Hopefully the funds are all in escrow, and its not starring Bernadette Madoff.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Hopefully the funds are all in escrow, and its not starring Bernadette Madoff.
What if all the fan filmmakers did their own version of Axanar? Payback time.
because as much as Axanar has screwed the fan film pooch, producing a fan film out of spite is not the right thing to do, they should be created out of love.
I dont know if you can tell the same basic story, they planned to tell in 30 minutes, with a different framing device, but it should be done out of love, not spite.
Which is funny because I always got a "spite" vibe from the Axanar production.
^^^
What? Like Alec Peters with AXANAR?
At this point it appears the only 'love' Mr. Peters had with regard to AXANAR was the 'love' of the money made from Pledges/Donations/The Donor store; and it seems the only thing Alec Peters is trying to do is KEEP that money to start his studio business.
If Alec Peters and Co. had in fact acted 'out of love' for the Star Trek franchise and respected the long known 'unofficial guidelines' most Star Trek Fan Film groups had been following for the last decade or so; the full AXANAR feature would have been completed by now, and the situation the Star Trek Fan Film community now finds itself in WHOLLY because of the current actions of Alec Peters wouldn't exist - and we'd be getting a sequel to Tommy Kraft's "Star Trek: Horizon" fan film and groups like "Star Trek Continues" would be continuing production as they have been for the last several years.
TLDR: #ThanksAlec
at some point it had to have started with some love for TOS, they are picking up on a minor plot point after all, so at some point there was some genuine love for Star Trek involved.
Maybe from some but that wasn't the vibe that I got from AP and RMB. It all seemed to hinged upon doing Star Trek better than CBS. It felt very spiteful towards Abrams' Trek, and that was kind of off putting to me.
TBH I am not close enough to the production, or steeped enough in its history to make such a statement or challange anything said about it. What I will say however is that making a better Star Trek than the Abrams universe is subjective, you could say Continues or Phase 2 do just that, creating a Star Trek more true to the TV series than the reboot films can ever hope to be. This is because JJ does not try to be faithful to the series, they know those movies exist in their own timeline.
If I was to fault AP for that alone, I would be faulting alot of other fan films, what is to be faulted is how he has gone about it, and what it has been turned into.
Even if Axanar is born out of frustration that the new timeline is not more similar to the TV series, its still born out of a love for the TV series, even if its become an abusive love.
I admire this. Out of love. Fan films, an expression of love. Yes
Fair enough.
It is indeed admirable to think and say this production is born out of frustration.. And without any doubt of mine it is born out of love for the TV series, at least the long ago child and youth. Which love possibly continues in some form or degree to this day.
I take your point here of course as it has indeed been demonstrated to be that.
Though I cannot go with you in concluding Axanar was born out of frustration for the new timeline. Axanar was born and being developed before the Kelvin Timeline was produced.
I will stay with you on an original love, even a long held love. But there is documented evidence of long time online abusive presence for years too. If I remember accurately at least as far back as 2008. Documented falsehoods and attacks to collectors of ST properties, and concealed to the point of blatant falsehoods to fans collecting these items.
If love there be, which I do not doubt, I also recognize it as possibly having become a distorted one from this all too easily documentable defendant over the years. With the new universe eventually becoming what gives me the appearance of more a tool to help promote what had turned into something more akin to a personal Agenda.
And I think it to be of grave importance that abuse not be met with abuse. It is often the urge, which is human. Though I deeply believe that some urges should be resisted as individuals and a society. Whatever the truth regarding the love of Trek expressed by this defendant, and however each fact and opinion may weighed by each of us, fostering the urge to use a fan film as a tool to exact a type of righteous revenge is something to be resisted.
So I reiterate:
I admire this. Out of love. Fan films, an expression of love.
Last edited:
I can not say when Axanar first started, and if it was pre the Kelvin timeline, then fair enough, but lets face it fandom is its own worst enemy, prior to and the reason for the reboot, we got a couple of dud movies, and Star Trek Enterprise, which with the best will in the world, was at times dull. There were reasons for fans of earlier Star Trek, to start to think that Star Trek had lost its way and that "they could do better" like the arm chair football managers who always call exactly the right play, when the professional manager was deemed to have screwed up.
We have all seen shows falter in their final seasons, but keep watching out of our love for earlier seasons, and the hope it can improve, such a love / hate relationship is almost normal in fandom, and the toxic relationship I suggested in my post.
Axanar is the result of the arm chair manager who actually got out of the chair and coached a local kids team, but instead of doing it for the love of the game, did it prove he knew better, and surprise surprise the team is failing.
It is of course more than clear to me that Alex Peters action are totally indefensible (and at times he appears to have gone completely off the deep end), but if fandom and the love of something, can become both sides of the love and hate coin, then if a fan has enough love to create something new like a Continues (which is an awe inspiring visual love letter to Star Trek) then someones whose love has turned to hate, whose love has turned to the desire to prove they can do better, could make an Axanar.
Lets not forget of course that the back drop of the other fan films and the support/interest Axanar had from many in the early days, would have been further fuel to that fire.
Somewhere at the start there has to have been a love for Star Trek, or he would not hate the more modern treks enough to do this.
For a fan film group to produce an Axanar inspired fan film, as a way to vent their frustration at the situation, and to prove they are better than Alex Peters, is too close to his reasons for producing Axanar, and as such it should not be done.
Side note on the attitude towards the JJverse in this forum: The new universe is an easy hate figure, because it sets out to be different, so of course some fans wont like it, mirror that with a growing fan film community whose love is mostly based on the more traditional Star Trek, its no surprise you see people hating on JJ verse Trek in THIS foum, the fan films provide a comfort blanket fans can hold on to, giving us something to love, giving us something to say is better and more like the Trek we love than the JJ verse. They take a polar opposite approach.
I know this, because I say the exact same thing, its easy to love a Continues or Phase 2 for its love of the TV series, but you should find things you love about the JJverse Star Trek, or just not bother at all with it.
We have all seen shows falter in their final seasons, but keep watching out of our love for earlier seasons, and the hope it can improve, such a love / hate relationship is almost normal in fandom, and the toxic relationship I suggested in my post.
Axanar is the result of the arm chair manager who actually got out of the chair and coached a local kids team, but instead of doing it for the love of the game, did it prove he knew better, and surprise surprise the team is failing.
It is of course more than clear to me that Alex Peters action are totally indefensible (and at times he appears to have gone completely off the deep end), but if fandom and the love of something, can become both sides of the love and hate coin, then if a fan has enough love to create something new like a Continues (which is an awe inspiring visual love letter to Star Trek) then someones whose love has turned to hate, whose love has turned to the desire to prove they can do better, could make an Axanar.
Lets not forget of course that the back drop of the other fan films and the support/interest Axanar had from many in the early days, would have been further fuel to that fire.
Somewhere at the start there has to have been a love for Star Trek, or he would not hate the more modern treks enough to do this.
For a fan film group to produce an Axanar inspired fan film, as a way to vent their frustration at the situation, and to prove they are better than Alex Peters, is too close to his reasons for producing Axanar, and as such it should not be done.
Side note on the attitude towards the JJverse in this forum: The new universe is an easy hate figure, because it sets out to be different, so of course some fans wont like it, mirror that with a growing fan film community whose love is mostly based on the more traditional Star Trek, its no surprise you see people hating on JJ verse Trek in THIS foum, the fan films provide a comfort blanket fans can hold on to, giving us something to love, giving us something to say is better and more like the Trek we love than the JJ verse. They take a polar opposite approach.
I know this, because I say the exact same thing, its easy to love a Continues or Phase 2 for its love of the TV series, but you should find things you love about the JJverse Star Trek, or just not bother at all with it.
I have no quarrel with the Kelvin Timeline. Star Trek has changed vastly since TOS. All versions have their fans and detractors. I, for example liked Enterprise and wasn't fond of Voyager.
His "recruited local kids team" was almost all career-professional cast and crew and management. He went to great lengths to make sure everyone knew this. IMO its softball to let him be characterized as doing just what all the other fan films do.
"Surprise he is failing" does not derive from his desire to prove he knew better [than JJ how to make Trek]. He expressed this desire, but IMO its not the cause of his failing. In reality he is failing, in the words of his former staff, because he insisted in all things he knew better than the professionals he hired, and it is they he couldn't equal, not JJ. And he is failing because in the words of the studios, he stole from them seriously enough to create a large lawsuit where no other production had raised this issue. To say he is failing because he tried to prove he is better than JJ is again a softball.
Well 99.9% of this thread has been about Axanar, not the JJverse. A variety of opinions have been expressed when the JJverse has come up as a side topic, and I would say that any dislike expressed here is a way lower percentage than on the Axanar forum. The assertion that because people in this thread support fan films its no surprise they hate on the JJverse doesn't seem like an evidence based statement to me.
As far as either loving the JJverse or not bothering with it, sure having opinions about it is just a fan thing, not important in the big picture, but by the reasoning presented no critical opinion should ever be expressed about any artistic work that has ever existed. That's a strategy that probably applies to wide open flamewars more than to this thread.
None of this is a criticism, but I don't think what Axanar has done should be lobbed any softballs in the name of fans being at peace. Axanar took over a million fan film dollars and after a point when real money came in, tried to create something largely serving their personal financial futures while neglecting the film. That deserves a three strikes call.
Last edited:
Well, there have been adventures in emails lately and I just wanted to point this one out from last summer. Propworx continues its auctions and people should be aware. Adam Schneider is the guy who had the original Galileo restored and donated so everyone can enjoy it.
Propworx Admits to Bidding At Its Auctions Without Disclosure - BUYER BEWARE
Sent By:
Adam Schneider On:Aug 08/11/15 9:21 AM
Hello,
I am sending this to about 40 of my "prop" friends. I will post it at the same time in the various Trek and prop collecting forums. I'll start with facts and put my opinions at the end.
I have been a prop collector since the 2006 Christie's Trek auction. Since then I have made many collecting friends, participated in Trek conventions and become involved with the franchise. I have tried to add to the community... by dealing fairly with all, by buying, restoring, and donating Galileo, and by assisting the Smithsonian with restoring the original Starship Enterprise.
This last weekend was the Creation Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas. I was deeply disturbed by two events which challenge my perception of Propworx as an organization to do business with.
On Saturday August 8, Creation held a "no minimum bid" auction, and one piece was screen-used. The bidding stalled at $250. However, Propworx CEO Alec Peters continually bid against the winner until it reached $1,000. Alec said he had a "fiduciary obligation" to the seller.... on a "no minimum bid" auction! To say it again - Alec bid up an item because he promised a certain outcome. (By the way, unless Alec was contractually working for the seller, there is no such fiduciary obligation.)
The next day Propworx held their auction. There were about 70 people watching and bidding in person and more on the internet. Alec asked for questions. I asked two, and to the best of my recollection, this was the exchange.
I asked: Is there any reserve on any of the items? Answer: No.
I asked: Are you, or any agent of yours, or your girlfriend sitting in the corner typing on the internet, bidding against buyers on these items? Answer: Propworx makes proxy bids.
The exchange was heard by those 70 people including many prominent collectors. Yes, the Propworx CEO stated in public that they do bid against buyers.
My take: Propworx is making bids against its customers without any disclosure. Propworx is actively raising prices and in the process unjustly enriching themselves. It is like a reserve that increases if collectors are interested! It is inherently unfair to buyers.
I am not a lawyer, but this sure seems like fraud. I have checked the terms and conditions for the auction and none of this is disclosed. In fact, it seems quite clear in person that they are managing their bids versus active client bids (most from the internet) so as to maximize revenue. The cost of Propworx's bidding is being borne by its customers.
Fellow collectors:
We should ask Propworx to disclose ALL such bidding for its prior auctions.
In all cases where Propworx or its agent is the underbidder, collectors should only be asked to pay the "last good bid".
Propworx should cease this behavior and if they do not, you as the buyer stop doing business with them.
Thank you,
Adam Schneider
Propworx Admits to Bidding At Its Auctions Without Disclosure - BUYER BEWARE
Sent By:
Adam Schneider On:Aug 08/11/15 9:21 AM
Hello,
I am sending this to about 40 of my "prop" friends. I will post it at the same time in the various Trek and prop collecting forums. I'll start with facts and put my opinions at the end.
I have been a prop collector since the 2006 Christie's Trek auction. Since then I have made many collecting friends, participated in Trek conventions and become involved with the franchise. I have tried to add to the community... by dealing fairly with all, by buying, restoring, and donating Galileo, and by assisting the Smithsonian with restoring the original Starship Enterprise.
This last weekend was the Creation Star Trek Convention in Las Vegas. I was deeply disturbed by two events which challenge my perception of Propworx as an organization to do business with.
On Saturday August 8, Creation held a "no minimum bid" auction, and one piece was screen-used. The bidding stalled at $250. However, Propworx CEO Alec Peters continually bid against the winner until it reached $1,000. Alec said he had a "fiduciary obligation" to the seller.... on a "no minimum bid" auction! To say it again - Alec bid up an item because he promised a certain outcome. (By the way, unless Alec was contractually working for the seller, there is no such fiduciary obligation.)
The next day Propworx held their auction. There were about 70 people watching and bidding in person and more on the internet. Alec asked for questions. I asked two, and to the best of my recollection, this was the exchange.
I asked: Is there any reserve on any of the items? Answer: No.
I asked: Are you, or any agent of yours, or your girlfriend sitting in the corner typing on the internet, bidding against buyers on these items? Answer: Propworx makes proxy bids.
The exchange was heard by those 70 people including many prominent collectors. Yes, the Propworx CEO stated in public that they do bid against buyers.
My take: Propworx is making bids against its customers without any disclosure. Propworx is actively raising prices and in the process unjustly enriching themselves. It is like a reserve that increases if collectors are interested! It is inherently unfair to buyers.
I am not a lawyer, but this sure seems like fraud. I have checked the terms and conditions for the auction and none of this is disclosed. In fact, it seems quite clear in person that they are managing their bids versus active client bids (most from the internet) so as to maximize revenue. The cost of Propworx's bidding is being borne by its customers.
Fellow collectors:
We should ask Propworx to disclose ALL such bidding for its prior auctions.
In all cases where Propworx or its agent is the underbidder, collectors should only be asked to pay the "last good bid".
Propworx should cease this behavior and if they do not, you as the buyer stop doing business with them.
Thank you,
Adam Schneider
^^^ This
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the definition of a proxy bid is when you're bidding on behalf of someone who can't attend the auction? If so, shouldn't they have written instructions from a real-live person with max bid amounts and such? In hindsight, don't you wish you had said, "Prove you have buyers you're a proxy for, or I'm leaving." How many of those 70-some-odd people would have followed you out the door?
Last edited:
It's shill bidding. In Australia it's illegal in most states, and people have been prosecuted for it when they've pulled the stunt in real estate auctions. There are some exceptions, such as reserve prices, so long as the vendor bid is publicly declared.
I'm not certain about the US, and it probably varies depending where you are.
Fraud is a tort, and a bit of a bugger to establish. There needs to be loss, you need to prove Alec acted in a way that was intended to be deceitful, that he intended to use that deceit to cause that loss, and that Alec's combined action and intent directly caused you to lose money. If there's doubt that you were going to spend that amount of money anyway? Forget about it.
Misrepresentation would be easier to establish, but it doesn't entitle the bidder to damages.
On a certain level we did learn a lot on Friday out of Sun Valley Idaho.
* "The narrative making its way from the conference is of consolidation among companies, and Viacom is rumored to eventually recombine with CBS Corp. (CBSA). The two companies split in 2006."
*"Viacom is still seeking a minority investment for its film studio Paramount Pictures."
Paramount is a company held by Viacom so the public doesn't always get the exact picture of how well they are doing financially in the present business cycle. It's been made clear that Paramount is looking to raise money and even has gone to Ailbaba to fund in part Star Trek Beyond in exchange for distribution rights in China. A corporate Tycoon John Malone (net worth around $7 billion) I assume was able to review the Paramount financials and stated "He would have no interest in such an investment (Paramount) as he views the movie business as a tough one."
*"Turmoil continues with the struggle for control of Viacom, as the health of its controlling shareholder, 93-year-old Sumner Redstone, declines. Viacom Inc. Chairman Philippe Dauman and Mr. Redstone's daughter, Shari Redstone, are on opposite sides of a legal battle that will determine the makeup of Viacom's board and who will oversee Mr. Redstone's assets after he dies or is declared incapacitated."
Actually these shake up events happen in nearly every major Corporation, we just saw Mcdonalds have a shake up and rebuilding period. A few years back if you followed CNBC make some weird changes to it's line up months before General Electric announced it was for sale. Today I've seen posts from theaters stating that the Star Trek Movie has been canceled by the distributor (reason unknown) This April - May Business rumors claimed an offer was on the table for the Star Trek Franchise (bidder unknown) Sometimes these "offers" are floated to discover value if anyone comes forward with a real offer.
I'm not sure how any of this will effect Fan Films, just keeping an eye on it.
* "The narrative making its way from the conference is of consolidation among companies, and Viacom is rumored to eventually recombine with CBS Corp. (CBSA). The two companies split in 2006."
*"Viacom is still seeking a minority investment for its film studio Paramount Pictures."
Paramount is a company held by Viacom so the public doesn't always get the exact picture of how well they are doing financially in the present business cycle. It's been made clear that Paramount is looking to raise money and even has gone to Ailbaba to fund in part Star Trek Beyond in exchange for distribution rights in China. A corporate Tycoon John Malone (net worth around $7 billion) I assume was able to review the Paramount financials and stated "He would have no interest in such an investment (Paramount) as he views the movie business as a tough one."
*"Turmoil continues with the struggle for control of Viacom, as the health of its controlling shareholder, 93-year-old Sumner Redstone, declines. Viacom Inc. Chairman Philippe Dauman and Mr. Redstone's daughter, Shari Redstone, are on opposite sides of a legal battle that will determine the makeup of Viacom's board and who will oversee Mr. Redstone's assets after he dies or is declared incapacitated."
Actually these shake up events happen in nearly every major Corporation, we just saw Mcdonalds have a shake up and rebuilding period. A few years back if you followed CNBC make some weird changes to it's line up months before General Electric announced it was for sale. Today I've seen posts from theaters stating that the Star Trek Movie has been canceled by the distributor (reason unknown) This April - May Business rumors claimed an offer was on the table for the Star Trek Franchise (bidder unknown) Sometimes these "offers" are floated to discover value if anyone comes forward with a real offer.
I'm not sure how any of this will effect Fan Films, just keeping an eye on it.
Wait. What??
Sorry, I haven't figured out how to post photos on here yet.
https://www.facebook.com/thomas.k.t...=feed_comment_reply¬if_id=1468111631245928
- Status