Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars

Terran · November 21 2012, 11:25 PM

So I was having this ol' debate with a friend the other day, my friend being a Star Wars fan. His reasoning being that Star Wars is better because it caters to a wider audience, has a larger budget and better CGI. But for me, he just isn't getting it. Trek is just so much more involving for me. Not only is there much much more content out there to experience, but its reflection of real world issues, and its cultural diversity make it for me. I don't think I need to even point out that Star Wars has Jar Jar.

So, I wonder how many reasons we can come up with that Star Trek is better than Star Wars (or the other way round perhaps, for arguments sake).

JirinPanthosa · November 22 2012, 04:10 AM

First of all, budget is irrelevant, audience size is irrelevant. If you use those as arguments you automatically declare Twilight as high art.

I prefer Star Trek, hard to say it's better. I could easily argue Star Wars is better. But, things Star Trek does better than Star Wars.

1) Greater variety of stories to be told in the universe
2) Better at moral philosophy, more nuanced in Star Wars you're just kinda either good or evil.
3) Universe is more expansive
4) Star Trek doesn't rely on planet-destruction to make you root against the bad guy.
5) The prequels.

Reasons Star Wars is better than Star Trek?

1) Less preachy
2) Star Trek is oversaturated, there's just so much of it a whole lot of it isn't very good
3) More straightforward entertainment, designed around action and adrenaline.
4) Relies less on technobabble and gadget-ex-machina.
5) Enterprise

teacake · November 22 2012, 04:16 AM

I like both kinds of music.

The Wormhole · November 22 2012, 04:11 PM

I like both Star Trek and Star Wars, why do we have to pit them against each other?

Admittedly, I'm probably more into Trek than Wars, but Star Wars has entertained me since I was ten years old and has provided me many fine memories throughout life. Really, there is no Star Trek vs Star Wars, neither one is better or worse than the other. Granted we all have preferances for one or the other, but preferances do not equal quality.

Gotham Central · November 22 2012, 05:06 PM

Star Wars is more popular because it was created as a straight old fashioned adventure. It benefits from the fact that its was tethered to more historical/timeless archetypes and storytelling. Star Trek was more understated and more reliant on military structures that had fallen out of favor by the time Star wars rolled around. Indeed, on of the things that Trek had going for it in the 60s was that much of its viewing audience had a favorable view of military service and experience with such service. Star wars was about the triumph of rebellion over oppressive authority. That's the world we've been living in ever since.

Star Wars is also more popular because Star Wars was an event. The was very little of it so when you got new product it was BIG news. Star Trek was on television uninterrupted for the better part of 20 years. Even the movies sometimes felt lacking because of the scope of what could be found on TV every week.

The Wormhole · November 22 2012, 05:09 PM

Gotham Central wrote:

Star Wars is also more popular because Star Wars was an event. The was very little of it so when you got new product it was BIG news. Star Trek was on television uninterrupted for the better part of 20 years. Even the movies sometimes felt lacking because of the scope of what could be found on TV every week.

It is true the announcement of Star Wars Episode VII has received a lot more fanfare than the announcement of Trek XI back in 2006.

Gotham Central · November 22 2012, 05:31 PM

The Wormhole wrote:

Gotham Central wrote:

Star Wars is also more popular because Star Wars was an event. The was very little of it so when you got new product it was BIG news. Star Trek was on television uninterrupted for the better part of 20 years. Even the movies sometimes felt lacking because of the scope of what could be found on TV every week.

It is true the announcement of Star Wars Episode VII has received a lot more fanfare than the announcement of Trek XI back in 2006.

It makes sense if you think about it. Most people both in the media and fans knew that Star Trek would not stay dormant long. Where as with Star Wars, most of knew that there would probably be more at some point, but many thought it was going to have to wait for Lucas to become one with the Force before he'd let that happen.

T'Girl · November 22 2012, 08:32 PM

JirinPanthosa wrote:

things Star Trek does better than Star Wars.

3) Universe is more expansive

While I enjoy both ST and SW, I love Star Trek more, but on your point three, I think you have it reversed. The Star Wars extended universe is out and out huge. Even just going off what's on screen Star Wars has more species, more planets and most important, far more diversity of beliefs and concepts than is ever seen in Star Trek. Star Wars did have more money thrown at it and it shows. Star Trek has more hours behind it and you see that, but much of what you see is the same.

The Republic/Empire is depicted as enormous, in comparison the Federation is tiny.

MacLeod · November 22 2012, 08:48 PM

Does TV Sci-Fi have a stigma attached to it, or did it in the past?

I'd bet there are some peope that won't admit to watching the Sci-Fi/Fantasy genre on TV but say they went to see one of those genre movies at the cinema.

-Brett- · November 23 2012, 05:30 AM

Apples and oranges, as they say.

Other than the name and the fact that they're both set in space, they don't actually have a hell of a lot in common. Well, they're both creatively dead properties whose best days are long past and whose fanbases have only endless mediocrity to look forward to, if they're lucky, but that's about where the similarities end.

teacake · November 23 2012, 06:13 AM

The ONLY reason these two keep getting pitted against each other is that they each start with the word Star.

This is why Stargate cleverly used the star word as the first syllable rather than the first word. To avoid these retarded comparisons.

Nerys Myk · November 23 2012, 06:31 AM

There is only one reason I can think of: I like it more. Your mileage may vary.

FreddyE · November 23 2012, 10:17 AM

For me it´s a non-issue. I don´t get why people see both shows as somehow "warring" (pardon the pun). Granted, they are of the same main genre...but have decidetly different sub-gerne characteristics. Star Wars is sci-fi fantasy / space opera, Star Trek is sci-fi utopia most of the time. It´s like comparing apples and bananas.

King Daniel Into Darkness · November 23 2012, 10:18 PM

T'Girl wrote:

The Star Wars extended universe is out and out huge. Even just going off what's on screen Star Wars has more species, more planets and most important, far more diversity of beliefs and concepts than is ever seen in Star Trek.

If you include the SW EU, you've gotta include Trek's too, and although I can't compare it directly to the SW EU (of which my knowledge is nil), it's far more diverse than anything in TV/film Trek. It's also insanely enourmous, covering countless locations, Human, Romulan, Klingon, Tzenkethi, Cardassian, Ferengi and a great meany other wordviews, and multiple alternate histories.

T'Girl · November 23 2012, 10:52 PM

Semi concede the point KingDaniel, while my knowledge of EU-Trek is above nil, it likely isn't as extensive as yours. If you include the source books for the various role playing games going back to the 1980's, the Federation becomes far larger and more powerful entity than what little we saw on screen. Beyond even the Dominion War Starfleet.

Plus, the Federation will alway have two important advantages over the Empire. One, Starfleet would find a valuable ally in the rebel alliance. Two, it would never be necessary to actually defeat the Imperial Starfleet. If you kill the Federation president and the upper members of the council, the Federation would simply replace them, disruption would be minimal.

If Starfleet (or S31) kills the Emperor and his top "henchmen," any war would end with their deaths.

The federation would leave the rebel alliance to pick up the pieces and go about their merry way.

November 21 2012, 11:25 PM	#1
Terran Ensign Location: UK	Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars So I was having this ol' debate with a friend the other day, my friend being a Star Wars fan. His reasoning being that Star Wars is better because it caters to a wider audience, has a larger budget and better CGI. But for me, he just isn't getting it. Trek is just so much more involving for me. Not only is there much much more content out there to experience, but its reflection of real world issues, and its cultural diversity make it for me. I don't think I need to even point out that Star Wars has Jar Jar. So, I wonder how many reasons we can come up with that Star Trek is better than Star Wars (or the other way round perhaps, for arguments sake).

November 22 2012, 04:10 AM	#2
JirinPanthosa Captain	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars First of all, budget is irrelevant, audience size is irrelevant. If you use those as arguments you automatically declare Twilight as high art. I prefer Star Trek, hard to say it's better. I could easily argue Star Wars is better. But, things Star Trek does better than Star Wars. 1) Greater variety of stories to be told in the universe 2) Better at moral philosophy, more nuanced in Star Wars you're just kinda either good or evil. 3) Universe is more expansive 4) Star Trek doesn't rely on planet-destruction to make you root against the bad guy. 5) The prequels. Reasons Star Wars is better than Star Trek? 1) Less preachy 2) Star Trek is oversaturated, there's just so much of it a whole lot of it isn't very good 3) More straightforward entertainment, designed around action and adrenaline. 4) Relies less on technobabble and gadget-ex-machina. 5) Enterprise

November 22 2012, 04:16 AM	#3
teacake Admiral Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars I like both kinds of music. __________________ Rider: I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes. J'onn: It's all I have. ■ ■ ■ Janeway does Melbourne

November 22 2012, 04:11 PM	#4
The Wormhole Admiral	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars I like both Star Trek and Star Wars, why do we have to pit them against each other? Admittedly, I'm probably more into Trek than Wars, but Star Wars has entertained me since I was ten years old and has provided me many fine memories throughout life. Really, there is no Star Trek vs Star Wars, neither one is better or worse than the other. Granted we all have preferances for one or the other, but preferances do not equal quality. __________________ "Internet message boards aren't as funny today as they were ten years ago. I've stopped reading new posts." -The Simpsons 20th anniversary special.

November 22 2012, 05:06 PM	#5
Gotham Central Vice Admiral Location: Under the Globe with Clark	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars Star Wars is more popular because it was created as a straight old fashioned adventure. It benefits from the fact that its was tethered to more historical/timeless archetypes and storytelling. Star Trek was more understated and more reliant on military structures that had fallen out of favor by the time Star wars rolled around. Indeed, on of the things that Trek had going for it in the 60s was that much of its viewing audience had a favorable view of military service and experience with such service. Star wars was about the triumph of rebellion over oppressive authority. That's the world we've been living in ever since. Star Wars is also more popular because Star Wars was an event. The was very little of it so when you got new product it was BIG news. Star Trek was on television uninterrupted for the better part of 20 years. Even the movies sometimes felt lacking because of the scope of what could be found on TV every week. __________________ Well maybe I'm the faggot America. I'm not a part of a redneck agenda. Now everybody do the propaganda. And sing along in the age of paranoia Green Day

STAR TREK

CSI

ABOUT US

November 22 2012, 08:48 PM	#9
MacLeod Vice Admiral Location: Great Britain	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars Does TV Sci-Fi have a stigma attached to it, or did it in the past? I'd bet there are some peope that won't admit to watching the Sci-Fi/Fantasy genre on TV but say they went to see one of those genre movies at the cinema. __________________ On the continent of wild endeavour in the mountains of solace and solitude there stood the citadel of the time lords, the oldest and most mighty race in the universe looking down on the galaxies below sworn never to interfere only to watch.

November 23 2012, 05:30 AM	#10
-Brett- Rear Admiral	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars Apples and oranges, as they say. Other than the name and the fact that they're both set in space, they don't actually have a hell of a lot in common. Well, they're both creatively dead properties whose best days are long past and whose fanbases have only endless mediocrity to look forward to, if they're lucky, but that's about where the similarities end.

November 23 2012, 06:13 AM	#11
teacake Admiral Location: Militant Janeway True Path Devotees Compound. With Sehlats.	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars The ONLY reason these two keep getting pitted against each other is that they each start with the word Star. This is why Stargate cleverly used the star word as the first syllable rather than the first word. To avoid these retarded comparisons. __________________ Rider: I can't believe you'd kill me for a field of empty holes. J'onn: It's all I have. ■ ■ ■ Janeway does Melbourne

November 23 2012, 06:31 AM	#12
Nerys Myk Admiral Location: House of Kang, now with ridges	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars There is only one reason I can think of: I like it more. Your mileage may vary. __________________ Nerys Myk's Midnight In Never Land A novel of Dark Fantasy @ Amazon.com

November 23 2012, 10:17 AM	#13
FreddyE Commander	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars For me it´s a non-issue. I don´t get why people see both shows as somehow "warring" (pardon the pun). Granted, they are of the same main genre...but have decidetly different sub-gerne characteristics. Star Wars is sci-fi fantasy / space opera, Star Trek is sci-fi utopia most of the time. It´s like comparing apples and bananas.

November 23 2012, 10:52 PM	#15
T'Girl Vice Admiral	Re: Age old discussion, Star Trek vs. Star Wars Semi concede the point KingDaniel, while my knowledge of EU-Trek is above nil, it likely isn't as extensive as yours. If you include the source books for the various role playing games going back to the 1980's, the Federation becomes far larger and more powerful entity than what little we saw on screen. Beyond even the Dominion War Starfleet. Plus, the Federation will alway have two important advantages over the Empire. One, Starfleet would find a valuable ally in the rebel alliance. Two, it would never be necessary to actually defeat the Imperial Starfleet. If you kill the Federation president and the upper members of the council, the Federation would simply replace them, disruption would be minimal. If Starfleet (or S31) kills the Emperor and his top "henchmen," any war would end with their deaths. The federation would leave the rebel alliance to pick up the pieces and go about their merry way.