And on remastering, I wonder how many more years it will be before people start "remastering" things like Michelangelo's David or the Mona Lisa? I can almost see a group of Hollywood execs huddled together..." You know that thing could use a larger penis...and the Mona Lisa isn't very hot by today's standards, let's re-do it with Angelina Jolie and scrap the old one"
I'm not putting Trek in the category of great works of art or anything, but I think people's stories and craftsmanship should be respected, not changed to meet modern ideals. That is what NEW things are for.
Remastering has nothing to do with adding anything. It's about preserving what's there before it's gone for good. You know, the exact opposite
of what you just said.
You think allowing the original DS9 film to deteriorate so that no one will ever see the detail that's there is "respcting" DS9? Let's go back to your Mona Lisa example. You're arguing against preserving the original film because the bad copy -- the show you've watched all these years -- is what you know. Using your own logic, it's like saying, "Well, we don't need the original painting -- the low-res picture of the Mona Lisa I downloaded off wikipedia is good enough."
Those of us arguing for remastering are looking to preserve the original DS9 painting.
Yes, the FX would have to be redone. You can blame the TNG/DS9/VOY producers for that.
A big part of the problem is that most people in this thread haven't the slightest clue what "remastering" means. "Remastering" has nothing whatsoever to do with adding new special FX. You and I can watch TOS remastered on blu-ray with the original FX
. It's just unfortunate that in the case of TNG/DS9/VOY, adding new FX is unavoidable. That doesn't mean we should just let the original richly detailed film go off into oblivion. I can't fathom how that would be respecting the filmakers art by any stretch of the imagination.