The long time fanboy battle has been going on for ages, lets see what the rotten tomatoes community likes more! Vote below and i will tally up votes on May 30th, this blog will also be on Star Wars 7. To vote just comment with you choice below!
Star Wars if you do not count the prequels or Star Trek if you do count the prequels. Sorry all, I am not a fan of the three Star Wars prequels. Hopefully Disney will learn from those mistakes and make 7-9 (maybe more) as good (or better) as the original 3. If not, the Star Trek again. I don't care how bad some of those Star Trek movies are, they will never be as bad as the Star Wars prequels.
Here's the way I see it: Star Wars had three great films (Empire, the original, and Revenge of the Sith), one mediocre one (Jedi, fuck the Ewoks), and two epic failures (Attack of the Clones and... shudder... The Phantom Butthurt). Not to mention the shitty Christmas special and the Clone Wars movie which, to be fair, don't even deserve to be on this list.
Star Trek had four great ones (Wrath of Khan, The Voyage Home, The Undiscovered Country, and '09), a shit ton of less-than-average ones (Nemesis, First Contact, The Motion Picture, The Search for Spock, etc), and one truly awful one-- the fifth one (I dare not speak its name).
Final tally: Star Trek comes out ahead, but just barely.
Star Trek for me, if only because the characters are so much better written. The only Star Wars movie I saw that I thought affected me in that I cared as much about the characters as the zap-zap and doof-doof was Empire Strikes Back.
I would say that I have been exposed to Star Trek more than Star wars. I saw Star Wars 4-6 on DVD, saw the remaster of Star Wars 1 (err 4) and the three prequels on the big screen, and the clone wars animation on my computer. That's all the Star Wars exposure I got and I didn't like the prequels at all, especially Jar Jar Binks. I have seen Star Trek (reruns of course:), Star Trek: The Next Generation, Star Trek Deep Space 9, Star Trek Voyager, and Star Trek Enterprise on TV, and all the movies up to the 2009 reboot. I rented Star Trek 1-5 on DVD, Saw Star Trek 6-Insurection in the theaters (part 6 and first contact were the best one lol. rest were a waste of money), and Star Trek 2009 on Netflix. That's a lot of exposure. By default I would say Star trek vs. Star Wars. Some may argue Quality vs. Quantity, but I did't see that much quality in Star wars. Matter of fact, the quality pretty much equaled the quantity. That's my take/opinion.
Star Wars, and I mean all Star Wars. The originals for their sheer originality, Luke, and humor. The prequels for the planet/costume designs, dirty politcs, and music.
I'm a fan of both franchises. I love the old SW trilogy and love (most) of old/older Trek. Other than a space setting, aliens, and having "Star" in both titles, the similarities between the two end there. One is a space-setting fantasy; the other a space exploration story.
I'm not a huge Star Trek fan, but even I'm familiar with the show's main slogan. Just like Star Wars has "May the Force be with you," Trek has "... to boldly go where no man has gone before..." The previous Trek movie failed to live up to that, and it seems like the second one is going to commit the same fault. The previous Trek movie was very flat, bland and mindless.
Now that Abrams is also doing Star Wars, he'll deliver more of the same corporate blandness there -- mindless, safe entertainment that makes a lot of money but is largely forgettable.
J.J. Abrams could film himself taking a shit for ten minutes and it would still be better than anything George Lucas has made in the past fifteen years.
That movie is a bit longer than ten minutes and he didn't direct it. And I'd watch Gone Fishin' over anything that George Lucas has made in the past fifteen years.
Star Wars got the voice of James Earl Jones as Darth I will kick your ass Vader because I am the baddest nigga up in this shit. Also had them little Ewok niggas, Yoda the second most badass nigga there is in Star Wars as that flippin cgi nigga, and the prequels got Samuel L Mother Fucker Jackson with a purple lightsaber dawg. That's the shit that makes Star Wars the shit. Na mean? Star Trek got the most pimpin ass cracker out there. James T Kirk nigga. That mother fucker was all in that colored pussy all over the galaxy and shit. That nigga boldly went where others were to chicken shit to go. Ya know? Klingons are the shit. Michael Dorn is Samuel L Jackson before that nigga was Samuel L Jackson. Na mean? Deep Space Nine had a nigga for a captain. He wasn't some pussy ass cracker either. That dude was a bad ass too. When DS9 had Michael Dorn that was the deep shit right there nigga. For reals. The new Star Trek movies got Zoe Saldana in it. Damn that bitch is fine. I engage that shit. Hells yeah. I pick Star Trek vs. Star Wars. Word.
Since there is no edit option I will say it here, Star Trek has no c in it and the last "you" is meant to be "your". Sorry for the innocence, I will proof read better next time. Haha
TREK does not have a 'C'. Might wanna fix that. And comparing the two is a bit odd, considering their barely anything alike. Star Wars follows a traditional monomyth which results in an adventurous self discovery story. Star Trek has always been about philosophy of alien species to help learn the nature of ourselves and how species are willing to go to thrive and live. JJ Abrams indeed has turned Star Trek into a more similar copy of Star Wars, but the original Star Trek is NOTHING like Star Wars.
Yes, I see my error I was just wondering which franchise was more prominent in the RT community, I was not trying to compare the two I was just asking for the audiences opinion. And thank you for pointing out my spelling mistake.
Which two were more prominent? Well Star Wars and Star Trek (Film Series) are both quite powerful stories to follow. I loved every Star Trek film except Final Frontier, Generations, Insurrection, and Nemesis. I thought every Star Wars film of the original trilogy were pure classics (Return had flaws but was still great). I thought the prequels were quite bad, and even though Revenge of the Sith improved the dialogue, narrative, and performances were still incredibly weak.
But I honestly can't decide. They both have their weaknesses and strengths. It'd be easier to compare Star Wars with Lord of the Rings because their both thematically similar.
May 4 - 12:40 PM
Log in with Facebook to share your reviews with friends, create a want-to-see list, and more!
The Rotten Tomato
Star Wars if you do not count the prequels or Star Trek if you do count the prequels. Sorry all, I am not a fan of the three Star Wars prequels. Hopefully Disney will learn from those mistakes and make 7-9 (maybe more) as good (or better) as the original 3. If not, the Star Trek again. I don't care how bad some of those Star Trek movies are, they will never be as bad as the Star Wars prequels.
May 8 - 11:02 PM