Is SW in danger of becoming too Trekkie?

One of the things that I have noticed about Star Trek fandom is the fact that there are several "camps" and the lines are clearly drawn. Like there are the original 'Trekkies' who say that the original TV series is the be all and end all, there are those who take the films into account as well, there are thoise who take everything and there are some that are just into the novels of the various TV spin-offs, like the fanboys who watch Voyager for Seven-of-Nine.

Star Wars isn't like that, we have set camps yet these are a bit more loosely defined or they are not of your own choosing. Apart from the completists and the purists we have the first generation (class of 77) second generation (class of 99) and even these aren't clearly defined as though I am by age a second generation fan my loyalty lies with the OT. There's also the artists, the ficcers, the film makers, the fleet-junkies and the Mandy-fans. Yet unlike for Trekkies, we often intermingle within these camps and have a common understanding that we are all fans of SW, the films form the central core that surround us, bind us and bring us...well you know what I mean.
The problem is that SW can easily get like that, and if it does it will be by LFL. It could happen with the TV series, but it could also happen if the EU continues after Legacy finishes which I hope won't happen.

And SW is science-fiction, but it's more swashbuckling than other sci-fi like that of Arthur C. Clark or Philip K. Dick. SW is a space opera, a western set in space, it's also a fairy tale particularly ANH which can be easily re-written as a medieval fairy tale.

 

The only trekkie novel would probally be the Crystal Star.

 

I'm Ackbared at the racial prejudices displayed here.

It's almost as if you lads and chaps patronage one or the other.

This is science fiction! The Naturals think we're geeks, integrity-deficient tabloids especially. As though romance lovers are never called eye-tearful ladies, or detective readers old fashioners. Obi-Wan's brother, look at yourselves!

I'm not quite a Star Trek fan because I know little of it, but I'll watch it by the by. I'm a Star Wars fan. Doctor Who adherent, Galactica fan, Stargate fan, Space: Above and Beyond disliker, the list goes on.

TV is bombfarted with endless legal, police and medical "dramas". Mara's luggage, I'll take what I can get. Sci fi is rare precious enough as it is. The impression I'm gettin' is, a SW fan is not a ST fan.

Why? Why are people even comparing the two to each others' baselines; they're nothing alike.

 

Just to say something on the original topic - I dont even think there is any question that Star Wars is becoming like Star Trek - they are completely different in atmosphere, setting, and 'hardness' of sci-fi.

Note that good isnt a strong word like 'perfect', also note my following posts.

Enterprise is set in the same timeline as all other Star Trek series - although we all wish it wasnt. Bernd is completely right as usual, and he is only repeating what fans said at the time anyway.

 

Impossible. Unless my understanding of ST time travel is flawed, all the episodes of TNG and Voyager and TOS and DS9 leading up to FC are set in a timeline in which the Borg never traveled back in time and ****ed with the timeline. However, once they traveled time, they set off a separate timeline. Now, I guess, whether or not Enterprise is in this separate timeline is up to dispute, but the prescence of Borg in the Alpha Quadrant in the years of Enterprise should indicate that it's a separate timeline from the timeline of all the pre-FC shows.

 

Here is why it is official:

1). The producers say it is in the same timeline as all Trek, therefore it officially is.

2). Seperate timelines are only created if an event happened that wasnt meant to, so I dunno why you think Ent would be in a seperate timeline when you have no evidence that Picard's journey back in time hadnt always been part of the Star Trek timeline, which it offically has.

3). When a seperate timeline is created, it is created by the action of the members of that timeline, hence all alterations to the timeline that remain, were pre-destination paradoxes, aka were meant to happen, else Picard would have returned to an altered future.

4). The singal sent towards the delta quadrant at the end of the episode in a cheap nod to continuity was intended to indicate that these Borg were responsible for the invasion of Federation space in Picard's time.

5). Why would producers possibly want to make their show set in another timeline, thus deliberatly divorcing it from all other Star Trek?

6). If one could simply travel back in time without making alterations to their own timeline, there would be no restriction on time travel.

Not to be rude, but you idea of Star Trek temporal physics is definatly wrong, it dosent stand up to logic, or what we have seen in the show.

As much as many fans would love to divorce Ent into another timeline, it is not.

 

You know, I liked Enterprise. Well, up until the last few episodes, which were boring. And the last one was awful.

But then, I've generally disliked Trek prior to that show, so that could be why.

 

Can we please not discuss Trek continuity on here? Those in this threa who arew Trekkie must keep their obsessions within limited bounds.

IMHO Star Trek jumped the shark ages ago which is why it's so commerical and decentralised. SW has a central core, the films and Trek is not like that and probably never will be.

And SW and Trek are going to be compared, like it or lump it and we're often confused for one or the other. (Like the Vulcan salute) Trek kinda shows what SW could be in about 20 years or more from now when the films no longer form the centre.

 

I hate to disagree, but I do believe that star wars is becoming like star trek. The only difference is that, star wars, has a more cohesive unity between the mediums. The novels, comic books, video games (last 4 years more or less), rpg's from both WEG and WOTC, cartoons, Essential Guides, and the Star Wars Gamer, Star Wars Insider, and the 13 issues of Topps that was dedicated to star wars provide history, information and story that all fit into one universe. It expands GL movies in many ways. Some of it is good, and yes, some of it is bad, some lets just say is forgetable, while others are debateable. With Star Trek, I think its just the movies and the tv espisodes, but the rest is somewhat discarded. At least from what I remember. But everything else is quite the same. We have new products coming out every year, and if you didn't catch this stuff from the begining (1991), you can get pretty behind both on collectabliltiy and money. No to forget all these new information that is being made avaliable. On that aspect, yes, star wars has become a star trek.

 

I'm going to state what may end up being an unpopular opinion, and I'm sorry about that if it happens....here goes...


If SW is moving in the direction of ST, it's because of some of the more recent books that have come out. Not the novels, but things like the Incredible Cross-sections and such. I've got nothing against these books (in fact, I love them and flip through them frequently), but when every nook and cranny of every piece of equipment every seen is required to be detailed to the last wire, that moves Star Wars away from being "space fantasy" where it started and into "science fiction" which it was not intended to be.

The reason for this may be a simple one: the audience (fans) are more demanding than ever. The sense of wonder has been replaced with a "tell me why" attitude. I don't know if anyone agrees with me, but that's my thought on the matter.

 

There is no point talking about Star Trek 'obsessions' on a forum full of Star Wars fans. This thread was bound to provoke Trek related discussion. It is also hypocritical for a fan of one of the two franchises to talk about the other is 'commercialised' when both are capitalistically driven endevours. It dosent take a lot of reasearch to find which franchise sells all the toys, etc.

Everyone keeps comparing the superficial similarities between where Star Wars is going and Star Trek 'has gone before' - but in any fictional franchise, the setting defines its difference - Star Trek and Star Wars settings are about as far apart as one can be whilst still in the 'space opera' genre - there is no danger of Star Wars becoming like Star Trek unless the force is scrapped and the Republic develops a prime directive.

 

yeah WHATEVER!

 

Mayor Quimby: May the Force be with you
Leonard Nimoy: Do you even knoe who I am?
Mayor Quimby: Of course I do...weren't you one of the Little Rascals?

 

Orbis, I was refering more to commericiality and fandom by saying that Star Wars could go the same as Star Trek. In terms of story and theme I would agree 100% in saying that SW and Trek are different, we may as well compare a Hutt to a Klingon in that regard. Forever and a day SW has more than the outer garments of science fiction, there's a sense of morality and heroism that Star Trek simply does not possess. Okay, it may be there in small doses but this is what GL set out to do in the beginning, he wanted to tell a story and he wanted to show a hero. This cannot be said about Star Trek which as far as I am aware is more of a 'what if?'

But what makes any franchise fail, what causes something that we love to be sold down the river is in fact us the fans. What happens we scream out for more and the big boys at LFL pump it out while at the same time rubbing their hands together at all the stuff we lap up. In other words:

The reason for this may be a simple one: the audience (fans) are more demanding than ever. The sense of wonder has been replaced with a "tell me why" attitude. I don't know if anyone agrees with me, but that's my thought on the matter.

However, this can be easily fixed, we can still have more SW and not be stretching the limits too much. The first way to do this is to end the post-ROTJ EU after the Legacy series finishes. We will cry, we will scream, we will threaten to chain ourselves to the gate of the Skywalker ranch, but it will be the best thing that could have been done.
And then, we focus on before and between the films as there's more than enough unmarked territory there to keep us amused for the next 50 years.

 

I think -as has been stated before- that 'end' is not necessarily necessary, just a hiatus. Give us a break from Luke & Co. Give those of us who haven't read everything from SOTME to LOTF a chance to catch up.

I'm definitely agreeing that the EU needs to stay away from Post-ROTJ for a while. I love the concept of KOTOR and Legacy because of the relatively untrodden ground. I want those two eras to be milked for all they're worth. KOTOR has one of -if not the- best-selling Star Wars games ever, and a very good series of comics. Legacy is just one comic issue so far, but it should turn out to be a very good comic series. I think we need Legacy games, and KOTOR movies/TV shows, and novels for both of these eras. I think each of these eras needs to become a mini-post-ROTJ era. And I think it would sell. I didn't buy KOTOR because I particularly like the comic medium or because I love the games (both of which, I do), but I bought KOTOR because it promised something new in my beloved SW. If someone made a movie that was "Brand New! Star Wars like you've never seen it before!" I'd get behind it, and I bet a lot of other people would too. Those that are just getting into SW. Those who've loved it since '77, everyone.

 

I was refering to Legacy of the Force novels, as in Jacen et al, but we could use a break nonetheless. SW has broken away from the Skywalkers before with the X-wing series, I,Jedi, Dark Forces (i.e.Kyle Katarn) and some of the Clone Wars novels and in most cases it made a better story (just don't ask Ex for an opinion )

Though more of late the focus was LOCKED on the Skywalkers and other characters suffered as a result, we lost Lando a G-canon character, we lost Corran Horn's kids even though he hands around the Temple in DN like a bad smell and I dunno how many others.
Yet these are SW issues and don't really have that much to do with Star Trek as that's rather TOO big.

 

lucas made SW what it is with both the sequels and the prequels.
nothing is more SW than "A New Hope"
-I think with the launch of the Legacy era SW has lost its magical touch (kinda).
-Also I have never really liked Star Trek and I think that most will agree that while ST is just Sci Fi ,star wars is a Cult Classic and people who like SW are not nessecarily NERD's, and I can't say that for ST.

 

Bit of a narrow-minded view there don't you think bud? I love Star Trek AND Star Wars. Does that make me a nerd?
Star Trek does have what you call 'cult classics' with the original series and the first 6 movies part of it. The difference I think is that Star Wars has more-or-less always been a big intertwined story whereas Star Trek has gone off on tangents (i.e. DS9, Voyager, Enterprise).

But yes I do have to agree with you that SW has lost that magic that is used to have. It just seems to be going around in one big circle with a more depressing storyline.

 

You must have read a different version of New Jedi Order than I did. It was the first EU Arc that felt more like Star Wars in the Fantasty elements of it to me.

 

It's called being human, Ex.

 

Well thats a good example of the difference - i.e. hero story. I dont think the fans wanting to know more will make it like Trek, because I mean its not like we havent had essential guides, history, etc, in the setting for ages now.

Just to explain why Trek isnt like that - its because it isnt a 'saga' i.e. an adventure or fantasy, and so there are no chosen ones, or special powers, just hard work, and human frailties.

 

I agree to some extent...but I also feel that there are radical reactions to that, that offer things far too "fantasttic" to be Star Wars. It's a delicate line to be sure. I think the biggest issue is we got wrapped up in the universe, when the universe shouldn't be the focus, but the characters.

Sci-fi vs. Fantasy

Action vs. Drama

All describe setting, situations...not the characters...and I think this is because the authors STINK at character development (well...a few get a pass). I think this was also evident in the prequels themselves, evidenced by George's lyrical tongue for dialogue.

And here is the funny part:

Take any Star Trek series...the longer it goes...the more STAR WARS it became...know why...cause the characters began to drive the story, not the worlds, aliens, technology or the like. That is where Star Trek starts...at that extreme. Will Star Wars ever get there? Unlikely...until someone rights a book or comic series on the Imperial Ship Enterprise...then I swear off reading forever.

 

[image=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bb/Sifl_and_Olly.jpg]

This is my United States of WHATEVER!