Star Wars or Star Trek

Which is better?

There are other sci-fi franchises but between the big 2, which do you like more? Why?

While I like them both, Star Trek has been around the longest

When I was younger, I always thought Star Trek was dumb and Star Wars was the best. But years later, I was recommended by some people to watch a couple specific episodes of Star Trek: TNG to see if it changed my mind, and sure enough, it did. I've only ever watched episodes of TNG and the movies, but I think it's an amazing show, though the first season isn't as good as the seasons after that.

While I like them both, Star Trek has been around the longest Originally Posted by jmichael

Star Trek set the bar. no Star Trek, no Star Wars. Lucas was well aware of Star Trek when he was formulating Star Wars. while Lucas didn't directly copy Star Trek the many concepts are the same, this vast Universe with space travel and many races of aliens. Roddenberry and Lucas wanted the same thing ..


Space Western

When I was younger, I always thought Star Trek was dumb and Star Wars was the best. But years later, I was recommended by some people to watch a couple specific episodes of Star Trek: TNG to see if it changed my mind, and sure enough, it did. I've only ever watched episodes of TNG and the movies, but I think it's an amazing show, though the first season isn't as good as the seasons after that. Originally Posted by Albedo

you need to watch Star Trek TOS, it started it all. many great episodes i'd start here ..









TNG's first season was uneven and most insiders claim Roddenberry himself was meddling too much and only after he agreed to step back beginning season 2 the show got better. and Roddenberry did famously refuse to make Patrick Stewart a wig/toupee.


btw Stewart did do one early test shoot with a toupee and it looked terrible and Roddenberry refused to try again.

At this point in America, we all need beamed up to somewhere different.

Idk, Waco. Star Wars has more in common with Buck Roger's and old sci-fi serials... and spaghetti westerns than Star Trek.

I was more of a Star Trek fan. Based in 'science theories', while Star Wars was more 'fiction'. Plus any movie after the original SW Trilogy just sucked donkey balls, starting with Jar Jar Binks up to Solo.



I still remember watching Space 1999 and Battlestar Galactica in the 70s. The reboot of Battlestar was frickin' Excellent!

you need to watch Star Trek TOS, it started it all. many great episodes i'd start here ..









TNG's first season was uneven and most insiders claim Roddenberry himself was meddling too much and only after he agreed to step back beginning season 2 the show got better. and Roddenberry did famously refuse to make Patrick Stewart a wig/toupee.


btw Stewart did do one early test shoot with a toupee and it looked terrible and Roddenberry refused to try again. Originally Posted by The_Waco_Kid

The original series is waaaaay before my time, so I don't think I could get into it. It would feel too primitive I think. Hell, even by the time TNG finished on TV, I was still a kid.

I generally like Star Wars better, but I loved the Wrath of Kahn.

I was more of a Star Trek fan. Based in 'science theories', while Star Wars was more 'fiction'. Plus any movie after the original SW Trilogy just sucked donkey balls, starting with Jar Jar Binks up to Solo.



I still remember watching Space 1999 and Battlestar Galactica in the 70s. The reboot of Battlestar was frickin' Excellent! Originally Posted by DrivesAllDay

Surprised you didn't mention Babylon 5 since you seem versed in this corner of scifi

Interesting. This went from heavy Star Trek to tied up.

Who else wants to weigh in?

Still even

Interesting. This went from heavy Star Trek to tied up.

Who else wants to weigh in? Originally Posted by HDGristle

not surprising given the huge fan bases for each that it's basically split down the middle.

The original series is waaaaay before my time, so I don't think I could get into it. It would feel too primitive I think. Hell, even by the time TNG finished on TV, I was still a kid. Originally Posted by Albedo

perhaps so since Star Trek TOS was done in the 60's. CGI didn't exist then, the effects were done in the traditional ways of the day and were mostly hand animated. by the time of Star Trek TNG (largely as a result of the ground breaking CGI work pioneered by ILM for Star Wars) were far better than Star Trek TOS.

I was more of a Star Trek fan. Based in 'science theories', while Star Wars was more 'fiction'. Plus any movie after the original SW Trilogy just sucked donkey balls, starting with Jar Jar Binks up to Solo.



I still remember watching Space 1999 and Battlestar Galactica in the 70s. The reboot of Battlestar was frickin' Excellent! Originally Posted by DrivesAllDay

you could say Star Wars was more sci fantasy due to the concept of The Force which was Lucas's way of being "religious without being religious" i guess. Roddenberry wanted to stick to science fact as much as possible and did research what was theoretically possible including meeting with NASA scientists.



in the end of they day both Roddenberry and Lucas needed a way to do what Einstein said can't be done, go faster than light. even if possible there's still the relativistic effect, the time dilation effect where only days or weeks/ months in real time would pass on a ship at "warp speed" yet years/decades would pass in regular space. both Lucas and Roddenberry simply ignored this and to this day all sci-fi ignore it. they had to as there's no way to travel such vast distances in the context of a movie/tv show without "warp drive".



never could get into Space 1999. the entire concept was nonsense. the moon thrown out of orbit by some nuclear explosion of nuclear waste? nonsense! and why store it at all? can't those dummies just send it into the Sun? but Space 1999 was a Brit show so what do you expect?



if you want a better Brit sci-fi show from Gerry and Sylvia Anderson who also created Space 1999 check out UFO another 1970's show of theirs.



https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UFO_(TV_series)





the original Battlestar Galactica came about directly due to the massive success of Star Wars and had a "Star Wars" look to it as ILM and Dennis Muren designed all the special effects. Muren of course was heavily involved with Lucas and Star Wars.


the original Battlestar Galactica was simply too expensive to do at the time, for TV. and that second season compromise to keep it on the air was an abomination! but, like Star Trek, it happened due to a strong fanbase campaign to keep it on air but what they got was crap! the fans including me abandoned it big time and it got cancelled after season two.


the re-imaged Battlestar Galactica was awesome! to take the premise of the original show and "flip" everything around was brilliant.


the re-imaged Battlestar Galactica also benefits from about 40 years of science in that it's method of travel, a "warp jump" rather than "warp speed" is theoretically possible and avoids the wrath of Einstein! by the way, it was Einstein himself who predicted this, it's called an Einstein-Rosen bridge, an artificially created wormhole.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wormhole