The powers of propaganda and media.

[Push The Button]

I love them both. One of my best childhood memories is of my father taking me to the theater to see Star Wars in 1977, one of the very few times that we ever went to the movies together.

I'll be in line to see the next SW movie this December, and I'll also be in line next year for JJ's next Trek film.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

It seems to me that if you were very young when you were first exposed to a Star Wars movie, then Star Wars is, for you, the greatest thing EVARRR and always will be.

But if your critical faculties were more mature upon first contact with SW, then your response will be a very individual thing. For my part, at age 15 I thought Episode IV was good but hardly life-changing. And needless to say, I'm not a big fan of the three prequels.

By contrast, I got started on Star Trek at age 7 and it really is the greatest thing ever. And it always will be.

 

[Lexx Shrapnel]

It had a great run and the Trek experience is 200 years if you read all the books.

It did, but, it's aging as the effects and technology evolve (I don't know how Wars is not). It may had a great run, yes, but you are forgetting about all the people that will come after, the new trekkers!

I for example, it feels sad to think the series i love exist in old TV shows that don't get more credit those days. If that's the way it is now, imagine years from now! I wish that Trek had keep up with the passage of time, but it looks like the new generation is just more stupid (sorry the word) and the ones that actually have capacity to understand Trek are getting rare and rare.

OBS: I'm not a Star Wars hater ok? I like Star Wars and Darth Vader is awesome. Wen i said capacity to understand i mean as general, not only Star Wars fans. Because even Wars is losing popularity close to new stuff like Vampire movies. I only mention Wars as a example since it's the closest thing to Trek that has a number of popularity.

Please, don't tell me sci-fy is dying, because it's pretty much all i like to watch.

More stupid? Tv shows are smarter than ever.

 

[Horizons96]

I was a huge fan of SW up until it sold to Disney (the irony of the franchise being sold to an extremely insidious puzzle piece of a real-world evil empire is not lost on me), however one can look at exactly how ST and SW have affected society!
Star Wars made a huge impact on popular culture, language and sometimes black&white interpretations of notions of good and evil.
Star Trek, on the other hand has made (often unseen and unappreciated by the masses) huge impacts on how we as a species have and will move toward our horizon.
Look at the space shuttle Enterprise (and how the name came to be), the IXS Enterprise (and Alcubierre's work), the upcoming medical tricorders being developed etc etc.
You can be GUARANTEED that when we properly mature and become interstellar as a species, there will be aspects of Trek which will have given rise (at the very least in an inspirational sense) to what we will begin to be.
Star Wars will remain a fairy tale set in space, and I think will be considered much the same way we consider grainy old pre-war westerns. Maybe they will offer to show them at movie nights on board a future Enterprise.

 

[enterprisecvn65]

Star Wars is like Bud Light and Star Trek is like craft beer. There will always be more Star Wars fans for the same reason there will always be more Bud Light drinkers.

And why is that exactly? Again because once Lucas saw what he had he took the marketing and merchandising and absolutely ran with it, while Star Trek almost totally missed the boat on that aspect. You want to call it propaganda or selling out, that fine. I call it extremely shrew business practices.

If you want to believe this was because Roddenberry or others at Paramount were too noble or thought Star Trek was above this kind of mass marketing, I don't think that could be more untrue.

Roddenberry, remember, tried to market that IDIC medallion for a quick buck so he wasn't above this.

I would be any amount of money when he saw what Lucas did at some point Roddenberry was kicking himself in the ass for not doing it first.

And I would also equally bet money that there are many retired Paramount execs who slapped their foreheads going "Damnit.....that should have been us making billions in merchandising".

It's convenient for ST so spin it now as they were above such crass stuff, now that that ship has long sailed. The cold hard truth is though Lucas took them to the cleaners in this area and if ST had been able to pull it off first and to the degree SW did they would have jumped on it in a second and never looked back.

Don't kid yourself, money is the first and last issue with these kind of things, ST folks didn't pass up billions by being noble. They passed up billions by not doing it first.

So please don't act like ST is some kind of micro brewery who takes pride in it's work and didn't market the hell out of it because they want quality and SW is a huge corp who markets their inferior product.

ST got outfoxed here, pure and simple, and very few, if anyone involved with ST would have minded if they were the big bad merchandising machine instead of SW.

 

[Greg Cox]

Well both SW and ST have managed to transcend what they are and enter the public consciousness.

But perhaps there is still a bit of a stigma attached to TV Sci-Fi. Whilkst people go in their droves to watch Sci-Fi & Fantasy films at the cinema.

Very few sci-fi films do that well in theatres to say "people go in droves" to see them. Sure last year we had Guardians of the Galaxy own the summer box office, but before that what was the previous sci-fi movie to enjoy any kind of success at the box office? I'm thinking Avatar, and before that the Star Wars prequels.

Depends on how you define sci-fi. If you're just talking "space adventure," maybe. But if you look at the top-grossing movies of 2014, pretty much all of them are sci-fi/superhero/fantasy flicks: HUNGER GAMES (dystopian sf), GUARDIANS (space opera), CAPTAIN AMERICA (superhero), THE HOBBIT (fantasy), TRANSFORMERS (giant robots from outer space!), MALIFICENT (fantasy), X-MEN: DAYS OF FUTURE PAST (superheroes, time travel), DAWN OF THE PLANET OF THE APES (science fiction), GODZILLA (giant radioactive monster), INTERSTELLAR (science fiction), etc.

The only non-genre flick in the Top Ten is AMERICAN SNIPER.

And that's not even counting the kid's flicks, like THE LEGO MOVIE or BIG HERO SIX, which are also heavy on sci-fi elements.

 

[Nightdiamond]

Trek has been a dominate force on TV with a lot of viewing hours. Star Wars had the movies.

But it only had three movies. So it had to branch out with books, toys, games and fanfare marketing.

Star Trek movies generally made money, but it couldn't touch Star Wars at the box office. And Trek's movie history is very hit or miss.

I'm not as much a fan of Star Wars moving to Disney. I liked the Clone Wars at first--It was different. It was more adult.

But towards the end, it seemed to go all over the place. Then with the move to Disney, the franchise itself seemed to go all over the place. Lego Star Wars, Kids Lego star wars etc.

I'm not into the new animated show they have. It seems too watered down, and very standard.

Remember what happened to Trek, Disney, "too many trips to well?"

 

[1001001]

Well both SW and ST have managed to transcend what they are and enter the public consciousness.

But perhaps there is still a bit of a stigma attached to TV Sci-Fi. Whilkst people go in their droves to watch Sci-Fi & Fantasy films at the cinema.

Very few sci-fi films do that well in theatres to say "people go in droves" to see them. Sure last year we had Guardians of the Galaxy own the summer box office, but before that what was the previous sci-fi movie to enjoy any kind of success at the box office? I'm thinking Avatar, and before that the Star Wars prequels.

Gravity.

I think the success of Guardians of the Galaxy and Interstellar (both different, popular, and good) show that there is a substantial audience out there. "If you build it well, we will come."

 

[Inactive-Shapeshifter]

Honestly I've always hated this "Which is better Star Wars vs. Star Trek" crap.

Because, aside from the fact they are both sci-fi series, they really don't have that much in common.

Star Trek has had 5 TV series and 12 movies. There are literally hundreds of different, and often unconnected storylines, with dozens if not hundreds of important characters.

Star Wars currently has 6 movies covering one basic story arc with several subplots, with maybe 20 or so important characters. Of course that will change in December but still.

You're talking about Star Trek having hundreds of hours, maybe even a thousand versus Star Wars having about 15 hours. And I'm not getting into all that books and cartoons and expanded universe stuff. I'm talking about things that were filmed with actors and released for public consumption.

It's like comparing the collective works of Sherlock Holmes (Star Trek) to War and Peace (Star Wars).

Even their lives are completely different. Star Trek was something that was created, found a niche audience but not enough to keep it on air, and died within 3 years. It experienced an amazing comeback from the dead and has proven durable enough to be spun off into all aforementioned creations.

Star Wars was a total surprise and became a MEGA sensation the likes of which film had never seen before and if I ran the world the OT would have been made and that would have been it and history could marvel how from 1977 to 1983 an epic that has few equals dominated pop culture.

Of course Lucas couldn't leave well enough and......you know the rest. Our society can't ever let something great just be, gotta milk it for more money. Hell they even wrote a sequel to "Gone With the Wind" in the 90's.

Back in the 40's it was filmed, it was a huge hit, it changed the film industry and it was left alone to bask in immortality for all eternity. They didn't start drafting "Return of the Wind" after it broke all box office records and, so far, no one has been stupid to try and remake or "reboot" it.

That should have been the Star Wars Triology.

And I also can't stand how it's been simplified by so many that "Star Wars was more action and effects where Star Trek was more thought provoking and cerebral" The Empire Strikes Back had moments that were every bit as emotional and deep as anything Star Trek did. Likewise things like Nemesis and the reboots have had just as many space battles and other action sequence as did Star Wars......to that's just a dumb stance to take IMHO.

Star Trek may not have ever had the "HOLY SHIT!!!!!" moments Star Wars did with the public but it has proven to be more flexible to expanding itself, where Star Wars has not and I don't believe it will do so in a good way in any future films.

The ONE thing Star Wars did that put far ahead of Star Trek in the public's mind was the MERCHANDISING!!!!! Say what you want about George Lucas but his act of keeping the merchandising rights is one of the most brilliant moves in film or business history and he absolutely killed it.

Star Trek had a head start in this area but the never moved on it. There were a few things here and there, but you could never find toys of the Enterprise and other ships or action figures or sets in the quantity and quality if Star Wars in the 70's and 80's and early 90's. And by the time they did start to release these things it was impossible to match Star Wars.

I mean TO THIS DAY you can't find a decent sized replica (or toy) of the Refit Enterprise or the Reliant....Something I would have bought in a heartbeat as a kid had they released ones of similarity quality to Star Wars ships. They've made the smaller ones which are nice, but if you want say a 1/400 scale then you'd better be a great model builder or pay a shitload for someone to do it, because that's the only way you're ever going to get one.

Star Trek failed MISERABLY in the merchandising department and Star Wars jumped on it and crushed it. That to me is the difference in popularity for a lot of people. I wouldn't call that propaganda I would call it a brilliant move on Lucas' part and a major screw up by Paramount.

You sir, understood what i was trying to say completely, so, my mistake, wen i said propaganda, yes, i was referring to toys, replicas, miniatures etc. I am sorry for my bad writing, i'm not native english speaker, in fact, i'm still learning it. It seemed the best way to explain at the time i write the post. I also, did not knew that Paramount had not tried much on the market, i tough that the market simply preferred Wars stuff to Trek (what i, wrongly called "propaganda")

Sorry, and thanks for the patience (and for clearing my point to others and myself )

But the thing that remains is... why does the NEW people still prefer Wars stuff than Trek? Since Trek HAS merchandise today?

 

[Inactive-Shapeshifter]

It had a great run and the Trek experience is 200 years if you read all the books.

It did, but, it's aging as the effects and technology evolve (I don't know how Wars is not). It may had a great run, yes, but you are forgetting about all the people that will come after, the new trekkers!

I for example, it feels sad to think the series i love exist in old TV shows that don't get more credit those days. If that's the way it is now, imagine years from now! I wish that Trek had keep up with the passage of time, but it looks like the new generation is just more stupid (sorry the word) and the ones that actually have capacity to understand Trek are getting rare and rare.

OBS: I'm not a Star Wars hater ok? I like Star Wars and Darth Vader is awesome. Wen i said capacity to understand i mean as general, not only Star Wars fans. Because even Wars is losing popularity close to new stuff like Vampire movies. I only mention Wars as a example since it's the closest thing to Trek that has a number of popularity.

Please, don't tell me sci-fy is dying, because it's pretty much all i like to watch.

More stupid? Tv shows are smarter than ever.

I would kindly have to disagree. No TV shows that i have seen had a fraction of impact Trek had.

Trek talked about science, about future, about society, about philosophy, about parents and sons, about loos, about war, about a Android trying to rise a daughter, about the state, about prejudice, about sexuality.

Sorry, but there is NO other thing i ever seen that had so many critics in such a very well done manner. Lets see shows that we have today... Killing zombies, comedy, violence, sex, blood and gore, drama, pessimism... I don't see one bloody show that was optimism and so beautiful as Trek. Sorry.

To me, anyway....

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

 

[Lexx Shrapnel]

It did, but, it's aging as the effects and technology evolve (I don't know how Wars is not). It may had a great run, yes, but you are forgetting about all the people that will come after, the new trekkers!

I for example, it feels sad to think the series i love exist in old TV shows that don't get more credit those days. If that's the way it is now, imagine years from now! I wish that Trek had keep up with the passage of time, but it looks like the new generation is just more stupid (sorry the word) and the ones that actually have capacity to understand Trek are getting rare and rare.

OBS: I'm not a Star Wars hater ok? I like Star Wars and Darth Vader is awesome. Wen i said capacity to understand i mean as general, not only Star Wars fans. Because even Wars is losing popularity close to new stuff like Vampire movies. I only mention Wars as a example since it's the closest thing to Trek that has a number of popularity.

Please, don't tell me sci-fy is dying, because it's pretty much all i like to watch.

More stupid? Tv shows are smarter than ever.

I would kindly have to disagree. No TV shows that i have seen had a fraction of impact Trek had.

Trek talked about science, about future, about society, about philosophy, about parents and sons, about loos, about war, about a Android trying to rise a daughter, about the state, about prejudice, about sexuality.

Sorry, but there is NO other thing i ever seen that had so many critics in such a very well done manner. Lets see shows that we have today... Killing zombies, comedy, violence, sex, blood and gore, drama, pessimism... I don't see one bloody show that was optimism and so beautiful as Trek. Sorry.

To me, anyway....

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

So, optimism=smart?
Game of Thrones is an amazing show about history in a non-historical setting.

 

[Greg Cox]

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

I don't know. I like the music to the 2009 STAR TREK movie and listen to it often. Haven't gotten around to picking up the soundtrack to INTO DARKNESS yet.

 

[Inactive-Shapeshifter]

More stupid? Tv shows are smarter than ever.

I would kindly have to disagree. No TV shows that i have seen had a fraction of impact Trek had.

Trek talked about science, about future, about society, about philosophy, about parents and sons, about loos, about war, about a Android trying to rise a daughter, about the state, about prejudice, about sexuality.

Sorry, but there is NO other thing i ever seen that had so many critics in such a very well done manner. Lets see shows that we have today... Killing zombies, comedy, violence, sex, blood and gore, drama, pessimism... I don't see one bloody show that was optimism and so beautiful as Trek. Sorry.

To me, anyway....

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

So, optimism=smart?
Game of Thrones is an amazing show about history in a non-historical setting.

Can't argue with that, but i still don't see the critic part. I can't see where Game of Thrones critics society and make people think the way Trek did. But it's awesome anyway. Just saying it doesn't have such complicated and philosophical things.

Optimism is not = smart
Philosophy, critics to society, science and drama = smart (to me)

 

[Inactive-Shapeshifter]

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

I don't know. I like the music to the 2009 STAR TREK movie and listen to it often. Haven't gotten around to picking up the soundtrack to INTO DARKNESS yet.

I was talking of series on TV in that particular case. Movies have some epic score those days.

 

[Greg Cox]

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

I don't know. I like the music to the 2009 STAR TREK movie and listen to it often. Haven't gotten around to picking up the soundtrack to INTO DARKNESS yet.

I was talking of series on TV in that particular case. Movies have some epic score those days.

Fair enough. Part of the issue there, of course, is that extended credits sequences on TV shows are going the way of the dinosaurs. It's not uncommon for a show to feature just a brief title card these days, in order to make time for more story.

 

[Lexx Shrapnel]

I would kindly have to disagree. No TV shows that i have seen had a fraction of impact Trek had.

Trek talked about science, about future, about society, about philosophy, about parents and sons, about loos, about war, about a Android trying to rise a daughter, about the state, about prejudice, about sexuality.

Sorry, but there is NO other thing i ever seen that had so many critics in such a very well done manner. Lets see shows that we have today... Killing zombies, comedy, violence, sex, blood and gore, drama, pessimism... I don't see one bloody show that was optimism and so beautiful as Trek. Sorry.

To me, anyway....

Hell! Even the music is worse those days! Wen was last time someone did a theme like DS9 or VOY?

So, optimism=smart?
Game of Thrones is an amazing show about history in a non-historical setting.

Can't argue with that, but i still don't see the critic part. I can't see where Game of Thrones critics society and make people think the way Trek did. But it's awesome anyway. Just saying it doesn't have such complicated and philosophical things.

Optimism is not = smart
Philosophy, critics to society, science and drama = smart (to me)

People can just learn by just watching the mechanisms of political power working, they can just come up with their conclusions.

 

[Maurice]

More stupid? Tv shows are smarter than ever.

I would kindly have to disagree. No TV shows that i have seen had a fraction of impact Trek had.

You guys aren't even talking about the same thing. Impact does not equal smarts. Those are separate subjects.

There's a ton of junk TV out there, and the junk is junkier than ever even as the smart stuff if smarter than ever. One may not like the tone of a lot of the better new shows, but that doesn't mean that they're not smart or savvy or talking about issues.

 

[ZapBrannigan]

ST folks didn't pass up billions by being noble. They passed up billions by not doing it first.

You're generally right but I don't think that's entirely it. Star Trek did do it first. They licensed tons of merchandise, from the first AMT model kit in 1967 onward. They didn't snooze and miss the boat. Star Trek toys were all over the place in the 1970s.

But apparently, more children get excited about robots and X-wing fighters than the stuff from Star Trek.

Star Wars was designed for average children in the first place, while Star Trek was aimed at adults and appealed to intelligent, thoughtful kids without meaning to. And there just aren't as many of those kids.

 

[fireproof78]

Which is funny, because I was constantly looking from Trek toys as a kid in the 90s. Star Wars was just as fun, but it was frustrating to have just the SW selection and less Trek.

As for smarts, eh, that's a matter of perspective. ST delved in to cultural issues (not always well, but it tried) while having an adventure. SW had the adventure but used broad strokes of good and evil that resonate quickly with many people. SW is actually as deep as Trek, if you are will to go with it, because you can find cultural mythology being built there that is similar to other mythology of the past.

ST doesn't have to be that, to have an impact, but it doesn't have to impact everyone to be relevant. I think it just has to be done, and done well, to provide imagination fuel for the next audience.

 

[Kevman7987]

Fair enough. Part of the issue there, of course, is that extended credits sequences on TV shows are going the way of the dinosaurs. It's not uncommon for a show to feature just a brief title card these days, in order to make time for more story.

According to sources I've read, the short credit sequences are used to make room for more commercials instead, unfortunately.