Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.


Previous revision
Next revision
—axanar_maybe [2016/03/26 19:50] – Carlos Pedraza
Line 1: Line 1:
 +====== The Axanar that Might've Been ======
  
 +/* RMB and Axanar's cinematographer describe what //Axanar// might have been if not for the copyright lawsuit brought against them by CBS Studios and Paramount Pictures.
 +
 +From Facebook thread: https://www.facebook.com/groups/CBSvsAxanar/permalink/1178230432188325/?comment_id=1178240622187306&comment_tracking=%7B%22tn%22%3A%22R%22%7D
 +
 +RMB: How much do you think it costs to build a full scale, fully illuminated and interactive Bridge set? Better yet, what do you think it should cost?
 +
 +We didn't [reinvent the wheel]. But we still had to build [our bridge] from scratch. And buy plasma screens and computers to run them.
 +
 +David Sturm: I'm familiar that it was said (by Alec) that Gossett felt Cawley's sets were unusable. But I've heard other viewpoints on that. And I understand to have availability of name actors, filming in Tico NY or Kingsland GA would be a bit challenging. Plasma screens and computers though... to produce a TOS prequel seem like overdoing it. TNG backlit graphics could have worked reasonably well. But it seems there haven't been any plasma screens and computers bought... at least none are listed in the Historical Documents (I mean... Excel report of December 15, 2015).
 +
 +Robert Meyer Burnett: When I took over as director in July of 2015, my plan was always to release the fInished AXANAR on Sept. 8th, 2016. We were right on schedule to make that date. As I said before, I was tackling the space VFX first, so I'd have the first half finished before the commencement of life action photography. As far as I was concerned, there were no delays when I began work. The lawsuit obviously changed those plans.
 +
 +Ryan Campen: Rob, why did you HAVE to build a bridge from scratch? There are several bridges might have worked. I understand that Christian felt it was necessary. Why couldn't you work with the NV sets?
 +
 +On another point, why did you have to build everything on the soundstage? Why couldn't elements (consoles, walls, the captain's chair, etc.) be built offsite and brought in for final assembly on the set? To me, and admittedly I just know from what I've had to do in my years of theatre, that it's sometimes necessary to build things offsite before you get the space. I understand that might be different in film. I'd just like a reason if you can provide one.
 +
 +Not trying to be snarky on either point. I'm really just trying to understand.
 +
 +Robert Meyer Burnett: When we first started, the plan was indeed to come out before BEYOND. But those plans changed, and when I took over, I had a specific schedule I was working under, which was always to complete the entire film for the 50th.
 +
 +**Axanar cinematographer Milton Santiago**: Ryan Campen, shooting Axanar on the sets of NV would be impractical on many levels. First, aesthetically those sets have been constructed to meet the needs of the TOS style which the NV team aim to recreate. Axanar is to have its own visual style and look. This style and look is dictated by the needs of the script. 
 +
 +This a specific story that needs a specific approach to be told effectively. Second, because the NV sets have been designed to emulate a certain style, the tool set available at that location is limited for those purposes. There isn't anywhere even remotely close to Ticonderoga from where different tools can be brought in easily. By tools, I'm referring to those specifically for camera, electric, and grip.
 +
 +Third, NV sets are treated as museum pieces which is to say the idea that a production could go there and change things around, both aesthetically and technically, to meet the needs of a different film is flawed. I've shot on those sets. Its owners are very particular about how those sets are treated and rightfully so.
 +
 +Fourth, NV sets serve their purpose, but likely could not withstand the wear and tear that Axanar would require. There are scripted practical effects that could not be accomplished there. The sets that were being built for Axanar are as robust as any I've seen on any of the professional productions I've been on. There is sufficient space with which to accomplish certain shots. Our approach in Ticondergoa would be limited to the confines of those sets.
 +
 +Fifth, it would be impractical to think that the crew necessary to accomplish the needs of Axanar could be transported and housed for a long period of time in Ticonderoga without significant costs. The town is beautiful and quaint, but barely has the infrastructure to support a small production. Crew would have to be flown into Albany, NY or Burlington, VT. both are at least 75 minutes away. This doesn't even begin to touch on getting the cast there.
 +
 +Sixth, the volunteers who work on NV are wonderful, hard-working, kind individuals. They do great work for what they are after. They themselves would tell you that they do it with great love very very slowly. The needs of Axanar could not be accomplished with volunteer hands. The film needs a certain level of production expertise to be made successfully. The shots need to be accomplished at a specific pace and page counts must absolutely be made.
 +
 +Though Axanar had the luxury of time in constructing its sets, it would not have the luxury of time in terms of principal photography. It's certainly one thing to ask production friends to come out and play for a short film lasting 3-4 days. I've certainly done that before. Heck it's what we did on Prelude. But to ask those same friends to come out and do that on a feature is a stretch.
 +
 +A previous poster asked why the lighting on the sets needed to be interactive. A seemingly fair question. The answer is that the style of film as dictated by the story requires elements that would heightened the tension. Creatively, we've made the decision that a level of interactivity is necessary for that purpose. This is how we have chosen to tell the story. It may not be how someone else would tell the story, but these are the choices we have made.
 +
 +Another poster asks about why sets where not built offsite first. Another fair question. Personally I was not privy to that decision and I can see how that may have been a viable route. I can say this that the sets that were conceived for Axanar are fairly big and that any space rented for set construction would have to be considerably large.
 +
 +Once the lease was signed, it made a lot of sense to build the sets on site. There are many many advantages to the sets being in an accessible place to all members of the production team. Rob and I have been able to carefully strategize and map out every single shot of the film because of that accessibility. We are able to see how all of the sets relate to each other and find methodologies that would allow us to shoot more of the film with less.
 +
 +The more that I refer to is quantified in time saved which equals money saved that can be used elsewhere in the production. In this very long post I've hoped to give you some honest answers to what I have received as sincere production questions. I hope you will receive my answers in kind.
 +
 +
 +
 +*/