OT: THe Dark Knight Rises by Greg Cox

[Dantheman]

I remember reading the novelization for Batman Forever a month before the film came out, and after reading the book, being excited to see the movie because of how good it was. I was disappointed some things from the book weren't in the movie (it was made clearer in the book that Bruce Wayne blamed himself for the death of his parents because he asked if they could go to the movies that night).

I also remember reading the novelization for X-Men 2 before seeing the movie, and being VERY surprised by Jean Grey's death when I saw the movie. That must've been something they kept so much of a secret, they even kept the movie novelization's writer out of the loop.

[Rush Limborg]

^I will say, the novelization for Dead Man's Chest that came out before the film ended with Jack being taken down by the Kracken.

The entire epilogue with Norrington and Becket--and at Tia Dalma's hut, where they reflect on Jack wasn't in that book. As a result, when you-know-who stepped down in the very last shot--I, and the rest of the theater, were stunned.

[Therin of Andor]

Rush Limborg wrote:

---

You can't trust the person at the bookstore to buy the book, and read it front-to-back.

As a non-fan, I bought ST:TMP's novelization on impulse, following an enthusiastic review of the movie itself by a friend, who was at the gala Sydney premiere. I started to browse (and there is a beautiful, glossy photo section in the Aussie version!), intending to not finish the book before going to see the actual film. I couldn't put the book down!

Then, when meeting new ST friends at ST gatherings over the next six months, I discovered that I seemed to be unique in liking/understanding the movie. Esp. re Deltan pheromones, Decker's parents, the New Human Movement, Kirk's ex-wife, and what happens at the end to Vejur.

I couldn't locate a ST II novelization early enough, but ST III had a delayed release Down Under (about four-five months, IIRC), so the ST III novelization was like manna from heaven! So much new material!

And yeah, I read the "ET" novelization long before catching that movie. I also much preferred the connection between M&Ms and the Speak 'n' Spell to the movie alien's fascination with Reece's Pieces.

[Captaindemotion]

^ Vonda McIntyre's novelisations of II and III were very good, with lots of extra character development and scenes. Once she left the series, I don't think subsequent novelisations were as developed.

[JacksonArcher]

If Greg likes fellatio like I think he does, then I'm sure he'll be telling me the secrets of The Dark Knight Rises in no time.

[Captaindemotion]

^Deep throat, indeed... I suppose we should be grateful that James Swallow isn't writing it, the puns I'd be making would be unbearable...

[Therin of Andor]

Captaindemotion wrote:

---

^ Vonda McIntyre's novelisations of II and III were very good, with lots of extra character development and scenes.

Totally agreed. Amazingly good!

Once she left the series, I don't think subsequent novelisations were as developed.

Friends and I noted, at the time, that Vonda's novelization of ST IV begins to add new material as she had on the previous two, but abruptly becomes a strict conversion-of-script-into-prose from just after the 20th century trash collectors were revealed to be brainstorming clichéd lines for a movie script they're writing together.

From comments in "Voyages of Imagination", it seems like ST IV might have been the first tie-in manuscript scrutinized by Richard Arnold, rather than Susan Sackett, with objections to authors adding new material. Certainly, Vonda's experiences getting "Enterprise: The First Adventure" and ST IV through the approval process seem to have turned her off ST tie-ins.

[Rush Limborg]

Shame, that.

Frankly, Richard Arnold's reign seems to have been the TrekLit equivillant of the Hays Code.

But to be fair to Arnold...a lot of the blame seems to be Gene's, with his obsession that no writer DARE show Kirk & Co., Starfleet, or the UFP in any kind of internal conflict.

One need only read his biography...and the chapter on the novels. Particularly telling is Gene's letter regarding a novel which he claims paints Starfleet in a far too negative light--apparently Prime Directive. He claims that no matter how bad the situation was, Starfleet would NEVER hold Kirk in disgrace, like that!

[Therin of Andor]

Rush Limborg wrote:

---

a lot of the blame seems to be Gene's, with his obsession that no writer DARE show Kirk & Co., Starfleet, or the UFP in any kind of internal conflict.

Strangely enough, nearly all of Kirk's canonical teachers, Starfleet heroes and Academy colleagues went cuckoo, which kind of set a template which many authors emulated.

Prime Directive. He claims that no matter how bad the situation was, Starfleet would NEVER hold Kirk in disgrace, like that!

Actually, Kirk in disgrace was the one thing in "Prime Directive" that I had trouble believing. Despite the gripping story, I was still unconvinced that Starfleet would be so distrusting of him.

[King Daniel Into Darkness]

Kirk (seemingly) incompetantly kills an entire planet and billions of people, and Starfleet's supposed to let him off the hook and send him back to duty like nothing happened? I haven't read Gene's biog, so I don't know the specifics, but I suspect this is like Majel's uninformed reaction to Lwaxana's death in "Imzadi"

[Therin of Andor]

KingDaniel wrote:

---

Starfleet's supposed to let him off the hook and send him back to duty like nothing happened?

Who claimed that?

[Admiral_Young]

Kirk is in Dark Knight Rises?

[Captaindemotion]

^ Yes. And Bane is in Star Trek (1)2. Hardy and Pine made this bizarre pact while making This Means War.

[Admiral_Young]

Does this mean Reese Witherspoon is Sarah Essen?

[Captaindemotion]

^ Nah, she's Carol Marcus.