TrekIn09: Best Star Trek Fan Productions Of 2009 |
jump to navigation

TrekIn09: Best Star Trek Fan Productions Of 2009 December 31, 2009

by Staff , Filed under: Fan Productions,List , trackback

Star Trek fans don’t just sit around and wait for the next thing to come from CBS and Paramount, many of them like to ‘roll their own’. Today TrekMovie picks our favorite audio and video Star Trek fan productions of 2009.




Fan Production of the Year – Star Trek Phase II "Blood and Fire Part 2"
After a year-long wait, the Phase II team finally delivered a very satisfying conclusion to David Gerrold’s "Blood and Fire". Updated from a TNG script to fit with the Original Series crew, Gerrold told an emotional yet exciting story, complete with the excellent production values and effects that we have come to expect from the Phase II team. [see TrekMovie review].

Best Audio series – Star Trek Defiant
Fans of Star Trek audio books have not had much to be happy about since the output from Pocket Books slowed to a trickle, but there are a number of interesting audio productions from fans to chose from. This year we have been impressed with the folks from Pendant Audio, who have been producting "Star Trek Defiant", a full cast audio set in the DS9 universe for the last three years. With interesting stories and strong voice acting, it is worth checking out at

Best Fan Animation – Klingon Propaganda
In October TrekMovie first reported a mysterious new video on YouTube called "Klingon Propaganda", which ended up being shown all over the web. It was so well-made that many thought it was the beginning of an official viral campaign. After a week or so the creator, Mark Farinas came forward and revealed the animation was a labor of love, and proof of concept that animated Star Trek could live again.

Best Podcast – TrekCast
There are a lot of Star Trek related podcasts, but the favorite for 2009 for TrekMovie is TrekCast. Broadcasting out of Las Vegas, the TrekCast is headed up by David Ivy and Darren Benjamin (who used to be a bartender at Quark’s at the Star Trek The Experience). The show debates the Trek issues of the day, includes guests, and mostly has a lot of fun. Check it out at

Best Mashup  – Star Trek Torch (by Spockboy) 
Our old friend Paul ‘Spockboy’ Sibbald put this amazing video together to commemorate the passing of the torch in 2009 and to remind everyone where Star Trek began.

Best Mashup  (humor) – Happy in Paraguay (by Day Job Orchestra) 
This totally not safe for work video takes clips from the Next Generation and adds new audio that matches the lip movements, but doesn’t make a whole lot of sense…but it is still pretty funny! [Warning: contains adult language]

Best Viral Video: Kirk vs. Spock Dance Off (by WickedAwesomeFilms)
The folks at Wicked Awesome Films were insprired by the new Star Trek movie and Spock and Kirk going head to head, but they really wanted to know…who is the better dancer?

More TrekIn09
TrekMovie is looking back at the year that was. In the series so far:


1. S. John Ross - December 31, 2009

I thought the Klingon Propaganda was brilliant, but I still think it pales to labor of love that is the Farragut stuff ( … while the voice acting on Farragut was winceworthy, the animation approached 100% perfect evocation of both the look and motion of The Animated Series.

But either way, I applaud all these productions and all those not mentioned … the people who do this stuff are all awesome.

2. Dances With Klingons - December 31, 2009

Passing the torch was cool and I look forward to more Prime stories with Phase II

3. SPB - December 31, 2009

Sorry, but Klingon Propaganda gets more points for originality than that Farragut series.

4. S. John Ross - December 31, 2009

#3: Entirely understandable. I just wish that this list, like (for example) the books and comics list, had offered up a few words for the also-rans.

5. Jeffrey S. Nelson - December 31, 2009

The Star Trek Phase II crew needs to work a bit more on achieving consistent audio levels. Closer miking to the actors would help. The audio in the scenes on the bridge makes me cringe at times.

6. anderbre - December 31, 2009

Surprised Kirk kissing the woman before punching her in the face didnt get a mention. That made the YouTube rounds this year lol

7. Christine - December 31, 2009

Loved the “passing the torch” video. I’ve watched that so many times, and I never love it any less with each viewing. It’s so awesome, and simultaneously so touching (in a nerdy Star Trek kind of way, LOL).

What a fab year!

8. Autumn of 76 - January 1, 2010

Iam sorry but as much as i try i just cant get into star trek phase II.
While the special effects are top notch, the acting just is not doing it for me.
I know the people who work on that production frequent this site, so please dont take my critiques personally.

I just dont understand how a production that has so many things right going for it. (i.e. having actual trek actors guest star, and having excellent special effects) can not produce something better.
granted your main actors are fans, so to expect great acting is a bit much.

But how can you get such a bad acting performance out of a talented actress like Denise Crosby.

and iam sorry but your spock you have now seems like a bad impersanation of Quinto.

Again please understand iam not bashing your production just to bash it, I really want to like it and keep giving it a chance when new episodes are released and i totally respect the energy and effort put into by the crew and cast(for what iam guess to be little to no pay) but its just not doing it for me.

I respect the work you put into please respect my right to have an opinon on its quality and not take it personally.

9. Autumn of 76 - January 1, 2010

oh and one more thing, There is one person who does stand out acting wise though, and thats your actor you have playing Scotty.
that guy stands out among your cast, you should find a way to feature him more in your production.

10. Captain Dunsel - January 1, 2010

@8. Autumn of 76 “But how can you get such a bad acting performance out of a talented actress like Denise Crosby.”

Non sequiter. Your facts are uncoordinated.

11. Anthony Thompson - January 1, 2010

Spockboy, sometimes you’re a pain in the comments but I must admit that you put together an amazing video. I hadn’t seen it before. It’s beautiful.

12. Joshua J. Slone - January 1, 2010

Happy in Paraguay is good for a laugh, but I don’t think it can compare to the _dozens_ of TNG edits by gazorra that can be found on YouTube.

13. Admiral Shatner - January 1, 2010

Star Trek Phase II is great, but I wish they had done new characters. I just don’t see most of the characters. On the other hand, some of them do better than the well compensated Star Trek 11 actors.

14. RobertMfromLI - January 1, 2010

5. Jeffrey S. Nelson: The audio in BaF Part 2 Acts 3 onwards are temporary and will be replaced with the final audio in the near future.


15. RobertMfromLI - January 1, 2010

8. Autumn of 76: Just a couple of comments…

“But how can you get such a bad acting performance out of a talented actress like Denise Crosby.”

To each their own. I thought Denise did wonderful. She was always on her mark, always knew her lines, and (IMHO) delivered them in a way that was very fitting to the character…

“and iam sorry but your spock you have now seems like a bad impersanation of Quinto.”

LoL! Since we filmed this long before ST:11 started filming, then *IF* you are correct as to the acting similarities, then Quinto would be the bad impersonation of Tolpin – not the other way around as you are indicating. Just something to think about.


16. Rocket Scientist - January 1, 2010

Phase II looks wonderful! Sure you have to understand that it’s a fan production, but the love really shows and it carries the day. I am very impressed. Well done!

17. FredCFO - January 1, 2010

“Power Source” (Starship Farragut) gets my vote as the best animated Trek of 2009. Dead on “Filmation” by Neo FX. The voiceover work was fine.

18. MIchael-NEO f/x - January 1, 2010

To be honest, there should really be an ‘official’ contest sponsored by TrekMovie, or even Paramount / CBS. While maybe a pipedream, it might inspire more of these fan production.

For those that ARE interested in Starship Farragut-The Animated Episodes, we just released the first act of our second episode entitled “The Needs of the Many”. This stars the Farragut crew, and has performances by Tim Russ and Chris Doohan.

There is a special guest introduced in Act 1 that could be considered ‘fan-boyish’ ; however, this is a fan-produced episode, so some of the is to be expected :). Act 2, to be released by February, will include a great performance by Chase Masterson.

19. wickedjacob - January 1, 2010

As long as we are giving opinions about Phase II, I’d have to say I’d rather watch it than many ENT episodes. Phase II gets the feeling, pacing, and vibe of early trek down pat, understands the philosophy, takes the same kind of risks, and honestly rivals some of the (lesser) TOS episodes when it comes to acting. I’m very happy it exists.

20. Suliban - January 1, 2010

I prefer Hidden Frontier. More episodes, more alien species (kudos to makeup), better looking environments (more detailed) and 24. century (looks more convincing to me – but I was always more of a TNG/DS9/VOY fan). Independently, Phase 2 is really great.

21. MC1 Doug - January 1, 2010

Congrats to all of the aforementioned ‘bests!’

I especially enjoy ST: PII and Farragut… uh, what happened to Exeter this year?

Happy New Year everyone!

22. Mark Anton - January 1, 2010

I really liked part !! of Blood and Fire. But have they actually released the finished product. I saw the version with temporary music in some parts. Is it finally finished and released?

23. Autumn of 76 - January 1, 2010

Why is it people cant take criticsim or accept that not everyone is going to find enjoyment or merits in these productions.

#10 please explain to me how my facts uncordinated, and what does that statement even have to do with what i wrote? really tell me?
Your going to honestly sit there and tell me that the performance the director got from her in this is a great one! that its just as good as the performances the directors of STTNG, of Deep Impact, Of Pet Semetary and any of the other countless movies and tv series she has played a part on? Denise Crosby is such a talented actress yet the performance as edited and featured in this production doesnt do her any justice? she is a far better actress than what this episode showcases.

#15 again see above my respsonse to #8 can you honestly tell me the performance you got from her as you have it edited is just as compelling and good as what shes done proffesionally.
A good director can get a good perfomance out of a ok to moderate actor and a great director can get an amazing performance out of a great actress.
but bad direction can make even the most talented actress on the planet come across really really bad.

Iam sorry if my criticism rubs you the wrong way, but as i said i have tried on several occasions to give this show a chance, and like i said i am not just bashing to bash it. I respect all the time and energy and effort that goes into these productions. in many ways these fan productions(not just star trek but any fan production) are in the same vein as community theatre(main exception being you do manage to get quite a bit of proffesional talent to join in on what iam sure must be a fun experience for you all) But even people going to community theatre critique the acting performances and production values inspite of the fact the cast crew volunteer there time and energy. so you have to expect that people who invest the time to give your production a chance will be willing to come right out and tell you when something works and when it doesnt.

you didnt even make mention of my compliments on your production values,special effects etc. or the praise i gave your actor who portarys scotty. You chose to hone in on the criticism of the acting performance of your proffesional actress and of the person you have playing spock.
which in that case wow thats actually intresting that his voice comes across more in line with Quinto and than nimoy inspite of as you said being filmed long before star trek 09 was filmed.

my main critique of that actor is his manerisms, you know like how hes holding himself, his stage presence (or actually lack of one) he kind of just hunches and slouches in several of the scenes.(especially was noticed the slouching of the shoulders in the teaser righ before he is beamed out) again thats just not good acting, you use your entire body to convey your character and it just looks sloppy when an actor is not in character when he thinks hes not the focus of the scene playing out at the time.

Again i have nothing but respect for the time and energy put into this production, and as i said your special effects and make up and production values are excellent, its just the acting that really is not all that great.

when you put a product out there, even one that people arent getting paid for or your not getting a profit off of you still have to expect and respect when someone gives you feedback you might not like. if you want everyone to invest their time to watch your productions than you can take to heart both compliments and criticism(which i gave both )

And when people give you criticism you should take that and use it to help you push harder so there is less criticism for the next one.

I wouldnt keep going back to watch if i didnt think there was potential to the production, Ive given it seveal chances to win me over and iam sure i will again in the future but it just hasnt yet.

next time though if you respond me, be sure to remember i gave your production several compliments as well, and it was not just all negative.

24. Autumn of 76 - January 1, 2010

#10 I do have a question for you, actually any of you who are on here who prodcue these fan shows.

in terms of your guest casting, how do you guys work it out to get proffesional sag actors and actresses such as
Densie Crosby, Tim Russ, George Takei, chase Masterson?

do you compensate them for their time, Do they Volunteer their time and skills? and what about the unions, do you get waivers or special agrements with SAG or AFTRA giving you permison to use uninon actors on these productions?

again just a curiousity i had.

25. April Hebert - January 1, 2010

Congrats to Dave and Darren of Trekcast for their great podcast! They are great friends and talented guys who love all things Trek. They also do a great job keeping the memory of Star Trek:the Experience alive and well. Check them out!

26. Rob - January 1, 2010

I think Defiant is from a few years ago. That think with the apple juice is crap.

27. Daniel - January 1, 2010

That clip by Spockboy was way cool. Excellent work.

28. MIchael-NEO f/x - January 2, 2010

#24 For the Farragut Animated productions (the only one I can speak about), NEO f/x was required by their union to become ‘signatory’ to allow us to ‘hire’ these professionals. I don’t know how much paperwork I personally signed, but most of it had to do with following the bylaws of the union; that we pay them at least a minimum wage for the state they were performing in, and that a certain percentage of that pay would then be contributed to their retirement accounts. Since ours is a ‘not for profit’ production, I didn’t need to worry about residuals or any of that aspect.

I was lead to believe SAG frowns on actor volunteering their time; however, the actors can name any price as long as it is above the minimum hourly wage of the state. Since ours was animation, I didn’t have to worry about insurance for stunts or anything like that; however, I know that is a consideration in some productions.

Hope that helps…that was our production. I cannot speak for other productions.

29. Voice of Byers - January 2, 2010

@26- Rob- Defiant is still around and still in production, coming out bimonthly. The story started out as a text RP group around fifteen years ago, if that is what you remember. The show made the jump to audio around four years ago.

30. Voice of Byers - January 2, 2010

Oh, and by bimonthly I mean “monthly.” I had a different show in mind.

31. skyjedi - January 2, 2010

One thing that made no sense. How can Peter Kirk be gay when in the last roundup novel he was straight and his girl friend/wife was Kilngon.
Or is like the JJfilm this set in a seperate continuity?

32. RobertMfromLI - January 2, 2010

22. Mark Anton:

Not yet. A front page announcement and forum announcement will be made when it’s complete.

23. Autumn of 76 (re #15):

David Gerrold was happy with her performances, so I can only imagine that he got out of her what he wanted in terms of the performance. Sorry you disagree, but then again you didnt direct it, he did.

Your criticism didnt rub me the wrong way… I thought it was humorous, which I think I indicated in my post (the LoL). Especially the part about Tolpin doing a bad imitation of Quinto even though Tolpin did BaF before Quinto was even a part of ST:11.

“next time though if you respond me, be sure to remember i gave your production several compliments as well, and it was not just all negative.”

No, next time I will respond as I see fit, just like last time. I am not sure why you expected someone to pick a fight with you based on your opinion (you indicated this in your earlier post), but that was not my intent. Perhaps, if you dropped such preconceived notions, you would not have such a misunderstanding. We all appreciate the comments that you have made, truly. But next time, please dont read into my posts for an attitude that was not there, and was not intended; based on your preconceived notion of how you think I would respond.

Or more simply… relax! There was nothing of ill intent in my response to you, even though you expected it and looked for such. And thanks again for the compliments.

30. skyjedi:

Novels are not canon (per Paramount), and I dont think anyone ever claimed he was gay anyway.

24. Autumn of 76:

Not something I can comment on, other than mentioning we are SAG Signatory and comply with all requirements for SAG actors. This is something (due to the nature of such) that you would need to discuss with the particular talent and/or their agent as each situation varies (webisode, direct to DVD, TV, movie, etc – in addition to their own requirements per their SAG membership).

33. P Technobabble - January 2, 2010

30., 31. It is the James Cawley production of Star Trek: Phase II which portrtayed Peter Kirk as a gay man. The story, entitled “Blood And Fire,” was written by David Gerrold of “Tribbles” fame. Watch the episode for more info!

34. Christine - January 2, 2010

#32 :: Oh, omigosh, someone else has actually read that novel. 8D I thought I was, like, the only one, ha. Personally, I thought it was fabulous, in my opinion but, yah, whatever.

Just wanted to make a comment on all the “Phase II” talk. I think it’s absolutely fantastic for a fan production. I have honestly not seen anything else (in that category) that has impressed me more. No, I admit, it’s not perfect, but it’s also not under the benefit of a multi-million dollar company like CBS, or UPN, or Paramount, or whatever. In that sense, it’s pretty darn amazing what all the actors and actresses and crew (everyone really) has been able to accomplish. You’re all to be commended!

35. Christine - January 2, 2010

(Gr, I meant, to “#30″ there. Sorry, guys!)

36. Gummy - January 2, 2010

The Dance-Off one was Stink-On-Ice. Phase II, I look forward to.

37. ryanhuyton - January 2, 2010

I hope that someone somewhere puts on an “Enterprise” fan production with live actors. I watched the video of the action figures and thought that was awesome. But I guess the complexity and expenses of building NX-01 sets might preclude that from happening. I am not alone in wanting an “Enterprise” equivalent of “Star Trek: Phase II:.

38. P Technobabble - January 3, 2010

I, for one, do not think it is fair to look at fan-made productions with a “professional” eye. First, and foremost, the sort of finances available to the pro is far beyond what fan-made productions have available. The fact that a production like Phase II looks as good as it does owes more to the imaginations and ingenuity of those involved than it certainly does to $$$. Secondly, the overall look, feel, etc. of a professionally produced program is the result of having “the right tools for the right job,” while the fan-made shows are made with whatever tools are available, and, in some cases, without any tools at all. It is all well and good to give these folks credit on the one hand, yet cut them no slack on the other.
As for the acting, I’m sure many of these people (I’m not referring to the pro actors) are either actors waiting for a break, amature actors, or simply fans. To expect them to deliver “feature film” performances is, IMO, being rather unfair, and, perhaps, unrealistic. I give them all a great deal of credit for putting themselves in front of a camera.
Finally, the people making these productions are fans… hence “fan-made.” The fans are not allowed to profit off anything they do, it is all done as a labor of love, people having fun playing around in the Star Trek Universe. Many fans (myself included) would love the opportunity to do something within the world of Trek, and an unpaid fan-made gig is probably the only opportunity to ever do that. And then, I’m sure, there are many fans who only imagine doing it but never do. People like James Cawley are actually doing it. They should only be congratulated for that, not criticized. It is one thing for a pro to tell Mr. Cawley something like, “Y’know, I didn’t think this particular scene or that particular effect worked; what if you did it this way or that….” — just as a suggestion, with the knowledge that might make it work. But for another fan to come along and rattle off a list of criticisms — without any real ability to contribute something constructive — amounts to nothing.
Fan-made productions (of whatever kind) might please you, or not. For the people making them, it is a noble endeavor. I’ve said many times: no artist sets out to create something people are not going to like.

39. RobertMfromLI - January 3, 2010

33. P Technobabble:

It showed Peter being in love with another guy… that does not necessarily make him anything.

40. Nick Cook - January 3, 2010

As #38 quite rightly points out, Peter Kirk being involved in a same sex relationship does not necessarily mean he is gay.

41. P Technobabble - January 3, 2010

39, 40. Robert & Nick

I guess you are right, forgive my choice of words. I would point out, however, that in purely conventional terms, same sex relationships are typically referred to as “gay,” or “lesbian,” or “transsexual,” or maybe some other terms. The terms each have specific connotations, none of which I had anything to do with.
I play in a band with four other guys, whom I love dearly, yet none of us has ever had sex with each other. If we did, most people would probably tag us as “gay.” Am I wrong about this? Are we splitting atoms, at this point?
I wasn’t trying to be offensive. It seems to me that, in previous posts regarding this particular episode, Peter Kirk was referred to as being gay. I’m willing to be corrected if I am wrong, of course.

42. Nick Cook - January 3, 2010

Technobabble, I can’t comment on what the producers intention is, I’m not in that loop, but while some people in same sex relationships are indeed gay, some are bisexual. So it’s entirely possible Peter could be bisexual (though I make no claim one way or the other). :)

43. S. John Ross - January 3, 2010

#41: “[…]in purely conventional terms, same sex relationships are typically referred to as “gay,” or “lesbian,” or “transsexual,” […]”

How can a _relationship_ be transsexual? :/

44. Desstruxion - January 3, 2010

I’d like a Klingon starship based series. Animated or otherwise. On a new class of ship too. Something original.

45. HelenofPeel - January 3, 2010

#41 – transsexual??? Absolutely not! I am a transsexual and I can tell hou that same sex relationships have no association with the term “transsexual”…

Transsexual is about gender.
Gay and Straight and Lesbian are about orientation/innate attractions.

Wow. I never thought I’d see something like that in print.


46. P Technobabble - January 3, 2010

43, 45. S. John & Helen

Apparently, we are splitting atoms, and subatomic particles, etc.
Look, I was just speaking in very general terms, I don’t care what anyone IS, what sexual preference they practice, what they call themselves, nor do I really focus that much of my attention on sexual relationships, other than my own… I really wasn’t expecting the Spanish Inquisition, folks. Someone, in an earlier post, said they had never seen any mention of Peter Kirk — a completely ficticious character, I might add — as being gay, and I distinctly recall there being some mention of it, regarding the episode which David Gerrold had originally written as a kind of allegory about AIDS and, I’ll quote from Wikipedia:
“With Gerrold’s permission, Carlos Pedraza rewrote Blood and Fire for the fan series Star Trek: New Voyages. Gerrold did a final draft polish (possibly to expand the gay relationship to something more than a hint) and also directed the episode. The episode has come under fire for showing the two crewmembers “dry humping” and sharing an extended, open-mouthed kiss while in their quarters…”
I was simply trying to answer that person’s question, based upon seeing the episode and whatever else I had read/heard about the episode, and was merely commenting on it from a purely conventional point of view, not as any kind of judge, nor as the author.

I’m hoping that no one is trying to imply that I meant something more than what I said, and, AGAIN, I will apologize if I offended anyone, but there’s really no need AT ALL for anyone to be taking anything I say personally, since I don’t know anyone who frequents here personally, and no one knows me personally. I am not anti- ANYONE, so I hope ANYONE will not attempt to turn this into some sort of problem. I did not create the world as it is, nor do I fully understand all of it, in all of its complexities. If anyone bothers to read the majority of my posts, they should, by now, realize that I am a harmless, peaceful guy who is not out to start a lot of crap with anyone else. Be straight, gay, lesbian, bisexual, and whatever else there is to be, I’m not a judge nor a jury nor even a critic of any of that. I was just throwing in my two cents regarding the episode. If I missed the cup, I’ll try harder next time. Please don’t shoot me, I’m dying just like you and everyone else… whew…….

47. Autumn of 76 - January 3, 2010

#38 here is the thing, Fan productions are very much like Community theatre, and like community theatre, viewers are asked to invest are time in watching them. true the actors and talent are not being paid monetarily, but that doesnt mean we have to accept a bad performance.

and if what you mention is true that people in these productions are wanna be actors, then yes it is to be expected by us the viewers that they do put in a good performance. Just as they should be expected to be able to graciously take both criticism and praise, and respect your viewers opinon and not just rudely tell them that they are wrong or have no idea what they are talking about.

iam not specificly talking about New voyages, as i stated my criticism and compliments about the production in an earlier post, with the compliments being ignored while the negatives being trumpted and being shot down.

in any artistic medium the artist needs to understand your audience can and will (rightfully so) tell you point blank when something disagrees with them. If the artists involved in producing something can not take critics negative remarks, then you shouldnt be putting your art on display for the world to see. Artists should take any negative criticism and use it to push them harder to win over their critics.

I know iam sure that my comment will result in people who are going to try and tear my comment apart, But if you want me to watch your production or recomend it potentially to friends then you can read and respect MY opinon.

48. Autumn of 76 - January 3, 2010

One thing i left off, earlier in this thread poster number 5 made a critique about the audio quality of a production and even went on to give advice as to away this can be solved for future productions.

rather than thanking him for his observation or help
The response given was that all of the acts starting with part 3 featured temporary audio and that a final audio track would be added latter.
Iam sorry but why would you release a episode if the audio was not yet finalized and completed.

oh well like i said some of these shows have some good things going for them and negatives as well but rather than be gratefull and appreciative of the complimenting there instead seems to be a defensive tone in responses that are anything other than lavishing praise.

49. Nick Cook - January 4, 2010

P Technobabble. For the record, no offense taken here, I was just trying to add something to your own comments. :)

50. Nick Cook - January 4, 2010

Autmon of 76, perhaps if you actually gave some constructive criticism of the acting, rather than just dismissing it as bad, someone might actually give some credence to your comments. As it is, they mostly amount to “your actors suck” which is hardly constructive.

51. S. John Ross - January 4, 2010

#46: “I really wasn’t expecting the Spanish Inquisition, folks.”

Aha, we’ve spotted the problem :) The language you were mangling is _English,_ not Spanish.

And I don’t think anyone took offense at all.

52. Frederick Von Fronkensteen - January 4, 2010

Spockboy is a talented man. I applaud you, sir, and lift a glass of Tranya to you!

53. P Technobabble - January 4, 2010

47. Autum

You make some good points, and I don’t think your compliments went completely ignored. Human nature leans toward pleasure due to compliments and other-than-pleasure due to criticisms.
I agree, a project shouldn’t be presented if it is not finished. I agree, if criticism is backed by constructive suggestions, that can be valuable — particularly if the suggestions can actually solve a problem.
Without boring you with the details, a friend and I once made a 1/2 hr. sci-fi comedy pilot, a project overwhelmed by equipment problems, cast problems, crew problems and problem problems. It was an unbelievably difficult project, and my friend and I were often at odds about how to do certain things. When it was finished, we had two showings — mostly friends and family. As you can imagine, the response was other-than- pleasurable. But, in the end — after all of everyone’s time and efforts — it’s what we had. And it was a drag, honestly.
I guess the point I am making is that, for those people who have embarked on these little projects, they deserve as much praise as possible — because most of the time, they’ve already learned about a lot of things they wouldn’t do again. I have nothing but praise for them based on my own experience. Indeed, I learned some very hard lessons! But life goes on…

51, S. John

Mi aerodeslizador esta lleno de anguilas! ;-)

54. Autumn of 76 - January 4, 2010

#50 Excuse me sir i never said “YOUR ACTORS SUCK”
i listed two examples of acting performances on the production,as being bad.
One being from a very talented actress who everyone on here has seen give excellent performances elsewhere.

The other being an actor who is not a proffesional and i did explain what it was that i felt hampered his performance. As for my criticism of the acting performance of Denise crosby, as its edited in this cut it is not a good performance which was very sad to see.

If you need specific example here is one the way in which the director has her say her lines is very stilted, it doesnt flow naturally it comes across as if she were reading her lines of a cue card off stage.

If you can honestly sit there and tell me that the director got as good of a performance from her as the directors she worked with on TNG or the performance Mimi Leder got from her in Deep Impact or Mary lambert got from her in Pet Semetary, then there is no reasoning with you.

Let also present something to compare her Phase II appearnce with, She appeard as a guest actress on an episode of southland last year, and she was spot on perfect in that episode,the lines delivered excellently and moe imporatnat believeably, but her acting in Phase II which i assume was filmed not to long before or after that southland episode gets a performance which is not up to her normal excellence.

and again yet another one of you fail to notice that i paid compliments to the acting of one of your cast,the guy who plays scotty is pretty darn good and i will say it again.

you know something its sad that you honestly have to lash out at MY OPINON when i presented plenty of compliments as well.

I am not sitting here saying the story sucks or bagging on the whole sexual orientation stuff that quite a few others on here are doing.

Heck i point blank said while i havent been able to get myself to be won over by it yet, that i still keep giving it a chance, and i probably will continue to watch and hope that it will one day win me over.

but iam telling you when people from the cast and crew just take and lash out cause they dont want to believe that your audience members who find things wrong with your production make valid points, then it makes me and iam sure others just want to say fine they just lost a viewer, which is pretty darn sad.

And i will repeat it again everyone one of my posts i gave the production both compliments and criticism,but yet another crew member chooses to focus on the negative and not even say thanks for the compliments on the story or the special effects or make up or the compliments on the actor playing scotty.

i wonder what your cast and crews reactions would be if a reviewer from the L.A. Times, chicago Tribune, New York Times, or any other major paper were to watch one of your episodes and make the same points? would they be wrong as well?

its ashame that you cant get beyond YOUR EGO, to let a viewer have the right to voice HIS OWN OPINON about something.

55. Autumn of 76 - January 4, 2010

Oh and one more thing number 50, in the past i have acutally enjoyed your star trek intrepid series , including the acting and prodcution values,have even left positive compliments on the episodes you have on you tube, Its to bad you took offense to MY OPINONS on phase II and focus on my criticisms and respond that i said ” YOUR ACTORS SUCK!” when i never said any such thing.

56. Nick Cook - January 4, 2010

Autumn, I thank you for your previous kind comments on Intrepid, but it is certainly not my place to comment on specific feedback regarding Blood and Fire in which I played no part. I suggest you take that up with the people responsible for those aspects.

For the record, the actors in Blood and Fire are not *my* actors, and I do not speak for or represent Phase II in any way, shape, or form. I merely suggest that the way you are wording your commentary on the actors is not constructive (opinion alone does not constitute constructive feedback), and explains why production staff from Phase II have responded as they have. If anything, it us you who takes offense for no reason. I am certainly not offended by your comments, other than the unnecessary personal barbs at me in your latest posts.

I do, however, note that you have made some small attempt to explain your stance on Ms Crosby’s performance, which is certainly a step in the right direction, and somewhat more helpful than simply saying it is a “bad acting performance”. Simply put, how do you expect anyone to up their game when the only feedback you provide is that they are “bad”?

Anyway, I certainly never quoted you as saying “the actors suck”. I did say that your criticism amounts to *little more than* the actors suck. While in hindsight I will admit my comments did not perhaps come across as diplomatically as intended, I can assure you it was purely a polite suggestion. However, if you’re determined to take it otherwise then I shall simply say adieu, ignore the personal attacks, and refrain from responding in kind.

57. Nick Cook - January 4, 2010

Oh, and before you jump on the comment about “playing no part” I am referring to the direction, writing and post-production process, in which I played no part.

58. S. John Ross - January 4, 2010

#53: My nipples explode with delight!

59. Autumn of 76 - January 4, 2010

56 twist it however you want, obviously you are just reading it how you want to read it, and furthermore I never stated they were your actors your the one who said i was only implying “your actors suck” , re read what you wrote you said (As it is, they mostly amount to “your actors suck”),

Furthermore it says alot about you as a ARTIST with the way you responded to my original post, there was no personal attack against you at all in my last post I said(its ashame that you cant get beyond YOUR EGO, to let a viewer have the right to voice HIS OWN OPINON about something.)

if you take that as a personal attack, then i dont know what to tell you, Cause everyone on this planet, every person in this world has an ego buddy, EVERYONE! and if you are an artist then you should have the abilty to rise above your ego and not take criticism on a project personally and respect the people whom you want to watch your project, right to voice their opinon on it.

and i will repeat myself again i gave both compliments and criticisms, unlike some of the people on here who bash just to bash.

but thats ok, i guess i should just keep my opinon to myself shouldnt i, never mind the fact its a right of every person to speak their mind.
nope i will just keep quite like a good little drone and keep to myself, cause i obviously my voice means nothing.

60. Scott Gammans - January 4, 2010

Paul “SpockBoy” Sibbald put a lot of love (and hours in front of his editing workstation!) into the “Star Trek: Torch” mashup and it truly shows. Congratulations, SpockBoy!

61. Autumn of 76 - January 4, 2010

The Klingon propaganda video was excellent!! definately kudos to its creator. very well done.

62. ryanhuyton - January 4, 2010

Autumn, these are “fan productions”. To expect top calibre(i.e, Oscar or Emmy level) performances is naive and quite frankly out of place. Sure, the acting in Phase II isn’t perfect, but the actors do a fine job as is. And Denise Crosby was pretty darn good. The production values are excellent especially the visual effects, which at times are arguably better than TOS Remastered.

If you criticise fan productions for their flaws(for which I grant you there are), then you will get no enjoyment out of it. On the other hand, if you leave your expectations at the door, then there will be lots of fun to be had.

63. Autumn of 76 - January 4, 2010

62 again someone who doesnt take note of the fact that i also praised it with compliments as well.
in anycase if a fan production has the budget to hire a proffesional actor then yeah as a viewer you should expect to see a great performance especially when you are casting a person who has demonstrated time and again in hollywood productions there excellent acting skills.

its a waste to spend money on a talented proffesional actor if you dont know how to properly direct them.

in anycase i am done with this.

64. ryanhuyton - January 4, 2010

63 I still think you expect too much from people who are doing this for free. These people have put in a lot of blood, sweat and tears for basically entertaining others in spite of the fact James Cawley and crew are not allowed to be rewarded for their efforts. You don’t like Denise Crosby’s performance, or James Cawley’s for that matter, that is fine, but a lot of people can overlook the flaws because of the overall quality of the production. You seem to feel entitled to determine what should be considered a poor performance when it doesn’t measure up to your expectations.

65. Autumn of 76 - January 5, 2010

63 for the record i never made mention of James Cawley at all, so why you are even saying i dont like his performance i have no clue.

I just love how YOU feel iam wrong for not feeling the director was not able to get a great performance out of A WORKING PROFFESIONAL ACTOR!!!! a really TALENTED WORKING PROFFESIONAL ACTOR at that!!

and for the final time i gave several very big compliments to the production as well but obviously If a person states there is something they dont think is good enough then that person is wrong.

I have spent many years doing community theatre, and trust me i know what its like to put in a good deal of hard work blood sweat and tears for free. The reward is getting the chance to entertain others.

i had several times where i got a less than stellar review on my take on a character, but you know what i didnt whine and complain about it, i used it to help for remainder of the run of the show.

if you are the tampa bay area stop by and check out one of our shows at Richey suncoast theatre in New Port Richey, You can see me in the comedy Funny Money opening up in just about a week and a half.
and i guarentee if you dont like my performance, i wont cry and whine about it, i will thank you and use that criticsim to make me better.

Iam done trying to justify the right to my opinon.

66. Nick Cook - January 5, 2010

Which part of ‘I am not offended’ was not clear to you? Not once did I say you can’t share your opinion, I merely point out that if you are going to criticise, make it *constructive*. That’s all. I fail to see how that is an attack on you, or why you feel the need to take such an aggressive tone.

I suggest you go find someone else to pick a fight with. I’m not playing.

67. Nick Cook - January 5, 2010

^^^ That was for Autumn of 76.

68. Gimme a Break Guys - January 5, 2010

ST: P2 has yet to comply with SAG rules and in fact they filmed Buck Rogers without signing an agreement. At this point, they are not even Signatory with the Guild. Don’t take my word or Robert’s either. Just call the Guild and ask if Retro Film or Cawley Ent is signatory and they will tell you NO!!!!

So Trekmovie are you going to let this post exist? True journalists check the truth out first.

Also, Tim Russ and Chase Masterson have never worked on ST:P2. OGaM and Farragut yes

AGAIN, call the Guild and ask if you are curious, SAG and only SAG knows. Stop listening to the to what ST:NV wants you to believe.

If you notice as well, Denise was not at her peak in acting. Maybe it was because she was suppose to be paid before she worked and instead she had to interrupt filming to demand the money that was due her. Also aren’t any of you curious why Denise or for that fact Ben Tolpin have not been promoting BaF?

Nick Cook was great in his role and took direction well. He flew himself across the “big pond” because he loves Star Trek.

69. Nick Cook - January 5, 2010

@ #64 Ryan Hutton.

I’m yet to meet a *single* actor on any production that doesn’t value and seek constructive feedback, and I don’t think people should reign in their criticisms simply because it’s a fan production. Of course, any criticism should *always* be constructive and there are often reasons why some aspects may fall short of expections for various logistical reasons, but that’s certainly no barrier to *fair* criticism.

Now as I said to the other gentleman, I don’t think it’s unreasonable for people making these fan productions to expect *constructive* feedback (and by constructive, I mean something more helpful than just good or bad). If you disliked something, we all want to know why you felt that way. I can’t speak for Phase II, but on a personal level I always appreciate knowing where I did well and where I fell down, and how I can learn from that. I won’t always agree (these things are often subjective) but it’s not something I’d dismiss out of hand, as much as some people may be determined to believe otherwise.

And thank you #68, appreciate the kind words on my efforts.

And last but not least, because this just begs for response;

#65 “i guarentee if you dont like my performance, i wont cry and whine about it, i will thank you and use that criticsim to make me better.”

Nobody whined. Nobody cried. Except you when you were politely asked to provide *constructive* criticism. So apparently you’re not nearly as willing to accept criticism of yourself as you suggest.

70. ‘Blood and Fire’ picked as 2009’s best by TrekMovie « Blue Seraph Productions - January 5, 2010

[…] Trek: Phase II production of Carlos Pedraza’s screenplay, “Blood and Fire, Part 2″ the best Star Trek fan production of […]

71. P Technobabble - January 5, 2010

58. S John

Very well, Cardinal Fang!

72. John Broughton - January 5, 2010

I concur with comment #18, there should be an ‘official’ contest sponsored by TrekMovie or perhaps even (CBS Television) with criteria clearly defined and entries submitted for review and consideration.

73. Gimme a Break Guys - January 5, 2010

Here here, I agree with 72, John Broughton. Another suggestion would be Richard Arnold, I know that he would be unbiased or JJ Abrams. SAG Indies or AFI are also good suggestions. Finally how about Gene Roddenberry Jr?

74. Autumn of 76 - January 5, 2010

wow thats a very intresting thing you have pointed out, very intresting indeed. So I checked the sag signatory data base and guess what there is indeed no listing for Retro film , Cawley Ent, star trek phase II, star trek New Voyages, or Buck Rogers. I also called the . florida office of S.A.G. and they also said these are not S.A.G. signatory productions.

Its very intresting

75. Gimme a Break Guys - January 5, 2010

You are very welcome Autumn of 76

76. Gimme a Break Guys - January 5, 2010

PS: 32 is the Line Producer of ST:P2

77. James Cawley - January 6, 2010

“Gimme a break guys” is completely out of line. She is known to us, and this is libel.
Anyone with any questions regarding our status with SAG may contact Mr. Pierre Debs at SAG in L.A. directly by calling him at 310-549-6801. We are in complete good standing with them.

78. RobertMfromLI - January 6, 2010

#76. Gimme a Break Guys – wrote:

“PS: 32 is the Line Producer of ST:P2″

Exactly… which is why my information would be correct, while yours, especially since you have not been with the production for years – and even then only had a minor position, is inaccurate and possibly libelous.

I’ve been reading your posts here and elsewhere. Don’t you think it’s really long past time you give up?

Anyone that interested about this, call the gentleman that James listed. It is so tempting to post “Gimme a Break Guys” name with a list of all the slander and libel she has posted across the net… but I wont. Which is sad, because if I did, you could even ask SAG about her and her numerous calls to them with lies, misinformation and other nonsense. By now, I am sure they are on a first name basis with her and the stories they’ve told us about her… nonsense… for fear of using a worse term… is quite amusing.

Dunno what Stunt she thinks she is pulling with all of this regarding our Trek production. I would have thought any sane person would have given up by now. Guess some part of my evaluation of the situation (in my last sentence) is incorrect – I wonder which part?

79. Dennis Bailey - January 6, 2010

I don’t have no opinion on fan awards but just want to say that the guy who gets eaten alive by bloodworms in “Blood And Fire” is teh awesome actor. We need to see more of him.

80. Nick Cook - January 6, 2010

More of him being eaten maybe, Dennis. :)

81. Pyroboy - January 6, 2010

How about a new Band “Nick Cook and the Bloodworms” It will be one bloody of a show!

82. tomjscott - January 6, 2010

If P2 is not SAG then all the SAG actors working on their show are risking their status as union members in good standing with the guild. I’m not sure what fines or possible suspensions they could face, but they are indeed in violation of their union rules. I know because I am SAG, Aftra, and Actors Equity, and even though I haven’t had a single pro job in over 28 years, SAG told me that I couldn’t do non-union work without repurcussions. On the other hand, maybe they just say that to scare you and then they turn a blind eye to the big names. I don’t know. But the rules say they can’t be in these non-union productions.

83. Pyroboy - January 6, 2010

ANYHOWWWWW……. It was previously stated by James Cawley “77” that Phase 2 is in GOOD STANDINGS with SAG. He even gave a person and a number to call for verifcation. I hard to understand why people have to force the issue on things that are just not there busness. James opened up and told you the truth. Now it’s up to the people that don’t believe him to call the number that he gave to you. Then you will know. Thank you.

84. Nick Cook - January 7, 2010

Pyro, it seems some folks just come on here to pick fights and dig dirt. Sad to see.

85. tomjscott - January 7, 2010


Being in good standing with SAG is not the same as being a SAG production. I am not inclined to call Mr. Pierre out of the blue just to confirm this, but I did do a SAG Signatory database search and the only thing that came up was World Enough and Time. The last Buck Rogers to be SAG was in 1980. Now, maybe if James had stated in his post that they are indeed a SAG signatory and which contract they are using then it might carry more weight. But just being in good standing could mean anything. It could mean that SAG simply doesn’t want to make a big deal out of it and has given their blessing.

And I’m not trying to pick a fight here. I’m just defending a friend who has really been hammered here for her statements. I have every reason to beleive that she is telling it exactly like it is.

86. Nick Cook - January 7, 2010

tomjscott, apologies if you thought I was suggesting you personally were trying to start a fight, that was not my intention.

87. PYROBOY - January 7, 2010

It’s up to you if you want to call or not. I just don’t want to see the bickering about whether this or that production is SAG this Or Sag that. All production company know what the SAG guidelines are. I’m sure that Phase 2, Farragut, and all other fan produced productions are very aware of of these guidelines and should be abiding them. If anyone on these productions want to chime in, here your chance…..

88. PYROBOY - January 7, 2010

my last post was for 85

89. Fascinating - January 7, 2010

Something odd is happening with this site. I actually took a screenshot at the point that my post #85 had disappeared and posts had become 85 and 86. Now they are all back to the original numbering. I suspect a wormhole was involved.

90. RobertMfromLI - January 7, 2010

tomjscott: Sorry you feel that way. You’ve got my contact information if you want the list of libelous and/or slanderous and downright incorrect posts your friend has posted elsewhere, which I can back up with the IP logs matching it to her IPs over the last couple years. I would not make that claim without having plenty of evidence to back it up.

Or… you could simply cease trying to stir up the same trouble she has and continues to do. Perhaps then we can get back to the real topic at hand…

I for one am looking forward to next year, when we’ve got more competition from Polaris, Farragut and the rest. The more great fan films out there the better. Regardless of who wins “Best of” it is a win for all fans everywhere.

91. James Cawley - January 7, 2010

We are a signatory and have been for some time. “Your Friend” knows it.
Phase II was covered under the old agreement and Buck is under the new media agreement.

92. James Cawley - January 7, 2010

By the way, 3 of our actors, Myself, Bobby Rice and Evan Fowler earned their SAG eligibility by working for Phase II.
I am in no way responsible for SAG’s lack of information on their online listing. I posted the contact number for my go to guy at SAG, and He has assured me we are fine. And realize, this is private business, I do not have to share anything.

93. tomjscott - January 7, 2010


Please, go ahead and send me all the libelous and/or slanderous and downright incorrect posts. My e-mail is tscott at magiqueproductions dot com.


Thanks for clarifying your statement. However, why do your productions, with the exception of WEAT, not show up in the signatory database? I’m just curious.

94. Fascinating - January 7, 2010


What kind of two-bit organization is SAG? Your “go-to” guy assures you that you are fine, but their website doesn’t know you from Adam’s Off Ox? Show me the Carfax!

I love this intrigue between you and your stalker. You should both make movies about it. I would pay to watch.

When you say you are signatory, are you saying that you are compliant with the regulations?


Producer shall provide the following completed reports for the MFNM Program:

1. Copies of employment contracts and/or deal memos for each Performer within a week of the first day of their employment;
2. Production Time Reports; and
3. Final Cast List

95. Pyroboy - January 7, 2010

You can lead a horse to water……

96. Larry Talbot - January 7, 2010

I checked out the SAG Signatory Database:

I can’t find Farragut Films or NEO f/x in the Signatory Database no matter which contract year I search under.

97. Pyroboy - January 8, 2010

I’m wondering if SAG handles Fan Films differntly than for profit Independent and professional Motion Pictures?

98. John Broughton - January 8, 2010

Whether or not Farragut Films (or any other company) is in the SAG Signatory DB does not mean that we’re not SAG Signatory. I can relay that we are in complete compliance and in good standing with SAG — currently working on a SAG-authorized production that is non-TREK. I will check with our REP there to find out more details about this database — I didn’t know this database existed. Thinking it could be an administrative oversight.

So much negative energies being spent trying to oust other folks and their film projects — these films are being made for free viewing. Star Trek fans are capable of greater things with these energies being applied towards productive, meaningful efforts.

I wonder if train collectors have this much fun…

99. Nick Cook - January 8, 2010

Well said John. What difference does it make to anyone, beyond those directly involved, whether or not these productions are in the database or not?

Honestly folks, enjoy these productions or not. Watch or not. Talk about the product. Or not. That’s really all that matters here.

That, and congrats to the winners. :)

100. PYROBOY - January 8, 2010


101. tomjscott - January 8, 2010

Agreed. Enough has been said. let’s move on. :)

102. RobertMfromLI - January 8, 2010

Thanks for the wonderful post John!

As a related note (and the last one I will post on this topic), the company I work for (aiBuilt, Inc) should be on the CompTIA’s a+ Certified Tech Shops list… for the last FIVE years… we still aren’t. It’s a simple process…

(How many techs do you have?) 4

(How many are A+ Certified?) 3

(Is three greater than half of four?) yes

(Who are they and what are their cert #’s?) here’s the list

Half or more of the techs need to be A+ Certified for the shop to gain certification. They never added us. Now they want a fee to add us (their new certification program asks the same questions but has to be paid for). I am loathe to pay them for anything simply because the shop I worked for before this had the same problem, took a year to resolve, which required NUMEROUS emails and phone calls to finally get them added to the list.

…and that’s a web oriented, (exclusively) computer tech savvy organization (unlike SAG which is an Actor’s Guild). These things happen.

103. Larry Talbot - January 8, 2010

Oh, *now* he wants to move on. It was all very exciting to discuss back at posts 82, 85, and 93. Now all of a sudden it’s no longer interesting.

104. PYROBOY - January 8, 2010

You can beat a dead horse only so long……………………….

105. PYROBOY - January 8, 2010

The horse is DEAD, he didn’t drink……..

106. Davy Crocket, King of the Alaskan Frontier - January 8, 2010

why is the sound so poor on the Intrepid shows?
I try to watch but its so hard to hear what the actors are saying,even with my volume turned all the way up.

Now mind you I dont have great hearing now that iam getting up in years but, I am usually pretty good with being able to watch videos online without straining my ears.

And whats up with every single actor on that show talking with a scottish accent (even the Vulcan).

Combine the accents with the poor sound quality and its unwatchable.
Perhaps you can do something to make it easier for us who are a bit older with less than perfect hearing to experience.

107. Nick Cook - January 9, 2010

I’m not sure this is really the palce for this, however thre question was asked

Davy Crockett, sorry you find Intrepid unwatchable due to the sound quality. It would probably be helpful if you could specify which installments you have tried to watch, or whether you simply feel they are all equally poor. Sound quality has improved with each release, and our last had vastly improved sound. While I realise it’s still not *perfect*, we continue to improve. However, until someone with sound experience volunteers their time, there’s only so much we can do.

Since most of the cast are Scottish, I’m afraid you’re stuck with the accents though. Even on the Romulan (theactor playing the *Vulcan* is actually German).

108. Nick Cook - January 9, 2010

Eesh, I really should proof-read before hitting send.

109. Pyroboy - January 9, 2010

It’s ok Nick we’re not all Perfect.

110. Nick Cook - January 9, 2010

Just as well. :)

111. Judy Schewe - January 9, 2010

77. James, could you give the actual phone number? Otherwise, it makes you look like a con man.

112. Larry Talbot - January 9, 2010

Man! It’s like no one knows how to do Google web searches all of a sudden….

If you want to check to see if Farragut Films and NEO f/x really are SAG Signatories, you can probably ask Mr. Pierre Debs. Mr. Debs is the Senior Business Representative for Internet and Interactive/Videogame Contracts at the Screen Actors Guild. He works in the SAG Los Angeles office. His phone is (323) 549-6849.

Or you can call information and ask for the Screen Actors Guild in Los Angeles and when you get SAG’s main number, you can ask their operator to connect you to Mr. Debs.

113. RobertMfromLI - January 9, 2010

111 Judy:

You mean the phone number he already gave above?

Anyway, remember my comment above about companies who are not good at updating databases (or have broken ones like SAG)? Do this…

Search for:
Title: World Enough and Time
Year: 2004

That will return Retro Film Studios, Inc.

Then search for:
Production company; Retro Film Studios, Inc.
(Copy and paste it from the earlier search result even to make sure it’s exact.)
Year: 2004

That will return… wait for it… wait for it…

At the very least, their database is obviously not working correctly.

The first one though does indicate that the production status is as follows:
Contract Details for INT2001
Contract Notes: 2001 Internet Programming
Signatory Status: Active/Approved
Year Published Online: 01/01/2008 (which isn’t WEaT’s year)

So, it seems the only thing not updated is the Title list and the last release date (BaF Part 2’s).


114. Larry Talbot - January 9, 2010


I think Judy’s comment is related to the fact that Mr. Cawley appears to have provided the wrong phone number for Mr. Debs. I think that’s actually Mr. Debs’ fax number for one thing, and I think Mr. Cawley accidentally typed Area Code 310 instead of 323. (Los Angeles has *a lot* of area codes; it’s hard to keep them all straight.)

In addition to being able to bring up “World Enough and Time” (which at least confirms, if nothing else, that STNV was a SAG Signatory at one time), is there *any* way to bring up Farragut Films or NEO f/x? I know that tomjscott and Fascinating and Gimmie a Break Guys are probably all very interested in confirming that Farragut is SAG complaint and won’t let up until they can verify it. They haven’t seen interested in taking producers at their word.

115. RobertMfromLI - January 9, 2010

Anyway, in response to Leslie’s posts above, she also knows the status of STP2. She got an email from them about us and stated this:

“Today, just after 5pm I received an email from the Guild saying indeed this Company and all it’s films are signatory to the Guild. This came about one half hour after the Producer and Line Producer said that they were signatory. Just in time for a call to the Guild and make things better.”

On my word, I did not make such a call. And the database entry above, which was there for ages (see the date entry – which is 2004) proves as much.

116. Larry Talbot - January 9, 2010

Excellent news for you STNV/P2 folks. So whether you were indeed a SAG Signatory all along–as your producers have asserted all along–or whether you actually were a Signatory back in 2004, and then lost it for some reason based on, well, I’m not really sure why or how anyone would have made that determination–the important thing is that your show would seem to have all its ducks in a row now (and probably has all along). Other than claims by outsiders not in a real position to speak informedly, I haven’t seen any actual evidence that you haven’t been compliant all along.

I can understand Mr. Broughton’s frustration with this kind of scrutiny of his Farragut productions. I hope he can weather the storm, too.

117. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 9, 2010

Whats all the hulla baloo about? So what if the show has worse acting than a bad ED WOOD film/ Its obvious that Mr Cawley and His crew are having fun with it/ I dont know about you but i think I stand sub par bad ED Wood acting if it means I get to Watch New Trek Adventures/ But i wonder how long TPTB will let Mr Cawley and others like him play in the big sand box that is Trek/ I am betting eventually they take there toys away and start saying cease and desist/

118. RobertMfromLI - January 9, 2010

115: Larry,

So do I… Farragut, and any other fan film so devoted to their content, deserve only the best.

I guess the sad thing is, we’ve all (fans and crew alike) got such a love for the content, that sometimes we let things get out of hand, only making situations worse and rifts grow deeper that coulda been healed early on.

So, here’s to the love of Star Trek, and everyone involved in every production for helping keep it alive!


119. Pyroboy - January 10, 2010

117 :
Phase 2 has an agreement with CBS/Paramount that allows them to make these websodes as long as no profit is made from them. Believe me when I say that the producers of Phase 2 has done thier homeworks and are the good graces of CBS/Paramount and the Roddenberrys.

120. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 10, 2010


What do I care, I was just making an observation.
The Fact that they get so many proffesional Trek actors involved, would lead any one to think that while Paramount might be turning a blind eye to them in the past figureing these shows with the acting skills of a bad Ed Wood Flick arent worth paying attention.
But now that they have had so many Trek actors “PROFIT” from this.

These SAG actors are being paid for their time right? So that means some of Actors are making a profit.

But what do I care Iam just making an observation!

121. RobertMfromLI - January 10, 2010

120: We are still in Paramount’s good graces, and even reviewing their new releases at their marketing team’s behest.

You aren’t making an observation, by the way… what you are doing is called “wild speculation” – there is a big difference between the two. Nothing personal.

122. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 10, 2010

Like I Care, I was just making an observation.

123. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 10, 2010

Like I care I was just making an Observation.

The acting is ED wood bad, But hey if they have people are willing to sit through some of worst acting ever filmed in the recorded history of man every few months more power to the people who make this.

124. James Cawley - January 10, 2010

#114, Thank You. You are correct. I made a mistake and posted Mr. Debs fax number. Seems no one can 411 or google anymore. I do not troll these boards everyday and thus I did not realize I posted the wrong number from my business file, until I visited tonight.
We are and have been a signatory for quite some time, we never have lost it only to regain it. That is pure Bull. The SAG database is way off even with what little info they have, 2004 was long before “WEAT” was even shot.
I refuse to comment on these folks and whatever their personal agendas.
They are not involved in P2 and have no direct knowledge of anything in it’s operation. This is my last comment on this.

125. RobertMfromLI - January 10, 2010

#114: Larry

Gimmie a Break Guys has since talked to me, and tried making a post here, but it apparently didnt go through or got removed or whatever. Gimmie a Break Guys says the gist of it was, with the status of the SAG database, the confusion is quite understandable and everything seems fine to her and she agrees with me on the issue.

126. Larry Talbot - January 10, 2010

So that’s it? Just “woops?” After all these years–“woops?”

I’d like to see her double back to every Internet forum or chat board she’s ever frequented over the years, erroneously proclaiming that STNV/P2 isn’t really a SAG Signatory and have her apologize and issue retractions.

*That* would be a real mitzvah.

127. Pyroboy - January 10, 2010

it’s one thing to pay for production costs, (which includes paying actors) This is what every production company does in one way or another.
It’s another thing to profit off of internet sales and DVD’s. This is the type of profit i’m talking about. We’re not allow to sale DVD’s or pay per view over the internet. In this way we are upholding our agreement with the copyright owners.
And yes, I know your just making an observation!

128. Bill - January 11, 2010

I tried the phone number posted in 77 and it is bogus. What is going on here?

129. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 11, 2010

127 :
Blah Blah Blah excuses excuses blah blah.
The thing is these are suppose to be fan productions, more and more these are looking less and less like fan productions and more and more like proffesional productions(horribly acted and produced mind you).

If these “FANS” who produce these are now suddenly a PRODUCTION COMPANY then guess what that means they are a bussiness.

When they are signing contarcts with an acting UNION and paying UNION actors to be in their “FAN” shows, They are a BUSSINESS.

The Ironic thing is while the acting has been ED WOOD BAD since day one, atleast the early episodes a observer could let the acting slide, since they really were “FANS” in the guest roles, now though with using so many UNION actors in guest roles, the quality of the acting being so ED WOOD BAD is no longer something viewers will want to let slide.

Here is one tasty question I will leave the forum with,
what does it tell the producer who is bragging about phase II being the way he got his sag card about the quality of his performance skills.
what does It tell him, the only way he was able to get a S.A.G. card was by “PRODUCING” his own ED WOOD style project.

Heck the superman impersantor with the jacked up teeth, they have on Jimmy Kimme live all the time, was able to Earn his S.A.G. card through an actual real legitimate production. And he has people casting him in movies and television all the time, even with his jacked up teeth.
Just my observation though.

130. Larry Talbot - January 11, 2010


Dude–read post #112.

131. PYROBOY - January 11, 2010

Well… I guess if you work hard enough, you can achieve most anything! The cast and crew of the fan productions do work very hard and deserve the best at what life can offer them!

132. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 12, 2010

zzzzzz zzzzzz
funny you had no response to my question

133. PYROBOY - January 12, 2010

Cawley Enertainment and Retro Film Studios are both professional Production company / Film Studio. They produce both fan (Phase 2 non profit) and professional (Buck Rogers for profit) at there facility. Both Productions are completely seperate from each other.

134. PYROBOY - January 12, 2010

I did answer your question in the last part of 127

135. startrekkinacrosstheuniverse - January 12, 2010

if its a proffesional production company, then its not a fan film.
iam sorry but its just stupid to suggest that this is being done without any profit if they are a proffesional company.

this whole thing is a friggen joke, alls i know is one day i am going to be laughing when the studios decide to take away the keys to the playground

136. RobertMfromLI - January 12, 2010

135: ok… whatever. You talk from no knowledge on the situation. You sound like a guy named Richard that we know…

137. Pyroboy - January 12, 2010

Now i’m beating a dead horse……..Pyroboy out.

138. Larry Talbot - January 12, 2010


Well, it seems to me that if Cawley Entertainment and Retro Films were trying to make some profit off of the Star Trek franchise, they don’t seem to be doing a very good job of it. They don’t seem to be charging for downloads, they don’t seem to be charging for streaming views, they don’t seem to be selling DVDs or videotapes, they don’t seem to be charging for exhibiting at conventions, and they don’t seem to be selling advertising time during their episodes. I can see where money is *spent* in making these productions; the production values are getting pretty damned high. But I’ll be damned if I can see where they bring in a cent of income from these things. I know *I* haven’t been charged for any of their episodes in any way. It looks to me like these poor schnooks bend over backwards trying to not profit in any way from the franchise. If they are trying to profit somehow, their Business Plan is worse than their acting.

I think the fact that actors (including Mr. Cawley) can earn a SAG card through Cawley Entertainment/Retro Films tells me more about the seriousness of their venture than it does about the quality of their acting. We’ve seen that even a “professional” production enables people like a “Superman impersonator with jacked-up teeth” to earn a SAG card. He doesn’t seem like a real master thespian to me and I don’t know if that’s much of a highwater mark, gold standard of acting. I mean, “If you were a ‘professional’ production, you’d have actors with the calibre of that Superman impersonator with jacked up teeth. Until you get him, you haven’t really proven you are a viable production company worthy of being a SAG Signatory.” Is that really your contention?

Of course, you seem to know Mr. Cawley’s name, but not the name of the Superman Impersonator with the jacked-up teeth. So if name recognition is worth anything, Mr. Cawley seems to beat the fake Christopher Reeve/Kal-El guy.

Regarding “professional” versus “non-income producing,” I think that even lawyers can do pro bono work, earning no income from a particular engagement or client–and they don’t have to reliquish their right to use the term “professional.” I think these Star Trek Phase II productions are simply Cawley Entertainment and Retro Films’ pro bono work–which they hope to make up for with other clients/productions. I think your argument simply creates a false dichotomy.

A question: since 1966, how many Hugo Award nominees have had “Star Trek” in the title?

139. Dennis Bailey - January 13, 2010

Never mind what real fan films may or may not be doing that’s “income producing” – clearly all of these guys are trying to play by the rules as they understand them.

ON THE OTHER HAND, today in email I got yet another ad from a *non-fan-film but unlicensed production* that uses “Star Trek” in its title, offering to sell me a DVD of its movie for $19.95.

They send these emails out every month or two. I’ve got bunches of ’em.

The fig leaf that they use is that along with the DVD I’m getting an autographed picture of the cast. So I’m paying for the picture.

Yeah, right.

How long do you suppose before Paramount drops a legal rock on these guys?

140. Pyroboy - January 13, 2010

I get the same email as you do. They will sell you somthing off of thier website and then as a free gift they give you a copy of thier production.

141. Dennis Bailey - January 13, 2010

“A free gift.” LOL – they’re not giving you anything, and there’s no way that this deal would legally satisfy *anyone.* They’re telling you that if you send them a certain amount of money, you get a DVD – it’s as simple as that.

142. PYROBOY - January 14, 2010

I understand where your coming from Dennis.

143. Dennis Bailey - January 14, 2010

Yeah, I’ve left it alone for a long time but every time I get one of these emails it gets on my nerves. Farragut, New Voyages and the other real fan films are pretty scrupulous about this sort of thing. The good will and public attention they generate is being taken advantage of here.

144. Pyroboy - January 14, 2010

The one thng you’ve got to watch out for is rocking the boat. The copyright owner is the pond and every fan production is in a diffrent boat on the pond. if someone talks about someones mistakes it cause waves in the “pond”.
If there are too many waves, the “pond” may capsize all the boats! We don’t want to drown! We’re all having too much fun playing Trek!

145. Dennis Bailey - January 14, 2010

Well, charging for an unlicensed “Star Trek” film is what’s really rocking the boat. Pretending that it’s not happening is not going to protect anyone from anything.

146. PYROBOY - January 15, 2010

Remember TPTB do monitor these forums. Just talking about other projects problems here sends many many waves all over the pond.

147. Dennis Bailey - January 15, 2010

Then it would be a good idea for these people to stop selling their movie, wouldn’t it?

148. Pyroboy - January 18, 2010

Yes it would Dennis.

149. EFB - May 30, 2012

Hey, great list of fan-based Trek. Normally I’m pretty picky about the fan based shows I’ll watch, since there’s only so much green-screening or bad acting I can handle. However, I’ll vouch for the New Voyages series being worthwhile.

I thought that Next-Gen mash-up was pretty funny too.

There is a new ST fan series called ST: Phoenix. It’s not great but it might get better if they get some more funding. is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.