Opiniones de usuarios

I gave "I survived" a 9 not because I find it enjoyable. I do NOT find the show enjoyable. Nevertheless it might be the most truly hard-hitting and dramatic television series of all time.

I Survived is one solid hour consisting of monologues by 3 people telling 3 different stories, about some harrowing, terrifying and near-fatal experiences that they somehow lived through. And the stories are all as different as the people who tell them - stories filled with death, carnage, torture and ultra-violence some at a level I wouldn't have believed them to be even possible. "I survived" is literal tales of life and death, raw and unfiltered, some so shocking they are the stuff of nightmares.

If you watch "I survived" you might find the show is as shocking as other reviewers say, or you might not...but you probably won't find this show boring.

For once, the (usually gratuitous) viewer warning that begins each episode is appropriate, well deserved, and probably ought to be heeded. If there were young children in my household, "I survived" is one of the very few TV shows I would definitely NOT allow them to watch.

The only reason I didn't give this 10 stars is because of how disturbing it is to watch, and yet, there's no actual violence shown or seen. I'm glad they don't attempt reenactments. I watched another show on another channel that does reenactments. They're too fake and cheapen the actual violence these people experienced.

Anyway, "I survived" is 3 stories in each episode, going back and forth in each one. I saw some reviews complaining that they don't finish out a story all at once. I'm sure that, just like in fictional crime stories, the idea is to build suspense, so Idk why this should be different.

It works well for us. In fact, the true crime shows about real life murders take a full hour or longer to get to the end. These are done in a half hour.

You wouldn't think that watching someone's face as they tell their story would be interesting. It IS, though, and I think it's because: 1 the stories are true 2. We never get this much detail from the news 3. In other true crime shows like "48 hours" , "20/20", and "Dateline", it's about someone who did NOT survive, so we get only speculation, from neighbors,friends, relatives, detectives, lawyers.

This is the ONLY show where with firsthand accounts of what actually happened, from start to finish.

4. It's a great lesson in why some people survive while others don't. Yes, some of that is just timing, but a lot of these people did things a little differently that made the difference btwn life and death.

I find survival stories fascinating. For some reason, the first 2 of this series were frustrating for me. Contrary to the write-up there are no reenactments. 90% is the camera focused on the actual victim telling the story and the lens is so close it's a level of discomfort. The slow pace is often agonizing and weaving between stories was confusing. But despite these aspects, it's hard not to be engaged with most of the stories. Some I recall being in the news. I was very moved by many of them.

I admit, though, later I was on my phone playing a game instead of giving my full attention to such limited visuals. However, using this method will cause you to miss the unusually large amount of text periodically flashed on the screen of negligible additions and reiterations to the story.

In one review, someone claiming to be from Texas tells us there are no wolves or mountains in Southeast Texas and questions the show's research methods. But actually, wolves not only do exist in the Gulfcoast of Southeast Texas but one of the species known to be dwindling in numbers is actually still there - one of their last known habitats in the Chisos Mountains in Southeast Texas.

I Survived on Biography is a show, told by the actual persons involved, of their harrowing stories/personal accounts of situations in which they should have lost their lives, but lived through it. From a teenager abducted and lit on fire in the trunk of a car, to another who was hitch-hiking, picked up by an insane attacker who cut off her arms, raped her and left her for dead... to accident victims and people who survived catastrophes, the stories are intense and often astounding they lived through such horror. Each story has you holding your breath in anticipation of the next horrific detail and in the end your wondering how any human being could not only survive, but go on to live any kind of a normal life. I HIGHLY recommend this show, along with it's companion show, *I survived, beyond and back which details accounts of those who died during these stories and had experiences 'on the other side'. I Survived is amazing.

I love this series and wish more episodes could be created. Listening to people's personal experiences of true heroism under the most extreme circumstances is awe inspiring. God bless these people and their families and thank you for sharing your stories in hopes that maybe others can learn from what you survived.

I love how everyone has different views after they die.

I also died when I was 18 and mine was so different. I used to question if what I saw was real but listening to everyone's stories really helped me realize what I went through was real! It was an amazing yet strange experience I went through!

I remember the pain, the confusion, and being told it wasn't my time. I remember being so afraid. I was told it was going to be extremely painful but that I had to go back. It wasn't my time yet. I also saw my Nana who passed away when I was 7. She told me she loved me but I couldn't stay. I never saw a light but I do remember the calm and love. It was just a confusing situation that I wouldn't want to miss again.

I look forward to the day I get to see my family that I've lost!

I enjoy your series a lot, however I don't understand why the camera man has to get so close to the victims faces when they speak? There faces fill up the whole screen on the TV. Its a little too much & it distracts me to listen what they're saying because they're so huge & every little flaw is in your face.id like it better if the camera man did a better job & back up some anyway tmo other wise good show.

I watched a segment where the crime occurred in my area. I looked up the case, and found actual pictures of the victim. The fact that they are both women, and have long curly-hair, they look nothing alike. Are actors used in place of actual parties in recounting their stories?

First off, why does the camera have to be so close to their faces? These guys could stick their tongue out and lick the camera it's so close. Whoever the director is that made the decision to have these extreme close-ups should find a new calling. What do they think this will add to the show besides the audience having to stare at everyone's wrinkles, nose hairs and giant moles? NOBODY wants to watch someone's pores.

While some of the stories are riveting, there is a lot of repetition with many of them. Alot of 'girl gets kidnapped, raped, 'killed' by assailant, plays dead, escapes' and 'guy gets lost/stuck in snow, develops hypothermia, starvation, gets rescued', etc. So it feels like you're just listening to a different person tell the same story. It would be way better if they added some REAL pictures, not the generic ones they flash.

I actually prefer the show "I Shouldnt Be Alive" over this one. Yes, some of the reenactments are totally cheesy, but I found that in many cases it did add to the story. Perhaps I'm just more of a visual person, but I just found that staring at a face with a black background telling a story made it slow and boring. And you can't even just listen to this in the background or on audio because there is telling text often flashed on the screen.

This would have been a good series, but they would tell part of a story then go to another one, then tell part of that one then go to another one. You lose interest quickly. Why didn't they just tell a story in full then move onto the next one. You get frustrated and just change channels.

Very annoying to me is how there are often many, obvious questions that are never answered or explained.

Ex: "Family wakes up with a homicidal stranger in the house."

How did he get in ?

What, they don't have access to a gun in their house ?

Also unspoken, often the situation is a direct result of stupidity on the part of the victims, which they compound with even more stupid decisions.

Makes one wonder how indeed they survived.

Each episode introduces a story, tells the beginning of it, then introduces another story, then another, then another, and we're supposed to keep up with all of them. What a dumb format. When you care about the happenings of one story, then that's cut out for another, and several stories later they go back to the first one, you no longer care.

They shouldn't have to look far to realize there aren't any mountains or wolves in southeast Texas. I was surprised to see my home area on the show. I looked the story up, it really happened. But MOUNTAINS!? Really!? Now, who knows what's actually real on this show.

The reason i looked this one up, is because i love the "i shouldnt be alive"-series.. Whats great about i shouldnt be alive in my opinion, is the mix of the story being told together with reenactments which are very well done..

This show only consists of the stories being told by the survivors.. They should have made a podcast version of it instead, that media would suit it better..

Catches you initially with buildup of a few stories. Yes I agree not interested in details of their attempts towards makeup that's suppose to cover/enhance something-pitiful. Also not interested closeup of moles etc...with format of closeup of victims face telling story. It mostly loses me when they spend every break advertising the damn show you're tryin to watch. Same people same stories every commercial! I tolerate commercials understanding show needs/wants to make money so WTF? Interrupting a show to say you really should watch this DOES NOT MAKE YOU MONEY DF's. It makes anybody with brains say to themselves-ya I'm stupid, I'm gonna keep watchin this- I don't think so.

The camera is so close to the people who are telling their stories. I dont need to look in their nose or see if something is in their teeth! Lose my attention with this! Come on.. fix this!!! The stories are too short for me, but I could make it work if the camera view was better. An ideal solution would be to record the stories where the survivers could be seen no closer than the center of their chest and up. Current view doesnt even show their whole face. Shows half their forehead and right below their chin. Ridiculous... And to lengthen the stories, possibly one at a time instead of scattered.

Some of the stories are definitely interesting. However, I just cannot stand the 3 completely different stories within one show thing. On average there is usually ONE story that interests me and the other two bore me to tears. I do get irritated easily, and often, I will admit. So of course this show gets on my last nerve. And sadly no matter how interesting the one segment on the show is I get bored and irritated and give up on the whole deal.

I also dislike the extreme close ups on the speakers and the fact that some of them are obviously lacking in the common sense department. LOL I also think that if the story tellers were coming across as dumb or doofussy, they should've let them know or at least done some creative editing so they didn't appear so moronic. LOL By that I don't mean they change the stories or facts. On one episode the lady telling her story said "Umm" so much that I had to stop watching it. Omg, it drove me crazy. So, that is what I mean by editing and/or letting them know if they are going to be embarrassed when watching themselves later. I would be so upset if I (and I know they must be nervous being filmed for a TV show) did a horrible job on a show. 😟 Yeah, I will watch this show when I have run out of true crime shows that I haven't already watched.