Badmovies.org Forum

The ultimate match up of nerdiness begins.  Counting all TV shows, movies, novels etc  what series do you prefer the most?  I obviously will go with Star Wars.  I never watched Dr. Who much, I did watch Star Trek TNG here and there but never cared for the series much.  Star Wars, although awful at times, wins my vote for being a huge part of my childhood.  

Doctor Who, of course!  While I do have a lot of love for Star Wars and Star Trek, I like Doctor Who a lot more. :cheers:

My definite favorite is "Doctor Who" although I like "Star Wars" as well, in no small part due to the nostalgia factor associated with it. I do like "Star Trek", especially the original series and several of the movies but prefer the other two franchises.

Star Wars, I like the story and feel engaged and connected to the characters.  Star Trek isn't bad but I never really got into it and always hated the Deus Ex Machina endings.  Dr. Who I used to watch back in the Tom Baker days but lost track with a move and couldn't ever find it on anywhere since that time. 

Star Wars hands down.  The charecters had more life and fun to them.  Star Trek has to many robots or robot wannabies as its charecters.  No one seems to have fun in the Star Trek Universe.

Star Trek for me.  Loved the original series with Kirk and Spock, and season 3 of Enterprise was really good as well.  Didn't like The Next Generation, Deep Space 9 or Voyager at all though.  The Wrath of Khan was a great movie, and a few of the other ones with the original cast were pretty entertaining too.

I loved the original Star Wars, and the second movie was pretty good.  Third one kind of petered out. 

For Dr. Who I mostly watched that back in the  Tom Baker and Peter Davison days.  Really enjoyed a lot of the episodes, but I was never into it enough to count it as a big favorite.

Star Wars.

I liked the old Star Trek TV series and some of the movies but nothing more beyond that.

Dr. Who never appealed to me. Some of my best friends are Dr. Who fanatics and their constant geeky drooling makes me avoid Dr. Who even more.

This was tough: I find all three to be 'tops' for me in three different categories, really. It was tough to choose between them.

Star Trek.  Largely an emotional choice: I hold TOS in greatest affection.  The first movie is still my favourite, on a purely emotional basis: "It's BACK!"  (Hated Wrath of Khan, btw...)  It's love.

Dr Who is a close second.  I am fond of the series also and I find I have more fun re-watching it than I do re-watching ST.  It remains interesting and amusing and bears re-visiting well.

Star Wars was great fun, still is, but in this company it has to come in third.  More like a favourite musical album.

Star Wars was a big part of my childhood, but when I look back at what I've really enjoyed of Star Wars, it amounts to a couple of movies and some toys.

Same with Star Trek. There's a lot more of it, and I was a huge fan at one time, but I can still sum up what I really liked as most of TOS, about a third of TNG, a few episodes each of the other shows, five or six movies, and a few books.

Doctor Who has over 30 years of TV shows that are watchable and often excellent, and a couple of entertaining movies. It's managed to create a substantial mythos and a lot of popular characters without becoming weighed down by them. It's explored a variety of styles, settings and characterizations over the years, and managed to retain what was good. And it's been revived very successfully, with a show that has stayed fairly true to the original. It's dealt with some heavy subjects, but has always managed to retain its playfulness and fun.

It comes down to a tough choice between Star Trek and Doctor Who, but I have to go with Doctor Who as the best of the three.

I had to go with STAR TREK.  Heck, I remember watching it on a TV with a rabbit ear antenna when I was a little kid.

We had it on uhf ch.41-so we had to adjust that weird round uhf antenna thingy in the back-and sometimes you had to wrap a wire coat hanger around that to get a half way descent picture!

I went with STAR TREK too...the ORIGINAL series!

(http://i93.photobucket.com/albums/l79/RCMerchant/StarTrek-1.jpg)

Dr. Who! Some episodes are just plain cheesy that it's hilarious!

Star Wars.  I read comics, manga, watch anime, love silly bad movies, read Harry Potter, enjoy sci-fi shows, wrote fan fiction, and several other things.  I don't watch Star Trek or Dr. Who, because I can't afford to be any geekier!

I love all three a great deal but my favourite is definitely Doctor Who, although I prefer the classic Doctors best. Star Trek is a very close second for me with Star Wars coming last here although I loved that as a kid too. In every case, I prefer the original series, trilogy, cast, whathaveyou. The Doctor seems to hold up to change better than most characters and at times, I even like the new version.

Star Wars for me.

Star Trek for my girl friend.

This is tricky.

The original Star Wars trilogy WAS a runaway winner here before Lucas cut it to pieces and tried his best to ruin it.  The THX remastered version is the best, and would win this vote.

However, Episode I was an abomination, Episode II was thin, and Episode III was pretty good but not good enough to make up for the butchering of the original trilogy and Episode I.

Star Trek is also tricky.  The original series was fun, and I like Next Gen also.  I don't have any interest in any of the other series though.  Movies 1, 2, 6, Generations (DIE SHATNER, DIE!!!!!), and First Contact were all pretty good.  6 is a personal favorite, and obviously the death of Kirk in Generations makes it an instant classic.  But major point deductions for Deep Space Nine and The Return of Spock.

I have never watched Doctor Who.

So, given all this, I have no idea how to vote.  Star Wars I guess, but under protest because Lucas is a dick.

Dr Who, obviously (but you'd have guessed that from my alias)

I had to go with the underdog, "Doctor Who!" I loved it because it was so different. There were elements of Hammer Horror in it. Ridley Scott was a big fan. You can see seeds of "Alien" in episodes like "Ark in Space," "Robots of Death" and "Horror of Fang Rock." You didn't have ridiculous expectations if Doctor Who was your hero. He wasn't super strong, didn't have great powers (except for a few tricks to keep him breathing) and was not a ladies man. He was just smart. Don't get me wrong. To this day, I think "Star Wars" is the greatest movie of all time, it changed my life at the tender age of six. "Star Trek" was great and I watched it all the time, but I never cared for the spin-offs. Shatner is so charismatic, I don't want to see anyone else in the captain's seat.

I loved Dr Who as a kid ~ Tom Baker, Peter Davison, Colin Baker and a tiny bit of Jon Pertwee as well.

I loved the original Star Wars chapters but I have never seen 1, 2 or 3 at all.

The original Star Trek series for me, the animated series and the first six movies. Nothing else.

Sorry, DS: I can't vote as I love them all.  :cheers:

It's all about the Star Wars. Theres a big nostalgia part of that, but I can still watch it whenever and still love it. However, I only ever watch the theatrical old versions (Greedo has never shot first) of the original trilogy, and I was never a fan of the new films. They seemed a bit heartless.

I enjoy watched the old series of Star Trek, but I never got into it properly, same as Doctor Who really.

I voted for "None of the Above" only becasue I couldn't pick a clear winner of the three. I like them all for different reasons.

I like Star Wars mostly for nostalgia reasons. It blew my little mind when it first came out and Empire and to a lesser extent Jedi were good follow-ups. But after that it went down hill.

 I like Star Trek also for nostalgia. I like some of the stories and characters better too. I think these were much more focused on than in Star Wars. However it seems like at some point during TNG they became more interested in protecting their franchise than innovative storytelling, which is what helped put them on the map in the first place.

Dr. Who keeps trucking along. There are some classic stories here, and some great characters. They do seem the more capable of change and mixing things up than Star Wars or Trek, as long as they stay within their comfortable template. The stories are usually less dynamic than the other choices though, and while there ae some really great ones there are also some dogs,. Also if you don't like any of the Doctors you're kind of stuck until a new one comes along.

I actually have to agree with your sentiment on Star Wars.  I can't tolerate the re-released versions are horrid and can't stand watching them.  It takes away from what I love about Star Wars.  I enjoy that first experience when I watched it and always will prefer the version I remember from my youth. 

Doctor Who for me.
There's just something so manic and imaginative about it.  :thumbup:

I love the classic Trek films but not the series.

Wars is fun but never left a lasting impact on me.

This should provide adequate sustenance for the Doctor Who marathon:

(http://24.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_l4ydogOd4R1qbnhllo1_500.jpg)

 :teddyr:

Dr. Who. Never liked the other two.

This got me thinking of why the three original "Star Wars" films are so much better the new ones. The first one was made by the skin of it's teeth, technology had to be created. You had a simple story with strong characters right down to R2D2, this beeping trash can actually had a personality. Lucas relied on the cuts and the music score to dictate the pace instead of the actors. It was a new way of doing things and worked so well. The reason "Empire" is thought to be the best is because it was story driven. Irving Kirshner was the perfect director for that one. The actors really got to sink their teeth into it. Plus that suprising "I am your father" revelation. "Jedi" was a nice way of just wrapping the whole thing up. A formula had been established and Lucas put in a few suprises. So even though "Jedi" isn't quite as good as the first two, it is very satisfying. "Phantom Menace" was just CGI and The begining of a boring back story. Jar Jar was suposed to be there for the kids to like but I think kids found him annoying. Yoda, The Ewoks, R2D2 and C3P0 didn't play directly to the kids, and that's why kids liked them. Kids are smarter than even George Lucas thinks. I see why "Clones" works better as a cartoon series than a movie, because the clone wars are really a separate story that plays into the overall mythos. Haden Christensen and Natalie Portman's performances are so wooden and plastic. They are not right for these parts. Ewen McGreggor on the other hand was born to play Obi-Wan, and is the glue that holds the preqeuals together. "Sith" is the best of the three, it had to be. But I still found Anakin a bit to weak, even as he was transforming into the monster of Darth Vader. I was dissapointed that Vader didn't beat up on Obi-Wan a little more. And The Emporer should have beaten Yoda in a battle. Instead he has to have Ankin help battle Mace. Overall it was a B-rated ending.

Exactly. And it helped that for at least the first movie, nobody fully grasped what they'd created until after Star Wars was released. It was not only a phenomenal hit, but a merchandising juggernaut. Kenner struggled to keep up with the unanticipated demand for the toys. Meco's disco version of the theme made it to number one the same summer, and John Williams score not only won an Oscar, but sold extremely well as a double album and took three Grammys. I don't think any film before Star Wars had success that transcended the movie medium to that degree.

And you can see how each of the first three movies takes more advantage of those other income streams than the last. For Star Wars, the merchandise was gravy. In Empire, we see more cool vehicles and more cool characters, and settings that lend themselves well to playsets. By Jedi, it was starting to get a little crazy, particularly the number of freaky looking aliens who serve no purpose other than to be seen. If you look back at the original Star Wars, you had Jawas, Wookies, Sand People, and a handful of funny-looking aliens in Mos Eisley who did serve a purpose. Every part of Jedi was throwing distinctive characters at us in bunches. Still, the movie came first.

Jump forward to 1999, when merchandising is a major concern for any blockbuster or family film, and a priority throughout development. Star Wars never stopped being a cash cow, so a new trilogy was bound to be engineered to utilize its full merchandising potential. I admit, the first time I saw Phantom Menace, I loved it just because it was a new Star Wars movie. It took a while for me to reach the conclusion that the good parts didn't really balance out what was bad. However, even in that bedazzled state, I could see every potential toy and video game in that movie, and recognize ships, people, funny-looking aliens, droids, vehicles and whole scenes that seemed to exist for the sole purpose of becoming merchandise. The story itself seemed less interested in advancing a plot than it was in taking us between all these things, and ultimately going a long way to travel a short distance. It was a bare-bones plot straining under the weight of all this other gimmicky stuff.

The second prequel, as basically the middle act of a three-act play, had even less going for it plot-wise. All it does is take the people and situations introduced in the first act and move them toward the events of the final act. Sith, as the third act, fared somewhat better, because it had the payoff. With the climax and denouement of the whole trilogy, it got the biggest and best share of the plot.

I think that's where the original Star Wars also worked better. Lucas didn't know for sure that he'd get another kick at the can. He might have had a series of stories in mind, but he could only really plan for one movie that would deliver the goods in one shot, and would stand on its own. Empire was very much a middle chapter, but still managed to work because as the first sequel, it needed to meet or exceed the first movie in order to ensure a third. When Lucas got to the prequels, he knew for sure there would be three, and the whole trilogy was mapped out from beginning to end as a three-act play, resulting in a very uneven distribution of plot. One movie accomplishes little other than to introduce everybody and set things in motion. The next just keeps things moving in the direction we knew they were going in. Pretty much the entire story happens in the third. Really, the prequels spread about enough plot for one and a half movies over three, such that two of them get less than half a movie's worth of plot.

There might have been some method to the madness, though. Since we knew what was eventually coming, audiences would assume that anything not delivered by the first movie would be in the next, and that would keep the anticipation and speculation going for three movies. The prequels might have been unevenly plotted to deliberately jerk us around and keep us interested. It might keep up publicity and ticket sales, but as an audience member, I find being jerked around more frustrating than entertaining.