• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Big Finish to release Star Trek audiobooks

Is that what they did with Stargate for a while? I remember seeing SG stories with just one cast member listed.
That seems the most likely way to start off, just as a cheaper way to test the waters for original stories.

The first two series of the Stargate SG-1 & Stargate Atlantis followed what Big Finish loosely call the "chronicles" style of storytelling - one series cast member narrating/performing a story, with a guest star actor supporting them. They've done this with their Doctor Who, Blake's 7 and Judge Dredd audios too.

It's partly a way to keep production costs down - cheaper to get one actor than a whole cast! - and also lets you get around the issue of cast members who are unavailable (or sometimes passed on). These are usually a hybrid style of performance with some narrated story and some in radio play format.

If they were going to do full cast audio dramas it would like probably be something with just one or two onscreen stars and a bunch of new characters.

Which is exactly what we did with the 3rd and final series of Stargate audios! We got two main cast members to play their roles and populated the rest of the series with new actors in supporting roles.

The problem with doing audio versions of shows with big ensemble casts is that things can get unwieldy with too many voices. I've always thought audio works best when the cast is smaller and more focused...

The Captain Sulu audiobooks they did were technically not audiodramas, because while they had multiple in-character narrators, there was no dialogue between them. The stories were presented in the form of various characters' log entries, reports, broadcasts, monologues, etc., getting as close as they could to telling dramatic stories within the limits of the multiple-narrator audiobook format.

As someone with a lot of experience in writing and listening to audio drama, I have to disagree.

Your definition lacks nuance; if it's a text being read from a pre-existing work - like, for example Robert Petkoff's recent reading of my Discovery novel - that's an audiobook. The Sulu stories are clearly performances that were written specifically for audio and make full use of the medium to dramatic effect. The fact that the characters don't directly interact is irrelevant.
 
I don't think they'll ever get a full TV cast back together due to expense or willing. Even the Online reunion of a dozen DS9ers are mostly guest actors
 
The Sulu stories are clearly performances that were written specifically for audio and make full use of the medium to dramatic effect. The fact that the characters don't directly interact is irrelevant.

I wasn't expressing my own view of them or making a value judgment. My point is, the makers clearly wanted them to be dramatic but were apparently working under some kind of legal or technical restrictions that wouldn't allow two different actors to interact directly or have a conversation, so they had to be creative about telling essentially dramatized stories within those limits, through epistolary or "found footage" storytelling methods. So they were technically not "dramatic" by whatever arbitrary legal/licensing standards they were operating under, but of course they were as dramatic as they could be given those guidelines. (Which was more successfully done in some cases than others.)
 
the makers clearly wanted them to be dramatic but were apparently working under some kind of legal or technical restrictions that wouldn't allow two different actors to interact directly or have a conversation, so they had to be creative about telling essentially dramatized stories within those limits

This isn't the first time I've seen this mentioned in relation to the production of the Sulu audios, but I've never come across any direct confirmation of it from anyone who worked on the series. It would be interesting to hear from someone involved in the production if this was so. Dave Stern would probably be the man to ask...
 
Well, it just seems to me there must've been some reason they did it in such an almost-but-not-quite way, having multiple actors but never letting them actually converse directly. I don't know if the reason was contractual or technical or something else, but there must've been some reason, because it's kind of an awkward and limiting way of doing it.
 
This isn't the first time I've seen this mentioned in relation to the production of the Sulu audios, but I've never come across any direct confirmation of it from anyone who worked on the series. It would be interesting to hear from someone involved in the production if this was so. Dave Stern would probably be the man to ask...

Years ago, John Ordover said that the BBC held the audio drama rights to Star Trek, which is why the Excelsior audios were, essentially, audiobooks without the books.. One notable example of the licensing was the Q-in-Law audiobook, which featured John de Lancie and Majel Barrett recreating the conversations between Q and Lwaxana from the novel. Paramount Licensing said no, because S&S's license didn't cover that. The response, according to Peter David, was, "Who wants to be the one to tell Gene Roddenberry that Gene Roddenberry's wife isn't allowed to voice her character's lines in the audio book?" at which point, Paramount Licensing said, "Okay, just this once."
 
Well, it just seems to me there must've been some reason they did it in such an almost-but-not-quite way, having multiple actors but never letting them actually converse directly. I don't know if the reason was contractual or technical or something else, but there must've been some reason, because it's kind of an awkward and limiting way of doing it.

As I said, it would be interesting to know if there was any validity to this assumption, or if it was just down to some quirk of the project. It may have been a stylistic, production or directorial choice - although as far as I can ascertain, it appears that the Sulu audios were all directed by different people.

Years ago, John Ordover said that the BBC held the audio drama rights to Star Trek, which is why the Excelsior audios were, essentially, audiobooks without the books..

I have to admit I find this tough to get my head around! Why would a British broadcaster have Star Trek audio drama rights during the mid-90s and never exploit them in any way? Again, I'd love to know more details!
 
I have to admit I find this tough to get my head around! Why would a British broadcaster have Star Trek audio drama rights during the mid-90s and never exploit them in any way? Again, I'd love to know more details!

Companies are weird sometimes, man. Like back in 2007-2010 when Tony Head, Joss Whedon and Doctor Who producer Julie Gardner tried to get a 90 minute Ripper TV movie starring Head's Giles off the ground at the BBC. The script was written, BBC had already budgeted it and greenlit it for production and (I believe) the project was even cast. At the very least, Head's own daughters were set to play Giles' aunts who were extremely powerful witches that apparently hadn't aged due to either their power or maybe just a glamour (They later showed up in Christos Gage's acclaimed 25 issue run on the Angel & Faith comics).

Their plan was to have the BBC cover 100% of the production costs and give 50% of any profits to 20th Century Fox Television, who had to just sit back and let the free money come in. If the TV movie was successful enough to warrent a TV series continuation, the BBC would still cover 100% of the production costs and still toss 50% of the profits Fox's way.

Fox said they had no plans themselves for the character of Rupert Giles (or even the Buffyverse), but the BBC couldn't do it because it was their IP. After three years of trying to get Fox to change their mind to no avail Head, Whedon, Gardner and the BBC abandoned the project. It sucks sometimes, but corporations gonna corporate.
 
I have to admit I find this tough to get my head around! Why would a British broadcaster have Star Trek audio drama rights during the mid-90s and never exploit them in any way? Again, I'd love to know more details!

Maybe it just didn’t work out.

With the1996 Doctor Who TV movie, the viewing figures in the UK were sufficient for a series to be viable, in the US they were not.

So why did the US producers hold on to the rights when they had no intention of exploiting them? Thus denying the BBC an opportunity to do so until the contract term expired.
 
It sucks sometimes, but corporations gonna corporate.

True dat. Having worked directly and indirectly with BBC publishing and licensing over the years, I've seen a few decisions made that were...shall we say...mercurial.

Y'know, I thought this conversation felt familiar... Turns out we talked about this very subject on TrekBBS in 2015! And here's something from Therin in the thread that sheds a little more light on the Sulu audios...

I recall corresponding with John Ordover, on the old Psi Phi BBS, about this back when he was Trek editor at Pocket. The problem with audio dramas was that Simon & Schuster Audioworks had not bought/renewed the rights to producing audio dramas.

The closest they had come were three "Captain Sulu" exclusive-to-audio adventures. These were each 70 mins long, helped to pioneer a then-new "3D sound" system (which worked amazingly well for the CDs used with headphones, but less effectively with audio cassette), and featured a larger cast of actors.

Then they did audio adaptions of the CD-ROM games, "Klingon" (90 mins) and "Borg" (60 mins), using the already-available extended voice casts of the games, but when it came time to do the "Starfleet Academy" game, S&S Audiowork's license for ST audio drama had expired, and they continued to publish the one-voice-narrator abridgments of (hardcover) novels. (Actually, it seemed, at least at first, that a rival publisher had optioned the audio drama license but had then sat on the rights rather than produce anything. But perhaps not.)

Who was that "rival publisher", I wonder? If the "BBC" connection is on the money, it might have been Ebury Publishing, the imprint of Random House who handle the BBC Books line...
 
I'm about an hour into the first one of these. Two observations:
  • I admire the bold creative choice of letting Alec Newman make up his own pronunciations to canoncial Star Trek words. ("REE-sans"?) Also I get that "BEE-ta" is technically correct in his accent, but "BEE-ta-zoid" sounds weird.
  • The authors have done a good job of pastiching the narrative style of Destiny era fiction, in that I'm an hour into it and there's no sign of a plot (there have been a ton of mundane conversations), but I've had all sorts of "characterization" dumped on me in poorly handled exposition.
 
KEE-ko O'Brien!? :eek:

Also I'm pretty sure he's pronouncing non-proper nouns wrong; I think he pronounced "conflagration" as "conflagAration."
Well, Keith DeCandido edited the English translation so I guess some of the credit for that should go to him.
No, I don't mean the prose style, I mean the shape of the storyline.
 
More mispronunciations: "Akar" for "Akaar," a soft o for the second syllable of "Qo'noS," "neh-CHY-ev" for "Nechayev," a hard g in "Rigellian."

Is there an established pronunciation for "Caitian"? He keeps pronouncing the ai as a long i, which I guess is possible, but I'd always assumed a long a.

EDIT: Aha, "Passage to Moauv" uses a long a.
 
Last edited:
Another: a short a in "Kahless."

Also, I'd always assumed the "zh" in an Andorian name was a voiced palato-alveolar fricative, i.e., the symbol ʒ in IPA, like the s in "pleasure" or the j in "Jacques," but Newman just uses a z sound.
 
Is there an established pronunciation for "Caitian"? He keeps pronouncing the ai as a long i, which I guess is possible, but I'd always assumed a long a.
I've been watching TAS and I don't think anyone ever says it there.
I've always pronounced it "Kay-shen"
 
Yeah, it's only from behind-the-scenes materials, the novelizations, and the Power Records stories.

The TAS Writers' Bible, which was essentially the TOS WB with a few updates, has a hand-drawn diagram showing the location of Cait (and the Lynx constellation). There is a copy of the TAS WB in the closed reference section of a US library.

I assume that the TAS WB is where Bjo Trimble got the Caitian references used in the "ST Concordance". Arex is not similarly identified, although both get backgrounds in their Lincoln Enterprises biographies.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top