Of God's and Men ??

[Captain Atkin]

Anyone of you know WHY this was made?
Maybe these people involved had too much time and had the crazy idea of making "a fan movie"? nothing to win, only to loose, why?

It was originally conceived by "Sky" Conway as a money maker that would be sold to fans. Here's how Tim Russ described the project:

This is not a fan film. This is an independent Trek feature, and we have every intention of selling it to the public as either a download or on DVD. Fan films are usually allowed to be viewed for free. Not to take away from the hard work and dedication of the people who make fan films, the quality of "Gods and Men" is superior the the typical fan film. I was approached by the producer, Sky Douglas Conway , about co-creating the concept for it and directing it. To me at the time, it was more or less another directing job. But it turned out to be something very special.

I know they hoped that the film could be considered canon by Paramount, and sold as a direct-to-DVD type of movie. Of course, that didn't happen. Paramount would never allow it, as the suits need to be in control of these types of productions. I disagree that this was "superior" to other "free" fan films. It doesn't matter how many Trek actors you stick in a production. At the end of the day, fans want a good story. If the film got a proper re-edit, I might rate it higher, but as is, I don't think it rates as the best fan film. I might put it in the top 10, but it wouldn't be the best.

 

[MikeH92467]

I wouldn't rate it as a fan film at all. Since the director says it wasn't meant to be a fan film, I say judge by professional standards. By those standards, it falls woefully short on a number of counts.

 

[Stompy]

To the actors end, they need to be commended, it was the middle of summer 2006 in a heat wave in upstate NY and the actors had to put up with Temperatures of almost 100 degrees on the New Voyages set. Only a part of the building in the front had any AC. The LA part of the shoots was much better weather wise.

I just wish I could have been the guy to fan Chase...

Her costume is for sale on eBay...

 

[J.C. England]

...uh...okay, I'll say it...
"What costume?"...lol

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Not to take away from the hard work and dedication of the people who make fan films, the quality of "Gods and Men" is superior to the typical fan film.

No.

 

[wjaspers]

Not to take away from the hard work and dedication of the people who make fan films, the quality of "Gods and Men" is superior to the typical fan film.

No.

to the typical fan film.

Yes

 

[MikeH92467]

Not to take away from the hard work and dedication of the people who make fan films, the quality of "Gods and Men" is superior to the typical fan film.

No.

to the typical fan film.

Yes

No. Hodgepodge of a script, very weak effects. Great seeing so many familiar faces and some good performances, but not enough to make it coherent, successful project. Again, I don't judge it as a "fan film" since it was designed as a money making project, but even so it doesn't measure up to the quality of the best fan films or even some of the middle of the pack ones. Everyone's mileage will vary of course.

 

[Amaris]

No.

to the typical fan film.

Yes

No. Hodgepodge of a script, very weak effects. Great seeing so many familiar faces and some good performances, but not enough to make it coherent, successful project. Again, I don't judge it as a "fan film" since it was designed as a money making project, but even so it doesn't measure up to the quality of the best fan films or even some of the middle of the pack ones. Everyone's mileage will vary of course.

Agreed. Professional Trek actors, directors, producers, and what we got as a result doesn't obscure a mid-range fan film. Quite honestly, the better fan films (like New Voyages/Phase II and Exeter) simply blow the doors off of it.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Half the nuisance value of the original quote is that there's no reason to think that Russ had any idea what a "typical" fan film is like to begin with. Is there such a thing? He was blowing smoke - to the extent that he may have been familiar with these things he'd probably be aware of the Phase II folks, and "Of Gods And Men" isn't better than any of the Phase II efforts - even the early or less-successful ones.

 

[Captain Atkin]

I really don't think the FX were bad. I just think there was too many FX. I would trim that final battle down in editing. I would also trim down some of the FX shots at the start of the film. If you look at a classic Trek episode, the total FX work in an episode was usually no more than 1 minute and 40 seconds. Some of the bigger FX episodes would go past 2 minutes, like with 'The Doomsday Machine'. As this is a movie, I don't have an issue with there being more FX, but I do think too many FX actually serves to dilute the story.

 

[Therin of Andor]

"Of Gods And Men" isn't better than any of the Phase II efforts - even the early or less-successful ones.

Exactly. Last week I watched the first four "New Voyages" and was filled with dread re the first two, after hearing all the negativity, but they were surprisingly enjoyable.

 

[GSchnitzer]

"Of Gods And Men" isn't better than any of the Phase II efforts - even the early or less-successful ones.

Exactly. Last week I watched the first four "New Voyages" and was filled with dread re the first two, after hearing all the negativity, but they were surprisingly enjoyable.

What we lacked in production know-how we tried to make up for in a profound love of the source material.

 

[MikeH92467]

"Of Gods And Men" isn't better than any of the Phase II efforts - even the early or less-successful ones.

Exactly. Last week I watched the first four "New Voyages" and was filled with dread re the first two, after hearing all the negativity, but they were surprisingly enjoyable.

What we lacked in production know-how we tried to make up for in a profound love of the source material.

Both of those episodes were enormous morale builders during the post-Hurricane Ivan days when I was in the Cayman Islands. The temporary offices we were in had DSL and air conditioning which meant we spent a LOT of time there. Those episodes were hugely enjoyable. It gave me a little taste of just how much it meant for guys in war zones when USO shows came through. Being able to watch those shows was a brief respite from a very unpleasant reality.

 

[Barbreader]

Nothing done by New Voyages or Phase two or Farragut or Exeter or Aurora or Hidden Frontier or Intrepid or Metrensky Incident... I could name two dozen other top fan film groups... is typical. What is a typical fan film? Well, the most common results of trying to create a fan film is never finishing ANY film, so that would be typical. Even leaving out those that never complete a film, 'typical' films which are completed are probably something like Space Wreak, vis: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/47.html, or any of the Go!Animate animations other than those by RoTV or Solarbaby or DMAC6808, (Here's a Table of Contents of the Go!Animate selections, the ones closer to the top are generally better and offer more material than those further down, but I am comfortable that I have sampled a disproportionate number of the better Go!Animate films) http://startrekreviewed-goanimate.blogspot.com/2011/10/table-of-contents-for-goanimate.html .

So, either you are arguing that OGAM is inferior to the best Star Trek Fan Films, or you are arguing that it's inferior to Space Wreak. I have now located well in excess of 500 Star Trek Fan Films. The best of them are not TYPICAL and you all seem to only be comparing OGAM to top films, and calling them typical. They are NOT.

OK, most fan films are more quirky that Space Wreak, but I'd say that it is average in overall quality. If that is typical, you challenge, what's bad? Lookie here: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/144.html . I'm not sure the USS Proxima really belongs on this list, but it's there because it seems to be posted in more places on the web than any other fan film. Wanna see bad? Watch any of the others on this list.

 

[Amaris]

Nothing done by New Voyages or Phase two or Farragut or Exeter or Aurora or Hidden Frontier or Intrepid or Metrensky Incident... I could name two dozen other top fan film groups... is typical. What is a typical fan film? Well, the most common results of trying to create a fan film is never finishing ANY film, so that would be typical. Even leaving out those that never complete a film, 'typical' films which are completed are probably something like Space Wreak, vis: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/47.html, or any of the Go!Animate animations other than those by RoTV or Solarbaby or DMAC6808, (Here's a Table of Contents of the Go!Animate selections, the ones closer to the top are generally better and offer more material than those further down, but I am comfortable that I have sampled a disproportionate number of the better Go!Animate films) http://startrekreviewed-goanimate.blogspot.com/2011/10/table-of-contents-for-goanimate.html .

So, either you are arguing that OGAM is inferior to the best Star Trek Fan Films, or you are arguing that it's inferior to Space Wreak. I have now located well in excess of 500 Star Trek Fan Films. The best of them are not TYPICAL and you all seem to only be comparing OGAM to top films, and calling them typical. They are NOT.

OK, most fan films are more quirky that Space Wreak, but I'd say that it is average in overall quality. If that is typical, you challenge, what's bad? Lookie here: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/144.html . I'm not sure the USS Proxima really belongs on this list, but it's there because it seems to be posted in more places on the web than any other fan film. Wanna see bad? Watch any of the others on this list.

Unlike the vast majority of the fan film examples you've posted, OGAM was a professional production. Do you compare it to the performance of the cheapest, most poorly made celluloid filmed in some guy's basement, or do you compare it to more well made, quality productions? I mean, if we're going that route, I guess the lowest common denominator makes it look good, in a sense, but doesn't speak much in it's favor otherwise. I mean "it's better than dreck", or "at least it's finished" isn't really a ringing endorsement.

It's disingenuous to compare it to the full spectrum of fan films because 99% of the films are non-professional, incomplete, and poorly realized. Another analogy would be that if you're looking for comparison reviews on a good car, you don't go asking little Jimmy next door about the condition of his Radio Flyer wagon.

 

[Tom]

It is what is it is, somethings were done good and some things could have have been done differently. The next one will be better.

 

[USS Intrepid]

Besides, it's not a competition.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Unlike the vast majority of the fan film examples you've posted, OGAM was a professional production. Do you compare it to the performance of the cheapest, most poorly made celluloid filmed in some guy's basement, or do you compare it to more well made, quality productions?

This is the salient point, given that

• The producers insisted that it was not a "fan film" but a professional product, and
• The producers tried repeatedly to raise money with it.
  
  

 

[Amaris]

Unlike the vast majority of the fan film examples you've posted, OGAM was a professional production. Do you compare it to the performance of the cheapest, most poorly made celluloid filmed in some guy's basement, or do you compare it to more well made, quality productions?

This is the salient point, given that

• The producers insisted that it was not a "fan film" but a professional product, and
• The producers tried repeatedly to raise money with it.

Exactly. It makes all the difference, and puts OGAM into a category in which it is underequipped to handle.

 

[Barbreader]

Unlike the vast majority of the fan film examples you've posted, OGAM was a professional production. Do you compare it to the performance of the cheapest, most poorly made celluloid filmed in some guy's basement, or do you compare it to more well made, quality productions? I mean, if we're going that route, I guess the lowest common denominator makes it look good, in a sense, but doesn't speak much in it's favor otherwise. I mean "it's better than dreck", or "at least it's finished" isn't really a ringing endorsement.

It's disingenuous to compare it to the full spectrum of fan films because 99% of the films are non-professional, incomplete, and poorly realized. Another analogy would be that if you're looking for comparison reviews on a good car, you don't go asking little Jimmy next door about the condition of his Radio Flyer wagon.

The universe of fan films isn't just he best ones. When somebody states it's better than a typical fan film, and another person says it's not, before you can even discuss the matter you have to define what in heck you mean.

A Radio Flyer is not a car. Your choice of analogy is a demonstration of the deep flaws in your argument. Space Wreak IS a fan film. Incomplete fan films include Exeter's TTI, which some people think is the best fan film ever made. Star Trek: Beyond is also a professional production. I have found it unwatchable, and I have a lot of tolerance for bad fan films. I encourage people to define their universe of Star Trek Fan Films when they are making comparisons. All? Pro? Adult? Complete? What?

In a discussion of quality, if one person is comparing a used car with a 10 year old Chevy, and another person is comparing it with a 1 year old Mercedes, and the one says, "It's a pretty good used car" and the other says, "No, it's not" the discussion is useless until you clarify your terms. Notice, however, that both of my examples are, indeed, used cars.

My comment referred to the lack of clarity in terms in the argument above.