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

Why do you have to ruin everything good in my life? LOL

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.

hadsil on May 15, 2008 at 10:22 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.

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

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.

Personally, I was not offended by his “Get A Life” sketch on Saturday Night Live. I found it quite funny.

- The Cat

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.”

Outlander on May 15, 2008 at 8:59 AM

Why would someone right-of-center endorse this stuff?

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.

Whatta fun film. They manage homage and sendup all in the same hilarious package. BTW Tim Allen as Shatneresque prima donna is terrific.

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

But I am recouparating with the help of Battlestar Galactica. LOL

Bladerunner1701 on May 15, 2008 at 9:25 AM

Frak yes!

Shatner cheerfully replies: “Because this series takes place in the future.”

I’m sorry, I can’t hear you over the sound of how awesome I am.”

LOL

“Let’s get out of here before one of those things kills Guy!”

inviolet on May 15, 2008 at 11:23 AM

Oh, that’s not RIGHT! :)

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

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.

And…Galaxy Quest is awesome
“That was a helluva ride.”

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

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.

Galaxy Quest is epic.

OneGyT on May 15, 2008 at 10:40 AM

“Let’s get out of here before one of those things kills Guy!”

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.

Asher on May 15, 2008 at 10:51 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.

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.

You’re talking about Kirktrek, Outlander is talking about Picardtrek.

James on May 15, 2008 at 10:25 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.