I had never heard that term before. How ... interesting.
CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar 2 - Electric Boogaloo-Fanboys gone WILD-too many hyphens
- Thread starter jespah
- Start date
Thanks, but I'm paranoid about this kind of stuff, so I only stick to stuff coming though companies I know and trust.
(Directed at Alec)
I'm sorry, this GIF is just so perfect for this situation I'm going to use it every opportunity I get.
Monty Python is Gods Gift to Mankind
Not to belabor the argument, I find your emotional response to DSC...interesting. I only got through half the first season, and while some episodes were better and some were worse, IMO, overall it was a net positive for me.
But again, I don't get why you, or anyone else, should balk at CBS trying to drum up content for CBSAA; which has seen record subscriptions since DSC Season 2 debuted.
I'm not pointing fingers at you specifically, you are entitled to your opinion as much as anyone. It's simply the fact that ~$10 a month for CBSAA is such a turn off for the die-hard old school trekkies.
Last edited:
In 1985, Down Under, I was paying $AU 79.99 per movie on Beta and/or VHS, and TOS episodes were $39 each! (ie. not a season, just a single episode.) In 1988, TNG started coming out two episodes per tape per month, at first only avail for overnight rental. Eventually there were expensive sell-thru versions. It wasn't on TV and this was the only legal way to watch episodes. Then ditto for DS9, VGR and the first season of ENT. Then the VHS format was dropped by Paramount home video and there was a frustrating drought until ENT finally came to late-night commercial TV.
I think TAS was the only series I saw for free, but it was in b/w until colour TV came in March 1975. I caught up on TOS at six episodes per day in a cinema, each month. $5 a session in 1980, eventually $6 for five episodes but $1 off for club members.
I have almost always paid for my Trek fix. I held out from subscribing to cable or satellite TV until "Discovery". So, yes, I now have Netflix. I do watch other stuff, but mainly for my weekly Trek fix. A friend who can't afford a subscription visits for an old fashion viewing party.
Last edited:
That's actually not a deviation from what has been the narrative since the rather thin, so-called independent "financial report" was released two years ago. Of note is that — for once — he claims he put in less of his own money ($100,000) than he generally claims (about $50,000 more than that). If you've never read our kids' book version of the Axanar financials, check it out, "Think of the Children."
My take on the financials is that of course Alec was taking a salary. He didn't just say so countless times, he *defended it* countless times.
However, once everything started to go belly-up and he was stuck paying for the rent on Industry Studios, he started flogging his prop collection to cover that rent, and so in his mind retrospectively, that undid any previous monies he may have taken from the donor funds. Of course, most people know real life doesn't work like that. If the money had kept poring in, you can guarantee he'd have kept spending.
The caveat to this (and admittedly this is speculation on my part), is there's the untracked donor money raised via Paypal, conventions etc. Its long been the speculation that it went straight into Alec's pockets, so I remain convinced that when he talks about "his money", he's also including that, which was absolutely donor funds, and not his, and that's where part of his $100,000, $150,000 or whatever number it is this week comes from.
As an aside:
However, once everything started to go belly-up and he was stuck paying for the rent on Industry Studios, he started flogging his prop collection to cover that rent, and so in his mind retrospectively, that undid any previous monies he may have taken from the donor funds. Of course, most people know real life doesn't work like that. If the money had kept poring in, you can guarantee he'd have kept spending.
The caveat to this (and admittedly this is speculation on my part), is there's the untracked donor money raised via Paypal, conventions etc. Its long been the speculation that it went straight into Alec's pockets, so I remain convinced that when he talks about "his money", he's also including that, which was absolutely donor funds, and not his, and that's where part of his $100,000, $150,000 or whatever number it is this week comes from.
As an aside:
I'm just saying if I'd shelled out 6 figures of my own money on something, I'd damn well remember how much it was. And I'm not the greatest with money.
New on AxaMonitor: ANOTHER AXA-RESIGNATION Longtime Axanar spokesman Mike Bawden tells Trekzone he resigned last December amid a very public dispute between Alec Peters and former director Robert Meyer Burnett — but as usual, not a word from Peters about this key departure. AxaMonitor's coverage tells you why. Read more »
One interesting thought I had is that the next time s*it hits the proverbial fan (and it will, it's simply just a matter of time), LFIM is going to have a hell of a time defending Axanar/himself with his former sycophants having "seen the light" and jumped ship
Plus, if someone has shelled out a six figure sum personally, you'd think they would have something to show for it, like maybe the original intended product?
Where's the movie, Alec?
What I find odd is how many people act like I should be emotionless about things I feel passionately about. I'm a sci-fi fan, not an entertainment analyst
I got through the first episode. I liked it for five minutes. Then the Klingons showed up. It went downhill from there. Then I realized I had to pay to watch more of it. My thinking was: "Why the hell would I pay to watch more of this?"
They can drum up however much content they like. Again, the question is whether or not I fork over ten dollars a month out of my pocket for it. I choose not to.
I'll let you in on something. CBSAA almost got me last night. I saw the spot for the upcoming Twilight Zone reboot last night, and I like Twilight Zone and I like Jordan Peele, so for a hot second I thought I might join to see that. Then I remembered two things:
1. Twilight Zone has been rebooted before, more than once.
2. Twilight Zone reboots generally suck.
So I came to my senses and decided that unless CBS publicly announces that they've resurrected Rod Serling from the dead so he can write the lion's share of the episodes, I'll hard pass on any reboot. Until Serling's back, I'll be perfectly satisfied watching a serviceable clone called Black Mirror, on Netflix, which, again, I'm already paying for.
I never thought you singled me out. I can only respond to you on my own behalf.
So try a thought experiment:
There's an agricultural supply company that has the grandaddy of all backlogs in their fertilizer department. They've just got piles of it sitting around and they need to move it, so marketing comes up with an ingenious superdiscount plan: anybody who wants it can have a dump truck load full of organic fertilizer delivered anywhere they want it, and they can have another delivery every month for ten dollars a month. And it's not just ordinary fertilizer! It's a brand of fertilizer derived from a brand known worldwide, just mixed a little differently! And to sweeten the deal, every now and then you'll also get special bags of exotic fertilizer derived from the organic fertilizer. And, And, you'll also get some old fashioned standard fertilizer delivered in a separate truck for the same low price! With the plan in place, the agriculture company markets this amazing fertilizer deal specifically to people like you.
One problem: You live in an apartment, and don't have so much as a window flower box, much less enough arable land to actually require truckloads of fertilizer being sent directly to you.
With that scenario in mind, answer these questions:
1. Under these conditions would you consider the ten-dollar-a-month fertilizer deal a bargain?
2. How would you react if somebody walked up to you and said, "I just don't understand why you balk at only paying ten dollars a month for so much great fertilizer!"?
Let me know your conclusions.
He does still have Johnathan Lane to twist things into a more positive light for him. I just hope for his sake he doesn't piss him off, then he'd really be in trouble.
Have you seen Get Out? Anyone who doubts what Jordan Peel can do when it comes to TZ style stories needs to watch it right away.
I have seen Get Out, and yes I know how great a writer he is, but I've seen great writers screw up TZ stories before, because they all take the wrong lessons from the original stories when trying to craft new ones.
Case in point: One classic episode is "To Serve Man." Aliens come to earth promising humans the universe and humanity takes them up on the promise. Everybody knows the twist by now: "To Serve Man! It's...It's a cookbook!"
Fast forward to the eighties TZ, and an episode where aliens come to earth and promise humans the universe if it weren't for the fact that they had a small talent for war. Stunned, the world's leaders get together and hammer out the first, truly worldwide peace treaty in history and present it to the aliens with a smile. The head alien laughs, saying, "Oh you misunderstood. When I said you had a small talent for war, that's what I meant. It was small. We want warriors in our universe, and you puny humans have never truly lived up to your warrior potential! Too bad." Earth gets blowed up.
The first time you see "To Serve Man," the ending is a gut punch, but even in repeat viewings, when you know what's going to happen, there's always a tiny little bit of "Oh, shit!" when you consider what humanity's gotten itself into. The eighties episode, it's like the aliens were playing a frat boy prank on humanity, and in the end the aliens ruined the joke by explaining the punchline. And I could never shake the feeling that the only reason it exists is because the writers needed a script fast and some suit suggested: "Hey, remember when the human race got eaten because of a misunderstanding? We could just do that again."
I don't doubt Jordan's ability as a writer. I doubt his ability to keep CBS from screwing up yet another one of my favorite shows just to gin up content.
So @Admiral2; if someone is not interested in DSC simply because they don't enjoy it; no problem.
If someone can't be bothered to sign up for a new subscription service, no problem.
If someone HATES DSC solely because of the terrible price of $10/m; less when you account for the trial offers and perks they're giving out to attract new subscribers, what's the BFD?
EDIT:
$5.99/m with commercials, or $9.99/m without
If someone can't be bothered to sign up for a new subscription service, no problem.
If someone HATES DSC solely because of the terrible price of $10/m; less when you account for the trial offers and perks they're giving out to attract new subscribers, what's the BFD?
EDIT:
$5.99/m with commercials, or $9.99/m without
Last edited:
I like this. Short, simple and to the point.
And we're done.