Shatner: I don’t know why they despise my greatness
posted at 7:45 am on May 15, 2008 by Ed Morrissey
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
As a fan of Star Trek, I appreciate William Shatner’s work, but his ego … well, that’s a different story. He has written a new autobiography called Up Till Now in which he explains, in part, some of the controversies with his co-stars from the series, which have been legendary. He appeared with Bill O’Reilly last night in a segment that suggests he hasn’t learned much at all:
Shatner wrote a book several years ago, Star Trek Memories, in which he recounts the feuds a little more honestly. Nichelle Nichols asked Shatner whether he wanted to hear why his fellow cast members despised him while researching that book, and he faithfully recorded her hurts and those of the other supposedly secondary characters (besides himself, Leonard Nimoy, and DeForest Kelley). James Doohan refused to speak with him, and George Takei decided to focus on more pleasant memories, but the others confirmed Nichols’ complaints.
Perhaps O’Reilly rushed him through the segment, but it sounds like Shatner has decided to minimize those issues and blame immaturity on behalf of the Star Trek cast for their hurt feelings. As Shatner himself explained in his earlier book, the resentment came from Shatner’s constant whittling away at their screen time, arguing often to shunt them out of significant work on the series. It wasn’t an irrational issue, and for actors struggling to establish their careers, having lines taken away and getting cut out of scenes because the star wants more time doesn’t sound like a maturity issue — at least not on their part.
When Shatner tells O’Reilly that they despised him for no good reason, well …. Perhaps Shatner should see Galaxy Quest, which delivers a dead-on skewering of the long-rumored Trek dissension. In the movie, Tim Allen’s character finally grasps the damage he did. In real life, apparently, not so much.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
They’re a bunch of actors on a tv show.
I liked the show.
But as for them…who cares?
Mr. Bingley on May 15, 2008 at 7:54 AM
Love Shatner. Love Star Trek original series (watch it on TV Land every weekday morning at 6am while getting ready for work.)
But, no surprises here when it comes to actors and their egos(same goes for politicians)except that Shatner for once seems sober during this interview.
Brat on May 15, 2008 at 7:59 AM
WARNING: Contents may shift our of place during beaming.
Shy Guy on May 15, 2008 at 8:01 AM
Not only were they a bunch of actors on a TV show, but the show itself wasn’t an ensemble. Aside from Kirk, Spock, and McCoy any of those parts could’ve been played by anyone (and often were, when you look at how many actors sat in the seats in front of Kirk over the life of the show). That’s not a knock on the supporting cast, they did great jobs with what they were given, but they weren’t given much. I think they need to remember that without the star of the show and his iconic performance they would have continued to be B-list character actors doing bit parts, instead of making a career out of con appearances and six profitable movies. I mean really… who among them had a breakout career between the time the show ended and the time the first movie started shooting?
So Shatner was a prima-donna. Most leading actors are. That’s no reason to hold a grudge for forty years and take it to the grave (in the case of Doohan). Life’s too short for that.
crazy_legs on May 15, 2008 at 8:04 AM
The screen cap of Shatner that goes with this story makes him look a little bit like the creature on the airplane wing in “Nightmare at 20,000 Feet”. If he wasn’t shaving, the resemblance would be perfect.
jon1979 on May 15, 2008 at 8:07 AM
Who cares…except for the trekkies, and then once again, who cares?
right2bright on May 15, 2008 at 8:08 AM
Maybe I missed something in the interview but I don’t think the headline matches what he actually said.
It seems he took credit for his jealousy of spoke and then simply said the others told him they despised him… along some fairly sound advice about life near the end.
What did I miss?
12thman on May 15, 2008 at 8:13 AM
s/spoke/Spock/g
I’ve added Galaxy Quest to my NetFlix queue. Maybe I will understand better after a viewing.
12thman on May 15, 2008 at 8:16 AM
I can never tell when Shatner is being himself or when he’s playing the role of Shatner.
jnelchef on May 15, 2008 at 8:26 AM
Shatner is living proof that you don’t have to be liked by your peers in order to be remembered by your fans.
fossten on May 15, 2008 at 8:28 AM
William Shatner
David Carradine
Bruce Campbell
The Holy Trinity of Awesomeness
MadisonConservative on May 15, 2008 at 8:28 AM
Too coarse an analysis, I think. Shatner leads with remarking on his own jealousy of Nimoy. His comments at the end – think about choices because they reverberate – is hardly pointing the finger either.
This post and the interview don’t match up.
Spirit of 1776 on May 15, 2008 at 8:29 AM
I like the way he is able to laugh at himself and does all those silly commercials on tv.
surrounded on May 15, 2008 at 8:30 AM
Spirit, watch when O’Reilly asks him why Nichols despises him and he shrugs and says, “I don’t know”. Then watch towards the end of the interview when O’Reilly asks him why Boston Legal doesn’t have the same problems, and he attributes it to the maturity of the cast.
Ed Morrissey on May 15, 2008 at 8:34 AM
Surrounded, me too. He’s not a bad guy, but just clueless sometimes, and in this case, he has an apparent retrograde cluelessness.
Ed Morrissey on May 15, 2008 at 8:35 AM
He’s talking about actors who have already made their bones. Candice Bergen and James Spader were both stars in the 80s, so they’re doing this more as an afterthought. They’re not up-and-comers, which is what nearly everyone in the original Star Trek was. I think that was what he was referring to by maturity.
MadisonConservative on May 15, 2008 at 8:36 AM
Galaxy Quest is great. Non-trekkies can get a good laugh at the cast’s and other trekkies’ expense. Of course Trekkies get even more enjoyment out of it because they can laugh at themselves and can relate to the detailed resemblances to the cast.
shick on May 15, 2008 at 8:44 AM
Says that he never got a good reason. Why does she despise him?
To say that Shatner is putting himself above the others in their jealousy, etc or degrading their maturity is unfair. Again, he starts by his acknowledgment of his jealousy of Nimoy.
Boston Legal is totally different. Those are all older established actors. They are OLDER by age, which naturally leads to increased maturity usually, and by experience in acting.
Spirit of 1776 on May 15, 2008 at 8:46 AM
Shatner is the man.
Alien attacks. Red shirt guy dies. Kirk does a quick roll and rips his shirt. Then he falls in love with the green skinned alien babe.
Who could ask for anything more?
shick on May 15, 2008 at 8:47 AM
I remember being an actor in HS, and it was all ego. It got worse when I hit college, so I switched from theater arts to chemistry. Now I have to deal with academic egos.
Just goes to show you that ego is not limited to acting and politics.
Nethicus on May 15, 2008 at 8:49 AM
Since no one else will talk to Bill, Collie have YOU got anyting to say?
My collie says:
Do you suppose that he’ll ever admit that he’s been beat by Travelocity’s roaming gnome?
My collie says:
That’s right. He doesn’t believe in the “no-win” situation. Hmmm. Wait until he sees what happens to the Republicans in November.
CyberCipher on May 15, 2008 at 8:50 AM
I hate to turn everything political, but as someone who has watched a fair bit of Star Trek shows, I’ve always wondered… Why would someone right-of-center endorse this stuff? The original Star Trek was hilarious for the reasons shick articulated, but all the newer ones were, in my view, commie propaganda. You had a military junta (starfleet) running around “saving” the galaxy from itself, constant criticism of capitalism (complete with making the show’s capitalist race, the ferengi, look like vermin) and money and so forth. The show is commie!
Outlander on May 15, 2008 at 8:59 AM
I didn’t see this interview but I did catch some excerpts from his chat with Glenn Beck.
He really creeped me out: he blamed “all the world’s problems” on overpopulation, which should be a big red flag to anyone who knows anything about history. Run quickly from anyone who claims that everything would be great if we could just make a couple billion people disappear.
Who else suffered through this morning’s Star Trek rerun, by the way (where the ship is infested with Space Hippies)?
In space, no one can smell hippies.
saint kansas on May 15, 2008 at 8:59 AM
We reach, man.
Brat on May 15, 2008 at 9:03 AM
Geriatric edition?
Darth Executor on May 15, 2008 at 9:03 AM
And don’t be a “Herbert.”
Brat on May 15, 2008 at 9:05 AM
Strafleet was just an arm of the Federation, much like the US military is, and as far as I could tell it was still a capitalist society. I dunno where you got the commie stuff.
Darth Executor on May 15, 2008 at 9:06 AM
Shatner continued his shilling on WBIG (FM 100.3) in the DC area this morning. I changed the station…
rbb on May 15, 2008 at 9:07 AM
I was SOOOO Gonna say That!
Bladerunner1701 on May 15, 2008 at 9:13 AM
AT FIRST, it was still a capitalist society, and there were episodes that bragged on how America itself di things to make the whole world better. Uhura comes from the United States of Africa for Petes sake. LATER however, after Rodenberry got older and no longer cared, the show took a turn for the worse. Captain Archer ACTUALLY tells a Ferengi (Star Treks stab at capitalism) That Capitalism nearly destroyed Earth. They dont have money (though in the original show they had credits), they only work to better mankind and society and the acquisition of weatlh is no longer the driving force in peoples lives. They are COMMUNISTS. As you can see I know more about the show than any normal person should and being a conservative this change in the shows intent REALLY upset me. But I am recouparating with the help of Battlestar Galactica. LOL
Bladerunner1701 on May 15, 2008 at 9:25 AM
I’d call it Shatner Agonistes if I had any idea what Agonistes meant.
mymanpotsandpans on May 15, 2008 at 9:27 AM
OH, and after the original show, Starfleet became a scientific exploration organization. They said SEVERAL times on the show Starfleet was NOT the military. This also doesn’t mesh well with Kirks Star Trek witch was actually very Pro-American and Starfleet was obviously one of the Armed Forces. I hate the show now. Pisses me off they did that to it.
Bladerunner1701 on May 15, 2008 at 9:31 AM
Star Trek is hokey. Always has been, always will be.
robblefarian on May 15, 2008 at 9:41 AM
It’s a friggin’ 40 year old TV show!!!! It’s Hollywood! Nothing real happened. Sheesh! Calm down.
Terri on May 15, 2008 at 9:45 AM
No, it sounds like business as usual.
Not sure where you’re getting the idea from that tv business in the 60s somehow didn’t involve backstabbing and hubris.
Niko on May 15, 2008 at 9:47 AM
He sounds a bit like the Roger Waters of Star Trek…..
Think_b4_speaking on May 15, 2008 at 9:48 AM
I wish O’Reilly wouldn’t have kept cutting Shatner off when he was talking about the guy he hit back. I wanted to hear the end of that story.
Maxx on May 15, 2008 at 9:48 AM
The later series i.e. Next-Gen, Deep-Spoof 9, Vger were ALL ABOUT social commentary — and it was ALL leftist propaganda. That’s why I prefer the original series with its cheesy sets, bad dialog, and laughable sound tracks. I can’t watch the later series without groaning in disgust at least once per episode.
My collie says:
You don’t have the lobes for it.
CyberCipher on May 15, 2008 at 9:49 AM
I don’t know”. Then watch towards the end of the interview when O’Reilly asks him why Boston Legal doesn’t have the same problems, and he attributes it to the maturity of the cast.
I agree with the others, it means that the BL cast isn’t a bunch of people paranoid about screen time & who already have a catalog of successes & w/o the jealousies that HE ADMITTED that he partook. The title of this thread really SHOULD change.
BTW, weren’t the Star Trek movies brought about by Shatner? Didn’t he make all of the other actors multi-millionaires (if they already weren’t; those things made them beyond comfortable for the rest of their lives) by incorporating the ‘old’ cast into a newer age? Were he that big of an egomaniac, he could’ve done a John Ritter and brushed off the old cast when starting up a new brand w/the same primary characters.
Don’t forget, this is in a book that he’s hawking. Everyone knows that you play up anything you can to generate ‘buzz’ in order to push your latest, which is exactly what he’s doing with all those mentions of “friction” among those folks who have been his friends for many, many years.
rjwest21 on May 15, 2008 at 9:50 AM
ditto that. And travelocity has always been better than priceline.
I also took from the interview that Shatner said that he himself was jealous and regretted being jealous. If someone asks you why someone else hates you, there’s really nothing you can say. If you guess and you are wrong, well that’s out there and it doesn’t answer the question. The correct answer is always ‘you’ll have to ask them’. Otherwise you are setting yourself up with any answer.
As for me, I dream to be hated. It’s my goal.
ThackerAgency on May 15, 2008 at 9:51 AM
maybe she wanted more than just a kiss…you know a woman scorned….
right4life on May 15, 2008 at 9:54 AM
as long as the right (left-wing) people hate you, then you know you’re on the right track!
right4life on May 15, 2008 at 9:55 AM
Someone needs to give Shatner a cable show of his own. Maybe he can do “Point/Counterpoint” with Keith Olberman on MSNBC. I’d love to watch that exchange!
Steve McCullough on May 15, 2008 at 9:59 AM
I enjoyed all of the series but DS9 was my favourite in terms of redeeming the show from it’s liberal moments.
The Cardassian / Dominion threat was contained within their borders and Sisko, Martok and the Starfleet admiral decided that instead of letting the enemy regroup and rebuild, the fleet was going to go in and destroy them and eliminate the threat. Worked for me.
Canadian Infidel on May 15, 2008 at 10:00 AM
Because the original series had balance. Heck, there were two episodes I can think of off the top of my head that Roddenberry himself wrote that were quite patriotic – one was where the crew found a post-apocalyptic United States fighting for their lands back after being taken over by Asian communists, the other was a pro-Viet Nam episode.
Roddenberry was a patriot (fighter pilot in WWII, police office after that), and at one time when he was asked why there were so many “races” on the bridge of the Enterprise simply stated something to the effect of, “in the future if a black woman is sitting there on the bridge, she’s obviously the most qualified person for the job.”
Like Bladerunner1701 said, it was only after Roddenberry got older and handed the reigns over to Rick Berman that things took a turn for the worse. Berman single-handedly ruined the entire franchise.
crazy_legs on May 15, 2008 at 10:08 AM
Too much…overacting. Spittle…flies everywhere. The shame…is absent. The word ’sir’ becomes…a dagger to the throat.
James on May 15, 2008 at 10:13 AM
O’Reilly’s trademark.
whitetop on May 15, 2008 at 10:14 AM
They are COMMUNISTS. As you can see I know more about the show than any normal person should and being a conservative this change in the shows intent REALLY upset me. But I am recouparating with the help of Battlestar Galactica. LOL
Bladerunner1701 on May 15, 2008 at 9:25 AM
Battlestar Galactica is no better! They had an interview with the producers who basically conceded the show was a jab at Bush and the Iraq war. New Caprica = Iraq dude.. At one point, they even had the Dick Cheney analog (Admiral Cain, a lesbian (probably made that way to take another swipe at Cheney for his daughter)) orders the people on her ship to gang rape the #6 they captured. I watched the show through “Razor,” but have refused to watch season 4.
Outlander on May 15, 2008 at 10:17 AM
It was hardly ‘commie’. If you’ve seen The Omega Glory, which is silly but patriotic, you wouldn’t say that. Roddenberry was a bit of a pollyanna about the future and something of a hack writer, but not really a Leftist. There was a lot of silliness in Star Trek, but it wasn’t preachy leftist dogma.
Asher on May 15, 2008 at 10:19 AM
Maybe, maybe not.
They say that consistency is a virtue. If nothing else, Shatner is a proud man. What he knows and what he admits are two very separate things. But then, that is the case with us all more or less.
maverick muse on May 15, 2008 at 10:25 AM
You’re talking about Kirktrek, Outlander is talking about Picardtrek.
James on May 15, 2008 at 10:25 AM
And The Best of Both Worlds was just great television. If you didn’t like any of the shows, then fine. The whole ‘no money’ thing didn’t work for them, so they killed two birds with one stone by reworking a failed race (Ferengi) and a failed idea (no money).
And it’s fantasy/science fiction anyway. When you are suspending your disbelief, it’s a lot easier to ignore the goofy stuff, political and scientific, than most genres.
Asher on May 15, 2008 at 10:29 AM
He must be great. He is pulling more comments then Chavez.
Limerick on May 15, 2008 at 10:30 AM
He does that all the time. It’s his way of basically saying “All right, my three second attention span is up, and I need some more of my own voice, and I don’t care what you’re saying.”
My father has the exact same habit, and it bugs the hell out of me.
MadisonConservative on May 15, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Galaxy Quest is epic.
OneGyT on May 15, 2008 at 10:40 AM
I get that, but I think my point is that when I watched TOS or TNG as a kid, I totally didn’t buy into the transporter, for instance, because there is hard science that says that if you actually perfected such a technology, it would be a copy of you and not the original. But I could give it a pass, because there were other things I enjoyed about the show.
When they came up with the ‘no money’ thing in TNG, again I thought it was silly and wouldn’t work, but it’s science-fiction, I could give it a pass. Especially since the rest of the show is incompatible with collectivism. They couldn’t be communist because they are self-reliant and everyone isn’t poor and miserable.
If we are talking about Law and Order, it’s a different conversation. That is also a show I enjoy, but I recall an episode that involved lawsuits against gun makers. There wasn’t an opportunity for me to suspend my disbelief in that situation. It’s a totally different kind of drama.
Asher on May 15, 2008 at 10:51 AM
I rise to associate myself with the comments in praise of GalaxyQuest. It’s a lot of fun.
As for Star Trek’s economics, the way I always understood it as an economist had to do with energy-matter conversion technology like the replicators. If you eliminate scarcity (for all intents and purposes) you eliminate one of the fundamental issues (and yardsticks) in economics — how to address unlimited wants with limited means.
DrSteve on May 15, 2008 at 11:02 AM
He is Keerok!
Nosferightu on May 15, 2008 at 11:03 AM
The referred to the “no money” thing in the Whale Movie as well. I always assumed they were talking about cash, and that in the future everybody uses credit cards. Your average Federation citizen is probably deep in hock to the Ferengi.
Nosferightu on May 15, 2008 at 11:17 AM
You will. Oh, you will. LOL
Whatta fun film. They manage homage and sendup all in the same hilarious package. BTW Tim Allen as Shatneresque prima donna is terrific.
“Let’s get out of here before one of those things kills Guy!”
inviolet on May 15, 2008 at 11:23 AM
…the other reason they call him “Shat.”
And…Galaxy Quest is awesome
“That was a helluva ride.”
29Victor on May 15, 2008 at 11:31 AM
I agree. I adore him and I didn’t see any ego. What I saw was an aging man who wishes he had behaved better in his youth. I feel the same way about myself.
Glynn on May 15, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Oh, that’s not RIGHT! :)
Glynn on May 15, 2008 at 12:04 PM
Check out this page – the first “inspirational poster” is the best one, naturally!
I’m sorry, I can’t hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.”
LOL
Sir Loin on May 15, 2008 at 12:05 PM
Old story (definitely not true, but should be): A Muslim mullah meets Shatner, and after shaking his hand and telling him he loves the old “Star Trek,” he asks him why there are Russians, Africans, Scots, and others on board the ship, but no Muslims.
Shatner cheerfully replies: “Because this series takes place in the future.”
bonnie_ on May 15, 2008 at 12:24 PM
http://echosphere.net/star_trek_insp/insp_captkirk_preview.jpg
TheUnrepentantGeek on May 15, 2008 at 12:42 PM
Frak yes!
Squid Shark on May 15, 2008 at 12:48 PM
I always liked Alan Rickman as the “serious” actor forced too live his career out in makeup playing second fiddle to the “lead” was classic.
I loved the commercial that Leanard Nimoy did with Shatner
Squid Shark on May 15, 2008 at 12:52 PM
“I see you managed to get your shirt off.”
DrSteve on May 15, 2008 at 1:28 PM
Because they emphasize personal responsibility and they don’t (usually) get into moral quandaries about blowing the crap out of aliens that deserve it. They also don’t (again, usually) concern themselves with alien cultures, preferring to spread the ideas (and in Kirk’s case, the seed) of humanity wherever they go.
Kafir on May 15, 2008 at 2:22 PM
Blame Shatner’s rant on the Trek episode where half of his brain beamed up first and the other half ended up on Boston Legal.
saved on May 15, 2008 at 3:11 PM
On at least one issue, Star Trek frequently leaned towards conservatism: bioethics. Eugenics, genetic engineering, and euthanasia were always portrayed in a bad light, and both Kirk and Picard openly criticized eugenics.
Some of my favorite lines from Galaxy Quest:
“Look around you. Can you form some rudimentary lathe?”
“And it exploded.”
“By Grabthar’s Hammer. What a savings.”
Bill Ramey on May 15, 2008 at 5:28 PM
Who’s Bill O’Reilly and who gives a rat’s butt? Shatner was Kirk…all we need to know! He rocked in the show! Without him Star Trek would have sucked! He and Spock made the show, the rest of the cast was for decoration and should be thankful for the pay checks! Again, who is Bill O. and why did he intrude on Captain Kirk’s time on-screen!
sabbott on May 15, 2008 at 5:33 PM
Did Shatner make a joke about O’Reilly’s outburst?
- The Cat
MirCat on May 15, 2008 at 7:11 PM
ahhhh….you’re over analyzing the whole thing. wasting your time. he’s a good guy, we all have our faults. I would LOVE to hear the faults and short comings that created that anger towards him of his fellow actors!. Now THERE is something you WONT hear. I think its a classic example of reaching up and stretching really high with a really long banana knife, held at the ends of ones fingers, therefore giving one little strength (graphic enough for ya?)to take a whack at the top of the totem pole. And its more amusing when multiple people do it all at once. I got a sense that totem pole has moss on all sides.
eplain on May 15, 2008 at 9:54 PM
I’m more bugged of people saying Shatner can’t act. He can so. The only proof I need is “T. J. Hooker”. When I watched that show, I only saw him as the cop T J Hooker, not Captain Kirk. For that to happen takes great acting. Only two episodes made a Captain Kirk appearance. In one, he reluctantly goes to Chinatown because it involved an old acquaintance. A picture of his face in his younger days is shown. It may not have been a Star Trek shot, but it was “Captain Kirk”. The second episode was when Leonard Nimoy guest starred as a stunt casting. No Star Trek references were made, but it was the whole point.
Personally, I was not offended by his “Get A Life” sketch on Saturday Night Live. I found it quite funny.
hadsil on May 15, 2008 at 10:22 PM
Bingo. Of course, once you eliminate material scarcity as an economic issue, who knows what you would have?
You could write some really good science fiction speculating about the results, but that would have been beside the point of Star Trek, which was all about exploration through the galaxy, not the effects of future technology on social structures.
Part of the charm of TOS is that they just ignored that issue and told other stories. Of course, TNG then decided to make capitalism look evil in the form of the Ferengi. But then, science fiction stories have always said a lot more about the writer’s viewpoints than about the future.
Fortunately, DS9 pulled back from the precipice of political correctness. Unfortunately, Voyager went completely over the cliff. Enterprise redeemed the Trek franchise somewhat, though probably just because they were not so far in the future, and were therefore less “advanced.”
Leftists always ruin things that start off good or great. It’s just their karma.
theregoestheneighborhood on May 15, 2008 at 11:10 PM
I agree. Before T. J. Hooker, everyone knew William Shatner as Captain James T. Kirk. I never got into Hooker, but I well remember there were a lot of people who saw Shatner as T.J. Hooker, and barely remembered he had been Captain Kirk. For Shatner to be nearly typecast as a police officer after being nearly typecast as a starship captain is actually pretty impressive.
He’s not the most subtle actor, but it’s really not fair to claim he can’t act. I always thought Leonard Nimoy did a great job, and he actually starred for several years in Mission Impossible, but there’s no denying that Shatner’s career has been more impressive overall.
theregoestheneighborhood on May 15, 2008 at 11:16 PM
Why do you have to ruin everything good in my life? LOL
Bladerunner1701 on May 16, 2008 at 5:02 AM
Comment pages: