Trek Wars

TREK WARS

There's a brouhaha on YouTube over Star Trek vs Star Wars. Bill Shatner started it by calling 'Wars' “derivative.” Carrie Fisher responded with more heat than light, and others have waded in.
I don't usually get into these things, because A) nothing anyone says is likely to change anyone's mind, and B) they're just not all that interesting.
I was born at the beginning of WWII, and I grew up with science fiction. I saw all the TV shows, those great George Pal movies, and all the good and bad TV shows and movies that came along.
The great Ted Sturgeon once said, “90% of everything is crud,” which has come to be known in sci-fi circles as Sturgeon's Postulate. It was certainly true of the movies from the 50's. Some were scary, some were smart, but most were cheap and unmemorable to anyone over the age of 10.
So, here you have two actors both well beyond their glory days, sniping at each other over not much. I am sure both of them aren't happy about where their lives are now compared to Back Then. One is selling travel, one is selling a diet. But neither one of them is starving. So why does all this seem so desperate?
Who knows?
To get back to the argument, it's nearly pointless. Shatner saying 'Wars' is derivative is truly a case of the pot calling the kettle black. Look at everything that went before, especially shows like “Space Patrol” and “Tom Corbett, Space Cadet.” Any sci-fi show, movie, even a lot of books, all stand on the shoulders if what has gone before. They all had the blasters, the rocket ships, etc. Even the miniskirts, which were prominent in 'Patrol” and turned up again in “Forbidden Planet.” Data is merely Tweeky 7.0 or Robbie 10.09. As movie technology and real science eveolved, so did these shows.
Fisher's contention that 'Trek' “isn't in the same league” as 'Wars' is partially truey because of the quantum leap in technology in the intervening years and the fact that the films had bigger budgets. Later 'Trek' movies are arguably equal, and I think the later 'Wars' trilogies are not as good as the first. 'Clone Wars' sucks, IMHO.
I have several gripes with both series.
1. The uniforms. They're better in 'Wars' because they look more like real military dress uniforms, and they did at least provide a decent head cover – the caps, not the helmets. In fact, a lot of sci-fi shows with military milieus have neglected any kind of field service or dress head covering, which flies in the face of all military traditions. And Bill Theiss never seemed to think it worthwhile to look at real combat clothing before giving the Enterprise crew pajamas with no pockets and tops that kept riding up. When I was in the Air Force, our winter blue uniform had two jackets, the waist-length Ike jacket and the full-length blouse (it's what they call it, god knows why). I spent a lot f time doing the 'Trekker tug' in that Ike jacket. (The Brits got around that problem by making their jackets attach to their trousers.)
2. The weapons. Not so much a problem in these two cases as in many others. Despite the fact that real-life weapons technology constantly moves toward smaller and lighter, I have seen a lot of movies where the longarm was about the size of a keyboard and had to be worn with a sling in order to be maneuvered at all, A far cry from those neat little sub-guns in 'Stargate.' Those, by the way, are very real.
That aside, both series have made major contributions to the genre. They are distinct in their character and intention. “Wars' is more of a mythic piece of Good vs Evil, putting it closer to “The Lord of the Rings” than to “Battlestar Galactica,'” which. Like 'Trek' has more to do with Man's relationship to technology.
My favourite sci-fi show, though, is “Blake's 7,” a British low-budget job that rode in on the coattails of 'Dr. Who.' It was the creation of Terry Nation, who had invented the Daleks. It showed a Federation further in the future which had become corrupt and ruthless. Although there was never any textual reference, the insignia on the black uniforms was the Star Trek device turned on its side.