Skip to main content

Ok, well not just any space movie... I am just curious as to two of them.

Which do you go for more, the whole Star Wars series or the Star Trek series?

Note: I am not including the television series here... just the movies. (Both with the "new" and the "original" cast/crew.)

So are you more of a Star Wars person or more of a Trekkie, when it comes to movies?

This whole question comes about from a late night dinner conversation when we overheard this 16ish year old girl say she had never seen either the Star Wars movie or any of the Star Trek shows. We were amazed.

Anyways, what is your preference?

Poll

Star Trek or Star Wars: The better movies goes to....

64%36 votes
23%13 votes
12%7 votes

| 56 votes | Vote | Results

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (17+ / 0-)

    I'll tell you what justice is. Justice is a knee in the gut from the floor on the chin at night sneaky with a knife brought up down on the magazine of a battleship sandbagged underhanded in the dark without a word of warning.

    by BFSkinner on Sat May 24, 2014 at 11:30:46 PM PDT

  •  Star Wars movies are space movies? (9+ / 0-)

    Was The Blob about jello?  Was The Santa Clause about Jesus?

    Stars Wars would still be Star Wars if they moved around by sailing ships or hot air balloons.  Or flying magic ponies.  

    Quote of the week: "They call themselves bipartisan because they're able to buy members of both parties," (R. Eskow, Campaign for America's Future.)

    by mbayrob on Sat May 24, 2014 at 11:52:05 PM PDT

  •  heh (7+ / 0-)

    We are all made of star stuff, so please be kind to dust bunnies.

    by jwinIL14 on Sat May 24, 2014 at 11:55:45 PM PDT

  •  this is a complicated question. both series have (16+ / 0-)

    both good and poor entries.

    The basic premise of Trek has more depth. period.

    The first 3 Wars movies are VASTLY better than the 2d threesome.

    Trek movies 2 (Spock sacrifices for the good of the many), 4 (whales) and Undiscovered Country were uniformly superior to the other Trek movies. Including the recent re-boot, which we've only seen #1 of; interesting, but a bang-bang-shoot-em-up, typical action re-boot.

    "real" work : a job where you wash your hands BEFORE you use the bathroom...

    by chimene on Sat May 24, 2014 at 11:56:07 PM PDT

    •  Pretty much this (7+ / 0-)

      Although I hold a soft spot in my heart for Star Trek III. It's mostly the ignored movie, probably because no one really hates it enough to berate it, but I really like it and find it holds up fairly well.

      Two hundred fifty years of slavery. Ninety years of Jim Crow. Sixty years of separate but equal. Thirty-five years of racist housing policy. Until we reckon with our compounding moral debts, America will never be whole. - Ta-Nehisi Coates

      by moviemeister76 on Sun May 25, 2014 at 12:29:49 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  I agree that the new Trek has become just a (9+ / 0-)

      standard Hollywood CGI explosion-fest. It has lost the whole Trek feeling.  As far as I am concerned, Trek no longer exists. It has been replaced by Marvel comic book heroes (and I find all the current crop of superhero movies to be utterly unwatchable).

      I fear that Abrams will do the very same thing with Star Wars, and destroy that too.

      I would have liked to have seen a Joss Wheedon version of Star Wars (or Star Trek, for that matter).

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Sun May 25, 2014 at 05:29:43 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  A Joss Whedon version of anything (8+ / 0-)

        is always good to watch.  

        "To see both sides of a quarrel, is to judge without hate or alarm" - Richard Thompson

        by matching mole on Sun May 25, 2014 at 06:25:05 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Normally I accept the bad science in Star Trek (7+ / 0-)

        I always preferred the ST movies because of the depth and relationships of the characters - that's what the show was all about. And because it's sci-fi I always let he bad science go - but Whedon has cranked it up to 14, and even though the first reboot was bad sbout it, I thought the last movie (KHANNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!) was going to make my head explode. (The worst was the part where they were at the Moon, lost power and OMG THE EARTH'S GRAVITY HAS US and of course they fell straight down to the Earth in about 8 minutes. I was literally yelling at the screen.) I also hate the fact that they designed a fantastic bridge set, but the engine room of the most high-tech interstellar spaceship of the Federation is a rented sewage treatment plant.

        Star Wars was entertaining children's movies, but then Lucas cranked out the second trilogy, and I'm sorry but they were 3 of the worst movies in film history, all the more so because Lucas did them with literally unlimited funds and access to the best moviemaking talent and technology in the world. And I love bad movies (give me Ed Wood, Coleman Francis, and 60s era Godzilla and I'm in Heaven), but I draw the line at egotistical disasters. Even the SW cartoon was better done.

        "Jika Anda membutuhkan produk untuk meningkatkan kualitas hubungan seksual Anda atau membutuhkan produk obat pembesar penis!" - Bintangpasutri

        by Fordmandalay on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:05:50 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  I have alas only seen the Clone Wars cartoon (5+ / 0-)

          series a handful of times, mostly early on, but I found them interesting thematically.  One episode I happened to catch revolved around a plot by some of the clones to rebel against the Jedi and the Republic, since the clones were all essentially bred in captivity to be born slaves. I thought that a wonderful treatment. The cartoon series definitely strikes me as not really aimed at kids . . . at least the parts of it I've seen.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:18:12 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

        •  ps--I thought the SW episode 3 was the best of (4+ / 0-)

          the trilogy and the second-best of the entire series, comparable to the original 1977 "Star Wars".

          It was, alas, lots longer and slower-paced than it needed to be, since Lucas insisted on adding everything but the kitchen sink.

          One nitpick I had with the second trilogy was its reversion to spaceships that looked like they came from the 50's. In Star Wars, the X-Wing looked like a fighter plane should look, and the TIE fighters conveyed the right sense of cold mechanical menace--but the spacecraft in the second trilogy looked like finned and chromed Cadillac car bodies from the glory days of Detroit. Ugh.

          In the end, reality always wins.

          by Lenny Flank on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:24:28 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

    •  I'm the person who really liked (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      susans, matching mole

      Star Trek 1.

      Watching Star Trek: The Motion Picture in the theater for the first time was a revelation. The TV show came to life in vivid detail. It was the future. Our future. All we needed to do was build it.

      But beyond childhood sentimentality, Star Trek I had something different. Sure, it had its own Planet-Destroying-Thing-Headed-Directly-For-Earth™ (the very first PDTHDFE!). However, it wasn't a "bad guy" in the traditional sense. The story wasn't about fighting the PDTHDFE, it was about understanding what it represented. No big battle, no specially-modified photon torpedoes, no Vulcan mind meld... wait there was a mind meld.

      Star Trek IV echoed this a bit, with its non-evil, emotionless antagonist. But Star Trek I required the sheer alien quality of outer space in a way that IV did not.

      The effects have held up well over the years. The PDTHDFE in particular looks suitably organic and non-human. The models gave a excellent feel for the vast size of the ship. The only real clunker was the scene on Vulcan, which looked like a set left over from the 1950's.

  •  Here's a space movie ... (13+ / 0-)

    We are all made of star stuff, so please be kind to dust bunnies.

    by jwinIL14 on Sun May 25, 2014 at 12:00:52 AM PDT

  •  Isn’t that a bit like asking which (10+ / 0-)

    is better bread, Wonder Bread or Sunbeam?

  •  How about neither, oh noes I'm in trouble. (10+ / 0-)

    Then again I enjoyed Solaris both the 1972 and 2002 versions.

    "I decided it is better to scream. Silence is the real crime against humanity." Nadezhda Mandelstam

    by LaFeminista on Sun May 25, 2014 at 12:53:00 AM PDT

  •  One is Mythological Fantasy (12+ / 0-)

    The other is an idealized vision of the future of humanity.

    Completely different concepts, just set in "space".

    A fan of both, just as long as they don't cast Tom Cruise, or Ben Affleck in either.

    “Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities.” ... Voltaire

    by RUNDOWN on Sun May 25, 2014 at 12:56:17 AM PDT

  •  I'm more of a Trekkie. (6+ / 0-)

    I adored the original SW movies way back when, but Trek was my first love.

    Trek is far more than the rock-em sock-em whiz-bang of Star Wars. Plus, Trek just has better stories to tell. And, honestly, the second SW trilogy kinda ruined it for me.

    There are two types of Republicans: millionaires and suckers.

    by Phil T Duck on Sun May 25, 2014 at 01:52:50 AM PDT

  •  Space pie (5+ / 0-)

    Government and laws are the agreement we all make to secure everyone's freedom.

    by Simplify on Sun May 25, 2014 at 02:00:47 AM PDT

  •  Apples and oranges... (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, FloridaSNMOM, mjbleo, susans, mythatsme

    I challenge everybody to read Michio Kaku's "Physics of the Impossible"...




    It certainly tempered my enthusiasm for Trek/Wars.

    I liked both over the years, and actually re-found "Enterprise" that I had not watched when it was broadcast, and really liked it. Watched a lot of TNG and spin offs but lost tolerance for them all. TNG/Trek crossover movies were interesting, but overall they seem to be about, wrecking the car(Enterprise) and getting a new one. I have to weigh in that I do enjoy the new Trek movies/cast also.

    IMHO, Disney has a potential gold mine in trying to continue Wars, but have a very high bar.

    It would be fun to have some film where the two universes/characters came together... Spock and Yoda and Guinan together, Bones and Han Solo, Geordi and Anakin and Scotty; what would Data think of R2D2 and C3PO? Kirk, Picard and Luke? The Death Star assimilated by the Borg?... cool.

    SciFi is generally just about relationships, and the better stuff entices imagination and intellect to explore the future as well. Relationships drive both Wars and Trek ultimately.

    Dudehisattva...

    "Generosity, Ethics, Patience, Effort, Concentration, and Wisdom"

    by Dood Abides on Sun May 25, 2014 at 03:26:42 AM PDT

  •  I raised a son during the Star Wars era (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    jayden, FloridaSNMOM, mjbleo, susans

    the first three movies- that is.  So I saw them- over and over thanks to that new invention called the VCR.  The Star Wars movies were one of the first 'sets' we got.

    And I loved the TV series Star Trek, and the first three movies of that series.

    So I would say it's a toss up.

    Didn't like any 'spin-offs" of Star Trek- and since my son is now grown- I haven't seen any of the newer Star Wars movies either.

    Growing old is inevitable...Growing up is purely optional

    by grannycarol on Sun May 25, 2014 at 04:21:51 AM PDT

  •  I like the Star Wars better because (6+ / 0-)

    being a natural rebel myself, I am drawn to the whole "rebellion" theme, and being of the anarchistic bent, I am more drawn to the Star Wars emphasis on individuals, who go into battle with small one-person ships, than with Star Trek, where ships are huge entities with hundreds of anonymous crew members.

    Not at all to mean I don't like Star Trek, with its themes of a hopeful future and a better humanity.

    In the end, reality always wins.

    by Lenny Flank on Sun May 25, 2014 at 05:21:29 AM PDT

  •  Big fan of the ST series (4+ / 0-)

    all of them, except the last half of Voyager.

    But the films just don't do it for me. To put things in comparison, I watched TOS so often that I could determine the episode based on the first half second shot of the Enterprise just before the title displayed.

    I'm living in America, and in America you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business.

    by CFAmick on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:03:19 AM PDT

  •  It's a tough question to answer (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Lenny Flank, dallasdunlap, mjbleo, susans

    In my youth my dream was always that a 'space movie' would get made that would give me the same enjoyment that I got from written sf.  It's never happened.  

    I was a very serious sf loving 16 year old when Star Wars made its debut and I hated it with a passion.  I did like The Empire Strikes Back which seemed much more concerned with telling an actual story rather than just stringing a series of cliches together.  I should watch ESB again some day.  The fourth movie was so unbelievably bad that I never watched the fifth or sixth.

    I've always liked Star Trek although generally the series more than the movies (television sf tends to be more character and story and less special effect oriented and is thus, IMHO, mostly vastly superior).  The original series irritated me because of Kirk who I found annoying but I did lie the way that space travel seemed really adventurous.  In the Next Generation there was better characterization and better writing overall but there was always this feeling that they were exploring the universe in a luxury hotel.  I haven't seen any of the new trek movies and I doubt I will.  I find almost all modern 'action' movies incredibly boring - I keep looking at the clock during fight scenes and wondering when they are ever going to end and we can get back to the story.

    The firefly/serenity series/film is a bizarre premise.  I don't really like the western in space idea and the 'geography' of firefly universe was maddeningly vague and unlikely.  But Whedon's emphasis on dialogue and character and story made it just so satisfying.  As I watched Serenity in the theater I kept thinking 'This is really exciting - I can't wait to see what happens next.'    The action served as punctuation to the story rather than displacing the story for extended periods.

    "To see both sides of a quarrel, is to judge without hate or alarm" - Richard Thompson

    by matching mole on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:32:54 AM PDT

    •  I agree partly . . . (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      matching mole, mjbleo, susans, rduran

      I loved the original Star Wars. Loved it.

      When Empire first came out, I didn't particularly like it--maybe it was because it left so many cliffhangers that it just ended up feeling unfinished (which in a sense it was, but I still felt cheated watching an unfinished movie). After Return of the Jedi came out I re-watched Empire, and now I like the way it fits into the story. The first trilogy is essentially one big mofo-long single movie, and really needs to be watched as such.

      Most of the second trilogy sucked. I think Lucas's basic problem was that he had his own independent time and resources to do whatever he wanted--but fell in love with his own vision so much that he couldn't bear to cut anything, and nobody under him dared point out to him that his movie dragged like an anchor. As a result, the trilogy is wayyyy longer and slower than it needs to be. I think one could cut the entire trilogy down to a great single movie.

      The sixth movie, Revenge of the Sith, suffers from the same too long and too slow problem, but it does return to the emotional character-centered story that really matters. I liked it.

      Indeed, if one just watches Revenge of the Sith and then A New Hope, one gets the entire essence of the series, in a much smaller and less dragged-out package.

      Agree about the Western framework for Firefly/Serenity being a bit jarring, but it does fit in pretty well with the whole "outlying frontier areas of galactic civilization" framework. Serenity was a wonderful movie.  I can watch it a hundred times and still like it every time.

      In the end, reality always wins.

      by Lenny Flank on Sun May 25, 2014 at 07:59:03 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I think I would have liked the first Star Wars (0+ / 0-)

        movie if I'd seen it at least a decade later.  Then I could have 'got' Lucas' nostalgia for space opera and old movies.

        What I'd really like to see is a film version of a Jack Vance novel.  Or maybe I don't....

        "To see both sides of a quarrel, is to judge without hate or alarm" - Richard Thompson

        by matching mole on Sun May 25, 2014 at 01:04:34 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  If by character-drven (0+ / 0-)

      you mean "made up particle of the week"-driven, or "Planet Where Everybody Wears Hats"-driven, then yeah.  

  •  Which are the better "Movies"? (0+ / 0-)

    I think the question limits the choices.  The first Star Wars movie was original and fun.  Without it, there wouldn't have been any Trek movies.

    However, in terms of content, the Trek series had better stories.  Star Wars movies are like cotton candy - tastes great, but not very filling.  There's more character, story depth, new concepts and personal decisions in 48 minutes of Next Generation than any 3 Star Wars Movies.  

    #ALEC Brand Legislation now with new whitening agents! Dont like the color of your electorate?Just add #VoterID! Now with more suppression! @FAKEALECPR

    by Bandaloop on Sun May 25, 2014 at 10:50:42 AM PDT

  •  The original Star Wars trilogy (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    matching mole

    Hands down.  Though there's a lot of fanwank drek in both franchises, SW isn't marinated in nearly as much technobabble.

  •  Which world would you rather live in? (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    alice kleeman

    The Federation or the Empire? Assuming you don't get to be either a starship captain or a Jedi Knight.

    I'd take the Federation hands down. No poverty or greed. Plenty of opportunity to develop yourself to your fullest ability and put it to use.

    There is no comparison.

    American Presidents: 43 men, 0 women. Ready for Hillary

    by atana on Sun May 25, 2014 at 01:04:59 PM PDT

    •  At least that's what the brochure says (0+ / 0-)

      Post-scarcity non-economics doesn't seem to be the case on the fringe, or universal even in the interior.  Characters seem to talk out of both sides of their mouths concerning trade and finance, as well.  

      In Star Wars, the Empire spans an entire galaxy.  You could probably find something like your Federation somewhere in that mass of hundreds of billions of stars.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site