It's not really fair to compare the two that closely. Doing so misses a key aspect of Hypercard, which is how it fit holistically into the operating systems of its time. Hypercard "authors" had the ability to do many of the things their operating system could do from within the HC/HT system.
Hypertalk is also different in purpose and kind from JS. The former is easier to read than it is to write (Hypercard encouraged learning by copying / example), and was explicitly designed for everyday people. It was meant to bridge the gap between "users" and "programmers" and provide true computational media authoring.
It's true that HyperCard and the Web aren't exactly the same in all respects, but that's orthogonal to the fact that the Web drew direct inspiration from HyperCard (like, documented, on record, the inventors of Web browsers and HTTP saying as much).
Hypertalk is also different in purpose and kind from JS. The former is easier to read than it is to write (Hypercard encouraged learning by copying / example), and was explicitly designed for everyday people. It was meant to bridge the gap between "users" and "programmers" and provide true computational media authoring.