Planet Earth II

no negatives ? rather than plagiarize it, I share below eloquently expressed opinion ...

BushfireBilly ....
When is somebody going to take 'national treasure' David Attenborough to task for the awful, cliché ridden commentaries he delivers with such confidence? And the squirm-inducing Disney-style anthropomorphic mini-melodramas with which the behaviour of wild creatures are edited and voiced to provide a spurious sentimental narrative?
Wonderful photography by anonymous and intrepid cameramen and producers from the great BBC unit in Bristol....
Click to expand...

also some other interesting comments about production technique eg.

VoteLabour eidos3

Good grief. The idea that was a wildlife photographer waiting endlessly for this event to happen and just catching it is nonsense.

You had a controlled environment and multiple cameras. These weren't long lens shots. The cameras were right on top of the action. They had tracking shots following the snakes. The snakes and the iguana had been placed there. Beyond that the animals do what they do. There would have been multiple takes. That is staging. The behaviour is real but the way it is staged for tv is not. Its the modern equivalent of the stickleback in the tank.
Click to expand...

need a how it was made video.
 
jpaul said:
no negatives ? rather than plagiarize it, I share below eloquently expressed opinion ...



also some other interesting comments about production technique eg.



need a how it was made video.
Click to expand...

Can't please everybody it seems.

You'll always get critics anyhow.

They do a small "diary" section towards the end, they were showing the set up on the penguin islands. Although MY GOSH all that camera gear.
 
With all respect to those making the comments above, what a load of bloody nonsense.

How does the first commenter expect the show to be presented? It's an entertainment program being aired during prime time. Should they just pass comment on nothing and just show things happening? I don't get there mentality at all I'm afraid. Go watch Baraka if all you want is arty shots of stuff.

As for the second, I don't think he's quite keyed in on how far technology has come since the 70s. These crews are using cutting edge equipment to capture these events. There is SO MUCH evidence out there supporting the fact that capturing just minutes of such intimate interaction between animals takes weeks, sometimes months at a time. No evidence whatsoever to support the commenters idea that it might all be staged.
 
Last edited:
Last time round they were filming snow leopards, I think, of which there are about 3 in the wild. They were up in the mountains for weeks trying to get some shots of them.
 
There hasn't been negative views because only a troll would be looking to complain at that. Funny how they come out of the woodwork though.

Watch the end segment of each of the Planet Earth episodes and they explain how they'll use helicopters with gyro-stabilised cameras, small dingys to follow whales or sea lions, camera traps in strategic locations and millions of pounds of macro photography equipment. To say it was staged is not only moronic, but deeply short sighted given the plethora of "behind the scenes" information we have today.

Attenborough may not be "at the coal face" so much anymore, instead just providing voiceover work but would you, if you were 90 and didn't need to? No.

I for one don't understand the criticisms raised in the above BS, when you could arguably raise better arguments about the budget or resources needed to make the show. Even then, you'd probably find little support in that area given the quality of the product. Yes, cameramen are kept low-key but they're credited as a normal show.. what do these people want? I'd rather all traces of the crew are kept hidden from the final edit and this is someone whose worked the other end of the lense. Do I care about seeing a sound recordist with a shotgun mic or the camera man with a stablisation rig?

No. Show me the snakes!
 
One thought I had afterwards was about the iguana eggs. How did the iguanas get onto the sand and bury the eggs without them themselves getting nommed? Was the snakes' presence a seasonal thing? Either way, it was pretty tense watching them run the gauntlet!
 
toshj said:
One thought I had afterwards was about the iguana eggs. How did the iguanas get onto the sand and bury the eggs without them themselves getting nommed? Was the snakes' presence a seasonal thing? Either way, it was pretty tense watching them run the gauntlet!
Click to expand...

I guess the adults are too big for the snakes to nom
 
toshj said:
One thought I had afterwards was about the iguana eggs. How did the iguanas get onto the sand and bury the eggs without them themselves getting nommed? Was the snakes' presence a seasonal thing? Either way, it was pretty tense watching them run the gauntlet!
Click to expand...

I think the grown marine iguanas are too big and spikey for the snakes to swallow. The snakes hang around at hatching time because it's the one time of the year they can get a load of food by necking baby iguanas.
 
EVH said:
I'd rather all traces of the crew are kept hidden from the final edit and this is someone whose worked the other end of the lense. Do I care about seeing a sound recordist with a shotgun mic or the camera man with a stablisation rig?

No. Show me the snakes!
Click to expand...

I'd like to know from the program commissioners if there was ever any general public demand for these "diary" segments, or whether it was because they realised one day that getting 5 seconds worth of footage of an ant fighting spider costs the about same as a co-producer filming 10 minutes of a cameraman setting up some scaffolding on his camcorder. :)
 
EVH said:
There hasn't been negative views because only a troll would be looking to complain at that. Funny how they come out of the woodwork though.

Watch the end segment of each of the Planet Earth episodes and they explain how they'll use helicopters with gyro-stabilised cameras, small dingys to follow whales or sea lions, camera traps in strategic locations and millions of pounds of macro photography equipment. To say it was staged is not only moronic, but deeply short sighted given the plethora of "behind the scenes" information we have today.

Attenborough may not be "at the coal face" so much anymore, instead just providing voiceover work but would you, if you were 90 and didn't need to? No.

I for one don't understand the criticisms raised in the above BS, when you could arguably raise better arguments about the budget or resources needed to make the show. Even then, you'd probably find little support in that area given the quality of the product. Yes, cameramen are kept low-key but they're credited as a normal show.. what do these people want? I'd rather all traces of the crew are kept hidden from the final edit and this is someone whose worked the other end of the lense. Do I care about seeing a sound recordist with a shotgun mic or the camera man with a stablisation rig?

No. Show me the snakes!
Click to expand...

You forget There was the baby bears in the ice cave filmed in a zoo but shown as out in the wild in Frozen Planet
 
McManicMan said:
You forget There was the baby bears in the ice cave filmed in a zoo but shown as out in the wild in Frozen Planet
Click to expand...

Source?

Anyway, are you disputing that the vast majority of footage is shot on location or are you one of those that believes it is all CGI and staged nonsense?

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom