Star Trek Continues, Episode 4 - "The White Iris"

[Karzak]

Re: Star Trek Continues: White Iris

I just saw STC's newest episode and I thought it was very well done. It raises an interesting question: Do you think it is possible to die of a broken heart?

Now I understand some of you also think that STC comments and questions should go in the "fan dome" section. Well I disagree and I would like to take the time to explain why. I have watched many different types of fan Star Trek fiction over the years and when it comes down to it they all share a common factor. I call it "the cheese factor." Now I know what you are thinking and it isn't solely due to bad or cheep special effects. My philosophy of that is special effects can't hurt a good story but they can enhance it. And great special effects can't make a bad story good. I think this is why in the video game industry older games are still popular and flash in the pan games are forgotten not much longer after they release.

My point is this: in every fan fiction created in the TOS universe the problem is the actors. Either they get it completely wrong, or they have a person playing Captain Kirk who does all of the incredibly exaggerated Shatner pauses. (Think of Kevin McDonald's Captain Kirk in National Lampoons Senior Trip [youtube it if you haven't seen it.)

The fact is JJ Abrams Trek is not all that good, but what vic mignogna is doing with STC is very well made. If some of you are poo pooing it because of all the bad fan fiction you should give it a real chance. I think you'll be surprised as I was in how good it was.

I am more interested in hearing what you think about this.

Ok so people seem to be a little obtuse about this so my topic got moved. Not that I am trying to rock the boat here but do we really need to lump into STC with all of the bad ones out there? Read above to see what I am referring to....your thoughts???

You're certainly welcome to your opinion (which, in my opinion, is rather basic), but your premise is flawed. The Abrams' films have done just fine and aren't anywhere near as bad as the detractors would have you believe.

I do think your first question is worth examining (i.e. is it possible to die from a broken heart?) but the rest is just more of the same stuff that gets discussed (at length) in here.

 

[Barbreader]

We really don't know why The White Iris was pulled from You Tube.

The use of screen shots is not likely to be the reason. There are literally thousands of recuts that remain up (even though some are taken down). Recuts: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/214.html

There is a history of removing stories that take pictures and adapt them to a new story by editing, photoshopping, and adding new dialog, e.g., http://enterprises5.yolasite.com/ was removed.

They are MOST likely to object to the use of music from the Star Trek Franchise but which CBS does not own. Although New Voyages/Phase II does this also, Cawley seems to have a special relationship with CBS, and it would, in my opinion, be unwise for anyone else to assume because Cawley is permitted to do it, it's OK for other people.

The worst part is that we may never know why this happened. In March, 2014, CBS had You Tube take down Curt Danhauser's TAS tribute, "And Let The Heavens Fall." He contacted both You Tube and CBS repeatedly. He never got an answer and the film was never restored. I have speculated that the problem might have been that it was the only fan-made production ever made that could easily be confused with a real TAS episode. It looked and sounded like TAS and, in addition, was the same length as a TAS episode. Some speculated at the time that somebody mistook it for a TAS episode. In fact, it was taken down as part of a You Tube sweep which took down many illegal postings of Pro Trek episodes.

I hope we find out why The White Iris was removed. Knowing would inform all fan filmmakers, and help keep their productions from earning the ire of CBS legal.

 

[DCR]

Re: Star Trek Continues: White Iris

Ok so people seem to be a little obtuse about this so my topic got moved. Not that I am trying to rock the boat here but do we really need to lump into STC with all of the bad ones out there? Read above to see what I am referring to....your thoughts???

STC is good, even very good, but I wouldn't call it uniquely good, so I have to think that it belongs with the other fan films in this category.

Since "Pilgrim of Eternity" was released, we've seen major TOS-era releases from PII/NV, Exeter, and Farragut, as well as the three subsequent releases from STC. It also looks like we can expect both "The Crossing," and "The Holiest Thing" before the year is out. I for one, am looking forward to both those endeavors just as much as I did to "The White Iris," and as I am to the upcoming Ep.5 of STC.

We also have Renegades, Horizon, and Axanar to look forward to as well, and a huge number of other productions.

Sure, there are definitely production tiers among fan films, and STC is in the highest tier, but it's a huge, and I think unwarranted, stretch to say it's alone in that tier.

And this is coming from someone who thoroughly enjoyed "The White Iris."

 

[GSchnitzer]

Re: Star Trek Continues: White Iris

I just saw STC's newest episode and I thought it was very well done. It raises an interesting question: Do you think it is possible to die of a broken heart?

Now I understand some of you also think that STC comments and questions should go in the "fan dome" section. Well I disagree and I would like to take the time to explain why. I have watched many different types of fan Star Trek fiction over the years and when it comes down to it they all share a common factor. I call it "the cheese factor." Now I know what you are thinking and it isn't solely due to bad or cheep special effects. My philosophy of that is special effects can't hurt a good story but they can enhance it. And great special effects can't make a bad story good. I think this is why in the video game industry older games are still popular and flash in the pan games are forgotten not much longer after they release.

My point is this: in every fan fiction created in the TOS universe the problem is the actors. Either they get it completely wrong, or they have a person playing Captain Kirk who does all of the incredibly exaggerated Shatner pauses. (Think of Kevin McDonald's Captain Kirk in National Lampoons Senior Trip [youtube it if you haven't seen it.)

The fact is JJ Abrams Trek is not all that good, but what vic mignogna is doing with STC is very well made. If some of you are poo pooing it because of all the bad fan fiction you should give it a real chance. I think you'll be surprised as I was in how good it was.

I am more interested in hearing what you think about this.

Ok so people seem to be a little obtuse about this so my topic got moved. Not that I am trying to rock the boat here but do we really need to lump into STC with all of the bad ones out there? Read above to see what I am referring to....your thoughts???

Yes, we really need to lump STC and the other non-bad ones in with the bad ones. That way we don't need a mechanism to assess if the fan production is "good enough" to be lumped in with the *actual* show. And would it be only TOS-era shows that we would lump into the "real show" category? What if a fan series is "really good" that's set in the TNG/DS9/Voy era. Which "actual show" category should be used since they are all contemporaneous?

We'll just call STC a fan series; that way I and others won't have to try and convince you why NV/P2 or Exeter or Farragut should be promoted to the "real show" category. It also saves us from having to decide where to categorize the series if and when the quality slips and they become just as crappy as any more ordinary fan film--or if people decide that Vic's Kirk had just too many exaggerated Shatner pauses.

 

[The Transformed Man]

We really don't know why The White Iris was pulled from You Tube.

The use of screen shots is not likely to be the reason. There are literally thousands of recuts that remain up (even though some are taken down). Recuts: http://startrekreviewed.blogspot.com/2009/06/214.html

There is a history of removing stories that take pictures and adapt them to a new story by editing, photoshopping, and adding new dialog, e.g., http://enterprises5.yolasite.com/ was removed.

They are MOST likely to object to the use of music from the Star Trek Franchise but which CBS does not own. Although New Voyages/Phase II does this also, Cawley seems to have a special relationship with CBS, and it would, in my opinion, be unwise for anyone else to assume because Cawley is permitted to do it, it's OK for other people.

The worst part is that we may never know why this happened. In March, 2014, CBS had You Tube take down Curt Danhauser's TAS tribute, "And Let The Heavens Fall." He contacted both You Tube and CBS repeatedly. He never got an answer and the film was never restored. I have speculated that the problem might have been that it was the only fan-made production ever made that could easily be confused with a real TAS episode. It looked and sounded like TAS and, in addition, was the same length as a TAS episode. Some speculated at the time that somebody mistook it for a TAS episode. In fact, it was taken down as part of a You Tube sweep which took down many illegal postings of Pro Trek episodes.

I hope we find out why The White Iris was removed. Knowing would inform all fan filmmakers, and help keep their productions from earning the ire of CBS legal.

Yeah, that was my thought too. If the Miramanee lodge sequences was the issue then hundreds of fan tribute videos using footage from the TV shows and movies would be subject to the same rules.

This just sounds like one of those oddball automated Youtube copyright decisions. I had a video I produced eons ago for my church which used catalog music I had the rights for, but because that same bit of music was used in an episode of Spongebob Squarepants my video was taken down for a copyright violation. It took a full year and a half to get the issue resolved after a sending countless emails for an answer.

 

[Barbreader]

Re: Star Trek Continues: White Iris

I just saw STC's newest episode and I thought it was very well done. It raises an interesting question: Do you think it is possible to die of a broken heart?

Now I understand some of you also think that STC comments and questions should go in the "fan dome" section. Well I disagree and I would like to take the time to explain why. I have watched many different types of fan Star Trek fiction over the years and when it comes down to it they all share a common factor. I call it "the cheese factor." Now I know what you are thinking and it isn't solely due to bad or cheep special effects. My philosophy of that is special effects can't hurt a good story but they can enhance it. And great special effects can't make a bad story good. I think this is why in the video game industry older games are still popular and flash in the pan games are forgotten not much longer after they release.

My point is this: in every fan fiction created in the TOS universe the problem is the actors. Either they get it completely wrong, or they have a person playing Captain Kirk who does all of the incredibly exaggerated Shatner pauses. (Think of Kevin McDonald's Captain Kirk in National Lampoons Senior Trip [youtube it if you haven't seen it.)

The fact is JJ Abrams Trek is not all that good, but what vic mignogna is doing with STC is very well made. If some of you are poo pooing it because of all the bad fan fiction you should give it a real chance. I think you'll be surprised as I was in how good it was.

I am more interested in hearing what you think about this.

Ok so people seem to be a little obtuse about this so my topic got moved. Not that I am trying to rock the boat here but do we really need to lump into STC with all of the bad ones out there? Read above to see what I am referring to....your thoughts???

I have been following Star Trek Fan Films for six years, which by the standards of this board, makes me a newbie.

No, we are not 'obtuse.' We are experienced.

As it is, CBS has had The White Iris taken down from You Tube. I was raked across the coals here for stating inarticulately that STC comes across like a professional production. I was trying to say the way they promote themselves and the quality of their work was professional. I was not trying to suggest they were making money off it. However, fear raced across the internet because an old lady who makes an index to help people find these things (with zero filmmaking ability and a 55-year-old turtle for a companion) used the words professional with regards to STC, and judging from the takedown of The White Irs, rightly so.

The worst thing we could do to ANY fan production is suggest that it in any way competitive with a professional production. That invites CBS to take it down.

So if you love STC, protect it. Call it a fan film and keep it in this forum.

 

[Warped9]

Funny how these things work out. I look at STC's episodes and even with their missteps I find it works for me quite well and feels like a good extension of TOS.

I look at "official" Trek in the form of JJtrek and all I can think is

Indeed I can look at a number of fan productions that impress me enough as more authentic than what is "officially" being cranked out.

 

[Karzak]

Yes, we know.

 

[mos6507]

Youtube copyright enforcement is indiscriminate, inconsistent, and provides about as much due-process as talking to a robot from THX-1138. Unfortunately, you can't look at other videos to figure out what is and isn't allowed because Youtube is rife with flagrant copyright violations which stand uncontested.

I would really love to see more internet traffic shift to Vimeo. Unfortunately, that's not where people hang out, and so hobbyists need to cross their fingers everytime they upload something.

 

[RedShirtGuy797]

Re: Star Trek Continues: White Iris

I completely understand your point and I didn't consider your position previously. But I do want to add that quality work needs to be acknowledged and simply not seen as "fan dome." In my experiences people don't get serious credit if it is considered "fan fiction" a "cover," or whatever other synonyms people use to downplay writing if it is not considered their own. I want people to understand that cbs should not be the only ones to dictate this nor should we simply accept that JJ Abrams is the only person allowed to produce Star Trek. I am pretty sure once star wars gets rolling he is going to sell out. I think there needs to be a way to get star trek away from cbs, because as long as a major network is in charge their will never be another series on tv unless it is in the form of the internet like STC and others. Now it appears cbs doesn't like even that. Why be like that? If cbs doesn't really care about star trek then why block STC on YouTube? Is it just about the money? Because their is no profit being made.

 

[Maurice]

^^^"get star trek away from cbs"? Yeah, good luck with that. Mickey Mouse is still copyrighted and trademarked up the wazoo, and is much older than Star Trek.

 

[Treadwell]

FWIW I think this discussion is off-topic in this thread.

 

[Warped9]

We don't really know why the episode was yanked. It might not even have anything to do with CBS.

In our society one isn't considered "professional" until one is actually paid for their work. By that definition any fan made work cannot be considered professional--no matter how polished it may be--simply because they cannot profit from the work in any monetary way.

That isn't to say they cannot profit from the work in terms of experience and appreciation and even recognition which could lead to other non-related work from which they could profit monetarily.

Speaking as a fan I would prefer they keep a somewhat low profile so as not to piss off those who in fact own the legal rights to the property. And in holding the rights to the property CBS does get to dictate what can and cannot be done with it.

Now there have been some fans expressing the idea of wishing CBS would recognize and even fund STC so it could be broadcast on television. It's a cute dream, but if CBS actually did that (and it will never happen) it's very likely they would make/demand changes wherein STC could lose much of what we find appealing in it.

The simple fact is while we can really enjoy STC as is it's something that would never fly on contemporary television. And CBS would also more likely just make their own series rather than contract it out to a bunch of fans.

 

[Karzak]

Re: Star Trek Continues: White Iris

I completely understand your point and I didn't consider your position previously.

That much was obvious.

But I do want to add that quality work needs to be acknowledged and simply not seen as "fan dome."

I can agree with this.

In my experiences people don't get serious credit if it is considered "fan fiction" a "cover," or whatever other synonyms people use to downplay writing if it is not considered their own.

Exactly what do you consider "credit?" Seems like the people at STC are getting plenty of it.

I want people to understand that cbs should not be the only ones to dictate this

Yes, they should. They own STAR TREK. These fan films only exist there but for the grace of CBS.

nor should we simply accept that JJ Abrams is the only person allowed to produce Star Trek.

Currently, he is not. Justin Lin will be directing STAR TREK BEYOND.

I am pretty sure once star wars gets rolling he is going to sell out.

Supposition.

I think there needs to be a way to get star trek away from cbs, because as long as a major network is in charge their will never be another series on tv unless it is in the form of the internet like STC and others.

Good luck with that.

Now it appears cbs doesn't like even that. Why be like that?

Here's a wild guess: It's because they own STAR TREK and we don't.

 

[E-DUB]

I think that the world would be a better place if trademark, copyright, and for that matter patent, law had a "use it or lose it" clause. No sitting on properties or cool inventions. No more "pay to slay".

 

[Maurice]

You know what happens when you have "use it or lose it" clauses? You get bad movies and TV shows made just to maintain the rights. This is why that awful 1990s Fantastic Four film was made.

While I do think Copyright extensions have become ridiculous (nothing should be Copyrighted for a fucking century), I don't think "use it or lose it" clauses would actually help.

 

[James Kerwin]

Hey all, please stand by for a statement from STC and our executive producer.

In the meantime, I HIGHLY recommend ignoring gossip, rumors, and fabrications about what happened. Believe me, the speculators are batting .000 on this one.

So just hang on and chill. Drink a beer. Watch the ep on Vimeo for now if you want to see it. It's all good.

 

[Maurice]

"I'm here to announce an upcoming announcement."

 

[The Transformed Man]

On a related, yet simultaneously unrelated note, the film rights for Bond are up following the release of SPECTRE. Let the bidding war commence!

 

[James Kerwin]

"I am pleased to report that, contrary to speculation, STC episode IV was not deliberately pulled by anyone at CBS. Several members of our production have regular contact with CBS Licensing, and I spoke personally with a V.P. of CBS legal over the past couple days. She's assured us that the takedown was not intentional, and YouTube has been instructed to reinstate the episode immediately. We have enormous respect and gratitude to CBS for their help in resolving this matter.

Live long and prosper!"

Vic Mignogna
Exec Producer, Star Trek Continues