Star Wars Vs. Star Trek

[Vanny]

Both.
I like them both for different reasons.
Star Wars does have the stronger line of demarcation between good and evil- which I like-especially the original trilogy.
Some of the storylines on the Star Treks(all 5 of them, TO,TNG,
DS9,Voyager, and Enterprise)were very good,
Others I didn’t like so much.
I do agree about secularism creeping in to the ST series-someitmes- more from TNG on rather that the original.

 

[Hospitaller]

(oh look, another shot of Padme staring out a window, like Peter Jackson didn’t already kill this storytelling device in the first LOTR)

What, like the kiss-and-fade-out has been killed? Like the Hero-riding-off-into-the-sunset?

There are certain filmic conventions that just work.

 

[MEP]

Hospitaller:

What, like the kiss-and-fade-out has been killed? Like the Hero-riding-off-into-the-sunset?

There are certain filmic conventions that just work.

Having a character stare off blankly into a window pane 6 times over the course of one film is not a filmic convention that works. It is not comparable to riding off into the sunset or the kiss and fade. It is lazy directing, plain and simple.

 

[The_Black_Knight]

MEP:

Having a character stare off blankly into a window pane 6 times over the course of one film is not a filmic convention that works.

When, exactly, did they do that?

 

[MEP]

Let’s see… throughout a large portion of the horrible third movie in the prequel. Seriously, which movie were you watching?

 

[The_Black_Knight]

MEP:

Let’s see… throughout a large portion of the horrible third movie in the prequel. Seriously, which movie were you watching?

LotR. What are you talking about? AoTC?

 

[qmvsimp]

MEP:

Having a character stare off blankly into a window pane 6 times over the course of one film is not a filmic convention that works. It is not comparable to riding off into the sunset or the kiss and fade. It is lazy directing, plain and simple.

One of the most successful movies of all time, but had a filmic convention that didn’t work and had lazy directing.

While I know you’re just expressing your opinion, us legions of Star Wars fans and the legions of fans that buy movie tickets and DVD’s beg to differ.

 

[wabrams]

(sidenote, the actor who played Data is now a regular character on the new Battlestar Galactica series, also superior to Trek in every way)

Brent Spiner isn’t on *Battlestar Galactica. *Either way, that has got to be one of the best sci-fi shows on TV.

 

[InSearchOfGod]

I particularly hate one quote from Star Wars Episode III

“Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.” -Obi-Wan to newly named Darth Vader.

I thought God spoke in absolutes!

Not to mention the phrase “Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.” is pretty absolute itself

 

[wabrams]

InSearchOfGod:

I particularly hate one quote from Star Wars Episode III

“Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.” -Obi-Wan to newly named Darth Vader.

I thought God spoke in absolutes!

Not to mention the phrase “Only a Sith speaks in absolutes.” is pretty absolute itself

I think it was more or less beuase Anakin insisted Obi-Wab join him or he was his enemy.

 

[Hospitaller]

You chaps might like to check out Star Destroyer.net for an amusing (and more or less realistic and rational) look at how well the Federation would fare against the Galactic Empire.

 

[Cupofkindness]

According to my intellegent 12 year old son,

Star Wars is about good and evil, and Star Trek is about “us” and “them.” So I think I have to say that Star Wars is better. But, I’m not saying SW-ROTS (Episode III) was too much compared to the other five anyway, I think it wasn’t as good as the others. Also, although you see plenty of good STs, the percentage isn’t as good as Star Wars’(5/6). So ST<SW. And SW=LOTR. It is SCIENTIFIC!!!

That was his opinion, now for mine.

I really like the Next Generation characters. “Data” just can’t be beat, Brent Spiner is brilliant in that role. I loved the episode where he built himself a daughter. And many of the Next Generation episodes were so good, like “Time’s Arrow” or the original Borg one. Another one of my favorites is Beverley’s Bubble (I think it’s officially called “Remember Me”) and also time-space continum ruptures like the one where the Enterprise keeps blowing up. “The Inner Light” where Picard has a family had me in tears. And the one where Scotty returns to the future was touching, even though it was so sentimental. And any Star Trek that features Gene’s Roddenberry’s wife, as Deanna Troi’s mother is usually hilarious. So, where Star Wars might lack in plot, it makes up for in an interesting array of quirky characters who get themselves in very strange situations. Many of the values presented in Star Trek are not, in my view, compatible with Christian values and those are the episodes I like the least. And I never liked Deep Space Nine, it’s very dark.

Although the special effects are superior, Star Wars is incredibly violent. I don’t think I’ll ever see Episode Three for that reason. I think much of the plot is as superficial as Star Trek. I don’t much care for how Anakin is born of a human mother, but Anakin’s life allegedly begins at the will of the mitichlorian (or whatever that “may the force be with you” force energy is called). To me, that is a mockery of the Incarnation. But I still enjoy Star Wars immensely. I’m sorry to see it come to an end (although I didn’t see the end).

 

[InSearchOfGod]

Cupofkindness:

I don’t much care for how Anakin is born of a human mother, but Anakin’s life allegedly begins at the will of the mitichlorian (or whatever that “may the force be with you” force energy is called). To me, that is a mockery of the Incarnation. But I still enjoy Star Wars immensely. I’m sorry to see it come to an end (although I didn’t see the end).

I don’t think that’s George Lucas’s attempt at mocking the birth of Jesus. If you read about mythology the “Virgin Birth” is always a huge recurring theme, even before Jesus. Star Wars has many of these mythilogical themes throughout, which I’m sure is part of the reason it is so popular. Check out Joseph Campbell’s “Hero with a Thousand Faces”

wabrams:

I think it was more or less beuase Anakin insisted Obi-Wab join him or he was his enemy.

Yes, and Obi-Wan should have said, “I am the enemy of your evil choices” I mean, if you are evil in the real world, does that mean God is either with you or against you? He’s certainly against your evil. Very absolute.

 

[qmvsimp]

Cupofkindness:

I’m sorry to see it come to an end (although I didn’t see the end).

If you saw episode six, then you’ve seen the end.

 

[Cupofkindness]

True enough!

 

[jediliz]

there is no right or wrong answer to this question, but the answer is of course STAR WARS!

Star trek doesn’t have a princess or a scoundrel or a farm boy. Or a heroic droid!

still trying to convince two older nieces they want to dress as Princess Leia

 

[qmvsimp]

jediliz:

Star trek doesn’t have a princess or a scoundrel or a farm boy. Or a heroic droid!

Princess figure: Deana Troy plus several episodes did have female royalty including Deana’s mother.
Scoundrels: The Borg, The Klingons, The Dominion, etc.
Farm boy: Wesley Crusher.
Heroic droid: Data.

For the record, I like them both equally.

 

[BJRumph]

Hmm…

While I love the technical detail that ST displays, which is far superior than that of SW, ultimately I go with content and principle, therefore I have to vote for SW.

I agree with certain others here, in that if you cut out the gimmickry of ST, then you could condense the fanchise, in toto, into *less than * ten 1-hour episodes. TIme-travel, alternate universes, loops, whatever, are all gimmicks that allow the writers to simply regurgitate the same story content and principle over and over and over and over… Of course, cut out that gimmickry, then the show has virtually no appeal at all to me.

Stargate SG1 suffers the same basic fate as ST, though they are less technically restrictive (read: pseudo-realistic). The now (current season on SciFi Channel) obvious principle behind SG1 makes it, on principle, as insipid to myself as the over-sterile socialism of ST.

On Firefly, I agree that I like this short series far more than I had anticipated (it is one thing to reinterpret the archtypes represented in Westerns into a sci-fi universe, but to actually bring the cowboys, as such, into a sci-fi universe? I never thought it could be as logical as it turned out). However, as I first saw it on the DVD collection, I will say, first three discs- Great; the last disk should be melted down and redone, as those last episodes undo and destroy all of the character, whit, and charm that the series started out with. We’ll just have to see if Serenity will recover from or continue this dreadful twisting of the Firefly spirit.

Oh, and the Borg, Klingons, and Dominion are “villians”, not “scoundrels”. The “dirty good (or even bad) guy” scoundrel of SW does not exist (to my knowledge) in the ST universe. The *closest thing * that the ST universe has that could be called a “scoundrel” in good-faith is the Ferengi.

But, jmho.

B

 

[qmvsimp]

BJRumph:

Oh, and the Borg, Klingons, and Dominion are “villians”, not “scoundrels”. The “dirty good (or even bad) guy” scoundrel of SW does not exist (to my knowledge) in the ST universe. The *closest thing *that the ST universe has that could be called a “scoundrel” in good-faith is the Ferengi.

Webster defines scoundrel as “a disreputable person.” American Heritage defines scoundrel as “a villain; a rogue.”

I was clearly using scoundrel as synonymous with villain. Even if you don’t use them as synonymous, wouldn’t you say that in the episodes where the Klingons, Borg and Dominion are the villians that the specific ones are disreputable and rogues in terms of Federation standards?

 

[Hospitaller]

BJRumph:

Hmm…

While I love the technical detail that ST displays, which is far superior than that of SW, ultimately I go with content and principle, therefore I have to vote for SW.

Nah-uh. SW wins by virtue of *not *attempting to explain its miraculous advanced technology through incomprehensible and self-contradictory technobabble.