Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 
 Posted:   Apr 17, 2014 - 12:47 PM   
 By:   filmusicnow   (Member)

What's your opinion of The History Channel's documentary miniseries "The Men Who Built America"? It comes off as promising, but is rife with errors (such as stating that John D. Rockefeller FOUNDED Standard Oil when in reality it was an existing refinery that he bought at an auction, while it introduces him with his wife Cettie with a little girl in 1865, when in reality John D. Rockefeller didn't have any children until the following year, and the actor who played him looks more like somebody out of "Boardwalk Empire")?

 
 Posted:   Apr 17, 2014 - 10:25 PM   
 By:   Sirusjr   (Member)

It was good until I got tired of the repetition that comes inherent with History Channel stuff. They spend 1/3 of the time telling you what they are going to show you next then 1/3 of the time telling you what they already showed you and maybe the final 1/3 of the time actually giving you new information. They should be half the time and actually full of information and I would totally watch it. I just don't have the patience for this over-padded way of doing things.

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 10:44 AM   
 By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member)

It was good until I got tired of the repetition that comes inherent with History Channel stuff. They spend 1/3 of the time telling you what they are going to show you next then 1/3 of the time telling you what they already showed you and maybe the final 1/3 of the time actually giving you new information. They should be half the time and actually full of information and I would totally watch it. I just don't have the patience for this over-padded way of doing things.


I've noticed this on other shows/networks as well. The show "American Greed" on CNBC follows the same format. Even news shows spend an inordinate amount of time on teasing their next segment. I think it's a reaction to people's shorter attention span and the tendency for people to channel surf. I fear that it's only a matter of time before dramatic shows adopt this approach, and then I'm going to be really upset.

 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 11:34 AM   
 By:   Sirusjr   (Member)

The irony is that people wouldn't channel surf if networks would provide content worth watching for the entire segment. And they respond by creating content that is even less worth watching for the entire segment than it was before!

 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 11:40 AM   
 By:   Grecchus   (Member)

It's the commercials, isnt' it? They build up to a crescendo moment and then suddenly comes the break. The interruption occurs. You wait for the flies to stop buzzing and then when the show slots back you endure the buildup that took place before the commercial break as an intro to the post commericial continuity break, then a blank screen pause and then they hit you with what you should have been hit with ten effing minutes ago.

 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 12:04 PM   
 By:   Francis   (Member)

It was good until I got tired of the repetition that comes inherent with History Channel stuff. They spend 1/3 of the time telling you what they are going to show you next then 1/3 of the time telling you what they already showed you and maybe the final 1/3 of the time actually giving you new information. They should be half the time and actually full of information and I would totally watch it. I just don't have the patience for this over-padded way of doing things.

I've been noticing this format as well on history channel, discovery channel, ... It is frustrating to sit through any program of which at least 1/5 is repeats of the same shots and teasers, always resulting in an outcome that can't compete with the buildup it's been getting for the last half hour! smile

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 1:06 PM   
 By:   Bob DiMucci   (Member)

They spend 1/3 of the time telling you what they are going to show you next then 1/3 of the time telling you what they already showed you and maybe the final 1/3 of the time actually giving you new information.


This is reminiscent of the advice that is given to speakers to make sure that they get their points across: "Tell them what you're going to tell them; then tell them; then tell them what you told them."

 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 1:18 PM   
 By:   solium   (Member)

They spend 1/3 of the time telling you what they are going to show you next then 1/3 of the time telling you what they already showed you and maybe the final 1/3 of the time actually giving you new information.


This is reminiscent of the advice that is given to speakers to make sure that they get their points across: "Tell them what you're going to tell them; then tell them; then tell them what you told them."


This is correct. It's especially important to sum up at the end of each idea. When it comes to television shows it might be done for the sake of "padding" the episodes.

 
 Posted:   Apr 18, 2014 - 9:22 PM   
 By:   gone   (Member)

I liked it... quite good for History Channel fare. After viewing the series I found some other more in depth documentaries on youtube. Time well spent.

 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2014 - 7:12 AM   
 By:   TominAtl   (Member)

I thoroughly enjoyed it. A handsome and quality production. One of their better shows actually.

 
 
 Posted:   Apr 19, 2014 - 4:39 PM   
 By:   filmusicnow   (Member)

I thoroughly enjoyed it. A handsome and quality production. One of their better shows actually.


Though rife with errors.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2014 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.