Roddenberry effectively used the resources he had to make a series with several others following, and an eventual movie franchise. Lucas on the other hand, first took the movie approach. The way I see it is that beginning with a series first as Roddenberry did is a much better strategy than movies…sure you might think that star wars has a larger gross in movies but that doesn’t account for episode VHS that trek offers. What Roddenberry's has done in making a series first is ensure continuity anyway this thread is not about who’s better...who am I kidding...well just try to humor Wars a little. Star trek once a week and a movie once every three or so years Vs star wars once every as an average eight years. The fact is the Star Wars story line is somewhat blurry in comparison to Star Trek. What Trek has on the other hand is a bold outline of events; it is an idea on what the future of a society could be like. A long time ago, in a galaxy far far away Vs. Seek out new life and new civilizations to boldly go where no man has gone before…
[ April 26, 2002, 14:20: Message edited by: koy'peled Oy'tio ]
Posted by Malnurtured Snayer (Member # 411) on :
And yet the Star Wars movies do much better in the theaters then Star Trek films, essentially ruining your theory that a TV show equals higher movie grosses (I don't think the X-Files film did all that well either, did it?)
BTW: I had to re-read your post like five times before I figured out what the hell you were saying. Try to be more clear, okay?
[ April 26, 2002, 09:16: Message edited by: Malnurtured Snayer ]
Posted by Harry (Member # 265) on :
AL HENDS DO BATTELSTATIONS!!1!!
Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"...Roddenberry (I can never spell that right)..."
Then how did you?
Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :
I'm afraid I don't see your point, koy'peled.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
You have a cold Harry?
Posted by koy'peled Oy'tio (Member # 796) on :
well i have edited it for those of you who can't quite grasp what im trying to say.
Posted by Veers (Member # 661) on :
Snay--the X-files movie made around $80 million domestically, so it was a hit on a certain level, but no where near Star Wars.
I have to say I like Star Wars better than Star Trek. It may be because I grew up with it longer than Trek, or that I think Star Wars is written better (dodges rocks of people who disagree). I like Star Trek, but not as much as Star Wars.
Posted by Peregrinus (Member # 504) on :
Star Trek at its best is quality hard s-f. At its worst, Trek is pop-culture pablum. But all of it, even the movies, is the victim of the episodic mentality -- that the status quo be maintained form installment to installment. Big things may happen, but the core characters and ship are back to where they were at the beginning by the end. Even Star Trek II and III, if you look at them as the two-parter they are. The only significant changes have been the refit of the original Enterprise (and the destruction of same), and the destruction of the TNG Enterprise. And both for the same reason -- the TV miniature wasn't detailed enough for the big screen.
Star Wars, on the other hand, is space opera or epic poetry. It's the ancient heroic monomyth set in a science-fiction-y universe. There's no moral, no commentary on contemporary cultural issues. It's just a mythic cycle writ large for latter-20th-century audiences.
...And Star Wars films come out every three years, not counting the gap between the original trilogy and the prequel trilogy.
--Jonah
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
quote:Star Trek at its best is quality hard s-f. At its worst, Trek is pop-culture pablum.
I'm sorry, but did I miss the hearing on this matter at the axiom approval commission?
Posted by Malnurtured Snayer (Member # 411) on :
I'm thinking he just meant how people personally rate it, The_Tom ... not a literal rating. Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Didn't someone once say that Star Trek and Star Wars only exist so that we continue to appreciate Babylon 5? Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
"well i have edited it for those of you who can't quite grasp what im trying to say."
Didn't help.
Posted by koy'peled Oy'tio (Member # 796) on :
DAMN YOU ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!! (or just TSN if he's the only one)
Posted by Malnurtured Snayer (Member # 411) on :
quote:Didn't someone once say that Star Trek and Star Wars only exist so that we continue to appreciate Babylon 5
As what? The poorly written, poorly acted waste of time it is?
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
I love these "X vs. Y" threads. They always permeate such a warm and friendly atmosphere.
quote:Can't we all just get along?
Ah, rethorical question.
[ April 27, 2002, 13:36: Message edited by: Cartman ]
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
Star Wars has a really defined line between Good and Bad. It also has a sort of knight in shining armor mentality where the good defeats the evil. The good makes evil good. In addition when it first came out, it had the best SFX at that time, combined with the first space fighter dog fight, that kept you glued to your seat. All other space fighter dogfights are afterwards copied after that.
Only Star Trek in ST2 actually showed a different form of a space battle. The problem is that as much as we'd like to think, the whole concept is not 'with' the world, and so unlike Star Wars which catches a bigger part, Star Trek catches only a smaller part.
If Star Trek is to pass Star Wars, then first it has to have ground breaking events in it that attracts the whole world to go see it. Next, the story has to be something the people can relate to at that time. At the very least as well, it has have such good writing that it has the perfect mix of everything that a movie needs to keep the people happy.
Episode 1 did good for the simple reason it was like what 15 years since a Star wars movie was made? So what happened was that it got people constantly hyped so that 2 weeks before the premiere, they start camping out. There was a massive fan base, like the Harry Potter movie. That's it. The movie itself was not good, with horrible acting by the kid, cartoony special effects, and a plot that makes it seem to be made for kids only.
Star Trek had its downpoints as well, like ST5 and ST7. ST9 was ok that it made money, same goes for The Slow Motion Picture.
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I'm not sure why I'm doing this, but Jake Lloyd really wasn't that bad. And look at what he had to work with.
And "Episode 1 was written for kids" has never been a decent argument for me. Star Wars is for kids. Not in the sense of it's for young people. More in it's lack of complexity (and I don't mean that as an insult). Not every film has to be a Vertigo, Fight Club, or similar. You can have fun knockabout good vs evil and have it be great. And Star Wars was.
"The only significant changes have been the refit of the original Enterprise (and the destruction of same), and the destruction of the TNG Enterprise. And both for the same reason -- the TV miniature wasn't detailed enough for the big screen."
Er, which is why the Enterprise-D wasn't seen on the big screen at all in Generations then?
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
quote:The only significant changes have been the refit of the original Enterprise (and the destruction of same), and the destruction of the TNG Enterprise. And both for the same reason -- the TV miniature wasn't detailed enough for the big screen.
Whatever about the reasons, I'm sorry to hear we're now defining the changing of ship models as "significant."
Star Trek has always been about ending with something reasonably close to the status quo. So have a great many other films, including most "franchises," many of which are overall probably better pieces of celluloid than the Treks. I wouldn't consider it a tell-tale mark of good or bad filmaking if James Bond lives to fight another evil megalomaniac with an assortment of gadgets, or if Indiana Jones rides off into the sunset with a new relic in-hand while retaining all limbs and a fear of snakes.
quote:I'm not sure why I'm doing this, but Jake Lloyd really wasn't that bad. And look at what he had to work with.
He was that bad. But the script was worse.
"I was wondering... what ARE midichlorians?"
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
I would say that the best original series movies were different fro the series in one fairly significant way, how the characters had aged. Both II and VI (which are fairly highly received overall) portray Kirk and co as a crew realising that they aren't young trailblazers anymore, and with differing conclusions reached.
Kirk wearing a pair of glasses in ST II is, to me, much more significant than the Enterprise-D becoming the Ent-E.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
quote:"I was wondering... what ARE midichlorians?"
They would be half way between minichlorians and maxichlorians.
Posted by The Apocalypse (Member # 633) on :
quote:Originally posted by koy'peled Oy'tio: DAMN YOU ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!! (or just TSN if he's the only one)
if you're confused, then I agree.. Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote: I'm not sure why I'm doing this, but Jake Lloyd really wasn't that bad. And look at what he had to work with.
quote:He was that bad. But the script was worse.
The kid was excrutiatingly bad. Even the script (which I didn't mind that much), Jar Jar, and George Lucus' directly rolled together couldn't equal his complete horribleness.
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:Originally posted by Obi Juan: [qb] [QUOTE] I'm not sure why I'm doing this, but Jake Lloyd really wasn't that bad. And look at what he had to work with.
quote:He was that bad. But the script was worse.
The kid was excrutiatingly bad. Even the script (which I didn't mind that much), Jar Jar, and George Lucus' directing rolled together couldn't equal his complete horribleness.
[ April 27, 2002, 23:15: Message edited by: Obi Juan ]
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:I'm not sure why I'm doing this, but Jake Lloyd really wasn't that bad. And look at what he had to work with.
quote:He was that bad. But the script was worse.
The kid was excrutiatingly bad. Even the script (which I didn't mind that much), Jar Jar, and George Lucus' directing rolled together couldn't equal his complete horribleness.
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
quote: Originally posted by Matrix: Star Wars has a really defined line between Good and Bad. It also has a sort of knight in shining armor mentality where the good defeats the evil. The good makes evil good.
Unfortunately, it also has a strong letting-you-off-the-hook mentality, too. Darth Vader spends more than twenty years serving the Dark Side, committing who knows how many atrocities, and he earns his way into Jedi heaven simply by killing the Emperor? No mention of atonement for his sins? It's particularly grating because he didn't do it for any altruistic notion; he did it for the selfish reason of saving his son's life. Isn't selfish behavior one of the things that leads you to the Dark Side?
Posted by koy'peled Oy'tio (Member # 796) on :
Your sense of ethic is terribly warped.
Posted by Matrix (Member # 376) on :
We are talking about the Force here. Apparently hen you go from Dark to Light all your past sins are washed away like nothing happened. It was the work of the Dark Side not your true self. They got their system messed up big time.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Just saw the title to this thread... remember the "Gene" Seinfeld episode... where George had to BEAT Gene to get the girl - even though he had her! Then he wanted Gene's secret! (The Same as the Mandelbaum/Crepe episode/Kramer's Cubans - who were people and Dominicans, and how Elaine HATED The English Patient - and always wanted to see "Sack Lunch" LOL!)
[ April 30, 2002, 09:12: Message edited by: AndrewR ]
Posted by koy'peled Oy'tio (Member # 796) on :
...........yeah......anyway so i sez to mable i sez.....
[ May 09, 2002, 08:16: Message edited by: koy'peled Oy'tio ]
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Hey my post WAS a joke you know! Posted by TSN (Member # 31) on :
Much as I hate to admit it, koi'Pond Oce'lot actually made more sense there than you did...
Posted by Woodside Kid (Member # 699) on :
quote: Originally posted by koy'peled Oy'tio: Your sense of ethic is terribly warped.
Oh, really? By Lucas' Jedi logic, if one of the girls Charlie Manson had sent to commit the Tate-LaBianca murders later decided to kill him because Manson was going to kill her boyfriend, she should have gotten off scott free for the other killings. Somebody's sense of ethics is warped, but it sure as hell isn't mine!
Posted by koy'peled Oy'tio (Member # 796) on :
...........yeah......anyway so i sez to mable i sez.....
[ May 09, 2002, 08:18: Message edited by: koy'peled Oy'tio ]
Posted by Dan Stack (Member # 516) on :
The "repent at the last moment granting you salvation" isn't unique to Star Wars. Most Chrisitian denominations that I know of attest that a mass murderer can find salvation by truly repenting. Not suggesting you have to agree with that belief, but it is not without predecessors.
Posted by Dukhat (Member # 341) on :
I think you meant "precedence," not "predecessors."
And Koy'peled Oy'tio: If all you're going to do is respond in gibberish when someone replies to your accusations, then don't bother posting at all. And if you have a problem with our "bullsh*t," no one's making you stay here.
[ May 01, 2002, 09:31: Message edited by: Dukhat ]
Posted by Aban Rune (Member # 226) on :
The thing you have to remember when talking about Vader making it to "Jedi Heaven" is that it's not really heaven. It's not like, a reward or anything. While the writing of Star Wars is heavily influenced by religious undertones, the Jedi order doesn't appear to be a religion nor does the Force appear to be any kind of divine entity. The Force simply is and what aspects of it you allow to dominate your use of it determiones your "allegiance".
That said, however, given the snipits I've seen of Episode 2...the question of whether or not Anakin was ever a very nice guy seems to be a more and more valid question.
Posted by Dan Stack (Member # 516) on :
Actually, I meant to say "Lucas is not without predecessors", but either way, little word-jumbling. Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
Well, TSN - you might just have needed to have SEEN those Seinfeld episodes.
Andrew
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
Pastrami is the most sensuous of the spiced prepared meats.
Posted by EdipisReks (Member # 510) on :
i think they said "cured" not "prepared", as all spiced meats would by definition be "prepared" (and i don't think they said "spiced" either).
--jacob
Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :
What's more important is who said it... Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
I think Gene (circa late 1960s) would take him in the third, but he would have serious help in the form of Majel (circa late 1960s) in his corner wearing her Nurse Chapel outfit. It would still be close. Lucas's Jedi mind tricks would wreak some havok early on. But Gene's berserk would consume him and, after some tunic-ripping clashes, I believe Gene would suddenly remember the "twelve parsecs" line and just go primal on that Joe-Campbell-listening-to-John-Dykstra-relying-upon-JD-Sallinger-of-science-fiction-wanting-to-be proto-auteur.
Posted by Austin Powers (Member # 250) on :
Now what the holy hell was THAT supposed to mean when it's at home???????
Ahaaaa, now I get it - SARCASM! Great.
I know that koy'peled Oy'tio (how did you come to imagine that nickname?) isn't making much sense either, but on the other hand, I don't really care anyway. I happen to like both SW and ST, so no hard feelings here.
On a different note, I don't like what I have seen of Anakin so far either. Please bring back Vader ASAP! Stuff that Anakin brat - be it in Ep I or II.
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
Hopefully by the time he reaches his late teens Anakin can act.
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
quote:Hopefully by the time he reaches his late teens Anakin can act.
Obi Juan, isn't it your job to teach him?
Posted by CaptainMike (Member # 709) on :
I'm impressed that K'p O't quoted the sImpsons rather than just posting an oversized .jpg Maybe we'll make a Jedi of him yet (the name he was looking for is Mable, nat 'mAybul' or whatever he typed)
Posted by Mark Nguyen (Member # 469) on :
Mabel, even.
Mark
Posted by Obi Juan (Member # 90) on :
quote:Originally posted by Grokca:
quote:Hopefully by the time he reaches his late teens Anakin can act.
Obi Juan, isn't it your job to teach him?
Does that mean I'll he'll become the worst actor ever, eventually slaying all of those who can act and even cutting me down with the dark power of his inability to deliver a single line that doesn't cause audiences everywhere to cringe.
[ May 09, 2002, 15:22: Message edited by: Obi Juan ]
Posted by Grokca (Member # 722) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
...........yeah......anyway so i sez to mable i sez.....![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Hey my post WAS a joke you know! ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Confused]](confused.gif)
...........yeah......anyway so i sez to mable i sez..... ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)