William Shatner On Star Trek Vs Star Wars

Star Trek Star Wars

Star Trek Vs Star Wars has always been a hot topic of debate in the nerd world, I honestly don’t think there is any comparison between the two. William Shatner voices his opinion on the matter as well and he says they are completely different too. I just don’t understand where people get that Star Trek and Star Wars are similar in any way. Read below at what Shatner had to say on the matter.

Shatner (Captured from Video):

“Star Trek had relationships and conflict among the relationship as well as stories that involved humanity. Star Wars was special effects it was ILM (Industrial Lights and Magic) at its best. First of all Star Wars is derivitave of Star Trek by 10, 15, 20 years whatever it was. DERIVATIVE! The only thing they had was… Our special effects as good as they were (laughs). God knows what those actors looked like in reality with all those special effects. I mean theres no telling what ILM did to those faces and those hairdos, they may have walked around with nothing on and they got clothed and made up by ILM. We don’t know! There’s no question that we puny humans on Star Trek facing that cold camera everyday were exposed to a far greater degree. Tight fitting clothes after lunch as well. There is a BIG difference between Star Wars and Star Trek and with JJ. Abrams piling on the special effects now uh I would say that there is a resurgence of Star Trek in a big movie frame that supersedes Star Wars. On EVERY level! Now look at that, I’ve just discovered something, not only was the television show more humane and dealt with more human principals than Star Wars but now Star Trek has even more special effects than Star Wars. So Star Wars has nothing to expand on. Princess Leia is as beautiful as she was and as wonderful an actress as she is cant compare to the marvelous heroines that we had on Star Trek. I’m saying, I’m not saying that the pretty girls and they were pretty on Star Wars absolutely I’m not saying that Star Trek is the only thing that its better than Star Wars I’m saying that the stories were better. The perfect union between Star Trek and Star Wars would be if Captain Kirk and Princess Leia were to ran off together pursued by Chewbakka.

There you have it, straight from the horses mouth. There really is no comparison between Star Trek and Star Wars, they are different and that’s how it should be. Let me know your opinion in the comments below after you watch the video interview.

Learn more the author of this post:

I was a Computer and Information Technology student at Purdue University. I have always wanted my own website and have been fascinated with technology my entire life. So here I am, what's next?
  • Alfredo Jara

    What, no trolling yet? But I guess that taking Star Wars and Star Trek and never compare is just fair. Star Wars presented the same old hero-in-search-of-redemption plot, in a space opera. Star Trek goes with the let’s-deal-with-different-civilization-using-our-own-in-comparison plot, which is also good. Both have merits, and should never be taken down. BTW, 1st post?

  • Ed Lipp Jr

    Pretty retarded IMHO.  What do they have in common?  Ummm, besides the space age/space travel/space ships?  Besides aliens?  Besides good vs. bad?  Shatner is and always has been an idiot but I still like his role as Kirk.  He talks about ILM doing their hair!  C’mon – his entire quote is just rambling nonsense.  Both of these iconic works gave us a great adventure in space – how can they NOT be compared?  Some people like one or the other – I’m partial to SW but I love me some Star Trek too!

  • Julian Field

    I love them both for different reasons. But I grew up.
    Star Wars for the heroic Space Opera of Good vs Evil is the essence of our childish need to be excited by heroes. When George put more effects in, he actually appealed to more children.
    Star Trek was (and still is) the epitome of the dream that human beings can strive to be better. That in our near future, we can explore more of our universe in person. We can let the experience of achieving this ability, and the act of living it out from there shape us into a more understanding and benevolent society toward ourselves and possible others.
    I hate to quote, but here it is. “When I was a child, I spoke as a child, I understood as a child, I
    thought as a child: but when I became a man, I put away childish things.”
    Star Trek made us truly dream about what was possible here and in the near future; not in some galaxy far, far away …

  • Anonymous

    The full interview without cuts has got to be fucking hilarious.

  • Ross Nicholson

    Hello, I am the original co-creator of Star Wars.  It was developed out of my favorite juvenile science fiction book, a half-written 1963 novella with title:  The Star War.  I invented the Force, the Jedi, the Training (through which I put Stevie Spielberg in 1972, along with Ann Richards, and Bill and Hillary Clinton).  I provided the plots for episodes I, II, and III.  IV was the book with additions, V and VI were written by somebody else.  Naturally, since Hillary Clinton’s dad was a professional drill sergeant, Hillary Clinton modeled for Princess Lea Organa of Aulderan. (Steve’s momma’s maiden name was Leah Aulder, by the way).  Yes, that character is Hillary Rodham at twenty-four, a Yale Law scholar summa cum laude valedictorian, bound and determined to conquer the galaxy, set it free, or die trying.  Bill Clinton modeled for Han Solo (and Indiana Jones/Arkansas Bob-whip, hat, both vintage Clinton behind enemy lines in Russia blowing up ammo trains).
    I’d like to answer Shatner.  Incidentally, can you guess the derivation of the name Shat ner?  Yes, I’ll just bet you can.  Yes, we loved Star Trek, but ours was a different galaxy and a different ancient time. Next, ours was a struggle against the power, vs. Trek’s paean for ultimate state power.  We made Star Wars, like we made Indiana Jones, to lift people up and out of the onerous and odorous doldrums that was the racist stink state of Texas in 1972.  Ours was a struggle to avoid suffocation of our democracy against republican gangs, led by none other than George W. Bush.  (See my memoir, Hillary’s Angel on Amazon:  ASIN: B002TSB0ZU)  
    It was  only with extreme difficulty that George W. Bush was turned away from the Dark Side.  We had him integrate the republican party, elevate those whose lives he had already destroyed, and change the future from one of war, hatred, bigotry, meanness, unfairness, poverty, and intolerance to this future which we all now enjoy.

    Star Trek, opened new vistas and those who explore will always receive it’s morality plays with joy.  I composed the film Galaxy Quest as a tribute to the TV episodes of Star Trek, acknowledging the debt we still owe to those going where no man has gone before.
    Oh, and since I modeled for O. B. Juan Kinobe as well as Yo! DUH!!, AND E.T., I have absolute power. So be good and don’t bother me with chit chat and naybobbingen.

  • Jose R. Perez

    Star Trek is far superior than Star Wars…. I mean, I thought this was known!

  • Ross Nicholson

    Comment to post

  • Pingback: NEWS LINKS: The White House’s ‘urgent’ jobs bill isn’t written yet « David McElroy()

  • Anonymous

    Star Trek was TV Star Wars was BIG SCREEN 4- D….perhaps Captain Kirk inspired George Lucas…now that would be a great interview! Host the two of them and the makers of Star Trek to discover what inspired them all, and if they inspired each other!

  • Bill Checkers

    Here is the problem with both ST and SW:  If and when humans venture far into space, we may come in contact with other life.  If we do, and knowing our human nature and our history, in all likelihood WE will be the ones doing evil, and not the other way around.  Put a spacesuit on Dick Cheney and you get the picture….  

    Conquer the Klingons and turn them into slaves and domestic servants, and then you would have a reality show!

  • Scott Hayworth

    Well said!

  • Steve

    What’s with all the trekkies lately?  Is someone slacking on their seasonal quota?  If you don’t keep that population culled then soon we’ll be up to our armpits in the little fascist tribbles.

    It’s probably time to posse up the tolkiens, jedi and browncoats and decimate the trekkies again.

  • Alain De Botty

    They’re totally different. Star Wars has Jabba the Hutt, Star Trek has Shatner.

  • barry99705

    You never see Kirk french kiss his sister.  Everything else with breasts, or without, but not his sister.

  • Anonymous

    Hey man, pass that pan-galactic space-bong over here. I wanna be as high as you are!

  • Anonymous

    Unless SW makes more movies and spin offs like ST then it will be loss on the next generation.

  • SebSpot

    I’m pretty sure he’s insane.  The “ours is older so it’s better” argument? Really Shatner?

  • Pingback: William Shatner On Star Trek Vs Star Wars | TekGoblin « The Greg Jones Blog()

  • Alan Bloomberg

    neither has the pan-galatic gargle blaster….so 😀

  • Alexsander Troutnoodler

    More human principals?  Marvelous heroins? 

    *sigh*  At least you used spell-check.

  • Daniel

    Is he crushing on Carrie Fisher??

  • Larry Hicks

    Star Wars being “derivative”? Don’t make me spew.  I would expect that kind of tripe from an “actor” like Shatner, but even HE should have done a little research.  Lucas was writing the material for Star Wars before the first papier-mache rock was filmed for that series.  The heroines on Star Trek were, with a very few exceptions (like the brilliant Diana Muldaur), purely T & A.  Leia, by contrast, was a gutsy broad who was anything BUT a cream-filled damsel in distress.  The two worlds were entirely different from each other.  Trying to compare or even contrast the two in any meaningful or relevant way is purest folly. 

  • bruce

    “Star Trek” was more like “Wagon Train”, with its emphasis on stories describing the human condition, and its stories’ basic adherence to the laws of physics.  “Star Wars” was more like “Lost in Space”, with its emphasis placed on entertaining juveniles with special effects monsters, and its stories’ ignorance of the laws of physics.

  • felipe g

    Star Wars was just shoot em bang bang drivel. If if it wasn’t for the FX the movie would have tanked.

  • Larry Hicks

    After all, Star Wars developed universal mystical themes drawn from archetypical human collective mythologies whereas Star Trek’s series was distinctly 1960’s with miniskirts, cheesecake for Kirk to smooch, and eyelash-batting lacquered beehive hairdos.  The movies did a better job of broadening the horizon philosophically, but still never reached the depths of character development and universal sweep of Star Wars.  Star Wars was before CGI, not to mention it was John Dykstra who did the effects.  Lastly, I did LOVE the 3 Star Trek series, and the movies (with the exception of number 5 which I found inutterably silly in idea and execution), and I’ve had fun watching the TNG cast take over for the Classic Cast in the movies.    

  • Anonymous

    Honestly Star Trek and Star Wars are 2 different worlds Star Trek was a relistic side of the human future why Star Wars was another galaxy far far away you cannot compare them both were great I however disagree with Shatner even though I have been a fan of his since I was a kid Star Wars did deal with the human side like everything in life we make our choices for good or bad that is a theme we have seen over and over although I give Star Trek being an orginal story somewhat borrowed from military and human cultures in a way Lucas did give us an alternate allstar version of all religions and cultures and politics with Star Wars so you can say both have the greats about them then again folks they are just movies Off The Couch Engage and Make It Soooooooo May The Shazbot Be With You

  • jong

    Star Trek made people think and it shows.  Many of that shows (movies) tech is coming to reality now.  Star Wars was made for the non-thinking person for entertainment period.  It is basically a rip off of Dune which actually had much more reality going for it look at the Science and see the truth of the matter .

  • jong

    The Science of Star Trek was a head of its time but real on the other hand Star Wars was full of it.  Lets take a look the Death Star was a Dyson sphere for all practical purposes it was handled unrealisticly (I can go in to a three hour discussion but the science simply was not there) in the Next Generation finding Scottie on the wrecked ship was scienctifically correct (infinte loop with hopfully little or no degeneration of signal) but the sphere was done correctly according to Freemans theorm unlike star wars which is pure fantasy and therefore simple entertainment.

  • Eloy

    i like the star wars mythology. star trek has none. there is no back stories at all to star trek. two diff ideas. star trek has earth to evolve from, star wars has no earth. coruscant rocks better than earth. then you have endor for earth like things.weapons and ships better in star wars. yet Lucas’s company makes star trek happen so who is the real winner.

  • Gavain M

    This has to be one of the dumbest conversations a person can have.  Just because they both have “Star” in the title and are set in space they get compared.  It would be one thing if they were both telling the same kind of story or something, but comparing these two is like comparing Saving Private Ryan to Ryan’s Hope.  Star Trek was conceived as a television serial, and was created to be just that.  That’s why it has struggled with translation to film … not that it has been all good or all bad, but the story is not built for that medium.  Star Wars was only intended to be a single movie.  Lucas hit a nerve and ended up making 5 more.  They were built around a more limited story line and geared for film.  The two are both done well and each is entertaining in its own way.  I like each for different reasons, but prefer one over the other.  Which one or why is irrelevant, because it’s just not that important.

  • Gavain M

    The more pertinent conversation (for fans … nobody else cares) would be to compare the individual films/shows from each property to other films/shows from that same family.  I have never cared about comparing them to each other.  It just doesn’t make sense.  Sure I like one over the other, but it’s not because the other is worse than the one I prefer … it’s because I connected more with one than the other.  I still like both.  I don’t question someone’s intelligence because they prefer one over the other.  Who cares?  I question why people like Lady Gaga, but not Star Wars or Star Trek.

  • Morpeth

    “…depths of character development and universal sweep of Star Wars” You’re kidding right? character development in Star Wars? SW has the most cliched, two dimensional characters that any sci-fi series/film has ever seen

  • Greg

    If you’re calling the Death Star (which was, in essence, a giant mobile weapon) “a Dyson sphere for all practical purposes,” then maybe you should read up more on what a Dyson Sphere is, what it’s purpose is, and how it functions.
    Also, not sure how that relates to Larry’s post . . .

  • Greg

    Actually, Star Wars is a lot more relevent now, with the re-release of the movies on Bluray and the Clone Wars series on Cartoon Network

  • Chris Neal

    Thats the smartest thing ive read on here yet, we will just give them a blanket so they can keep warm, and give them smallpox.

  • Craig Stull

    I agree with Shatner. Star Trek is much more interesting to me than Star Wars. The characters are more compelling as are the storylines. And now that the new Star Trek movie series is under way I think it will leave Star Wars in the dust, with all due respect to Star Wars. Star Trek rules!!

  • DV

    Trek is more defined because of all the tv episodes. At first glance, it is awesome space fights versus storylines. Yes, the special bond between Kirk, Spock and McCoy is very well defined and the movies only reinforce that. But I would also say that the relationships surrounding Anakin/Vader are defined over the course of all six episodes with episode 3 really making a deeper emotional storyline with Obi Wan and Anakin. I think trying to compare and rank one versus the other is a bad idea. Both franchises are the strongest of their genre and only strengthen each other.

  • VirginiaH

    If, you need to have the differences between a show that in a sense was mythology (Star Wars) to a weekly show that was more or less in the words of its creator “Wagon Train to the stars (or set in the stars) (Star Trek), the dileniation would be that one was science based telling of empire building (Star Trek) while the other was fantasy telling of a two generation novel of growth (Star Wars). Neither is better than the other, both were greatly enjoyable and in their own way timeless.

  • Pingback: watch for falling bears()

  • Alan Funkle

    I love star trek and star wars, if your nerdy your generaly into both so i dont get the fuss that thier fans are at odds with eachother. abrams completely missed the point with his movie reboot as do new reboot fanboys why star trek was great, it had human interest stories with special effects, while star wars was for action sci fi buffs.

    J.J. In some ways totaly lamefied star trek and largely star treks demise tv ratings wise was when they removed the terrific horner/goldsmith score and watered it down (with goldsmith messing up his own score with star trek 5) and trying to turn it into action star trek, especialy
    with enterprise. action doesnt make people care about characters, star trek is like a family
    soap opera with a scifi setting much like star wars is, the crew of the enterprise is like a family
    of multicultural people in space, star wars is a disfunctional family with luke, leah and darth vader.

    I love abrams work in lost, i havent seen one abrams movie ive liked (also hate mission impossible for removing the terrific score of 1 and the original series). music really does make
    a movie and i wish that movies would return to using cliffhangers and properly pacing score to emotionaly involve audiences wich movies did superbly in the 80s especialy (70s-80s heyday of american cenima) instead of spending 250 million on visual effects.

    the other change i would like to see is way less bickering with kirk, spock and bones and more half and half, that relationship was always fun to watch on the tv show as kirk and spock and bones would bicker but you could tell they had a deep friendship, unlike pine who plays kirk angry, shater was terrific as kirk for being terrificly friendly and charming to the crew and then being intense in action scenes, unlike han solo who’s a loner and action oriented and quipping with leah and 3PO. thiers distinct differences between genre’s. (and for gods sake i hope they return to the space final frontier opening gaff in the beginning, one of the cool things about st and tng). I wish franchises would stop dropping music, they wont tank and stop changing things to the point of you might as well have a new movie, as  well as the straight lasers in star trek made it unique to other scifi shows. but thats just me. abrams movie was largely a revenge action fest with kirk and spock acting contrary to rodenberries humanistic principles, derailing from those principles is why star trek started to suck. nobodys gonna care about the characters if thier angry emo young people.

    right on mr. shatner. im with you man. (and can we have fat and old people in space j.j.? , just saying if your going to be realistic thiers gotta be fat and old people in the future lol).

  • Alan Funkle

    sorry thats distinct differences between franchises. lol.

  • FJW

    I never liked Star Wars as much as Star Trek. Star Wars became this action hero thing for little kids – there was never any philosophy that made you think about the world you live in or dream of boldly going where no one has gone before. It was just kind of an action/drama/romance set in space. Star Trek was certianly dramatic, but as Bill Shatner said there were complicated relationships and the like which made it very interesting. Star Wars was just simple like a fairy tale. And I never liked fairy tales.

  • David

    Absolutely there is no comparison. I’ve always love Star Trek and never liked Star Wars. It’s apples and oranges, day and night. Can’t wait for the next Star Trek movie!

  • Kevin Richard Given

    I love ’em both!  Which makes me the ultimate geek!

  • Melanie Deschamphelaere

    If it were not for Star Trek, Star Wars may never had happened. I remember in 1978, I was ‘security’ for  Oddessy One in Milwaukee, WI. I had to pick up George and Walter at the airport. I had made a jean jumpsuit outfit (actually it looked a lot like what they finally did in ENTERPRISE) where I had taken the now outlawed UPF symbol and cruel-worked it onto my sleeve, made my ship, the USS Endurance, and a simlar emblem on my lapel. I had two small buttons on my purse, One said,” Han Solo”, the other said, “It’s worse.” Walter looked at me, beyond the hours of work I did on my subtle yet totally ‘in honor of ‘ Star Trek uniform, and said…”TRAITOR!’ I’m not sure how that could classify, as ILM did the CGI for SNORE…I mean STMP.

  • Anonymous

    That should be ‘heroines’ not ‘heroins’.

  • Anonymous

    What amazes me is how some pussfied guys on this board classify a gutsy, smart mouthed broad as something they admire? They were probably raised by loud mouthed single mommies as well.

  • Anonymous

    You need to get a life.

  • Anonymous

    So if there are other lifeforms that automatically makes them sinless? Like duhhhhh

  • Larry Hicks

    Oh God what ignorance! My Mom was a dutiful Christian wife, but she was also a teacher and mother. She and I don’t see eye to eye about a lot of things, but we treat each other with a mutual respect. She and i have lived and worked in several countries and states, and have learned from each other, though we do not give an inch on our convictions. I use my real face and name, unlike those little “intellects” who like to sling peanuts from the monkeys’ gallery.

  • Larry Hicks

    Perhaps if you’re too young to have done advanced studies in Jungian archetypes and related mythological tie-ins it might seem so. But to anyone who has done in-depth psych-anthro studies and the common links between seemingly unrelated world mythologies the similarities and how they were used is fairly profound

  • Larry Hicks

    The “science” of Star Trek the original series was just silly. Remember I am several decades older and watched the original broadcasts and have been involved in several sciences since then. There is no “science” in Star Wars because it’s a story about universal themes, first causes, and primal forces. The overall story covers ten thousand years and more, and follows a single cycle of Light becoming Dark briefly, then spasming into Light again. It is a slice of either the Light moving deeply to the Dark, or vica-versa. You quote from TNG as though it was some sort of “science manual”. There’s no such thing as a “Dyson Sphere”, however much the manufacturer paid the producers to pretend otherwise. The notion of a “loop” is just childish if you know the first thing about particle physics. Get over it.

  • Larry Hicks

    Didn’t mean to offend any Trekkies as I count myself in that group.  I like Star Trek for its humanity (Vulcans, Romulans, and Klingons notwithstanding), and Star Wars for its timeless roots in psycho-mythology.  The two simply cannot be compared.  The only common ground (no pun intended) is that they’re set in outer space.  And George Lucas was working up the material for Star Wars back in the early 1960’s, long before Star Trek was conceived by the Great Bird of the Galaxy.  Each is the top of its game in its own niche.

  • modsuperstar

    He makes a good point in that Star Trek definitely preceded Star Wars, and for that reason would be somewhat derivative of it, since Lucas sampled from so many previous works and themes to craft Star Wars. I do find it funny that Shatner uses the newest Star Trek as an example, where they essentially they layered a big heaping helping of Star Wars on top of Star Trek to make the franchise relevant again.  I loved the latest Star Trek movie and feel it’s the first timeless Trek movie, in the same way that Star Wars movies are timeless.

  • Blair Page

    Star Trek > Star Wars … it is comparable in that aspect lol

  • Pingback: Get Facebook Likes()

  • Pingback: gurtredlop()

  • Pingback: เอเชีย()

  • Pingback: job hunting while pregnant()

  • Pingback: cost efficient home heaters()

  • Pingback: lottery video()

  • Pingback: Free Bible Download()

  • Pingback: garage doors()

  • Pingback: review hostgator()

  • Pingback: teen porn movies()

  • Pingback: Remedios para la impotencia masculina()

  • Pingback: qivana scam()

  • Pingback: make money blogging()

  • Pingback: vancouver photographer()

  • Pingback: incorporating in california()

  • Pingback: web design utah()

  • Pingback: hostgator review()

  • Pingback: dentist in salt lake city()

  • Pingback: is banners brokers a scam()

  • Pingback: college applications essay()

  • Pingback: gainesville metal buildings()

  • Pingback: rapid weight loss()

  • Pingback: cheap knife set()

  • Pingback: watch video here()

  • Pingback: dehumidifiers for basement()

  • Pingback: disavow links webmaster tools()

  • Pingback: track stocks on your homepage()

  • Pingback: -

  • Pingback: wiecej()

  • Pingback: sharekhan()

  • Pingback: Rdv sexe avec jeune salope sur Nice()

  • Pingback: