Recensione in evidenza
Other reviewers have commented on the narrating style of the host which is in a fairly dull monotone. This is true, and it does detract slightly from the content, but the actual tone of her voice has also been poorly adjusted so only the lower frequencies are present making her sound quite muffled.
There is little if any new content here and I find it odd that a lot of developments or claims that have surfaced are not substantiated at all. For example, in the first episode there are some experts interviewed who state that "at one time the government denied the existence of UFO's but now they accept and admit that they exist" (I'm paraphrasing) but really! I've never heard any government admission of this fact and if there is surely should be included in the program since its about UFO's and in particular, peoples attitudes to them in the current era. They mention that president Reagan and then president Clinton referenced them (whilst briefly flashing up two second video clips of them speaking - with no audio) but no quotes, statements or specific references to this claim are included at all!
There were several instances in the episodes I watched where supposed information now 'common knowledge' should be taken for granted, but with no actual detail about this information other than the program's says so. No references as to who, what or how this information is substantiated. This is ridiculous. I have no interest in hearsay, I get enough of that on social media. If your going to make a UFO program and claim the definitive on certain information, please state clearly how, who and why it has come to be known or I will find these claims unacceptable. Needless to say I stopped watching after the third episode.
It's a bit of a shame as I liked the slightly different and refreshingly objective angle this program initially seemed to be taking, but ultimately it's simply more of the same.
Based on what it actually offers, and the few but significant shortcomings, I can't recommend this program and as such give it 3 stars.
There is little if any new content here and I find it odd that a lot of developments or claims that have surfaced are not substantiated at all. For example, in the first episode there are some experts interviewed who state that "at one time the government denied the existence of UFO's but now they accept and admit that they exist" (I'm paraphrasing) but really! I've never heard any government admission of this fact and if there is surely should be included in the program since its about UFO's and in particular, peoples attitudes to them in the current era. They mention that president Reagan and then president Clinton referenced them (whilst briefly flashing up two second video clips of them speaking - with no audio) but no quotes, statements or specific references to this claim are included at all!
There were several instances in the episodes I watched where supposed information now 'common knowledge' should be taken for granted, but with no actual detail about this information other than the program's says so. No references as to who, what or how this information is substantiated. This is ridiculous. I have no interest in hearsay, I get enough of that on social media. If your going to make a UFO program and claim the definitive on certain information, please state clearly how, who and why it has come to be known or I will find these claims unacceptable. Needless to say I stopped watching after the third episode.
It's a bit of a shame as I liked the slightly different and refreshingly objective angle this program initially seemed to be taking, but ultimately it's simply more of the same.
Based on what it actually offers, and the few but significant shortcomings, I can't recommend this program and as such give it 3 stars.
- Jim_Screechy
- 14 lug 2020
- Permalink
Trama
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Colore
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti