Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Television Media Sci-Fi

William Shatner to Star in New Reality TV Series 271

Posted by michael from the proud-to-be-a-born-again-trek-fan dept.
Gildor writes "The small town of Riverside, Iowa has long billed itself as the birthplace of James T. Kirk. So they were thrilled when William Shatner came there to film a Star Trek prequel about the early life of Kirk. Except there was no movie. After about 9 days, Shatner announced they were actually filming a reality TV mini-series."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

William Shatner to Star in New Reality TV Series More

William Shatner to Star in New Reality TV Series

Comments Filter:

  • Too much reality tv (Score:5, Insightful)

    by benna ( 614220 ) <mimenarrator@g m a i l .com> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:46PM (#10422073) Journal
    When are people going to stop allowing the networks to shove this filth down their throats?

    • Re:Too much reality tv (Score:5, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:49PM (#10422095)
      benna, You're Fired!(tm)

    • When people stop watching them? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by brunes69 ( 86786 ) <slashdot@nOSpam.keirstead.org> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:53PM (#10422121)
      The networks are out to make money, not be your friend. They wouldn't be airing reality TV if they didnt make money at it.

      However, the profit margins on a reality TV show are MUCH higher. They don't have to pay expensive actors, they don't have to build or maintain sets, they don't need to hire extras from the screen actors guild, etc. They can even usually do product placements *on* the shows to make more money.

      Then you have shows like American Idol - not only is the show cheap, but afterwards, they have an artist that is guaranteed to sell at least a few records - and they don't have to spend any money promoting them!

      The marketers that convinced the masses to watch these shows are pure genius. And the networks are laughing all the way to the bank.

      • Thats why I want people to stop allowing this shit to be shoved down their throats...I know its the people that watch who are at fault.

        • Re:When people stop watching them? (Score:5, Funny)

          by LemonFire ( 514342 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @04:06PM (#10422218) Homepage
          Thats why I want people to stop allowing this shit to be shoved down their throats...I know its the people that watch who are at fault.

          I agree totally with this statement.
          I really miss the quality TV programming we had about five years ago, it was so much more enriching and educational.

        • Re:When people stop watching them? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Nyder ( 754090 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @05:20PM (#10422615) Journal
          you are the one missing the point, benna. People watch it because they enjoy it. You do NOT obviously enjoy it, so I assume you do not watch it. If people didn't watch the show, they wouldn't make it, or if they did make it, wouldn't make money off of it (because networks wouldn't show it if they get too many complaints). That how tv works.

          But crying about peoples bad taste, and trying to tell others not to watch it because YOU don't watch it is lame and selfish.

          I personally don't watch much reality shows because I think they are stupid. So I watch other things on TV. Very simple, I just change the channel.

          Everyone has different taste, the networks try to make money by showing stuff the appeals to some majority of people ('cept niche channels, like food, so on). They cannot please everyone all the time. hell, they can't please most people most the time. That's why there is feedback and Nelson ratings and so on.

          So it's very simple, you don't like a show, don't watch it, complain to the network hosting the show, complain to the company producing the show.

          But DO NOT try to blame people for watching the show. People are allowed to watch what they want, even if you do NOT like it. I know it hurts to hear that the world does no evolve around you, but it's true. I'm sorry.

          • Through my complaints about peoples tastes im really complaining about the state of our culture. It really says alot about our culture that people watch these shows.
            • It may say something about "our culture" (I'm unsure if you mean Americans or the world - the "reality show" trend started elsewhere in the world, of course) but it's not saying anything new. Tabloids, for example, have sold for years upon years. Tacky TV has been going on for a long time as well - 60 Minutes has been popular for a long, long time, and has done some pretty shoddy journalism at times, like Mike Wallace's confrontational ambush interviews.

              It just so happens that TV networks had quite a bi

          • Re:When people stop watching them? (Score:5, Funny)

            by Thing 1 ( 178996 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @06:59PM (#10423165) Journal
            That's why there is feedback and Nelson ratings and so on.

            For your typo: " Ha -ha!"

      • Re:When people stop watching them? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Nehi the Ganchark ( 818676 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @04:05PM (#10422211) Homepage
        "They don't have to pay expensive actors..." Can I assume that is why they called Shatner?
      • You could also argue it's closer to their mandate when granted a broadcast license. Though the situations are artificial the parcipants aren't, they're not actors. Even a gem like Elimidate closer reflects daily living than decades of daytime soaps.

      • Re:When people stop watching them? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by hai.uchida ( 814492 ) <hai.uchida@gmail.com> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @05:56PM (#10422802)
        However, the profit margins on a reality TV show are MUCH higher. They don't have to pay expensive actors, they don't have to build or maintain sets, they don't need to hire extras from the screen actors guild, etc. They can even usually do product placements *on* the shows to make more money.

        You are right, but one thing I would add is that the networks are really sealing their own doom by moving to reality TV. They're going after the ratings and profit right now without creating new shows that could potentially live forever in syndication-- and that, along with DVDs, merchandising and whatever on-demand system may evolve in the future, is where the real profit is... As well as the love of the viewers.
      • So true. I personally won't spend any time whatsoever watching anything even remotely close to "reality television". I'm well aware that one viewer isn't going to make much difference of course. I just can't bring myself to watch any of it.

        My wife was watching one of them for a while. I don't know which one it was (or care) but when she asked me why I would leave the room when she turned it on I asked her if she liked all of the new reality shows that were coming out. The answer was "Well, no but this o

    • Re:Too much reality tv (Score:5, Funny)

      by sgant ( 178166 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:54PM (#10422125) Homepage Journal
      But Shatner is already in a series...Boston Law or whatever it's called now. Comes on tonight on ABC, check local listings.

      No, it's not that TJ Hooker hung up his gun and became a lawyer either...though that might be interesting.

      Shatner won an Emmy last year...yeah, hard to belive. The Emmy's are still kind of sort of legit (please insert indignation about what show you loved that didn't get nominated) but at least they're not like the "Throw-in-every-catagory
      there-is-so-everyone-get s-an-award-no-matter-what" that is the Grammys. If you put out a record, you get a Grammy.

      Ok, I have NO idea how I drove the topic right into a ditch...what were we talking about again?

    • Re:Too much reality tv (Score:4, Funny)

      by Amiga Lover ( 708890 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:57PM (#10422151)
      When are people going to stop allowing the networks to shove this filth down their throats?

      Yeah. Better get all those millions of people who enjoy reality tv to write in and tell the networks to stop broadcasting what they want to watch. dammit.
    • Reality TV is about as cheap as infomercials and cooking shows, if not more so. Quality Programming, on the other hand, is a lot more expensive.

      We've been told America Loves Reality TV when the Reality is that the networks LOVE it because it's PURE PROFIT.
      • *Reality is that the networks LOVE it because it's PURE PROFIT.*

        it wouldn't be profit unless people would be watching it.

        people WANT to watch realityshit.. sad truth.

        • Re:When it stops being cheap. (Score:5, Insightful)

          by UnrepentantHarlequin ( 766870 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @06:03PM (#10422837)
          people WANT to watch realityshit.. sad truth.

          Actually, I think more people than not want to watch something, they don't really care what it is. I know people who just flip through the channels trying to find something worth watching. They're not in front of the TV because there's a show they want to watch -- they're there because it's their default mode of existence, and they try to find a show they can tolerate watching. I suspect a fair percentage of the "reality" TV watchers are the same: they're watching it because it's what's on, not because it's anything they would watch if there was something better competing with it. The creators make it because it's cheap and easy, so it's what's on. The viewers are making a choice between "reality" TV and no TV, not "reality" TV and something else worth watching.
          • no no.. people really get off from following the survivor series and others - they like them. i don't like them, you might not like them.. but people in general do like them. they follow how the tensions build up between people and so on. like soap.

            remember, shitloads of people watch springer as well.. when they could watch something better.

          • Possibly the most insightful comment I've read in weeks. Blinding flash of the obvious it may be but that's it in a nutshell.

            If there were only two networks and they both showed blank screens with the sound of fingernails scratching down a chalkboard then the one that was the least grating would probably get an Emmy and get ratings nearly equal to what your average episode of "The Bachelor" pulls.
    • "When are people going to stop allowing the networks to shove this filth down their throats?"

      Answer: When it stops making money. Networks don't make shows to entertain us...they make shows that make money for them.

      The sad thing is, even those that hate this kind of programming will likely still watch it out of curiosity...which keeps the ratings up.
    • Hey, chances are it'll still be better than Enterprise.
    • ... when there are no more people left who are willing to participate in reality TV shows anymore. I mean, it's not like they can make a reality TV show without real people [cartoonresearch.com], right?
    • When are people going to stop allowing the networks to shove this filth down their throats?

      When the viewers realize that they are not the customers of the networks, they are the products of the networks to be sold to the advertisers. Take a look back at Rusty's article on kuro5hin [kuro5hin.org] from 2002.

  • Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:48PM (#10422085)
    Kahhhhhhhhnnnnnnn

  • Star... Wars? (Score:2, Funny)

    by emazing ( 778569 )
    Did anyone else read: "William Shatner to Star in New Star Wars Reality TV Series." I was about to say..
    • I....can...not.....wait...to..see.this..new....sho w.

      • Re:I...Can't...Wait... (Score:2, Insightful)

        by shirai ( 42309 ) *
        If you're gonna make fun of his speaking rhythm, do it right.

        I... cannot... wait... to see... this... new show.

        He doesn't break at every single word. It's more like 1 syllable, 2 syllable, 1 syllable, 2 syllable... ;)
      • Tannoy: Captain Kirk, this is Big Brother.

        You have been voted off the Big Brother starship, please collect your belongings and beam down to the surface immediately.

        Kirk: DEVINNNNNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

  • Born in Iowa? (Score:4, Funny)

    by Narmi ( 161370 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:49PM (#10422094)
    I thought he was Canadian.

    • Re:Born in Iowa? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Evangelion ( 2145 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:50PM (#10422104) Homepage
      Kirk was born in Iowa, not Shatner.

      Jeez, geeks these days just aren't what they used to be...

      • Re:Born in Iowa? (Score:3, Funny)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Ah but does it say anywhere that Iowa won't be part of Canada around the time of Kirk's birth? :-P
    • The fictional character of kirk is to be born in iowa, not shatner himself.
      • gawd, its one thing when posters don't bother reading the article, but when they don't read the original post what have we come to?!!

        for the very, very lazy:
        The small town of Riverside, Iowa has long billed itself as the birthplace of James T. Kirk. So they were thrilled when William Shatner came there to film a Star Trek prequel about the early life of Kirk.

  • reality? (Score:2, Insightful)

    by lawngnome ( 573912 )
    Um, Id perfer to get my scifi without any reality at all. Perhaps a show about space cops saving kittens or something like that. We need more programming that allows celebs to go freakin crazy...

  • shitener (Score:5, Insightful)

    by s4m7 ( 519684 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:50PM (#10422101) Homepage
    I've never seen any celebrity with so much contempt for the fanbase that made him famous as Shatner. It's pretty friggin funny though.

    I wonder where the guy is who's sitting around thinking "you know what our fall lineup needs? another reality show!"

    • Re:shitener (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Kardnal ( 471745 )
      You obviously haven't seen Spike TV's Joe Schmoe, or Joe Schmoe II They're not 'real' reality TV shows. They're set up so that most of the 'stars' of the show are actually actors. There are one or two people on the show who have no idea they compatriots are actually actors, and assume they're just regular people on a reality show like they are. I have a feeling this is going to wind up be Joe Schmoe III. The first two Joe Schmoe's were hilarious, and well written. Defiantely worth checking out (though I

    • Re:shitener (Score:5, Interesting)

      by DeepHurtn! ( 773713 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @04:35PM (#10422371)
      Oh, that's not really fair. Have you read his "Get a Life"? Contempt is the last word I would use to describe his feelings towards his fans. (The book title is mocking his (in)famous joke on SNL, btw.)

  • predicting the future (Score:5, Funny)

    by ilikeitraw ( 706793 ) <dca_102@hotmail.com> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:51PM (#10422110)
    They should team Shatner up with Hasslehoff.
    A Space / Beach setting with the Olsen twins thrown in as well... with a reality twist maybe ?
    Money baby... money.

  • Sounds like a good thing all around. (Score:5, Interesting)

    by lonesome phreak ( 142354 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:54PM (#10422127) Journal
    According to the article, Shatner, when he announced it was a hoax, gave the town $100,000 as a gift. The crew of the "film" donated $12,000 to the library. Most people where just happy to have him in town...and Shatner said it wasn't going to make fun of anyone - the reality TV show was when a big Hollywood production company comes in to a small town.

    They also spent $1,000,000 to make the show, much of that going into the towns economy. What would be REALLY cool was if the reality show went over well and Shatner decided to actually make the movie into a real movie. That could be pretty cool, and it would already have tons of publicity and marketing started for it.
    • The show is stale news if you can call it that. The evening news was very excited about it at least, they were interviewing people who hoped it would portray their positive values or something lame like that. Lame.
    • I don't think you get it. Rhett Reese is a TV producer who is turning out to be a serial fraudster. His best known project is "The Joe Schmo Show" which also airs on SpikeTV (the former TNN) and ends on the same theme of $100,000 and a "We're sorry" party supposedly making good for the fraud.

      This guy's turning into a serial con artist creating scripted annoying situations to get the reactions on tape. Now, that's a concept as old as TV itself in the form of Candid Camera... but Candid Camera's stunts alway

    • People are not merely means (Score:5, Insightful)

      by gilroy ( 155262 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @05:25PM (#10422654) Homepage Journal
      This isn't a "good thing all around". It's a terrible thing. Basically, a bunch of people in "the biz" decided it would be funny to fool a small town community. They came in, lied, manipulated, and essentially disrespected these people, then decided that their trust was worth about $100,000. The donated money is a bribe, plain and simple, to buy off the feeble stirrings of conscience in Shatner, et al.

      I see this happening more and more, and it's starting to get to me. People aren't here for your entertainment. Real people aren't the Sims, for Pete's sake. They don't go about their lives just to relieve the tedium of yours. It's a bad thing to treat people as if they were just means to be used in achieving your ends, whether that's something cartoony grand or as mundane as filling half an hour of that gaping void that is your life.

      People are not means only.

      I don't care that they got "genuine reactions" and "true feeling" and all that other crap that producers of shows like this believe justify their deceptions. In the end, a bunch of Hollywood types decided that small town people can be easily duped for the entertainment of a jaded national audience.

      And for all those who asked, back when the reality craze fist hit, what harm Survivor etc. could do... well, here we are. These people didn't volunteer for the reality show; they were impressed into service, kidnapped.

      • Re:People are not merely means (Score:4, Interesting)

        by lonesome phreak ( 142354 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @06:02PM (#10422832) Journal
        I think it's interesting. The town doesn't seem to mind all that much. There's only 930 people in the town. Now their famous.

        And what if the movie ends up being made? It might if things go right.

        Think about a bit bigger picture. And actually, if your religious, we're here for God's entertainment. :)

        One person got paid $5,000 for nine days. The town made $100,000. In two weeks. Not bad. Let's just ssee how it plays out.
        • Now their famous.

          Yeah, being made fools of can make people famous in todays entertainment. Briefly. Very briefly. Yay.

          I'll pass, thank you.

          Does anyone seriously think a movie will come out of this? Come on...

          SB

        • Re:People are not merely means (Score:5, Insightful)

          by gilroy ( 155262 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @09:06PM (#10423755) Homepage Journal
          Blockquoth the poster:

          One person got paid $5,000 for nine days. The town made $100,000. In two weeks. Not bad. Let's just ssee how it plays out.

          It's not about the money. It's about the license taken by the producers. Those people weren't paid for their reactions on a reality show. They were paid for help in producing a movie. If they had known the ultimate destination of the footage, they might have been OK with it. Or they might have demanded more money. Or they might have chosen not to participate. The point is, they were denied that choice. In essence a fraud was perpetrated on them.

          (And don't give me any of those "people play pranks on their friends all the time" lines. These people weren't friends; they were business associates. It matters.)

        • Re:People are not merely means (Score:4, Interesting)

          by cobyrne ( 118270 ) on Monday October 04, 2004 @06:42AM (#10427181) Homepage

          There's only 930 people in the town. Now their famous.

          Yes - they are famous for being duped. It remains to be seen, but they may yet become famous for being people that the nation laughs at. Fame isn't always a good thing. Fame isn't for everyone. Fame usually doesn't live up to the expectations of those that want it.

    • Yeah, if we've learned anything from this it is
      that money makes everything better. Lie to
      people, use them, then throw your wallet at them.

  • Early life of Kirk? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by dougmc ( 70836 ) <dougmc+slashdot@frenzied.us> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:57PM (#10422144) Homepage
    So they were thrilled when William Shatner came there to film a Star Trek prequel about the early life of Kirk. Except there was no movie.
    So, what role would Shatner play here? Kirk's dad? Shatner is almost 40 years older than he was when he first played Kirk. I hope you weren't thinking that they could pull off 40+ years off of Shatner to make him seem even younger than he was when Star Trek started (he's 73 now. He was around 35 when Star Trek started.)

    I guess it would make sense for Shatner to have a cameo in whatever Trek show they might make about Kirk, but he won't be playing Kirk in any prequels :)

    But reality TV? Blech. I'd rather have a 73 old old Shatner trying to play a 30 year old Kirk :)

    • Kirk could be re-visiting his hometown, or, perhaps he's telling the story about his early life as an old man much as Indiana Jones.
      • Kirk could be re-visiting his hometown, or, perhaps he's telling the story about his early life as an old man much as Indiana Jones.
        Sounds fine, except that Kirk was killed in Star Trek Generations, made in 1994. Could they make Shatner look 10+ years youger with makeup? (It might be hard, but it's more in the realm of possiblity.)
        • but also remember, that in generations, Whoopi wound up being in both places.

          So there's always a chance of another kirk sitting in the ribbon,clone, or even a transporter twin.

        • No no no, the one who died was finally the evil Kirk from the alternate universe, he was just pretending to be Kirk because he is evil. The real one is still waiting in the bubble until they call him for another movie.

          (or something similar that they could pull out of their ass)

    • Unless he get's stuck in a time bubble, and get's to go back in time and talk to himself as a kid.

      or if he get's sent to the future, and get's to play with a child version of himself on the holodeck.

      • * Unless he get's stuck in a time bubble, and get's to go back in time and talk to himself as a kid.

        or if he get's sent to the future, and get's to play with a child version of himself on the holodeck.
        *

        this being star trek both are equally as possible!

  • It mau have been worse... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Skiron ( 735617 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @03:58PM (#10422158)
    He perhaps could have brought along a few Tribbles...
  • In terms of reality TV, what would it be like to have a reality show with trekkies participating in the same studio that the actors normally play in? What would make this one interesting, is that you could have the ship actually being piloted though VR space with internet participants.

    Then, just to make it interesting you could, in the same way they do for MUDs, allocate points to internet participants who (via videoconferencing) have the most convincing characters, and then have them participate with great

  • From the article... (Score:3, Funny)

    by carou ( 88501 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @04:19PM (#10422289) Homepage Journal
    "They also said they created their own little soap opera where Shatner pretended to be a jerk to his cast"

    Good thing they didn't try to make him act.
    • I am reminded of that Futurama episode where they are stranded on the planet with the energy being and the cast of Star Trek; the energy creature is yelling at the cast during his fan script rehearsal, and Leonard Nimoy says, "You must respect your actors. When I directed Star Trek IV, I got an excellent performance out of Bill because I respected him" and Shatner responds with "And when I directed Star Trek V, I got an excellent performance out of me, because I respected me so much". Yeah, good old Shatn
  • How is that possible?
  • It's in stores tomorrow!!!!!
    http://www.nme.com/features/110018. htm, and you can even hear songs from it!!

  • Fraud in the name of Television (Score:5, Interesting)

    by LostCluster ( 625375 ) * on Sunday October 03, 2004 @04:31PM (#10422348)
    This seems to be a going trend for TV producers to claim they are working on project A in order to get people to unwittingly participate in project B... here on Slashdot not to look ago there was a warning story about MTV Networks fooling experts into appearing on a Comedy Central project called "Crossballs" [slashdot.org]

    MTV Networks seems to be making a habit of this. MTV itself fooled a half dozen college students who thought they were interning on a music video project into being the stars of Faking the Video [mtv.com]. And let's not forget TNN/SpikeTV's project called The Joe Schmo Show [spiketv.com].

    There oughta be a law against these things... because apparently basic fraud hasn't caught up to when fraud is being done in the name of TV.

    • Re:Fraud in the name of Television (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Animats ( 122034 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @05:36PM (#10422707) Homepage
      Yeah. I'd get a good lawyer, not take the money.

      Many years ago, the first "reality TV show", "Candid Camera", actually did get busted. They were operating in a store, and when a customer put his hat on the counter (this was a long time ago), they tried to sell the hat back to him. During the dispute with the customer, a cop walked in. Listened to the participants. Said, to the Candid Camera guy, "That's not a new hat. You're under arrest". The Candid Camera people came out from hiding, showed the camera, and said they were filming a TV show. The cop told them "It doesn't matter. You tried to steal the guy's hat. You're still under arrest", called for backup, and sent the whole crew to the lockup.

      This was back when New York City's official policy on filming was "This city is too busy to make way for film crews". Now it's "Free permits, free locations, free police assistance". And tax credits.

    • Re: Crossballs: remember how there was that "gun nut" that got all upset?

      Yeah, that would be me :). And yes, I'm the same guy suing Diebold so hey, I ain't JUST a gun nut :).

      Anyways. They never ran my episode :). Swear to God - they pulled it at the last second. My lawyer's two letters about how they didn't have permission appear to have sunk in.

      [/blows rassberries towards NYC and the Viacom corporate office:ON]
  • Behold.... for I am

    William Shatner

    I got canned

    really fast by priceline..

    dot com

    Now I am

    an overrated washed up actor

    Whose only claim to fame is

    acting in Esperanto and

    being the first white man

    to admit to kissing a black chick

    Now I can be me

    Not competing with

    that damn vulcan nemoy.
  • Reality TV? (scoff)

    No, THIS [imdb.com] is his low-point, William Shatner's Spplat Attack, a DVD of a Star Trek-themed day of paintball. A friend bought this and brought it over one night.

    It was painful.

    Very painful.

    How painful was it? There was actually a moment when I wished I was watching Star Trek V instead.

  • Kirkacatecas (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Baldrson ( 78598 )
    They should have done a reality TV show about how the real Kirk will be from a long line of Mexican-Iowans [uis.edu].

  • Offtopic, but... (Score:3, Informative)

    by idiotnot ( 302133 ) <sean@757.org> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @04:47PM (#10422432) Homepage Journal
    His new CD, Has Been comes out on Tuesday. Here is a review [guardian.co.uk].

    I'm still looking for a copy of Transformed Man if anyone knows where to get one.....
  • Shatner has a temper as short as a Klingon's. He would be a wreck in a reality tv kind of situation.
    Have you heard him freak out about his hairpiece?
    If anyone can find a link to the radio interview I am referring to, please post it here.
  • This kind of crap really bothers me. The first few times it was done, it was funny, ha ha. But now this kind of shit is just as annoying as all of the "cowboy neal" and "in soviet russia" stuff, just not as funny. However, here is my real problem with it. Spike and others seem to think it's OK as long as they smooth everything over with a little cash. Bullshit! When are people going to wake up and realize that sometimes, money just isn't worth being made a fool of? The problem here is that most peopl
  • Why bother lying to a community that you want to film a movie in their town? There are zillions of movies being filmed on locations all over the world, so why not just pick one, tow cameras around all over the place, and record what the real reactions of people are to the real-life situation of having a big production come to their town?

    Oh, wait. That's not reality TV. That's a documentary.

  • Cut back to Peter and William Shatner dancing barefoot in puddles by the side of the road. Meg comes along the road, and spots them.

    Peter: Aaaargh!
    William: My God! Look out!

    The car skids to a stop, but knocks them both down. Meg and Lois get out.

    Meg: Oh, my God. I hit William Shatner.
    William: Light... growing... dimmer... can't... breathe. Beam me up, God.

    He lays flat on his back, his shirt pops open and his gut pops out. Ensign Ricky and a crowd of people stand watching.

    Ensign: Whoo.

  • Sample dialogue (Score:4, Funny)

    by BorgCopyeditor ( 590345 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @06:43PM (#10423067)
    [shatner mode="kirk"]You don't understand why we must have such diversions? Do not your own people ... seek enjoyment in their own way? So it is with us. You see, we humans ... we need to ... relax ... to entertain ourselves. All of the great leaders in history have realized this: Caesar, Napoleon, Darius of Rigel IV. That's why ... we created ... television. If. You. Deny us. The chance to relax ... we will grow weary of our lives ... our less human lives?[/kirk]
  • From the article: "They don't understand that we opened our hearts to them," Simon said.

    There's the problem right there. Never, ever open your heart to TV executives!!

  • Hey, I SAW him in Iowa (Score:4, Informative)

    by rlthomps-1 ( 545290 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @06:59PM (#10423164) Homepage
    Hey hey! He was at the University of Iowa on Friday to use our satellite uplink for interviews. I work in the same building and we tracked him down and got a pic.... here's the scoop [oculon.org]

  • Set Phasers to 'Ridicule' (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Mulletproof ( 513805 ) on Sunday October 03, 2004 @07:10PM (#10423210) Homepage Journal
    I guess you can look at this two ways... One, a good ol' boy playing a friendly prank on his old town, or the one I'm favoring at the moment; Galaxy Quest primadonna trying to make it off the dying embers of his career. I mean, why his town? Why not some other middle America? I'm thinking because that's where his name was the strongest and would be least likely questioned. In otherwords, the easiest marks they could find. Yeah, so they gave em' a $112,000... BFD. That's called a bribe in order not to litigate Shatner's ass for being played the fool, like every other "you're a fool and we secretly know it" show out there. Besides, only $112,000 to the entire town? They're obviously hoping to make $$$ off it's syndication, which means $100,000 divided by 903 people is fucking peanuts.

    I know they could portray them as decent folk as Rev. Rich Adam hopes, but these shows don't get viewership off folks being good and decent. They get it by putting people in tight spots and making em look like fools. Oh hey, Guess who didn't attend James Doohan's (suffering from Parkinson's disease, diabetes, lung fibrosis and Alzheimer's disease) annointement to the Hollywood Walk of Fame? Probably too busy getting a great hotel rate.

  • Wow (Score:3, Funny)

    by srcosmo ( 73503 ) <ultramegatron@gmail . c om> on Sunday October 03, 2004 @07:11PM (#10423214) Journal
    William Shatner and reality TV, together at last.

    I think I'll go weep for the fate of the world now.

Slashdot Top Deals

"Being against torture ought to be sort of a multipartisan thing." -- Karl Lehenbauer, as amended by Jeff Daiell, a Libertarian

Close