BREAKING: Official Fan Film Guidelines Issued

[JD]

It's going to have to be proven.

When I sit back to watch a story unfold in an egaging way I want and need some meat to it. I'm not interested in seeing a collection of unrelated vignettes.

I speak only for myself. The vast majority of fanfilms don't interest me. If the ones that do interest me are castrated and pushed into oblivion then it will take something absolutely amazing to bring me back.

I've seen some five minute short films which have more "meat" on them than some 2 hour movies. All it takes is a talented writer and director who knows how to use their time well.
Just look at the Intrepid short posted up threat.

Maybe fan films could adopt a practice from Doctor Who and tell one story in a total of 30 minutes but have a cliff-hanger at the end of the first 15 minute mark?!

That seems to me like the ideal way to go about it.

At risk of hawking my own crap (sorry), I think this is a pretty good example of a solid short film that fits well within the fifteen minutes. It also didn't cost us $50,000. And we're certainly not the only ones producing films like this.

The guidelines basically mean we can do a lot more of this type of storytelling, and I for one am more than happy with that.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

That was great. I haven't see any of Intrepid stuff before this, but now I might have to.
I'm still a little confused about the whole series thing. Are you guys absolutely sure you're OK to continue with ongoing characters and ships and such?
I would assume that the guidline would mean that you can not have any connections between fan films at all.
So if your first film is about Capt. Smith and the USS XX fighting Klingons in the Alpha Quadrtant, then your next one would have to be about Capt. Doe and the USS YY fighting Romulans in the Beta Quadrant.

 

[Phoenix219]

Wow, it only took one post for someone to prove my point. Ongoing series of parodies = Copyright infringement.

Here's another example of what I'm talking about: http://goodcomics.comicbookresources.com/2012/01/20/comic-book-legends-revealed-350/

One time is okay, an ongoing series is infringement.

From Wiki:

Farrand planned to release a Nitpicker's Guide for Star Wars in April 1999, one month before Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace, but publishers became wary of publishing media tie-in products as a result copyright infringement lawsuits brought against similar products. Although the lawsuits did not name Farrand's Guides as an example — and in fact, even cited the Guides used as an example of what was legal — Del Rey ceased publishing Farrand's Guides, leaving Nitcentral as the sole ongoing outlet for the Guild.


It may have been stopped because the scare of copyright infringement, but the Guides were and have been legal.

 

[USS Intrepid]

My thanks to everyone who took the time to watch. And apologies for the shameless plug.

That was great. I haven't see any of Intrepid stuff before this, but now I might have to.
I'm still a little confused about the whole series thing. Are you guys absolutely sure you're OK to continue with ongoing characters and ships and such?
I would assume that the guidline would mean that you can not have any connections between fan films at all.
So if your first film is about Capt. Smith and the USS XX fighting Klingons in the Alpha Quadrtant, then your next one would have to be about Capt. Doe and the USS YY fighting Romulans in the Beta Quadrant.

This was our most recent effort and I think our strongest. It's certainly the one I have the least problems with.

That's a fair question, and while I think folks are right and it's a little undefined, I'm pretty confident that recurring characters aren't going to be a sticking point. At least as long as we're not trying to market it as a series. So no big story arcs, no cutting a 2 hour movie into eight 15 minute segments, no overall series titles, etc, etc.

I'm equally confident, from John Van Citter's tone, that if doing so does cross a line, we'll simply receive a politely worded request that we desist. I can live with that.

 

[Amaris]

My thanks to everyone who took the time to watch. And apologies for the shameless plug.

This was our most recent effort and I think our strongest. It's certainly the one I have the least problems with.

That's a fair question, and while I think folks are right and it's a little undefined, I'm pretty confident that recurring characters aren't going to be a sticking point. At least as long as we're not trying to market it as a series. So no big story arcs, no cutting a 2 hour movie into eight 15 minute segments, no overall series titles, etc, etc.

I'm equally confident, from John Van Citter's tone, that if doing so does cross a line, we'll simply receive a politely worded request that we desist. I can live with that.

You guys look great on camera.

Just sayin'.

 

[mos6507]

No where does it say you can't reuse characters in the productions.

The rep should explicitly state one way or the other whether a series is acceptable or not. BTW, many fan-films employ arc storytelling where what happens in one episode impacts future episodes. This method works well at the low-budget level because you can publish the story in chunks or chapters. There's nothing inherently nefarious about doing this.

 

[GSchnitzer]

I honestly think that Into Darkness would have been a better movie (and certainly better received) if John Harrison had just been John Harrison....and Khan had still been a Popsicle.

Just a reminder to take discussions of the new Trek movies over to the appropriate thread, not this fan film guideline thread.

Thanks.

 

[Csalem]

My thanks to everyone who took the time to watch. And apologies for the shameless plug.

This was our most recent effort and I think our strongest. It's certainly the one I have the least problems with.

That's a fair question, and while I think folks are right and it's a little undefined, I'm pretty confident that recurring characters aren't going to be a sticking point. At least as long as we're not trying to market it as a series. So no big story arcs, no cutting a 2 hour movie into eight 15 minute segments, no overall series titles, etc, etc.

I'm equally confident, from John Van Citter's tone, that if doing so does cross a line, we'll simply receive a politely worded request that we desist. I can live with that.

I think the series are ok using the same characters as long as the story does not continue on through subsequent episodes. I suppose it is a bit like TOS where same characters appear every week but they never recall the previous stories. Everyone is back at the same point at the end of an episode as they were at the start.

 

[Amaris]

The rep should explicitly state one way or the other whether a series is acceptable or not. BTW, many fan-films employ arc storytelling where what happens in one episode impacts future episodes. This method works well at the low-budget level because you can publish the story in chunks or chapters. There's nothing inherently nefarious about doing this.

No, because when you have strict rules, they become easier to get around. By keeping some things vague, it leaves the discretion up to CBS/P, which is as it should be. JVC already said they won't be coming down hard on every little thing. It will be as it was before, when there weren't huge Kickstarter fund campaigns and bringing in every B and C list actor from every Trek series available.

 

[asurob]

My thanks to everyone who took the time to watch. And apologies for the shameless plug.

This was our most recent effort and I think our strongest. It's certainly the one I have the least problems with.

That's a fair question, and while I think folks are right and it's a little undefined, I'm pretty confident that recurring characters aren't going to be a sticking point. At least as long as we're not trying to market it as a series. So no big story arcs, no cutting a 2 hour movie into eight 15 minute segments, no overall series titles, etc, etc.

I'm equally confident, from John Van Citter's tone, that if doing so does cross a line, we'll simply receive a politely worded request that we desist. I can live with that.

This was pretty much my take from his interview. They aren't going to police things persay or looking to sic the lawyers on everyone...simply want the fan films to return to the hands of "amateurs". I doubt that your production ever hears from them accept maybe an attaboy.

 

[Noname Given]

At risk of hawking my own crap (sorry), I think this is a pretty good example of a solid short film that fits well within the fifteen minutes. It also didn't cost us $50,000. And we're certainly not the only ones producing films like this.

The guidelines basically mean we can do a lot more of this type of storytelling, and I for one am more than happy with that.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

^^^
Very nice and well done. Had the TNG era shown more characters like these, I'd probably have enjoyed TNG more. I agree with others who've said this is one of your group's best yet - all around.

 

[USS Intrepid]

You guys look great on camera.

Just sayin'.

Thanks.

^^^
Very nice and well done. Had the TNG era shown more characters like these, I'd probably have enjoyed TNG more. I agree with others who've said this is one of your group's best yet - all around.

And again, thank you. That's very kind of you to say.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

And according to the guidelines, the most recent Potemkin will be the last.

Not hardly, sir. We should have another Star Trek fan production released relatively soon. We've been filming all along.

I don't understand

I suggest that mos6507 was interpreting the guidelines in a way that I do not.

 

[Navigator_NCC2120]

George Carlin was right, it's all bullshit. If someone watched a Star Trek fan film and complains to CBS and/or Paramount about it then CBS/Paramount should tell this person/persons to go fuck themselves!

 

[JonnyQuest037]

It may have been stopped because the scare of copyright infringement, but the Guides were and have been legal.

I was never at any point talking about the Nitpicker's Guides. I was talking about direct parodies.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

We should have another Star Trek fan production released relatively soon. We've been filming all along.

Here you are, one of the leaders in successfully adapting to and thriving in this week old new world of making fan films, dispelling the gloom and doom reporting of such as this hub cap guy who writes on or before June 26, 2016:
"however we got here, the fact is, we are here and most people are spitting mad about these guidelines."

<sigh> This seemingly unending proclivity of people to deem themselves The Voice Of The People wrapped in the mantle of My Thoughts Are Your Thoughts, My Opinion Is Your Opinion.

"The lawsuit has yet to be settled, but here we have a set of guidelines that not only make filming Axanar impossible, but pretty much shuts down nearly every fan production out there short of Project Potemkin (and even then, Potemkin couldn't continue in a series format).

And here you are, Potemkin, you and Intrepid leading the way in successfully adapting to and thriving within, as this guy called them, a "set of guidelines that ... pretty much shuts down nearly every fan production out there".


Since you are personally cited, Potemkin, stretch your out hand & drop the mic because you, Sir, just Owned this hubcap guy.

 

[Potemkin_Prod]

I just feel we're not the productions they're looking for.

 

[ThankYouGeneR]

A forward thinking fan film maker... and a gentleman.

Nice.

 

[Sgt_G]

During a conversation earlier today, I was reminded of something we used to say back when I played Dungeons and Dragons: "It's called the DM Guide, not the DM's Bible." The CBS guidelines are just that -- guidelines. They aren't rules with automatic punitive action for the first tiny little violation. I'm pretty sure that if you make a good-faith effort to follow them, CBS won't care in the least.

 

[Solarbaby]

Star Trek: Absolution [yt]

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

[/yt] is an animated series with a 2 x 40 mins pilot. I have written a long running full circle story arc over 50 episodes. Therefore film is a no go. However as audio dramas are exempt from the guidelines it may be a way to tell the story.
I invested a massive amount of time in developing the theme and have written 20 episodes. I am just wondering if it was changed to an audio drama on youtube would it be ok to insert links to artwork to accompany it? Or would this make it a film? Is it still in the spirit of the guidelines?
I also spent a lot of time creating 3D models and sets and characters for upcoming episodes. It would be a waste to not have them shown in context with the story; however I don't want to overstep the mark.

I listened to the podcast and it became clear that CBS are offering us an amazing and unique mechanism to make films. They do want to see fan films.

 

[USS Intrepid]

I just feel we're not the productions they're looking for.

We're not. As long as we play nice. And I think that's more than fair.