Star Trek or Star Wars

  • Thread starter Thread starter Ted_CharlotteNC
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Star Wars is better, of the two. Farscape is probably as cool as SW, and Babylon 5 slightly cooler than both. The best SF, however, is anime: Outlaw Star, Gundam Wing, Cowboy Bebop, all great. Kiddy Grade’s really just an excuse to draw hot chicks and stuff exploding, but it’s better scifi, and far better story, than Star Trek. Did Roddenberry even know what an orbit elevator was?
Van Dread should be required viewing for all feminists, and Tenchi Muyo is just beautiful to look at, even if the story is insane. Gunsword and Trigun aren’t “Space SF”, but they’ve got a lot going for them, too. There’s some cool SF in Read or Die, too.

I used to like Star Trek, but then my voice broke and I went to junior high :3
Seriously, there’s just so much wrong with that franchise! The pajama yuppies in space, first off: are we supposed to care if they live or die? Because I just can’t do it. And the music, I mean the stuff performed on the ships: what, nothing survives but coffee bar jazz and classical? Curse you, Roddenberry, I want bebop! Cabaret! Hairband! Visual Kei! You’re telling me Deanna Troi didn’t listen to boy bands when she was a teenager? You speak foolishness! And if Klingons are such great warriors, why in the name of all that’s holy don’t they kick!
And then there’s the transporter: when you have thrown the Heisenberg uncertainty principle out the window, don’t call people’s attention back to it by saying you have Heisenberg Compensators! Oh, there are so many science problems with that show! To say nothing of the philosophical errors, historical blunders, and quaint, hippy-dippy braindead optimism. Feh.

Oh well, it’s not as bad as the new Battlestar Galactica. Nothing, not even Legolas’ skateboarding in Two Towers, is as bad as the new Battlestar Galactica. Except maybe Eureka, that’s pretty awful, too.
 
Hastrman said:
IOh well, it’s not as bad as the new Battlestar Galactica. Nothing, not even Legolas’ skateboarding in Two Towers, is as bad as the new Battlestar Galactica. Except maybe Eureka, that’s pretty awful, too.
Click to expand...
I must be the only LOTR reader on earth who had no issue with that.
 
I LOVE Star Trek! Dr. McCoy is probably my favorite, something about a cranky old Southern doctor…I dunno.
Other than that, I will take Dune over Star Wars any day.
 
Liberalsaved said:
I must be the only LOTR reader on earth who had no issue with that.
Click to expand...
I wouldn’t have a problem with it as an idea, but the way it plays out all I could think of was Back to the Future and now when I watch the DVD I hear the BttF theme music in my head at that point. 🙂
 
Hastrman said:
Oh well, it’s not as bad as the new Battlestar Galactica. Nothing, not even Legolas’ skateboarding in Two Towers, is as bad as the new Battlestar Galactica. Except maybe Eureka, that’s pretty awful, too.
Click to expand...
Sorry you can’t appreciate great story telling. 🙂
 
I used to love Battlestar Galactica as a kid.

I like Star Wars, but LOVE

Star Trek TNG!

Captain Picard is my favorite.🙂
 
Star Wars is the one for me. I find the story more compelling, especially how it tells the rise, fall, and redemption of Anakin Skywalker. Darth Vader is a very compelling character–not essentially evil as we know evil to be, but a complex character that’s in part been deceived by those he trusted (Palpatine). Vader has elements of good and bad, which makes him complex. We frist see the bad in Episode IV, but gradually we are treated to something else–George Lucas unveils this complexity most especially in Return of the Jedi, where we see Vader as more brooding, and reflective.
 
I’m 49 years old.

I like both Star Wars and Star Trek. I think Star Trek has more complex plots that ask searching questions.

My favorite Star Trek was the Voyager. I really loved the concept.

I grew up with Star Trek, of course, but at the time, there was another fantasy show on that rivalled Star Trek–Dark Shadows! I remember one of the teen magazines ran a popularity poll: Mr. Spock vs. Barnabas Collins. Barnabas won by a landslide. (I voted for Barnabas and I’m still in love with him!)

Interesting that neither show has ever died. We all know about the success of the Star Trek “world.” And Dark Shadows has been on the air somewhere in the world continuously since it was cancelled in the early 1970s. A miniseries was done in 1990. The annual Dark Shadows Festival is still a draw for fans from all over the world. Most of the actors still have a fan following (several have become quite famous, especially Kate Jackson and Marsha Mason). Several books based on Dark Shadows have come out in recent years, including a new fiction novel by Lara Parker, the actress who played the original Angelique (she’s written two other fiction novels based on the show).

Anyone here a Dr. Who fan?! I love that show, especially the Tom Baker episodes. Apparently it’s back on again in England–isn’t that cool?!

I’m also an X-Files fan, but only the John Doggett episodes. I’m sorry, y’all, but I usually didn’t watch the show when Mulder was on–he put me to sleep with his incomprehensible mumbling! Some of the Mulder episodes were awesome, especially the creepy Peacock story, and the weather episode with VIctoria Jackson! But I loved the writing for the Doggett shows, especially Audrey Pauley and John Doe. Both excellent episodes. I also liked the scary episode featuring the Rosary guy.
 
Sorry you can’t appreciate great story telling
Click to expand...
You been watching the same sub-novela soap opera my dad’s been watching? Seriously, it made me wish for “Muffet, muffet, come back, muffet!” Sides, BSG’s just a knockoff of Saberhagen’s Berserker novels.

Also forgot to mention that the new Dr. Who is the third part of the tri-defecta. Here’s a hint for the trained lemurs who write that tripe: YOU DON’T HAVE TO HIDE A SPACEFLEET FROM SONAR!

So, yeah, I’m a go watch me some Kiddy Grade. Ahhhhhh…bishoujo action anime, nature’s most perfect food.

I forgot to mention one other scifi show, among the greatest of them all: Invader ZIM! That, too, is better SF than Battlestar Galactica, and the finest thing to appear on Nickelodeon since Cities of Gold. You seen ZIM’s BackPAK’s legs? Good lord are those cool.
 
Hastrman, I see you like anime so much, since you’re familiar with the terms. I like majou shoujo anime (magical girl anime for those who cannot read Romanji) like Sailormoon and Majou No Stage Fancy Lala. 😃 But to be a bit more in line with the topic, the anime I like best are Neon Genesis Evangelion and Vision of Escaflowne, two anime series I would recommend for those who like sci-fi (especially Evangelion–highly recommended).
 
Anime? Are we talking about Miyazaki now? If so, I vote for Miyazaki. I don’t really care what the other options are. Or what the question was.😃
 
I like Star Wars books more than anything. Luke and Mara are my top characters.

I really like the New Jedi Order books. The story is very close to what is going on in the world, and the theories can be applied.

Star Trek is fun to watch. It has a series appeal.
 
Ted_CharlotteNC said:
I like science fiction and these two “franchises” are probably the best ones to discuss.

If you have a favorite character, series please share.

Personally I am a Star Trek The Next Generation Fan
I like Data and his ongoing struggle to be more human.

In Star Wars Luke is the best character and his tutoring with Yoda is my favorite.
Click to expand...

I really really really do not like SW one bit.​

The problem w. SW is that it has no mythopoetic quality; there is none of what literary men 300 years ago called “invention”. Tolkien had “invention” by the bucket-load, which is why his fictions are so alive. SW relies not on invention, but on technology - and there is only so much that light-sabres can do in a story. If George Lucas had given the light-sabres the ability to speak & to advise their owners (say), that would have been inventive. SW needed a Tolkien - it did not have one. Whoopi Goldberg in a funny purple hat looks like Whoopi Goldberg;

Another problem is that these “space-operas” take bits & pieces of ancient stories, but don’t integrate them in the space-operas to make a new story. Tolkien did - SW (& Stargate) don’t. It’s not enough to use ancient words & names - kiten (as in ST); Marduk, Apophis (both in SG); they need to be used creatively, as if they had never been used before. Tolkien does this so well, that it is easy to forget the Old Norse, Old English, Lombardic, Egyptian, & other sources he drew upon.

If people are going to talk about trilithium, there has to be enough detail in the story to persuade the hearer that whatever trilithium may be, it exists independently of the particular occasion in which it it mentioned; photon torpedos are convincing in just this way - they are like real torpedos, yet sufficiently unfamiliar to be good as elements in a story; there is enough distance between the familar & the unfamiliar for them to work well as a device in the plot. Tolkien maintains this distance. The tribes on other planets in ST - TNG all too often do not; giving a group of actors a bit of make up, some non-human anatomy, and a language unlike English, is not the same as inventing credible aliens who give the impression of utter non-humanity, of being “other than human”, that a genuine alien would.

ST- TNG is too inward-looking; self-obsessed, almost.

Perhaps a world full of machinery is not favourable to creativity & invention (in the sense mentioned). ##
 
Star Wars, hands down, no contest in my book. I can’t give a Spock-like logical analysis of why, I just know what captivated me and made me a die hard fan. (and it wasn’t just Leia as Jabba’s slave in Return of the Jedi…although that may have had something to do with it:D ) And I could have gone my whole life without Jar Jar Binks and been just fine. But overall, I loved Star Wars and could never get into Star Trek.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

I really really really do not like SW one bit.​

The problem w. SW is that it has no mythopoetic quality; there is none of what literary men 300 years ago called “invention”. Tolkien had “invention” by the bucket-load, which is why his fictions are so alive. SW relies not on invention, but on technology - and there is only so much that light-sabres can do in a story. If George Lucas had given the light-sabres the ability to speak & to advise their owners (say), that would have been inventive. SW needed a Tolkien - it did not have one. Whoopi Goldberg in a funny purple hat looks like Whoopi Goldberg;

Another problem is that these “space-operas” take bits & pieces of ancient stories, but don’t integrate them in the space-operas to make a new story. Tolkien did - SW (& Stargate) don’t. It’s not enough to use ancient words & names - kiten (as in ST); Marduk, Apophis (both in SG); they need to be used creatively, as if they had never been used before. Tolkien does this so well, that it is easy to forget the Old Norse, Old English, Lombardic, Egyptian, & other sources he drew upon.

If people are going to talk about trilithium, there has to be enough detail in the story to persuade the hearer that whatever trilithium may be, it exists independently of the particular occasion in which it it mentioned; photon torpedos are convincing in just this way - they are like real torpedos, yet sufficiently unfamiliar to be good as elements in a story; there is enough distance between the familar & the unfamiliar for them to work well as a device in the plot. Tolkien maintains this distance. The tribes on other planets in ST - TNG all too often do not; giving a group of actors a bit of make up, some non-human anatomy, and a language unlike English, is not the same as inventing credible aliens who give the impression of utter non-humanity, of being “other than human”, that a genuine alien would.

ST- TNG is too inward-looking; self-obsessed, almost.

Perhaps a world full of machinery is not favourable to creativity & invention (in the sense mentioned). ##
Click to expand...
At the same time I admire Tolkien, he very much wrote an archetypal story, and Star Wars was another archetypal story (I may be spelling that incorrectly). One of the central things to elarn about story analysis is that archetypes are everywhere. Originality goes only so far.
 
Milliardo said:
Star Wars is the one for me. I find the story more compelling, especially how it tells the rise, fall, and redemption of Anakin Skywalker. Darth Vader is a very compelling character–not essentially evil as we know evil to be, but a complex character that’s in part been deceived by those he trusted (Palpatine). Vader has elements of good and bad, which makes him complex. We frist see the bad in Episode IV, but gradually we are treated to something else–George Lucas unveils this complexity most especially in Return of the Jedi, where we see Vader as more brooding, and reflective.
Click to expand...
Yup! Yup! And even Palpatine’s dark rule had a good side in it. A novel elaborated that he started the galactic empire to prepare their galaxy from the impending Yuhzhan Vong invasion. The glactic civil war that lead to his rule gave birh to a much stronger new republic than that of the episode 1-3 republic.
 
Gottle_of_Geer said:

I really really really do not like SW one bit.​

The problem w. SW is that it has no mythopoetic quality; there is none of what literary men 300 years ago called “invention”. Tolkien had “invention” by the bucket-load, which is why his fictions are so alive. SW relies not on invention, but on technology - and there is only so much that light-sabres can do in a story. If George Lucas had given the light-sabres the ability to speak & to advise their owners (say), that would have been inventive. SW needed a Tolkien - it did not have one. Whoopi Goldberg in a funny purple hat looks like Whoopi Goldberg;

Another problem is that these “space-operas” take bits & pieces of ancient stories, but don’t integrate them in the space-operas to make a new story. Tolkien did - SW (& Stargate) don’t. It’s not enough to use ancient words & names - kiten (as in ST); Marduk, Apophis (both in SG); they need to be used creatively, as if they had never been used before. Tolkien does this so well, that it is easy to forget the Old Norse, Old English, Lombardic, Egyptian, & other sources he drew upon.

If people are going to talk about trilithium, there has to be enough detail in the story to persuade the hearer that whatever trilithium may be, it exists independently of the particular occasion in which it it mentioned; photon torpedos are convincing in just this way - they are like real torpedos, yet sufficiently unfamiliar to be good as elements in a story; there is enough distance between the familar & the unfamiliar for them to work well as a device in the plot. Tolkien maintains this distance. The tribes on other planets in ST - TNG all too often do not; giving a group of actors a bit of make up, some non-human anatomy, and a language unlike English, is not the same as inventing credible aliens who give the impression of utter non-humanity, of being “other than human”, that a genuine alien would.

ST- TNG is too inward-looking; self-obsessed, almost.

Perhaps a world full of machinery is not favourable to creativity & invention (in the sense mentioned). ##
Click to expand...
Apparently you’ve not read any of Starwars’ expanded universe(EU) novels. The stories of the Sith, the knights of the old republic, the after-Endor stories that included the Yuuzhan Vong, Correlian Insurrection, etc… The SW history is rich, creative, and deep, somewhat unlike the movies…

But, when all is said and done, I still wold have to agree that Tolkien is one great “Inventor”… LOTR is the single most influential work of fiction in the 20th century… Maybe this century too… But I like CS Lewis more… Not that I think it’s better, but because I like its children’s book approach… I’m kind of a child by way of the things I like… Hehehehe! 😃
 
I like star treck more, but I really liked the original star wars a lot. Both are great IMO. I didn’t like the new star wars films however.

They sure won’t go down as classics.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top