Who Do You Think You Are?

Who Do You Thing You Are

Series 18

Josh Widdecombe, despite denials and a wishing to maintain "street cred" we were never under any illusion Josh had descended from a privileged life and privileged education, and thus it was so. This was a "hum-dinger" of a ride for Josh and a great watch. The BBC was playful in its reveal and we captured incredulity a plenty, it was quite masterful the emotional sweep the description of a beheading played on the viewer. This is a 10/10 from me!

Judi Dench's show, I was gob-smacked, who could have believed it. Clearly the First World War and the inherent brutality of the conflict was in direct opposition to Judi's principles, however all must play there their part and do their duty and this was revealed. The Danish element was quite wonderfully handled with the lightest of touches. Another 10/10 from me.

Alex Scott (diversity box ticked), not sure who this person is, but it was certainly unremarkable except for discovering her ancestor owned 26 slaves, no less, and had children by them who he made provision for in his will. We all know that everyone on Jamaica either was either a slave or owned a slave. Of course this "snowflake" "struggled" with that reality. Lastly I really couldn't make out what was being said half the time, so subtitles are a must, and yet this lady said she was a presenter, who would have thunk it! 3/10 from me.

Joe Lycett (diversity box ticked), not really sure who this person is, but he seems to be permanently on stage and we never see who lays behind the facade and that is unusual in a programme of this nature.

Like Josh he derided his happy and comfortable childhood as if it undermined his "street cred" or was an "anti-source" for comedy, this is despicable when children all over the world lead miserable lives, why he thinks this posture is funny when it is not!

How insulting to suggest that a society for good was "camp" and infer a master of that society was "buff", you could see how uncomfortable he was being ridiculed having that comment made, let alone by a man towards him. Joe suggested wearing "drag" was a deciding factor as to whether he would join or not, outrageous. This behaviour is misjudged!

Despite the paperwork with regard to Joe's relative being described as a chimney sweep nowhere did the history say he was a "climbing boy", at 10 years of age he would be to big he may have just helped his grandfather with the brushes and odd jobs. The history was dodgy here!

The analysis of the stabbing on the Donegal as the result of an "unrequited" same sex affair as the first explanation of events is quite bizarre, Joe says he won't judge and then that is exactly what he does! The programme fails to highlight the surgeons diagnosis of delirium tremens, with is an altered mental state due to ethanol poisoning. Chloralhydrate is used to make the patient sleep whilst going through withdrawal. This was all missing. More dodgy history!

Overall this programme was so bad it should have been pulled, truly dreadful 0/10

Pixie Lott, a great show, Pixie had her heart on a sleeve from the start, it was a lovely moment when the marching band played her pop song and she sang. Her story took us from one hard life to another and reflected the desperate times they lived through. Despite a largely paper driven account it was brought to life quite graphically as we moved from place to place.

Overall this was a 7 outta 10 as we had far to much reading aloud from documents that we could read for ourselves. Pixie was very childlike when in fact she is 30 years of age, maybe that's all part of being a pop star.

Joe Sugg, I know nothing about this person and seemingly he knows nothing either. Every fact he uncovers he repeats, so irritating! How is it possible to believe history began the moment you were born. Seeming no clue about telephones, telegraph poles, telegrams or disease, contagion or the fact that life expectancy was way lower in the 1800's.

Joe seems shocked that protestant marriages are not recognised by the French at the time of the Huguenots when the English do not recognise sharia marriages today, is it not the same!

Overall this was tedious beyond believe half the time you could actually see him think (cogs turning) and he just didn't know anything so the whole programme was dumbed down to a primary school level. At best this is a 3 outta of 10.

Ed Balls, his politics stunk, his political career ended ignominiously, however he has always been a man of conviction and I respect him for that. Since leaving politics he has done great things, and he is a great person.

Poor Ed, the very first meeting with his Dad and Uncle was brilliant, he stood totally corrected, he was from upper middle class stock not the "honest" farm labourer he so desired lol! Ed is a self-effacing man who has a dry wit, the navel investigation was fabulous history and the shock of a court case over the same relative was very hard for Ed to hear. He received a further kicking when this very same relative was accused of sexual assault. Poor Ed!

Ed gave some fabulous self analysis is coming to terms with this blow, but did not enunciate that the arbitrary line of 16 years of age for consent today was not alway so, for his relative it was 13, (it changed to 16 in 1875), and is a human construct, nature knows no such rules.

For his next relative he was majorly partisan, there is quite a difference between vandalism (criminal damage) and protest, and had the subsequent arson have led to human deaths would Ed have thought the death penalty was "always wrong"!

I was relieved, let alone Ed, when a no guilty plea was entered on Christopher Green, phew!

Overall this programme was a strong 8 outta 10, brilliant and honest emotional rollercoaster!

This show was first shown on NBC for 3 seasons, and is now continuing on TLC. I'm happy that they're continuing without much decline in the production value. I doubt it costs much, and the most important ingredient are the celebrities.

Each episode, one celebrity investigate his/her ancestral history usually concentrating on something they're interested in. That's really the only rub I have against this show. The celebrities could certainly hide things they don't want to air in public. But most importantly, they might be interested in a really boring ancestor.

That doesn't happen a lot. Most of the discoveries are quite fascinating. Not only does it reveal personal history, but sometimes it reveals little known world history events. It brings the past worlds to life in the most personal ways.

This is one of the better "reality-based" shows on network TV since it has to do with learning about yourself and where you originally came from, but not the best.

Since celebrities are used in each episode, this show needs more diverse people to discuss their genealogy with. There are approximately 10 episodes per season and out of all of the episodes, only ONE person depicted is non-white. We live in a melting pot of ethnicities, and there are hundreds of actors that are non-white that have fascinating genealogy stores to be told.

"Finding Your Roots" on PBS is MUCH more diverse in who's history to follow whether they are black, hispanic, Jewish, or homoesexual. Check your local PBS stations of when it will air. Generally "Finding Your Roots" starts airing in Sept. It's more worthwhile to watch.

Humans love stories, and this show does an excellent job of using television to tell the stories of real people, without being maudlin or mawkish, or throwing them into contrived situations for comic or dramatic effect.

While we are dealing with the ancestors of a very select group of people (after all, how many would watch a show about *my* family tree?), the stories they tell are the stories of all of us: the former German POW who loved his time in an Iowa POW camp so much he came back to the U.S. after WWII. The story of a family torn apart by alcoholism and abuse. The story of people fighting for justice, sometimes at the risk of their own lives.

To get stories told this well, I am willing to put up with the heavy handed references to ancestry.com, and the smiling, infallible librarians and archivists who seem to always have just the right document.

Lisa Kudrow was great in "Friends" but I think this is the show should should put at the top of her resume

Who Do You Think You Are

Series 17

Jodie Whitaker, a really brilliant and revealing show, John Walter, why the BBC thought the content needed parental guidance is a mystery, war is brutal war. Two observations that show unfortunate bias in Jodi, to get on a train as a pregnant woman on your own is not an act of female bravery of note. Secondly Jodi seems determined to have some working class credentials, when she is in fact privileged middle class, to use these outdated sociological describers. Jodi needs to accept she has moved upwards. With regard to her preconceived judgements on her family of mine owners who ran a risky business in a difficult economy, she gasps in amazement when her relative leaves 1.5 million in today's money, she herself is worth three time that in today's money, and two council houses in Plaistow add up to that. Either way I really enjoyed this slice of history as Jodi was entirely genuine and it is her story after all.

David Walliams, this was brilliant stuff from start to finish, I would just make one observation that the mistrust of travelling people does not come from nowhere and David states they were "othered" without appreciating that this might not stem from discrimination but actions and behaviours by travellers themselves. The coverage of the First World War was so interesting but some of the "experts" added little.

Ruth Jones, this was really quite brilliant TV, a total delight from start to finish. It was great to understand some Welsh history.

Liz Carr, this was heady stuff I was on the edge of my seat, brilliant!

The BBC at its best and can we have someone that covers some American history as this was quite fascinating before.