It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
Breja: On one hand you've got Star Trek tackling important socio-political issues and complex sci-fi concepts and on the other you have a very nice, but absolutely basic story of good vs evil.
avatar
Vainamoinen: That's not actually the measure of "good storytelling". The most basic of stories, beautifully and emotionally told, can be the best of experiences still.

...I still think you're right and Lucius is wrong. :)
Well gee thanks. X) Though it's a matter of opinion.
Post edited January 08, 2017 by Lucius_Malfoy
Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
avatar
Lucius_Malfoy: Well gee thanks. X) Though it's a matter of opinion.
It's the most subjective thing in the world, certainly.

However, concerning reiteration, reboots and prequels, I could make a whole lot of points as to how those things can ruin the integrity of previously introduced stories and particularly their all important novelty and surprise moments. And sadly enough, the last decade was basically all-prequel for Star Wars, while Episode VII – which I still liked a lot! – was reiteration in the greatest possible degree.

Star Trek vs. Star Wars is a battle as old as those galaxies, and I don't want to get into it. I can do with the most basic of stories if it's told well, I even liked James Cameron's Avatar. Stories don't get more basic than that.

Star Wars is going in a better direction right now, while I subjectively felt Star Trek to go into a worse direction with the Abramsverse. Still, the groundbreaking stories were told in the Star Trek universe all along.


By the way, on topic:

8. Episode III (illogical SFX surpriseless yawn)
7. Episode I (for all its faults, I occasionally find it enjoyable)
6. Episode II (the only prequel I have on DVD)
5. Rogue One (only saw it this week. Still don't know what disappointed me)
4. Episode VII (great start, but repeats Episode IV with a shameful vengeance)
3. Episode IV
2. Episode VI
1. Episode V (Come on. It has Yoda and the real Force teaching stuff.)



avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
Well, yes of course. But it wouldn't make sense to compare apples to apples or oranges to oranges. They're identical, what would the result of the comparison even be?
Post edited January 08, 2017 by Vainamoinen
avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
Oh, absolutely. Usually when someone asks me which one is better I say "Babylon 5" to cut it short right there. They have different strenghts and weaknesses precisely because they are very different beasts with different goals. But in this case it wasn't about which in is better as much as about how they differ in one aspect so there was actually some point ot it.
Post edited January 08, 2017 by Breja
avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
mm
Clementines are the best.

I suppose people will have their favorite. My favorite is whatever is on. I can watch just about anything from all of them except the Christmas special.
avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
avatar
Tallima: mm
Clementines are the best.

I suppose people will have their favorite. My favorite is whatever is on. I can watch just about anything from all of them except the Christmas special.
Hi Tallima. :D
That's gotta be embarrassing.
avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
As usual, you "throw the stone and then hide the hand" lol
Post edited January 08, 2017 by phaolo
avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
avatar
phaolo: As usual, you "throw the stone and then hide the hand" lol
Are you calling me a marzooker? :P
avatar
tinyE: Are you calling me a marzooker? :P
Master illusionist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4U-kHdXgz0
You know, I think I just realised something new about why Force Awakens sucks. Or maybe I should rather say that I've figured out something I felt about why it sucked from the start, but didn't exactly put into words before.

I have complained before, and not just me, about how the new characters are bland, lack charisma and the villain is laughable and all that, but here's something more- the main characters aren't actually the main characters. They are almost entirely inconsequential to the major events in the movie.

The story that the main characters are a part of is that of getting the droid with the map to Luke to the Resistance. Which has nothing to do with the First Order's plan to violently hatefuck the Republic with their Mega Death Star of Death, and the Resistance efforts to stop them. In fact, the only way they contribute anything to this plot, is when it turns out of nowhere that Finn just happened to scrub toilets on the base and thanks to that knows something that can help them. It's terrible writing, it's like what would happen in a tabletop RPG game if the players reached the final mission without picking up any clues on the bad guys plan and how to stop it along the way, and the DM just had to pull something out of his ass at the last moment to just hand them the information, becuase otherwise the game is fucked and they can just go home.

And after that they stop being relevant to the actual plot again. Te confrontation between Han and Kylo would not influence the outcome of the Resistanc vs First Order battle in any way, and neither does the fight between Finn, Rey and Kylo in the end. It's am ovie where nothing that happens to the supposed heroes in the climax actually matters.
Post edited January 08, 2017 by Breja
avatar
Breja: You know, I think I just realised something new about why Force Awakens sucks. Or maybe I should rather say that I've figured out something I felt about why it sucked from the start, but didn't exactly put into words before.

I have complained before, and not just me, about how the new characters are bland, lack charisma and the villain is laughable and all that, but here's something more- the main characters aren't actually the main characters. They are almost entirely inconsequential to the major events in the movie.

The story that the main characters are a part of is that of getting the droid with the map to Luke to the Resistance. Which has nothing to do with the First Order's plan to violently hatefuck the Republic with their Mega Death Star of Death, and the Resistance efforts to stop them. In fact, the only way they contribute anything to this plot, is when it turns out of nowhere that Finn just happened to scrub toilets on the base and thanks to that knows something that can help them. It's terrible writing, it's like what would happen in a tabletop RPG game if the players reached the final mission without picking up any clues on the bad guys plan and how to stop it along the way, and the DM just had to pull something out of his ass at the last moment to just hand them the information, becuase otherwise the game is fucked and they can just go home.

And after that they stop being relevant to the actual plot again. Te confrontation between Han and Kylo would not influence the outcome of the Resistanc vs First Order battle in any way, and neither does the fight between Finn, Rey and Kylo in the end. It's am ovie where nothing that happens to the supposed heroes in the climax actually matters.
So you are saying they are as inconsequential to the plot as Indiana Jones is in Raiders of the Lost Ark?
Saw Rogue One yesterday and I honestly don't know where to place it on the list. It sure as hell was better than Episode III, but overall I enjoyed it less than Episode VII. Episode VII is mediocre but entertaining fan fiction, Rogue One is mediocre grimdark fan fiction for a lot of its running time.

It DOES pick up significantly during the second half. Once they got the team assembled, I was as invested into this as I have been in any Star Wars film (save from the original). I'm not much of a Donnie Yen fan, but I liked his Zatoichi-Jedi. Rogue One also handles having a stronk independent womyn protagonist far better than VII's know-it-all estrogen version of Wesley Crusher. R1 just has her be a cool character, while VII ceaselessly shoves whatshername's awesomeness down your throat: "Look! Look at how awesome she is!"

CGI-Van Helsing looked atrocious. I wonder how they somehow made post-mortem Brandon Lee look realistic in 1994's The Crow, yet 2016 Peter Cushing just looks... wrong. CGI-Leia looked like some creepy real doll that some Star Wars nerd had manufactured to satisfy his sordid fantasies.

Bottom line, Rogue One is about 70 minutes of grimderp tedium and 55 minutes of the best Star Wars since the original trilogy. That qualifies it for... 5th place I guess?
The results in this poll seem quite stable, by now.

110 goggers voted that:
ep 5>4>6>RO1>7>3>1>2
avatar
tinyE: Am I the only one who thinks this whole Star Wars v. Star Trek thing is kind of like comparing apples to oranges?
Well you can agree they have one thing in common, is that Jar Jar Abrams destroyed both of them and turned them both into shit.
Post edited January 20, 2017 by eksasol