Comments on: Great Links: Trek On The Lists, In A Rap, On A Car, and more

By: Closettrekker

Closettrekker — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 20:20:08 +0000

#72—I’m also in Dallas quite a bit, and New Orleans (I was born 30 miles from there) as well. Ironic…

By: Krik Semaj

Krik Semaj — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 16:08:22 +0000

I go to Dallas once or twice a year on business, and I have relatives in New Orleans. Maybe one day I can make it over there and we can resume our discussion..

By: Closettrekker

Closettrekker — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 15:34:01 +0000

#70—Haven’t been there in awhile, but New England is a beautiful place. If you ever find yourself in Houston, I would be glad to welcome you as well.

By: Krik Semaj

Krik Semaj — Sat, 14 Jun 2008 03:53:42 +0000

#67
We will have to agree to disagree. I would rather take up this friendly debate in person. If Star Wars were to reference how their technology worked in conversation in the movies likr Trek does then you might be more inclined to distance the comparison to LOTR. The difference is no electronic technology in Tolkiens world. Star Wars is closer to Trek than Rings – not just because it’s in space. Trek dealt in mystical powers all the time. Look at Vulcans and their “immortal souls” or Katra if you prefer..
Next time you are in New England let me know. We could debate this for a long time.

By: WannaBeatle

WannaBeatle — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:41:48 +0000

ooops, I guess it can’t show the video, so here’s the link-

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5PsnxDQvQpw

By: WannaBeatle

WannaBeatle — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 22:40:26 +0000

That rap reminds me a bit of my ex-fiance’s best friend’s vids he has on YT and every other site (I’m sure a lot of you have seen it)

By: Closettrekker

Closettrekker — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:51:46 +0000

#65—You definitely should invest a few dollars in the Director’s Edition. You’ll probably come away with a new appreciation for the film. IMO, it’s not just underrated as a Trek film, but as a science fiction story as well. There are also some good special features, most of which wasn’t anything new, but it is well put together and alot of fun.

#66—Once again, I think Star Wars is a pure fantasy film series. I find Star Trek to have far more sci-fi credibility. I can see where it is easier to define “Alien” as what you refer to as “hard sci-fi”, and I am in complete agreement, but I’ll never view Star Wars as being anything but fantasy. IMO, Star Wars is much more similar to LOTR than it is to Star Trek. Other than some similarity in the title and the fact that they are both set in space, SW has nothing in common with Trek. At least there are scientists on the fringe of credibility who believe that a variance of what Trek does with faster-than-light travel is theorectically possible, as well as those who believe that transporters could work in the future (albeit with simple and purely inanimate objects). As I said, there are elements of fantasy in Trek (like time-travel, although again there are “scientists” who disagree), but no significant elements of sci-fi in SW. Trek may be mostly sci-fi that borders on fantasy, but SW and LOTR are, to me, pretty much the same thing, and neither has anything to do with science fiction. Whether it is “hard” or “soft”, Star Trek is sci-fi, and Star Wars is pure fantasy. It appears we may have to agree to disagree, the opinions of “hard” sci-fi authors notwithstanding.

By: Krik Semaj

Krik Semaj — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 18:23:27 +0000

#62
Nope. It is still in the fantasy dept. Look I’m as big a Trek fan as anyone. I’m 48, so I’ve watched it for a good long time, and still do, but It is still in the same camp as Star Wars. – faster than light travel, faster than light communications among the 2 main commonalities. Star Wars has the force, and Trek wallows in time travel. These are all topics you won’t find in hard Sci FI, and I’m not just talking about novels. Movies as well. It’s why Alien is hard Sci Fi and Trek is not. The big difference is that Trek tries to explain their technology, and Star Wars doesn’t (other than the force – and that’s more like an ability that needs nurturing not technology) Trek does not do a good job with things like “warp” speed, and “sub space”. It’s nonsense & technobabble (but it makes for good entertainment). LOTR is strictly fantasy no science – just magic. Trek & Wars add some science to it and have a hybrid. I’ll admit Trek tries to stay closer to real science, but it still has plenty to keep it in the “fantasy” realm of Sci Fi. just at different ends of it. It’s not just me. Some of the great authors of Sci Fi – Clark, Asimov, Bradbury all liked Trek, but also never considered it hard Sci Fi.

By: cp

cp — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:43:29 +0000

63: I’m pretty sure the version I downloaded (shhhh) and rewatched just a few weeks ago didn’t have it, so presumably there’s /some/ version of the movie that doesn’t.

By: Closettrekker

Closettrekker — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 17:24:48 +0000

#63—I was just a pup in Trekland when the film was first released, and I certainly did not appreciate it the way I do now. I don’t remember specifically if I saw that scene in the theater or not. I know I enjoy the Director’s Edition each and every time I see it, and that scene is very powerful and explains alot about Spock’s evolution into the man we know now as being comfortable in his own half-human skin.