As A Star-trek fan explain to me why Star Wars is better?

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

I grew up on Enterprise. Had to double back to the OG and well it's pretty fukking good as well. If you can sort through the worse effects and have an open mind. But I saw Star Wars as a 10 yr old and was like eh. What makes this franchise so renown. I get it Darth Vader is dope. Han Solo too. but what else. The gay butler? The garbage can that bleeps and bloops. I know one is mostly known for cinema and the other for TV. but in no way shape or form is Star Wars a better franchise.

 

[MartyMcFly]

I wouldn’t say Star Wars is better. And I’m a big fan of both. But Star Wars is the more commercial product. It’s not as heady as Star Trek and relies on basic storytelling tropes that never go out of style. The mysticism of the force and the Jedi, the family story with the skywalkers, the imagery of Vader and the empire, the serialiezed storytelling and cliffhangers. It all makes for an engaging commercial product that just works man and is dope as hell when done right.

 

[David_TheMan]

Star Wars and Star Trek are equal in my opinion, they are the gold star, top teir american sci fi franchises.
The difference is Viacom/Paramount President hates Star Trek so Star Trek suffured for it in movies and tv.
Star Wars was Lucas's baby and the gem of his company, and to Disney its a valuable IP, so the owners always treated the IPs differently.

 

[MartyMcFly]

Star Wars and Star Trek are equal in my opinion, they are the gold star, top teir american sci fi franchises.
The difference is Viacom/Paramount President hates Star Trek so Star Trek suffured for it in movies and tv.
Star Trek was Lucas's baby and the gem of his company, and to Disney its a valuable IP, so the owners always treated the IPs differently.

To be fair Star Trek also doesn’t lend itself to film as well as Star Wars. Star Trek is a lot of dialogue and people talking problems out and talking out their philosophy. It’s made for tv. It’s not full of explosions and daring escapes and shyt like that.

 

[Poetical Poltergeist]

When I was growing up I saw star wars was for nerds and star trek was for the nerd nerds. I sort of grew up with star wars but was never a hard core fan but I could never for the life of me, be entertained by star trek. That shyt would come on late at night and I would be like, yep time for bed. The newer ones I can't even get into to.

So for me star wars is better.

 

[David_TheMan]

To be fair Star Trek also doesn’t lend itself to film as well as Star Wars. Star Trek is a lot of dialogue and people talking problems out and talking out their philosophy. It’s made for tv. It’s not full of explosions and daring escapes and shyt like that.

Disagree with you.
Star trek: wrath of Khan is better than any Star Wars movie ever made.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

Star Wars and Star Trek are equal in my opinion,

Star Wars and Star Trek are equal in my opinion, they are the gold star, top teir american sci fi franchises.
The difference is Viacom/Paramount President hates Star Trek so Star Trek suffured for it in movies and tv.
Star Trek was Lucas's baby and the gem of his company, and to Disney its a valuable IP, so the owners always treated the IPs differently.

es.
The difference is Viacom/Paramount President hates Star Trek so Star Trek suffured for it in movies and tv.
Star Trek was Lucas's baby and the gem of his company, and to Disney its a valuable IP, so the owners always treated the IPs differently.

Uhhh

 

[David_TheMan]

Uhhh

Twillight zone isn't hard sci-fi, fiction but not hard sci fi, there is horror, fantasy, and other genres.
X-files is sci-fi but its no where close to being on the level of a Star Wars or Star Trek.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

When I was growing up I saw star wars was for nerds and star trek was for the nerd nerds. I sort of grew up with star wars but was never a hard core fan but I could never for the life of me, be entertained by star trek. That shyt would come on late at night and I would be like, yep time for bed. The newer ones I can't even get into to.

So for me star wars is better.

That's what made it piff. It was much deeper. Star Wars was pretend deep. Dont get me wrong it started it share of original properties. but it's not really that deep. Star-Trek has a lore unmatched by StarWars. It's the NPR of Sci-Fi shows. it REALLY touches on politics. StarWars is like eh, well fukk those guys.

 

[MartyMcFly]

Disagree with you.
Star trek: wrath of Khan is better than any Star Wars movie ever made.

And Star Trek wrath of khan is mostly talking and character shyt. It’s not space opera on the level of Star Wars. It’s not trying to be. It’s heady talks about life and the nature of vengeance and moby dikk. It’s an episode of the tv show made on the big screen. That’s not Star Wars.

And it’s not about the “better than” argument for me cause that’s reductive when they’re both trying to do and be two very different things. Wrath of khan at its core is not an action movie. It’s a character drama in space. Star Wars at their core will always be sci-fi action

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

Twillight zone isn't hard sci-fi, fiction but not hard sci fi, there is horror, fantasy, and other genres.
X-files is sci-fi but its no where close to being on the level of a Star Wars or Star Trek.

In what way? What you taking science fiction and Futurism into seperate lanes. StarWars is Futurism. Its basically the world we have now extrapolated into hundreds of years later.

 

[Tetsuo]

One has light sabers and Boba Fett, the other doesn't

 

[David_TheMan]

In what way? What you taking science fiction and Futurism into seperate lanes. StarWars is Futurism. Its basically the world we have now extrapolated into hundreds of years later.

Do you not know what sci-fi means?
Sorry but its pretty simple, if you don't know what sci-fi means let me know and I'll direct you to a dictionary so you can understand the meaning.

That said what I said is extremely clear and not complex at all.

Star Wars and Star Trek are the gold star, top tier, of American sci-fi.
Twilight Zone isn't a dedicated sci-fi property, and X-files is sci-fi but not on the level of Star Wars and Sci-fi.

Simple

 

[David_TheMan]

And Star Trek wrath of khan is mostly talking and character shyt. It’s not space opera on the level of Star Wars. It’s not trying to be. It’s heady talks about life and the nature of vengeance and moby dikk. It’s an episode of the tv show made on the big screen. That’s not Star Wars.

And it’s not about the “better than” argument for me cause that’s reductive when they’re both trying to do and be two very different things. Wrath of khan at its core is not an action movie. It’s a character drama in space. Star Wars at their core will always be sci-fi action

Yeah, you made the claim that Star Trek isn't geared towards movies, I disagreed, and pointed to you that Wrath of Khan is a better movie than any Star Wars movie I've seen. This refutes your point of it not being a geared towards movies, it most definitely can be, if there is good writing involved and direction, seen in Wrath of Khan, ST4, and Undiscovered Country.

 

[BelowTheMasonDixon]

Do you not know what sci-fi means?
Sorry but its pretty simple, if you don't know what sci-fi means let me know and I'll direct you to a dictionary so you can understand the meaning.

That said what I said is extremely clear and not complex at all.

Star Wars and Star Trek are the gold star, top tier, of American sci-fi.
Twilight Zone isn't a dedicated sci-fi property, and X-files is sci-fi but not on the level of Star Wars and Sci-fi.

Simple

you talking greasy as fukk.