Mysteries at the Museum

It's a wonderful program. Don Wildman makes for such a compelling and engaging host. The stories are wonderful to learn about, and the reenactments are entertaining to watch. The series delves deeper into stories from history that have either been forgotten or are lesser known. The stories most often told are about historical events that were not as well heard about or significantly well documented as others, often telling the tales of people who worked in the background of major events to reach an end to an event that took place. The stories told are always based on objects currently located at museums all around the world, giving the stories behind why some more obscure or unusual objects would find themselves at a museum in the first place. For example, one story was told about a celebrities car crash and the mysterious circumstances behind it , based off a piece of wreckage from that crash that's in a museum on display. The series also takes on stories of personal conflicts and events that individual people have experienced, as well as even occasionally tackling supernatural and strange events that took place. It tells these stories through reenactments that Don narrates beautifully. This is a show that really has something for everyone. There are even special episodes that will specifically tackles events like Amelia Earhart's disappearance and the origins of Dracula among other special episodes. This is a great show for any history buff or even casual viewer looking for something that is both informational and entertaining.

It is a great idea for a TV show, I absolutely love the stories, however, they are very loosely based (at best) on the objects in the museums. For example, a medieval clay etching, depicting farming in ancient Britain, then goes on to tell a story on crop circles. Or the story of John Smith, a barber who once cut president so and so's hair, who used this phone, that is on show at the museum of telephones... It's kind of funny how irrelevant the objects actually are.

It's also another very americanised program, in this I mean that the historical war accounts are somewhat pro-America, and twisted to paint their history in a favourable light. It's bias, annoying, and eyeroll inducing, because more often than not, there is much more to the story.

Overall it is a good show, and worth watching if you love history.

This is definitely my favorite show by far, and has been for years. I seriously hope they never end this show (otherwise I probably wouldn't even watch the Travel Channel), and hope they keep coming up with great stories.

This is a great show. It is amazing what fascinating little nuggets of history they dig up. Some of the stories are so compelling I am continually amazed that they aren't more well known. Some of them would make great films. I will very often research the stories on my own to get more information. Usually, the portrayals are fairly accurate, although they do emphasize certain aspects and play down (or ignore) others for dramatic purposes.

I usually DVR the show and watch it in bed, preparing to go to sleep. As fascinating as it is, conversely,it has a somnolent affect on me, and I usually have to re watch 2 or even 3 times to get through all of the stories. I think it is partly due to the reliable and unchanging rhythm of the show. they start out each entry the same way: setting the scene with the museum that holds the artifact that will introduce the related story, first mentioning some of the other museum holdings, then describing the physicality of the artifact in question. Then they tell the story with silent actors pantomiming the narration.

The narration itself has its own certain conceits: then never use one word when three will do, and adjectives abound. They never use a simple word, when a fancy one exists. (It's never a book, It's and "ancient tome" . People don't die, they "succumb to injuries"). Another little conceit is the rhetorical question and the use of puns. For example, In the story of the Double Eagle balloon crossing of the Atlantic: "Will their "lofty" ambitions be fulfilled? Will the balloon rise to the occasion? Will a slave that worked as a seamstress trying to get confederate plans to the Union be able to "thread the needle" and sneak past guards? How did a brassiere "boost" a young mother's bank account?" I love it. It's amusing.

Don Wildman, the host, is superb. He has a great tone, and conveys a sense of urgency, when called for, without getting all worked up. And always has this kind of amused inflection. Plus he is very easy on the eyes.

Another thing that is part of the predictable comfortable rhythm is timing and flow. When they finish one story, they immediately start the next one, saving the commercial break until a crucial cliffhanger. After the commercial break, they briefly recap the story and proceed. This is good for fast forwarding through the commercials, or if you doze off during the story, you can get up to speed without having to rewind. I swear, it's the same pattern over and over. It's like waves crashing on a beach. Two other shows that are just as good are Mysteries of the Monument and Mysteries of the Castle.

Well, it is readily apparent that no one is listening to any of the comments presented with respect to the background noise.

Although the program has some redeeming qualities, the music/noise in the background overshadows the dialog.

Question: Is anyone listening???

I'm sorry, What did you say?