|
|
Just awful, as soon as the world's most annoying voice over started my heart sank.
This series pretends to be a scientific look at superstitions and paranormal myths but is filmed more like a fiction. The viewer is drowned in slow motion shots of the presenter doing not terribly much while he narrates very little of consequence. In fact the series over all is more interested in Sam than the actual content he's meant to be investigating, as he poses in the dark in set piece rooms. Is this how we make data crunching look edgy now rather than showing what actual hard work looks like? Or is it just over compensating for the fact that clearly a team of researchers has already cribbed the data for him?
When people are interviewed who have actual facts to expound they're either overlaid with over the top music or we're left struggling to focus on their data thanks to wobbly camera angles.
Moreover, the information that does get brought in is scanty and spread out over multiple advert breaks. Very, very little is achieved in the time slot compared to other programs tackling the same subject. The longer I watched this the angrier I began to feel that this is how Nat Geo is treating its viewers now. Remember when Nat Geo used to be respected for it's well researched and well presented content? Yes, I'm struggling too, as it seems like such a long time ago now. Seriously, decide what you are and do it properly NG, you're either a documentary or you're a fiction, make your mind up and respect your content as well as the intelligence of your audience.
score 1/10
quantum-nic 10 December 2020
Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw6352879/ |
|
7-3-2021 11:35:02