Very Orwellian, sounds like. Though it is the market, not the gov't in this case. Much like Fahrenheit 451 which was illustrative of what happens when we allow government to take total control. Ray Bradbury liked to go in those directions.

Thanks, Michael, Alec Peters, the producer who has been working on the project for a few years, said that it was based on the FASA books for the 4 years war. The 2 books you reference are for the FASA game ( a role playing game) where they basically "made up" things as they went along. Paramount pulled their license in 1989 because of the conflicts they believed existed between FASA and what Paramount called "canon". A lot of Trek fans still cling to the FASA interpretation, but Alec has changed the storyline a little to make it fit what the Garth of Izar character was supposedly having done in the Battle of Axanar ( referenced in the episode Whom Gods destroy). FASA was one of the things that held the Star Trek franchise together during the 80's until the Next generation started.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_Tr...The_Role_Playing_Game

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whom_Go...%28Star_Trek:_The_Original_Series%29

Thanks for the reference to the book, I didn't know they had one they had made.

Indeed so. It is connected to the fact all media is a powerful tool that allows a specific mindset to reach a huge crowd. However, it even has it's own set of rules and patrons, witness the fact AS1-3 were never seen in many theaters. I didn't even find out about AS1 until I was looking for some AR material after I listened to the audio book.

The programming team that creates the first true to life actor/actress won't get paid 111 million per film, but it should have a substantial effect on the cost of acting talent, and their idiotic political causes, but the digital actors will have very politically correct opinions, I suspect.

it seems that the "bank them" process is almost exclusively how they get actors. I would say they all use some bizarre calculation on their "draw". But no one is worth 111 million. Even if the movie gets 750 million in take, it would be just as bankable at 25 million. I think it is all modeled on government spending and contracts. Whats good for the Goose...

I am not adverse to him, I liked his way of doing the Ironman stint. But 111 million is a lot of coin for even 3 months work. I think it goes back to the definition of value and what is real and what is percieved. She was complaining she didn't think he was worth 111 million because women didn't get the same amount. If she had gotten 111 million she would have been ok with it, I believe. I think all the studios are not giving fair value to their shareholders, when they just toss money around that way, in that movies become bigger and bigger crap shoots that they gamble the companies money on and "hope" they get it rich. There should be a lot more thought and investigation into what is cost effective and has a good chance of making money in entertainment. A little "out of the box" investigation and thinking might give a better return for investors. Right now it's "throw it a the wall and see what sticks " mode.

Robert Downey, Jr
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000375/
imo, good as Sherlock Holmes, although the digital SFX certainly add to the effect. Otherwise, he is a decent actor who has been touted as fantastic by insiders for decades.
He would have made a good effort at Francisco, imo. ;^)

Or has a better agent. But it is a good explanation for the huge surge in costs for a movie. I am sure it is always based on the actors "draw" and how many people will go just to see him in a movie. I am not onboard with the "value" they bring, but I am sure they all justify it to each other.

Pot calling the kettle black, but it is nice to see discord in the enemy.
“I am who I am. I can’t pretend to be somebody who makes $25,000 a year.”
Paltrow reportedly gets a paltry 16 million per movie. Could be that Downey is a better businessman than he is an actor.

Also, here is an article where Gwyneth Paltrow questions how Robert Downey Jr is worth 111 million for one movie.

http://wegotthiscovered.com/movies/gw...

Thanks for the link, I didn't have time to look for it. Appreciate it, you are right, worth watching. Richard seems to have a good grasp of what is needed in the business.

The "federation" is nothing more than a thinly disguised UN on steroids. Even the flags are reminiscent of each other.

Yes, it is unfortunate. The "federation" is a problem as well; individuals always trusting that a centralized government won't misuse power is as naive as expecting Klingons not to be true to their culture of war.

The unfortunate jarring downside to Star Trek. They really like to drive the episode's "lesson" home with a sledge. And the lessons tended to be altruistic.

The original series had some of the best sci-fi writers of the time creating episodes, and they were always interesting. You could tell if the episodes were created by ST writers or outsiders pretty easily.

Still an enjoyable series in spite of the underpinnings.

The Star Trek Continues started out with follow-ups to TOS episodes.

Pilgrim of Eternity - Follow on to - Who Mourns for Adonis
Lolani - also a follow on, but don't recall the name of the original episode.
Fairest of them All - follow on to - Mirror, Mirror

They are trying to follow the existing materials for the Star Trek milieu. That material pushes the altruism, since that was what Gene Roddenberry set it up as. He really pushed this, and not just in Star Trek either. Genesis II was a series pilot that aired in the 70s, same group underpinnings as ST. Given the history, they really have to get some good writing to step beyond those constraints without offending the fan base (which still exists)

Since it is fan written, produced, and acted, kind of trapped.

The link for the SD comic con Axanar panel :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BM0_P...
Hatch's comments start at about 15 minutes, but the entire video is worth watching if you have interest in Trek or film making.

There is a lot of angst over JJ's interpretation of Trek. I think a lot of it comes from studio pressure to make it different and bolder. Notice the flashy bridge, which was a huge jump from supposedly just diverging the timeline. I just let it go as just another interpretation that can be either embraced or rejected. That was why I helped fund Axanar, The more people vote with their money, the more the studios will have to (someday) wake up. Richard Hatch (ex-Apollo, original Battlestar Galactica) makes an excellent summation of just where the industry is at in their SD Comic Con Panel on You Tube, if you are interested. I was impressed with his perception. K'Plah!

Where the JJ movies were entertaining, they did not really do justice to the original series . Everything is so overblown and exaggerated that it is hard to believe it is the same storeyline.
It would have been nice to use some facts and relevance from the original series such as crew size and the size of the ship.
Thanks to Netflix all the series still live.
" Live Long and Prosper ".

Yes, there is constant rumors that the legal issue expired Jan1 2015, but so far no movement has been seen from Sony/Paramount on anything new but the movie.