This page is the comparisons of all the notable Sci-Fi shows
The Great
Babylon 5
Yeah sure who did you expect to win? :)
Info: The first episode of Babylon5 aired on January 26, 1994. This show has much
more transition than most of the others, but it is seamless and well done.
Acting: The acting in this show is the best of any science fiction show I have seen,
Star Trek TNG isn't even as good. Heck, even the introduction is more convincing in the acting than ST: Voyager. Score:10 out of 10
Storyline: Solid, consistent storyline, like every show is a chapter in a novel, better
than even the Star Wars Trilogy. Score:10 out of 10
Accuracy: This is far more real, by human nature than any of the Star Trek shows
the humans actually act like humans, not like the Minbari a la Star Trek, but he space scenes
are too busy. Unlike Star Trek it follows most rules of science, not breaks them. Score:
8.9 out of 10
Special Effects: The budget is not nearly as high as either Voyager or DS9, so obviously it doesn't look as good, but it is very respectable with nice looking explosions. Not to mention the great, though fake looking organic 3D ships
Score: 8.8 out of 10
Costumes: The costumes are more cheesy than the modern Star Trek and Star Wars, but still very respectable.
Score: 8.0 out of 10
Major Ups: Acting, accuracy of science, and accuracy of human nature.
Major Downs: None Whatsoever.
Overall: Great Show, acting is phenomenal, great storyline, special effects are good, this is Sci-Fi T.V. at its best
. Score: 9.9 out of 10
Star Trek TNG
Info:Star Trek TNG first aired in 1987, it is the most loved of all Star Trek
titles.
Acting: Great acting, Patrick Stewart and Brent Spiner were phenomenal, it makes
the fantasy Star Trek titles seem far more authentic than any other Star Trek, humorist and
witty actors, something the other Star Treks don't have. Don't let the rating fool you though,
this isn't as good as B5, B5 was capable of exceeding ten Score: 10 out of 10
Storyline: . Next Gen has a respectable well developed storyline that develops incidents over the years. Score: 8.5 out of 10
Accuracy: The Star Trek shows are more fantasy than science, face it Trekkers it is
not possible for us to achieve that much in 400 years, human nature isn't realistic, but at least the characters behave naturally in their environment. . Score: 7.0 out of 10
Special Effects: Great Fx, nice explosions, but aren't as real as B5 explosions.
Score: 9.5 out of 10.
Costumes: Natural looking costumes, great molding technices. Score: 9.7 out of
10
Major Ups: Acting, special effects costumes.
Major Downs: Science and human accuracy.
Overall: Best of all Treks ever created, beautiful acting, great special effects, the
standard in Star Treks, and a close second place. Score: 9.5 out of 10.
Star Wars Trilogy
Info: Movies were made in 1977, 1980 and 1983 (Star Wars, The Empire Strikes
Back, Return of the Jedi) very popular in the movie theater, never intended to be much
science.
Acting: Mark Hamill, Harrison Ford, and Carrie Fisher are great actors, Mark
Hamill in peticular, very touching, yes very touching acting, but not quite as good as the
leaders. Very good with emotion. Score: 9.7 out of 10
Storyline: It's a movie, of course it follows a good storyline, but there is a big jump
between Empire Strikes Back and Return of the Jedi. Score: 9 out of 10
Accuracy:This was never meant to be much science, as the use of the force shows,
but more like magic, space scenes are more authentic than B5 but everything else is not very
real. Score: 4 out of 10.
Special Effects: There's the old phrase "You spend a lot, you get a lot." Star Wars
movies were pretty expensive to make, thus the special effects were very good, although that
was by early 80's standards. Score 8.5 out of 10
Costumes: Despite the more primitive 80's molding techniques the aliens look great!
some aliens didn't have humans in them, like Jabba the Hut, overall just as good as the
modern Star Treks. Score: 9.8 out of 10
Major Ups: Great acting, very good special effects, and great costumes.
Major Downs: The accuracy isn't good, but that isn't majorly bad.
Overall: Great sci-fi trilogy, better than all Star Trek movies, although I haven't seen
First Contact, overcomes more primitive technices really well, great acting, close third.
Score: 9.2 out of 10
Space: Above and Beyond
Info:First aired in 1995, Fox's space story, may be cancelled though. After careful reconsideration, I decided to increase this show's acting score, and thus, move it into the great section.
Acting: The acting is on par with the best, everyone shows emotion, from West to
McQueen. Gives no environment of acting. Score: 9.8 out of 10
Storyline: Storyline is a solid second behind Babylon5. Score: 9.8 out of
10
Accuracy: I never quite figured out how the science works in Above and Beyond,
but human nature is so close to modern that people still own T.V.s and there are Tanks (the
vehicles not the people) for ground forces. Chig ships aren't affected much by black holes and
that puzzles me. Human nature is closer to modern than even B5. Score: 8.8 out of
10
Special Effects: The special effects are cheesier than Babylon5's, that's what keeps it
from a higher score, can't see the weapons that well and combat pace is very brisk, Chig
weapons look like big balls. Chig ships look like less organic versions of B5's shadow
fighters. Score: 4.9 out of 10
Costumes: This is the worst part of the show, the Siliconates look cheesy, the Chigs
usually wear predator type suits, and none are very inspirational.
Score: 4.5 out of
10
Major Ups: Acting is a virtue of all the good shows, that is what saved this shows
behind!
Major Downs: Costumes are the cheesiest of all the modern shows and the Star
Wars movies.
Overall: Acting is the virtue that I look for, storyline is second, this has a good dealing of both, A&B is definatly the most underrated show on the list. Score: 9.2 out of 10
The Good
Star Trek DS9
DS9 has been moved up a notch because of its extensive improvements in the last season.
Info: First aired in 1993.
Acting: Of the two Treks, DS9 has a markly better cast. It has Avery Brooks (Sisko), one of the finest actors in Sci-Fi television. He gives a solid performance every time. The others are somewhat inconsistant, but this show is rapidly improving. .
Score: 8.4 out of 10
Storyline: I was wrong before. This show has a good storyline, it bothers developing the plots, and is fairly consistant in it's showings. In all just as good as TNG. Score: 8.5 out of 10
Accuracy: Human nature is the best of all the Treks in this show. It deals with families, relationships, food, all in a good respectable way. And it does it all without it seeming to be tacked on.
Score: 8.2 out of 10
Special Effects: Modern Treks excel at the last two categories, unfortunately these
don't carry much weight. Score: 9.5 out of 10
Costumes: See above. Score: 10 out 10
Major Ups: The acting (50% of the time), the Storyline, and the good FX and Costumes.
Major Downs: Some thrown in episodes and inconsistant acting.
Overall: This show really has the potential to be up there with the best of them. It has great acting in some episodes, but average in others. If they would only concentrate on the conflict between the Federation and the Jem'hadar instead of tossing in other stuff, this would be a real succesor to TNG. Score:
8.7 out of 10 (BUT CLIMBING)
The Average
Star Trek TOS
Info: The original Star Trek first aired in 1963 and ended in 1966, gained its
popularity in reruns.
Acting: All the Treks besides TNG are weak on acting, they are really not good.
TOS shows some hints of acting, but it is better than Voyager. Score: 7.5 out of
10
Storyline: I already explained Trek's weakness, this is not good on Storyline.
Score: 5.5 out of 10
Accuracy: Space really looks unreal, human nature appears to be fake, Trek
science. Score: 4 out of 10
Special Effects: Really bad Fx, but in the 60's computers weren't very advanced.
Score: 2.5 out of 10
Costumes: Costumes are the cheesiest of all shows, but by 60's standards they are
good, Klingons only wear powder. Score 2 out of 10
Major Ups: Not much.
Major Downs: Storyline, Fx, Costumes, the last two can't be blamed on lack of
effort.
Overall: If you average this out, this is worst show, but some faults can blamed on
primitive techniques, and acting is O.K. Score 7.0 out of 10
The Bad
Star Trek Voyager
Info: First aired Jan. 1995, not nearly as popular as Next Gen (Or as good as DS9).
Acting: Can you say "Scum of the lot?" Well that is what it is, no one can act well in this show, speaking of acting, this reeks of it. Score: 4.0 out of 10
Storyline: Worst storyline of all shows listed, besides trying to get home there is no storyline. . Score: 4 out of 10.
Accuracy: Trek science and human nature. Space looks real, but human nature isn't even close to modern, even when they traveled back in time. Score: 4.5 out of 10
Special Effects: See DS9 Fx. Score: 9.5 out of 10
Costumes: See DS9 costumes. Score: 10 out of 10
Major Ups: Fx, costumes.
Major Downs: Everything else.
Overall: Can anyone tell me why this is still on? It is just plain terrible. This show has the largest viewing audience, and it is the most Overrated show on the list. Score:
4.3 out of 10
Revised 9-05-97
Click here if you have questions, new
information, or if you are just a mad Star Trek fan.
