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

Savonarola

Quote from: Caliga on January 12, 2010, 06:03:26 AM
Quote from: Barrister on January 11, 2010, 05:21:09 PM
I never thought of it that way...
It's a fairly interesting concept, but breaks down when you consider that the Borg are a Star Trek 'species', as well as the plot of the first Star Trek film.  The comparisons would work better if there was magic in the Star Trek universe, which I guess you *could* say there is in the form of the Q species, but IIRC the idea there was that the species was so advanced that its technology appeared to be magic to lesser species.

Star Trek has a number of instances where technology malfunctions and tries to kill people; like in the first movie, or the time the killer robot came on the Enterprise and Kirk exposed it to a paradox which caused it to explode.  I don't think these are sinister in the way that Darth Vader is sinister.  The Borg are an exception, though they're technological monsters that are terrifying the way the Death Star is; I'll concede Star Trek does not always portray technology in a favorable light, but it usually does.

Star Trek has plenty of aliens with mysterious powers which are essentially magic.  In addition to the Q there was that kid on TOS who could melt things with his mind, or Apollo, or telepathic Betazoids; but that's besides the point.  Technology can be portrayed as sinister in universes without magic, as it is in Frankenstein or the new BSG.
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

The Minsky Moment

Star Trek - like the child of the 60s that it was - had a fundamentally optimistic view of humanity, its possibilities, and its perfectability.  So naturally technology as a product of human effort and imagination, is mostly going to be a positive force, though occasionally perverted by wicked.

Star Wars OTOH begins with the assumption of decadence or at least cyclicality (the good old days of the republic are long past now . . .) where the forces of evil have material and technical superirority.  Different premise.
The purpose of studying economics is not to acquire a set of ready-made answers to economic questions, but to learn how to avoid being deceived by economists.
--Joan Robinson

Barrister

Quote from: grumbler on January 12, 2010, 03:14:30 PM
Quote from: Barrister on January 12, 2010, 01:47:40 PM
Since Q features prominently in the both the series premiere and season finale, plus of course introduced the Borg to the world of Star Trek, I'm not sure I can agree with your statement.
Most of us try very hard not to think of the premiere or finale of TNG, I suspect, and the Borg could easily have been introduced in any number of ways.

I thought the finale was fun.  The premier was awkward, but series premieres often are.
Posts here are my own private opinions.  I do not speak for my employer.

Caliga

Quote from: grumbler on January 12, 2010, 01:27:39 PM
Why would you think we differ in this?  I didn't even use the term "canon" so any assumptions I make about what is canon would be unsupported, would they not?
Right, you didn't say "canon" but I assumed that's what you were getting at.  Bad assumption on my part, sorry.
0 Ed Anger Disapproval Points

grumbler

Quote from: Caliga on January 12, 2010, 06:32:49 PM
Right, you didn't say "canon" but I assumed that's what you were getting at.  Bad assumption on my part, sorry.
We are on the same page, then.
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: Savonarola on January 12, 2010, 05:43:34 PM
Star Trek has a number of instances where technology malfunctions and tries to kill people; like in the first movie, or the time the killer robot came on the Enterprise and Kirk exposed it to a paradox which caused it to explode.  I don't think these are sinister in the way that Darth Vader is sinister.  The Borg are an exception, though they're technological monsters that are terrifying the way the Death Star is; I'll concede Star Trek does not always portray technology in a favorable light, but it usually does.

Star Trek has plenty of aliens with mysterious powers which are essentially magic.  In addition to the Q there was that kid on TOS who could melt things with his mind, or Apollo, or telepathic Betazoids; but that's besides the point.  Technology can be portrayed as sinister in universes without magic, as it is in Frankenstein or the new BSG.
Lots of good, thought-provoking stuff from you in this thread, Sav.  Thanks for it all, and keep it up.
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!

Viking

Quote from: Syt on January 08, 2010, 10:36:23 AM
The idea was to have a low tech people effectively oppose a high tech superpower, in reference to how some people supposedly saw 'Nam.

I saw Narn. Low tech people who use lots of big guns and are willing to take huge casualties. I curse Lucas for the Ewoks.
First Maxim - "There are only two amounts, too few and enough."
First Corollary - "You cannot have too many soldiers, only too few supplies."
Second Maxim - "Be willing to exchange a bad idea for a good one."
Second Corollary - "You can only be wrong or agree with me."

A terrorist which starts a slaughter quoting Locke, Burke and Mill has completely missed the point.
The fact remains that the only person or group to applaud the Norway massacre are random Islamists.

BuddhaRhubarb

Quote from: Tamas on January 12, 2010, 04:39:48 AM
Yes but in reality, "reversing the sub-atomic resonance of the anti-matter injectors to reveal a temporal flux in the plasma conduits of the Enterprise" translates to "I was way too lazy to write the plot"

Now called "The Ron Moore school of writing" :contract:
:p