# If you want it done right...



## Dean (Jan 11, 2006)

With all the support out there for concepts like serenity and Trek and Farscape, why would it be a bad idea for the fans to sponsor one themselves?  
      We, you, they, have spent huge efforts to bring cancelled series back to life, How hard would it be to put something together that is totally fan driven from the start?  I cant say I know how to stick all the peices together but rather than sitting about complaining or commenting on the faults of a peice why not be a regular contributer to an effort, rather than waiting for a Jos Whedon, or a Gene Rodenbary, These were great efforts, dont mistake me, but could the fans go one better than resusitating a show by actually dreaming it up on their own?


----------



## dwndrgn (Jan 11, 2006)

I'd be all for fan-driven series.  The problem is getting it produced and shown.  Someone could write an awesome script but would then have to go out and shop it on their own.  The problem with that is that the studios aren't going to take some fan and his/her story seriously.  They would also need to find financing and backers and whatnot to create at least a pilot to get it shown to the studios.

A good idea but unless studios take the individual story creator seriously and/or the individual has good connections, money to work with and lots of time and energy to put into shopping it around, it isn't a very workable one.


----------



## Dean (Jan 11, 2006)

I guess I have more enthusiasm then common sense, but thanks for the word, I thought about it after I got the idea out, I figure you would need a website dedicated to a weekly "Science Fiction Theater" type of show that a fan base could be involved with. This was, after all, the draw behind "Outer Limits" and the like, Variety. Different concepts and characters would avoid typecasting. It was a Utopian dream of: "Wouldnt it be great if..." I agree that it would be a monumental undertaking for the right individual, but I think there is merit to an idea that seems so simple on the surface. I make no claim here as to the suitability of the concept, just that there is so much enthusiasm out there among SF Fandom that it seemed...Logical.


----------



## ravenus (Jan 12, 2006)

Although I do mentally conjure to myself how I would like certain aspects of a book/movie/TV series to be approached the idea of a fan-driven franchise is scary to me. Rather than any coherent and intriguing narrative one suspects we'd end up with a horrific mishmash of the collective imagination or lack thereof from a gaggle of franchise obsessed nerds.

It somehow brings to mind a spoof program done on the Star Wars fans who had lined up to see The Phantom Menace where the intervieer asks on of them "What would your imaginary girlfriend say about all this?"


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 12, 2006)

I think what you are talking about is probably the very reason Machinima now exists. It provides a cheap and easy way for folk to put together their own movies using available technology and without having to worry too much about location finding or set production. I've seen some Machinima and some of it is very good. 

I don't think what you are suggesting is impossible but it would take a lot of dedication and organisation


----------



## Dean (Jan 13, 2006)

I will look into Machinama, thank you, I say it again, I did not really know how to go about it, thats what this forum addresses, I think that "ravenous" comments to good affect, I agree that the concept is not without faults, I do however see fans of startrek banding together to build their own sets and thats the kind of thing I was speaking too. Its easy to say the concept might spawn mindlessness in story telling, but if it were given a chance, and somehow the formula were developed, one might weed out the rediculous. this is exactly what Gene Roddenbary did with star trek, The idea evolved from the games Gene played as a child with physical challenges and he started out with a cardboard box in his parents back yard. I Cant say I could drive the whole process, I dont have any background in it, but thats not the point, The idea is to make it a community project, Like a website or something, not sure how to do it, if its like the same process gene went through, or Joss,  then it would take time and dedication,  and lots of general input.  Attack of the show had some people on last night that actually built the original enterprise bridge from the blueprints !  For their efforts I say WELL DONE, lets back up projects like that and encourage people to contribute in a supportive way.  The true nature of Science Fiction is that its creative and imaginative in the extreme, enough so that even in the 50's the special affects were marginal at best, It was concepts that were new that drove the movement in its early hayday. And It dosnt have to be all SpaceShips, megadollar sets, and 10 hour makeup jobs, I have run on long enough, I just dont want the concept to die an unmentioned death. Keep imagining and give me a nudge from time to time on the subject.  Thanks All !


----------



## Dean (Jan 13, 2006)

Oh and just a caveat: I have five cardboard boxes and a Home Computer connected to a worldwide network of friends !

 "No power in the Verse' can stop me !"


----------



## Dean (Jan 14, 2006)

IF we pull out now, we will appear WEAK, and that would not be a good idea for the next twenty years.


----------



## Priv8eye (Jan 26, 2006)

I suppose the problem becomes that to keep it fan based it has to remain independant, and so the only place that could show it would be the Web without a governing company putting their nose in for 'guidance'.  Lots of potentially good ideas have been destroyed this way.

I suppose Joss and Gene were fans in many ways, but as soon as someone gains the power to create these things for 'fans', you often wiht the old addage of 'you can please some of the people....'

As soon as it falls to the hands of the controlling few it becomes their vision and not everyone elses and so you fall into the trap of annoying someone who says you've done it wrong (multiple versions of Star Trek come to mind as does the new Battlestar Galactica).

as you point out Sci-Fi is so diverse and contains so many elements that no one view can encompass it all.  To some it is only big budgets and flashy special effects.


----------



## chrispenycate (Jan 26, 2006)

Ufortunately money does have a great deal to do with it. For several years our society was making programs for childrens television, about children now (ie. a minimum of special effects, using actors straight out of drama school, minimum of post production, three or four camera (two or three cameramen and one fixed), maximum of direct edit, cutting corners everywhere. You still need the cameramen, lighting man, sound man, boom operator, makeup person, costumes, script, stage manager… and trying to use inexperienced labour in any of these posts can vastly increase shooting times. (but vastly, five times, ten times) Most of these posts had assistants, less experienced and thus cheaper, so we could shoot simple scenes in parallel with the more advanced ones. The set was -um - set up at the beginning of the season and basically, apart from a few props, stayed constant all year, no set builders required during the shooting period. Even with a bare bones production like this, with the scripts prepared in advance, and the actors learning their lines just before the take (imagine the emotion you can put into the performance) the costs were rarely under £100 par minute. Even having half the people working for the love of it you couldn't cut that by all that much. And that's without buying the equipment in the first place. Now watch all the end titles of a science fiction film, and consider what is the minimum standard *you* would accept, A bit higher than I'm describing, no? You want some professional actors? Some sophisticated sets? Some special effects (well I suppose special effects are more a question of time, and if the person doing them doesn't care about being paid they merely slow the production a few months.
One final point - when our ideas man/script writer got stale after writing for the same characters and asked the actors to generate some story lines, for which he did the diaogue and _mise en scene_, the standard went extremely rapidly downhill, one of the major factors in its demise (plus, everyone was bored with it, the cast as well as the public) Committee writing very rarely produces anything very coherent, or interesting. You need a small, focussed team. which can change from episode to episode but must never get out of hand. Sort of eliminates the fen, doesn't it?
Still, it was great fun.


----------



## ravenus (Jan 26, 2006)

> Committee writing very rarely produces anything very coherent, or interesting


Amen to that.


----------



## Dean (Jan 27, 2006)

Thanks to all, I see the many facets of such a production, a flash in the pan idea, maybe an idea for a story about writing such a project, It was a utopian idea, nice while it lasted.  I appreciate everyones contributions, it has been educational.


----------



## ravenus (Jan 28, 2006)

*@Dean:*
Sorry if some of us (I count myself as a prime guilty) sounded too pessimistic there, but unless a creative group is kept sufficiently small and focussed (or has such an immensely powerful and charismatic force at the head), it won't be too long before the trading of ideas turns into an empty  clash of egos.


----------



## chrispenycate (Jan 28, 2006)

For what it's worth; I too apologise for unsupportive behavior. Given a project, I invariably start by enumerating the problems that come to mind, then search for potential supplementary ones. Then, I bring them all out into the open, to confuse and confound the optimists. Yes, I'm aware that several projects go ahead because their originators had no concept of the complexity or the amount of work involved.

In my defense I will add that these projects are frequently brought to term by us pessimists, who keep on solving problems and doing the practical work long after the originators have lost interest and drifted off to other utopias.


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 29, 2006)

Well, for what it's worth, I was part of a 3 man team who brought a small (35 minute) film to the public via DVD. It was neither Sci-Fi nor Fantasy. It was the discovery of some old 16mm film chronicling life in  a small Scottish town from 1949 to 1955. We each had specific roles - one was to edit and prepare the 16mm film, one to co-ordinate and liaise with the duplicators (including gaining copy permission for the soundtrack). My task was to do the digital transfer, some editing, and set in place the audio track. The one important thing was that we made sure we had enough pre-orders from interested individuals to cover duplication costs. 

It took 3 months of hard work and long hours (doing this and holding down a full-time job) but we did it. We released it in september 05 and sold our first hundred copies in two weeks. We are now well into profit (all cash going to charity). It is only on sale locally through various townsfolk but it is still selling (I know that one copy ended up in Canada). The important point here is that you need to know your market.

So, it can be done with the right team...but getting the team is the hard part (it took a 18 months from concept to team to completion). I learned so much and got a huge amount of satisfaction from this but would warn against the faint of heart treading this path. It ain't easy


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jan 29, 2006)

Dean said:
			
		

> With all the support out there for concepts like serenity and Trek and Farscape, why would it be a bad idea for the fans to sponsor one themselves?



I think you'll find that they will.

Read this as to why:
http://www.platinax.co.uk/57-the-new-digital-revolution/

I've already made a promise that I intend to deliver *something* to the chronicles network within 5 years:
http://www.chronicles-network.com/forum/4428-5-year-plan.html


----------



## Omega (Jan 29, 2006)

I said:
			
		

> I think you'll find that they will.
> 
> Read this as to why:
> http://www.platinax.co.uk/57-the-new-digital-revolution/
> ...



So how's the first year of your 5 year plan been?


----------



## Brian G Turner (Jan 29, 2006)

A learning experience. Particularly, to have a plan before announcing a plan. 

More seriously though, I think media broadcasts - no matter how limited - will be far more common on the web in even 4 years time - and the chronicles network is in a very good position to serve the SFF niche.


----------



## Foxbat (Jan 29, 2006)

> More seriously though, I think media broadcasts - no matter how limited - will be far more common on the web in even 4 years time - and the chronicles network is in a very good position to serve the SFF niche.


 
I agree. The terrestrial channels are already seeing significant drops in audience figures with the plethora of digital channels. I expect to see this continue and cross over into web-broadcasting. The technology now becoming available to ordinary Joes will allow many projects to come to fruition that would have been stillborn in the days of the two TV Goliaths. Many will be of very poor quality but, as always, one or two will stand out. The future is bright, the future is here


----------



## Dean (Feb 1, 2006)

Again, I couldnt be more satisfied with everyones contribution, I have gotten an education, I knew it would be a big project from its inseption, but had no idea of all the complexities. Heck who knows, I might rechannel the energy into a smaller scale, podcast or the like, project.   Thanks Everyone!


----------



## Whitestar (Feb 23, 2006)

Agreed! The future of tv (and movies) will be the internet. Check out the following link:

http://www.nomensa.com/news/industry-news/2005/3/internet-tv-tipped-as-the-future.html

We're all about to enter a whole new world in regards to the entertainment industry. Anyone can finally bring their own creative vision and talent through the internet, without any network interference. Of course, you'll need money to get your vision realized, which is why I'm urging those that wish to create their visions online to start learning about the stock market and investing. From there, you can take from your earnings the neccessary money to produce your creations, with no inference from the studios. I personally have several science fiction sagas in the works, one of which will most likely be an online virtual television show. 


Whitestar



			
				Foxbat said:
			
		

> I agree. The terrestrial channels are already seeing significant drops in audience figures with the plethora of digital channels. I expect to see this continue and cross over into web-broadcasting. The technology now becoming available to ordinary Joes will allow many projects to come to fruition that would have been stillborn in the days of the two TV Goliaths. Many will be of very poor quality but, as always, one or two will stand out. The future is bright, the future is here


​


----------

