Weird or What? with William Shatner

Absolute mind numbing rubbish. This is the first IMDb review I've made, I couldn't watch this and NOT publicly express my discontent.

First of all I'd like to know what Bill's definition of the word 'weird' is, as 90% of what I saw (in the one episode I watched) was extremely mundane, and was always followed by the host reflecting with "is that weird, or what?". No William, it's not 'weird', you're obviously just predisposed to believing supernatural rubbish and aren't bright enough to identify simple logical fallacies.

To provide an example of the fail inherent to this show, one segment approached the case of 'three eye witnesses of a time traveler!', reenacted the witness accounts, and then made absolutely no effort to debunk the extraordinary claims of these individuals (actually just 3 acquaintances who all knew each other), except to go on and explain that time travel of a completely different kind is known to technically occur in accordance with the laws of relativity - something which has NOTHING to do with the original witness claims. Sorry Bill, but I want to go back to those claims and examine the FACTS...

• only one witness supposedly saw the female traveler 'materialise' - the remaining two witnesses saw the supposed traveler, but did not see anything supernatural occur - at least one witness is a science fiction novelist, obviously he will be predisposed to perceive what he saw as a 'time traveler' - the witnesses claim the materialized woman to be a time traveler, although they never spoke to her, saw her again, or communicated with her in any which way (how on earth did they conclude 'omg time travel!!' ???) - there is NO EVIDENCE THAT THE WITNESS CLAIMS ARE TRUE; no camera footage, no repeat occurrences, no unrelated accounts, nobody actually admitting to being a time traveler, nothing!

It scares me when I see people on here saying things like "this is our favorite family show!!"; honestly you belong to a family of dolts if you believe this stuff.. I think that says it all. Peace.

Back in the 1970s, Leonard Nimoy was the host of a pseudo-scientific show, "In Search of". It featured a lot of crackpot theories, crackpot experts and crackpot assumptions. Now, decades later, William Shatner has helmed a show that makes "In Search of" look like a film created by Nobel Prize winning scientists! Yes, it's THAT bad. Again and again, episodes feature a lot of nutty scientists, weirdos and rogues spouting all sorts of silly nonsense meant to scare the viewer and keep them watching. Intellectually, however, these 'theories' are meaningless claptrap and the arguments they present often bizarre and meaningless. And, again and again, these crazies present their 'evidence'--all followed by Shatner saying '....weird or what?!'. An embarrassment and surely Mr. Shatner can do better...as can the audience.

As long as you don't take it too seriously this show is OK. On the upside it is entertaining. Capt. Kirk (i.e. William Shatner) is an entertaining host, but too much reliance on "personal experiences" leaves plenty of room for doubt and skepticism. I'm in the skeptic camp.

On the credible side there are a few academics that offer a modicum of credibility, but not enough to convince me. There is a crapload of conjecture, most of it extremely questionable garbage. There are many things not physically possible, most notably time travel an parallel universes.

Still, if you don't take it too seriously, the show can be a fun watch.

Usually I find that you come along a load of trife these days on the documentary channels. It's usually something like air-crash investigation this, or another mummy that or just a bunch of middle-aged men carrying out menial and boring jobs. It's nice to see a program that strays away from what all the other programmes are feeding you, and just learn about some weird things.

The best thing about the show is it typically presents quite absurd ideas. Then it just shows different people's opinions on them; with a good ratio between the more skeptical community and the more bonkers people who buy into it all. The contrast is fair and balanced; doing little to try and sway your opinion at all.

The show portrays it all in a fun context; much like mythbusters. It's nice to see something that actually shows you things that are weird in wonderful... rather than fat men running a pawn store or some guys fishing for.. well fish.

Apparently, Shatner will dive to no depth unseen just to compete with Nimoy for camera time. You've heard the stories about onset ba shatter would pull to get fellow actors blocked out of shots. To the movies and the fact that Shatner secured directing duties in STV since Nimoy was given ST4 when he was enticed to come back.

This series is just one of the collateral damage caught on film in that private little war. It's ham strung and piece medaled together with cheesey cliff hangers before commercials and other stuff that by any standard would be labeled "yeah, kind of different" as compared to "weird or what?" But, alas, Bill, Leonard did it first, and did it better. Even if his experts were just as dubious.

More proof of the competition, aside from the movie stuff above, go to you tube and check out "ballad of bilbo baggins" by Leonard Nimoy. Get ready for some laughs. They even have him dressed up in his pointy era and helmet hair cut from Star Trek tos...and he's smiling. It's almost surreal and certainly off putting. Now, ready for this. "Rocket man" from William Shatner on YouTube. You will not be disappointed. It takes itself wayyyy too seriously and puts you in the mood to reflect on the meaning of life......no no.no ...I'm kidding. You'll be laughing even harder on this one.

Enjoy!