Captain Kirk Requests Status Report; NASA Tweets Update

Captain Kirk Requests Status Report; NASA Tweets Update

A Tweet from Star Trek actor William Shatner this past weekend resulted in a Starfleet style report to the "Captain" from NASA.

When it comes to Star Trek, my captain is Kirk. Granted, that's mostly because I'm a relative newcomer to the franchise and I've only managed to watch a season and a half of The Next Generation. Regardless, even if your prefer Picard, there's little denying that Captain Kirk is one of the great sci-fi characters. It's a pop culture position that plain and simple, commands respect.

That, at least, would seem to be the indication of a recent Twitter conversation between NASA and William Shatner. Shatner, who of course played the icon Kirk. It began innocently enough with Shatner Tweeting the famous organization to see how its Saturday was going. "How is NASA doing today?" he asked. NASA, not skipping a beat or an opportunity to show off its lighter side, offered a swift response addressing the actor as "Captain" and reporting as they might to his onscreen alter ego.

"Good day, Captain," Tweeted back NASA. "#ISS is in standard orbit and Commander Swanson has the conn. Hope you're having a great weekend."

Shatner Tweeted back shortly after, but his reply was pretty well lost in the Tweets from fans, many of whom were understandably excited about the exchange. All we need now is for Patrick Stewart to give it a try. I suppose Chris Pine could too, but something tells me that wouldn't excite people quite the same way.

Source: Twitter

Permalink

Adorable. I don't know if there's much else to say, as it is just a little exchange on twitter, but still made me smile. While I do prefer Next Gen, William Shatner is pretty cool.

he's just showing off :P

William Shatner:
those pesky trekkies are everywhere in the space program

pretty much guaranteed "NASA" would reply with style

He's just biding his time until he can pull a Kobiyashi Maru on them.

Sleekit:
he's just showing off :P

William Shatner:
those pesky trekkies are everywhere in the space program

pretty much guaranteed "NASA" would reply with style

Nerd And Space Administration, right? <.<

Yeah this is cute but not incredibly surprising. If you ever watch a convention panel with Trek actors someone will often ask about the space program and the actors will relate how NASA has gone out of its way to court them. With something like "Here are real astronauts lining up to get fake astronauts autographs, amazing!"

Marina Sirtis (Troi from TNG) says her husband still hasn't forgiven her for not letting him come along to a NASA event where it turned out she got to meet Neil Armstrong. Patrick Stewart said he was once talking to someone leading the international space station (presumably over a video feed at some NASA building) and they showed him a picture of all the crew of the ISS in Star Trek uniforms. At first Sir Patrick thought they'd all been photoshopped but the Commander (I think it was) corrected him and said "No, we all wore them."

Lot of Trekkies in the space program, have been almost from the beginning.

I almost feel bad for Chris Pine. I wouldn't want to follow Shatner. The greatness of The Shat looms large.

That said, Pine was a pretty terrible Kirk, but anyone would suffer from the comparison.

You know what would've made that little exhange complete?
If it got this response:

Patrick Steward @SirPatStew:

@NASA @WilliamShatner Make it so!

Only Shatner.

Patrick Stewart might say something droll, George Takei might be wonderfully amusing, John De Lancie would go over his character limit with a witty anecdote or lymric, but only Shatner would play that one straight.

I can imagine the nerd running the twitter seeing that pop in and freaking out with excitement. Must have made their day.

The world would be a better place I think if there were more people with this sense of humor. A good move on NASA's part.

That was pretty cool of him. And it's nice to see NASA have a sense of humor and play along...

Good to see NASA has a sense of humor. Now all we need is for them to make good on those concepts for that Enterprise starship they keep talking about.

FalloutJack:
Only Shatner.

Patrick Stewart might say something droll, George Takei might be wonderfully amusing, John De Lancie would go over his character limit with a witty anecdote or lymric, but only Shatner would play that one straight.

And Avery Brooks would yell at them, because he's badass like that.

ZZoMBiE13:
I almost feel bad for Chris Pine. I wouldn't want to follow Shatner. The greatness of The Shat looms large.

That said, Pine was a pretty terrible Kirk, but anyone would suffer from the comparison.

He's a different Kirk, and I don't think its so bad personally. Hell there was a huge divide when TNG came about, a sort of Trekkie civil war. I don't honestly think people give Abrams' Star Trek the honest critique it deserves. Too many people just compare it to the original which is very unfair. They don't seem to judge it on its merit, just how it stands next to the original show/movies. Solidly biased from the start. Chris Pine's Kirk is different, he grew up differently, with a bit more issues than the first Kirk. His irreverent attitude is more pronounced, his swagger is sometimes nauseating but its supposed to be. Kirk's always been a kind of stubborn rebellious asshole from an outsider's point of view, this Kirk is just a bit more pronounced.
But hey you don't have to like it, just give it a chance on its own instead of comparing.

OT: Shatner, you are some kind of awesome.

Imperioratorex Caprae:

ZZoMBiE13:
I almost feel bad for Chris Pine. I wouldn't want to follow Shatner. The greatness of The Shat looms large.

That said, Pine was a pretty terrible Kirk, but anyone would suffer from the comparison.

He's a different Kirk, and I don't think its so bad personally. Hell there was a huge divide when TNG came about, a sort of Trekkie civil war. I don't honestly think people give Abrams' Star Trek the honest critique it deserves. Too many people just compare it to the original which is very unfair. They don't seem to judge it on its merit, just how it stands next to the original show/movies. Solidly biased from the start. Chris Pine's Kirk is different, he grew up differently, with a bit more issues than the first Kirk. His irreverent attitude is more pronounced, his swagger is sometimes nauseating but its supposed to be. Kirk's always been a kind of stubborn rebellious asshole from an outsider's point of view, this Kirk is just a bit more pronounced.
But hey you don't have to like it, just give it a chance on its own instead of comparing.

OT: Shatner, you are some kind of awesome.

Actually I did give it a fair chance on it's own merits. I went into it wide eyed and hopeful, desperately wanting to like it. All my friends had liked it. I was on board.

And then I saw it.

I even watched it a second time to make sure I wasn't just rushing to judgement. There's good stuff in there, but it's mostly bad for me. And I wasn't a Trekkie from way back either. I jumped on during my college years (i.e. the TNG years). As much as I like Shatner now, I haven't been a fan since the 60s or anything (I wasn't even alive in the 60s). I just don't like much of anything in that movie other than Karl Urban and Eric Bana. Those guys are good in just about anything.

Imperioratorex Caprae:

He's a different Kirk, and I don't think its so bad personally. Hell there was a huge divide when TNG came about, a sort of Trekkie civil war.

at least its a little different in that TNG isn't a reboot...at least they did something "new" back then...just imagine if TNG didn't get past the first two seasons....

Ratty:

Marina Sirtis (Troi from TNG) says her husband still hasn't forgiven her for not letting him come along to a NASA event where it turned out she got to meet Neil Armstrong.

......heh XD

people tend to like dislike Troi...which is a shame because its not like Sirtis had a lot to work with there, I somtimes wonder what her "Yarr" would have been like

ZZoMBiE13:
[snip.

I really hope I'm dead before they ever try and Reboot TNG

....they'll probably do that before we get another original star trek series...*sigh*

Ok now bring in the rest of the crew, because that would be awesome

Imperioratorex Caprae:

ZZoMBiE13:
I almost feel bad for Chris Pine. I wouldn't want to follow Shatner. The greatness of The Shat looms large.

That said, Pine was a pretty terrible Kirk, but anyone would suffer from the comparison.

He's a different Kirk, and I don't think its so bad personally. Hell there was a huge divide when TNG came about, a sort of Trekkie civil war. I don't honestly think people give Abrams' Star Trek the honest critique it deserves. Too many people just compare it to the original which is very unfair. They don't seem to judge it on its merit, just how it stands next to the original show/movies. Solidly biased from the start. Chris Pine's Kirk is different, he grew up differently, with a bit more issues than the first Kirk. His irreverent attitude is more pronounced, his swagger is sometimes nauseating but its supposed to be. Kirk's always been a kind of stubborn rebellious asshole from an outsider's point of view, this Kirk is just a bit more pronounced.
But hey you don't have to like it, just give it a chance on its own instead of comparing.

OT: Shatner, you are some kind of awesome.

They got huge parts of Kirk's character wrong in the new films. He was rebellious and reckless, but he was also incredibly tactical and intelligent. In most of the original episodes, he wins by outsmarting, or out-manourvering his opponent. Even the might Khan falls because Kirk is more experienced in tactical 3D ship combat.

Another example is the Koybiashi Marui Test. In TOS, he won that by making the Klingons fear him, which is far more impressive than just blowing them up.

The new Kirk is a man-child, who cheats and lies, and then wins through plot-magic.

StewShearer:
I've only managed to watch a season and a half of The Next Generation.

God, I hope you weren't going from episode 1.
Seasons 1 and 2 of TNG were absolute torture!
Keep at it though, It does get MUCH MUCH better.

And for the record.
In the Kirk vs Picard thing... I choose Sisko!

Deathlyphil:

Imperioratorex Caprae:

ZZoMBiE13:
I almost feel bad for Chris Pine. I wouldn't want to follow Shatner. The greatness of The Shat looms large.

That said, Pine was a pretty terrible Kirk, but anyone would suffer from the comparison.

He's a different Kirk, and I don't think its so bad personally. Hell there was a huge divide when TNG came about, a sort of Trekkie civil war. I don't honestly think people give Abrams' Star Trek the honest critique it deserves. Too many people just compare it to the original which is very unfair. They don't seem to judge it on its merit, just how it stands next to the original show/movies. Solidly biased from the start. Chris Pine's Kirk is different, he grew up differently, with a bit more issues than the first Kirk. His irreverent attitude is more pronounced, his swagger is sometimes nauseating but its supposed to be. Kirk's always been a kind of stubborn rebellious asshole from an outsider's point of view, this Kirk is just a bit more pronounced.
But hey you don't have to like it, just give it a chance on its own instead of comparing.

OT: Shatner, you are some kind of awesome.

They got huge parts of Kirk's character wrong in the new films. He was rebellious and reckless, but he was also incredibly tactical and intelligent. In most of the original episodes, he wins by outsmarting, or out-manourvering his opponent. Even the might Khan falls because Kirk is more experienced in tactical 3D ship combat.

Another example is the Koybiashi Marui Test. In TOS, he won that by making the Klingons fear him, which is far more impressive than just blowing them up.

The new Kirk is a man-child, who cheats and lies, and then wins through plot-magic.

People turn out different if their past isn't the same. This Kirk grew up without a father, hating Starfleet, etc. Of course he's immature, cocksure and reckless. Moreso than the original, because this isn't TOS. Its not a rehash of the old, its a regroup, reorganizing of it. Also he cheated in both timelines on the Kobayashi Maru after failing twice. (Star Trek II - Wrath of Khan). Check your facts sir/ma'am/androgynous-humanoid.
Also this Kirk is less experienced in Starfleet, in a command position. The timeline is skewed heavily from the original so you're not seeing the same Kirk at all. A different man with different pressures in life shaped him into something new. But he does figure out his own failings and makes progress into becoming a less immature (but still rebellious and somewhat reckless) Kirk.
If you went in expecting the "real" Kirk (and by god is that a pretentious thought) you were setting unreasonable expectations on the movie. But not liking it is OK, just saying its not a bad movie or character if you divorce your perspective from all that came before. Tough to do, I know.

Imperioratorex Caprae:

Deathlyphil:

They got huge parts of Kirk's character wrong in the new films. He was rebellious and reckless, but he was also incredibly tactical and intelligent. In most of the original episodes, he wins by outsmarting, or out-manourvering his opponent. Even the might Khan falls because Kirk is more experienced in tactical 3D ship combat.

Another example is the Koybiashi Marui Test. In TOS, he won that by making the Klingons fear him, which is far more impressive than just blowing them up.

The new Kirk is a man-child, who cheats and lies, and then wins through plot-magic.

People turn out different if their past isn't the same. This Kirk grew up without a father, hating Starfleet, etc. Of course he's immature, cocksure and reckless. Moreso than the original, because this isn't TOS. Its not a rehash of the old, its a regroup, reorganizing of it. Also he cheated in both timelines on the Kobayashi Maru after failing twice. (Star Trek II - Wrath of Khan). Check your facts sir/ma'am/androgynous-humanoid.
Also this Kirk is less experienced in Starfleet, in a command position. The timeline is skewed heavily from the original so you're not seeing the same Kirk at all. A different man with different pressures in life shaped him into something new. But he does figure out his own failings and makes progress into becoming a less immature (but still rebellious and somewhat reckless) Kirk.
If you went in expecting the "real" Kirk (and by god is that a pretentious thought) you were setting unreasonable expectations on the movie. But not liking it is OK, just saying its not a bad movie or character if you divorce your perspective from all that came before. Tough to do, I know.

Yes, he cheated the exam. I never said he didn't. He changed the basic settings so that the Klingons thought he was a mighty warrior, and that wouldn't stand a chance against him in a fight. He won by making the Klingons afraid of him. As I posted above.

The basis of Kirk's character are his intelligence, his tactical prowess, and unshakeable will. The new films ignore these first two points, because that would require good writing, and an actor that has more than one expression. It's far easier to over emphasise the recklessness and womanising side of Kirk, rather than the part that actually made him one of the greatest captains in Starfleet.

As for the new films, I enjoyed the first one. It had plot holes you could drive a borg cube through, but it was entertaining.

The second one however... The only way I can describe it is with quantum physics. You can either watch the piece of fluff that is the story, or try and make sense of what is going on. You can't do both.

Sometimes I kinda wish NASA acted more serious... how am I supposed to take their research seriously if half the time they act like circus performers. Honest.

Deathlyphil:

The second one however... The only way I can describe it is with quantum physics. You can either watch the piece of fluff that is the story, or try and make sense of what is going on. You can't do both.

Interestingly enough I made sense of it from the start, but maybe I'm just one of those loony people who actually like this sort of thing. Sure there are plot holes, but just about every damn movie/book/game has them. Drive yourself crazy nitpicking over them or enjoy whats there. I may just have a different perspective... But hey I'll reiterate that you don't have to like it. And btw, I meant that "facts" crack as a joke, forgot to put my /joke in there.

 

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Register for a free account here