MOBomberFan Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Yep... no fantasy in Star Trek. Just pretend dilithium is actually a thing, and ignore the existence of the prophets or motherfucking Q, and it is all clearly rooted in science. Star Wars is pure fantasy. There is very little science in it and using sciencey sounding mumbo jumbo doesn't change that. Considering that virtually none of the technology in Star Trek actually exists, doesn't that make all of it 'sciencey sounding mumbo jumbo'? What actual science is there in Star Trek? I love sci-fi and fantasy alike. There certainly is a distinction. Star Trek is primarily Sci-Fi, no doubt, but it unabashedly borrows from fantasy on the regular. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Dont get me wrong, the lazy technobabble always sucks. But Star Trek is (or is supposed to be) our current humanity extrapolated 300-400 years into the future. Certainly, they seem to be more advanced than is reasonably possible but they also predicted a lot of things acurrately. If im not mistaken, a deflector dish is legitimate possible technology. Re-routing every sort of beam and lazer through it is somewhat far-fetched but the idea of the dish and it's intended purpose isnt. Speaking of Star Trek, the third of the Bad Robot films is entitled Star Trek Beyond and has Idris Elba and Sofia Boutella linked to roles. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Yep... no fantasy in Star Trek. Just pretend dilithium is actually a thing, and ignore the existence of the prophets or motherfucking Q, and it is all clearly rooted in science. Star Wars is pure fantasy. There is very little science in it and using sciencey sounding mumbo jumbo doesn't change that. Considering that virtually none of the technology in Star Trek actually exists, doesn't that make all of it 'sciencey sounding mumbo jumbo'? What actual science is there in Star Trek? I love sci-fi and fantasy alike. There certainly is a distinction. Star Trek is primarily Sci-Fi, no doubt, but it unabashedly borrows from fantasy on the regular. Many technology in Star Trek has a basis in reality or were predicted in Trek and eventually came true or are in development: Tractor Beams Communicators PADDS In-Ear Comms Voice Interface Transparent Alluminum Tricorders Hypo Spray Replicators Holodeck Transporters Matter-Antimatter power generation Impulse Engines Cloaking devices Phasers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOBomberFan Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Star Wars has tractors beams... and communicators, in ear comms, voice interface... all in that bald android guy in cloud city!... but more importantly it has light-sabers and princesses in gold bikinis. Checkmate sir. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Star Wars has tractors beams... and communicators, in ear comms, voice interface... all in that bald android guy in cloud city!... but more importantly it has light-sabers and princesses in gold bikinis. Checkmate sir. Well thats true. But Trek has green orion slave girls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jacquie Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Trek has always used real science as a basis for many of its premises. It's one of the reasons they had science advisors compared to George Lucas just making stuff up. Star Wars has tractors beams... and communicators, in ear comms, voice interface... all in that bald android guy in cloud city!... but more importantly it has light-sabers and princesses in gold bikinis. Checkmate sir. Obviously you've never seen an Orion Slave Girl. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Star Wars was influenced by Star Trek. Just as Paramount was influenced to make Star Trek into a film rather than a TV show after the success of A New Hope. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taynted_Fayth Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 (edited) dont wanna toot my own horn but I got to be ship captain of the enterprise in 1992, bigg jay was checkov or sulu lol toot toot Edited April 23, 2015 by Taynted_Fayth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Dont get me wrong, the lazy technobabble always sucks. But Star Trek is (or is supposed to be) our current humanity extrapolated 300-400 years into the future. Certainly, they seem to be more advanced than is reasonably possible but they also predicted a lot of things acurrately. If im not mistaken, a deflector dish is legitimate possible technology. Re-routing every sort of beam and lazer through it is somewhat far-fetched but the idea of the dish and it's intended purpose isnt. but that's not really the point, sure a lot of the stuff in Trek is theoretically possible, including warp fields... the fantasy part is how they're magicked up a limitless and infinite power source to run all these technologies that have insanely high energy demands. The idea behind Star Trek is that energy is limitless and available to everyone, but that's as magical and fantastical as saying there's a mystical force that surrounds everything and special people can manipulate it. The difference is really episodic tv series vs. blockbuster movie. One prioritizes exploring characters and the setting, the other prioritizes the adventure. My main point in all of this though, is trying to separate sci-fi and science fantasy is silly. Too much gets made of genres and people like to make them too specific. It's all just window dressing for the story and characters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Star Wars is fantasy because its not humans. As for Star Trek, an infinite energy source isnt so far-fetched actually. In the original series, there was a limit. They were powered by Dilithium Crystals that occasionally needed replacement. The plot of Star Trek IV included the fact their ship did not have enough power to return home but they were able to use Nuclear Power. A Nuclear Power source is legitimate as a supply. NASA has commented on Matter/AntiMatter as a power source also. Imagine taking a cell phone, iPad, Ferrari and Stealth Jet to 1850. Now imagine going ahead to 2300. Who's to say what will be what then? I certainly hope we have developed nearly unlimited power sources that can get us inter-planetary by then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taynted_Fayth Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 I wonder what kind and how much it took too run the death star... my moneys on diesel Logan007 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Star Wars is fantasy because its not humans. As for Star Trek, an infinite energy source isnt so far-fetched actually. In the original series, there was a limit. They were powered by Dilithium Crystals that occasionally needed replacement. The plot of Star Trek IV included the fact their ship did not have enough power to return home but they were able to use Nuclear Power. A Nuclear Power source is legitimate as a supply. NASA has commented on Matter/AntiMatter as a power source also. Imagine taking a cell phone, iPad, Ferrari and Stealth Jet to 1850. Now imagine going ahead to 2300. Who's to say what will be what then? I certainly hope we have developed nearly unlimited power sources that can get us inter-planetary by then. every power source has limits and yes I am aware that they talk about dilithium crystals, but the fact is that if you look at the theoretical work on warp fields, the magnitude of the power required for that, let alone all the other energy ---> matter technology they have it might as well just be magic. Let's not even get into the idea behind their transporters. That technology was implemented simply because it was too costly to film shuttle landing sequences every episode. It's all still magicked away, they just dress it up in sciency mumbo jumbo. The difference comes down to the format of each. In an hour long tv episode you can come up with an explanation for why the problem of the week can be solved, in a movie you don't have time to explain everything, you just have things that work because they work and explaining why takes away from the action and adventure and makes it more tedious. Episodic story telling can be more detail focussed by it's nature. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 Futurama is more science fiction than Star Trek Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 23, 2015 Report Share Posted April 23, 2015 It's still fiction. I mean we have to accept that. Thing with trek is theybhad some good writers in the 60's who created things that really had no real basis in science then but do now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrostyWinnipeg Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Lucas tried to make it a love story but he's such a bad writer. Anakin falls for no real reason. Falls for Padme? If so...Natalie Portman. That's all you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Lucas tried to make it a love story but he's such a bad writer. Anakin falls for no real reason. Falls for Padme? If so...Natalie Portman. That's all you need to know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
17to85 Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 Lucas tried to make it a love story but he's such a bad writer. Anakin falls for no real reason. Falls for Padme? If so...Natalie Portman. That's all you need to know. Falls to the dark side. Portman is gorgeous ofcourse. That was an odd relationship in the context she meets him when he's a little boy, he goes off to train/fight and next she sees him he's a teenager and she ends up in bed. For a leader of a planet she exercised pretty poor judgement. In fact, she was downright stupid in several respects. That's simply writing problems. Better writers could have made the relationship seem more natural and less forced. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taynted_Fayth Posted April 24, 2015 Report Share Posted April 24, 2015 depends how old they were trying to portray Portman/padme in phantom menace. if shes like 15 or 16 vs. anakins 8, then when he comes back say 16 or 17 himself shes only 24 or 25. the first galactic cougar. anakin does sweet talk her off the get go asking if shes an angel, then says hes done nothing but think of her thru out his absence. im sure padme lived a very lonely and sheltered life being in her political position, wouldnt be hard to think shed easily fall for a silver tongued horny jedi lol FrostyWinnipeg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 The fact they had zero chemistry didn't hell. Certainly wasn't the same natural love story that leia and han was Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taynted_Fayth Posted April 25, 2015 Report Share Posted April 25, 2015 is that the characters or actors fault? id say 8year old anakin made her blush pretty good with that angel line. ive tried it myself, but I think he used jedi mind tricks, cuz its never worked for me FrostyWinnipeg 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Unknown Poster Posted September 21, 2015 Report Share Posted September 21, 2015 Speculation is Disney will release the original trilogy on Blu Ray, unedited, unLucas'ed. Something I didnt realise though, FOX owns the original six films. They own A New Hope forever and the other five until May 2020. Must have been some deal between Lucas and FOX for FOX to own the films but Lucas maintains ownership of all the characters. Disney and FOX made a deal when they released the films digitally. They will have to strike another deal to release blu-rays. Shame Disney wont get all the films. Cant imagine FOX would ever part with A New Hope. And supposedly, FOX still plans to release Empire and Jedi in 3D...should have done so this summer. Also, Benicio Del Toro is cast in Star Wars VIII which is already filming and includes, potentially, a clean shaven Mark Hamil (spotted at a pub on location without his wizened old Jedi beard). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now