I refuse to spend too much of my time responding to this seeing as how the OP is critically flawed in its premise:
“Topic: Why Star Trek is better than Star Wars”
Since this is GD and not the Pit, I shall refrain from posting my thoughts on Star Drek and simply say that Star Wars has no competition–from Klingons or anyone else.
The dumber people think you are, the more surprised they’re going to be when you kill them.
I met Harlan Ellison a long time ago (in the 80s). He was actually very pleasant.
This happened to my best bud: Said friend obtained a copy of Doomsman, one of Ellison’s fist published works. It was a “double paperback”; i.e., Doomsman was half of the book, and you’d flip the book to see the cover and story by another author. Friend attempted to get Ellison to autograph the book. Ellison asked him how much he paid for the book. Friend told him and Ellison bought the book from him. He then ripped the book in half and proceded to tear the Doomsman half to shreds. He autographed the remainder and gave it back to my friend. I have a copy of that book, but I don’t think I’ll try to get Ellison to sign it.
More:
Right out of high school my friend (the same one, above) and I made a short super-8 film based on Ellison’s Deal From the Bottom. My friend wrote to Ellison asking if we could submit the film to a student film fest. Ellison called him up and reamed him a new asshole for making the film in the first place without getting permission. (Remember, we were just teenagers and had no intention of selling it or using it for commercial purposes.) Ellison wrote my friend a letter later, saying:
[quote]
Dear [Friend],
Sorry for being such a prick on the phone… Go ahead and enter the movie in a [film fest]…*
We never did. I still have the film; and no, it’s not for sale.
I have no opinion about the OP; it is like asking whether Indian fod is superior to Thai. I do have an opinion on Science Fiction writers (who as a general rule hate the term sci-fi).
I have never had a problem with Harlan Ellison, but the metaphor I usually apply to him is loose cannon. And I was always careful to stay away from the danger zone.
Larry Niven, in my experience, has unfailingly been condescending, rude and uninteresting. That said, I much prefer his company to Jerry Pournelle’s.
They are all fine writers, though. Sometimes it is best to not meet the artist behind the work.
The best lack all conviction
The worst are full of passionate intensity.
*
Star Wars all the way!
And lay off the Ewoks, buddy. If they hadn’t given birth to ALF, we would have lost one of the greatest treasures of modern television. 
Chaim Mattis Keller
ckeller@kozmo.com
“Sherlock Holmes once said that once you have eliminated the
impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be
the answer. I, however, do not like to eliminate the impossible.
The impossible often has a kind of integrity to it that the merely improbable lacks.”
– Douglas Adams’s Dirk Gently, Holistic Detective
I say we put the Ewoks, the Jawas, and Jar-Jar Binks together in a pit with lots of sharp implements and let them fight it out. Then we’ll only have to shoot whoever’s left standing.
I am a fan of both. A soft-core fan, mind you. I’ve never been to a Star Trek convention, I don’t read the novels (Star Trek or Star Wars), I don’t stand in line to see the movies, I don’t catch every single episode of any of the series religiously… Nor do I know much bout the science fiction genre in general. That said, I vote for Star Trek. Why? Because Star Trek is about us. Star Wars is set in a galaxy far away; Star Trek is set in a future we could conceivably achieve. IMO, this is Star Trek’s greatest strength. It is a vision of a future in which we do NOT destroy ourselves.
BTW, I like Ewoks. Cute little furry, blood-thirsty bastards…
Jess
Full of 'satiable curtiosity
Y’know, Jab, originally the ewoks were supposed to be Wookies. Lucas changed them into midgets when he realized that it would be a little incongrous to have Chewbacca running around with all kinds of hi-tech stuff while his relatives were discovering how to make fire.
[QUOTE]
Originally posted by DSYoungEsq:
Star Wars has MUCH better actors (this isn’t even debatable; to any who don’t agree I simply say: DeForrest Kelly),
Billy D. williams! Carrie Fischer! Mark Hammill (sp?).
THE ONE KID IN THE WORLD WHO CAN’T EVEN SAY WAHOO WITH ANY FEELING WHO PLAYED YOUNG VADER!
Yeah, Star Wars has some great actors–so does Trek (Stewart of the RSC, C. Plummer). But no actor I have ever seen, including shows I’ve directed with 4 year olds, was as awful as that kid in the latest piece of dreck. BTW, Natalie Portman is nothing to write home about as an artist, either.
P.S. Whoever did the voice for Jar Jar!!!
Oh, well. We can always make more killbots.
Jess wrote:
Ever read The Physics of Star Trek? Transporters are most definitely not something we could conceivably achieve.
I am not sure Jess meant the technological achievements as much as it shows how far we can go to get away from the silliness that plagues us now. (i.e. racial problems, criminals, etc.)
And I do agree that Star Trek seems more viable than Star Wars.
I mean for crying out loud. They go back to the age of the knights. It is Camelot set in space. Can’t they come up with better weapons than a hi-tech sword? Of course, a hi-tech crossbow. How about a hi-tech club? Or a hi-tech rock to throw at the enemy? Give me a break. How stupid can you get? Did Lucas have any imagination?
Lucas: “I am thinking of a group of guys that run around with hi-tech swords rescuing damsels in distress.”
Money guy: “How is that different from a King Arther movie?”
Lucas: “I will have space battles and lots of special effects.”
Money guy: “Okay, how big a check do you want?”
The only movies that Lucas did that were worth a dang, were the Indiana Jones movies. Raiders of the Lost Ark was brilliant. He should stick with things set in the past on Earth.
Jeffery
“Let’s head 'em off at the pass!”
In other words, before someone brings up that photon teleportation experiment, let me point out that transporting a SINGLE photon is a LONG way from transporting a solid object made up of billions or even trillions of atoms. And while it may be possible to teleport photons, it may not be possible to convert atoms to photons and then back to atoms.
As for Ellison, he does still have an aversion to computers, but he does have a website: http://harlanellison.com He doesn’t run it, someone else does, but all info on the site is approved by Harlan before it’s posted, so it’s an official, authorized site. It has a few works by Harlan that he’s allowed to be featured on the site; in other words, he donated them, he’s not getting any more money for them. When you consider that writing is how he makes his living, it’s like a lawyer doing pro bono work or a doctor operating for free. He’s donated other works for charititable purposes.
Anyway, he does have difficulty controlling his temper and has admitted so and has apologized when it was called for, usually without being asked, as Johnny L.A. has indicated. Frankly, it usually depends on how he feels that day. He suffered from Epstein-Barr a few years ago and has had open-heart surgery. Also, he had to deal with Anti-Semitism as a boy, so he’s sensitive to criticism and prejudice.
Anyway, I like the guy and will try to meet him any time I can. He and others are going to discuss the original Outer Limits next month here in L.A. as part of The Museum of Television and Radio’s salute to TV in the 60s and 70s. It oughtta be interesting. (Harlan wrote two scripts for OL.)
>< DARWIN >
__L___L
OK, I just had to throw this in here:
So they’re going to avoid stereotypes by including a Native American character with a spiritual nature, and an Asian character trained in martial arts?
(insert long drawn-out laughter here)
Also an Irish character with the gift of gab, an Italian who’s loud and volatile, but happy and loyal to his family, and a brave, but earthy, Russian. Not to mention the kid from Brooklyn who just wants to get back home, eat a hot dog at Coney Island and see a Dodgers game at Ebbets Field.
Acting…
I saw The Phantom Menace once. Once. I could not believe the wooden performance by Natalie Portman. All that money and they get someone who seems to be suffering from a severe hangover???
A couple of weeks later I caught The Professional on teevee. It’s a move about an illiterate hitman who befriends a little girl. I thought, “That little girl can act!” I was surprised to find out it was a slightly younger Natalie Portman. Must’ve been the direction.
Back to TPM. What was with that guy with the red face? He looked like a Mexican wrestler! (ICYDK, Mexican wrestlers wear colourful masks.)
From my OP: “13) Leonard Nimoy is a better director than George Lucas.” And so is Jonathan Frakes, for that matter.
Natalie Portman in Episode One is exactly what I’m talking about. But watch Harrison Ford in the first Wars, especially in the cantina scenes where Han Solo is talking to Ob-wan. Granted, it’s the beginning of his career, but Ford’s a better actor than that. Sometimes I wonder if Lucas wasn’t in a hurry and low on cash and had to take whatever performance Ford gave. But that doesn’t explain why Portman was like a zombie so much in her role.
>< DARWIN >
__L___L
I like Star Trek better because it hypothesizes a better future – humans bravely and level-headedly exploring space, bringing goodness and light to all they encounter as they repeatedly violate the Prime Directive. Star Wars is just a war war movie(s) set in space.
I also like the fact that Star Trek has a sense of humor – the ‘Barclay’ episodes of The Next Generation were genuinely funny. And I liked the fact that when the guy who thought of the Heisenberg Compensator was asked how it worked, he blythely replied, “it works great!” Star Wars is special effects, and cool ones at that, but it’s got bubkes as far as plot is concerned.
Jodi
Fiat Justitia
Don’t confuse character with acting skill. Natalie Portman’s wooden performance was because she was playing very regal royalty, and it was imperative that she put on an emotionless performance. When she was Padme she was looser, though not by much as she was still a 14 year old Queen in disguise.
In the next two, she will be allowed to shed the stiffness and kick ass with the best of them.
-PIGEONMAN-
The Legend Of PigeonMan - Shadow of the Pigeon
Weirdo of the Night
It occurs to me that, ON AVERAGE, Trek must be better than Wars.
Lucas has brought us four movies over 25 years. Two were excellent, one was OK and one blew. Trek has produced – what? – eight movies, half good and half not so good. So the movies are basically a wash.
Ah, but then you factor in all those hours and hours of television shows. Some were good for their campiness, some for their action, some for their idea. A few here and there were dull and occasionally you had a real clunker. But the average success rate is quite high.
So, purely on objective mathematical terms, I must side with the Trekkers/ies on this debate.
But light-sabres are really cool.
Up, up and away!
StrTrkr777 wrote:
Oh yeah? Well, the Trek writers have this nasty nack of forgetting about all the whiz-bang 24th century technology they have whenever it serves the plot.
Remember the episode of Deep Space Nine titled “The Siege of AR-558,” where a few grungy troopers had to defend this one out-of-the-way planet from the Jem Hadar? They defended their position with portable phaser rifles – and they only fired THOSE at one target at a time, never “sweeping” the beam across a group of targets. What ever happened to transporters? To orbital photon torpedo launchers? To orbital SPY satellites to see the enemy coming? And how did they manage to un-invent something as obvious as the HAND GRENADE? Sheesh! There were clusters of 10 Jem Hadar charging at once. One grenade would have taken a whole cluster out, without having to shoot each and every one individually with a phaser rifle.
In short, one of the writers had just seen Saving Private Ryan and wanted to do the same thing in the Star Trek universe. He forgot that, just as past wars were not fought like World War 2 with spears, so future wars will not be fought like World War 2 with ray guns.
The truth, as always, is more complicated than that.
As others have said, we’re comparing apples and oranges. Trying to compare a television series that has spawned thousands[?] of episodes and eight movies against a universe that has spawned just 4 movies is foolish.
However, I must say that the fictional universe Star Wars takes place in appeals to me more than the fictional universe Star Trek takes place in. A lot.
Star Wars appeals to fairy tales and mythological backgrounds that I can’t help but and emrace. Star Trek takes place in a sterile, near-utopia.
Where would you rather live? On a far away planet where you get to rescue damsels in distress from gigantic, vile monsters, or in a world where you get your meals from a slot in the wall?