I help Curt with that site, and the footage I had transferred was from the collector...4 minutes of Shatner in the trench.
ST:TMP - How Much of the Memory Wall Sequence Was Really Filmed?
- Thread starter FalTorPan
- Start date
I help Curt with that site, and the footage I had transferred was from the collector...4 minutes of Shatner in the trench.
Alchemist,
That's great news! I hope we get to see it at some point soon...it's been at least a couple of years since I discussed this footage with Curt.
Trevian,
I think a lot of us would like to see that book published (particularly in a coffee-table book format with lots of unseen photography/artwork included). But, I think you're right in that Pocket Books would have to be the publisher.
I get the feeling there was a kind of blackout on any information regarding the work of Abel and Associates on the film. That's one reason I wanted to dig deeper and try to expose the Abel point of view with regard to their work on the film. That, and, in part because I know and love the work of the firm. Robert Abel was an unsung hero of the visual effects industry and LOTS of talented artists, effects people, and directors who work in the industry today came from out of RAA. So, I never subscribed to the idea that this was a team of "ne're-do-well hacks".
I would like to see a book published on just their tenure on the film, but as you can see, Pederson doesn't seem interested in discussing it -- or has been "silenced". Pederson was/is indeed a talented guy. He worked on 2001: A Space Odyssey as well.
I think the Star Trek: The Magazine ST:TMP issue -- that I contributed to, BTW -- is as close as we're likely to get to that book we'd all like to see.
That's great news! I hope we get to see it at some point soon...it's been at least a couple of years since I discussed this footage with Curt.
Trevian,
I think a lot of us would like to see that book published (particularly in a coffee-table book format with lots of unseen photography/artwork included). But, I think you're right in that Pocket Books would have to be the publisher.
I get the feeling there was a kind of blackout on any information regarding the work of Abel and Associates on the film. That's one reason I wanted to dig deeper and try to expose the Abel point of view with regard to their work on the film. That, and, in part because I know and love the work of the firm. Robert Abel was an unsung hero of the visual effects industry and LOTS of talented artists, effects people, and directors who work in the industry today came from out of RAA. So, I never subscribed to the idea that this was a team of "ne're-do-well hacks".
I would like to see a book published on just their tenure on the film, but as you can see, Pederson doesn't seem interested in discussing it -- or has been "silenced". Pederson was/is indeed a talented guy. He worked on 2001: A Space Odyssey as well.
I think the Star Trek: The Magazine ST:TMP issue -- that I contributed to, BTW -- is as close as we're likely to get to that book we'd all like to see.
I would love to see that book get made. I'd pay what ever it took to get it too.
I don't ever underestimate the ability of driven trek fans. "There are always... possibilities."
I don't ever underestimate the ability of driven trek fans. "There are always... possibilities."
I don't get why people assume Pocket would have to be involved in a book about TMP, especially if the proposed book were a non-fiction one about the making of 29 year old movie. You just can't necesssarily use "Star Trek The Motion Picture" in the title because of the registered trademark. The book about the making of "The Bonfire of the Vanities", "The Devil's Candy" wasn't published by Warner Bros., who no doubt would've preferred it not be released.
Please elucidate.
Please elucidate.
Last edited:
The 'fly in the ointment" is this little thing called "licensing".
Pocket Books is the (only?) publishing company licensed to publish Star Trek books...at least the most predominant one.
Reporting on a subject doesn't fall under licensing, but if you want to use the registered trademarks, then it does, otherwise lots of books on film and television could never have been published.
QuasarVM is correct here - Pocket Books (Simon and Schuster) has the license. It would be exceedingly difficult to publish a Trek book of any kind and not use registered trademarks and images.
A BOOK is not merely a "report on a subject".
I am 99% sure Paramount gave the exclusive license for books to Pocket Books as that was -- still? -- part of a conglomerate that Paramount and publisher Simon and Shuster was part of.
I am not sure of the arrangement now that CBS (From what I understand, CBS controls Trek TV and Paramount, the films -- anyone in the know can correct me if I am wrong) is part of the group, but I would bet my last doughnut that there is a similar exclusive licensing arrangement.
Different players perhaps...but a similar licensing agreement. It's not like any "average Joe" can go out and publish a Star Trek book.
They'd likely get the pants (or skirt) sued off them if they did.
I don't know how old you are -- but that's indisputable. While, I do not pretend to know all the "ins and outs" and details of such things, I at least understand licensing agreements are a reality.
I guess if it behooved them, they could always extend the licensing agreement to another publisher, but since there's a kind of "licensing nepotism" going on (or at least there was), I don't see why they would change it.
I know it's not idealistic...but that's the way it is...
This is why when you go to a convention you only see a bunch of "officially licensed" products. Back in the 70's when I started going -- that wasn't the case. Back then, there were all kinds of publishers printing things and selling them at conventions. And other Trek-related stuff as well.
After Star Trek:TMP, all that changed. Paramount finally recognized the cash cow and began to clamp down on all those "independent" producers of Trek related items for sale.
Anyway, let's get back on topic. I suppose we could create a "licensing" thread if anyone is so-inclined...but I came here to discuss ST:TMP...
PS:Thanks for backing me up, Alchemist...mind if I call you "Al"? LOL!
Last edited:
CBS Consumer Products controls liscensing for CBS Paramount.
Yep.
Remember in the old days when it was easy to publish a non-fiction Trek book? James Van Hise, anyone?
You're welcome! And feel free to call me Al (or Dave, as my friends do).
Cool, Dave!
Yep...didn't Van Hise write for Enterprise Incidents too? I've still got several issues of that around...
I hated to see those days end, but I certainly understand why they would move to licensing from a business standpoint. But even back then, we had Bantam (publishing the James Blish novels) and Ballantine (publishing the "Making of", "World of", and "Tribbles" books) as the "licensed" publishers of Trek books.
Anyway, Dave...you must be an "old time covention goer" like me...?
Those were the days...
trevanian
Rear Admiral
There is a LEGAL precedent (invoked on title pages) for those unauthorized things, but I think highpowered lawyers override that in the 90s to get some trek books banned an scare publishers away(sort of like how the Bond people were able to squash Kevin McClory's efforts to make his Bond films despite owning all rights to SPECTRE from 1976 on.)
A heavy duty film book publisher like McFarland could do it if they were so inclined. I'd love to work for 'em, too. But you'd still have the problem of too many people already dead, and others still frightened to talk. Though it'd be great to get Katzen
berg (apparently he was very honest on his DVD DE chat, so much so that they delayed release awhile to edit out all his comments.)
A heavy duty film book publisher like McFarland could do it if they were so inclined. I'd love to work for 'em, too. But you'd still have the problem of too many people already dead, and others still frightened to talk. Though it'd be great to get Katzen
berg (apparently he was very honest on his DVD DE chat, so much so that they delayed release awhile to edit out all his comments.)
Obviously, Robert Abel has passed on but most/all of the main players are still alive with regard to the early work on TMP's effects. Ed Verreaux http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0894835/) was one of the guys who worked at Abel during the time they were working on TMP. Andy Probert might be willing to divulge some information. He's a nice guy, but I found it difficult to pin him down long enough to get a detailed coherent account of his recollections of those days. Maybe someone else would have better luck. He's been interviewed a lot, but not so much about this specific period -- mostly the period after the transition to Trumbull and Apogee (John Dykstra's old company). John Hughes of Rhythym and Hues is another person who came out of Abel (not sure the extent -- if any -- of his work on ST:TMP)...BTW, Con Pederson was working there at last check (Scooby Doo 2: Monsters Unleashed)...
Illustrator David Negron, Sr. might make for an interesting interview as I believe he did many of the pre-production paintings that are out on the Forgotten Trek site.
You're right about some people being unwilling to talk about it. As I pointed out earlier, Pederson is one of those people...for whatever reason. I respect his privacy, but if anyone could get him to open up on it that would be a MAJOR coup, in my opinion. Now that Abel has passed away, Pederson is the person with the most seniority that worked on ST:TMP of the Abel team. He was the visual effects supervisor.
Of course, now we are going to be fighting time/memory. How much can one truly remember from a job that took place thirty years ago?
One of the things I ran into when interviewing Taylor and Andy Probert was that there was this difference of opinion of who actually did what...and stories sometimes not aligning. I don't think this was malicious in any sort of way...I think it's attributable to so much time having passed and people's memories getting fuzzy.
I've always been more interested in the Abel team story than that of Trumbull and Dykstra...only because I think that was covered so well in Cinefex and other sources. I'm not sure there's much to add to the "official story".
Last edited:
There's a difference between reporting on something and violating Copyrights and Trademarks. There many many examples of books written about films and the making of films that do not have the sanction of the companies and individuals that own the film. I previously cited the 1991 book "The Devil's Candy: The Anatomy of a Hollywood Fiasco", which laid bare the making of "The Bonfire of the Vanities", a book that Warner Bros. wouldn't have wanted published, but was published, and was printed several times. How about Richard Schickel's "The Disney Version"? You think Disney wanted that printed?
Production companies don't own the personal stories of people who work on their productions. Since that's what any book about the making of TMP would be, there's nothing they could do to stop it. The only place it gets dicey is if you start reproducing material they do own under copyright (images, titles, etc.).
Production companies don't own the personal stories of people who work on their productions. Since that's what any book about the making of TMP would be, there's nothing they could do to stop it. The only place it gets dicey is if you start reproducing material they do own under copyright (images, titles, etc.).
What you're talking about here is the application of the fair use doctrine of copyright law: http://www.copyright.gov/title17/92chap1.html#107
"Fair use" gives individuals the right to use copyrighted work for the purposes of criticism, reporting, news, teaching, etc.
Indeed, fair use doctrine does protect many literary works such as critical reviews. However, the problem is that if the holder of the copyrighted material wants to challenge the fair use of it in the new (perhaps transformative) work, then they can drag the author and publisher into court to make them defend themselves. It is this potential court challenge that makes most authors and publishers run away from using copyrighted material. Mind you, it's not that the authors fear that they may lose, its just that they fear that they may go bankrupt defending themselves, especially if the plaintiff is a very large corporation.
Right on, Dave...
trevanian
Rear Admiral
As I think I mentioned earlier, TMP's BTS is something of a longterm obsession for me, so whenever I interview somebody who did work on it, I make a point of bringing it up, just to see if there is anything new or different. I talked to Ed Verreaux about CONTACT and MISSION TO MARS and Marty Kline about STUART LITTLE and got them to remember a bit about TMP, but nothing that was new; same with one or two of the kids -- kids, they have to be older than me by a lil bit! -- who founded DreamQuest after working on TMP. I've interviewed Dykstra a couple times, about LITTLE and STAR WARS, and each time I've prompted him on TMP. All I really got was an analogy, which went something like this (have the document somewhere on a floppy, not sure where):
Bob Abel had the same kind of leap of faith on TMP that we had with motion control on STAR WARS. It was the idea that you could previsualize everything to such a degree you'd have total control over the frame. Essentially he was trying to do what came along much later with TOY STORY, but in a time when there weren't systems to do that kind of thing. You can fault him for failing, but if nobody tries to do these impossible things, they might not ever get done by anyone else either.
(I actually think that is pretty close to the actual quote, now that I reread it.)
Heh! DreamQuest...now that's a name I have not heard in a very long time. They did some great work!
Do you write for a magazine -- or do you have a site with all these interviews on it?
That's a very nice thing for Mr. Dykstra to say! And very true as well. With Star Wars, Dykstra had Lucas behind him on trying all the new and groundbreaking stuff.
Unfortunately, the Abel team (from all/most accounts) didn't have that kind of support. As Taylor said, there was no "Lucas" behind him on Star Trek. ST:TMP was run by committee really. Roddenberry wasn't the Lucas type...and I really wonder, looking back on it, how much control Roddenberry had at that time as well.
Looked like a case of "too many chefs in the kitchen" to me.
Let's face it -- the production of ST:TMP was a mess! I think a lot of people were getting mixed signals because Paramount didn't have a clue as to what they were trying to do -- except capitalize on the success of Star Wars and Close Encounters.
Just look at how long it took for ANY new Trek to get made over the time they started planning it. Low budget movie...TV movie...TV series...then, TMP. Clearly they had no clue as to what they were doing.
And really...why was it so difficult to come up with a decent storyline? The V'Ger plot was taken from an old story outline for an episode of Genesis II! They were using that for "In Thy Image" the pilot episode for Star Trek Phase II! Then they just turned that into a feature!
That's pretty lazy to me. I remember reading all the back and forths during the 70's about all the writers they had trying to come up with a good plot. I was like, "Jesus H. Christ! It's Star Trek! There's a MILLION things you could do!". I never got it. Following the whole process back then was maddening.
Anyway, with regard to RAA: Bob Abel was vindicated later...he and Bernie Kovacs were two of the pioneers of CGI effects. But, I think Dykstra is correct: RAA tried to do things that were very advanced...perhaps TOO advanced for the time.
They didn't have the technology or the time to get accomplished what they were trying to do within the alotted timeframe.
I think that's what it really comes down to.
Oh..BTW...I am in discussions to secure a new interview with another source (possibly two). Wish me luck...;-)
Last edited:
GodThingFormerly
A Different Kind of Asshole
^ Gene Roddenberry wanted to use his The God Thing screenplay to reincarnate Star Trek for the 1970s. It was Paramount's Michael Eisner who demanded that In Thy Image be retooled from the Phase II television pilot into a feature film after the success of CE3K.
TGT
TGT
Similar threads
