Battles B.C.

[desert]

http://www.history.com/content/battl...about-the-show

Just what we needed?

Sounds cool, if you ask me.

Edit: http://www.history.com/content/battles-bc/videos

Oh God, I take it back.

I'll never get the image of a barechested, 7 foot tall Hannibal decapitating a Roman with dual swords and then emitting a classic 300 scream out of my head now.

[Centurio Nixalsverdrus]

Argh. I fear the day they gonna buy it over here.

[A Very Super Market]

*facepalm

I don't see why you would bother having historians when you're going to make such a silly show.

[Ibrahim]

ah, yes, I was going to make a thread about that Frank-miller poisoned abomination of a documentary, but desert beat me to it..

but as you can tell from above half, I do not like the fact that battles BC is being made 300 style...TPC is not the only one who despises Miller and whoever follows him(though for slightly different reasons)...

EDIT: doesn't the blood letting in those commercials seem to much to you?

[desert]

I know people will decry the visual battle bits for being inaccurate because well, they are, but to me that doesn't matter. When I thought about it I came to the conclusion that had those leaders who participated in the battle had the chance the tell the tale in a visual format they would do something like this. When stories of the battles were told they were not told in an accurate fashion, they were sensationalized as is one to do when one is the victor. Characters turn into larger than life legends to live for the ages. I will be tuning in.

I would be inclined to agree, but seriously, those scenes in the trailers where Hannibal is showing off his 6-pack, killing dudes with dual swords...I might have been able to tolerate it, but the teeth-baring, slow-mo closeup screams that follow are just so ludicrous.

*slash*

BYRREYUEUEUEEUUAAAAGH!!

[Ibrahim]

I would be inclined to agree, but seriously, those scenes in the trailers where Hannibal is showing off his 6-pack, killing dudes with dual swords...I might have been able to tolerate it, but the teeth-baring, slow-mo closeup screams that follow are just so ludicrous.

*slash*

BYRREYUEUEUEEUUAAAAGH!!

indeed. you can thank/curse frank miller. he started the tendancy by writing comics that ended up in movies (e.g 300 and sin city)

[desert]

I don't blame Miller, I blame the producers for making this so over-the-top.

For example...

Is that Hannibal...



or Kratos from God of War?

[Ibrahim]

I don't blame Miller, I blame the producers for making this so over-the-top.

For example...

Is that Hannibal...



or Kratos from God of War?

I have a hard time telling really. I lean towards him being an unholy cross between the two.

also, you need to read the man's comics: the producers were faithful in every detail, including the over the top nature. serious.

EDIT: you can watch Noah Antwiler's review of watchmen the movie: he mentions Miller's 300 and compares it to the movie adaptation (I figured you wanted a seperate view from mine, equally based on experiance):
http://www.thatguywiththeglasses.com...ke-on-watchmen

[Rilder]

History channel has really gone down the drain hasn't it. Instead of teaching people about history all they do is put together some CGI of some barbarians and plate or lorica failmenta clad romans fighting and throw in some 75% false info they saw in a movie.

Give one of the history buffs around here a copy of fraps and a microphone and he could probably put together a better show.

[Elukka]

Ow, my brain.

How can they pass this off as history? 300 type things are okay, because they don't claim to be historically accurate. This, however, markets itself as a documentary type thing. :/

[Macilrille]

I have not seen it, I do not intend to even see the trailers. I despise telly as a way of propagating history. I started feeling that way about ten years ago as Discovery took off "Battlefield" and started doing some crap. I have not owned a telly for 3 years. It has gone down the drain, even the net is better as you *can* actually dig up something good here and there :-(

Fortunately the gaming industri now surpasses the movie one in terms of production and income. THIS is the next, the future way of propagating and teaching history together with the I-net. Which is why things such as EB is so nice to find and why even RTW is important as it at least has many of the basics right, and might tempt some to learn more.

What we really need is to spread EB everywhere. Personally I am a substitute teacher these days and I intend to make the 6th + graders learn about RTW and EB.

[sgsandor]

All I can say is that, yes i was very very very disappointed. Like it was said i thought it was the history channel not Frank Miller Tv

[Lysimachos]

It's ridiculous. Have you read under "upcoming episodes"? They have an episode about David, obviously based on what is written in the bible, although it's not certain if he even existed! And may I quote from the description of the episode "Joshua: Epic Slaughter":

Joshua's special operations forces secretly infiltrate and destroy Jericho from the inside out

His special operations forces?!

[Dutchhoplite]

I hope they give Hannibal those rhinosaurs from 300 or it will a real disappointment!

His special operations forces?!

His secret ramshorn unit

[Hax]

On March 9th, Hannibal Rises!

<insert obvious Silence of the Lambs joke here>

Hannibal's merciless attacks on Roman soil dealt a near fatal blow to the soon-to-be Empire.

Yes.."Empire". I think they might be confused about 200 years now

[the tokai]

THIS. IS. CARTHAGE!!!

Also, why did they have an anthropologist commenting on the battle of Cannae and what the hell is Hasdrubals cowvalry?

[Dutchhoplite]

Trivialities!

Amuse the people, that's what i say!

[Africanvs]

I don't know, I love history so much I'll watch anything there is to see on the topic, even ridiculous thinks like 300 or the new Battles B.C. I'm happy I have a fully functional brain and can tell what is silly and what is history. It's kind of the same as watching war movies after you've been to war. All the nonsense stands out so much more than it ever did. Focusing on Battles for a moment though, it was about as historically accurate as 300 was. Some things it got right, some not so much, some never mentioned. I found it funny that the Carthaginian forces were described as tribal warriors from all uncivilized parts of the world, and naked gauls, yet, they never mentioned the African troops. Then throw Hannibal on an elephant half naked and let him cross the Alps. He would have frozen his teets off if he wasn't such a bad ass. There is so much to say, I'm laughing as I talk about it. I guess I can't really blame the history channel though. They have to sell advertising like everyone else and Axemen, Iceroad Truckers, and roid-munching half-naked Hannibals seems to be what the general public wants to see.

[Teleklos Archelaou]

Wow - what a huge step backwards. This is clearly an enormous pile of steaming shit. The people they get to comment on it certainly are third or fourth tier "experts" also - I'd bet the usuals were way too afraid to let their names be associated with something this awful.

[Ibrahim]

Wow - what a huge step backwards. This is clearly an enormous pile of steaming shit. The people they get to comment on it certainly are third or fourth tier "experts" also - I'd bet the usuals were way too afraid to let their names be associated with something this awful.

that is an understatement I am afraid.

[antisocialmunky]

Here's a thought, would you rather have Battles B.C or more UFOs?

[MarcusAureliusAntoninus]

Here's a thought, would you rather have Battles B.C or more UFOs?

Don't forget Ice Road Truckers!

[Husker98]

ive lost alot of respect for the history channel here recently, monster quest, UFO's and reality TV B.S. has really made me angry. ITS THE HISTORY CHANNEl. it should be about history not monsters and little green men. And the whole Hannibal 300 conparison they are making is a great example of how far they have fallen, their documentry directors see a movie like 300 and try to make what they saw apply to the punic war is embarassing. They did the same thing when the movies Alexander and Patriot came out if i recall correctly, alot of the shots and the visual effects in their documnetries were awfully similar as far as i could tell.

wat ever happened to Roger Mudd????? That dude told it how it was, and those documenteries were freaking great. he prolly passed away but man i liked how the history channel did things back then.

[Ibrahim]

ive lost alot of respect for the history channel here recently, monster quest, UFO's and reality TV B.S. has really made me angry. ITS THE HISTORY CHANNEl. it should be about history not monsters and little green men. And the whole Hannibal 300 conparison they are making is a great example of how far they have fallen, their documentry directors see a movie like 300 and try to make what they saw apply to the punic war is embarassing. They did the same thing when the movies Alexander and Patriot came out if i recall correctly, alot of the shots and the visual effects in their documnetries were awfully similar as far as i could tell.

wat ever happened to Roger Mudd????? That dude told it how it was, and those documenteries were freaking great. he prolly passed away but man i liked how the history channel did things back then.

last I heard, he was alive.

[-Praetor-]

Honestly, it's one thing to produce an adaptation of a fantasy graphic novel such as 300, and entirely another to pass this garbage as history facts. This is wanton mis-education.

The more I watch History Channel... the more I love vainilla RTW.

[A Very Super Market]

Christ, the only period that history channel emulates with any degree of competency is WWII, and thats with a hefty amount of US-centric thinking.

[Aemilius Paulus]

I never had any respect for them anyway. They always do the sensational stories. I have not watched TV since I was 10, and the last thing I remember watching on History (sic) Channel was a "documentary" about the purported "Bible Code". They make me sick. Same goes for the "Discovery" (sic) Channel. (sic) because there is no real history or discovery in both. I remember watching some Discovery Channel show one time, and it had busty females in skimpy clothing spraying water on each other and testing various explosives. And that was supposed to be a children's programme. At noon.

Kids in my school seem to think I am a smart nerd, so they always run to me and brag how "they watched the History Channel" yesterday as if it is some exceptional intellectual achievement. I may be a snob and an "elitist" but I do not approve of getting one's own knowledge from television. I read books. I believe I am actually making some effort to learn. Sitting in a couch, devouring and masticating crisps (chips), gurgling a soft drink and then claiming to be "smart" is not something I accept.

[antisocialmunky]

Everything intellegent produced in the last 30 years has moved to science channel.

[Owen Glyndwr]

Man, I actually ended up accidentally watching this for about 20 minutes, watching some half naked guy running around with two (were those falcatas?) slitting people's throats. My favorite were the scenes with him marching around chest exposed in the snow.

Why can't they return to the times of such shows as Engineering an Empire and Barbarians? Those were the shows where I would drop everything to watch. I hate that these channels feel that in order "attract viewers" they need to abandon their founding pronciples?

History Channel has gone down the same path as G4; you watch 4 hours of crap so you get to see 30 mins of what you actually want to see.

[Aemilius Paulus]

Everything intellegent produced in the last 30 years has moved to science channel.

Is it really better? I doubt it. It may not be sensational, but still, you know. All those stories about "cool gadgets" as they say. No, they could not call it new technology. They had to say "cool gadgets". Gah! But really, do they show anything that might be boring to a slightly above average person? The channel might not for the truly intelligent people, just for, as I said, above average people who wish to make themselves feel marginally better by watching something supposedly "educational". Do they ever go into physics in that channel?

Really, I do not want those channels to be only for people with IQs of over 140. I would simply like to see them run something that is actually educational as opposed to sensational. Educational channels are not supposed to worry about ratings. A good example of such channel might be PBS, for any Americans who had the fortune to notice it. Then again, PBS is non-profit, whereas History and Discovery Channels are. And how can you make profit by running two hour lectures of university history professors? Most of the individuals on these forums might be fond of those lectures, but I doubt the public will.