Captain America: Civil War (May 6, 2016)

[jye4ever]

2 perfect SW movies > 100 Ok to Good ST movies.

Wrath of Khan has nothing on SW/ESB.

So no.

 

[a-dev]

The bias is strong with that one.

 

[RIDDICK]

Star Trek > Star Wars

 

[jye4ever]

 

[karamazov80]

2 perfect SW movies > 100 Ok to Good ST movies.

Wrath of Khan has nothing on SW/ESB.

So no.

Well I'm factoring in the TV shows. Star Trek, Next Generation, and DS9 are some of the best sci fi out there. But it's more of what I consider "science fiction," and not "space action fantasy" which is more what Star Wars is to my eyes. Pretty fundamentally different franchises.

 

[jye4ever]

For me ST is as much space fantasy as SW.

Only reason SW is considered more "fantasy" is because "Earth/Humans" were never mentioned.

Same theory can even be applied to AOU on an earthly cultural scale , as soon as Americans were not the ones being saved in Manhattan, but eastern european gypsies in an ugly made up city the Avengers now sucked.

I'll say just about anything to defend that movie.

 

[KitFisto]

Wrath of Khan has nothing on SW/ESB.

.

 

[Nintenjoe]

I'm amazed the footage hasn't leaked yet. Everything leaks.

 

[jye4ever]

.

The cultural impact of Wrath of Khan is insignificant to SW.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

The cultural impact of Wrath of Khan is insignificant to SW.

Well, the cultural impact of Wrath of Khan is insignificant to Twilight

 

[RIDDICK]

The cultural impact of SW.

Saberfighting is the only positive cultural impact of SW, and a very questionable one at that.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

I don't get the whole SW vs ST rivalry?

Besides, everyone knows Dr. Who owns them all

 

[RIDDICK]

 

[karamazov80]

For me ST is as much space fantasy as SW.

Only reason SW is considered more "fantasy" is because "Earth/Humans" were never mentioned.

Same theory can even be applied to AOU on an earthly cultural scale , as soon as Americans were not the ones being saved in Manhattan, but eastern european gypsies in an ugly made up city the Avengers now sucked.

I'll say just about anything to defend that movie.

I'm just thinking about the focus of those franchises, not necessarily whether some of the characters are human or not. The core difference is that Star Wars--though there are pseudo-scientific elements--is about this magical force guiding everything (making it fantasy), while Star Trek is meant to be more potentially feasible, with futuristic science, politics, and scientific exploration at its core. I guess Lucas was trying to push Star Wars into sci-fi territory with the midichlorians, but they backed off from that (and rightly so IMO). Though. . .in DS9, we did have a pretty trippy supernatural/spiritual element, but those "gods" were referred to by many as the "wormhole aliens," so not exactly the same I guess

It's some kind of British kids' show, I think.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

It's some kind of British kids' show, I think.

 

[a-dev]

Can't believe no one has yet pointed out how very off topic we are, all because of one GIF.

Has there ever been a Star Wars VS Star Trek thread on this forum? Or is that filed alongside religion and politics as a forum nono?

 

[GasparZizou]

Well, the cultural impact of Wrath of Khan is insignificant to Twilight

You comparing SW to Twilight? Fight me!

 

[WWEJedi]

Star Trek?

It is not even a debate which one is better, Star Wars in every single way possible.

 

[a-dev]

I never would have thought you'd hold such an opinion

 

[WWEJedi]

I never would have thought you'd hold such an opinion

Shocking right?