Star Wars

[engebro 0]

I've noticed that a lot of Star Trek fans hate star wars and vice versa. A friend of mine was even threatened when talking about ST in line for one of the SW movies.

 

My question is... can you like both? Or am I just "special"?

 

:)

[Vex Xiang 0]

Well...here's my thing about Star Wars.

 

I like Star Wars. But enough! Sheesh it was only 3 movies. They're finally coming out with more. 3 more. But 6 movies is not huge. Nightmare on Elm street had a longer run...and you don't see Freddy conventions or Freddy sims.

 

Star Wars is just a small player compared to Trek. There's just not enough content, and I watch the movies maybe once every few years...but other than that its boring because there's nothing new!

 

Thats probably why I like the new Star Wars movies and many of the hard core fans dont. I'm relieved that they've finally got some new material. Only took them 20 years right?

 

Star Wars for me...just gets old fast...because you can only be interested in watching the same 6 hour bit for so long. :)

 

I'm glad you like both though, sensei...because I think the ST vs SW debates are silly.

 

I mean SW uses lasers...the Enterprise would totally kick butt :P

Edited March 10, 2004 by Vex Xiang

[Dumbass 0]

I like Star Wars. But enough! Sheesh it was only 3 movies. They're finally coming out with more. 3 more. But 6 movies is not huge. Nightmare on Elm street had a longer run...and you don't see Freddy conventions or Freddy sims.

 

Star Wars is just a small player compared to Trek. There's just not enough content, and I watch the movies maybe once every few years...but other than that its boring because there's nothing new!

I disagree.

 

First of all, there were more Jason movies than Freddy movies - 11 in all if you count Jason X and Freddy vs. Jason. He had a higher body count too. (My main complaint is I was waiting for Freddy vs. Jason since the '80s and it ended in a TIE!! :) )

 

Second, although the span of the 6 Star Wars movies covers only about 35 years or so the first 6 Star Trek movies covered even less time than that (assuming you discount the brief time they were in the '80s). There is a much richer Extended Universe in Star Wars for the diehard fans while the Star Trek diehard fans debate about what is canon and what isn't.

 

There are Star Wars fan clubs and conventions and the like as well. (I'm not a member but I won a free pass to see Attack of the Clones on IMAX from a contest a local chapter had. I was the only one who knew Luke's call sign was Red 5 even though they were showing the original Star Wars in the lobby!) The Star Trek clubs and conventions get more press simply because they have been around longer.

 

And I'm pretty sure a lightsaber would block a disruptor or phaser blast just as easily as a laser.

Edited March 10, 2004 by Dumbass

[Vex Xiang 0]

I dont deny that the "extended universe" of Star Wars may be bigger. I'm talking about what has been canonly produced in the shows. And the 6 hours just doesnt show that much. Actually I guess its 10 hours now, give or take.

 

Star Trek...Im willing to bet...is coming up on almost a thousand hours of on-screen material. When it comes down to it...theres a whole lot more in Star Trek to keep me entertained than in Star Wars. I'm not talking about internet gaming or fan sites or games or books. I'm just talking about movies and TV and how much the "creators" (or inherited creators) have given to us.

 

And I doubt a lightsaber would do any good against a photon torpedo :)

[Merina 0]

::in Caitian tone:: GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Edited March 10, 2004 by pittykitty

[Dumbass 0]

And I doubt a lightsaber would do any good against a photon torpedo :P

I'm pretty sure Yoda could deflect a photon torpedo if he wanted to bad enough.

 

Maybe not a quantum, but definitely a photon. :P

 

My point is you can't really compare Star Wars with Star Trek. It's like comparing a Wookie with a Klingon. They're just different. Best you can do is give a subjective opinion saying "I like this better."

 

As a side note about 10 years ago my girlfriend and I went to the Art of Star Wars exhibit at the newly-opened San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. I got her excited about seeing the Klingons. :)

[Lance Moris 0]

First of all, there were more Jason movies than Freddy movies - 11 in all if you count Jason X and Freddy vs. Jason.  He had a higher body count too.  (My main complaint is I was waiting for Freddy vs. Jason since the '80s and it ended in a TIE!!  :) )

Is this an argument for the st/sw debate?

 

Star Wars, I consider, is high fantasy as much as scifi. And theres nothing wrong with that. But that alone moots any point the comparisons have. They're both good in their own rights.

Edited March 10, 2004 by Lance Moris

[Vex Xiang 0]

As a side note about 10 years ago my girlfriend and I went to the Art of Star Wars exhibit at the newly-opened San Francisco Museum of Modern Art. I got her excited about seeing the Klingons.

 

Wow...what's your secret? I cant get mine to stop complaining whenever anything sci-fi related pops on the TV.

[Dumbass 0]

Wow...what's your secret? I cant get mine to stop complaining whenever anything sci-fi related pops on the TV.

First of all, because of my prank, I didn't get any that night.

 

Second, the trip was her idea. She was an engineering major which helps a lot.

[Travis Kroells 0]

First of all, because of my prank, I didn't get any that night.

Thats why it's always important to prank those that only have a good sense of humor...or that put out.

 

 

Anyways, to keep the topic from falling off topic, and being locked....

 

I like both of them. I am inclined to also agree, that while Trek has a lot more "Cannon stuff" SW has an unbeliveable amount of SW books and stuff. New Jedi Order, the New Republic, that stuff can easly make many more movies.

 

We Trekkies argue over Cannon to much. That is our down fall, it's like supermans Kryptonite...except this doesn't kill us...it makes us ramble about stupid things.

[Vex Xiang 0]

I think us arguing about canon and SW fans not doing it has more to do with the availability of content.

 

SW dont have to argue about canon because basically NOTHING is canon. They have so little canon that arguing over it would be silly. Its better just to make up your own stuff and go with it because otherwise you're left with practically nothing.

 

Trekkies argue canon so much because there's soooo much established material. We don't NEED to go out of our way to make up new stuff because there's tons of it already. So we want to stick with what's 'real' in Trek.

 

At least thats my theory :)

[Seiben 0]

yeah, I like Star Wars.. I find there's more action in it than Satr Trek, without actually going into detail of al those confusing Trek technical terminologies. It's what I like about Star Wars. Still though, Trek Universe is much more advanced than Star Wars.. also makes you think too. (Star Wars too, but for me more so for Star Trek), and the ships look better too. :)

[Dumbass 0]

SW dont have to argue about canon because basically NOTHING is canon. They have so little canon that arguing over it would be silly. Its better just to make up your own stuff and go with it because otherwise you're left with practically nothing.

Yeah, Obi-Wan's "certain point of view" stuff pretty much makes canon a moot point since we don't even know if what we see on screen is the truth.

 

But anyone who thinks there can't be argument anyway should look at the message board section of starwars.com. You'll find page after page of arguments there.

[Jenna James 0]

Only good thing about Star Wars is R2D2 and C3PO.

Gives engebro gas injection for starting subject :)

Edited March 11, 2004 by Jenna James

[engebro 0]

Gives engebro gas injection for starting subject :)

owwwwww......

::sleep::