Star Trek vs Star Wars (Ultimate Nerd Showdown)

1.1 - Although you keep saying that Star Trek wins the "originality argument," I'm not sure you fully understand just how wrong that is. The success of Star Wars has nothing to do with Star Trek in the least bit. You see, Star Trek: The Original Series only ran from 1966 to 1969, a measly three season run. I really doubt that Fox would base their decision on green lighting Star Wars due to a cheesy tv show that ran for three years. Please let up on this "originality argument" when you fully know that science fiction has been a staple of literature for hundreds of years. If not, please refer to my run through in the second round. 1.2- Why should a series reinvent their original characters in order to captivate audiences? You are under the assumption that it's a necessary progression to get rid of original characters and introduce new ones in order for something to be integrated into one's psyche. You see, in my eyes, it's quite the opposite. I feel like a series should carry on with their original characters and build on the relationships internally. When a series continuously introduces new characters, it shows that the writers have run out of ideas on how to build these characters up which was proven in Deep Space Nine. These characters were not interesting to begin with and then further driven into the ground. I'm not sure we can see eye to eye on this point as I believe that the character development of loved characters is an admirable way to build a series, while you believe that new characters need to be continuously introduced to fuel your A.D.D-fueled cinema viewing. 1.3 - You say that my comeback regarding Marvel is "weak" but it completely illustrates this argument. You are arguing that Star Trek is better than Star Wars simply because it came before it, but when you try to illustrate this point, you bring up the argument of an alternate reality from Marvel instead of DC. DC's alternate reality came long before Marvel's and is fully fleshed out while Marvel just recently instated theirs to counter act that of DC's. In your eyes, these two comics' foray into alternate universes is interchangeable and if you truly cared for the originator then you'd realize that DC's was more important. Instead, you care less which came first. Why is it then that Star Trek breaking onto the scene before Star Wars is so important to you? Obviously you've proved that it doesn't matter which came first in other categories (alternate realities) but in this argument you've continuously brought up this point really trying to make everyone believe that Star Trek is better than Star Wars just for coming out first, a completely irrelevant point. 1.4- "When I say "art" I don't mean drawings. I mean that ethereal phenomena that causes us to see something deeper than the special effects or the tightly coiled buns on Carrie Fisher's head. The Star Wars cartoons hardly measure up, they were aimed at kids and had the depth of a fisher price swimming pool." Sure, when you say art you may mean one thing, but art is such a broad term that you can't cheapen one facet just because you deem an animated series unworthy. The fact is that this series was artistic and beautiful. You also say that the animated series is "aimed at kids" which is basically a rehash of what I had originally said. Please enlighten me as to how Star Trek can be deemed artistic in the least bit. While Star Wars has been reimagined from an artistic perspective in many different forms, such as cartoons, art pieces, songs, etc, Star Trek continues to be reimagined as tv shows and movies. Since you brought this point up, please point out the artistic merits of Star Trek. 1.5 - "Further, if this is Star Wars' last best hope at reinvention, getting a 2 season canceled series on a kid's channel, then I think you have sealed the win for Star Trek." Sure, this cancellation after two seasons is no comparison to the Original Series being canceled after three seasons, The Animated Series after two seasons or Star Trek: Enterprise after four seasons. 2.1- All this point was aiming to do was counteract your point that Star Wars doesn't relate to our earthly existence while Star Trek does. Whether you agree with the way it does or not is irrelevant. 2.1.1- For thousands of years, the Jedi Order taught the importance of keeping the peace while battling the ever-rising threat of the Sith. Revenge of the Sith is the culmination of this battle and the instance in which the Jedi Order as it stood for thousands of years, falls to the Sith. Of course Obi-Wan did what he did, he just saw the destruction of the one institution he believed in beyond a doubt and the betrayal of Senator Palpatine as he called Order 66 to action effectively killing every comrade he had ever had. For the first time in his life, Obi-Wan thought instinctively without meditating with the Force flowing within him. This point actually proves that he did not think in absolutes, it's safe to say that the Dark Side was flowing within him as he left his past-Padawan learner to die. This isn't the first time the series showcased this either, Mace Windu was known to deal in the Dark Side which is why his saber was Purple and at the beginning of Return of the Jedi, Luke is seen in black garb, a true indicator of the Dark Side as he had been having an internal struggle after the events of Shadows of the Empire and the carbon freezing of his friend. 3.1- Of course "IT" isn't going to be as scary as an adult as it was when you were a 9 year old kid, but it still leaves a lasting impression. That's the same with Star Wars and Star Trek, these series impact the psyche of those that have watched them as children, a lasting impression that has fueled this very debate we are having. 1.1- It is safe to say that Anakin Skywalker and Darth Vader are two completely different characters in the Star Wars saga. Skywalker was a weak-minded Jedi that was manipulated by the Emperor and caused to die on the lava-filled planet of Mustafar at the end of Revenge of the Sith. When the Emperor found him and put him in the iconic suit, the humanity of Skywalker was dead and all that lived was Darth Vader. 2.1- I haven't abandoned Darth Vader as the most highlighted villain in the Star Wars saga, I was merely attempting to showcase the immense talent that makes up the universe as you have not truly given credit while trying to flaunt those of the Star Trek universe. Let's face it, the villains of Star Wars are more memorable, colorful and interesting than those of Star Trek. 3.1- You didn't talk about the merits of 7 of 9 as a character; instead you tried to avert the attention to Whoopi and the cast of Star Wars. Please, can you enlighten me as to why 7 of 9 is a valuable character to the Star Trek universe besides being eye candy as you initially brought it up as? And before you bring up Slave Leia, she was a Princess immensely important to the overarching story long before the gold bikini. 3.2.2- Millenium Falcon completed the Kessel Run in 12 parsecs, this is fact. It has speed on its side as well as a smaller infrastructure. If Han and Chewie, or Lando depending on who was piloting, sealed the cockpit blocking anyone from beaming onboard while effectively destroying the Enterprise with auto-pilot gun turrets, modified quad laser cannons, concussion missles and lightning guns. There would be no chance of locking on to such a small ship while outmaneuvering the Enterprise and eventually all systems would shut down. So yes, the Falcon is a better ship inside and out.