I don't think it's right to compare Star Wars and Star Trek!

[Mole]

I think it's dumb... They are 2 very completely different stories, and Star Wars is only 2 trilogies with a ton of side stories, novels, fan fiction, and games with independant and original stories based in the Star Wars universe. The Star Wars stories have kinda always been about overcoming odds and fighting for the cause of good. Star Trek is the same, but it seems more about space conquest. Star Trek (from what I have seen) has a universe that's about as big as that, maybe bigger, but there aren't trilogies, there's TONS of movies and episodes from it, as well as lots of side stories, fan fiction, and novels based on other parts of the Star Trek universe. Haven't seen many games from the Star Trek universe.

Anyway, those are probably some sh*tty opinions, but I get mad when geeks try to compare Star Wars and Star Trek, I think they should be beaten.

[DUKE HARDKNOCK]

Haven't seen many games from the Star Trek universe.
Try searching for "Star Trek" at GameFAQs.

I do agree that comparing Star Wars to Star Trek is somewhat of an exercise in futility though, unless you're trying to determine which is the better sci-fi setting of course (hint: it's Star Wars). I'd say that Star Trek is about space exploration rather than conquest though. As far as the respective EUs go, I expect there's not that much between them in terms of novels and fan fiction. Googlefight seems to favour SW in the latter department (http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=star+wars+fan+fiction&q2=star+trek+fan+fiction&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us), though. Well, latter and former (http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=star+wars+novels&q2=star+trek+novels&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us).

[1badjedi]

:rolleyes:


star trek bl0wz in comparison :P

[Indolentron]

star trek blows out of comparison too.

[opus512]

I never saw the point or relation in comparing the two, either. Best thing I ever saw on them both was Triumph the Insult Dog doing the interview of poeople waiting in line to see EP 1 and had some dude dressed up as Spock came out and flipped them all off.

Two different shows, stories, universes, everything.

Hell I even have a hard time comparing the original SW trilogy to the new, or the original ST shows to TSG and all the shit that came after it. IMO, the originals of both blow anything from the later shit of either away.

[DUKE HARDKNOCK]

Hell I even have a hard time comparing the original SW trilogy to the new, or the original ST shows to TSG and all the shit that came after it. IMO, the originals of both blow anything from the later shit of either away.
The original Star Wars trilogy is still good today. Star Trek: TOS is terrible camp. Seriously, it's absolutely dreadful - if rather unintentionally funny. TNG was a much better series overall (though only after crazyman Roddenberry stopped writing, I believe; I vividly remember the horrific pilot), even if it was still plagued by pseudo-science, non-sensical physics and insane superior officers who seemed hellbent on putting themselves in danger by scouting out unknown territory on their own. Some of the later episodes had pretty cool premises though, particularly the ones about Data.

[noTiger]

I never saw the point or relation in comparing the two, either. Best thing I ever saw on them both was Triumph the Insult Dog doing the interview of poeople waiting in line to see EP 1 and had some dude dressed up as Spock came out and flipped them all off.

Two different shows, stories, universes, everything.

Hell I even have a hard time comparing the original SW trilogy to the new, or the original ST shows to TSG and all the shit that came after it. IMO, the originals of both blow anything from the later shit of either away.


I remember seeing that... I was on my honeymoon and laughed so hard I almost fell off my chair. "Look at you... you like, some kind of a supernerd!!!

...made in a laboratory... from the parts of lesser nerds..." :lol:

FOUND IT: http://www.ifilm.com/filmdetail?ifilmid=2456970

[1badjedi]

the next gen 0wned but the original is surely camp with every episode being centered on how many alien babes kirk can bang before the end of the episode. ;)

[opus512]

The original Star Wars trilogy is still good today. Star Trek: TOS is terrible camp. Seriously, it's absolutely dreadful - if rather unintentionally funny. TNG was a much better series overall (though only after crazyman Roddenberry stopped writing, I believe; I vividly remember the horrific pilot), even if it was still plagued by pseudo-science, non-sensical physics and insane superior officers who seemed hellbent on putting themselves in danger by scouting out unknown territory on their own. Some of the later episodes had pretty cool premises though, particularly the ones about Data.
Only the first season or so of the original Star Trek was meant to be semi-serious, after that, they intentionaly went low budget and camp. Well, not intentionaly low budget, their budget was cut despite what the shows producers wanted, but they ran with it and went with the cheese factor.

And I agree TNG was a well written and produced show. The problem I have always had was combining the two into one over all 'universe'. They just don't fir together, any more than the first SW trilogy fits with the second. That's just me, anyway.

[opus512]

the next gen 0wned but the original is surely camp with every episode being centered on how many alien babes kirk can bang before the end of the episode. ;)
I liked one scene, in the first movie I think? Where McCoy and Kirk are stuck in some prison and Kirk goes and hits on some alien shape changing chick, and McCoy asks him "What is it with you!?" :lol:

Classic shit :bigthumb:

[1badjedi]

yep thats all the original ST was. a way for shatner to get laid ;)

[DUKE HARDKNOCK]

Only the first season or so of the original Star Trek was meant to be semi-serious, after that, they intentionaly went low budget and camp. Well, not intentionaly low budget, their budget was cut despite what the shows producers wanted, but they ran with it and went with the cheese factor.
I can respect that, but that just makes it cheesy campy stuff. :P

And I agree TNG was a well written and produced show. The problem I have always had was combining the two into one over all 'universe'. They just don't fir together, any more than the first SW trilogy fits with the second. That's just me, anyway.
I didn't grow up with TOS so I'm probably less critical in that respect, but I think TNG fitted in pretty well with the original premise and remained true to the spirit of Star Trek (minus the somewhat sexist overtones, perhaps). :dunno:

As for the Star Wars trilogies, I don't really have any trouble 'fitting them together'. They're played out differently and against different political backdrops of course, but all the familiar Star Wars elements are in place and so far I don't think we've seen anything that feels like it doesn't belong in the Star Wars galaxy. I find it more difficult to say the same about the New Jedi Order books (some 20+ years after RotJ).

[opus512]

Yeah, I grew up watching the original series :D

Gotta remember the time it was made, too, not real high end special effects available back then.

The first few seasons of TNG I liked quite a bit, loved the Tasha Yar<?) charecter, and Riker in the early years. BUt then it just bogged down, and all the sudden *bam* we gots like a half dozen freaking Star Trek shows on :mad:

Also, I could never take the TNG movies. The original Star Trek movies were great, because the series was so low budget, it was just awsome what they could do later with special effects with a real big movie budget, and that made them special, IMO.

The new show though, already had some pretty damn good effects, which, towards the end, were damn near on par with movie level. So when the movies came out, they just seemed more like they could have been just a two hour TV special or something. I htink that speaks well for the TNG TV series though, more than a slam on the movies.

Star Wars, I don't know. To me I go back to the contrast between the Star Trek series and movies. With Star Wars, there's no real contrast. The effects in the first trilogy were pretty damn good, and Lucas was incredible at working around limitations in technology and budget. In the second trilogy, it's almost like they just threw out as much eye candy as they could, for no other reason than they could because they had the money and tech this time around, but that, IMO, just made them souless.

I suppose your right and the story does mesh ok, even if the 'older' techn of the new series looks better than the 'newer' tech of the old series (one reason I refuse to watch the latest Star Trek series Enterprise, other than hating Scott Bakula).

I wish Lucas had played it more low key. I mean, all I gotta do is bring up the iron works scene with Padme flopping all over through the melting pots and shit. Did that scene need to happen? No, but it looked cool, so let's have some filler.

Don't read the books, so can't comment on them.

[Cop]

While I still like the new movies, I can't argue with that...

The effects in the first trilogy were pretty damn good, and Lucas was incredible at working around limitations in technology and budget. In the second trilogy, it's almost like they just threw out as much eye candy as they could, for no other reason than they could because they had the money and tech this time around, but that, IMO, just made them souless.

[DUKE HARDKNOCK]

In the second trilogy, it's almost like they just threw out as much eye candy as they could, for no other reason than they could because they had the money and tech this time around, but that, IMO, just made them souless.
Well, you're not too far off really. George Lucas hasn't tried to hide the fact that the visual department of the Star Wars films in particular has always been very important to him, which of course is one of the primary reasons the Special Edition was made. He said himself that quite early on he thought that digital effects were the next step, allowing him to do what he really wanted to do as his vision and creativity wouldn't be impeded by physical limitations if everything could be done with computers. When ILM did Jurassic Park, he saw this time had come.

Basically then, the prequels are simply as heavy in the CGI department because they can. And in all fairness, the battle of Hoth looks rather timid compared to the battle of Geonosis in AotC; there are many scenes and events that wouldn't have been possible with the technology available two decades ago. I think it's important to keep in mind that if the original trilogy would have been produced with the same tools as the prequels, it may very well have come out much more closely resembling the prequels than the existing oldies. George Lucas and ILM pushed the envelope back then to get everything looking as appealing as possible back then, and they're doing the same now.

I suppose your right and the story does mesh ok, even if the 'older' techn of the new series looks better than the 'newer' tech of the old series (one reason I refuse to watch the latest Star Trek series Enterprise, other than hating Scott Bakula).
There's been a lot of debate on the tech, but then a lot of that comes from the elegant Naboo ships we saw in TPM; the droid control ships are much more industrial and utilitarian, presumably because they're produced in large quantities and are designed primarily for warfare. Whether it's 'true' or not, a commonly accepted explanation for the look of vessels in the original trilogy is that there was a civil war going on and making pretty looking combat vehicles wasn't much of an option.

However, I must admit that it's hard to find a good fictional explanation for the completely different looks of computer systems and displays. The obvious 'real-life' reason is that technology, imagination and special effects have changed a great deal since the OT (something that is also painfully apparent in other older sci-fi set in our own future, where computers and screens look positively archaic), but knowing that doesn't really help you suspend your disbelief.

I wish Lucas had played it more low key. I mean, all I gotta do is bring up the iron works scene with Padme flopping all over through the melting pots and shit. Did that scene need to happen? No, but it looked cool, so let's have some filler.
There's a bit on that about the DVD, actually. Apparently they found that, months into post-production, Lucas felt they really needed something extra to fit in at that point to maintain momentum instead of stopping the action and having yet more dialogue. So based on an earlier scene in which Obi-wan was looking down into the droid factory, they decided to make this conveyor belt sequence to keep the action going. It was arguably a superfluous scene nonetheless, but it wasn't thrown in quite as carelessly as one might think.

Don't read the books, so can't comment on them.
Basically, the Empire is no longer a factor and now weird-as-hell semi-humanoid aliens from another galaxy, who mutilate themselves on purpose and have all these organic weapons and ships etc, come to invade the galaxy where Luke and friends live to pretty much kill everyone. That kind of nonsense belongs in Babylon 5 or Star Trek or Farscape or whatever - not in Star Wars (in my opinion).

[scottg26]

Look upon this gem i have stumbled upon :D

true, they shouldn't be compared, the enterprise vs star destroyer conversations are pointless too

As for TOS, i LOVE IT! and TNG (bought them all on dvd). havent watched a lot of the new enterprise show though. That trip guy pisses me off

i laugh at every star trek episode an movie. which is why i always watch it by myself :evil:

i take it semi seriously, ok very seriously, but laugh at it constantly. whether the comedy was intentional or not

TOS is absoloutly hillarious