Reviews

6 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
7/10
All evidence is subject to prejudice
4 March 2024
Warning: Spoilers
Love Phillipa. In her search for Richard III's body, she did magnificent research, which combined with some luck led to finding it literally with the first scoop of the dig. However she expressed an extreme hero-worship of Richard, to the point where she refused to believe the body was Richard because it had the twisted spine she'd thought had been made up by Richard's enemies. When I saw that she was investigating the disappearance of the princes Richard was accused of murdering, I knew exactly what her conclusion would be. And I was right. I found that all the evidence presented was based on what people said or was told by another. The receipt for weapons to supply a Prince's invasion was written by someone who was told who they were for. I noticed that most of the support for both of the princes retaking their throne was done in Ireland, a country that hated the British and resented the control Britain represented. Putting a puppet, easily controlled and grateful, on the British throne is all too easily believed. No one is going to go around saying the boy is a fraud when stirring up support, so most written evidence will be referring to him as a prince. As to their aunt, Margaret, the odds are good she never saw her nephews before Richard III came to the throne. Like Ireland, she would support anyone she could control and especially to get the hated Lancaster off the throne. The autobiography alleged to be written by Richard, Phillipa said it was too specific, that a fake would be too general. Sorry, Phillipa, many people are VERY good writers, then as now. That's not proof. Proof might be if you can find Perkin Warbeck or Simkin Lambert's grave and do DNA. Or the bodies found at the tower. We have Richard III's verified DNA.
0 out of 0 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Hidden Mother (2019)
4/10
You call this a movie?
24 April 2020
I loved the premise and looked forward to a nice time with a scary movie. And then it was over. I thought I must have accidently tuned in at the end, but no, that's all there was. No plot, no twist, no backstory, Pffftt! It's gone.
5 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
2/10
Child in a cage pic was from the Obama-era
25 October 2018
I'm disappointed in the franchise. Traditionally it's been fairly balanced with one character taking one side of the issue and another the other. This one must have been written by a hard leftist. It's conflating a child in a cage pic that was taken during Obama's admin with the current flap about taking children from illegal alien parents. They ignored the outrageous occurrence when children were given back to slave traders, also during the Obama admin. It's common sense given this trade to at least make sure the parents are the parents, but no, this episode just passes on the misinformation the left have given on this subject.
44 out of 101 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
3/10
Greedy SOBs. There's no archaeology here
17 September 2018
Warning: Spoilers
I watched Cavern of Skulls, S3ep12. They took heavy machinery in with no regard to the archaeological value of what they find, just grab the gold and run. They found a piece of fabric with gold interwoven in it, they balled it up in their hand and stuffed it into a baggy. More properly, it should have gingerly been slid onto a piece stiff paper and put into a paper large envelope. No gloves worn. Later they found a skeleton. They took out a blanket and stacked the bones on it, balled it up, then buried it upside. This is the Science Channel. There's no science here. They should be arrested.
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
What's with the frequent use of bad(bleep)!
15 October 2014
Warning: Spoilers
I love these types of shows that put out trivia and unknown facts of history and this show does not disappoint. There's a slight undercurrent of pride in America that's rare these days. The stars are well spoken and humerus and I enjoy their commentaries. A lot of the information has been put out before, like DB Cooper, but others are new, like about George H W Bush still skydiving. Each show has a theme, like one about presidents, which covered President Jackson's feisty personality. But whats with the frequent use of bad ass which is then bleeped. I find bleeps annoying and bad ass has become more or less acceptable. Please, find another adjective or quit bleeping!!!
2 out of 3 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
America Unearthed (2012– )
2/10
New psychiatric disorder
29 March 2013
I believe this gullibility in believing that the old world had influence in the new world must be a psychiatric disorder. I posit that Americans are envious of the old world where you can't throw a stone without hitting a major archaeological site. When the Egyptians were fascinating the world, magically Egyptian like artifacts started turning up in the US, most of which were inconsistent and outright forgeries. Same for the Vikings. This show is falling right into that paradigm. The host outrightly disbelieves experts who disagree with his hypothesis. One expert on Stonehenge featured on the show suggested that it is people being people, they observe the same things and put up similar worship centers, the host just laughed. He says he doesn't believe in coincidences yet they happen every day like when you think of someone and the phone rings, or run into someone you know thousands of miles away. People routinely do the same things over and over again in history without hearing about an example, extreme examples are bizarre behaviors of serial killers. A similar psychology applies to people who apply everything to aliens. The history channel has gotten far away from it's name and is indulging in fantasy
8 out of 20 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed