OK... you can stop laughing... and yes, my nerd glasses slipped down my nose a bit... but I'm actually posing a serious question here. Between the two (Star Trek and Star Wars), which is more credible?

I've always been on the side that says Star Trek is more credible because it's based in the future and falls into the science fiction category. Star Wars is based in the past (even though it might be the future for us because of the galaxy's size - again... you can stop laughing) and is classified as fantasy. Even though there is science-type themes involved with Star Wars, the ideas are not based off of what may come but of what has been. Confusing as this might sound, I stand my ground.

You might be wondering what prompted such a posting and why I chose to waste your time writing about such a trivial topic. Excellent observation (and thanks for reading this far)!

Enter the new Star Trek movie (coming to theaters May 8th of this year). I proudly admit that I'm looking forward to it's release, not because it is a Star Trek movie, but because J.J. Abrams is producing and directing the film. Abrams is the creator of ABC's LOST and is known for creating excellent drama series. (If you have a few minutes, it's well worth it to watch his presentation at TED. Very inspiring!) What he brings to the table has me wondering if the newest Star Trek movie will be more like the Star Wars series and therefore submit to being inferior to George Lucas' Star Wars dynasty?

What are your thoughts? (Please don't mock me too badly. I am still human and have some feelings.)

BTW...here's a link to the new movie, Star Trek.

 Subscribe to Drewbe.com