Personal "Deal Breakers" for watching Fan Productions

[KennyB]

Same here. It's probably best to give everything a chance and not over-think it.

Axanar is a sort of unique example, though. I enjoyed Prelude when I first watched it but, in light of some of the frankly appalling events since then, I have no interest in sitting through it again. I'd probably only watch their final Axanar production (if it ever appears, which I'm not convinced it will) if I read it's shockingly, laughingly bad. That probably makes me a bad person.

Nah---I feel the same way. I enjoyed Prelude and came very close to sending them $500, but I just couldn't pull the trigger. In light of everything I am so glad I did not. If they do every actually release their 2 15 minute films I may watch just to see the result since most of the actors and creative team from Prelude are gone now.

 

[Mike Farley]

I know it's only been a few months, but does anyone know of any fan productions that have been contacted by CBS for violating the guidelines?

 

[CRM-114]

I know it's only been a few months, but does anyone know of any fan productions that have been contacted by CBS for violating the guidelines?

Don't think so.

 

[dmac]

Being through the production cycle a few times I'm not sure there are many "Deal Breakers" for me. As Mr. Spock would say, "Each according to their gifts"
After all it's fan films so I'm also looking at what resources did they start with and how did they use them. For some fan films, everything is in the experimental stages, mainly in the sense that they could be missing 9 out of 10 experienced skills. How well did they Soldier on to complete their mission, what did they learn and put to use in the next project?
To me Fan Films are a whole lot more than a single production, it's a process.
This leaves only one real "Deal Breaker" and that's when your sole ability is to raise a ton of cash, outsource most of your production talent and thumb your nose down at other fan clubs.

 

[Matthew Raymond]

To me Fan Films are a whole lot more than a single production, it's a process.

<rant type="guidelines">Doesn't Guideline #1 make this more difficult? Do successive productions by the same group constitute a series that runs afoul of Guideline #1? If you look at shows like the Outer Limits and the Twilight Zone, most of the episodes have nothing to do with each other and have no recurring characters, yet they are considered series.

Even if CBS/Paramount specifically mean a series with recurring characters, that still has a significant burden because you're always scratch with the audience with regard to knowing the characters. You're forced to confine all character development to a very small time frame, and that's not realistic.</rant>

This leaves only one real "Deal Breaker" and that's when your sole ability is to raise a ton of cash, outsource most of your production talent and thumb your nose down at other fan clubs.

Yeah, if someone wants to make it all about them, they can create their own sci-fi franchise.

 

[dmac]

The fan production must be less than 15 minutes for a single self-contained story, or no more than 2 segments, episodes or parts, not to exceed 30 minutes total, with no additional seasons, episodes, parts, sequels or remakes. - See more at: http://www.startrek.com/fan-films#sthash.QsyQFOgU.dpuf
A year from now someone could dwell on the words Episodes & Sequels.but the subject of the sentence is a "single self-contained story" that can't evolve into a huge story arc over more than two 15 minute productions.
(self - contained story)
Mission begins
Issue arises
Issue explored
Issue resolved
Tease the Vulcan
Nowhere in Guideline #1 do I read "Blow up the ship and disband the crew."

 

[Matthew Raymond]

A year from now someone could dwell on the words Episodes & Sequels.but the subject of the sentence is a "single self-contained story" that can't evolve into a huge story arc over more than two 15 minute productions.

I'm pretty sure that a plain reading of the phrase "with no additional seasons, episodes, parts, sequels or remakes" precludes such story arcs. Heck, it prevents you from reshooting your own film.

(self - contained story)
Mission begins
Issue arises
Issue explored
Issue resolved
Tease the Vulcan

Three minutes each, not including opening and closing credits. Just to give you an idea, just the part of Darmok where Picard recounts the story of Gilgamesh takes about 2 1/2 minutes. So if you have to recount anything from ancient mythology, kiss your Vulcan teasing goodbye.

Nowhere in Guideline #1 do I read "Blow up the ship and disband the crew."

It's more like Q telling you the ship and it's crew will go on, but you'll never see them again. Bahahahahaha!

 

[Firebird]

Three minutes each, not including opening and closing credits. Just to give you an idea, just the part of Darmok where Picard recounts the story of Gilgamesh takes about 2 1/2 minutes. So if you have to recount anything from ancient mythology, kiss your Vulcan teasing goodbye.

There's a little thing called the economy of writing. Your story shouldn't have to depend on a 2.5 minute scene of storytime. Many TV series managed to tell compelling dramatic pieces since the dawn of the medium with 21-25 minutes of available screen time without complaining about time restrictions. The time limit encourages creativity by making you think of more efficient ways to handle a scene or a plotline, not hinder it.

 

[USS Intrepid]

There is nothing whatsoever precluding recurring characters. Further, the guidelines don't tell us what we *can't* do. They tell us what we *can*. Make of that what you will.

 

[Jedi_Master]

There's a little thing called the economy of writing. Your story shouldn't have to depend on a 2.5 minute scene of storytime. Many TV series managed to tell compelling dramatic pieces since the dawn of the medium with 21-25 minutes of available screen time without complaining about time restrictions. The time limit encourages creativity by making you think of more efficient ways to handle a scene or a plotline, not hinder it.

Some Super Bowl ads are masterpieces of economical story telling. Creative people find a way,

 

[dmac]

There's a little thing called the economy of writing. Your story shouldn't have to depend on a 2.5 minute scene of storytime. Many TV series managed to tell compelling dramatic pieces since the dawn of the medium with 21-25 minutes of available screen time without complaining about time restrictions. The time limit encourages creativity by making you think of more efficient ways to handle a scene or a plotline, not hinder it.

One might look at it as encouraging creativity, while another might think of the time limits as encouraging less creative works. Mostly it depends on the story, I've done some where 7-8 minutes of story was all that was required. Other times you get around page 40 or so and simply realize it will never be a "Star Trek" fan film. Of course the studio also has had resource limits for each episode so for some 95% of our productions, the guideline time limits didn't effect us as much as others.
It is what it is and until someone comes along to Poke the Bear again, it's what we are granted to work within.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

There is nothing whatsoever precluding recurring characters. Further, the guidelines don't tell us what we *can't* do. They tell us what we *can*. Make of that what you will.

THIS

 

[Matthew Raymond]

There's a little thing called the economy of writing. Your story shouldn't have to depend on a 2.5 minute scene of storytime. Many TV series managed to tell compelling dramatic pieces since the dawn of the medium with 21-25 minutes of available screen time without complaining about time restrictions. The time limit encourages creativity by making you think of more efficient ways to handle a scene or a plotline, not hinder it.

Do you have any idea how many 30 minute shows I've watched where they have frequent multi-part episodes? The format is a limitation that people often circumvent with serialization of the story, which is expressly prohibited by Guideline #1.

Also, economy and efficiency don't necessarily make a story better. Ever seen Samurai Jack? Episodes often feature long pauses or beats for dramatic effect. The show only has 30 minute episodes, so they could do more elaborate stories if they removed those pauses, but if they did, it would actually undermine the dramatic pacing of the show.

There is nothing whatsoever precluding recurring characters.

It's pretty clear that the point of Guideline #1 is to prevent an ongoing series. If you have multiple productions with the same character that has a multi-film character arc, it's pretty much a series about that character. I don't see how the first guideline doesn't apply in that case. And if there's no character arc, why even have the character recur at all?

Further, the guidelines don't tell us what we *can't* do. They tell us what we *can*. Make of that what you will.

Oh please! The guidelines feature the word "cannot" specifically NINE TIMES!!! Do you even believe what you're saying?

One might look at it as encouraging creativity, while another might think of the time limits as encouraging less creative works.

Exactly. It depends on the kind of story you're trying to tell. Think of the last time you went back and watched an old episode of your favorite TV show and saw things you didn't before because of what you knew from later episodes. That kind of storytelling isn't possible without a continuous story.

 

[Firebird]

Do you have any idea how many 30 minute shows I've watched where they have frequent multi-part episodes? The format is a limitation that people often circumvent with serialization of the story, which is expressly prohibited by Guideline #1.

Also, economy and efficiency don't necessarily make a story better. Ever seen Samurai Jack? Episodes often feature long pauses or beats for dramatic effect. The show only has 30 minute episodes, so they could do more elaborate stories if they removed those pauses, but if they did, it would actually undermine the dramatic pacing of the show.

Do you have any idea how many 30 minute shows that have been made that never relied on multi-part episodes? You're saying the only type of viable storytelling method is to be serialized? Also, Samurai Jack can do whatever they want with their stories, because they're the ones in ownership of the copyright. Fan film makers don't have the same free rein, because they're playing with someone else's copyright.

 

[Richard Baker]

IIRC The Next Generation series really got into having a primary 'A' story and a secondary 'B' story, each developing as the episode unfolded. Remove the 'B' story entirely and tighten up the 'A' and it could still be an episode in a 30 minute span.

 

[USS Intrepid]

Do you have any idea how many 30 minute shows I've watched where they have frequent multi-part episodes? The format is a limitation that people often circumvent with serialization of the story, which is expressly prohibited by Guideline #1.
It's pretty clear that the point of Guideline #1 is to prevent an ongoing series. If you have multiple productions with the same character that has a multi-film character arc, it's pretty much a series about that character. I don't see how the first guideline doesn't apply in that case. And if there's no character arc, why even have the character recur at all?

Oh please! The guidelines feature the word "cannot" specifically NINE TIMES!!! Do you even believe what you're saying?

Yeah actually I know exactly what I'm talking about. I have good reason to be confident about the stance Randy, myself and others have on the guidelines. You're more than welcome to disagree, and TYPE IN CAPS SOME MORE, I won't be losing any sleep over it.

Maybe instead of nitpicking the wording of the guidelines, you might actually want to think about the spirit of them. Because, quite frankly, you may have read them, but you don't understand them at all.

 

[Matthew Raymond]

Do you have any idea how many 30 minute shows that have been made that never relied on multi-part episodes?

No, because no one compiles lists of shows that don't have something.

You're saying the only type of viable storytelling method is to be serialized? Also, Samurai Jack can do whatever they want with their stories, because they're the ones in ownership of the copyright. Fan film makers don't have the same free rein, because they're playing with someone else's copyright.

This has nothing to do with copyright and everything to do with the fact that the guidelines do in fact place limitations on the nature of the stories that can be told. There's a difference between the effects of what an entity does and whether or not they have a right to do it.

IIRC The Next Generation series really got into having a primary 'A' story and a secondary 'B' story, each developing as the episode unfolded. Remove the 'B' story entirely and tighten up the 'A' and it could still be an episode in a 30 minute span.

B plots serve a necessary purpose. They break up a story so that the viewer can come down from a tense moment. When you return to the A plot, the tension is suddenly fresh because you've had some time away from it. Maintain tension for too long and people start to become desensitized to it.

Also, there the fact that the B plot sometimes ties into the A plot...

 

[Matthew Raymond]

Yeah actually I know exactly what I'm talking about. I have good reason to be confident about the stance Randy, myself and others have on the guidelines. You're more than welcome to disagree, and TYPE IN CAPS SOME MORE, I won't be losing any sleep over it.

1) Your argument is basically "My interpretation is right because I have knowledge I didn't tell you." Well how am I supposed to know that ahead of time? You didn't tell me. You could have just said "Person X told me Y". Instead, you made a snarky, holier-than-thou comment about a whopping two words being in all caps.
2) You said in a previous message that the guidelines don't tell you what you cannot do, but they do exactly that in the literal sense. For instance, Guideline #2 says "The title of the fan production or any parts cannot include the name 'Star Trek.'" How is that not literally telling someone something they can't do? (Oddly enough, I picked one of the few guidelines I really don't have a problem with as an example, but my argument is still valid.)

Maybe instead of nitpicking the wording of the guidelines, you might actually want to think about the spirit of them. Because, quite frankly, you may have read them, but you don't understand them at all.

They mention taking "legal action" in the opening paragraph, so you'll excuse me if I read the guidelines in a legalistic fashion. If the guidelines are so hard to understand that a plain reading of them doesn't reveal their meaning, they need to be rewritten. Or should I be consulting the Sages of the Guidelines for guidence?

 

[USS Intrepid]

Shouting in caps is generally considered poor form, but if I'm reading a level of snark into your post that isn't there I apologise. Anyway, moving on.

The guidelines specifically say "CBS and Paramount Pictures will not object to, or take legal action against, Star Trek fan productions that are non-professional and amateur and meet the following guidelines."

At no point do they say what they *will* object to or take legal action against, they only say *what they will not* object to. They are creating a safe haven for those who want to stay within it, that's all. The guidelines protect both fanfilms (who want to use that safe haven) and the studio.

How many fanfilms continue to use recurring characters since the guidelines came out? And how many fanfilms have been C&Ded or sued? Any? No? Could it be the people making them actually know what they're doing?

Anyway, I'm not going to keep going round in circles with you. I'm sure we both have better things to be doing.

 

[Maurice]

I read a lot of TV scripts. B plots can be a good thing, they can also be a bad thing. Well written scripts do not require them. And the TNG staff didn't call a lot of those B plots "Piller filler" without a reason.

The history of television is replete with half-hour dramas which worked perfectly fine, so the argument that 30 minutes is too little is specious on its face. Hell, Gunsmoke was a half how show for the first six years and 233 episodes of its TV run.

Re "can" and "cannot". The guidelines in effect say "don't cross these lines and you're safe." You can heed those and be safe, but you cannot be guaranteed to be safe if you fail to heed them. Simple enough.