Slashdot Mirror
Star Trek Luminaries Behind the Fastest Funded Film Project On Kickstarter
An anonymous reader writes "Legendary sci-fi writer Marc Zicree (Star Trek, Babylon 5, Sliders) and special effects wizard Doug Drexler (Star Trek, Battlestar Galactica) are behind the fastest funded film project on Kickstarter. They're using crowd-funding website kickstarter to directly communicate with and enlist the support of fans for their latest project Space Command. Maybe with direct communication, sci-fi fans can rest easy and not have to worry about their favorite shows being cancelled like FireFly."
first
Maybe with direct communication, sci-fi fans can rest easy and not have to worry about their favorite shows being cancelled like FireFly.
That would work only if the writer actually owns the copyright in the show's setting. If the publisher owns it, and the publisher wants it canceled, no amount of crowd funding is going to bring it back.
It would be nice if finally they made a Star Trek that wasn't male dominated for a change. Or use all black actors to play the Klingons, because agression and violence is part of the Klingon culture.
PS. Janeway doesn't count, since that show was so bad that she was really a minor character.
I hope they succeed, but... all that talent, and they couldn't think of a name better than "Space Command?"
I don't understand kick starter. If you fund a project you don't get any shares and don't get to share in the profit, and if the person leading the project blows all the dough on ale and wenches you can't interject any authority right?
Sounds like its for suckers sorry. Why not find a bright young person and partner with them to try and get something great done? Is it just because kick starter is easier to fire and forget some cash on?
"(C)ommunication" isn't the issue, it's having demonstrable ratings that appeal to advertisers - TV is not an entertainment medium, it is a mediumm for conveying advertising. They attract you by offering you some entertainment, but until you realize the networks don't really care what they show, they just want an audience to watch the commercials in it.
The best thing a Sci-Fi fan can do is get themselves a nielson box and then set their TV to watch all their favorite shows.
Ken
I was a bit surprised to see Marc Zicree listed as being a Babylon 5 writer, because my vague recollection was that J. Michael Straczynski wrote the entire show. But some quick research revealed that Marc Zicree wrote one of the 18 episodes (out of 110) not personally written by JMS. It's legit to list it as one of his writing credits, but I'm not sure it really contributes to his "legendary" status.
That star trek and star wars stuff should stop being made, as in movies and tv shows? they had their run and there really isn't much new they can offer. even more if there is a star trek show or star wars one they seem to crowd out other sci-fi shows even if those shows are better. babylon 5 only became successful be was out in between major star trek tv shows. firefly died because it had the bad luck of being out at the same time a star trek show was out despite how horrible that star trek show was.
I know it sounds impressive... fastest funded (a claim made), blowing past their $75k goal, etc.
But does anybody actually remember the average cost of an episode of Firefly? Low estimates - and I do mean low are $500,000. Per episode.
Now, I know.. they don't need seasoned actors. They don't need expensive VFX firms. They don't need extensive sets. Perhaps they don't need people for wardrobe, catering, location scouting, etc. etc. etc.
And yes, I did see Star Wreck. But if that is the sort of result that one can expect*, it's entertaining enough but certainly not nearly as good as most of the TNG or DS9 episodes, Firefly, BSG, StarGate, or even Red Dwarf.
* I actually have, or had, higher hopes for Pioneer One. But Season 2 still seems very much up in the air, with the crew behind it admitting that they'll have to secure far more substantial funding first.
Still, best of luck to them.
" [..] and not have to worry about their favorite shows being cancelled like FireFly."
Yea I am still not over that either ..
But there was this follow-up movie, where all of it was wrapped up, right? *ducks*
The three laws of thermodynamics:(1) You can't win. (2) You can't break even. (3) You can't even quit.
Heilein is a legendary sci fi writer. Who the @#$% are these people?
Re-run after reboot after re-run.
So many more great novels exist in the world that would be incredible on big screen.
Isn't it time to give some other hugo award winners a chance on the big screen?
My personal vote, tho not hugo class is the amber series.
> "Maybe with direct communication, sci-fi fans can rest easy and not have to worry about their favorite shows being cancelled like FireFly."
And the downside, which they may learn the hard way? They may end up with something exactly like FireFly.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
So this guy, Zicree, saved sliders? Or at least, that's what they claim in the kickstarter video.
In that case I have little trust in the quality of this kickstarter project. Sliders pretty much went to shit in the season Zicree came on board.
Wasn't this guy credited with making one of the worst low-budget scifi "movies" in recent memory? ... A straight-to-Youtube kind-of deal?
+1, Mod up! Make sticky! and all that!
Well said! The should also make Lord of Light!
It's like watching a poor soul on life support begging to be let go. Slashdotters, do the right thing, pull the plug and move on with your lives. Sticking to the topic though, I'm very interested in seeing this movie.
Fastest funded for getting 75K in 3 days? the Double-Fine Adventure project reached 1.000.000$ in 24 hours!!! and they reached the 400.000$ they wanted in the first 8-10 hours.
No address no dead-tree check ... I love dead trees.
Of course, I'm not the only one who feels this way. It looks like the current TV business model has changed little over the past century (since the dawn of commercial radio), with consumers now being asked to buy packages from their local cable TV providers that are more expensive than ever despite the prevalence of broadband Internet connectivity.
What it comes down to is money and monopoly power. All I want to see probably adds up to a maximum of 10 hours a week, including the news, some sporting events and one or two TV series. Yet, the only way for me to gain access to that specific content legally is to buy a cable subscription, along with one or two supplemental packages, that include dozens of other channels, and hundreds of other program items that I have no interest in. Yet, my only choice is all or nothing, and on top of that those few shows that I am interested in are regularly interrupted by advertisements, which makes the experience a lot less enjoyable.
On the other hand, many people would be more than happy to pay to watch just those shows they want to see via their broadband Internet connections -- and without any advertising. That way also, more of the money would go to the show's producers, who in turn would have a much better idea of how many people were actually watching their show every week. We know consumers want this, because of the huge scale on which TV shows are being pirated and distributed via the Internet. Nevertheless, the only things that consumers can expect to receive directly from the studios today are personal lawsuits regarding their involvement in file sharing networks.
Perhaps getting what we want as consumers will depend on the success of sites like fora.tv, although the prices they ask for access to their content can be pretty steep (e.g. $5 to $25 to watch a single program) -- hardly a strategy likely to make much of a dent in the numbers of people watching Game of Thrones illegally. It seems to me that if an entire season of that series costs $60 million to produce, that HBO could double their money if, at 10 episodes season, 10 million Internet viewers would be willing to pay $1.20 per episode to see it. However, none of the big U.S. studios seem willing to even entertain the idea of giving consumers a choice like that. How come?
Do you mean we have such "addicted" Star Trek junkies,
on the planet, who are prepared to chip-in to make a film
that could make its producers, et al. rich[er], but NOT
share the profits with their crowd-sourced investors?!?
The latter should expect - at least - free, or highly dis-
counted ticket prices, & possibly a BlueRay disk of the
resulting film for their seed funding.
Nice is nice... but Fair is fair, as well. ;-)
If they're serious about attracting funding for a relatively independent TV series, then why not create a series of webisodes. This is the way Sanctuary made into the SyFy channel. Sanctuary is a relatively novel and watchable series as far as, well, TV is concerned.
Also, why not go down the more traditional path the Wachowski brothers took to secure funding for The Matrix? I'm sure the first half a dozen episodes of their series won't cost that much.
What a pile of dog cock
Foundation novels by Asimov could be a great Game of Thrones like experience if done proper.
Defining Statistics and Social Research
I won't accept it unless they adhere to #3 on: http://www.cracked.com/article_17392_6-sci-fi-movie-conventions-that-need-to-die_p2.html
zakta onu alr! Yakar, bu deerli yakar! Salk Personeli
Ender's Game: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1731141/
Neuromancer: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1037220/
Unfortunately they take so long to get approved I am afraid the stories will be a bit dated.
There are more in the works that might be along the lines of decent Sci-Fi, but just remember, they did base I-Robot on Asimov, even if it wasn't a direct translation of a book.
APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?