Trek vs. Gate: cage match!

[ShadowMaat]

This is a thread for those who wish to discuss the merits of Star Trek (specifically Enterprise) vs. the merits of Stargate- be it VFX, casting, storylines or whatever. You guys know what you wanna talk about, now you have a place to do it.

[mancslad08]

As I've said before Stargate season 1-6 could match or even surpass any Trek series in terms of quality. Seasons 7, 8 and what looks like 9 on the other hand are the result of TPTB's blind insistence to carry the franchise on till season 20. We're at season 9 and the entire cast has practically been replaced. Vala? Give me a break. Evil Ancients? As if we haven't had enough of the Ancients

Enterprise is brilliant Trek with each season surpassing the previous one. Season 4 is nothing short of brilliant, and although sad, a perfect way to end the series (on a high).

Production values (excluding visual effects) on SG-1 are excellent, as is the cinematography. Enterprise also excels in this category (but hardly surprising given the bigger budget).

Visual Effects are average to good on SG-1. Breathtaking on Enterprise, especially considering there is about 5 times more effects shots on this than Stargate.

Compared to Enterprise, acting is probably better on SG-1.

As I've said, Stargate has really disappointed in the past couple of years to the point where I don't really look forward to new episodes. Enterprise is exciting, dramatic, is tying into previous series nicely etc...

Overall in my opinion, SG-1 Seasons 1-6 are equal to Star Trek in general.
SG-1 Seasons 7-8-probably 9 are embarassing.

[Goddess of the Dark Side]

They both have their own great moments. I have to say though even thought Star Trek introduced me to Sci-fi, Stargate is better. With maybe the exception on DS9. The reason I say that is because most of the other Trek took themselves way to seriously. On DS9 you had people making mistakes not being perfect or trying be. DS9 also had great humor, I mean Odo and Quark little love-hate friendship. And Garak he always had something irreverent to say.

Stargate just does so much better than Star Trek in all fields thought. The acting for example IMO it's just been bad. While SG-1 is funny ,developed,and still going strong after 8 years. Even the villains on Stargate are incredibly developed in their intentions . While Star Trek villains these days are rather one demnatiol

Storylines...Ha. Star Trek hasn't had a good one since DS9.

[david2708]

Trek is for well educated grown ups.
SG-1 is for the kiddies and the working classes.

[TheUniqueDrone]

Yeah, maybe that's true, but at least Stargate has a sense of humour, whereas Trek is too serious at times.
Stargate has imagination, and its universe has cultures and characters that are wildly eccentric, the only limitations are the writers' imaginations. Star Trek, however, although I do enjoy it, has become progressively more insipid and derivative. Stargate wins in terms of storylines, with its grander, overarching plots being the most interesting, whereas Star Trek, in my opinion, has less well-developed plots, save for Enterprise's Xindi Conflict/ Temporal Cold War story, which was still not at the standard of drama that SG-1's Anubis plot reached.
Oh, and P90s are so much cooler in a firefight than Phasers set to Kill !

[Bast]

Trek is for well educated grown ups.
SG-1 is for the kiddies and the working classes.

You know really thats one of the those lame rants I always hear from overly narrow minded hard line trekie gushers.

Really the last three seasons of enterprise have been anything but educated or intellectual ,While this season has far improved I wouldnt call it high class either.

Just cause trek uses alot of fancy technoballish dribble doesnt mean any of it is sensical, How many times does Geordi la forge solve his bugs and kinks with the machinary by "reversing the polarity of blah blah blah" , While alot of the writing may be roughly inspired by current science alot of it is all out fantasy far from it , The episode "Threshold" for instance in Star trek voyager isnt even close to the current facts of the process of evolution , Really all it was is stereotypical pseudo science assumptions and urban myths on evolution served up to the average uninformed viewer.

TNG and DS9 are probaily the few atleast thought out trek shows , Not to say no bad science there either.

[Darth Buddha]

Silly discussion. Have it here, Stargate wins. It's a succer bet.

Have it at TrekBBS, Trek wins. Again a succer bet.

Stargate is simpler. The science and the fiction more rote. On the other hand, it takes less of a stretch of the imagination for some, despite its "Chariots of the Gods" basic concept. Even Enterprise dealt with more in the way of scientific and science fiction ideas.

Stargate has fewer morally complex questions. It is more "good guys vs. bad guys", period. Stargate has fewer challenges, as humans aren't nearly as "responsible" in Stargate as they are in Trek, even in Enterprise.

But the bottom line is, Trek has been on the air for 18 years continuously, has had ten feature films, and has had a total of 28 seasons of programming made. Several of the programs in question ended when they could easily have continued (TNG and DS9). Stargate hasn't even passed the halfway mark in terms of total impact. The world knows what Star Trek is... Stargate is still a niche player on a cable network.

Even Enterprise, which is being cancelled, was competitive with Stargate's ratings.. when aired on a fourth string network targetting urban viewers. The bottom line is that Stargate fans should be glad that Atlantis was already on the air.. had Enterprise been cancelled before Atlantis was contracted, I have little doubt but that the Scifi Channel would have had to seriously consider bidding for a new season, and instead of one aging Stargate and one new one, you might be left with only one aging Stargate, and Enterprise AND BSG as the new darlings of the channel. Bonnie Hammer is known to be very fickle!

Give it ten years, and maybe we'll be able to judge.

[Hywel]

I much prefer the way Stargate is shot to Enterprise. Stargate feels cinematic, where I always get the impression that Enterprise tries too hard to be cinematic. And what's with the colour of Enterprise? Has someone put clear blue plastic over the camera lenses? Or maybe it's just my eyes....

[Madeleine]

Trek is for well educated grown ups.
SG-1 is for the kiddies and the working classes.

'working classes' as opposed to 'well educated'?

Cripes, what kind of a pickle am I in if I'm 'working class' and have been to university? No, don't answer!

I do find that a very simplistic discinction. For a start, the ST franchise has given us such drek as ToS's "Spock's Brain", DS9's "Rivals" (anyone remember it? no? lucky sods!), Star Trek V: The Search for the Remote Control, TNG's "Sub Rosa" and Voyager's... episodes. Any of these would compare pretty poorly as 'adult fare' against such SG eps as Matter of Time, Reckoning, Changeling, WoO, Abyss etc, which might be watchable for children but certainly seem aimed squarely at adults to me.

I can't see how 'education' can make Star Trek: Nemesis watchable, and I can't see how being 'uneducated' or 'working class' could make Best of Both Worlds inaccessible. Nor can I see how a person's education or lack thereof affect their enjoyment of The Other Side or Urgo. Both Franchises produce their share of eps that challenge the mind and address serious and universal issues, and both shows churn out plenty of stuff that can be watched with your brain switched off (or in the case of Voyager, stuff that makes you want to lobotomise yourself as you watch).

Me, I like Stargate better. I'll admit that the writing on Trek is often much better; in fact Trek probably has many more Classics than SG. Certainly the best Trek stands above the best SG - Best of Both Worlds and In The Pale Moonlight are two Trek eps that come to my mind as unrivalled by any SG ep, even Changeling (sorry Mr Judge ). But I far prefer the *characters* on both Stargate shows to most of the Trek people, and that makes a difference. Also I like the SG background and its mythos more than I like that of ST.

[Easter Lily]

I don't know really how we can compare the two really... Star Trek took itself so seriously (an optimistic vision for the future all that) and half the time Stargate doesn't! And then there's Star Trek TOS, Star Trek TNG, Star Trek Voyager, and Star Trek Enterprise which were trying to do all kinds of different things.
If you had asked me when I was 10 what I liked better I would have said the one thing and when I was 25 what I enjoyed I would have said another. These days I have a preference for an arc-based show and couldn't care less which universe they belong to. If a show has continuity in storyline and consistency in character development, I'm all for it...

But I'm with Madeline, the writing in B5 is superior to the two.

[Dahak]

A lot of people say that Trek is better because they use a lot more technobabble and give the viewers numbers. However this would only matter if the writers actually follow the numbers they give us.
Take Broken Bow for instance. Archer brags about going 30 million kilometers per second. Which if you are a dork enough to do the math means (and yes I did) that Enterprise is going about 80 times LS. Even if he meant miles that moves it up to 125 times LS. But then Enterprise makes it to another planet in 3 days. Come on Bermaga you should at least pick up an 8th grade astronomy book so you can get these numbers right. There are a lot of things like this in the ST universe. The
In the SG universe the only big goof I can remember is the Zat issue which at least thy made fun of later.

[Ouroboros]

What Trek series are we supposed to be comparing against here?

Trek in general tends to take a more optomistic outlook on the universe and arguably a more philosophically complex one as well, at least in some of the series. SG-1 tends to take a more realistic outlook in general but at the same time also tends to oversimplify ethical matters and gloss over a lot of the philosiphical questions regarding good and evil in favour of just force feeding us the idea that certain beings or individuals are "bad guys".

The actions and reactions of the characters make more sense to us as far as identification with the characters is concerned; however the circumstances that motivate those actions are often very black and white and tend to leave the best course of action ethically as a very obvious one, the one that our heroes will typically champion against their universally evil enemies.

Now granted there are some exceptions, as there always are with a general overview like this, but if I'm going to go into all of them I'll be clicking away here all night.

[david2708]

Voyager seems to get panned by alot of people but I'd have to say Voyager's best eps are far above Stargates best eps.
All shows have their good, so so & stinker eps.
Although I do like Stargate(Have all the boxsets) I'd struggle if you asked me to name a 'classic' ep. Lots of good one's but none that i would deem 'classic' ep.

[Dahak]

I like Trek most of the time but this whole optimistic thing is about as accurate as the Wagon Train to the Stars line that Roddenberry peddled to the suits 40 years ago.
You have a show that brags about how there is no sexism in the future and then has Yeoman Rand wearing a cleavage top and a miniskirt. You have Troi who is supposedly an officer wearing a special uniform so she can show off the twins for 7 years. 7 of 9 I can ignore because she was never officially a crewmember. Then look at T'Pol's uniform it is designed to show off her assets as well and there is no reason for her to dress that way.
Also what negative shows for the future are we comparing Trek too? Maybe Firefly and certainly BSG but since TOS predates both and last longer than both (or all 3) together. You can't name shows like Buck Rogers because Trek had the same basic plot of mankind grew up after WW3 and while Earth is better the galaxy at large is a dangerous place.

[Cymro]

I like Trek most of the time but this whole optimistic thing is about as accurate as the Wagon Train to the Stars line that Roddenberry peddled to the suits 40 years ago.
You have a show that brags about how there is no sexism in the future and then has Yeoman Rand wearing a cleavage top and a miniskirt. You have Troi who is supposedly an officer wearing a special uniform so she can show off the twins for 7 years. 7 of 9 I can ignore because she was never officially a crewmember. Then look at T'Pol's uniform it is designed to show off her assets as well and there is no reason for her to dress that way.
Also what negative shows for the future are we comparing Trek too? Maybe Firefly and certainly BSG but since TOS predates both and last longer than both (or all 3) together. You can't name shows like Buck Rogers because Trek had the same basic plot of mankind grew up after WW3 and while Earth is better the galaxy at large is a dangerous place.

You can rant about that, but look at Teyla, or one of the many female guest stars on SG-1, they're usually hot, and in many cases wear very tight or revealing costumes (Remember Anise/Freya's boob tube?). Most of those issues are caused by the networks.