BBC1 Dynasties

I felt the polar opposite to your reaction it seems.

I watched the trailer and all I saw was slow mo.and music over lay with epic vistas and at this poinat all it had me thinking was that this is going to be lazy film making at best.

The program then comes on .. all the epic vistas and slowmo in the episode was clearly shown in the advert. Everything else was generic wild life filming.

The BBC needs to stop, close it's doors entirely and stop the bully tactics of requiring a TV license when I'd rather not watch any of their rubbish. The fact you have to have one to watch any TV even if it's not a BBC production is disgusting and what's worse is that a chunk of this money have previously gone to hide the predators operating within their four walls that have abused children.

Rant over.

It was meh. You can catch much better productions over of nat geo and discovery now. The BBC should stick to its usual course of forcing political opinion on the public with its propaganda and tasteless radio offerings.
 
gramps said:
Oh dear someone's got their grumpy trousers on! :D

Love the BBC wildlife programmes, definitely what BBC do best.
Click to expand...
When it comes to the BBC I have the best pair of grumpy trousers on ever created.

If it's the best the BBC have to offer (I have no idea, I don't watch their news, listen to their radio or watch any of the other rubbish they put together) then the BBC is doing one hell of a job of keeping its head above water.
 
Last edited:
Andrew Moore said:
When it comes to the BBC I have the best pair of grumpy trousers on ever created.

If it's the best the BBC have to offer (I have no idea, I don't watch their news, listen to their radio or watch any of the other rubbish they put together) then the BBC is doing one hell of a job of keeping its head above water.
Click to expand...


Andrew,I'm curious do you make any wildlife images or videos yourself??

cheers muchly
stu
 
I agree with @Andrew Moore. I thought last week's episode was poor. Good photography but a contrived storyline.

Just started watching the penguins and already it looks better.
 
Stuart Philpott said:
Andrew,I'm curious do you make any wildlife images or videos yourself??

cheers muchly
stu
Click to expand...
Not at all, I don't have a need to but those guys over at national geographic and discovery are doing a fantastic job of bettering the BBC recently. As mickledore has said, the story was very contrived, couple this with the generic done to death type of docu-videograohy and yoir left with an uninspiring time filler type TV. My issue is with the BBC over all and it's Draconian rule over how I use MY TV.
 
ancient_mariner said:
No - they want money from him when he doesn't want to watch their material.
Click to expand...
So the OP doesn't watch or listen to any BBC TV or radio, ever? Or watch any of the Freeview channels that buying a TV licence allows him to do?

I find the TV licence is a damned sight cheaper than Sky TV subscription. I binned my contract with Sky about 5 or 6 years ago as they kept putting their prices up right in the middle of a recession when no one else dare ask for more - and that included my wages! It wasn't just a couple of percent increase either, from memory it was something like +£1.50 on a £26 per month subscription, which percentage wise was well above any inflation rate at the time.

Originally I'd got Satellite TV for channels like Nat Geographic and Discovery, who had the sort of content I enjoyed watching. By the end of my days with Sky this seemed to have changed to programmes about Americans looking for gold, cutting down trees and building log cabins, which I did not enjoy watching or have any interest in. If I wanted to watch American reality TV programmes I'd move to America! So Sky's annual price increase did me a favour, as I realised I could get the majority of the channels I was actually watching on Freeview for the price of my TV licence, which I was already paying! Doing that saved me over £300 a year!

So I think the TV licence is actually quite good value for money when you weigh up what you actually get for it, including the lawful right to watch TV and listen to radio. It might be worth bearing in mind that the Government are unlikely to make receiving TV signals free so, even if the BBC is shut down, they'd most likely still charge us a fee for a TV licence. Otherwise, who pays for the maintenance of the broadcast networks; TV transmitters don't build and maintain themselves, so someone will have to pay for them, either directly or indirectly, and guess who? Yes, the end user, one way or another!
 
Last edited:
If you didn't pay a licence to the BBC you'd pay it to the government , then you really would get nothing for it
 
Someone had it on before, so I saw five mins of it. Used to love those programmes.
 
I may not want to watch the BBC but I also don't use many of the Public Services my other taxes are spent on. The BBC should be looked on as providing a service in my opinion rather than just a TV channel. In your opinion you may think they pour out propaganda and are virtually state run but that is only an opinion and not the views of everyone.

I though the filming in dynasties was excellent BTW but do agree that the BBC is political on some of it's broadcasts but offers good value for money.
 
Didn't see the first one on Chimpanzees but want to catch up on the Penguin one and especially the Hunting Dogs programme.

I think the fact that from time to time over many years the BBC has been criticised for bias from both Left and Right is a fair comment on whether they the promote propaganda.

Dave
 
this thread has got a bit strayed from the original posters comment, I watched both episodes of dynasties and learnt new stuff about both the chimpanzees and emperor penguins, so that in itself is a good thing, also at the end the put on a segment about how they made the documentary which in itself for me at least makes interesting viewing, so its a thumbs up from yours truly
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top