The Official Star Trek Movie Forum

The Official Star Trek Movie Forum (
-   Off Topic Discussions (
-   -   Franchise Wars (

omegaman 01-28-2013 02:47 PM

Compared to Star Wars is Star Trek…
Compared to Star Wars is Star Trek…

a) a viable franchise

b) as big as / or equal to Star Wars

c) something of lame horse that just won't get up.

d) something entirely unique with a limited popularity and a small fan base

Share your thoughts…

kevin 01-28-2013 02:56 PM

It's not a war. That's just a portion of both sides bases that can't see beyond 'their' preferences. And the internet gave them a megaphone.

horatio 01-28-2013 03:04 PM

No idea which franchise is bigger, more popular or more sustainable. All I know is that the one is a space opera and the other science fiction and that I am currently more into Wars.

omegaman 01-28-2013 03:09 PM


Originally Posted by horatio (Post 328779)

No idea which franchise is bigger, more popular or more sustainable. All I know is that the one is a space opera and the other science fiction and that I am currently more into Wars.

I'm surprised Horatio… I would have thought you had more to say on the subject.

martok2112 01-28-2013 03:14 PM

Amen to the both of ya's, Horatio and Kevin!

Both are viable franchises, always have been....and both have suffered from their creative decisions... Star Trek with Nemesis and Star Wars with its prequel trilogy.... not that I have a problem with either Nemesis or the SW prequels.

horatio 01-28-2013 03:31 PM


Originally Posted by omegaman (Post 328781)
I'm surprised Horatio… I would have thought you had more to say on the subject.

Liking both I don't perceive them as a lame horses and a, b and d are empirical questions which, lacking evidence/data, I cannot answer. Give me credit when I do at least sometimes STFU when I don't know what I am talking about. ;)

Seriously, I think that Wars and Trek are compared too often. IMO they do not have that much in common, one leans more towards sci-fi and one more towards space opera and Wars was inspired by Tolkien, Kurosawa and Campbell whereas Trek was inspired by Forbidden Planet (and something else?).
One problem both franchises might share is that they are basically (too?) closed. The last Wars project, Clone Wars, basically fills a fictional historical gap while the last Trek project basically revisits a certain spacial-temporal place in the fictional universe. You could argue that Trek is more open as it is not centered around one character, Vader, and as it can thus more easily play in the future or use sci-fi tricks like time travel, parallel universe and so on but I think that Wars compensates this via being "broader" in terms of space, i.e. Trek is e.g. fixated on certain aliens while Wars has an easier time inventing new aliens.

martok2112 01-29-2013 12:32 AM

There's a mutual sharing of credit when it comes to how Star Trek and Star Wars propagate.

Obviously before Star Wars, there was Star Trek. Star Trek provided some pretty epic storytelling, and very human storytelling despite its resources at the time. Granted, ST does owe some of its existence and creativity to the likes of Forbidden Planet, which established many sci-fi/space fantasy trappings that are pretty much taken for granted in today's sci-fi/space fantasy environment. Star Trek paved the way for imaginative sci-fi on a weekly basis, and for sci-fi movies to come.

Flash Gordon was a large inspiration for George Lucas, as indeed were the other authors/directors you cited, Horatio. I'm pretty sure that Trek has its place among that list as inspiration for Star Wars as well.

Star Wars, in turn, paved the way for gigantic cinema, high adventure, and space fantasy...but it also blazed a trail for Star Trek to follow in terms of cinematic splendor. This was pretty evident when Paramount decided, as a result of Fox's success with Star Wars, to cancel the series "Star Trek Phase II" and make a big screen translation of Star Trek. Star Trek The Motion Picture even made use of the services of effects wizard John Dykstra, who did work for both Star Wars and the original Battlestar Galactica. Star Trek TMP was a financial success, if not a critical one, and it paved the way for Star Trek II, which was made for I think about half the budget of TMP (largely because of the reuse of some sets, as well as stock footage from TMP). But its space battles were clearly influenced by the epic, big screen appeal of Star Wars....especially with the rapid firing pulse phasers/gatling phasers featured in their space battles. I will say that the battle in the Mutara Nebula was certainly beautiful, and unlike anything seen before.

Both franchises told human stories. Star Trek is based somewhat on science and science speculation, but still knew how to create fun for its audience. Star Wars, not so much on science, but it just asked you to suspend disbelief and're in for one hell of a ride.

I find fun and entertainment in both. They have their strengths and their weaknesses, but I am far more forgiving than The Emperor. :)

kevin 01-29-2013 10:05 AM

All the major space opera franchises owe things to each other and to other sources of influence as well. Star Wars and Star Trek included.

But they all also go through ebbs and flows. Trek has a good decade on Wars but it's been up and down plenty of times. Wars is in a bit of a rut just now and I don't know if this Disney film will be a good thing or a bad thing but the overall consensus is that it can't be worse than the prequels.

Not hating the prequels quite as much as some I don't entirely believe that automatically. But we'll see.

Enterprise Captain 01-29-2013 10:30 AM

martok2112 01-29-2013 12:21 PM

That's an interesting visual summation of monetary (and popular) success there, EC.
But I also think it shows that Star Trek is quite the capable alternative in terms of viability for those who may not like Star Wars.

I remember, sometimes I used to post box office numbers between the staggering success of six Star Wars films, vs the decent, but far lagging monetary success of the first 10 Star Trek films. The 11th film, Star Trek 2009 was largely responsible for narrowing that gap. Now that there are new productions of Star Wars underway, and considering that even the prequels did mega blockbuster success, I think we'll see Star Wars gain the severe monetary lead it once had. I also have a sneaking suspicion that the newer Star Trek productions will give Star Wars a run for its pun intended. :)

But in terms of viability, both are standouts. :)

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:28 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2009 by Paramount Pictures. STAR TREK and all related
marks and logos are trademarks of CBS Studios Inc. All Rights Reserved.