George Lucas Says Star Wars Stood On The Shoulders Of Star Trek

By Rappy
in The Media Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

Grand Master

Rappy Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Aside from both being science fiction and sharing the word ?Star? in their titles, Star Wars creator George Lucas feels that both franchises are closely related. As reported in Hero Complex, the documentary Trek Nation, which was released on DVD yesterday, includes George Lucas talking about why Star Wars ?stood on the shoulders? of Star Trek when it was first released in 1977. Lucas contends that Star Trek played a very important role in his space opera, and why the film was ultimately successful with general audiences around the world. Lucas says:

Star Trek softened up the entertainment arena so that Star Wars could come along and stand on its shoulders. There was an effective group of people in the beginning who accepted it..that it wasn?t that far out. For the studios it was way far out, [they said] ?what is this??, but there was a fanbase out there ? primarily the Star Trek fanbase ? who understood sci-fi, understood visual sci-fi, and was ready for something like this (Star Wars) to be in the feature arena.

In today?s pop culture landscape, it seems like the Star Wars and Star Trek rivalry is less important to audiences. These days, people can just be fans of everything, regardless of affiliation or genre. There are plenty of people who love both Marvel and DC Comics movies and comic books. This summer is a perfect example of that, with the success of both Iron Man 3 and Man of Steel. So why shouldn?t people be able to like both Star Trek and Star Wars? Why deny yourself the pleasure of both sci-fi properties? They?re both enjoyable, entertaining, and completely worth your time.

http://www.giantfreakinrobot.com/scifi/george-lucas-star-wars-stood-shoulders-star-trek.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

+virtorio MVC

Posted
  • MVC
Posted

Related? I don't think Star Wars is even "sci-fi", it's pure fantasy, with lasers instead of swords and arrows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

HawkMan

Posted
Posted

Yeah but that's the thing, if it's got lasers and stuff, it's SciFi, even if it's not realistic hard sci-fi. that's how the classifications work. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mentor

Spartan Erik

Posted
Posted

Related? I don't think Star Wars is even "sci-fi", it's pure fantasy, with lasers instead of swords and arrows.

 

By today's definition, you would be right.  However when sci-fi first started, pretty much anything in space/space-age was considered sci-fi at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

astropheed Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Original Star Wars > Star Trek TNG > Newer Star Trek Movies > Other Star Treks > New Star Wars.

 

This is my opinion, relax.

 

Edit: Other Star Treks: DSN > Original > Voyager > Enterprise (never watched any others. Are there others? This is how little my opinion matters lol.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Yusuf M. Veteran

Posted
  • Veteran
Posted

Related? I don't think Star Wars is even "sci-fi", it's pure fantasy, with lasers instead of swords and arrows.

Yeah but that's the thing, if it's got lasers and stuff, it's SciFi, even if it's not realistic hard sci-fi. that's how the classifications work. 

In a broad sense, it's science fiction. Specifically though, it's "science fantasy" because it has science fiction elements as well as fantasy elements (e.g. the Force). Star Trek, on the other hand, is pure science fiction. There's no magic that can't be explained with science or technology.

 

I'm a fan of both for different reasons but I like Star Trek a little more because it's more plausible. One thing that bothers me about Star Wars is the technology. Thousands of years can go by and it's still the same.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Mentor

thomastmc

Posted
Posted

Star Trek was to Sci-Fi what the Model T was to the automobile. It made Sci-Fi accessible to everyone, and raised the bar far beyond what any others had done since the genre was invented.

 

I understand the distinction some are making between Star Wars and Star Trek as far as being Sci-Fi, because in Star Wars there's a lot less science. It's mostly fantasy. Still, I would consider Star Wars to be Sci-Fi Fantasy.

 

Original Star Wars > Star Trek TNG > Newer Star Trek Movies > Other Star Treks > New Star Wars.

 

This is my opinion, relax.

 

Edit: Other Star Treks: DSN > Original > Voyager > Enterprise (never watched any others. Are there others? This is how little my opinion matters lol.)

 

Your opinion is stupid! I wish I could beam my fist into your stupid face! (j/k, faux outrage :) )

 

Seriously though, Voyager is the most underrated Star Trek series of them all. I recently (within the last year or so) watched the entire series over about 5 or 6 months. It's just about as good as TNG, IMHO. 

 

I could never get into DS9. They weren't doing too much "trekking" on that space station :)

 

TV:

TNG > Voyager > OS > Enterprise > DS9

 

Film:

Star Wars EP V > Wrath of Kahn > Star Wars EP IV/VI > Undiscovered Country

 

That said, I'm more of Trekkie than a Star Warrior :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grand Master

Motoko.

Posted
Posted

I love both universes but Star Trek had an easier journey of expanding its saga through tv series unlike Star Wars where movies don't give a lot of room for environment, character development, that sort of thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing