Cinemablend proposed a question pitting Star Trek vs. Star Wars.
Star Trek and Star Wars are like the difference between a piece of wagyu beef and a cheeseburger from Mcdonald’s. Now, you may think that’s a dig, but it’s not. McDonald’s, while not the healthiest thing for you, often produces a fine meal. It’s affordable, accessible, and has (had) a heavy marketing campaign targeted at children. While Star Trek is largely for all, it, like a good piece of beef, takes some time to get into. There’s a patience there that pays off big that just doesn’t exist in Star Wars.
That’s ok. They both exist on their own spectrums to cater to the different needs of people. Sometimes you’re just too tired to make dinner, other times you’re trying too hard to impress people who don’t matter. As brands, they both have their own corner of science fiction that they dominate.
So why Cinemablend is writing articles about if Starfleet from Star Trek could defeat the Galactic Empire from Star Wars is beyond me.
Asking who would win before Star Trek and Star Wars is a silly exercise
There’s no reason to even ask that question because the two universes are so fundamentally different that there isn’t a point. It’s like asking who’s the better athlete; Michael Phelps or Usain Bolt. Can Bolt run on water? Can Phelps swim through synthetic rubber?
No. They can’t.
Star Trek and Star Wars operate on two different sets of principles and have two wildly different views on things like propulsion, combat, and how physics works. It isn’t a one-to-one comparison and in fact, few things in this world ever are.
You can’t even compare generations of basketball players honestly due to the ever-changing nature of the game itself. Michael Jordan and LeBron James played in distinctly different eras with distinctly different rules. To compare them is foolishness. It’s sill. It’s absurd.
And yes, Spock would body Vader; don’t at me.