Tell me why one is better than the other. I am a star trek fan above all, but 10 points will go to the best answer, gate or trek.
127227
I could be a real snit and say "Three words: 'no Prime Directive'" but I won't.\n\n"Stargate has less history"?  "Star Trek has two centuries of history"?  \n\nCorrect me if I'm wrong, but wasn't one of the main problems with the short-lived "Enterprise" the fact that it was revisionist history, placing people and events in places they weren't supposed to be for another two hundred years?  (Yes, that Borg-on-ice episode comes to mind, the VERY LAST episode of that show I watched.)\n\nIf you want to get technical, SG-1 has over five THOUSAND years of history to build from, and that's only if you go back to when Daniel Jackson led the Egyptians in a revolt against Ra and kicked him out of Egypt.  The show also draws many of its characters, stories, and challenges from people and events of Earth's ancient mythologies, including (but certainly not limited to) the Egyptian, Greek, Norse, Celtic, Hindu, and Japanese pantheons.  That doesn't count the history of the Ancients and the Ori, which spans thousands of years before Earth's recorded history.\n\nHowever, THAT is not the reason I believe Stargate is better.  The characters of SG-1 are far richer and more believable than most of the characters of Star Trek, especially of the latter shows.  The friendships shared by the cast members of the show translate to the characters they play, giving the central people of the show an underlying chemistry that can't be faked.  The characters themselves evoke such strong emotions in the viewers that when the Daniel Jackson character was written out at the end of the fifth season, outraged fans over-loaded the studio's switchboard to the point it had to be shut down, and flooded the production offices with thousands of letters.  You think Paramount experienced the same when Tasha Yar was killed?  Or Jadzia Dax?  Nope, or if they did, they refused to acknowledge it as the folks of Stargate did: giving the fans what they wanted.\n\nI'm not denying the historical impact of the original Trek and how the waves it made in the late '60s-early 70s still resonate today, but it's apples and oranges to try to compare it to SG-1's action-packed, thought-provoking, pop-culture-referencing, self-effacing, friendship-building, moral-strengthening, darn good story-telling.
383411
DS9 barely survived as a series, making it into a movie just won't happen.  Even the last TNG movie did not do great.\nBy the way, I would see it, but I would probably be lonely at the theater.
521637
I also vote for Athrun and Cagalli. \nThey have the more true-to-life form of a relationship like separation and reunion, rivals to love, problems and resolutions, etc. Unlike Kira and Lacus who are just always together and are sooo canon.
118944
Battle Star Galactica.  They simply had more deployable fighter ships.  The Enterprise was the sole fighting machine and the shields could be diminished under a persistent attack. Star Trek never demonstrated that the Enterprise could defend itself from swarm of fighters like the kind StarBuck flew OR a top down attack either.\n\n You drop their shields and swarm them with the fighter ships!
276440
Data from Star Trek could ref- he's impartial.\nThis is a fan film I would LOVE to see. \nMy bet- Ewoks. They took down the empire, and captured the heroes, and are cannibals. Whereas we never saw the Oompa Loompas have any warrior culture, and their big mojo is turning people into blueberries. Ewoks win.
8168
Quite possibly.  I watched it but thought it was pretty bad until Manny Coto started to liven it up in the 3rd season.  I think they tried to do something new with Trek by making it more of a soap opera to broaden the audience but what ended up happening was the diehard trek fans were alienated, and no one new was watching either.  Who wants a prequel series?  The problem with a prequel is that you have a pretty good idea about what can't happen.  For instance, you know the Federation is going to appear, that earth is not destroyed, etc.
621054
Not in the "holodeck" sense from Star Trek.  There are some very cool things done with simulations though.  They are a combination of focused input from a bank of screens and movement of the trainer to trick your mind into believing that you are part of the experience happening on the screen.  Still really large and expensive but every generation gets a little smaller and a little cheaper.
339244
http://www.geocities.com/ussmunchkin7/Star_Trek_IV.htm
19349
I think that they're both great series. They both have a good plot, and character depth. I can't decide which one is better.
430787
Great show... aired Friday nights at 8:00pm on CBS. Then Sci-Fi Network picked up the re-runs. Wish they would show it again.
173876
Could be thise one: Star Trek: New Voyages http://newvoyages.com/\n\nI've seen a couple fan groups attempt this over the years with varrying degrees of success. I've never seen one of these episodes through, but it could be decent.\n\nThere was also a guy who was in bother the Trekkers documentaries; forget his name but I remember he was taking a crack at something like this to.
530550
Bill Shatner. He's just good at everything he does. Big fan of Boston Legal. I hope that by hosting this show that it doesn't effect is Denny Crane persona. This show is better then that other show on NBC.  This show takes wisdom, and not a game of chance, (what suitcase, please) Hope it last a while. Good Luck Captain Kirk....
361553
I wish it would be back as a show again!  Contrary to previous reviewers, the cast has not already "moved on" nor are they looking at doing "movie episodes".  The current word is that they have been approved to do two direct-to-DVD movies, the first of which wraps up the Ori storyline.\n\nThe OFFICIAL MGM website actually has a Save Stargate campaign going, with multiple contests for rabid--er, I mean AVID fans to engage in and show the world we want our show back next year!  \n\n*coughs, steps off soap box*\n\nSeriously, though, I think it's great that the series' parent company isn't quite ready to give up on it yet.
605866
The enemy of my enemy is my friend...Once the USA takes over the entire planet we will achieve a society that Roddenberry would embrace.  Just kidding.  Why do we always want to homogenize everything.  Let's embrace diversity and leave cultures alone.  I've always wondered about the Star Trek Earth and yet they had the prime directive.
261116
The Chronicles of Narina is better because it has so much suspense. the characters are so interesting. Al lot of technology was used in it, there are talking animals for God's sake.\nKingkong is an old story. \n\nwala 2eh ra2yek?
673532
Wow say hello to Mr Spock for me hehehe, beam us all up Scotty! \nlol oh you mean the satellite tv one, NOPE.\nI preferred the Star Trek one  o_-
64298
Yes, but the pretext for everything in Star Trek is that adventure is good.  Think about how many transporter accidents they had, but the few times they re-calibrate the transporter to do some day-saving derring-do they never bother  to write down what they did.  Because documentation is *boring*.  So if we say that we've got a recreational facility that may randomly become sentient and effectively do a Matrix-like takeover on the ship, great!  Break out the tricorders and study that sucker -- but don't save any data because we wouldn't want to ruin the surprise for the next series in the franchise.