Star Trek New Voyages in The New York Times

[Treadwell]

The merits or lack thereof of the post in question aside, STC has better things to do than to dispatch trolls. STC lets the work stand for itself, and bashing other productions is not its modus operandi. The audience can decide what production is better, if indeed such a decision must be made at all.

That member's claims are his own.

 

[USS Intrepid]

Folks, just for once it would be really nice if one of these threads didn't turn into another bitchfest. Can we not just congratulate the New Voyages team on some nice coverage and leave it at that? Let those with personal agendas and grudges stew in their own juice.

I, for one, am thrilled to see New Voyages get this coverage. Congrats to you all.

 

[GSchnitzer]

...Apparently, they Googled "Star Trek fan films" and New Voyages was the first to pop up. The mistake wasn't noticed until final editing, but they decided to run it because it was a local story.

I don't know why no one thought to simply confirm this.

Googling "Star Trek fan films" yields, in order:

1. An alphabetical list of Star Trek fan films in Wikipedia
2. The "top five Star Trek fan films on YouTube"at the "whatculture.com" website with WEAT being the fifth title on the list
3. STC's website
4. ST NV/P2's website

So the idea that a review of ST NV/P2 by the New York Times was a mistake simply because ST NV/P2 ranks higher than STC in the aforementioned Google search and the editor erroneously assumed that this higher ranking must be reflecting the fan film getting "all the hype" would seem to be a bogus claim.

If there is some reason for the Times doing an article about ST NV/P2 other than the merits of that production (like the Times "meant" to do it about STC), this Google result explanation doesn't seem to hold water.

 

[ihno]

Oh, I wrote a longer post, which got lost (by my own fault - too many open windows and closed the wrong one). What a pity, it was a very good one, full of philosophical stuff.

Anyway, congrats to the article. This is great publicity and I hope it will give you lots of feedback!

My all time fave "episode" of Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II is 1701 Pennsylvania Av.

I was just checking on youtube for the title and have opened Kitumba, which I have watched a while ago - I notice Andrew Probert this time. Oh, that is soo nice!

One question though: So New Voyages becomes or became Phase II - will the new ship/design for Phase II be included? (only the outside of course).

 

[GSchnitzer]

Oh, I wrote a longer post, which got lost (by my own fault - too many open windows and closed the wrong one). What a pity, it was a very good one, full of philosophical stuff.

Anyway, congrats to the article. This is great publicity and I hope it will give you lots of feedback!

My all time fave "episode" of Star Trek New Voyages/Phase II is 1701 Pennsylvania Av.

I was just checking on youtube for the title and have opened Kitumba, which I have watched a while ago - I notice Andrew Probert this time. Oh, that is soo nice!

One question though: So New Voyages becomes or became Phase II - will the new ship/design for Phase II be included?

The Enterprise CGI model we used for the yet-to-he released "Bread and Savagery" and "The Holiest Thing" and "Torment of Destiny" all use the "Phase II" design: new warp engines, photon torpedo tube on the interconnecting dorsal, but no other real changes from the TOS Enterprise.

 

[Barbreader]

If you google "Star Trek Fan Film hype," the top five are:

Axanar
Axanar
"Star Trek Beyond" creator makes pitch
Star Trek Continues
Fan discussion about Star Trek Into Darkness.

=> No New Voyages.

The next five are:

Renegades
Fan Thoughts about JJ Abrams
Fans hype Shatner for ST3
Hype for Into Darkness in Overdrive
Renegades.

Still no New Voyages. In fact, I don't see New Voyages in the next 10 either. If you get to the 4th page, the 33rd listing links to a BB discussion of fan films, which does mention New Voyages if you scroll down.

So, throwing in the word, "hype" into a google search doesn't work, either.

And the fan film series with all the 'hype' is either Axanar or Renegades.

Which makes sense. No one would mistake the 10 years of solid production by New Voyages for mere "hype."

 

[ihno]

@GSchnitzler: Thank you, I see. So you have some old and some parts that were meant to become Phase II.

As for this: "The editor meant STC"-thing, I would not give that too much attention.

People outside the (fanfilm including) fandom can't tell Phase II and STC apart. So such an error would be possible. But that's still the same reason why this story is totally implausible. 1. There is no hype and 2. therefore the editor would most likely not ask for a specific fangroup. Why should he do that?

A reporter simply visiting an event after he saw a release and see an interesting entertaining story here is the most normal thing.

It's not difficult to choose what to believe.

 

[wtriker1701]

@Greg and Barb and Kevin James:
"Google it" is, sorry to say, no proof - in either direction.
Google is placing cookies, Google "searches" with each of its "Googlers" profiles. Please bear this in mind. Google uses your own preferences to sort results. So I wouldn't call any of your findings "proof".

And to be blunt: I love the article about NV! Congratulations to James, Greg et al. You've worked hard for this and it has been acknowledged.

And to be further blunt: Everything Nick said in his first paragraph!

Keep the dream alive, Guys and Gals! You all did well, so far!

 

[Jedman67]

@GSchnitzler: Thank you, I see. So you have some old and some parts that were meant to become Phase II.

As for this: "The editor meant STC"-thing, I would not give that too much attention.

People outside the (fanfilm including) fandom can't tell Phase II and STC apart. So such an error would be possible. But that's still the same reason why this story is totally implausible. 1. There is no hype and 2. therefore the editor would most likely not ask for a specific fangroup. Why should he do that?

A reporter simply visiting an event after he saw a release and see an interesting entertaining story here is the most normal thing.

It's not difficult to choose what to believe.

It didn't make sense. I have my own reasons for disliking the NYT, but they wouldn't publish an article based on a google search. Without bothering to verify James version myself, his version simply makes more sense. The editor may not have cared which Star Trek fanfilm was covered (to most people its all the same anyway) but once the topic was chosen they wouldn't make such a careless mistake.
Best simply not to feed the trolls...

 

[DCR]

Yeah, even if James wasn't a much more reliable source than someone with 4 posts who seems to have a definite agenda, his story makes so much more sense.

Also, while I won't say anything about production teams, I will say that STC seems to have more fans on here who believe it is the be all and end all of ST fan films than any of the other productions.

Personally, I think it's a great article and just the kind of thing I want to see more of. Let's get more good press for all the fan films out there.

 

[Maurice]

The Enterprise CGI model we used for the yet-to-he released "Bread and Savagery" and "The Holiest Thing" and "Torment of Destiny" all use the "Phase II" design: new warp engines, photon torpedo tube on the interconnecting dorsal, but no other real changes from the TOS Enterprise.

Of course, the actual Jefferies Star Trek (Phase) II design was closer to the TMP ship than the TOS ship; not a single component was the same size and exact shape as the TOS design, as Shaw has aptly illustrated on many occasions.

And congrats on the writeup.

 

[martok2112]

Very much, congrats on the article.

I am still amazed at how far fan films have come.... especially in terms of production value that they start to get notice from news venues and such.

My hat goes off to everyone involved such high-mark productions. And it is sad, but not surprising that there is such animus between fan film makers.

I thought it was all about the love of the show....not about "Who can do the one true Trek?". Your actual love may vary, I guess.

 

[USS Intrepid]

The New York Times has run an article on Star Trek fan films before, and New Voyages was part of that older article, as were a number of productions.

Of course this was back in the day when most of us were doing it purely for fun, and the animus was mostly non-existent.

 

[YJAGG]

I don't recall WPIX ever airing Trek "two or three times a day".

It was on a 6pm and midnight.

...Apparently, they Googled "Star Trek fan films" and New Voyages was the first to pop up. The mistake wasn't noticed until final editing, but they decided to run it because it was a local story.

I don't know why no one thought to simply confirm this.

Googling "Star Trek fan films" yields, in order:

1. An alphabetical list of Star Trek fan films in Wikipedia
2. The "top five Star Trek fan films on YouTube"at the "whatculture.com" website with WEAT being the fifth title on the list
3. STC's website
4. ST NV/P2's website

So the idea that a review of ST NV/P2 by the New York Times was a mistake simply because ST NV/P2 ranks higher than STC in the aforementioned Google search and the editor erroneously assumed that this higher ranking must be reflecting the fan film getting "all the hype" would seem to be a bogus claim.

If there is some reason for the Times doing an article about ST NV/P2 other than the merits of that production (like the Times "meant" to do it about STC), this Google result explanation doesn't seem to hold water.

My mileage varied- but with Google ALWAYS tweaking their algorithms, with relevance scores and intended and predictive targeting marketing users can get different results-

 

[martok2112]

The New York Times has run an article on Star Trek fan films before, and New Voyages was part of that older article, as were a number of productions.

Of course this was back in the day when most of us were doing it purely for fun, and the animus was mostly non-existent.

Aye....fun....where has it gone?

 

[YJAGG]

The New York Times has run an article on Star Trek fan films before, and New Voyages was part of that older article, as were a number of productions.

Of course this was back in the day when most of us were doing it purely for fun, and the animus was mostly non-existent.

Aye....fun....where has it gone?

That must of been a golden age

 

[USS Intrepid]

I think you'll find there is still plenty of fun. Just unfortunately rather more rivalry than there used to be.

 

[martok2112]

Oh, indeed. There certainly is fun in actually making the films. I have a lot of fun (as well as a lot of hair pulling, teeth gnashing, and inexplicable expletive strings) when I work on my own projects. And I'm sure that for those who make the larger productions (from Axanar to STC, STNV/P2, and others) it's a lot of fun during the production.

The problem is: the ego. And from what it sounds like, it's gone well beyond simple rivalry.

"My Trek will be like the one true Trek!"

"What are you talking about?! Your little web series is nothing like the one true Trek! My show, however, captures the very essence and spirit of Star Trek!"

"What are you talking about?! Your little web series isn't even a blip on the radar of major news publications!"

"What are you talking about?! How did your little web show even get notice, completely overlooking the contributions my series made to Star Trek and to fandom!!? We were here first! Whose ass did you kiss?!!?"

Some of these productions feel like they have to come across as the most vocal anti-JJ Abrams pulpits, to ensure that somehow, some way, their show is seen (what they view) as the one true Trek. And they lose focus. They focus more on the rivalry and animosity (towards Abrams and towards each other) rather than actually putting out quality productions.

There shouldn't be any competition in fan-film making. It should be about the love for Star Trek (any and all Star Trek), not egos.

Of course, I also know it doesn't help when there are fans of one particular production who will rail against all other productions as being inferior....so, it's not always the show runners who are to blame.

The things that fan film makers need to keep in mind:

-They are "labor of love" projects. They aren't going to make any money. They should have no illusions that CBS/Paramount is going to say: "Hey, let's make a series out of that show!" There are too many quality fan film productions for CBS/Paramount to even consider singling one out over the other. (IMHO...of course)

-They (fan film makers) do not own Star Trek....at all. Fans might say that their shows are closer to what they recognize as Star Trek, but it still isn't Star Trek until CBS/Paramount says so. See again, points in the first bullet.

Again, these are my humble opinions...to be taken with a fifth of Tranya.

 

[GSchnitzer]

The AV Club did a brief write-up on NV/P2. It's largely just a recapitulation of the New York Times article:

http://www.avclub.com/article/star-trek-fan-films-unofficial-fourth-season-origi-226968

 

[Treadwell]

Anyway, nice article. Good ink, guys.