Poll: Star Trek vs. Star Wars?


Gamer Life General Discussion

151 to 200 of 200 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>

Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Wow, didn't know that raise dead could be used on a sci-fi thread!

Sure you did. It's just not a spell. It's any number of technobabbly solutions. I can think of two just from Star Trek movies.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 32

Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Wow, didn't know that raise dead could be used on a sci-fi thread!

You have never read Mary Shelley?


G wrote:

.

Vulcans are now proficient in light sabers.

.

This is why Lucas had to sell the Franchise.

.


Star Wars is better.
I have zero like for Star Trek. Every time I try to like Star Trek I see it as a rip-off lesser version of Star Wars and far less interesting in comparison.

Dark Archive

2 people marked this as a favorite.
DoubleGold wrote:

Star Wars is better.

I have zero like for Star Trek. Every time I try to like Star Trek I see it as a rip-off lesser version of Star Wars and far less interesting in comparison.

It's totally okay to prefer one to the other, but referring to Star Trek (1966) as a 'rip off' of Star Wars (1977) makes me wonder if your interactions with linear time are perhaps a bit misaligned.

This just in, the Eurythmics totally ripped off that Marilyn Manson song, Sweet Dreams!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Set wrote:


It's totally okay to prefer one to the other, but referring to Star Trek (1966) as a 'rip off' of Star Wars (1977) makes me wonder if your interactions with linear time are perhaps a bit misaligned.

Keep in mind that for a lot of people, Star Trek begins with Patrick Stewart. Also keep in mind that it WAS Star Wars that gave Paramount the idea that a big budget movie would be a big way to make the Star Trek franchise actually pay off in real time for a change. I'm fairly sure that if "Phase 2" had actually gone off as planned, Trek would be just a historical footnote by now.

As it was, the botched execution of the first movie almost buried it anyway. Unfortunately Roddenberry was so attached to the dumbest ideas that he wanted in the first movie, that he resurrected them in the fifth.

If we go to Expanded Universe, Star Wars wins it hands down for having the most variety of stories not featuring the usual canon characters, especially in the Dark Horse productions. Although I will give IGW credit for an excellent Dr. Who/Trek crossover in "Assimilation Squared".

Dark Archive

LazarX wrote:
If we go to Expanded Universe, Star Wars wins it hands down for having the most variety of stories not featuring the usual canon characters, especially in the Dark Horse productions. Although I will give IGW credit for an excellent Dr. Who/Trek crossover in "Assimilation Squared".

The Star Trek 'expanded universe' of the novels (hundreds of novels...), has some great stories, but the 'third-party' writers seem to be held to a much tighter standard of what they are allowed to do with the characters and Federation setting.

The Star Wars novels and stuff, by comparison, have some stuff that is pretty wild and exciting, such as the Timothy Zahn novels, which I prefer to much of what George Lucas himself has done with his setting.

Given what a reputation Lucas has for being a micro-manager of the setting and property, the Star Trek novels feel much more like people playing with someone else's toys, while the best of the Star Wars novels seem less afraid to do some drastic things (like kill off main characters or portray the marriage and children of classics or whatever).

Still, what I said upthread, especially for the core movie / TV show properties holds true for me. Farmboys can be heroes (in both cases), but only if they are the son of a queen and midichlorian Jesus in Star Wars universe. Trek always felt like the heroes were more working class and egalitarian, with 100% less 'space princesses.' (Although Picard flew against that, seeming pretty aristocratic...)


Set wrote:
The Star Trek 'expanded universe' of the novels (hundreds of novels...), has some great stories, but the 'third-party' writers seem to be held to a much tighter standard of what they are allowed to do with the characters and Federation setting.

DS9 Relaunch Spoiler:
I don't know about how restricted they are in messing with stuff. In the DS9 relaunch Sisko came back from the dead, ran away from his family (new and old), and renounced the prophets, oh and the prophets let him, "ok tool, we are done with you, peace out and thanx for the fish!"

I was sorely let down.

Dark Archive

BigDTBone wrote:

** spoiler omitted **

I was sorely let down.

Wow. I guess it's been awhile since I've read Star Trek novels. That does sound weak.


Set wrote:


Still, what I said upthread, especially for the core movie / TV show properties holds true for me. Farmboys can be heroes (in both cases), but only if they are the son of a queen and midichlorian Jesus in Star Wars universe. Trek always felt like the heroes were more working class and egalitarian, with 100% less 'space princesses.' (Although Picard flew against that, seeming pretty aristocratic...)

I agree that the Trek characters do seem a bit more... mundane than Star Wars characters. But then the shows and movies tend to focus less on their "lives" than on what they do in their occupations (allowing for brief, episodic vignettes exploring aspects of a character's hobbies or interests like Riker's jazz trombone/cooking, Data's music and art, Bev Crusher's dancing, and Troi's mother issues). By comparison, the whole farm boy to hero journey is all about the transformation of an entire life. Trek is the heroism of normal people in crisis situations. Star Wars is about growing into the hero.

And as far as Picard's manners, Patrick Stewart's acting training seems to both work for and against him. His behavior and speech are very captainish and inspiring in that context. But they really don't seem to match Picard's history that seems to lurch between academic pursuits and roughhousing. Of course, they don't match Stewart's history of Yorkshire poverty and domestic violence either which just goes to show just how awesome his achievements as an actor and all-around humanitarian really are.

Sovereign Court

Both suck, IMO as I would rather Battlestar Galactica, but still in a yes/no answer, I Would take Babylon 5

Grand Lodge

sunshadow21 wrote:
Star Trek's biggest problem is that as actively produced tv programs, it ran longer than it probably needed to. Any tv show runs out of ideas after 5 years, and all of the iterations aside from the original had this issue. The early episoodes of TNG, Voyager, and DS9 were all quite good, but as sustainable storylines went, only DS9 had much to work with. TNG simply ran out of ideas. Voyager would have made a great movie, but was problematic as a tv show after the first 3 seasons. Enterprise, like most prequels, suffered from having a predetermined ending, and came too soon on the heels of the other iterations. The original series had the advantage of being the first, and was cancelled before it ran into the issue of recycling plots. I could see another iteration on tv eventually, but not right now.

The early episodes of TNG (by which I mean seasons 1 and 2) were TERRIBLE! They're pretty much a testament to how desperate we were for ANY television sci-fi in the mid-80s (as if the frantic rerunning and re-rerunning of TOS didn't get that across!). Season 1 was more or less trying to recreate the vibe of TOS and Season 2 was hampered by a writer's strike and piddled out in an awful clip show at the end. TNG didn't get good until season 3 and it stayed good until mid-season 7.


Kittyburger wrote:
The early episodes of TNG (by which I mean seasons 1 and 2) were TERRIBLE! They're pretty much a testament to how desperate we were for ANY television sci-fi in the mid-80s (as if the frantic rerunning and re-rerunning of TOS didn't get that across!). Season 1 was more or less trying to recreate the vibe of TOS and Season 2 was hampered by a writer's strike and piddled out in an awful clip show at the end. TNG didn't get good until season 3 and it stayed good until mid-season 7.

That still leaves a window of about 5 years of having a solid sustainable story line, in line with the original thought that it's biggest problem that it ran on well after it really needed to. I can understand taking some time to find it's legs, but recycling plots is harder to excuse away.


I voted Star Wars, but really you could drop the Force and lightsaber stuff as it BORED me. I liked Star Wars cause there was so many cool places to go, races in universe, and the ships. Specially the fighters, I loved all the fighter craft from all the Wars movies, even the bleh prequels had awesome looking fighters. That doesn't include the awesome AT-AT that began my LOVE for mechs.

But see I love Trek too as long as it's not Shatner. (TOS is fine just I don't like Shatner's take on Kirk.) I grew up with TNG and loved it, as I loved the politics and 'feel' of it.

But then there was DS9 and I hated it, it was soooooooo BOOOOORRRRRINGGG! Nothing happened until the Dominion stuff started up otherwise it was Space CSI.

Voyager was the best of the best, crème de le crème series. As they had no Federation support. (Many times Enterprise had to go in for repairs or even complete rebuilds with a competent captain like Picard at the helm.)

The Captain Archer Enterprise didn't stay on t.v. long enough for me to have an opinion other then "It's not...bad."

J.J. has put out the 2 best Trek films

So weighing them...Wars won out. (An entire movie about going back in time to save whales is what caused me to vote against Trek.)

----------------------------------------------------

As far as my favorite sci-fi world.

Wing Commander, hands down, best.


You are joking about the JJ movies being the best Trek films right? Into Darkness was ranked the worst Trek Movie of all time. Heck, ignoring nostalgia, I actually got extremely mad at the movie within the first few scenes. That movie, if you paid attention to all the plot points and followed its story structure and pacing, made no sense whatsoever.

I find Star Trek to be better but I still love Star Wars.


Jaçinto wrote:

You are joking about the JJ movies being the best Trek films right? Into Darkness was ranked the worst Trek Movie of all time. Heck, ignoring nostalgia, I actually got extremely mad at the movie within the first few scenes. That movie, if you paid attention to all the plot points and followed its story structure and pacing, made no sense whatsoever.

I find Star Trek to be better but I still love Star Wars.

JJ is a Star Wars guy, it isn't surprising that a Star Wars fan is going to like his take on Trek.


I would argue that Empire is far better than most of the Trek movies as it had a great feel and a story that seemed to make sense with few plot holes big enough to swallow a rancor like the JJ Trek movies did.

There is liking something because it has the starwarsy feel and then there is liking a well made story rather than just "Lets make action scenes and glue them together!" S

omeone like JJ could never do something comparable to The Empire Strikes Back and Into Darkness just proves that. That guy is the Michael Bay of Sci-Fi. Heck, I would rather watch anything Uwe Boll made than any JJ Abrams movie again.

To stay on point though, I like Star Trek's TV series and first few movies much more than all the Star Wars movies and TV shows combined and yes I DO like Star Trek the Motion Picture, though I still love the First -Two- star wars movies. RotJ was kinda lacking compared to the first two.


I like the SW universe. All the aliens and planets sets up a lot of possible adventures.

ST characters seem to be more developed, maybe because we know them from the TV shows.

As for Battlestar Galactica I did enjoy it, up until the last few episodes, and I hated the ending. I won't put any spoilers, but I will say some things were not explained.

As for Babylon 5, I actually have never seen an episode, but I might watch it. Did the series get cancelled or did it actually get to run it's course?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:

I like the SW universe. All the aliens and planets sets up a lot of possible adventures.

ST characters seem to be more developed, maybe because we know them from the TV shows.

As for Battlestar Galactica I did enjoy it, up until the last few episodes, and I hated the ending. I won't put any spoilers, but I will say some things were not explained.

As for Babylon 5, I actually have never seen an episode, but I might watch it. Did the series get cancelled or did it actually get to run it's course?

I just watched BSG for the first time. At first I liked the premise of the creators, a lot of ex-DS9 writers, who made a show where flawed people could make flawed decisions. But into the middle of the 3rd season I had lost pretty much all emotional attachment to any character. They were all terrible hypocrite disasters with messiah complexes. By the end of the series they gave up on even telling us,"uuuh the fleet thinks that is a bad idea." Because we know the response already...

I really REALLY liked Caprica, that show needed the leeway to get through it's first season bugs because it could have been an amazing story. I very much enjoyed the universe created in BSG.


Jaçinto wrote:

You are joking about the JJ movies being the best Trek films right? Into Darkness was ranked the worst Trek Movie of all time. Heck, ignoring nostalgia, I actually got extremely mad at the movie within the first few scenes. That movie, if you paid attention to all the plot points and followed its story structure and pacing, made no sense whatsoever.

Ranked as the worst Trek movie (which means worse than Star Trek 5!) by whom?!? Frankly, I find it hard to believe that would have been the outcome of a broad poll of Star Trek fans.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
KingmanHighborn wrote:


But see I love Trek too as long as it's not Shatner. (TOS is fine just I don't like Shatner's take on Kirk.) I grew up with TNG and loved it, as I loved the politics and 'feel' of it.

But then there was DS9 and I hated it, it was soooooooo BOOOOORRRRRINGGG! Nothing happened until the Dominion stuff started up otherwise it was Space CSI.

Voyager was the best of the best, crème de le crème series. As they had no Federation support. (Many times Enterprise had to go in for repairs or even complete rebuilds with a competent captain like Picard at the helm.)

It's like I've found my polar opposite here on the boards. I'll dub you my Bizarro Bill Dunn and you can dub me your Bizarro KingmanHighborn.


4 people marked this as a favorite.
KingmanHighborn wrote:

I voted Star Wars, but really you could drop the Force and lightsaber stuff as it BORED me. I liked Star Wars cause there was so many cool places to go, races in universe, and the ships.

For me, the Force and the Jedi are what make Star Wars really distinctive as a space opera setting. And I don't mean the superhumanic BS that appeared in Attack of the Clones/Revenge of the Sith. I'm talking about the mystical philosophy and modestly defined powers of the original trilogy.

"Size matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my size, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the Force, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the Force around you; here, between you, me, the tree, the rock, everywhere, yes. Even between the land and the ship."

That's one of my favorite passages of the whole series of movies, particularly the line in bold. Star Wars without that loses half its character.


^ this ^

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
wraithstrike wrote:
As for Babylon 5, I actually have never seen an episode, but I might watch it. Did the series get cancelled or did it actually get to run it's course?

It ran it's full planned 5 seasons. The problem being that the fate of the 5th season was so absolutely up in the air until after the last episode of the 4th season ended that JMS planned the last half of season 4 to be the end. As such, the last half of season 4 rushes things quite a bit, and season 5 suffers from only having bits that JMS had deemed expendable to fall back on.

Even so, seasons 1-4 remain better than any Star Trek series.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:

As for Babylon 5, I actually have never seen an episode, but I might watch it. Did the series get cancelled or did it actually get to run it's course?

In a way, both happened. During Year 4, it looked like the show as going to be canceled, so JMS sped up and concluded the 5 year arc. After he did that, the show DID get it's fifth year so he had to pad out a new storyline and moved the episode that was the season 4 closer to beome the series closer at the end of Year 5. Which is why Ivanova was in it despite the actress having moved on at the end of Year 4.


Bill Dunn wrote:
Jaçinto wrote:

You are joking about the JJ movies being the best Trek films right? Into Darkness was ranked the worst Trek Movie of all time. Heck, ignoring nostalgia, I actually got extremely mad at the movie within the first few scenes. That movie, if you paid attention to all the plot points and followed its story structure and pacing, made no sense whatsoever.

Ranked as the worst Trek movie (which means worse than Star Trek 5!) by whom?!? Frankly, I find it hard to believe that would have been the outcome of a broad poll of Star Trek fans.

Well if I have to do the work for you, then here. http://bit.ly/1t12A5q Just check for yourself. And while ST5 was bad, ST Nemesis was worse. Heck, pretty much all the TNG movies sucked as they had the characters act massivly different from how they were in the show. Movie Picard was a hothead that didn't care about the rules and flipped out a lot. TV Picard was calm and collected and put the rules first. Also I suggest you go to red letter media and watch the plinket reviews of the star trek movies.


KingmanHighborn wrote:

I voted Star Wars, but really you could drop the Force and lightsaber stuff as it BORED me. I liked Star Wars cause there was so many cool places to go, races in universe, and the ships. Specially the fighters, I loved all the fighter craft from all the Wars movies, even the bleh prequels had awesome looking fighters. That doesn't include the awesome AT-AT that began my LOVE for mechs.

But see I love Trek too as long as it's not Shatner. (TOS is fine just I don't like Shatner's take on Kirk.) I grew up with TNG and loved it, as I loved the politics and 'feel' of it.

But then there was DS9 and I hated it, it was soooooooo BOOOOORRRRRINGGG! Nothing happened until the Dominion stuff started up otherwise it was Space CSI.

Voyager was the best of the best, crème de le crème series. As they had no Federation support. (Many times Enterprise had to go in for repairs or even complete rebuilds with a competent captain like Picard at the helm.)

The Captain Archer Enterprise didn't stay on t.v. long enough for me to have an opinion other then "It's not...bad."

J.J. has put out the 2 best Trek films

So weighing them...Wars won out. (An entire movie about going back in time to save whales is what caused me to vote against Trek.)

----------------------------------------------------

As far as my favorite sci-fi world.

Wing Commander, hands down, best.

Wow I have an almost exactly opposite view... weird.

The force defines Star Wars... it is a generic sci fi show without it.

And while I may be one of the only people out there that feels this way I kind of liked Shatner's Kirk. And DS9 was awesome except for the oddly massive fleet battles which made little sense. I did like Voyager too and I feel Star Trek truly shines during the DS9/Voyager time. But TOS set up the universe and holds a special place of love for it and TNG seemed like a new extension on the mission of TOS but with a much more refined and civilized crew.

I also have to say... 4 seasons isn't long enough for you to notice a show?! Strange. Enterprise wasn't as bad as I first thought when I watched it on TV. In fact on my rewatch I came to love the show a lot. If I could disentangle the whole rotten time war out of it and make someone else the main bad guy... perhaps the Romulans spreading lies to get Earth attacked? Then it probably would have been one of the best ST shows. Oh well, producer politics ruined that...

JJ made two of the worst ST movies of all time. But I don't blame JJ. JJ can make a great action movie. But he probably had never watched Star Trek before and that is TOO much universe to absorb all at once. So he was doomed to make huge errors. Add to that the horrible plots and yes these blew even worse than ST4 "save the whales" or ST5 "Finding god". If you want to see some of the best ST then watch "Wrath of Khan", "First Contact", or "Undiscovered Country". I actually liked ST4 "save the whales" but view it as a light hearted parody of itself not all that dissimilar from Galaxy Quest.

Wing Commander was the best setting?! Huh?! You are probably alone in that view. But I have GREAT news for you! The creator of Wing Commander is finishing up a huge MMO set in that very universe that sounds similar to EVE, but better.

Dark Archive

Bill Dunn wrote:
It's like I've found my polar opposite here on the boards. I'll dub you my Bizarro Bill Dunn and you can dub me your Bizarro KingmanHighborn.

Indeed, his favorites are my least favorites (Voyager?), and the stuff he said was terrible (DS9) was my hands down favorite. I suspect if he and I came into contact, we'd annihilate each other and something else nearby would be accelerated to warp speed... :)


*shrugs* I'm not going to belittle anyone about their likes, if you Jedi and Force stuff that's cool, not my gravy, but don't let me stop you from dressing up as Vader, Luke, Obi-Wan, etc. Just don't begrudge me for wanting my own B-wing...or an X-Wing...or an A-wing...or an Advanced Tie, or a Star Destroyer...etc.etc. ad infineum As I even love the flying craft Jaba had.

As far as JJ Trek goes, I just enjoy it more. *shrugs*

I didn't enjoy 1, 3, 4, or 5, I appreciated what 2 did linking a character encountered before in a tv series to the film, but still was boring, I liked 6 for the political intrigue.

Genesis, First Contact and Nemesis I liked.

I my favorite is Into Darkness, followed by Star Trek 09'

---------------------------------------

Aranna I loved Wing Commander, I grew up on all the games and Mark Hamill live action in-game of 3,4,and 5. And the cartoon on USA, and the books. I adored the Kilrathi...which lead to be finding Larry Niven's stuff, and LOVING the Kzin. So if I get to be a giant (or human sized) cat person in space, I'm happy.

You don't realize how much I absorbed of the universe's goings-on.

Unfortunately EA is sitting on the IP and not doing anything with it. T-T

And yeah Chris Roberts was cool, if the movie hadn't had it's funding and time to produce sucked away by Phantom Menace he'd of had time to do it right, but...eh the movie ain't canon for fans anyway. :P


Alright I can get that. You found those movies to be the most enjoyable. That is your taste.

I just found them disgustingly awful what with the character motivations making no sense in the world they are in, all their superiors are stupid, nobody respects the captain at all to where none of them should have been command crew, and they took the best actors out of the movie right away. The best actors to me at least were the ones that played Bones and Scotty.

I get they were going for an action movie but I hate all flash with no substance, and that was not a lens flare joke. I think the rule for making and action movie is that you have to watch Die Hard 1 first. Learn character pacing and that constant action, even in an action movie, desensitizes the audience, and if you make the characters dumb but keep calling them smart then they lose all believably. It is why I liked the original three star wars movies and hated the prequel trilogy.

Thinking about it, when it comes to movies vs movies, I would say Star Wars is my preference hands down. But when it comes to TV show vs TV show, I gotta give it to Star Trek.

And KingmanHighborn, I liked the force stuff but I love gadgets and tech. The few times I play the roleplaying games for star wars, I am a gadget based bounty hunter. I like Star Trek more but when comes to the appearance of ships, I gotta give it to Star Wars. Trek was too clean and sleek. I like the look of the Star Wars ships in the original trilogy. Never cared for the naboo starfighters.

But you are right and I am sorry. Everyone has their own taste in films, even if I don't agree with it. If that is what works for you, then run with it. I just wish those two JJ movies were Sci-Fi movies all on their own as they did not need the Trek brand.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bill Dunn wrote:
Jaçinto wrote:

You are joking about the JJ movies being the best Trek films right? Into Darkness was ranked the worst Trek Movie of all time. Heck, ignoring nostalgia, I actually got extremely mad at the movie within the first few scenes. That movie, if you paid attention to all the plot points and followed its story structure and pacing, made no sense whatsoever.

Ranked as the worst Trek movie (which means worse than Star Trek 5!) by whom?!? Frankly, I find it hard to believe that would have been the outcome of a broad poll of Star Trek fans.

Even then, I think that history is skewed by Into Darkness being the new one. Star Trek V was pretty damned horrible, being that it was directed by its star, focused primarily on him to the exclusion of virtually every other cast member, and treated the other members of the cast as mirrors to reflect his greatness.

It's not entirely unfair to call Star Trek V, "Bill Shatner's loving valentine to James T. Kirk."

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Aranna wrote:
The force defines Star Wars... it is a generic sci fi show without it.

Actually even with it, it started as little more than a retelling of Kurizawa's "Hidden Fortress". The story has gotten so convoluted because of all the retrofitting to turn a one off story into a 9 movie franchise.


I'm a big Star Trek fan, but I really LOVE Star Wars and its universe. (I also like Elvis Presley AND the Beatles...)

As much as episode I, II and III made me cry inside, CN's The Clone Wars made me fall in love with SW again. To be fair, episode I, II and III were really good to define the universe despite their bad dialogues and their character's questionable motives.

I like sci-fi, but I'm a fantasy guy and that's what Star Wars is. I just happens to be in space, but it's more a fairy tale than a true space opera.


Laurefindel wrote:
(I also like Elvis Presley AND the Beatles...)

What? Is there a rivalry here? First I've heard of it. (Granted that might just say a lot about me and my musical tastes, I'm not a huge fan of either of those...)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Dr.Who.....


On a more on topic note, I have to say Star Trek. I mean, the Borgs are easily one of the coolest ideas I have ever seen! And Star Trek went so far as to create an actual, functioning language with syntax and everything!

Sovereign Court

K177Y C47 wrote:
On a more on topic note, I have to say Star Trek. I mean, the Borgs are easily one of the coolest ideas I have ever seen! And Star Trek went so far as to create an actual, functioning language with syntax and everything!

Yeah the "resistance is futile" is such a chilling phrase you cant make that up!


Poldaran wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Wow, didn't know that raise dead could be used on a sci-fi thread!
Sure you did. It's just not a spell. It's any number of technobabbly solutions. I can think of two just from Star Trek movies.

Of course, how could I make this mistake after watching The Wrath of Khan?!

Lord Fyre wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Wow, didn't know that raise dead could be used on a sci-fi thread!
You have never read Mary Shelley?

Sadly, yes. Or the first sentence of every paragraph, at least. Darned thing still took entirely too long to read though!


1 person marked this as a favorite.
KingmanHighborn wrote:
But then there was DS9 and I hated it, it was soooooooo BOOOOORRRRRINGGG! Nothing happened until the Dominion stuff started up otherwise it was Space CSI.

Haha, this just goes to show there's no accounting for taste. The space CSI vibe, and DS9's tone of slight moral ambiguity, which is more than the other ST shows can boast, is what makes it the least boring Trek series, IMO. Possibly with the exception of Enterprise's later two seasons.


Jaçinto wrote:
I just found them disgustingly awful...

Oh, nerdrage! What would the internet do without it?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
K177Y C47 wrote:
On a more on topic note, I have to say Star Trek. I mean, the Borgs are easily one of the coolest ideas I have ever seen! And Star Trek went so far as to create an actual, functioning language with syntax and everything!

It's even better with a Borg/Cyberman teamup in "Assimilation Squared."


Lord Fyre wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
That said, I don't know what your take on J.J.Abrams version of Star Trek is. :)

I think your blogger has missed out on one very essential truth of Trek in all it's incarnations.

The show is a product of it's time. TOS reflected the views of Roddenberry's generation, a very conservative, xenophobic, and frequently reactionary bunch, which still had some very important values and virtues attached to it. For all of its good points TOS could justly be accused of racial and national tokenism, being very much in favor of the Vietnam War, and harshly critical of the progressive movements of it's day, and expressing several misogynistic viewpoints as well in it's treatment of female characters.

Ironically - At Its Time - Star Trek was rightly considered liberal, socially progressive, racially inclusive and feminist. :)

Exactly right. Change happens slowly. If, at that time, for example Star Trek had an African American female captain... it would never have been put on the air. TNG had some episodes that pushed the envelope a bit. Though maybe not as much as they could have, but they explored various issues a bit (Riker's brief fling with a alien who had male and female genitalia, right to die issues, etc.)


Hmm, talking about star trek...ranking the movies they would probably be in this order...

ST 6
ST:FC
ST (2009)
ST 4
ST 2
ST First Contact
ST Nemesis (I actually like this one a ton, apparently I'm not part of the ST crowd that hates it)
ST 3
ST 5
ST Insurrection (not bad, just really really boring)
ST Into Darkness
ST Generations
ST 1 (I watch it occasionally, but this movie is an hour episode stretched out into a movie).

Just my ranking of the movies...right now (my rankings can change...and do occasionally).

On the series...

Absolutely LOVE TNG.

That's the top of the list.

Then probably TOS.

Then I'd say I really enjoyed Voyager. Truthfully, I really enjoyed it a lot. I admit that the first two to three seasons were snooze fests too. They got pretty boring. Season 7 wasn't great either. But loved the latter part of 3, and then 4, 5, and 6.

DS9 started off worse than Voyager for me. It was far too much about the station and staying put, except when on a shuttle. Game changer was the Defiant. Not all the episodes were about the war, but enabling them to go around and voyage a lot more, made a whole change to the dynamic of the show. Even if it's lower on the list than the others...DS9 is STILL exceptional TV in my opinion.

Enterprise didn't last long enough to give it a fair shake. The problem is I hate half of it. Seasons 1 and 2 really...don't catch my interest. I rewatched them this past summer, and I still can't say I was impressed. It starts to get pretty good with Season 3, though it feels almost like they were trying to recapture the magic of the Dominion War in DS9 for it, and Season 4 is ST gold. If Enterprise had gone on for 3 more seasons, and had continued like 3-4 had...it may actually have topped my list of favorite ST series, but as it is, with only half the seasons to my liking...it's nearer to the bottom...but NOT the bottom of the list...

That goes to one I don't think any have mentioned...

TAS, or the Animated Series. I know it was made long ago...but I still just can't get into it as much with the animation as it is. I should be more forgiving, but I found more fun from Filmation's animation series of superheroes at that time, than I did from the ST animation series.


Spock has Psionics.

Luke has Spirit.


GreyWolfLord wrote:
...not bad, just really really boring...

*very confused*

What metric do you measure entertainment by?


Tequila Sunrise wrote:
GreyWolfLord wrote:
...not bad, just really really boring...

*very confused*

What metric do you measure entertainment by?

Well, there are several different ones.

Normally Star Trek doesn't fall anywhere close to the artsy ones, so that doesn't even apply.

After that it's on how well written, how unique a plot, how exciting, how interesting, how deep, and various other items.

ST Insurrection wasn't bad, it had a unique idea, or a different slant on one of many plots that exist, and conversations were done well enough, but I simply was bored. Like really, really, bored. It just couldn't keep my interest all that much.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

This would be a harder question if it was ST:TNG vs Star Wars. I find Star Wars more fun (it's like D&D in space) but Jean Luc Picard > All. :P

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Robert Carter 58 wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
LazarX wrote:
Lord Fyre wrote:
That said, I don't know what your take on J.J.Abrams version of Star Trek is. :)

I think your blogger has missed out on one very essential truth of Trek in all it's incarnations.

The show is a product of it's time. TOS reflected the views of Roddenberry's generation, a very conservative, xenophobic, and frequently reactionary bunch, which still had some very important values and virtues attached to it. For all of its good points TOS could justly be accused of racial and national tokenism, being very much in favor of the Vietnam War, and harshly critical of the progressive movements of it's day, and expressing several misogynistic viewpoints as well in it's treatment of female characters.

Ironically - At Its Time - Star Trek was rightly considered liberal, socially progressive, racially inclusive and feminist. :)
Exactly right. Change happens slowly. If, at that time, for example Star Trek had an African American female captain... it would never have been put on the air. TNG had some episodes that pushed the envelope a bit. Though maybe not as much as they could have, but they explored various issues a bit (Riker's brief fling with a alien who had male and female genitalia, right to die issues, etc.)

Again, that would be true if everyone else was just as timid. Only Twilight Zone and Outer Limites were far more daring in their science fiction (as well as being much better written) and skated the ice far more often and they even predated Star Trek.

The fact of the matter is... Gene Roddenberry himself was Goldwater Republican conservative in his political views, and that expressed itself in TNG. His viewpoints were largely pushed aside as was the man himself by the time TNG came into the picture.


Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Poldaran wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Wow, didn't know that raise dead could be used on a sci-fi thread!
Sure you did. It's just not a spell. It's any number of technobabbly solutions. I can think of two just from Star Trek movies.

Of course, how could I make this mistake after watching The Wrath of Khan?!

Lord Fyre wrote:
Tequila Sunrise wrote:
Wow, didn't know that raise dead could be used on a sci-fi thread!
You have never read Mary Shelley?
Sadly, yes. Or the first sentence of every paragraph, at least. Darned thing still took entirely too long to read though!

I'm holding out for Dr. Crusher to simply scan a brain for its memories and use them to train a new system; like how they put the Red Leader named Jeff Chambers into R2D2s machine body.

Wayfinders

If Disney ever buys out Paramount, we can find out which is better in the first "Star Trek Wars" movie.

151 to 200 of 200 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Gamer Life / General Discussion / Poll: Star Trek vs. Star Wars? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in General Discussion