Garry k wrote:
Star Trek

cus the villains are more varried and interesting

Varied as in different noses?

Ninja wrote:
Lord of the Rings.  Because Peter Jackson pwns pretty much everyone else.

"All right, look, there's only one 'Return', okay, and it ain't 'of the King', it's 'of the Jedi'." - Randal Graves

Ninja wrote:
Lord of the Rings.  Because Peter Jackson pwns pretty much everyone else.

science fiction vs fantasy

Ed Burns Photography wrote:

"All right, look, there's only one 'Return', okay, and it ain't 'of the King', it's 'of the Jedi'." - Randal Graves

Pfft.

Garry k wrote:

science fiction vs fantasy

I was thinking more in terms of well-known, epic multi-pieced works in film, but if you want to play the genre game...what exactly is so scientific about Star Trek or Star Wars?

Sci-fi genres require the piece to include scientific knowledge.  Simply traveling on adventures through space with neato gadgets isn't exactly what I'd consider to be scientific.

They're all fantasy to me.  And LOTR wins.

Designit wrote:

Varied as in different noses?

no they have different forehead bumps.


Star Wars all the way!

Ninja wrote:

I was thinking more in terms of well-known, epic multi-pieced works in film, but if you want to play the genre game...what exactly is so scientific about Star Trek or Star Wars?

Sci-fi genres require the piece to include scientific knowledge.  Simply traveling on adventures through space with neato gadgets isn't exactly what I'd consider to be scientific.

They're all fantasy to me.  And LOTR wins.

and here I thought that science fiction presented a hypothetical spin on science whereas fantasy had nothing to do with science

Garry k wrote:

and here I thought that science fiction presented a hypothetical spin on science whereas fantasy had nothing to do with science

Stories like Frankenstein, The Time Machine, or much more recently, the movie Splice, are sci-fi.

Traveling through space, crazy gadgets, and weird aliens may *hint* at sci-fi, but do not define sci-fi.  There needs to be something else involved to separate it from fantasy.

Fifi wrote:
To me, they aren't even in the same category... Star Wars... hands down.




But, overall.... "One ring to rule them all!" - Elias

Fifi wrote:
To me, they aren't even in the same category... Star Wars... hands down.




But, overall.... "One ring to rule them all!" - Elias

"That look was so gay. I thought Sam was gonna tell the little hobbits to take a walk so he could saunter over to Frodo and suck his #%$&ing c@#k. Now *THAT* would have been an Academy Award worthy ending." - Randal

Ed Burns Photography wrote:

"That look was so gay. I thought Sam was gonna tell the little hobbits to take a walk so he could saunter over to Frodo and suck his #%$&ing c@#k. Now *THAT* would have been an Academy Award worthy ending." - Randal

You know what, I was hoping that would happen... but, with a better looking Sam.

Ed Burns Photography wrote:
Try getting a kid to watch the early Star Trek TV episodes and/or movies, then try getting them to watch the original Star Wars trilogy.  Even after 30 years, Star Wars can still hold a kid's attention; and the costumes and ships still make them want to be part of it.  The Star Trek stuff is so dated, I just can't see them getting into it.  The latest Star Trek movie was good, but if we're talking originals, then I'd say Star Wars wins hands down. 

When people see this...

they go, "How cool!"

When they see this though...

Uhhhhh....yeah.  Well...you know.

This


vs

this.

Boriken Warrior Studios wrote:
Star Wars

Star Trek

They both Star Suck!

They're both kiddie fodder.

Give me the new Battlestar Galactica anyday!

-Koa-

Yeah!

Renaissance Wife wrote:
This


vs

this?

Or this?






















'Scuse me while I take a shower to wash the gayness off me. 

Perish Motel wrote:
Stardate

/thread

Fixed...

David Shinobi wrote:

Fixed...

Macgyver in space is nothin to f**k with son!