• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

ST Phase 2: MIND-SIFTER

I notice that neither Sondra Marshak and Myrna Culbreath's names (who wrote the version of the story your writer's adapted) or David Reddish's name (who wrote the final version of the script, adding tons of story elements that weren't there before) are on the poster. I'm imagining that I can look forward to seeing them acknowledged in the credits though? As a writer it's kinda a pet peeve of mine...lots of hard work there that should be acknowledged.
http://www.amazon.com/The-New-Voyages-Star-Trek/dp/0553246364#customerReviews
 
Following up on that... here's a discussion worth having. How DO fanfims handle attribution for writers? I know the WGAw guidelines for the number of writers who can be credited on a screenplay/teleplay, but fan productions aren't beholden to that, so how are the credits determined, and what guidelines do people follow, if any?

Here's how a number of fanfilms have done it in some (not all) of their segments, and how they compare to what you'd see on TV.

Farragut has credited writers with "Story & Screenplay by", but on TV that would be simply "written by". You only credit both Story and Screenplay when the story originated with one writer or writing team and script was written or heavily rewritten by others. One of their vignettes features a "story concept by" credit instead of "story by", and another has the credit "screenplay by" without an associated "story by", both of which are not standard.

In Continues's "Pilgrim of Eternity" and "Lolani" they use "written by" instead of "teleplay by" on scripts which also have "story by" credits, but they get it WGA correct for "Fairest of Them All" with "story by" and "teleplay by" credits. The credits for their "Turn About Intruder" vignette are very nonstandard: "original teleplay by" and "extended script by" credits.

Phase II's "Kitumba" used a "based on a story by" instead of "story by", whereas "Enemy Starfleet" has the more standard "story by" attribution, but "The Child" has a really weird combo of "written by" and "teleplay by" which is confusing as heck.

Exeter's "The Savage Empire" has a nonstandard "Written and Directed by" credit, whereas "The Tressaurian Intersection" has WGAw standard credits, with separate "story by" and "teleplay by" credits and correct usage of "and" and "&" to indicate separate writers and writing teams.
 
Last edited:
I posted an update to our Phase II website regarding "Mind-Sifter" (and a bit about "The Holiest Thing." Find it here:

http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/?p=5016
Thanks, Mind-Schnitzer! :techman:

This was a favorite short story of mine as a kid. Looking forward to seeing it.

Well, my blurb doesn't say much more than "we're still go for launch." But I thought people might want to know that things still look good.

This is a reminder that "The Holiest Thing" was looking good for release even up until about an hour before we planned to post the episode. So I say "good for launch" knowing that problems still can crop up.
 
I posted an update to our Phase II website regarding "Mind-Sifter" (and a bit about "The Holiest Thing." Find it here:

http://www.startreknewvoyages.com/?p=5016
Thanks, Mind-Schnitzer! :techman:

This was a favorite short story of mine as a kid. Looking forward to seeing it.

Hey, Bored, I have a question.

Why was it a favorite story of yours? I've heard the "I loved this story" about a zillion times. There were a dozen or so stories in Star Trek: The New Voyages and then a dozen or so more stories in Star Trek: The New Voyages 2. I'm really wondering why this story received so much adoration.
 
I'm looking forward to it. :techman:

Why is Spock wearing a colander on his head?
 
I'm looking forward to it. :techman:

Why is Spock wearing a colander on his head?

That's the Mind Sifter. I found that picture over in the Photoshop thread here on TrekBBS years ago. It was a picture of Spock wearing this colander talking about how dangerous the mind sifter is from "Errand of Mercy:" "It should not be underestimated, Captain. It reaches directly into the mind. We Vulcans have certain mental certain disciplines which enable me to maintain a shield. Without those disciplines, there would be no protection."

I found the juxtaposition pretty funny.
 
Exeter's "The Savage Empire" has a nonstandard "Written and Directed by" credit

Nonstandard by whose standards? I've seen that credit a lot in feature films over the years. Do you mean that it is not approved by the WGA, or no longer approved?

Feature films being the operative word. Most of these fan shows attempt to ape the TV series model, which is why such a credit is "non-standard". I knew I should have made that plain.
 
Hey, Bored, I have a question.

Why was it a favorite story of yours? I've heard the "I loved this story" about a zillion times. There were a dozen or so stories in Star Trek: The New Voyages and then a dozen or so more stories in Star Trek: The New Voyages 2. I'm really wondering why this story received so much adoration.
It's hard to explain. I was probably 11 when I read it. It was just so radically different to see Kirk mentally incapacitated and struggling to relearn his very identity. It evoked a lot of sympathy for him because he was a character who normally was completely in charge and had all his wits about him, and here he was so extremely vulnerable. Total change of pace, and revealing another side of Kirk.

There was also the fact that Kirk had been missing so long that (IIRC) Spock assumed command on a permanent basis and wore command gold... that was kind of cool to visualize. I think I even changed the tunic on my Mego action figure to see how it would look. :lol:

(If I had to pick an absolute favorite from the New Voyages books, though, it would probably be Visit to a Weird Planet Revisited.) :vulcan:
 
(If I had to pick an absolute favorite from the New Voyages books, though, it would probably be Visit to a Weird Planet Revisited.)
That's mine, hands down.
I shouldn't even have qualified it with "probably." :rommie:

We contemplated shooting "Visit to a Weird Planet Revisited." But someone beat us to the "actors try to pull off real TV space adventure" punch. It's called "Galaxy Quest."
 
Greg, how much will it matter to view those two episode out of production order?

There were plenty of TOS episodes that were aired out of their production order and folks survived. I understand that back then stories were more self-contained than today's serial , soap opera style with multiple episode arcs. In the case of "Mind-Sifter," we are setting the episode back during the second season--shortly after the first season's "Errand of Mercy." I think our fans will be able to roll with that slightly odd anachronistic episode punch. (That's one reason why this will be titled a "New Voysges" episode instead of "Phase II.")

I think our use of a refit Enterprise versus a non-refit Enterprise should make clear at which point in the Trek timeline our various episodes takes place. I'm not wild about jumping around like that, but it's my boss's call. His vision of what our fan-based Star Trek should be is otherwise pretty close to my vision, so while it is different from how I would do it, I'm not losing any sleep over it.
 
I'm looking forward to it. :techman:

Why is Spock wearing a colander on his head?
That's the Mind Sifter. I found that picture over in the Photoshop thread here on TrekBBS years ago. It was a picture of Spock wearing this colander talking about how dangerous the mind sifter is from "Errand of Mercy:" "It should not be underestimated, Captain. It reaches directly into the mind. We Vulcans have certain mental certain disciplines which enable me to maintain a shield. Without those disciplines, there would be no protection."

I found the juxtaposition pretty funny.
:lol:

It is, plus I guess a colander would come in handy for preparing meals, considering that Spock is vegetarian.
 
I can only speak for Phase II and Ironsides "while I was involved" here. While I was involved, we TRIED to adhere to the WGA guidelines with the "suggested credits". Greg and I used to have long-winded discussions as to what writing credit was appropriate and accurate. (all suggested credits for P2 were either accepted as is or James made unilateral changes in his role as senior exec based on what he wanted or what others had requested. For instance, Jon Povill and Dave Galanter wrote the "writer credits" for their respective episodes.)

For "Kitumba", for example, I began with the basic story that JML had worked with for his two part "writer's drafts". However, I changed that story to my own story, still using his basic premise. So the "based on a story by" was in line with the WGA guidelines instead of the "story by" because, as I said, a lot of the story was mind, not JMLs.

However, when I wrote "Mind Sifter", I didn't change the story at all - I simply turned it into a screenplay and threw in a few "polishes" that I'd previously discussed with Shirley. (they mostly involved addressing the fact that a Russian with a thick accent was beaming down and running around McCarthy era early 50s USA). So the credits read "Story by".

According to David Gerrold (who was responding to the "how much of Patty's MS changes are in the new MS script" discussion) the current MS script was based on Sondra and Marsha's edited story published in TNV book, not on Shirley's original story, and the screenplay for that was written by Rick Chambers. (Shirley objected to this edited version and wanted her name distanced from it, so I don't know you acknoweldge that. "Based on Sondra and Marsha's edit based on Shirley's original story"? Pretty cumbersome. I'm sure P2 will figure something out. "based on a story by Shirley, Sondra and Marsha"?) According to David Gerrold, that first screenplay was then completely rewritten by David Reddish, removing what David G felt were faults with Shirley''s original story and introducing completely new story elements to it. David G then "did the final polish". David G specifically stated that David Reddish needed to have writing credit on the episode along side Rick Chambers, all of which is what I based my questions/observations on.

Reminder - if it's needed for some reason - I am not part of P2 any longer and don't represent them. I am simply commenting on/answering what we did to figure out writing credits while I was there to provide one answer to the "how do fanfilms figure this out". We did it the same way on Ironsides while I was involved as a producer with that fanfilm. The comments on the current episode's credits are simply using info I was given by the showrunner. I don't know how they'll figure it out and what they'll say in the end. As a writer, though, I've seen too many people not get credit for what they did so I'm a little Sheldon Cooper about proper writing credits....





Following up on that... here's a discussion worth having. How DO fanfims handle attribution for writers? I know the WGAw guidelines for the number of writers who can be credited on a screenplay/teleplay, but fan productions aren't beholden to that, so how are the credits determined, and what guidelines do people follow, if any?

Here's how a number of fanfilms have dome it in some (not all) of their segments, and how they compare to what you'd see on TV.

Farragut has credited writers with "Story & Screenplay by", but on TV that would be simply "written by". You only credit both Story and Screenplay when the story originated with one writer or writing team and script was written or heavily rewritten by others. One of their vignettes features a "story concept by" credit instead of "story by", and another has the credit "screenplay by" without an associated "story by", both of which are not standard.

In Continues's "Pilgrim of Eternity" and "Lolani" they use "written by" instead of "teleplay by" on scripts which also have "story by" credits, but they get it WGA correct for "Fairest of Them All" with "story by" and "teleplay by" credits. The credits for their "Turn About Intruder" vignette are very nonstandard: "original teleplay by" and "extended script by" credits.

Phase II's "Kitumba" used a "based on a story by" instead of "story by", whereas "Enemy Starfleet" has the more standard "story by" attribution, but "The Child" has a really weird combo of "written by" and "teleplay by" which is confusing as heck.

Exeter's "The Savage Empire" has a nonstandard "Written and Directed by" credit, whereas "The Tressaurian Intersection" has WGAw standard credits, with separate "story by" and "teleplay by" credits and correct usage of "and" and "&" to indicate separate writers and writing teams.
 
Exeter's "The Savage Empire" has a nonstandard "Written and Directed by" credit

Nonstandard by whose standards? I've seen that credit a lot in feature films over the years. Do you mean that it is not approved by the WGA, or no longer approved?

Feature films being the operative word. Most of these fan shows attempt to ape the TV series model, which is why such a credit is "non-standard". I knew I should have made that plain.

Thanks.
 
Following up on that... here's a discussion worth having. How DO fanfims handle attribution for writers? I know the WGAw guidelines for the number of writers who can be credited on a screenplay/teleplay, but fan productions aren't beholden to that, so how are the credits determined, and what guidelines do people follow, if any?

Here's how a number of fanfilms have dome it in some (not all) of their segments, and how they compare to what you'd see on TV.

Farragut has credited writers with "Story & Screenplay by", but on TV that would be simply "written by". You only credit both Story and Screenplay when the story originated with one writer or writing team and script was written or heavily rewritten by others. One of their vignettes features a "story concept by" credit instead of "story by", and another has the credit "screenplay by" without an associated "story by", both of which are not standard.

In Continues's "Pilgrim of Eternity" and "Lolani" they use "written by" instead of "teleplay by" on scripts which also have "story by" credits, but they get it WGA correct for "Fairest of Them All" with "story by" and "teleplay by" credits. The credits for their "Turn About Intruder" vignette are very nonstandard: "original teleplay by" and "extended script by" credits.

Phase II's "Kitumba" used a "based on a story by" instead of "story by", whereas "Enemy Starfleet" has the more standard "story by" attribution, but "The Child" has a really weird combo of "written by" and "teleplay by" which is confusing as heck.

Exeter's "The Savage Empire" has a nonstandard "Written and Directed by" credit, whereas "The Tressaurian Intersection" has WGAw standard credits, with separate "story by" and "teleplay by" credits and correct usage of "and" and "&" to indicate separate writers and writing teams.

I'd be interested in hearing Randy Lander's answer to this - as Potempkin has been churning out a lot of episodes and Randy, as a previous print editor, probably has a lot of thoughts on this.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top