|Index||6 reviews in total|
I try to catch Weird or What at every opportunity. Not only to I get to
listen to the hypnotic voice of William Shatner, I get to hear some
pretty far out stuff that may or may not be true but always makes for
fascinating conversation at our dinner table.
If you like watching docs about Nostradamus, you'll love Weird or What? UFOers, Trekkers, and kids alike will enjoy it.
Lightweight, great interviews from scientists and quasi scientists alike who offer alternative explanations for out of the ordinary occurrences.
Don't expect hard science, temporarily suspend your belief and let your imagination rule the hour.
Some of Mr. Shatner's stick is so hilarious it's worth watching just to see it. The science is lite, something to think about without straining your brain. If NOVA is like eating, this show is like chewing gum. Topics are explored from several points of view. The science is real, but the topics are not covered in great depth. I feel the balance is good for an entertainment show. The deadpan delivery used to introduce weird topics like zombies or Mothman cracks me up. Some of the things that are explored are just silly, but it all seems to work. Mr. Shatner reminds me a little of "Elvira Mistress of The Dark" hosting movies.... except it is executed with that wonderful Shatner flair. It's all in good fun. Weird or What?.. I enjoy it!
*** This review may contain spoilers ***
We absolutely love this show!! We seen it several times and it was entertaining, factual and just fun to watch. You can't go wrong with being challenged if an event is weird or what. The audience is out there and eventually they will find this show and love it, too. I find that there is evidence presented, action by actors or by William Shatner and it was fun to decide whether it was true or not. Some things out there are just weird and what is wrong with presenting some weird facts. We enjoyed the scenery presented, the commentary by Wm. Shatner and the possibility of presentation of weird or not facts. Television is entertaining, at times, and we found that this show is entertaining.
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.
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.
Can plants read minds? That's just one of the many questions posed by
this show and the answer is quite obviously no, don't be bloody
ridiculous. If you say otherwise I want to see some proof or at least
something that strongly suggests there may be something the botanists
around the world have missed, not some unqualified Indian scam artist
telling me otherwise. Hook him up to the lie detector instead of the
plant and we might get somewhere. Real botanists don't work out of
their messy garage.
I do like paranormal and unusual shows but I draw the line here. Is it weird or what that a man has been struck by lightning six times? No, again it's just completely stupid to stand out in a lightning storm holding metal objects. What's weird is he didn't think to go inside after being hit the fifth time.
Aside from the fact that every single thing proposed has no evidence the format of the show is highly annoying. It repeats itself over and over again. I say it repeats itself over and....yes it's annoying isn't it? Couple that with a director that isn't happy unless he is panning in, zooming out or speeding up the film and you just have a complete mess of a show.
Like I say I'm not someone who gets upset at being presented with alternative ideas but they have to be something credible and they have to be presented in a reasonable way. Telling me that someone who had a heart transplant had a sudden urge for chicken nuggets and his donor had some chicken nuggets on their person when they died is just insulting my intelligence. To do it while zooming the camera in no less than 15 times on the same shot of a grotesque scene of heart surgery earns this show the lowest possible rating and my heartfelt contempt.
Don't waste your time this is complete crap.
|Ratings||Plot keywords||Main details|
|Your user reviews||Your vote history|