Which Trek novel would make the best film and why ?

[Christopher]

The entire argument was about the superiority, in dramatic shows, of traditional animation to 3D CGI animation.

And I disagree with such a blanket generalization. It's as simplistic and unfair as any other stereotype.

There's a reason Venture Bros. is the best-animated Adult Swim program; while it is the funniest, it is also the one exploring the most serious themes and ideas, which it would be hard-pressed to do in Flash. I assert that, from my own point of view, it would also be hard-pressed to do so in 3D, regardless of the caliber of the 3D, because of the distracting nature of 3D outlined above.

Distracting to you. Isn't it rather egocentric to think that your personal tastes would be a factor in whether a particular type of show would succeed with a general audience?

I'm comparing crude 2D and 3D of any competence in their ultimate effect, not in their styles.

And that's an intrinsically and obviously unfair selection designed to reinforce your prejudices. It's also absurd to lump all 3D animation together regardless of era, budget, or style. That's blatant stereotyping and obviously illegitimate reasoning on the face of it.

 

[Myasishchev]

And I disagree with such a blanket generalization. It's as simplistic and unfair as any other stereotype.

I've laid out my reasoning, which I don't think is simplistic, nor based on a single or even a few samples. Even if it is unfair, what does fairness have to do with aesthetic judgment?

Would you interrogate my reasoning were I to say I ordinarily prefer brunettes to blondes? Or even one specific woman of any description over another? It's blatantly unfair, isn't it? It's even more deeply unfair than making a blanket statement about a rendering technique, since one can choose CGI or traditional, but one is imposed with their physical characteristics when they are conceived, without a scintilla of choice! If I were to say I prefer the look of brunettes to blondes, or the body of Jennifer to the body of Jessica, I am actually passing judgment on people, not art! That's a real asshole thing to do.

Yet it is an aesthetic judgment, and fairness in outcome is not a prerequisite. The opinion is valid, because it is subjectively true.

The only fairness that's really required is giving any given aesthetic option a chance. I have seen perhaps a hundred thousand blondes, between real life and TV. I have no doubt seen hundreds of thousands of CGI frames. On the merits, I have pronounced aesthetic judgments on each, enforceable only in the jurisdiction of me.

Why in the world would you find that so bothersome? I make no objective claim.

Isn't it rather egocentric to think that your personal tastes would be a factor in whether a particular type of show would succeed with a general audience?

Isn't it a bit presumptive to suggest I should care, at all, what a general audience wants?

I recognize that mine might be a minority opinion, and I'm fine with that--I liked North, for God's sake--and were I in a position of authority to determine what kind of shows or films get made, I would weigh things differently because of my contractual or fiduciary duties. If everyone on the planet but me wants CGI, despite my opinion, I should obviously give 'em CGI--because we're talking money.

But we aren't talking money. I am not a studio executive or on the board of directors of a film company. Hence, I need not concern myself with a business judgment.

And that's an intrinsically and obviously unfair selection designed to reinforce your prejudices. It's also absurd to lump all 3D animation together regardless of era, budget, or style. That's blatant stereotyping and obviously illegitimate reasoning on the face of it.

Okay, I'll give you this--as an evolving medium, the jury isn't in on CGI yet, in the same sense that it is for blondes (27 years for me, 10,000 for the "general audience" ). I may yet be surprised, and have to eat crow. That's fine too.

And finally, as a general point, criticism of any kind does not entail the promulgation of general truths, my friend. It merely involves the expression, sometimes better founded, sometimes not, sometimes more widely accepted, sometimes not, of subjective truth.

P.S.: I don't like poetry either, and find that when it succeeds, it does so in spite of the medium's limitations. I'm an extremely bad, stereotyping man.

P.P.S: Over a Torrent Sea is so far pretty rocking. Is that judgment okay with you?

 

[Christopher]

Would you interrogate my reasoning were I to say I ordinarily prefer brunettes to blondes?

I would if you cast it as an argument that only brunettes should be allowed to appear in dramatic programming.

 

[Myasishchev]

^ Fair enough.

 

[issreliant]

Well instead of First Contact which i like, i would have filmed "Vendetta", it has a more epic scope than FC, more action and a better story involving the borg, without having to use time travel. also it has refrences to TOS episode "The Doomsday Machine". would have loved to have seen flashback scenes from "The Doomsday Machine" in the movie. other books that would have made great films...The Ashes of Eden.....Federation.....and any Q book!

 

[justcorbly]

Coming late to this thread, I see it has wandered off, as usual, to distant pastures. But, I will add my voice in support of a film version of the Destiny trilogy.

Not because it would be flashy and explosive, but because of the potential depth. There's much more going on in Destiny than the typical Trek bad-guy-of-the-week episode. Too many Trek movies, including Khan, are just long TV shows.

I'm not sure how Destiny could be handled on film since it is set against a large Trek backstory. For example, how do you establish the threat and fear generated by the Borg if the viewer has no previous experience with them?

My second choice might be, ahem, one of the Shatner novels. Because their scope is much smaller, and because they center on familiar characters, audiences would require less handholding.

 

[JD]

I'm not sure how Destiny could be handled on film since it is set against a large Trek backstory. For example, how do you establish the threat and fear generated by the Borg if the viewer has no previous experience with them?

I really think that could conveyed pretty well through the amount of destruction they cause, and how people react to them and the invasion.