We started with a cold and objective fact: 'Star Trek' triples 'Star Wars' in amount of canonical audiovisual material. Only for that reason it is logical to assume that he has had more hours to develop his continuity and to approach the different elements that make up his lore with greater depth. But it's not just a question of numbers: with nine films and several animated series to his credit, Star Wars has had plenty of time to build a universe as rich as Star Trek ... the problem is that he has not wanted.
While the creation of Gene Roddenberry bet from the beginning for a coherent world and a sophisticated chronology, Star Wars has focused its attention again and again in the light / dark conflict, without deepening in the grays and rejecting at root any minimally intellectual approach to the psychology of his characters. Not to mention everything related to culture and technology, whose creative intentionality never goes beyond the aesthetic.
At least there is a whole sub-world of derivative products made up of hundreds of novels, videogames, comics and role-playing games where Star Wars has managed to expand its universe far beyond that seen in the cinema. But of course, Star Trek also has its own extended universe just as dense and incomprehensible ...
2. Pleasing the fan: the great burden of Star Wars
Ford Hamill Fisher
From the philosophical-spatial western initially conceived by Roddenberry to the current 'Star Trek Discovery' there is an extensive process of transformation with dozens of creative visions in constant collision and at least three major reinventions to adapt it to the society of the moment.
We are not going to say that Star Trek is an avant-garde audiovisual example, but there is an intention to inspire viewers through stimulating ideas, although many times these can be rejected by the hard core of the fans. On the other hand, the way in which Star Wars has been and is managed by its, ahem, administrators has something of a religion. Every author who signs for the franchise has to bow to the demands of the producer, dilute their style to the maximum and pay tribute to the sacred texts (the first two films).
The objective? Maintain and expand the fan base by giving them exactly what they want. Actually we are facing the classic example of a rancid business culture based on annulling and subjecting the creativity of those responsible and putting them to squeeze a chicken that has few eggs left to put: an error of galactic proportions whose consequences we will see sooner than late.
3. The music
This point connects directly with the previous one: the music of 'Star Wars' is John Williams. And period. There is no life beyond the fanfares of the renowned composer. 'Star Wars' has to sound like 'Star Wars': no one dares to compose a single discordant note. Williams himself received not a few criticisms from the fans for distancing himself slightly from his work in 'The Awakening of the Force'. Disappointed the less.
Let's go back to Star Trek and analyze his musical career: Alexander Courage, Jerry Goldsmith, James Horner, Leonard Rosenman, Cliff Eidelman, Ron Jones or Dennis McCarthy among many others. All of them with a very defined authorial identity and scores of unquestionable quality, contributed to a legacy in constant expansion without giving up some defining elements and symbolic fanfares almost as present in popular culture as the central themes of Star Wars.
There is a very representative case of this problem. Michael Giacchino, one of the best composers of today, was the author of the memorable score of 'Star Trek' (2009). A work where his recognizable style based on minimalist themes and a predominant use of the piano emerged to round out an epic, forceful and refreshing work, although respectful of the sound tradition of the saga (including a reformulation of the original theme of Courage).
It is significant that seven years later Giacchino received the order of 'Rogue One: A Story of Star Wars', a more than remarkable work done in record time where his style was buried under the heavy slab of the most shameless imitation. I think no one doubts the quality of the score of Rogue One, but it is a pity that a composer of his size can not make a contribution of greater value that contributes to expand the sound scope of Star Wars as it could with Star Trek .
4. A message for posterity
Christopher Plummer on Star Trek IV
The DNA of Star Trek is a celebration of diversity in an optimistic key and throughout all its incarnations it has been tried to enhance this feature with unusually inclusive character distributions -for its time- and hundreds of stories where the metaphor of social content and vindicative.
As in the best science fiction, Star Trek shines when it speaks of our present, as in the great 'Star Trek VI: That Unknown Country' (a reflection of the fall of the iron curtain), a film that in addition to its valuable content, It also tells great space battles that have nothing to envy to any Star Wars movie. A demonstration that you can make a film with an interesting and cerebral script, without renouncing at any time a great pyrotechnic show.
The closest we have in Star Wars is the political message that George Lucas tried to sow in the trilogy of the prequels, especially in the estimable 'Revenge of the Sith'. But due to its disastrous execution and the rejection of the fans, it is unlikely that Star Wars trails will return to that path seen as seen ... At least the arrival of Disney has meant some progress in diversity material. It's something.
5. Your aliens are better
There is no controversy here: you can get a lot of Chewie, porg, jawas, ewoks or even THE UNNOMBRABLE, but the aliens of Star Wars at best are pet cuquis, and in the worst miserable excuses to create new merchandising
In Star Trek we have: Vulcans, Klingons, Romulans, Ferengis, Andorians, Cardassians ... and all this without entering into mestizajes and other forms of life more difficult to define. All of them alien races with their history, complex cultures, their own languages, religious traditions and completely different political-economic systems. Nothing more to add in this respect, your honor.
6. Travel in time
What Star Wars is set in a fantastic universe similar to sword tales and witchcraft should provide its leaders a blank canvas to develop all kinds of stories ... But its internal micrologic, so close and determined to reuse both Once the same tropes, it does not allow it. For that reason the mere fact of proposing a journey in time within the context of Star Wars seems totally out of place ...
It's a shame, because travel in time is an amazing dramatic resource with almost infinite possibilities. Many of the best moments of Star Trek have used this idea to tell great stories that curiously, have nothing to do with the fact of temporary travel (and thank goodness: the resource should never eclipse the subtext). It does not matter that they are not always scientific theories of the most plausible, only a certain coherence and a minimum of sense at the level of script is necessary so that the suspension of the disbelief does its work with the spectators.
I would really like to see a journey in time that could fit into Star Wars, there are ways to do it without screeching too much, using some more mystical than scientific explanation would be acceptable. But again, I'm afraid the fans would not put on a good face and Disney is not about to play their most valuable license too much.
And we left for the end a KEY element that tilts even more definitely the balance in favor of Star Trek ...
7. William Shatner
Yes. Bill Shatner.
THE SHAT is an institution and a brand in itself. It is not the classic international superstar and hence in Spain is not a name especially recognized, but in the US its status is higher than that of a star: It is a legend. He is recognized both for his unwavering sense of humor when it comes to laughing at himself, and for his lack of pedantry and delusions of grandeur.
That huge ego led him to direct his own movie Star Trek (one of the worst, but also the most audacious conceptually), several documentaries, writing scripts, novels and even several spoken-word albums, both original and versioned. Such a trajectory earned enemies even among his castmates, to the point that one of them tried to lay more than one death trap during one of the best Comedy Central Roast ... and still came out unscathed.
As an actor, William Shatner made the overinterpretation an art to the point of being parodied on countless occasions for his intense and markedly theatrical style, but also recognized as a great talent in works more than the taste of critics such as' The Practice 'and' Boston Legal. ' It is not easy to get out of the shadow of such an iconic character as Captain Kirk, but unlike his co-star Leonard Nimoy, he did.
Yes, yes, I know. Star Wars has Carrie Fisher, Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford ... But only William Shatner is able to make an appearance at the AFI Life Achievement ceremony granted to George Lucas in 2005 and wipe out the most memorable speech of the gala. Two legends face to face. This is what happened:
Are we more in agreement now? Not yet? I see that you still have much to learn young Padawan, it is a matter of time that you embrace logic to surrender to the evidence: Star Trek is definitely and categorically, much better than Star Wars.
Oh boy it's got to be star wars!!! There's no contest here. Star Trek is great, but Star wars has it beaten in every way!!
Can you imagine what the world would be like today if the words "May the force be with you" were never spoken?? The very concept of the Jedi Knights battling the darkside is nothing short of genius. Don't even get me started on the concept of the light saber, a weapon able to cut through just about anything, I can't even begin to understand the physics behind how it works.
Then there's the fact that we get to see Luke Skywalker grow as a character and as a Jedi, shaping himself up to do battle with Darth Vader and the sith lord, only to find out that Darth Vader was actually his father, completely blowing everyones mind away!!!!!
It doesn't end there, like all great franchises, the show isn't complete unless we get to go back into the past and see the events that lead to the beginning of the entire franchise and we meet Luke's father, Anikin. We get to watch as he's corrupted by the darkside and eventually ends up becoming Darth Vader.
Let's not forget the new episodes with the resistance fighting not only for the sake of the galaxy, but for their very lives!!! The story is just beyond real!!! There's so much depth in it that they even have successful spin off stories like Solo and Rogue one. You can't pull of something like this if the franchise wasn't brilliant.
It's Star Wars for me any day and any time, sorry Spock.
Personally I prefer star trek to star wars. Growing up we all heard about the most epic scene in all of movie history. The scene from star wars where Luke found out that Darth Vader was actually his supposedly dead father. I looked forward to the day I'd watch that scene and then one day I did. And it was the worst bit of acting I had ever seen. The truth is that most people only like star wars because of the Jedis. Han solo, chubaka and the rest of them are nice and all but the Jedis are the main attraction
Star Trek on the other hand is full of adventure and every character is interesting in his or her own way. Then putting them all together makes for a most entertaining film.
When watching star trek, I enjoy the entire film, from the first second to the last but with star wars, I only look forward to the scenes where the Jedi fight or use the force. The clones aren't interesting at all in my opinion
First off I want to say that personally I think this debate only exists because they're both set in space and came out in the same general era. And probably that they both have the word 'star' in their name.
Beyond that, what one is better depends on how you like your sci-fi.
Star Trek has a lot of political stuff going on in it, they addressed the problems of society and politics in a way that was acceptable for the time period. Star Trek is about exploration, the human spirit, and basically humans getting used to space and aliens.
Star Wars is rather the opposite. While politics is still a thing, it has less real-world associations and more of "the politics make sense in the context of this setting". Star Wars is more in line with humans are already used to space and aliens and other related things and just the pure adventure of following along with a story of heroes and resistance.
Personally they are both good, and I would be hard pressed to pick a favorite. They should not be compared to one another except in the fact that they are both sci-fi shows that came out around the same time because beyond that they have very little relation to one another.