Star Wars or Star Trek?
which is better in your opinion.
me i'm a star wars fan. could never get into star trek
- Anonymous1 decade agoFavourite answer
Star Wars for sure. ---------------------------
Howbeit, Star Trek did have a few good big screen movies: "The Wrath of Kahn" "The Voyage Home" and "Generations"
- primalclaws1974Lv 61 decade ago
wow, this question gets asked over and over. But as the Star Trek series (all 5) have a combined airing of 29 seasons, plus at least 10 movies, and Star Wars as 6 movies and a cartoon series or two, the Star Trek universe is much more diverse and interesting. Also, Star Trek doesn't rely on special effects nearly as heavy as Star Wars does, so what does that tell you about plot?
- Spock FanLv 61 decade ago
Star Wars was great, too, but I like Trek more... but I don't really get why people keep comparing the two, they're two completely different stories the only similarities they share is that they have futuristic technology, other than that they are night and day.
- 1 decade ago
I'll take the most recent Star Trek movie over all the Star Wars films.
This isn't to say that I dislike the Star Wars saga, but I don't know why so many people treat it like a big deal. It WAS revolutionary for its time in terms of special effects, but... eh... that's it.
- What do you think of the answers? You can sign in to give your opinion on the answer.
- VashLv 61 decade ago
I worked in a factory when Star Wars was popular making the Chewbacca stuffies. It was such repetitive work, I dreamt them. So as good as Star Wars was, and I did enjoy the first movie very much!!... I associate that memory with those days and am bias. On the other hand Star Trek (TNG with Captain Picard my fave of them) has run for so long (as opposed to the periodic Star Wars movies) that in my opinion you just can't compare it. But I respect your preference.
- GREG BLv 51 decade ago
If we're talking about movies, the 1977 Star Wars was an amazing film for its time.
As far as plots, I think Star Trek has covered more ground, but it's had many more hours of film to do so. If you think about it, the star wars plot could be covered in 3 paragraphs.
- 1 decade ago
Well, I'll just give a quick review for each of the Star Wars/ Star Trek movies I've seen:
Star Wars, ep. IV. Excellent.
Star Wars, ep. V. More excellent.
Star Wars, ep. VI. Excellent.
Star Wars, ep. I. Tripe.
Star Wars, ep. II. Serviceable, I guess.
Star Wars, ep. III. Really, really bad.
Star Trek. Interesting idea, boring delivery.
Star Trek II. Fun!
Star Trek III. It's kinda neat.
Star Trek IV. Very amusing, as intended. Well played, Leonard.
Star Trek V. Awful.
Star Trek VI. Good detective yarn.
Star Trek Generations. Dumb.
Star Trek First Contact. Cool!
Star Trek Nemesis. It was popular, but I hated it.
Star Trek (2009). Neato!
So, Star Trek turns out, all in all, to be a less ambitious series. Mostly, those movies used space as a platform for some other kind of movie. An uneven track-record for me, but more entertaining than not. Only two of the ten I've seen struck me as particularly bad, while five struck me as particularly good.
Star Wars, on the other hand. Well, I love the original trilogy. It is really excellent film-making. I like that one stormtrooper in ep. IV who bangs his head on the door-jamb. I also like everything else in all three movies, even the ewoks. A friend of mine can't stand the ewoks, but I like the fact that they're man-eating, war-faring savages. Yes, I love Star Wars. I insist on saying this, as I have since I can remember (born in 1977), which is why I don't consider episode I, II or III to be Star Wars movies. A real Star Wars movie has good writing, good acting, and a story that stays in line with its sister films. George Lucas wrote a spectacular "first book", and followed it decades later with a real clunker. I'm just going to pretend the prequels were never made. (But I guess episode II can stick around, what with Yoda flexing his muscles and that cool colosseum sequence, and the General Greivous and the hey-hey, glaven. But it has to be left as a weird relic from a series of movies that Lucas ended up never making, like a "lost episode" or something, seeing as how the first and third have been stricken from my record.)
So, I say that STAR WARS is a great and epic series. It's a real saga. STAR TREK is a much more modest affair. Of course, it has usually been modest on purpose. Character chemistry, plots in the tradition of the Twilight Zone and Alfred Hitchcock Presents. It's not an epic thing. It's a tv show, on the big screen. Like the X-Files movies. Just cool stories that play like extended tv-episodes.
So, I like STAR TREK better than STAR WARS. I like it better because it keeps going, it's usually good, and sometimes it's great. STAR WARS is bigger and more ambitious, but it's like the captain went berzerk and returned 20 years later to torpedo his old ship. What happened there?
- paulcondoLv 71 decade ago
I'm old I grew in the 60's my family had very little money so i was a big star trek fan
- Jedi JokerLv 61 decade ago
The Wars, totally
- Sophie BLv 71 decade ago
Original movies? Star Wars ...better plot
- 1 decade ago
definitely star trek