They're just being clear so that people can evaluate the information. Which I for one appreciate.
Paramount+ 60th Anniversary Intro
- Thread starter Tallguy
- Start date
For me, this was a great representation of where Star Trek was and where it is now, even thiugh it didn't have anything from Prodigy and Lower Decks.
I wonder, if there were still animated shows in production, would they have a different version of this? IE, it starts with the Enterprise rendered Filmation style from TAS, then becomes the Cerritos, then the Protostar?
I wonder that, too. It would be great to see.
Jesus, no.
While I’d have liked to have Legacy (but have no problem with SFA, nor do I see it as a competition), making “the show people want them to spend on” can be a terrible idea.
Not always — SNW was something people wanted, and it did turn out pretty well. But a lot of the time, “the show people want” may be the equivalent of all those fan videos about Starfleet ships beating up Klingon ones (with comments sections full of “This is real Star Trek!”). You don’t want to make creative decisions on that basis, I think, unless it’s also the show the creators and producers (both) want to have money spent on. Pretty sure that’s what really happened with SNW.
(With Legacy the creators wanted it and a lot of viewers wanted it, but presumably the producers had economic or other reasons for not wanting it. C”est la vie.)
Not that I dispute Marc's claim, but how is he able to prove those are his models?
I'd say by looking at the grooves on the aft nacelle caps of his model and the model in the intro? (And he might have recognized some other tells?)
Those are not exactly like the 11 foot model. And they match what's in the intro.
Well, BOOO!
Can you make and release models of a copyright and possibly trademarked ship?
Sure. And Paramount can do what they want. You play in their pool, they can take your toys.
It's just not polite.
Perhaps Ralston and his associates needed lessons on capturing great angles of miniatures. They should've started by watching TOS with some of the greatest beauty / dramatic miniature shots ever captured on film. If there was a problem with the 1701, it was ILM's alone.
While a TAS-rendered 1701 would've been great, the TOS version technically represented it well enough.
Indeed. They don’t need to ask permission.
Would it be cool if the artists got compensated for their work? Sure.
Would it be the decent, bare minimum, thing to do to cite credit to the artist for making something that was used on-screen? Absolutely.
Are any of these things required for Paramount to do at the end of the day? Not even remotely. Sad but true…
Last edited:
I'd have far more sympathy if he hadn't used the word "licensed". Were his models licensed from paramount? Did he get permission from them? Did he even talk to them officially?
If he was disgruntled they hadn't put a "thanks" in the credits or contacted him to tell him they were using them then sure, have at it, but to me looks like he wants to monetize a property that isn't his.
If he was disgruntled they hadn't put a "thanks" in the credits or contacted him to tell him they were using them then sure, have at it, but to me looks like he wants to monetize a property that isn't his.
It's that someone else got his work for free and THEY got paid for it. He has no expectation to be paid. But someone did get paid. Lucky them?
Paramount as such are probably not the jerks here. It's whatever FX house or even an individual artist decided "Hey! This model is already DONE! Win!"
More words from Marc Bell on Instagram:
Looks like someone over att Paramount has some explaining to do.
"I originally released these models for free for non-commercial fan use only, with explicit notes prohibiting commercial usage or redistribution. I never licensed or sold them to Paramount or to the vendor who produced the ident."
Once again with the "I've stolen something and someone took it back and didn't pay me".
Once again with the "I've stolen something and someone took it back and didn't pay me".
