I Survived...

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.

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?

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.

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.