STAR TREK or star wars

madcow rocketry
the rocketry show
Onebadhawk
shop deals on amazon
The Rocketry Forum

Help Support The Rocketry Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Pick'em folks; STAR TREK or star wars

  • STAR TREK

  • star wars

Results are only viewable after voting.
rbelknap said:
Are you trying to start a frelling flame war? :p
Click to expand...

I have to say, when I heard about this mashup, I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of voices suddently cried out in terror and suddently silenced. This Abrams character, he tasks me. He tasks me; and I shall have him. I’ll chase him ’round the moons of Nibia and ’round the Antares maelstrom and ’round Perdition’s flames before I give him up. I have a very bad feeling about this. But the ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the power of Hollywood. And I suppose the needs of the movie industry outweigh the needs of the fans.
 
I like BOTH. There is no point in forcing an either-or conflict.

In the big picture, I do give a slight edge to Star Trek for two reasons. For one, raising the standards for science fiction so long ago. For the the other, simply the sheer numbers of episodes, hundreds over the years.

Star Wars blew my mind when I first saw it. Hour by hour, Star Trek could not beat it. But without Star Trek over a decade earlier, Star Wars would have been a harder sell to produce.

I am looking forward to the next Star Wars movie. I think they have learned from the mistakes of the last 3 movies. I am NOT looking forward to the next Star Trek movie. The last two Star Trek movies have done as much, if not more, to harm the Star Trek franchise, as "The Phantom Menace" did to Star Wars.

- George Gassaway
 
I second the motion for Firefly. And I like Star Wars and Star Trek equally, provided that we're pretending the Star Wars prequels don't exist.
 
I prefer Star Trek over Star Wars. Jar Jar Binks ruined the franchise.
 
The only way to truly answer the question would be to have an Estes Star Wars and Star Trek kit build and fly off. Which one has the best model rockets?
Click to expand...

I think you'd have to give this to Star Wars. I don't think Trek ships (other than perhaps the Defiant) would be very stable with the propulsion pods way the heck off of the center of gravity.

I'm a Trek person myself, come to that later in life. The original series was sometimes hokey but didn't take itself too seriously. Next Gen was pretty well rounded. Voyager suffered somewhat from new particle shows (it's all because of the tachyons, you know). On the other hand, Empire Strikes Back was the first movie I saw in theaters, at about age 5. Apparently, I flipped out when Yoda came on. My dad tried to reassure me that the puppeteer was the same person as Miss Piggy, but it didn't take.

Oddly enough, as I write this, I realize that I liked the shows and movies made with models much better than the ones made with CGI.
 
boatgeek said:
Oddly enough, as I write this, I realize that I liked the shows and movies made with models much better than the ones made with CGI.
Click to expand...

Thunderbirds, anyone? Surprised it took me so long to remember that series.
 
andrewlathrop87 said:
Folks pick'em STAR TREK or star wars?

I personally take STAR TREK 100% all the time. Here me out. I am nerd at heart. For me STAR TREK is more then sci-fi. In my opinion it is 100% possible reality. Yes, most of the technologies in STAR TREK dont actually exist yet! But there are lots of theories that have scientific backing that one day will be a reality. That is what drew me to STAR TREK. Like Gene Roddenberry said "A wagon train to the stars." As the world goes to hell and a hand bag right now the universe of STAR TREK looks even more awesome. Gene Roddenberry's vision was that STAR TREK was out future. Humanity would one day grow up and out grow its infancy. I believe what Roddenberry believed. Perhaps one day. "In the 24th century there will be no hunger, there will be no greed, and all the children will no how to read."

"Someone once told me that time is the predator that stalks us all out live, but I rather believe time is the companion that goes with us on the journey to remind us that it will never come again."

star wars is just a sci-fi series, no reality. Just a lot of smoke and mirrors.
Click to expand...

Have to agree here, but one thing andrew left out was the disembowlment of monetary money.
Once the greed and power ceases, by the power of wealth, ALL will earthlings will become equal.
How that will happen in the future is probably the greatest mistery on Earth, if not the Universe.
The one that does it, will be forever remembered alongside FRD's address to congress the day after 12.07.41.
 
CoyoteNumber2 said:
win_sector.jpg
Click to expand...

BOO-YEA!!! :headbang:
 
Woody's Workshop said:
Have to agree here, but one thing andrew left out was the disembowlment of monetary money.
Once the greed and power ceases, by the power of wealth, ALL will earthlings will become equal.
How that will happen in the future is probably the greatest mistery on Earth, if not the Universe.
The one that does it, will be forever remembered alongside FRD's address to congress the day after 12.07.41.
Click to expand...

Well said!!!
 
andrewlathrop87 said:
"In the 24th century there will be no hunger, there will be no greed, and all the children will no how to read."
Click to expand...

But will they know how to spell and use good grammar??

andrewlathrop87 said:
"Someone once told me that time is the predator that stalks us all out live, but I rather believe time is the companion that goes with us on the journey to remind us that it will never come again."

star wars is just a sci-fi series, no reality. Just a lot of smoke and mirrors.
Click to expand...

Nice quote by the way... Picard from the ending of "Generations" IIRC...

I like each for their own reasons. Trek is more "realistic" (though I'm not sure that "warp drive" and most certainly "transporters" will ever actually be real) but Star Wars has its merits too. Star Wars is basically the same sort of "heroic" storytelling that has been the hallmark of classical storytelling for thousands of years. "Star Wars" is the modern-day retelling of Homer's "Illiad", Greek tragedies, Shakespeare's plays, etc. It isn't SUPPOSED to be "real"... it's supposed to be the "hero's saga" and show how the choices and fates impact the hero's life over time.

The very best of Trek also has the "morality play" at its heart. That's why TOS is such a classic. Regardless of series or setting, however, Trek has always been the most endearing when it has stuck to a very "morality play" basis, in that it speaks to the human condition.

That's the real reason that I find SO LITTLE about the JJAbrams "Drek" to be worthwhile... he's turned Star Trek into a 2 hour Saturday afternoon popcorn and ticket comic book version of the original... his movies are fine for a 2 hour time waster on a Saturday afternoon, but they have NO deeper meaning, NO deeper connection or statement about humanity or the "human condition" at all... it's just a "comic book style shoot-em-up".

That's why I REALLY hate to think of how he's going to butcher the Star Wars franchise... He did a complete hack job on Star Trek and now I fear that Star Wars is in line for the same mess...

Later! OL JR :)
 
YodaMcFly said:
Why not both?

Seriously, though, I'm too cynical to buy in to Roddenberry's vision of a happy-happy joy-joy future where everyone just gets along. As a species, I think we're just too selfish.

From a story standpoint, yeah, Trek is better; Star Wars is a classic Western. Lucas' revisionism is ... extremely frustrating.
Click to expand...

Absolutely...

Roddenberry's "kum-ba-yah" version of the future was even more entrenched in the first couple seasons of TNG... and it was KILLING the show. Fortunately he was "promoted" out of the way so that enough "friction" or "conflict" could arise to make for effective storytelling... The first two seasons of TNG, especially the first, was VERY heavily influenced by Roddenberry's "in the future nobody will argue" mentality, ESPECIALLY 100 years after his "wagon train" TOS series. I liked the fact that the TOS series showed that yeah, we could all finally learn to get along and act decent, but there was still SOME conflict, hatred, etc to overcome... and that people actually worked to overcome those things. Roddenberry envisioned that by the time of TNG 100 years after Kirk and Co., that "everybody would just be BORN getting along" and that made for a VERY dull and preachy series in the very beginning, at least for some folks (I actually didn't have too much trouble with it, some of the first and second season episodes of TNG were among the series' best, but I COULD see that such a "happy, happy, joy, joy" type setting would really limit the show's creativity... and I'm glad they changed it...)

That said, I lost interest in "DS9" because, while it started off "darker and grittier" than TNG, which wasn't ALL bad; they made it work in the setting they put the show in, it just got darker, grittier, and WEIRDER as time went on... after about 3-4 seasons I lost all interest in it and quit watching it. Likewise, "Voyager" only held my interest for about most of the first season and part of the second, and with the end of TNG, I sorta tuned out of "Trek" because I didn't like the direction those series had taken it... Sadly I remained "tuned out" to Trek through the entire first run of "Enterprise", which having seen most of them now in re-runs, I have really enjoyed, though of course there were some things about it that I wasn't particularly fond of... I think "Enterprise" was definitely closer to what TNG and TOS was than the other series, to be sure.

Star Wars-- the first three movies were just classic. No doubt. At their heart, they're a retelling of the classic "hero's journey" type stories in a "sword and sorcery" fashion, only set in a futuristic spacefaring setting... I agree COMPLETELY that Lucas's constant "revisionism" and tinkering has in virtually ALL cases actually diminished the original work, rather than enhanced it. The few inserted scenes with cleaned up special effects and stuff, I don't really object to... but the whole tinkering with inserting Hayden Christiansen and stuff like that... just wonks it all up IMHO. I agree with the VAST majority of people out there that generally dislike the story arc of the "prequels", the last three movies. It's kind of hard sometimes to write a story where points A, B, C, and D happen, but you MUST end up at point "E", while "F, G, H, and I" have to remain true as well... BUT, I think it could have been done SO much better... at the end of Revenge of the Sith, the whole thing seemed SO hurried to just set up for the original 1977 "Star Wars" that it was ridiculous... and I TOTALLY agree that the "immaculate conception" and "midichlorians" crap just RUINED the whole idea of the Force and the Dark Side... It reduced the "mystical energy field that surrounds all living things-- it surrounds us and penetrates us; it binds the galaxy together!" into the equivalent of an infection... There was ABSOLUTELY NO need to go there AT ALL... it was a SERIOUS mistake that just diminishes the whole thing IMHO. The more I think about it, the more reason I see why serious fans tend to prefer the "hatchet order" and generally toss "The Phantom Menace" out the window...

Course, with JJAbrams at the helm, and seeing how he turned Star Trek into "just another stupid 2 hour forgettable comic book movie with NO meaning" I'm sure he's going to do the same sort of hack job on Star Wars...

Later! OL JR :)
 
luke strawwalker said:
But will they know how to spell and use good grammar??



Nice quote by the way... Picard from the ending of "Generations" IIRC...

I like each for their own reasons. Trek is more "realistic" (though I'm not sure that "warp drive" and most certainly "transporters" will ever actually be real) but Star Wars has its merits too. Star Wars is basically the same sort of "heroic" storytelling that has been the hallmark of classical storytelling for thousands of years. "Star Wars" is the modern-day retelling of Homer's "Illiad", Greek tragedies, Shakespeare's plays, etc. It isn't SUPPOSED to be "real"... it's supposed to be the "hero's saga" and show how the choices and fates impact the hero's life over time.

The very best of Trek also has the "morality play" at its heart. That's why TOS is such a classic. Regardless of series or setting, however, Trek has always been the most endearing when it has stuck to a very "morality play" basis, in that it speaks to the human condition.

That's the real reason that I find SO LITTLE about the JJAbrams "Drek" to be worthwhile... he's turned Star Trek into a 2 hour Saturday afternoon popcorn and ticket comic book version of the original... his movies are fine for a 2 hour time waster on a Saturday afternoon, but they have NO deeper meaning, NO deeper connection or statement about humanity or the "human condition" at all... it's just a "comic book style shoot-em-up".

That's why I REALLY hate to think of how he's going to butcher the Star Wars franchise... He did a complete hack job on Star Trek and now I fear that Star Wars is in line for the same mess...

Later! OL JR :)
Click to expand...


I hope he butchers star wars! Turn around is fair play.
 

Similar threads

Antares JS
For Sale Collection of Star Wars Books and Comics
Replies
3
Views
587
Antares JS
Antares JS
frogglicker
Scratch Build - Upscaled 3-in "Menace-3D"
Replies
2
Views
294
frogglicker
frogglicker
Winston
SDI (Star Wars) v2.0 - Neutral Particle Beam Weapon Redux
Replies
1
Views
1K
Peartree
Peartree
ColumbiaNX01
Star Trek Beyond trailer 2 (disappointed)
Replies
29
Views
4K
USAFmissileer
USAFmissileer
modeltrains
UFO conspiracy theory book: the U.S. Navy, Star Trek, and BSG
Replies
6
Views
915
Nytrunner
Nytrunner

Latest posts

Back
Top