for your 15 minute runtime. This might also allow up to $100,000 for 30 minutes. Apparently it doesn't preclude you from donations outside of crowdfunding.

The film can be available on streaming sites such as Youtube, Vimeo and the like as well as from your own website. No DVD or BluRay copies to be made available.

No using your production to generate advertising revenue. No merchandising or perks allowed.

Family friendly and suitable for public presentation means treat subjects accordingly and much like you might have seen it in an official production. Use good taste and good sense.

A proper disclaimer must be in place: “Star Trek and all related marks, logos and characters are solely owned by CBS Studios Inc. This fan production is not endorsed by, sponsored by, nor affiliated with CBS, Paramount Pictures, or any other Star Trek franchise, and is a non-commercial fan-made film intended for recreational use. No commercial exhibition or distribution is permitted. No alleged independent rights will be asserted against CBS or Paramount Pictures."

Don't try to register, copyright or trademark your work.



Looking at this I can see a couple of sticking points.

The first is the runtime. 15 minutes us tight. A 30 minute runtime in one instalment would have been entirely doable. Maybe CBS/P might be flexible enough to allow it.

Excluding people previously connected to Trek sounds rather hardass. Maybe this could be revisited.

 

[Csalem]

Maybe fan films could adopt a practice from Doctor Who and tell one story in a total of 30 minutes but have a cliff-hanger at the end of the first 15 minute mark?!

 

[Tosk]

Anyone previously or currently connected to official Trek is off-limits as far as participation is concerned.

Which they seem to be trying to spin as, "When some people get professionals to play, other people are discouraged from making their own fan film because they can't get them" ...is it just me, or does that sound like a load of bullcorn?

 

[Warped9]

Which they seem to be trying to spin as, "When some people get professionals to play, other people are discouraged from making their own fan film because they can't get them" ...is it just me, or does that sound like a load of bullcorn?

Case in point. Getting an actor or actress from a previous production isn't really a necessity for telling a story unless the hook is to have that performer to draw interest and/or recreate a character. But is that performer likely to ever again appear in an official Trek production? Was Michael Forest or Barbara Luna ever going to appear in another Trek production?

This definitely could be bad news for Chris Doohan and Kipleigh Brown who have appeared in somewhat recent productions.

Someone from offscreen and behind-the-scenes (such as Doug Drexler) is another iffy issue in my book. Seriously, why not?

 

[Astra]

This definitely could be bad news for Chris Doohan and Kipleigh Brown who have appeared in somewhat recent productions.

I wonder if (in Chris' case) being in the background in a couple of scenes without dialogue is the same like a well-known actor that is associated with a role? How many watching the movie but not exactly looking for him would even notice him? Same for Vic (and others) voicing a character in an official game - is it really the same?
I hope there is some wriggle room there as well.

 

[USS Intrepid]

At risk of hawking my own crap (sorry), I think this is a pretty good example of a solid short film that fits well within the fifteen minutes. It also didn't cost us $50,000. And we're certainly not the only ones producing films like this.

The guidelines basically mean we can do a lot more of this type of storytelling, and I for one am more than happy with that.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

 

[Warped9]

Van Citters was refreshingly informal, open, candid and knowledgable. He was also certainly not humourless and hardass. He clearly and fairly explained their reasoning behind the guidelines.

I also got a sense of fairness in CBS/P's willingness to look at things case-by-case and being open to revising their guidelines as things evolve.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Without getting specific in this thread, some fan films are overlong, in that they are filled with scenes that are inessential to telling a story. I'm not talking about A/B plot, but rather about scenes that are, for example, concerned with connecting dots in canon. Some scenes seem to exist largely to showcase certain guest actors. A third way of being too long is to have extended and overly-specific exposition. In some cases, such exposition isn't even intended to pay off until future installments that weren't necessarily ever going to get made (and at this point probably won't).

Connecting the dots with canon has been done to death at this point. I wouldn't be sorry if that never happens again in another fan film. @Maurice and others have mentioned these sorts of things many times before, and rightly so. I've mentioned it more than once myself, in the threads about individual productions.

 

[BrEnDoN]

At risk of hawking my own crap (sorry), I think this is a pretty good example of a solid short film that fits well within the fifteen minutes. It also didn't cost us $50,000. And we're certainly not the only ones producing films like this.

The guidelines basically mean we can do a lot more of this type of storytelling, and I for one am more than happy with that.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

I enjoyed that. If this is what "the end of fan films!!!!" looks like, I'll live...

 

[Gingerbread Demon]

Endless Pew Pew. Yawn.

No, I meant does it pass the "sniff test" as far as the new rules go?

 

[MikeH92467]

No, I meant does it pass the "sniff test" as far as the new rules go?

I think it could be classified as parody or satire. There's a tongue in cheek aspect to the whole thing. Certainly it is not heavy on intellectual content, but that's not what I think the producers were after anyway. (If it was supposed to be intellectual it was an epic fail in that regard)

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

Who wouldn't want a little more "having is not so pleasing a thing, after all, as wanting", and a little less "initiate aft thrusters, shields up, ready photon torpedoes, wait for it, wait for it... btw why don't we have a computer to do these things quicker?".

Fanboys, that's who.

Writing may be getting a chance to fight back against tektek pewpew. Even Stargate dumped the whizzy tunnel after the first few episodes. CBS/P may have opened the art house to fans.

Perhaps controversial thought: drop the bridge. Wouldn't that buy the time difference, and a lot of the cost difference? "Bridgeless Trek, the New Wave in Art SF".

"Writing may be getting a chance" to explore new ideas and new presentations of them? Oh, yes, I can envision this.

And to be absolutely clear on this lest I be mistakenly misconstrued to mean Continues, New Voyages and the other fab.u.lous big gun productions and others it is my pleasure to watch and admire -- are in any way remiss in doing this or shortfalling the writing - I categorically do NOT imply or mean or even think they aren't. So, James, Vic, and all you other wonderful fan film virtuosos --- luv luv luv your shows and see your writing carrying just as much weight, thought, depth, and emphasis to you and by you as your fab.u.lous production values.


And I see the possibilities of new and/or present writers jumping in smaller and/or newer productions to now take writing mantle to whole depths or places or some other description I'm not thinking of directly 'because of' the new limited guidelines. The Golden Age of Writing? I 'can' envision such a fan film thing being born out of it.


I mean, I just read someone on the board (whose ID slips my mind or I would cite them) quoting a critically respected director (whose name also slips my mind) saying something like the absence of limitations is the enemy of opportunity.

Many is a written word or phrase in Star Trek that has inspired me, empowered me, and down right tickled my funny bone in addition to sparking me to think more deeply about something:
"Fascinating"
"You can use logic to justify almost anything. That's its power - and its flaw"
"<to the 20th century computer mouse> Hellooo, computer"
"Is there no truth in beauty"
"There will always be those who mean to do us harm. To stop them, we risk awakening the same evil within ourselves. But that's not who we are"
"I have been and always shall be your friend"
"After a time, you may find that having is not so pleasing a thing after all as wanting. It is not logical, but it is often true."

These new boundaries in fan filming might see our writers, current & future, as muCuphi mentions, moving past a previously untapped to its fullest writing in those very people because of precisely because of these limitations that can no longer give us the as much of the wonderful action and adventure we have become accustomed to in our wonderful fan films.

A Golden Age in Fan Film Writing?

"Oh, my."

 

[Amaris]

At risk of hawking my own crap (sorry), I think this is a pretty good example of a solid short film that fits well within the fifteen minutes. It also didn't cost us $50,000. And we're certainly not the only ones producing films like this.

The guidelines basically mean we can do a lot more of this type of storytelling, and I for one am more than happy with that.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That was wonderful! This and the latest Potemkin fan film are both within the guidelines, and both are still great fanfilms. You didn't need $500,000 Kickstarters, piles of merchandise, new studios, new carpets, air fare to dozens of conventions, half a dozen b and c-list celebrities who stand around for much of their film time, or dare I say it: your own branded coffee. Plus, the story is fun and engaging. Great work all of you!

 

[DFScott]

re DFSCOTT's reply. Of course people learn by copying. My first attempt at writing a screenplay at age 13 was shamelessly derivative. I certainly was not arguing that there's no value is "rolling your own" as part of a learning process. In fact, that's a completely separate topic from what I wrote.

I'm not so sure it's as think as you separate it is, to paraphrase Red Skelton.

People who want to learn a craft need some kind of inspiring framework to give them a leg up. CBS and Paramount are saying to amateur craftspeople, you can't use episodic Star Trek as a framework, because if you get good at what you do, you could satisfy the public's need for interesting, regular characters (including the ones we created) in long, intriguing stories, and therefore take money out of our pockets.

We could get into an argument over the logic of that, but I'd rather not. Let's see instead if we can help everyone solve this dilemma to their mutual satisfaction. We'd start by conceding the above statement. Let's assume episodic fan films cost CBS/Paramount revenue. Let's concede that this is not fair to the legitimate rights holders of Star Trek.

So, let's suggest that they estimate exactly how much they lose in revenue to productions like New Voyages and Continues and Farragut. Don't tell us, keep those figures to yourselves, just figure it out. And set that as a ceiling.

Then, let's suggest that they consider the costs that would be involved in establishing an exclusive channel for the presentation of amateur Star Trek productions, through CBS. Balance that out with the revenue that could be gained from tying that channel to a pay-TV revenue stream such as All Access. And consider the potential benefits from establishing a kind of trust that pays a small part of the way for Trek veterans, both behind and in front of the camera, to contribute their talent to amateur productions whose products are shown only exclusively through this channel. Imagine the promotional benefits alone just from making the "Making Of" or "Behind the Scenes" videos, where Doug Drexler teaches folks about applying make-up or Tim Russ shows how to stage an outdoor shot.

If the cost of that investment is lower than the revenue lost on account of unrestricted fandom, then I don't see why this wouldn't be an equitable solution for both sides.

DF "Nobody Sees This? Alec Peters is Black on the Right Side. All of His Kind are Black on the Right Side!" Scott

 

[Noname Given]

This definitely could be bad news for Chris Doohan and Kipleigh Brown who have appeared in somewhat recent productions.

Well, it's also bad news for Vic Mignogna as he, Chris Doohan and Michelle Specht have done voice over work for the upcoming Star Trek Online MMO expansion "Agents of Yesterday" - and CBS definitely considers it a licensed Star Trek production as it's had quite a number of former Star Trek actors perform voice over reprising their characters as well. It also appears that CBS' take is "Hety if you had something in the works and were finalizing it - go ahead and put it up on Youtube; but any brand new stuff should adhere to the Guidelines..." meaning that STC can finish and post their Episode 7. After that though, CBS would prefer everyone work within the new guidelines to avoid issues.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

At risk of hawking my own crap (sorry), I think this is a pretty good example of a solid short film that fits well within the fifteen minutes. It also didn't cost us $50,000. And we're certainly not the only ones producing films like this.

The guidelines basically mean we can do a lot more of this type of storytelling, and I for one am more than happy with that.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Brilliant! Massively enjoyable, engaging to the fullest. An 8 minute 59 second fantastic shining example of the continuing future of fan films!!!!!




"Please, Sir, may I have more" !!

 

[Fenrir767]

I'm not so sure it's as think as you separate it is, to paraphrase Red Skelton.

People who want to learn a craft need some kind of inspiring framework to give them a leg up. CBS and Paramount are saying to amateur craftspeople, you can't use episodic Star Trek as a framework, because if you get good at what you do, you could satisfy the public's need for interesting, regular characters (including the ones we created) in long, intriguing stories, and therefore take money out of our pockets.

We could get into an argument over the logic of that, but I'd rather not. Let's see instead if we can help everyone solve this dilemma to their mutual satisfaction. We'd start by conceding the above statement. Let's assume episodic fan films cost CBS/Paramount revenue. Let's concede that this is not fair to the legitimate rights holders of Star Trek.

So, let's suggest that they estimate exactly how much they lose in revenue to productions like New Voyages and Continues and Farragut. Don't tell us, keep those figures to yourselves, just figure it out. And set that as a ceiling.

Then, let's suggest that they consider the costs that would be involved in establishing an exclusive channel for the presentation of amateur Star Trek productions, through CBS. Balance that out with the revenue that could be gained from tying that channel to a pay-TV revenue stream such as All Access. And consider the potential benefits from establishing a kind of trust that pays a small part of the way for Trek veterans, both behind and in front of the camera, to contribute their talent to amateur productions whose products are shown only exclusively through this channel. Imagine the promotional benefits alone just from making the "Making Of" or "Behind the Scenes" videos, where Doug Drexler teaches folks about applying make-up or Tim Russ shows how to stage an outdoor shot.

If the cost of that investment is lower than the revenue lost on account of unrestricted fandom, then I don't see why this wouldn't be an equitable solution for both sides.

DF "Nobody Sees This? Alec Peters is Black on the Right Side. All of His Kind are Black on the Right Side!" Scott

It doesn't balance out because of the resources they have to put into amateur productions. That would mean script verifications, working with amateur producers licensing agreements, who owns the content created the back end overhead cost is a lot more than what people realize. Making legitimate amateur trek that represents what CBS/P want from the Star Trek franchise.

The interest is not there to justify the cost as someone with some interest in fan films. There are very few I have really enjoyed STC being one of them. The market does not exist to make fan films a successful profitable endeavour. We are a percentage of a percentage of the fan base.

 

[drt]

Which they seem to be trying to spin as, "When some people get professionals to play, other people are discouraged from making their own fan film because they can't get them" ...is it just me, or does that sound like a load of bullcorn?

Is it really a "fan film" if you have the ability to hire professional actors? (Even if you don't pay them outright, the production usually covers travel and associated expenses.)
To me the guidelines seem to be putting the "fan" back into fanfilms.