Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

[Optimistic discord]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Heh, I love how that list of tech gets updated to ever slightly more modern versions. Sadly a lot of it is all based from existing tech. I am not saying star trek did not inspire people to help move that technology forwards I just think it is doing a disservice to those who created and worked on getting the science to a point where it was suggested In star trek.
as an example jet-injectors are old tech, theorised in the early 1900s and patented in the 60s. Phasers ect... Star trek was never the first program to push lasers/death rays

[anunitu]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

You are wrong. Did I not just tell you AND link you to actual scientific gadgets that Star Trek used and we use now?

Just because you say something after evidence is given to you doesn't mean you are correct. In fact facts are going to let me tell you in no uncertain terms...you are actually factually wrong.

There. I said it.

My dear Duce,I think you are knocking on an empty door....as in waste of time explaining....

[Optimistic discord]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Neither is superior to each other. Both are totally different and need to be appreciated on their own terms.

The old "star trek gave us all this tech" argument is frankly nothing more than spin. Everything that is claimed to exist because of star trek is a foreseeable development of existing technology and science.

George Lucas is a terrible director. The original star wars films ( I am a total star wars fan boy) had huge flaws and do not hold up well to time. His embracing of merchandising and sfx killed off any hope of having decent story focused plot ,hence why they lost their producer after empire.

- - - Updated - - -

Its almost as if people forget we had portable communication devices before star trek...

- - - Updated - - -

As a star wars fan it was never the battles that entertained me, those only really became important in the prequels.
It was always the classic "King Arthur" narrative. An orphan raised in hardship finds out he is important , gets ancient magic item, fights evil, loses mentor and makes friends
.

- - - Updated - - -

Then it was the expanded universe material which developed the setting and kept it Alive.

- - - Updated - - -

Star trek really played on issues that were effecting the viewers at the time. Most of the original series I "Reds vs Blues" .
It helped make people aware of things science was working on at the time. The follow on series started introducing more universe consistency and even decent multi episode plot lines.
Deep space 9 was by the beat for that.

[neráida]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

I think some people are unclear as to what constitutes science fiction.

[MaskedOne]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

In case there was any doubt, Wars. Trek occasionally amuses me but I love Wars.

[DragonsFriend]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

I like good science fiction and neither of these shows are about science fiction. Star Trek does incorporate more science into the show but the story lines are about the social and economic problems we face in real life. Star Wars is more like a space cowboy movie with magic and religion thrown in to make the elements stronger instead of money being the source of power. The "science" is just there and you just have to accept it. The "magic" is there and even though it is explained it is limited to a few gifted people. Instead of horses, the good guys have their nearly sentient androids.
Of the two, Star Trek is the better science fiction but only because you get to understand the technology a bit. Both shows explore good and evil but Star Trek has always shown there are degrees of good and evil and that fanatics rarely change.

[Juniper]

I have no preference of one over the other and wouldn't care of either franchise were to stop making new movies and/or television shows tomorrow.

[thalassa]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

I'm not a Star Wars fan, and never have been really.

[anubisa]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

I never could get into Star Trek. When I first saw Star Wars I was immediately drawn into it. The stories just had me from the first moment. And it does relate a bit to us. We have a bit of light and dark within us. We also never know what may come in the future. It wasn't that long ago when jets were considered something that could never be done. Or going to the moon. Maybe one day we won't need a spaceship like the ones we have today and can fly a single ship in space. You never know. It is inspirational in my opinion and I have always loved it.

[Hawkfeathers]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Erhmmm.....

Merging the two franchises would be bad for both of them. They have different themes, largely different cosmologies and very different scales.

I don't think they'll fully merge, but they can be shown to coexist at some point in time. Anything can be connected to anything if you find the right pathway. Being Hollywood, it depends on how much money is made by people debating which one's better LOL

[DanieMarie]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Why is it always an either/or thing with these two? It's such a stupid nerd stereotype. I love both for different reasons. Star Wars is a great fantasy story with a lot of adventure and colorful characters. Star Trek is fantastic science fiction that asks us to explore beyond the boundaries of what we know. Both feature great storytelling (in most cases, anyway...there are a lot of flaws in both the Star Wars prequels and some of the Star Trek stories).

In a lot of ways, I think they're very, very different. Even though Star Wars takes place in space, it feels more like a fantasy story to me than a Sci Fi story. Star Trek is definitely classic sci fi. Therefore, this question always feels as stupid as "Star Wars vs. Doctor Who" or "Star Trek vs. Game of Thrones." The nerds over at io9 agree with me: http://io9.gizmodo.com/5799837/10-wo...really-fantasy

[Medusa]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Ok now I'm going to say something about it Medusa. Star Trek lacks science. It doesn't have any potential to use the lack of science unlike Star Wars. There I said it.

You are wrong. Did I not just tell you AND link you to actual scientific gadgets that Star Trek used and we use now?

Just because you say something after evidence is given to you doesn't mean you are correct. In fact facts are going to let me tell you in no uncertain terms...you are actually factually wrong.

There. I said it.

[ThePaganMafia]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Ok now I'm going to say something about it Medusa. Star Trek lacks science. It doesn't have any potential to use the lack of science unlike Star Wars. There I said it.

My point is proven. You have absolutely no clue what your talking about. I think you are just being ridiculous for the sake of being ridiculous as you have little to offer an actual discussion about this.

[Bartmanhomer]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

Ok now I'm going to say something about it Medusa. Star Trek lacks science. It doesn't have any potential to use the lack of science unlike Star Wars. There I said it.

[ThePaganMafia]

Re: Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

So, I grew up watching both. But, here is why Start Trek has touched me far more in my life than Star Wars ever did. Star Wars is a fun space romp that doesn't rely much on explanation and engages feeling as opposed to intellect. It does this very well. Star Trek was a show, that in the 1960's pushed boundaries more than any other show before it. The first interracial kiss on television? That was Star Trek. It was a show that's message was equality, fairness, and the betterment of the human race. Martin L. King Jr., himself, was a fan. It touches moral questions and storylines like no other show has. It has a rich, detailed canon that spans hundreds of years. Star Trek is also far more relatable to me as it exists only a few hundred years in the future and is an exploration into the potential of humanity.

Much of my current viewpoints and beliefs are shaped by Star Trek. It got me interested in science and learning as a small child. No other television show has come close to doing this. It is a shame what Hollywood has done to Gene Roddenberry's vision. Star Wars has never made me cry. Star Trek has.

- - - Updated - - -

A couple of weeks ago in the chatroom I mention to the other member why Star Wars and Star Trek are superior to each other but the reason why Star Wars is more superior than Star Trek. It's a very long explanation so I'm giving you my reasons: The storyline. The Star Wars storyline is way different and more better than Star Trek because of the space battles and plot. It excites the Star Wars fans because of the action and adventure and the shocking surprises which leads them to a cliffhanger. While Star Trek lack a quality of a good storyline at all which means Star Wars wins the storyline. The Universe: Star Wars got over hundreds of planets where Star Trek got a few planets. Aliens: Star Wars got so many inter-galatic species is too many to count where Star Trek only got Klingon and Borg species. Originality: Star Wars got so much originality and creativity where Star Trek lack of. So overall Star Wars is more superior than Star Trek.

I will respond directly to this to correct some of the fallacies you have posted.

Star Trek lacking a quality storyline? You are only able to name two species in the entire Trek Universe which makes me wonder if you have ever watched it at all. Star Trek has shown probably hundred of more aliens on screen than Star War ever could in it's paltry seven movies. Space battles? Check out Deep Space Nine's Dominion War story arc. Only a few planets? Almost every episode takes place on a different planet. How many times do we have to see Tatooine and Coruscant in the Star War's movies?

Your arguments are poorly base and it seems you are making claims with absolutely no knowledge of Star Trek at all.