History channel et al

[Brian Wolle]

I really wonder if any one else has this problem. Sat there watching history and the military channels today -about WWI -really interesting stuff, fascinatiing. Then this thing about Pickett's charge comes on -a repeat but I'm catching it for the first time. And this happens every time to me -it seems that every other sentence, they are saying something that is either misleading or downright wrong and I have to wonder -how do they get all that other stuff so right and the CW stuff so wrong. Then I think, what if the other stuff is wrong too and I go yikes!

One guy said Lee never again attempted a grand assault and even Scott Hartwig said the Confederates were only in Pennsylvania once. I mean, what is the deal?

[Guy Gane III]

Try working on one of those productions! lol One word accurately describes the experience:

STRESS

I hate when you are standing right there... many of the necessary things that are needed for a particular scene are closely available... there are many things that could be done to make a scene more intense.... then boom.... "Um, we don't need this or that... the audience doesn't know the difference... this is MY vision... etc.

As much of a rush as me and my fellow movie addicts get when we work on a particular show... there are times when we question why we even did it anyway. lol :lol:

Truth is, there needs to be a go-between with History Channel and actually get through to them that some of the docs that are out there are done very poorly and very under-budget. Someone needs to let them in on the fact that the fantasy world of Holly-History-Would, could come out with some really great stuff. Like "Stealing Lincoln's Body". I thought the CGI that they did was fantastic and ground breaking.

Not to worry... things shall change soon. ;-)

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

http://www.cwreenactors.com/forum/showthread.php?t=12368&highlight=History+Channel Yep, I tend to agree....

[bob 125th nysvi]

Channel are caught between a rock and a hard place.

Unlike the networks and major cable channels they aren't getting their doors knocked down by people trying to sell them content. Let's face it documentaries just aren't that lucrative. This is the rock, because they are limited in the availability (and some of the things that appear on the History Channel don't even qualify as "hard" history they are more "social" history) of programming. So they pretty much have to take what is offered otherwise they are going to repeat the same three shows all the time.

The hard place is that much of history is open to interpretation. I mean cause and effect (especially effect) can be debated for hours on end. But even "hard" facts are up for debate. We have an estimate of how many men participated in Pickett's (or is it Pickett-Pettigrew's) Charge for the CSA but do we really know how many? Do we really know how many were WIA/KIA? The other part is that most people get lost in the "hard" facts part of history. Again let's face the fact that the average American wants the causes, battles and effects of the CW explained in 10-12 minute segments totaling no more than 1 hour. They want to be entertained not educated.

And then the producers of the documentaries are interested in their subject but they are also interested in making a profit. Thus they cut corners and dumb down the presentation to appeal to a wider audience.

Finally as an example of how "news" is no longer information in the world there is today's wire story about 'Russian Strategic Bombers to be based in Cuba and Venezuela'. Catchy headline right? Let's get everybody all worried, right? Sell ad space right?

Well when you drill into the story you find out, Chavez has offered and island airbase to be used by the Russians, but they haven't accepted. There isn't even a formal offer from Ramon but of course Soviet bombers have been visited Cuba in the past. And then there is the visit by two Russian "startegic bombers" (complete with picture) to Cuba last year.

The "strategic bombers" that visited Cuba last year are a pair of Tu-95 Bear recon planes. They have about as much 'strategic' capability as the Piper Cub sitting at the local airport.

But two 'old slow recon planes' (otherwise known as sitting ducks, what did the Soviet recon crews used to say about contact with the enemy, signal to command: "Enemy sighted, dosvidanyia (sic), Motherland.") doesn't sell headlines does it.

If "news" isn't getting the hard facts right, and that is about what is effecting us to today, why should we expect 'entertainment' to be picky about getting something right that occurred 140 or more years ago.

Sometimes I actually take great comfort in knowing that the programs are wrong. It reminds me that I am actually "smarter (and better educated) than your average bear, Boo-boo" in some areas.

[CUPP]

The history channel giving false information ?!?! Never the Hitler channel does not do that ????

[sbl]

They dragged Flight 19 out for another beating last night.

[sbl]

Now the David and Goliath story is getting the "300" treatment.

[Rob Weaver]

The moral of David and Goliath is simple: NEver employ armor unsupported. ;)

[sbl]

The CGI artist didn't read Samuel 1 verse 17:40. The animated stone wasn't smooth.

[flattop32355]

The CGI artist didn't read Samuel 1 verse 17:40. The animated stone wasn't smooth.

So, it's an alternate history program? ;)

[sbl]

The History Channel's Goliath was bare chested.

1 Samuel 17:4-7 (King James Version)

4And there went out a champion out of the camp of the Philistines, named Goliath, of Gath, whose height was six cubits and a span.

5And he had an helmet of brass upon his head, and he was armed with a coat of mail; and the weight of the coat was five thousand shekels of brass.

6And he had greaves of brass upon his legs, and a target of brass between his shoulders.

7And the staff of his spear was like a weaver's beam; and his spear's head weighed six hundred shekels of iron: and one bearing a shield went before hi



"It there a God Davy?" (Sunday morning TV reference.)

[Irish Bill]

I have stopped watching the history channel and I dont get the military channel. In my opinion most of the good channels have gone to reality tv. I tend to find more enjoyment reading a book on history than watching (supposedly) loggers make "history", or some idiot saying how he saw a monster orwatch people hunt for UFO's. If you ask me, History channel plays the same amount of tripe that MTV or other channels put on. Its sad when I watch a educational channel and feel a little dumber from it.:confused:

[sbl]

I tuned in to HC specially for the Warfare BC series, but as I wrote, it's "300" with the CGI and stop/start editing style. Funny, the HC's version of Thermopylae was pretty good. I like the former army ranger who tries ancient weapons. If I want entertainment straight, it's Sci-Fi, Comedy Central, and Cartoon Network. I don't know if you saw MTV when it started in the 80s but it actually showed music videos.

[Irish Bill]

well i didnt watch mtv in the 80s but they did have some in the 90s ... til mtv2 came out and now that hardly even shows music vids. but sometimes I feel like elvis and just wanna shoot my tv. But I will watch Doctor who (old and new) when it is on!

[johnerys]

The thing that really bothered me about the Pickett's Charge show was that they spent all kind of time and effort doing tests to show why more Confederates weren't killed but missed the obvious - with all the smoke from artillery and muskets you probably couldn't see very far and those that could were scared and may have been firing blindly without much effort to aim. And of course not every projectile fired hit something. It's almost like they started with the conclusion that most of Pickett's men stopped at the road then worked backwards trying to prove it.

[ejazzyjeff]

Pickett's Charge show was that they spent all kind of time and effort doing tests to show why more Confederates weren't killed but missed the obvious

If I remember, I thought they were basing their findings on the fact that the stories/map mader afterwards claimed thousands where killed during the charge, but in real life the casualties was not that high.

[Brian Wolle]

I'm still wondering, as I'm sure you guys know better... do they get the other stuff wrong as well? To the same degree? If so, I throw up the towel.

[Rob Weaver]

I don't know if you saw MTV when it started in the 80s but it actually showed music videos.
Remember Martha Quinn? (sigh)

[sbl]

Yes I do....I also remember when Don Imus was a VJ on VH-1.

[sbl]

I have to go back and read read the OT to see when all the details of the battles and armor came from.

[Rob Weaver]

I have to go back and read read the OT to see when all the details of the battles and armor came from.
There's a lot of good military detail in the OT histories, but expect to consult a Hebrew, or at least Greek text for the real eye openers.

[sbl]

Thank you Rob....I'll have to learn to read Greek and Hebrew. :)

[Rob Weaver]

Modern translations don't tend to take into account the nuances of military language. After all, the primary purpose of the text isn't military, or even historical. If "shield" or "sword" or "cavalryman" will do in English, that's what they tend to go with, even though the orginal word held shades of meaning. 40 years ago, Ygael Yadin (sp?) wrote a great book called "Warfare in Biblical Lands" or something generic sounding like that. It's an awesome book and will tell you more about bronze age middle eastern warfare than you ever wanted to know. Knowing how truly militarily feeble the Hebrews were, and how much the world around Israel was in flux circa 1400-1000 BC really enriches the story.

[sbl]

Neat! Amazon has it. Too much for me at $100.00. I'll have to see if my local library can get it.

The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands In the Light of Archaeological Study Volumes 1 and 2 (Hardcover)
by Yigael Yadin (Author)

[bob 125th nysvi]

Yes I do....I also remember when Don Imus was a VJ on VH-1.

from radio BEFORE he was exilied to Cleveland

[toptimlrd]

Remember Martha Quinn? (sigh)
She has an 80's show on XM and I think Sirius now.

Ahhh the 80's when MTV actually was about music.

[sbl]

I hope this is a recent photo....

http://blogs.tampabay.com/80s/images/2007/08/22/martha_quinn.jpg

[Rob Weaver]

Neat! Amazon has it. Too much for me at $100.00. I'll have to see if my local library can get it.

The Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands In the Light of Archaeological Study Volumes 1 and 2 (Hardcover)
by Yigael Yadin (Author)
That's it! I only have volume 1, which is the text. Volume 2 is mostly the color plates. As beautiful as they are, you can get by without them.

[Rob Weaver]

As I write, the History Channel just finished a program about the cardinal sin of "sloth," and is currently in the middle of a discussion of **** and Satan. Frankly, the treatment of the Christian understanding was more orthodox than I've heard opined in many churches. As much as I enjoy theology - it is my calling after all - how is this history, per se?

[sbl]

It's not history, the 7 Deadlies and the Divine Commedy are more like "fan fiction." I did understand that Gluttony could be a "gate way sin" to other sins.

I enjoyed the episode of "Warriors with Terry Schappert" about the Knights of Malta vs. the Ottomans. I was surprised that my RC wife hadn't heard of knights or the siege.

http://www.history.com/video.do?name=warriors&bcpid=12040020001&bclid=17037604001&bctid=17048184001

[Private Glover]

Ah, Martha. My sweet!