I've only watched the first two episodes, but I'm stopping there, can't watch on. I'm giving the "Bigfoot" episode (S1E3) a miss, and the rest of them.
That isn't so much a criticism of the series, as it's a query - or criticism - of its relevance, identity by target audience and a strange marketing approach. "The Lowe Files" is shown at 10pm, well beyond the last before watershed 8pm to 9pm slot on History here in the UK. Yet, clearly this is completely and fully a children's programme, family friendly at the same time - while there are few of those shows for kids which both kids and adults would be happy to watch together . It seems almost kind of ideal for settling inquisitive 8 to 10 year olds (and younger children still who aren't too frightened - most aren't and the show itself seems to be a very "safe environment" indeed). The youngest years of teens would still have some reasonable to good connection to this series and the fun but open minded approach, again would be welcomed. Itself, the fun and safety of this easy context where it's ok to consider if potentially sci-fi theories are possible or real, where a definite "conspiracy theory reasonably ok" vibe is going, is a positive thing. It may be very good for helping enquiring thought outside of real, prescriptive, serious and possibly troubling and harmful social norms. At the very least, that's the major point of both sci-fi linked topics and mature consideration of conspiracy theories in themselves to society.
So, no real criticisms there of the actual substance - just appreciation indeed! It all comes down to why on earth the series is on at adult viewing hours only, targeted at adults. At the same time there doesn't seem even to be the whiff of much of an intention for any serious, proper journalism in The Lowe Files. I reckon, most mid teens, 14 to 16 year olds would have something of a problem with this series. Probably while admiring the fun approach, they would feel condescended to and left feeling that the subjects of the shows were not really intended to be taken so seriously, though, in the first place. This is very far from serious, adult programming.
In a way, the strange miscategorisation of show type and context by identity and intended viewer may have given rise to some of the criticisms of the show. The Hollywood Reporter calls the show a "bizarre vanity project" of the veteran actor.
I give this show 3 stars out of 10 because it is a beast, which ought to be shown between 4pm in the afternoon and 7.30pm. Then, if it were, and described for what it really is, I'd give the show a good review - 6 or 7 stars plus, maybe a grade A for your school report, Msrs Lowes. But for mid to older teens and adults who can watch at scheduled times, when their juniors cannot, there's actually very little in there of any relevance or interest at all in the idea of this show (for often some way hackneyed topics anyway). We just get cartoon like basic descriptions of the topics with fun, school like immersion experiences by the Lowe family guys. So I have to rate the show as how it's described and presented, and it isn't on a kids or school age educational channel - but ought to be.
You have to admit that cable TV at least has gone dumbed down anyway, it's often hard to tell the difference between what's meant as serious journalism or playful, younger targeted "TV clickbait". From "Hunting Hitler", somewhere between the two, to "The Dark Files: Montauk Project", the latter often like a teenage school level research project, where to call it serious journalism would contain some degree of insult. The BBC indeed have been responsible for similar show factories in recent times (for example their superficial and actually insulting online-only 'investigative' documentary, "Fractured: The Mysterious Death of Conspiracy Theorist Max Spiers").
With "The Lowe Files" it seems that someone behind a desk at the History Channel has been so confused in the dumbing down, he or she fails to be able to tell the difference between kids and adult programming.
So - pretty good for kids, I suppose, but that really is it. As a serious show for older viewers, there's really actually more or less nothing in there, diverting for short attention spans as Lowe and his sons may be for their no doubt very high salaries!
The Hollywood Reporter draws atention to the "arrogance" in actually calling this show entertainment being "patently insulting" (of course, meaning to more "grown-ups"). I have to agree, but thinking of the very large salaries usually involved in these shows, which often go all the way around the globe and with several repeats, I think the arrogance may be considerably to severely underestimated.
That isn't so much a criticism of the series, as it's a query - or criticism - of its relevance, identity by target audience and a strange marketing approach. "The Lowe Files" is shown at 10pm, well beyond the last before watershed 8pm to 9pm slot on History here in the UK. Yet, clearly this is completely and fully a children's programme, family friendly at the same time - while there are few of those shows for kids which both kids and adults would be happy to watch together . It seems almost kind of ideal for settling inquisitive 8 to 10 year olds (and younger children still who aren't too frightened - most aren't and the show itself seems to be a very "safe environment" indeed). The youngest years of teens would still have some reasonable to good connection to this series and the fun but open minded approach, again would be welcomed. Itself, the fun and safety of this easy context where it's ok to consider if potentially sci-fi theories are possible or real, where a definite "conspiracy theory reasonably ok" vibe is going, is a positive thing. It may be very good for helping enquiring thought outside of real, prescriptive, serious and possibly troubling and harmful social norms. At the very least, that's the major point of both sci-fi linked topics and mature consideration of conspiracy theories in themselves to society.
So, no real criticisms there of the actual substance - just appreciation indeed! It all comes down to why on earth the series is on at adult viewing hours only, targeted at adults. At the same time there doesn't seem even to be the whiff of much of an intention for any serious, proper journalism in The Lowe Files. I reckon, most mid teens, 14 to 16 year olds would have something of a problem with this series. Probably while admiring the fun approach, they would feel condescended to and left feeling that the subjects of the shows were not really intended to be taken so seriously, though, in the first place. This is very far from serious, adult programming.
In a way, the strange miscategorisation of show type and context by identity and intended viewer may have given rise to some of the criticisms of the show. The Hollywood Reporter calls the show a "bizarre vanity project" of the veteran actor.
I give this show 3 stars out of 10 because it is a beast, which ought to be shown between 4pm in the afternoon and 7.30pm. Then, if it were, and described for what it really is, I'd give the show a good review - 6 or 7 stars plus, maybe a grade A for your school report, Msrs Lowes. But for mid to older teens and adults who can watch at scheduled times, when their juniors cannot, there's actually very little in there of any relevance or interest at all in the idea of this show (for often some way hackneyed topics anyway). We just get cartoon like basic descriptions of the topics with fun, school like immersion experiences by the Lowe family guys. So I have to rate the show as how it's described and presented, and it isn't on a kids or school age educational channel - but ought to be.
You have to admit that cable TV at least has gone dumbed down anyway, it's often hard to tell the difference between what's meant as serious journalism or playful, younger targeted "TV clickbait". From "Hunting Hitler", somewhere between the two, to "The Dark Files: Montauk Project", the latter often like a teenage school level research project, where to call it serious journalism would contain some degree of insult. The BBC indeed have been responsible for similar show factories in recent times (for example their superficial and actually insulting online-only 'investigative' documentary, "Fractured: The Mysterious Death of Conspiracy Theorist Max Spiers").
With "The Lowe Files" it seems that someone behind a desk at the History Channel has been so confused in the dumbing down, he or she fails to be able to tell the difference between kids and adult programming.
So - pretty good for kids, I suppose, but that really is it. As a serious show for older viewers, there's really actually more or less nothing in there, diverting for short attention spans as Lowe and his sons may be for their no doubt very high salaries!
The Hollywood Reporter draws atention to the "arrogance" in actually calling this show entertainment being "patently insulting" (of course, meaning to more "grown-ups"). I have to agree, but thinking of the very large salaries usually involved in these shows, which often go all the way around the globe and with several repeats, I think the arrogance may be considerably to severely underestimated.