Star Wars Vs. Star Trek; The Ultimate Battle…

Posted: September 20, 2011 by girolahozz in Grandad's Tea Kettle

Star Wars VS. Star Trek; The Ultimate Battle…

I recently read a silly article questioning William Shatner (Captain James T. Kirk of Star Trek fame) of which was better, Star Trek or Star Wars.

I’ll spare you the nonsensical quote from T.J. Hooker himself, but let’s just say it revolved around him saying Star Wars came from Star Trek, Star Wars was all special effects and that the ladies were the best part of it. How serious was this answer? It’s William Shatner! So who knows, the guy insists upon himself, basically spewing anything for fame and attention.

To be honest, this did kind of strike a nerve in me, being a fan of both science fiction juggernauts. So I figured why not drop my opinion on the matter? Read on…

First off, Star Wars obviously did not come from Star Trek, nor is it in any relation to it story wise, and I’m pretty certain Shatner knows this. Even though Star Trek premiered on television well before Star Wars was on the big screen in 1977, they are both still just science fiction ideas that somehow started a feud on which was better. Very few people I talk to about this are actually a fan of both, like I am. Most people choose Star Wars over Star Trek. Reason being that Star Wars was like Star Trek on steroids.

The Star Wars storyline was palatable enough for a 6 year old to understand and the action always moved each ‘episode’ along. The characters, to me, are what separate Star Trek from Star Wars. George Lucas, the mastermind behind Star Wars, was a genius at creating characters, aliens and the whole universe; much like Gene Roddenberry was a genius at creating the Star Trek universe. The main difference between the two was that Star Wars was “in a galaxy far, far away”, setting it up to be a fairy tale almost and pretty much created the atmosphere from scratch. Star Trek was Earth and our galaxy a few hundred years in the future, so Roddenberry had to tie in what happens from now until then.

 To be honest, Roddenberry did a pretty bang up job on a lot of things that have come to be. The iPad, laptop/desktop, iPhone, portable tvs, and so much more were all envisioned in the Star Trek universe decades before they became a reality, or even thought possible. Star Wars biggest ‘technology break-through’ was laser rifles and warp speed, things that Star Trek already had made visible on the tube more than a decade before.

Star Trek was written for the small screen, to be a bunch of stories that gave the viewer an outcome by the time the hour was almost up. Star Wars was written a 6 part story for the big screen, originally, and has spawned into more as the time goes by. This is probably why the ‘storyline-based’ Star Trek did not hold up to Star Wars ‘action-based’ films as well as fans would like to argue. I will say that in my book, Star Wars V The Empire Strikes Back and Star Trek II The Wrath of Khan are pretty close to amazing and untouchable in the history of film!

 The characters were a bit stale and dated though, in the Star Trek universe. Everyone seemed super smart, and athletic when they needed to be, so it really was a soap opera in space. Action rarely happened, but the links to humanity were what sold the show to the audience, at least to me. Roddenberry dealt with everyday issues, just pushed into a future setting and usually came up with pretty believable outcomes. People liked Captain Kirk because he was the hero, the leader, the cowboy where as Mr. Spock was the alien that balanced the outcome of the story.

Compassion to a race or species was always a focus in Star Trek.  Star Wars was similar, having witty characters like Luke Skywalker and Han Solo that could instantly spring into action. These were the equivalent to the military in both Star Wars and Star Trek, so maybe they were the best of the best and just had a ‘ninja switch’ they could shut on or off? Who knows, but everyone had their favorites in both series.

Acting. Acting in Star Wars was borderline awful, especially in the original 3 films (the final 3 weren’t exactly day time tv worthy either). I am stunned that Lucas could create characters this well and then have trouble with scripting and acting direction. Roddenberry’s acting wasn’t a whole lot better but again, was a decade before Star Wars and the ‘stage’ acting of Star Trek had dissipated more or less from the big screen by the time the first Star Wars film came out. Future series learned from both and created stronger, more entertaining series like Firefly, Stargate and eventually the J.J. Abrams rebirth of Star Trek that came out recently. It pretty much combines the action of Star Wars with the characters of Star Trek, but places it in an alternate cannon or alternate historical reality of what Star Trek followers have come to absorb over the last 35+ years by starting it all over with the characters as young. It was a huge success and already a sequel is in the works so Star Wars may need to “make it so” with some new material soon or the argument may stay in Captain Kirk’s corner…

When time becomes a loop


  1. Anonymous says:

    two comments:
    1) where did you find a picture of Carol Ford?
    2) I always prefered the Jetsons

  2. girolahozz says:

    Nice… I have my ways… APE.

  3. aquasac says:

    I like Seinfeld.

Please comment with a name other than "Anonymous", lest a Grizzly fall on your noggin.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s