Star Trek or Star Wars

which?


  • Total voters
    89
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

brokenflipflop

Veteran
Location
Worsley
I'm not sure about my sexuality now. Just shown the wife a picture of Servalan's nipples in a "what I got up to when I was 13" moment and she's worried I might fancy Marc Almond.
 

Maz

Guru
If you want sheer Sci-Fi piss-taking childish humour, you have to watch MST3K (Mystery Science Theatre 3000). Loads of vids on YouTube. Some of their stuff has me in stitches!
 

Yellow Fang

Legendary Member
Location
Reading
Douglas Adams did seem to have read a fair bit of science, as well as economics, philosophy and everything else. For example, the Heart of Gold's infinite improbability drive must have been inspired by quantum physics. That makes his books more science fiction than most sci-fi books, which don't seem to have any science in them at all.
 

threebikesmcginty

Corn Fed Hick...
Location
...on the slake
I always hoped so. I always hoped for a revival...

HitchHikers' Guide, BTW, isn't Sci-fi, it's a religion, and Douglas was our prophet...

I was in the world premier stage production of Hitch-Hikers (we did it for our school play). We wrote to Douglas and invited him along, he couldn't make it but he wrote us a very nice, and funny, letter.
 

Fab Foodie

hanging-on in quiet desperation ...
Location
Kirton, Devon.
Star Trek, the original series for me.
I'm not a big Sci-Fi fan, but I like the ones that pose and try to answers often quite big questions or pose and resolve some moral dilemma. I think the original Star-Trek tried to do just that. Even Red-Dwarf played with some interesting concepts. Star Wars really is flashy cowboys and Indians and only the first few made were any good.
 

yello

back and brave
Location
France
Servalan's magnificent nipples alone are worthy of giving it top spot.

You do realise you caused an outage on google's image server don't you? ;)

Gut reaction for me (having watched all the Star Wars movies not long ago) would have been Star Trek... but then I didn't know if we're talking Star Trek movies or TV or both. I don't think I've seen a Star Trek movie (which probably speaks volumes) but I do find the TV series has an unageing comic, camp quality to it. That over the silly muppet aliens of StarWars any day.
 

Flying_Monkey

Recyclist
Location
Odawa
Douglas Adams did seem to have read a fair bit of science, as well as economics, philosophy and everything else. For example, the Heart of Gold's infinite improbability drive must have been inspired by quantum physics. That makes his books more science fiction than most sci-fi books, which don't seem to have any science in them at all.

:rolleyes:

I'm really not trying to get into a serious argument on this thread, so don't take this the wrong way, but this really is a load of bollocks!

Douglas Adams was a a very funny man but he's very far from being some unique example of knowledge of science in SF. There is a basic difference between hard SF, which is very much based in 'actual science' (Greg Egan is a very good current example) - and many SF writers are (or were) actually scientists - and literary or soft SF which tends to be more along the lines of political social or psychological or poetic responses to accelerating technological and scientific progress (the J.G. Ballard 'inner space' end of things). And of course, everything in between (Kim Stanley Robinson being one example of a writer who can mix up politics, social speculation, all kinds of science and technology).

*there is also an awful lot of crap SF and sci-fi. But then, to paraphrase the SF writer Theodore Sturgeon, 90% of everything is crud.
 
Top Bottom