Difference between revisions of "Talk:2007-08 ASM Star Trek (1965-2005)"
Olaf Simons (Talk | contribs) (→Topic Comparison ST v SW) |
m |
||
| Line 14: | Line 14: | ||
:Sounds interesting (Starwars no fantasy??? with princesses and monsters and swords, I repeat swords, in a technically superior future???) | :Sounds interesting (Starwars no fantasy??? with princesses and monsters and swords, I repeat swords, in a technically superior future???) | ||
| + | |||
| + | Underline the "technical superior future" and you have the reason why I am still saying "at the very least no pure fantasy". And yes, yes I know that the definition is shaky. Unfortunately, they all are. --[[User:Nico Zorn|Nico Zorn]] 11:55, 31 August 2007 (CEST) | ||
Revision as of 11:55, 31 August 2007
Thought I'd give you a couple of link ideas as I go through my stuff on the net and find Star Trek mentioned. Cheers. Anna Auguscik 12:50, 24 June 2007 (CEST)
- Which is the definitive Star Trek?
- BBC Star Trek Cult Page
- More BBC Star Trek Results
- Guardian Article: Beam me up Scotty: Star Trek actor's ashes sent into space
Topic Comparison ST v SW
I think there could be an interesting comparison between the "general mindset" in Star Trek and Star Wars. While I know I always denied that Star Wars is Fantasy it... certainly has VERY strong elements of it, in contrast to ST. As you said: The Starfleet is militarily drilled while Luke et al rely on single heroes channelling an ominous FORCE (taught by grammatically challenged elders). I do not know yet how much time I will have left besides by Magisterarbeit (outline following soon...) but with interest twds. Fantasy I'd like to do something here maybe, possibly more twds. the beginning than the end. Main ideas I had: -[Main Point] Border of Fantasy and Science Fiction (Star Wars: Fantasy in a Science Fiction Disguise?) => What distinguishes ST from SF in this respect - What exactly makes SF "pure" SF? ... so far only basic ideas. --Nico Zorn 20:27, 30 August 2007 (CEST)
- Sounds interesting (Starwars no fantasy??? with princesses and monsters and swords, I repeat swords, in a technically superior future???)
Underline the "technical superior future" and you have the reason why I am still saying "at the very least no pure fantasy". And yes, yes I know that the definition is shaky. Unfortunately, they all are. --Nico Zorn 11:55, 31 August 2007 (CEST)
