Hey folks,
I felt ashamed watching this disgrace of the truly exciting founding of our nation. It begins with a foppish John Hancock and a teenage Sam Adams, and it degenerates from there. This is a disgrace to American history. Showing it on the History Channel only adds salt to the wounds.
Best wishes,
Dave Wile
What they need to do is release doves when the good guys walk into a room in slow motion and also have the protagonists walk away from explosions, making sure to not look back.
shareDavid... the useless pos channel is a disgrace to the word "History"....
If you deflect the topic of the thread from the show to me, our discussion is over
I'm ambivalent. On one hand, I'm very happy they've begun doing more scripted dramas. Even if inaccurate they are better, imo, than Pawn Stars, Ax Men, or any of the of reality-based programs that have little to do with history. Those types of shows are much cheaper to produce and can be very popular, which is disturbing but understandable from their corporate point of view.
It's possible that the people at History Channel feel no better about the situation. I imagine they're even appalled at having "Counting Cars" and "Swamp People" in their lineup, but it's what the public wants apparently. At least they help fund the dramas.
To get viewers interested in the dramas, especially the coveted younger ones, they have to appeal to them, hence dialing up the action, loud music, explosions, sex, etc. To many this is more important than accuracy, and I don't like it but have come to accept it. Think of the alternatives.
1776 (the musical) isn't historically accurate either, but that doesn't make it any less enjoyable. This is really the first I've seen of Sam Adams in a movie (although I believe John Adams--the wonderful William Daniels--does refer to his cousin Sam the rabble rouser once in 1776). I am enjoying this a great deal, but that may be because I adore Ben Barnes (can't wait for Seventh Son) and I like Ryan Eggold, Henry Thomas, Dean Norris (when he's not evil!), and Michael Raymond-James.
Boo Hoo! Let me wipe away the tears with my PLASTIC hand!--Lindsey McDonald (Angel)
Actually, there's a considerable amount in 1776 that IS accurate, it was originally conceived of by a history teacher. This is Sam Adams: Vampire Slayer. Plus at least the actors in 1776 look something like who they're supposed to be. This is completely off the mark
shareAva... the cheaply produced, staged, scripted, faked pos garbage "Reality" shows, that clog the channel that still has the nerve to call itself HISTORY, are exactly the type of programming that the people in charge of the useless pos channel... Nancy Dubuc... want.
The channel has been out of the "History" business since 2007, a channel that calls itself HISTORY would air a "documentary" on the Revolution.. they would not air a fictional "Drama"... check out "Patriots" on AMERICAN HEROES CHANNEL for a real documentary on the Revolution.
When you proclaim yourself HISTORY, the only obligation you have is to provide the best "History" programming you can, to the viewer who tunes to your channel expecting to see "History" programming... if you choose to no longer provide "History" programming, then the time has come to take down the HISTORY shingle and change the name something more fitting.. CRAPtv would fit... as it is now, the channel is a disgrace to the word "History".
If you deflect the topic of the thread from the show to me, our discussion is over
From Wikepedia:
"History was launched on January 1, 1995 as The History Channel, its original format focused entirely on historical series and specials.
History (originally The History Channel from 1995 to 2008) is an American basic cable and satellite television channel that is owned by A+E Networks, a joint venture between the Hearst Corporation and the Disney–ABC Television Group division of The Walt Disney Company.
It originally broadcast documentary programs and historical fiction series. However since 2008, it has mostly broadcast a variety of reality television series such as Pawn Stars, Ax Men, and other non-history related content.
On March 20, 2008, as part of that same rebranding effort--Programming on History has covered a wide range of historical periods and topics---Programming also includes mainstream reality television-style shows involving truck drivers, alligator hunters, pawn stores, antique and collectible "pickers", car restorers, and others. Occasionally some programs compare contemporary culture and technology with that of the past. On March 3rd, 2013 History channel premiered it's first original series Vikings which has since been renewed for a second and third season.
Some of the network's series, including Ice Road Truckers, Ax Men, and Pawn Stars, garnered ratings in the U.S. while receiving criticism over the series' non-historical nature.
Forbes.com contributor Brad Lockwood criticized the History Channel's addition of "programs devoted to monsters, aliens and conspiracies" and wrote that ratings trends have influenced the network to focus on entertainment rather than actual historical programming.[9] U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley is a frequent critic of the channel and its lack of historical or educational programming, showing particular disdain for Ax Men and Pawn Stars. The History channel does not identify the difference between programming that consists of documentaries and programming that contains material that ranges from speculative to fantasy"
Lots of docu-dramas...lacking any original source material to speak for itself...
Um, what can anyone expect when Disney takes on the mantel of producing history?
"Additionally, the network is frequently criticized by scientists and skeptics for broadcasting pseudo-documentaries, unsubstantiated and sensational investigative programming, such as Ancient Aliens, UFO Hunters, Brad Meltzer's Decoded and the Nostradamus Effect.
Re: History Channel program- Christmas Unwrapped – The History of Christmas, Daily Show host Jon Stewart responded the next day by stating it was their fault for trusting the History Channel and satirized a clip from the History Channel about UFOs and Nazis by stating, "The next thing you know we'll all find out the Nazis did not employ alien technology in their quest for world domination.""
I hated it for its complete fiction as well, but Ava_T, great point about the so-called reality crap shows they air.
shareDavid,
Cheers mate!!
I saw the reviews and heard a character yelling "The British are coming..." and I said to myself "This is going to be on the "History Channel"??? Before signing the Declaration of Independence the colonists considered themselves to be British.
I am currently watching the premiere episode and cringing. There was a much better series (though it still had inaccuracies) that focused on John Adams.
Je
They actually kept the original line Paul Revere said "The Regulars are coming" so at least that's accurate to that effect. I don't know why they did that in the commercial...
shareThey actually kept the original line Paul Revere said "The Regulars are coming"
Teenage Sam Adams?
shareI'm watching for entertainment. I knew that this wouldn't be accurate to begin with.
They did something correct because all of you here are watching and complaining.
Bad publicity or good .... people are talking.
Ben Barnes is the star of it. Enough said. That is good enough for me. I'm loving it. Can't wait to by the DVD!!
shareErrrmmm, I count maybe 10 people total discussing it. That's hardly "everyone". And TBH, having people pan your work is NOT a good thing---I've never agreed with Mae West on that score
shareIf they made very accurate portrayles of most historical events ... No one would watch. They would be a complete bore. Like watching paint dry. I will keep my History lessons to the written word and not in a made for TV Miniseries.
shareSo true launlori!
shareNot true at all. The John Adams miniseries was a hundred times better than this, stuck to reality, and was hugely popular. You can do history and make it interesting. It's largely laziness that results in this kind of stuff. Vikings, while partially hollywood, is a lot more historically accurate than this show, and a lot better.
shareOn the contrary, I love history but still found John Adams to be a bit on the dull side. It had too many places that dragged.
shareI've seen John Adams and that's not correct. There are several places that are boring. That's wasn't historically accurate either. Especially the timeline.
shareLoved it. The acting was superb. Well done historical fiction. Very good acting. Very good story. You naysayers are over-thinking this. As well as you Captain Hook fans. >;/
Neal The Greatest Hero Ever
Keeper of Rumpels fluffy socks!
Also John Adams is based on a book, so it was probably easier to adapt. This is an original production, I believe.
shareI'm enjoying this series. It's pretty well done and may get more people interested in American Revolutionary history. And it's not that far off from being accurate, just enough to make you go back and check.
shareI enjoyed it as well and agree that if it takes a fictionalized version to get people interested in history, I'm all for it. As far as "historical accuracy" that can be questionable anyway as the winners are usually the ones that get to write the official history; that brings a little bias into play. LOL
share