A Bit of an Update on "Kitumba" (Sort Of)

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Well, that was both helpful and necessary.

I've worked on a number of these projects, and passed on invitations to work on others.

I don't "feel sorry" for the Farragut people; never have - there's no reason to. I admire them tremendously, as a group and as individuals. What they've accomplished in seven years is extraordinary, and they've done it in the best way: by consistent hard work, responsible planning, and by treating the people that they work with well and respectfully.

As has been repeated ad nauseam by now, most people don't work on these movies for money. The contracts that do exist are of dubious value, as has also been noted. What we're left with, then, as collaborators is this: do people live up to what they promise?

John Broughton's given word is good. If he says he'll do a thing, it happens. He's one of the most reliable people I know, and a generous friend who despite all that goes on in the fan film community somehow still thinks the best of most everyone. His hard-working, long-time partners in all of this are good people and are truly his best friends as well.

John sets the tone for what actually happens with Farragut. The working conditions on their stages are first-rate, and off-stage drama during shoots is minimal. For the most part, things get done when they should and as they should.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Ok, so after reading all 6 pages of this thread, and doing an on-line check for more information (and coming up short), let me make sure I understand the situation:

The director of "Kitumba" has essentially stolen the master copies of all the footage, and cobbled together a "director's cut" and released it online after having some sort of undefined dispute with Cawley and PII. The footage has since been taken off line, and PII is attempting to piece together an "official" version of the episode using partial backup copies and scraps of the original footage.

Is this essentially correct?

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

Having seen the director's cut, I will say it was not "cobbled together." It may not be what the P2 group had in mind, but it was definitely an enjoyable production. I'm not going to say it was the best fan film ever, but it told a story, it was entertaining, and looked nice. To be honest, I enjoyed it more than I did "The Child."

That being said, one would hope that all the footage (which apparently P2 gave to the director of their own volition) would be returned to P2 with all due haste so that they may make their version of it. I take no sides in the matter; it is what it is. But coming in and saying the footage was "stolen" and that the direction was "ham-handed" and "not up to the level of quality of our productions" and "cobbled together" is not helping resolve the situation. It was inappropriate for the film to be released in the manner it was, but all of this should've been handled behind the scenes. I said that when the matter first came out, and I maintain that position.

 

[Captain Atkin]

Perhaps, but I don't see what purpose it served mentioning it in the interview. It seemed a bit unnecessary to me.

Umm ... Vic was asked a direct question related to his involvement with PII. He gave a direct answer where he stated simply, as Dennis pointed out, he was "disappointed in some of the behavior and attitudes." Rather than bashing and naming names, he gave a short, simple answer to why he was no longer involved with PII.

Now I'm not one to defend Vic. His work as a voice actor hasn't really impressed me. However, his statement was quite ... let's say ... politically given. And in true Hollywood he used it as an opportunity to plug his own project.

As an aside, all this talk of riffs and rivalry between the various fan productions reminds me of that B5 vs. DS9 nonsense that fans perpetuated and JMS occasionally fueled.

<< Laura: It’s known that you’re a fairly big Star Trek fan. Could you tell us a little about Star Trek Phase II (New Voyages) and your involvement in it?

Vic: I played some roles and even directed several episodes for Phase II. But I came to be very disappointed in some of the behaviour and attitudes of that particular production, and have since directed an episode for a fantastic group called “Starship Farragut“. We had such a great time that I partnered with them, and am very excited to announce that we are launching a brand new web series called STAR TREK CONTINUES where I will have the privilege of fulfilling a childhood dream of playing Captain Kirk! The entire cast is an amazing group of actors and I think the fans will really enjoy it. >>

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Interviewer simply asked him about Phase II and his involvement in their production. He could have easily just said that he had acted and directed a few episodes, and moved on to a new Star Trek fan-film project, which would have given him his plug. I don't see what good came from saying that he left the production because of the 'behaviour and attitudes' of a few people. As a person reading the interview, that just raises more questions. Some of you think that he didn't bash people by that comment, simply because he didn't name names, but I disagree. If anything, I think a blanket statement like that casts a bad light on everyone involved in those productions.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

Some of you think that he didn't bash people by that comment, simply because he didn't name names...

Because he didn't. Even Greg agrees there, despite the fact that his interests have been really directly and negatively impacted by Vic's behavior...and, of course, that he knows all of the details of this situation - which (it cannot be repeated too often) few of the rest of us do.

I get that you'd have answered the interviewer differently. Based on my experiences, I think I would have as well. Disapproval doesn't make exaggerated characterisations of Vic's answer any more accurate.

 

[Captain Atkin]

Some of you think that he didn't bash people by that comment, simply because he didn't name names...

Because he didn't. Even Greg agrees there, despite the fact that his interests have been really directly and negatively impacted by Vic's behavior...and, of course, that he knows all of the details of this situation - which (it cannot be repeated too often) few of the rest of us do.

You don't think he 'bashed' them, but I do. Simply a difference of opinion between us, and I do respect your opinion (and the others who agree with you) on that. I'm not saying that Vic went out of his way to bash them in that interview, but that was the impact I was left with after reading it, and my opinion hasn't changed on the matter on second viewing.

 

[beamMe]

Having seen the director's cut, I will say it was not "cobbled together." It may not be what the P2 group had in mind, but it was definitely an enjoyable production. I'm not going to say it was the best fan film ever, but it told a story, it was entertaining, and looked nice. To be honest, I enjoyed it more than I did "The Child."

Seconded.
Now, I'd like to see how the Phase II team tells this episode's story.

 

[Tom]

..So if Vic had the footage (Dailies I would assume) how did all the post production (VFX, SFX, ADR, Ect..) get done for the 'Directors Cut' ? Did he actually get a 'close to finished' episode with the post work already done?

 

[GSchnitzer]

..So if Vic had the footage (Dailies I would assume) how did all the post production (VFX, SFX, ADR, Ect..) get done for the 'Directors Cut' ? Did he actually get a 'close to finished' episode with the post work already done?

Yes, that's a good question and is, respectfully, not your concern--although I do understand your curiosity.

 

[Tom]

..So if Vic had the footage (Dailies I would assume) how did all the post production (VFX, SFX, ADR, Ect..) get done for the 'Directors Cut' ? Did he actually get a 'close to finished' episode with the post work already done?

Yes, that's a good question and is, respectfully, not your concern--although I do understand your curiosity.

Well, this is a discussion board and you did start the thread, that would naturaly invite questions from those that are curious about the situation. I agree it is not my concern, but as someone who knows most of the Phase II crew (and also Farragut crew for that matter) for several years, you can't blame a guy for asking a question on a disscusion board.

Cheers

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

..So if Vic had the footage (Dailies I would assume) how did all the post production (VFX, SFX, ADR, Ect..) get done for the 'Directors Cut' ? Did he actually get a 'close to finished' episode with the post work already done?

AFAIK Greg hasn't characterised the director's cut as being put together from "dailies" or "stolen footage;" simply that it was a preliminary, unfinished product.

One person in this thread has used the word "stolen" to characterize the materials, and it wasn't someone associated with Phase II. There may have been varied and sundry allegations thrown back and forth at places like earlier topics in this forum or the Trekmovie comment threads mentioned uptopic but those weren't made by Greg or James, either.

 

[Tom]

..So if Vic had the footage (Dailies I would assume) how did all the post production (VFX, SFX, ADR, Ect..) get done for the 'Directors Cut' ? Did he actually get a 'close to finished' episode with the post work already done?

AFAIK Greg hasn't characterised the director's cut as being put together from "dailies" or "stolen footage;" simply that it was a preliminary, unfinished product.

One person in this thread has used the word "stolen" to characterize the materials, and it wasn't someone associated with Phase II. There may have been varied and sundry allegations thrown back and forth at places like earlier topics in this forum or the Trekmovie comment threads mentioned uptopic but those weren't made by Greg or James, either.

Thanks Dennis, I just saw the word 'footage' thrown around and was simply wondering is it was some kind of beta release that was re-edited to a 'directors cut' .

 

[doubleohfive]

That, and despite the nature of this thread and who started it, none of the information we've been given or that is out there to further illustrate what's going on is anything that any of us are entitled to know, regardless of how personally we know anyone on P2.

 

[Tom]

That, and despite the nature of this thread and who started it, none of the information we've been given or that is out there to further illustrate what's going on is anything that any of us are entitled to know, regardless of how personally we know anyone on P2.

I tend to agree, my point is that this is an open thread subject to questions from the members of Trekbbs, the thread should be requested to be closed by the OP then, if they dont want any questions. I know that none of us are entitled to any answers on a question that is asked, but we can still ask.

 

[doubleohfive]

That, and despite the nature of this thread and who started it, none of the information we've been given or that is out there to further illustrate what's going on is anything that any of us are entitled to know, regardless of how personally we know anyone on P2.

I tend to agree, my point is that this is an open thread subject to questions from the members of Trekbbs, the thread should be requested to be closed by the OP then, if they dont want any questions. I know that none of us are entitled to any answers on a question that is asked, but we can still ask.

I don't think the thread needs to be closed, per se. I think the people involved (who started this public discussion) should be ready for any question to be posed to them, but anyone reading and asking those questions should be prepared to get the answer you just got.

Just my two cents.

 

[Tom]

That, and despite the nature of this thread and who started it, none of the information we've been given or that is out there to further illustrate what's going on is anything that any of us are entitled to know, regardless of how personally we know anyone on P2.

I tend to agree, my point is that this is an open thread subject to questions from the members of Trekbbs, the thread should be requested to be closed by the OP then, if they dont want any questions. I know that none of us are entitled to any answers on a question that is asked, but we can still ask.

I don't think the thread needs to be closed, per se. I think the people involved (who started this public discussion) should be ready for any question to be posed to them, but anyone reading and asking those questions should be prepared to get the answer you just got.

Just my two cents.

I agree, i already knew of this situation from other sources but had just thought of that question earlier and thought i would just ask here, since i was already on the board. i do hope everything gets resolved peacefully so we can all enjoy the proper release of this episode when it is ready.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

It might as well be closed.

Phase II got the word out, the video was removed, and that was the point of this announcement.

Now everybody's just throwing in their two cents on whether in their personal opinions enough evidence exists to convict someone of something or another.

 

[Maurice]

For what it's worth, I'm done in this topic. Ciao.

 

[Ryan Thomas Riddle]

^Yep. Seems the writing is on the wall for this discussion to degenerate into schoolyard bickering.

 

[Ian Keldon]

Having seen the director's cut, I will say it was not "cobbled together." It may not be what the P2 group had in mind, but it was definitely an enjoyable production. I'm not going to say it was the best fan film ever, but it told a story, it was entertaining, and looked nice. To be honest, I enjoyed it more than I did "The Child."

Fair enough.

But coming in and saying the footage was "stolen"

Let me put it this way: I let you take my car with the understanding that you are going to do some work on it for me. You do the work, but refuse to return the car afterward. Is that not theft? It's my car. I never surrendered legal title to the car, only possession, and only temporarily.

Is not the physical footage legally the property of Cawley and PII? He/they financed the production of it after all.

One person in this thread has used the word "stolen" to characterize the materials, and it wasn't someone associated with Phase II.

Is there any other way to characterize the situation where one person retains the legal property of another and refuses to surrender it upon request?

I'm just trying to understand the situation in a factual manner.