Planeta Hostil

I was expecting a show with images of animals living in hostile environment, and valuable information about their lives and HOW they manage to live and survive but the show falls short in this. Don't get me wrong, the images and the shots are spectacular, but what they have focused upon is mostly prey being preyed upon and killed. This series seems to be about the struggles animals are facing when it comes to find food our being killed by predetors. Its obvious the intent is to create an atmosphere of action and thrills. They don't focus more then 2-3 minutes on each species they show us, whick feels like such a waste when we see the behind the scenes photage of some of the scenes. They haste from one animal quickly to the next.

Like the photage of the bats in the dessert. What a waste! We are shown around 1-2 minutes of photage of bat swarms getting preyed upon by hawks. Thats it. Its like the show does not care about sharing anything valuable about the animals and species itself, what kind of bats they are, how they live and suvive. They just wanna show action photage. Like the hunting hawks in the dessert hunting a rabbit, what valuable information do we get? None! We just see beautiful action photage of hawks, killing a bunny. Same with the kangoroos, we just see a 2 minute of photage of kangaroos melting in the sun. There is no valuable lessons or information to this series. Only nice action shots where the behind the scenes videos at youtube actually were more interesting to watch. 3 years of filming small 2-3 minute sequences? You can do better national geographic!

In short, beautiful photage. But this is no BBC production, and it shows.

Truly captivating work! And who doesn't like bear grylls, I ask you, who? Not I

A lot of the moments I've seen in Planet Earth, Blue Planet, and Life Story but nothing in nature ever happens -exactly- the same twice so it doesn't feel terribly repetitive. Unless perhaps this is all BBC's unused footage repurposed, but I don't think a giant like Nat Geo would need to do that. The footage is just as gorgeous and thrilling, and Bear Grylls is a great narrator. Did they really fly him out to all those remote locations around the world just to shoot the 2 second intros/outros?

The facts are the global climate IS changing but never once did he say it was 'the end of the world' or that 'it's mankinds fault', I'm not sure what some of these naysayer reviewers were watching but they were hearing what they wanted to hear, not what he said. He did blame man for overfishing during the ocean episode and it wasn't a lie or liberal propaganda, just an observable fact. There is no way crews of cameramen, scientists and naturalists can spend this amount of time in the field gathering data and shooting footage without seeing the state of the environment. You want them to NOT report what they see and the data they record? I recommend watching this show for anybody willing to pull their head out of the sand and just learn a few things.

I watched all latest David Attenborough documentaries and this one is just as good. Footage is amazing, this is an undertaking of gigantic proportions. As for the "political" part, all I can say to those climate change deniers is to paraphrase JFK during The Cuban Missile Crisis: If we ... do what they want us to do (which in this case is nothing), none of us will be alive later to tell them that they were wrong.