The Star Wars vs. Star Trek fandom rivalry is a myth.

[-Sentinel-]

I don't believe there is, or has ever been, any serious rivalry between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans. At least, not to the extent commonly claimed by mainstream pop culture. I think this purported rivalry was largely made up by people who observe geek culture in much the same way Jane Goodall observes chimps.

Fandom rivalries tend to happen mostly between very similar works, often with one side accusing the other of being a ripoff, of hogging the spotlight of a particular medium/network, etc. Star Trek and Star Wars are not similar enough for this kind of rivalry. Star Trek is sci-fi (both in terms of setting and themes), while Star Wars is fantasy set in space. The former is mostly on TV, the latter is mostly movies. None is considerably "geekier" than the others; while Star Wars is considered more mainstream, it also has a wealth of supplemental material (expanded universe and such) that can answer the needs of even the most obsessive fans.

Plenty of people like both franchises equally, and for different reasons. Plenty of people see them as complementary in wider geek culture and modern Western fiction. Plenty of people prefer one over the other... but I've never seen anyone get into a heated argument over this, or accuse someone of being a "fake geek" for their preferences.

I would argue there is more of a rivalry between the fans of the various Star Trek Series (e.g., Next Gen fans vs. DS9 fans) than there is between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans.

[Donnadogsoth]

I don't believe there is, or has ever been, any serious rivalry between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans. At least, not to the extent commonly claimed by mainstream pop culture. I think this purported rivalry was largely made up by people who observe geek culture in much the same way Jane Goodall observes chimps.

Fandom rivalries tend to happen mostly between very similar works, often with one side accusing the other of being a ripoff, of hogging the spotlight of a particular medium/network, etc. Star Trek and Star Wars are not similar enough for this kind of rivalry. Star Trek is sci-fi (both in terms of setting and themes), while Star Wars is fantasy set in space. The former is mostly on TV, the latter is mostly movies. None is considerably "geekier" than the others; while Star Wars is considered more mainstream, it also has a wealth of supplemental material (expanded universe and such) that can answer the needs of even the most obsessive fans.

Plenty of people like both franchises equally, and for different reasons. Plenty of people see them as complementary in wider geek culture and modern Western fiction. Plenty of people prefer one over the other... but I've never seen anyone get into a heated argument over this, or accuse someone of being a "fake geek" for their preferences.

I would argue there is more of a rivalry between the fans of the various Star Trek Series (e.g., Next Gen fans vs. DS9 fans) than there is between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans.

Based on your knowledge of said groups, if there were a rivalry, and they took it outside while wearing their full costumes and gear, who would win?

[Rodin]

Based on your knowledge of said groups, if there were a rivalry, and they took it outside while wearing their full costumes and gear, who would win?

DS9 fans clearly. The Next-gen fans would start waxing poetic about the beauty of the human spirit while the DS9 fans massacre them.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted -Sentinel-
I don't believe there is, or has ever been, any serious rivalry between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans.

o gawd. Clearly you’ve never met some of my friends from college. One of whom stopped talking to me for several years after he misunderstood a comment of mine about Star Wars, which he took as an insufferable insult against Star Trek.

Seriously, he stopped talking to me because he thought I'd claimed that Star Wars was superior to Star Trek. "I do not read your letters" was all I heard from him for several years.

You’ve also never met some of my recent gaming friends, including another diehard Star Trek fan who can’t stop talking about how much he hates Star Wars, primarily for reasons we can’t discuss here. And this is in the presence of our gaming host, who has Sith posters all over his gaming room—and who is too classy and polite to respond in kind, but who never, ever mentions Star Trek.

So yes, there is indeed some intense antipathy in certain quarters. I can’t speak to what mainstream pop culture might have said about it, but having had deep immersion in a broad swath of nerdage over the past several decades, I can guarantee you it exists.

[Darth Ultron]

I don't believe there is, or has ever been, any serious rivalry between Star Wars fans and Star Trek fans.

It is very real.

Star Wars aims low, for children and people that like more simple fiction. And Star Wars bends over backwards to be rated G, and now with Disney all the way down to like Y7.

Star Trek aims high, for educated people and people that like complex fiction. And, sure Star Trek only dances close to PG 13, but that is still light years better then G.

But sure, you can like both.

[TeChameleon]

It is very real.

Star Wars aims low, for children and people that like more simple fiction. And Star Wars bends over backwards to be rated G, and now with Disney all the way down to like Y7.

Star Trek aims high, for educated people and people that like complex fiction. And, sure Star Trek only dances close to PG 13, but that is still light years better then G.

But sure, you can like both.

I honestly have no opinion either way- waging borderline holy war in the name of entertainment preferences has always struck me as a bit silly- but I couldn't resist pointing out that these comments come from someone who actually took their screen name (well, part of it) from the Star Wars series

[Razade]

It is very real.

Star Wars aims low, for children and people that like more simple fiction. And Star Wars bends over backwards to be rated G, and now with Disney all the way down to like Y7.

Star Trek aims high, for educated people and people that like complex fiction. And, sure Star Trek only dances close to PG 13, but that is still light years better then G.

But sure, you can like both.

Oh Darth Ultron. Always trying to shoehorn in your weird "children/adult" nonsense.

The first three Star Wars movies existed before a rating system existed. All three however would be Rated PG-13 however.

Attack of the Clones was PG. Revenge of the Sith was PG-13. Force Awakens was PG 13.

[DavidSh]

The first three Star Wars movies existed before a rating system existed. All three however would be Rated PG-13 however.

Attack of the Clones was PG. Revenge of the Sith was PG-13. Force Awakens was PG 13.

MPAA rating system took effect 1968.
"Star Wars" was released in 1977.

[Razade]

MPAA rating system took effect 1968.
"Star Wars" was released in 1977.

Except the PG13 rating didn't exist until 1984. A year after Return of the Jedi. Not only that but the G, PG, R, X system didn't come into use until 1972. Before that they used a different code.

[BannedInSchool]

Neither one is Real Science Fiction.

[Razade]

Neither one is Real Science Fiction.

I think you'd have a hard time arguing that with most people.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Razade
Attack of the Clones was PG. Revenge of the Sith was PG-13. Force Awakens was PG 13.

And Rogue One was PG-13, under Disney ownership no less.

Back in the 80s, I read a feminist review of the first Star Wars movie, and she was absolutely gushing about how awesome it was. I don’t remember who the author was, but she wrote how she’d gone into it expecting to hate it, and ended up loving the cosmic-unity aspect of the Force.

Honestly, both Star Trek and Star Wars have the ability to appeal to both children and adults, depending on the quality of the particular movie or episode. They often appeal to different realms of emotion—curiosity and optimism, heroism and adventure—but there’s a great deal of overlap, and for better or worse the Trek reboot films are often faster and rompier than some Star Wars movies. No accident there.

But each franchise promotes its own brand of technological optimism, and in that respect they're not so different at all.

Originally Posted by Razade
Except the PG13 rating didn't exist until 1984. A year after Return of the Jedi.

And PG-13 was prompted, at least in part, by general outcry after a scene in Temple of Doom.

[Dienekes]

o gawd. Clearly you’ve never met some of my friends from college. One of whom stopped talking to me for several years after he misunderstood a comment of mine about Star Wars, which he took as an insufferable insult against Star Trek.

Seriously, he stopped talking to me because he thought I'd claimed that Star Wars was superior to Star Trek. "I do not read your letters" was all I heard from him for several years.

You’ve also never met some of my recent gaming friends, including another diehard Star Trek fan who can’t stop talking about how much he hates Star Wars, primarily for reasons we can’t discuss here. And this is in the presence of our gaming host, who has Sith posters all over his gaming room—and who is too classy and polite to respond in kind, but who never, ever mentions Star Trek.

So yes, there is indeed some intense antipathy in certain quarters. I can’t speak to what mainstream pop culture might have said about it, but having had deep immersion in a broad swath of nerdage over the past several decades, I can guarantee you it exists.

You need better friends, mate.

[Darth Ultron]

And Rogue One was PG-13, under Disney ownership no less.

Good example...like how all the heroes died from explosions and not more personal deaths (except the robot, but computer animated death does not count).

And PG-13 was prompted, at least in part, by general outcry after a scene in Temple of Doom.

Was it the rip the guys heart out of his chest? I bet it was.....

[Ramza00]

There is more of a rivalry of who would win in a fight Indiana Jones vs Spock

[Peelee]

Oh Darth Ultron. Always trying to shoehorn in your weird "children/adult" nonsense.

Well, that argument is clearly made for children. Imean, it's so obviously G-rated. No fowl language, no violence... why, your comment is practically puppies and rainbows! Now, for a comment that is complex and nuanced, you go to Darth Ultron. The way that he claims Star Wars movies bent over backwards to be G-rated even though they were all rated PG or higher, for instance, is clearly for the more scientifically-oriented adult mind to comprehend. Such nuance, such metaphor, it can only lend credence to his position.

Back in the 80s, I read a feminist review of the first Star Wars movie, and she was absolutely gushing about how awesome it was. I don’t remember who the author was, but she wrote how she’d gone into it expecting to hate it, and ended up loving the cosmic-unity aspect of the Force.

Was there any love for Leia being a badass space princess? Because Leia was a badass space princess.

[Reddish Mage]

I have to agree with the premise. There is no need, and no data I've seen, that fans one one show tend to dislike the other, or a need for one to define themselves as the other.

Also, I'm just guessing here, but is it possible that major sci-fi enthusiasts actually tend to like both?

There is, however, an infuriating tendency for non-sci-fi people to get the two mixed up, and the fact that these two franchises both have staunch followings naturally lead to media to make comparisons.

Finally, the Star Wars and Star Trek are at polar-ends in their take on Sci-Fi, its meaning, and purpose. This leads geeks to grab drinks or go to these online forums and compare the many differences on what makes these two systems tick.

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Peelee
Was there any love for Leia being a badass space princess?

You know, I don’t remember. I read the article a long time ago, in a college library far, far away, and the article itself was circa 1978-ish.

Mainly I remember that the writer admitted she’d gone into the movie expecting to hate it for glorifying the military-industrial complex, and instead she came out loving it for the empowering, universal aspects of the Force. She was an instant fangirl after one viewing.

[DataNinja]

I think, as with most things, it's just that the vocal minority gets the attention. There's no media interest in hearing about or popularizing "Yep, most people are still getting along well," after all.

[Reddish Mage]

You know there really is only one important distinction:

There's people who know what Star Trek and Star Wars is

And there's the people who can't tell the difference.

Geeks of all fandoms unite! Take up your phasers and lightsabers, beat down the doors of the ignorant masses and make them hear...that lightsabers are found in Star Wars and phasers in Star Trek.

Do not return until they promise to never use "Live long and prosper" as a goodbye after the conversation turns to Death Stars, I mean seriously.

[scalyfreak]

Geeks of all fandoms unite! Take up your phasers and lightsabers, beat down the doors of the ignorant masses and make them hear...that lightsabers are found in Star Wars and phasers in Star Trek.

I've always found that to be annoying. I want to know if the Borg are capable of adapting to lightsabers.

[Bavarian itP]

Geeks of all fandoms unite! Take up your phasers and lightsabers, beat down the doors of the ignorant masses and make them hear...that lightsabers are found in Star Wars and phasers in Star Trek.

Also:

Photon torpedoes - Star Trek
Proton torpedoes - Star Wars

[The New Bruceski]

"There has been a rivalry" and "there shouldn't have to be a rivalry" are two separate things, and both are true. Just because it's a stupid argument doesn't mean the Trek/Wars divide, the Cola Wars of the 90s, or Nintendo vs Sega didn't happen. I was there, I saw them all. (Fought on the side of Trek, Coke, and Nintendo, for the record, but like when old western TV shows like the Rifleman have former Civil War soldiers, I look back on what happened as a tragedy all around rather than claiming a true victor.)

[Rodin]

I think you'd have a hard time arguing that with most people.

Depends on your definition, I suppose. "Takes place in space, using technology we do not currently possess" is good enough for me, but there is the periodic argument that both lack the Science aspect. Star Wars is a classic medieval fantasy movie IIIIIINNNNN SPAAAAAAAACCCCCEEE, and everything in them can be explained away by magic. Star Trek at least tries to address speculative fiction themes, but buries it under a layer of technobabble that, again, is pretty much magic. Are you inverting the flow of tachyon particles...or casting Time Stop? It's much the same.

Again, for me the genre is too wide for that to be a meaningful distinction - it's just the separation between "soft" Sci-Fi and "hard" Sci-Fi. Trying to define either as "real" Sci-Fi or trying to say something isn't Sci-Fi because it lacks a defined story-telling framework is just pedantic quibbling. It is, however, an argument I've seen made, and quite often at that.

[Razade]

Depends on your definition, I suppose. "Takes place in space, using technology we do not currently possess" is good enough for me, but there is the periodic argument that both lack the Science aspect. Star Wars is a classic medieval fantasy movie IIIIIINNNNN SPAAAAAAAACCCCCEEE, and everything in them can be explained away by magic. Star Trek at least tries to address speculative fiction themes, but buries it under a layer of technobabble that, again, is pretty much magic. Are you inverting the flow of tachyon particles...or casting Time Stop? It's much the same.

Again, for me the genre is too wide for that to be a meaningful distinction - it's just the separation between "soft" Sci-Fi and "hard" Sci-Fi. Trying to define either as "real" Sci-Fi or trying to say something isn't Sci-Fi because it lacks a defined story-telling framework is just pedantic quibbling. It is, however, an argument I've seen made, and quite often at that.

Yeah, I think if you asked someone on the street about Hard or Soft Sci-Fi they're just going to shrug and move on. It's a distinction, like so many of these things, for nerds by nerds.

[Darth Ultron]

Well, that argument is clearly made for children. Imean, it's so obviously G-rated. No fowl language, no violence... why, your comment is practically puppies and rainbows! Now, for a comment that is complex and nuanced, you go to Darth Ultron. The way that he claims Star Wars movies bent over backwards to be G-rated even though they were all rated PG or higher, for instance, is clearly for the more scientifically-oriented adult mind to comprehend. Such nuance, such metaphor, it can only lend credence to his position.

Not like there is a big difference between g/pg for adults, it is all kids stuff. Sure it's important to parents, but that is about it.

The Rogue One ''boom'' deaths are a great example. It have characters ''just sort of die'' in ''flashes of light and smoke'' is very, very safe....and ''rated G''(note I don't not just mean The Rated G rating, but any rating with a G in it). I'm sure plenty of parents could say ''oh, no, they did not die, they just escaped to live happily ever after''. After all the big thing about ''rated G'' is no consciences. We don't see Mon Mothra back at Rebel Headquarters being told ''the crew of Rogue One were all killed '' and see her sad face, see her cry, have her say ''they won't be forgotten'' and so forth.

Compare to say Star Trek II and III and really highlight the deaths of David and Spock both.

[JNAProductions]

I don't think there's anything wrong with being friendly towards kids. You can still address mature themes without alienating kids, and still be an enjoyable work for everyone.

As for the rivalry, my dad loves both. I'm more of a Star Wars fan, but that's just because I haven't seen much Star Trek. They're both good.

[Peelee]

Not like there is a big difference between g/pg for adults, it is all kids stuff. Sure it's important to parents, but that is about it.

The Rogue One ''boom'' deaths are a great example. It have characters ''just sort of die'' in ''flashes of light and smoke'' is very, very safe....and ''rated G''(note I don't not just mean The Rated G rating, but any rating with a G in it). I'm sure plenty of parents could say ''oh, no, they did not die, they just escaped to live happily ever after''. After all the big thing about ''rated G'' is no consciences. We don't see Mon Mothra back at Rebel Headquarters being told ''the crew of Rogue One were all killed '' and see her sad face, see her cry, have her say ''they won't be forgotten'' and so forth.

Ah. So you see movies as Rated R, and Rated Not R. I see my comments about the nuance and complexity of your position were, if anything, underestimating the situation.

Also, we didn't see that happening because it wouldn't have added anything to the story. It wouldn't have fit with the pacing. It would have been out of place and more than a bit silly. Who is around to tell Mon Mothma the rebels died? Only the Tantive IV made it out, and a fairly big part of the original movie is that they were only able to contact a farm boy on a backwater desert planet.

Also, I find it somewhat disturbing that you don't see death as a consequence.

[tomandtish]

Compare to say Star Trek II and III and really highlight the deaths of David and Spock both.

Which (BTW) did not get a ratings change when they released the Director's cut in 2014. Stayed PG.

And yes, if you release a director's cut on video and want to put a rating on it, the MPAA looks it over. It's why so many "extended editions" and "director's cuts" blatantly advertise the "Unrated edition" and then you discover nothing significantly extra in there. They just didn't want to bother.

Incidentally, for a really good look at the rating system (and a lot of the problems it has), check out "This Film is not yet Rated", a documentary about the system and rating issues, especially with NC-17 designation. (Unfortunately it is no longer on Netflix streaming).

[Palanan]

Originally Posted by Razade
Yeah, I think if you asked someone on the street about Hard or Soft Sci-Fi they're just going to shrug and move on.

Or, as happened to me recently, they’ll shout that you’re a “f*****’ weirdo geek” and jam their finger into the sky in your general direction.

I think there’s a broad swath of the general public which is hostile to SF in general. I remember standing in front of an exhibit in a small museum, admiring poster-sized prints of vividly colored nebulas, when a twentyish girl dragged her boyfriend past and refused to let him stop. “Don’t look at that, it’s for science fiction freaks,” she insisted, loudly enough for everyone to hear. More than likely my presence as a geeky teenager inspired her hostility; she didn’t want to be associated with anything so uncool.

Unfortunately, I’ve seen that attitude a lot. At least in the U.S., a lot of people hate the very notion of expanding their minds, and despise the people who enjoy it as freaks and weirdos.