CBS/Paramount sues to stop Axanar
- Thread starter Richard Baker
- Start date
- Status
Funding a fan film through robbery on the high seas is technically not a violation of the Guidelines.
Funding a fan film through robbery on the high seas is technically not a violation of the Guidelines.
It is, however, a violation of maritime law.
Well, you would be wrong to think that. Do you have any (fan) film experience yourself that your statement is based on or is your opinion all conjecture? I worked on the STC production, was on the STC Board and I am very familiar with the expenditures and budgets for the STC episodes so I do know what I'm talking about.
They said the sound barrier could never be broken.
It was broken.
They said warp speed could not be achieved.
It was achieved.
They said this thread could not go passed 1,701 pages.
It happened.
It was broken.
They said warp speed could not be achieved.
It was achieved.
They said this thread could not go passed 1,701 pages.
It happened.
I apologize. I was under the impression that Vic personally chipped in a considerable amount for the first episode, but perhaps I'm mistaken.
I don’t either. Especially since I never said that.
Glad you answered your own question.
That’ll teach’em!
Let's see:
Sure sounds like you were saying that.
That answer makes absolutely no sense. I'm now completely unsure you ever had a point to begin with.
It's not my responsibility to ensure that CBS listens to their fans, nor it is my obligation to remain silent if they don't.
Yes, he did fund the first episode (only) to demonstrate his vision; he wanted to be able to show what the episodes would look like and prove it could be done on budget before asking for money through fund-raising. My reply was in response to your price per minute comment. Regardless of who or how those episodes were funded; it had no bearing on the cost per min which is why I commented. FWIW, the first episode was done for about $960 per min.
I said creators create instead of complaining for pages and pages. Now, unless they have changed the definition of complaining to mean lazy, then, I don't know what you are going on about.
You do understand the "pages and pages" of complaining I'm talking about is here, right?
Creators create. Regardless of constraints. If you want to make a Star Trek fan film, then the guidelines don't make that impossible. You find a way to tell a story. And you're doing it because 1. You want to make a Star Trek fan film and 2. you're passionate about telling a story on film.
Creators create, complainers complain.
Sigh. I'll make it as simple as I can. Writers in the Eastern Bloc countries had to write under real constraints... if they wanted to write powerful meaningful work they had to be careful or they would be sent to jail, along with the other political prisoners. Writers like Vaclav Havel wrote political material at the threat of their own lives. They were creative with incredibly high stakes: their lives and the freedom of their people.
You are complaining about not having enough creative freedom because the rightful IP holder is saying you can only make two 15 minute family friendly films and only raise up to 50K on public forums.
I like how NOT making a movie is some how a political statement. It must be a relief to stand on that moral high ground rather than find a way to make a Star Trek fan film and put yourself out there.
Talking to that guy is like wrestling a pig. You get all muddy and the pig likes it.
If I had the time and the idea, I’d make a fan film. And whatever idea I had I’d do my best to make it with whatever restrictions I had put on me. I think that a lot of creatives would feel the same. I don’t understand the faux disgust with the situation. It just comes off as entitlement.
Damn! Missed 1701, but at least it's still open. So...
Damn! Missed 1701, but at least it's still open. So...
I think we're going for 1701-D...
...that's possible, right?
Q's mischief can make it happen!
- Status