As a fan of Wildlife programmes I was eagerly anticipating the BBC's much heralded Planet Earth Live. Having watched two slots I'm still waiting to see something live apart from two shots, both generated by heat seeking infrared cameras and both of which would have been indistinguishable if the presenter hadn't told us what they were.
That babbling tw*t Hammond seems more interested in pointing out it rains a lot and the woman involved let's us know that bear cubs are cuddly. So far the only live piece of animal related activity is the dissection of a wolf's turd. The next thing is perhaps the startling fact that "bears sh8t in the woods".
I was looking forward to this too but after 20 minutes of it on Sunday night I gave up.
I really think Hammond should stick to talking about inane drivel with Clarkson, and Bradbury should stick to trogging through the Lake District in the footsteps of Wainwright (which I quite enjoyed).
Quote from: ABERS on May 10, 2012, 08:00:00 AM
The next thing is perhaps the startling fact that "bears sh8t in the woods".
I wondered what I keep putting my foot in! :doh:
To be fair, the Masai Mara at night isn't a great choice for available light filming....
Quote from: Jonathan on May 10, 2012, 09:35:00 AM
To be fair, the Masai Mara at night isn't a great choice for available light filming....
I know that and
you know that, but....etc. etc.
I gave up and wathcch some thing else
I wanted to like this programme, I really did. However I also switched over after a few minutes. Richard Hammond seemed to waffle on needlessly.
It appears that the BBC is getting some flack over this program and the lack of live material. :uglystupid2:
The beasts were picked up by thermal imaging cameras in Kenya – and made up a disappointing five minutes of the 70-minute programme.
Viewers have now called on the BBC to scrap the series for its lack of live animal footage and criticised the 'inane drivel' from co-presenter Richard Hammond.
One comment on the BBC's Points of View site said of the Top Gear host: 'He's more interested in trying to be funny and should stick to low grade, inane series that he can't ruin.'
Another viewer posted on The Week's website: 'What was built up as a fascinating live series of broadcasts turned into a celeb-led, dumbed-down amalgam of 'recorded earlier' and gurning to camera.
The first episode, which also featured co-presenter Julia Bradbury in the US, included only about 20 minutes of live television between pre-recorded footage of animals.
Another comment to PoV read: 'So, let me get this right. The only 'live' aspect to this show is Hammond presenting the links from a dark and rainy Kenya?'
Another added: 'They should at least cancel the remaining episodes.'
Hammond has claimed he has a 'lifelong passion' for wildlife.
Read more: http://www.metro.co.uk/tv/898517-viewers-call-on-bbc-to-scrap-planet-earth-live-after-animal-no-show#ixzz1uUZV7zVU
Have to agree Abers,total waste.It's a pity because they really hyped it up in the advertising.I was really looking forward to the series.
How 'live,' can a wildlife programme be?
I remember one 'Springwatch' programme, where we went 'live' to the badger set at dusk. Only to look at the entrance where nothing happened and the presenter (Oddie?) going on and on, about how they could appear any minute. They never did. At least not during the programme.
Quote from: Reinardina on May 20, 2012, 03:32:34 PM
How 'live,' can a wildlife programme be?
I remember one 'Springwatch' programme, where we went 'live' to the badger set at dusk. Only to look at the entrance where nothing happened and the presenter (Oddie?) going on and on, about how they could appear any minute. They never did. At least not during the programme.
More goes on in the daylight than at night. :uglystupid2: