Star Wars vs Star Trek - the ultimate nerd battle

Started by Barrister, January 05, 2010, 06:15:10 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Which is the better sci fi series: Star Wars or Star Trek?

Star Wars
33 (45.2%)
Star Trek
36 (49.3%)
I like to pretend I'm not a nerd (even though I post on languish)
4 (5.5%)

Total Members Voted: 70

grumbler

Quote from: Neil on January 07, 2010, 07:39:54 PM
The ewoks aren't actually that bad.  You guys need to quit being such a bunch of faggots and untwist your panties.
:lol:  Sorry, Neil, but only you teenage girls are gonna buy this line.  The Ewoks are silly bad indeed, and should have stayed on the Saturday cartoon shows you all watch.  They are not the worst thing in Star Wars, but they are definitely the worst thing in the first three movies.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

The Brain

Quote from: DontSayBanana on January 08, 2010, 08:55:11 AM
Quote from: Siege on January 08, 2010, 07:31:06 AM
Star Wars is lefty propaganda.

And Star Wars is an unoriginal piece of tripe by an untalented hack that just happened to be scraped out of the bottom of the barrel by a couple of very talented ghost writers.  What's your point?

Let me add my voice to the chorus: Star Wars is OK for children but grown men liking it is just sad and weird. There are many books and movies made for kids that are enjoyable for adults too; Star Wars isn't one of them.
Women want me. Men want to be with me.

Savonarola

Quote from: Siege on January 08, 2010, 07:31:06 AM
Star Wars is lefty propaganda.

They have no money in Star Trek.  The communists already won in that universe.   :(
In Italy, for thirty years under the Borgias, they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed, but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace—and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock

Neil

Quote from: grumbler on January 08, 2010, 09:02:24 AM
Quote from: Neil on January 07, 2010, 07:39:54 PM
The ewoks aren't actually that bad.  You guys need to quit being such a bunch of faggots and untwist your panties.
:lol:  Sorry, Neil, but only you teenage girls are gonna buy this line.  The Ewoks are silly bad indeed, and should have stayed on the Saturday cartoon shows you all watch.  They are not the worst thing in Star Wars, but they are definitely the worst thing in the first three movies.
Wrong.  The guy at the end of Empire Strikes Back that says 'Yes sir!' to Admiral Piett is the worst thing in the first three movies.  The Ewoks played a minor but essential role.  I don't see what anyone could possibly hold against them.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

DontSayBanana

Quote from: Neil on January 08, 2010, 09:31:02 AM
Wrong.  The guy at the end of Empire Strikes Back that says 'Yes sir!' to Admiral Piett is the worst thing in the first three movies.  The Ewoks played a minor but essential role.  I don't see what anyone could possibly hold against them.

Seriously.  Don't punish the characters for the sins of the costume designer.  If, say, a hundred thousand pandas suddenly decided to lynch a couple squads of special forces guys, they'd be lucky to leave mostly uninjured, too.
Experience bij!

grumbler

Quote from: Neil on January 08, 2010, 09:31:02 AM
I don't see what anyone could possibly hold against them.
(1) the choice of the teddy bear as the archetype for them, which totally destroyed any chance of suspension of disbelief for anyone over age 8;
(2) the choice to costume them in outfits that looked to hideously fake that even 8-and-unders gagged.

The only thing they could have done to top the Ewoks as presented would have been to have the Millennium Falcon represented by a turd with sparklers stuck in it.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

DontSayBanana

Quote from: grumbler on January 08, 2010, 10:15:05 AM
Quote from: Neil on January 08, 2010, 09:31:02 AM
I don't see what anyone could possibly hold against them.
(1) the choice of the teddy bear as the archetype for them, which totally destroyed any chance of suspension of disbelief for anyone over age 8;
(2) the choice to costume them in outfits that looked to hideously fake that even 8-and-unders gagged.

The only thing they could have done to top the Ewoks as presented would have been to have the Millennium Falcon represented by a turd with sparklers stuck in it.

Grumbles, you didn't bother reading the post right above yours, did you? 
Experience bij!

Caliga

Does the "fault" lie with the costume designer or does it lie with Lucas?  I had thought Lucas wanted the Ewoks to be cute teddy bear clones because he suspected (correctly) they could sell shitloads of tie-in toys.

I don't personally have a huge problem with the Ewoks, but then again I first saw ROTJ when I was 8 years old.  If I saw the movie for the first time today, I would probably feel differently.  I liked ROTJ but it was without a doubt the worst of the original trilogy.
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

Grey Fox

If your first introduction to Star Wars is today. There is no way, in any order, that any of the movies it's an incredible pile of outdated suck.
Colonel Caliga is Awesome.

Syt

#264
Quote from: Caliga on January 08, 2010, 10:27:33 AM
Does the "fault" lie with the costume designer or does it lie with Lucas?  I had thought Lucas wanted the Ewoks to be cute teddy bear clones because he suspected (correctly) they could sell shitloads of tie-in toys.

I don't personally have a huge problem with the Ewoks, but then again I first saw ROTJ when I was 8 years old.  If I saw the movie for the first time today, I would probably feel differently.  I liked ROTJ but it was without a doubt the worst of the original trilogy.

I think the official Lucas line (at least in an interview that I had as part of the collector's edition VHS THX remastered tapes) was that he originally intended to have the Empire brought down by (technologically impaired) Wookies, but that by Episode VI Wookies had been established as tech savvy, space flying characters. Hence "short" versions of Wookies, with even the name similar (syllables basically switched around). Wook-E = E-Wook => Ewok.

The idea was to have a low tech people effectively oppose a high tech superpower, in reference to how some people supposedly saw 'Nam.

Of course in later statements Lucas backpedalled, claiming that the Ewok support was mostly a diversion to draw Imperial troops away from the bunker entrance, and not a full fledged battle + victory of the sides.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein's brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops.
—Stephen Jay Gould

Proud owner of 42 Zoupa Points.

Neil

Quote from: grumbler on January 08, 2010, 10:15:05 AM
Quote from: Neil on January 08, 2010, 09:31:02 AM
I don't see what anyone could possibly hold against them.
(1) the choice of the teddy bear as the archetype for them, which totally destroyed any chance of suspension of disbelief for anyone over age 8;
(2) the choice to costume them in outfits that looked to hideously fake that even 8-and-unders gagged.

The only thing they could have done to top the Ewoks as presented would have been to have the Millennium Falcon represented by a turd with sparklers stuck in it.
I don't see what's so shocking about bipedal omnivores who resemble flat-faced bears fighting (and getting killed in great numbers by) Imperial troops.  It's more plausible than some of the other alien designs.  And given that they were mostly nude, I don't think there's a lot of room to complain about the costuming.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.

grumbler

Quote from: DontSayBanana on January 08, 2010, 10:19:01 AM
Grumbles, you didn't bother reading the post right above yours, did you? 
Yes, i have read it.  Why?   Did you bother to read this post?  :huh:
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

grumbler

Quote from: Neil on January 08, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
I don't see what's so shocking about bipedal omnivores who resemble flat-faced bears fighting (and getting killed in great numbers by) Imperial troops.   
Who said anything about "shocking?"

QuoteIt's more plausible than some of the other alien designs.  And given that they were mostly nude, I don't think there's a lot of room to complain about the costuming.
:lol:  No, the actors playing Ewoks were not "mostly nude!" They were inside the most absurd-looking costumes I have seen in a big-budget film.
The future is all around us, waiting, in moments of transition, to be born in moments of revelation. No one knows the shape of that future or where it will take us. We know only that it is always born in pain.   -G'Kar

Bayraktar!

DontSayBanana

Grumbler, your argument makes no sense: "the characters are awful because their costume design isn't up to snuff."  Just because you personally don't like the route the costume designer took doesn't mean they're poor characters.  I wouldn't call them the best supporting characters in the world, either, but there's been far worse, especially in science fiction.

In fact, Trek has its fair share of horrible support.  Klingons in TOS are pretty lame, Vulcans took a nosedive after Enterprise was through with them, and there wasn't even a serious attempt to characterize the Remans from Nemesis.

Also, you're assuming "big budget" means "big costume budget."  Film costume designers have been bitching for years that this isn't the case.  I'd imagine that by the time you're done paying the cast and crew's salaries and paying the outside VFX unit, you'll find there's precious little to go toward costume development.
Experience bij!

Neil

Quote from: grumbler on January 08, 2010, 03:27:42 PM
Quote from: Neil on January 08, 2010, 03:15:28 PM
I don't see what's so shocking about bipedal omnivores who resemble flat-faced bears fighting (and getting killed in great numbers by) Imperial troops.   
Who said anything about "shocking?"
If you were able to suspend disbelief for the rest of the movie, but then were suddenly unable to do so because of the appearance of the ewoks, I would say that 'shocking' is an adequate word to use.  I could also use 'jolting' if you prefer.  But I will not, because it is my decision to make, not yours.
Quote
QuoteIt's more plausible than some of the other alien designs.  And given that they were mostly nude, I don't think there's a lot of room to complain about the costuming.
:lol:  No, the actors playing Ewoks were not "mostly nude!" They were inside the most absurd-looking costumes I have seen in a big-budget film.
The ewoks themselves were mostly nude.  And the ewok costumes weren't bad at all by the standards of the time.  Also, I feel that your use of an exclamation point demeans you.

So, what's your next move?  Go after Alien because of the shitty-looking costume?

You're just trying to be too cool for school.  It's kind of pathetic.  If you had children with Hortlund, I'd pity them.
I do not hate you, nor do I love you, but you are made out of atoms which I can use for something else.