White Rabbit Project

One of the most beloved and wickedly entertaining pieces of pop- culture in recent memory, "Mythbusters" was a small phenomena. Mixing real science with laugh-out-loud humor and an excellent cast of real-life characters, the series thrilled audiences for well over ten years and even after cancellation, it remains a fan-favorite for many a television viewer. So it should come as no surprise that a sort-of spiritual successor or follow-up would happen. And we get that in "White Rabbit Project", an entertaining but sometimes uneven new Netflix series starring the "Mythbusters" build-team of Kari Byron, Tory Belleci and Grant Imahara. While it has a small slew of issues holding it back from sheer perfection, I do think that the show is off to a promising start, has a lot of room to grow, and should it be renewed for a second season, it has the potential to get better and better.

Each episode follows our hosts as they explore and discuss a topic, whether it be comic-book superpowers, long-fabled future-tech or even just real-life scam artists. We explore different aspects and examples of each topic and how they could be recreated in the real world or be accomplished. Along the way, we are treated to friendly banter, the occasional skit and plenty of likable chemistry with our three leads.

I'll definitely admit that perhaps the biggest part of the appeal here is the fact that we've finally rejoined the build-team after their absence in the final episodes of "Mythbusters", and the leftover love for that series that fans have. And it's part of what makes the series all the more palatable even when it falters at time. Byron, Bellaci and Imahara are endlessly likable and entertaining and have an absolutely wonderful sense of companionship on screen. The topics discussed are very fascinating and it's a lot of fun seeing them doing oddball things like turning roaches into technical cyborgs or discussing the topic of heists.

But that being said, I can't help but feel that the series is way too unfocused and uneven at times. To the point that some episodes just don't work. The show has a very frenetic pace and it never really stops to let you appreciate the science of what's happening. Therefore it can be hard to really get a handle or invest yourself. I also think there's a bit too much "qwirkiness" and "style" going on for the show's own good. Yes, it's fun seeing an occasional skit or seeing Grant dress up in a supervillain's outfit. But we don't need a five-minute scene to introduce an episode or a prolonged scripted scene of acting to introduce a segment. It's just got too much filler. I'd rather see more deliberate and streamlined episodes with a greater focus on and more breathing room for the actual experimentation.

But that being said... it's still a very decent show. Even if abbreviated, the science is fascinating. The topics are often very fun and quite varied. Our hosts are just a blast and a half and are consistently enjoyable to watch. And there's a lot of untapped potential beneath the surface that keeps you invested and hoping for more. So hopefully it'll do well enough to get more episodes ordered. I know I'd love to see more, and I think newer installments will get progressively better. It might not quite live up to the sheer perfection that was "Mythbusters"... but it's a worthy unofficial follow-up.

"White Rabbit Project" is a solid 7 out of 10 for me.

I'm a huge fan of these guys and have been since they first appeared in Mythbusters. I enjoyed the last season of that show, but felt like losing these three was a big loss.

Therefore I'm super happy Netflix threw some bucks at them and got them their own gig, and it's a great time revisiting a gang who feel like old friends now - already this show gets a big pass from me.

My issue here really is with the presentation. Each subject they cover is LADEN with silly over-the-top sketch performances by the gang that easily eat up 60-70% of the screen time, with only 30% left over for the actual meat of the science. I realize that I'm in the minority of the public who find the tech stuff fascinating and the fluff, well, fluffy, but I could really do with a lot less "estrogen crazed Hitler dancing through the tulips" (in an especially egregious example of this from the "world war 2 crazy weapons" episode) and more fun experiments-gone-wrong. If they had cut out, for example, all of the "Farting Germans at a Cafe" and "Hitler gets boobs" feature-ettes from that episode they could have packed in at least a few more crazy weapon schemes which I would have found WAY more interesting.

To summarize, I watch a TON of hilarious sketch comedy shows already, when I want science I want to turn to these guys. Dial back the "acting" just a bit and you've got a winner.

Why don't the creators of this show like science???

They seem to think that the facts and stories in the show are not interesting enough by themselves. So they try to "improve" the "boring" science with weak jokes and a dumb ranking-system. Spoiler: it's not an improvement!

If you watch this show, just skip the intro and the "outro" = the 10 minutes of wasted time where they score the different stories against each other.

That way you skip all the stupid and are left with the core: a few (mildy) interesting science-related stories, which are nice to watch.

Mythbusters found out that you could not take the Build Team out of the show. Can you run a show using only the Build Team? And doing things similar to Mythbusters, without outright plagiarizing it? That's not an easy task.

And, for season one, it didn't go too well. If there is to be a second season, it will need some adjustments here and there.

The premise? Take a topic (Weirdest weapons of WW II, g-force and it's influence on humans, great escapes, just to give you examples) and pick six items related to it. Six weird weapons for example. Then, find three criteria to judge them by. Each of the three cast members takes two of them and demonstrates them. This can involve building something, like an electric car, it can be documentary footage, play scenes (some good, some bad) or a mix.

But - less nerd porn. Slightly more Byron cleavage, though (and a looong sequence of her in underwear). While Mythbusters tried, in a scientific way, to prove or disprove a myth, explaining the science behind it and showing different methods of testing them (with varying success), the White Rabbit Project lacks experimentation. More often than not, you will see experts in their fields and hobbyists demonstrating something. Quite interesting, but as six different aspects of the episode topic need their time, instead of just two or three myths, it lacks depth there.

Something is not quite right with the show. Yet. I'd love to see it succeed, though.

This show was setup to look great, it had all the makings of a great show. a great cast, great premise and its on Netflix, a great media outlet!

Somehow it came out sub par. And i was very disappointed by this. The show is clearly not myth-busters 2.0 something most fans were in many ways expecting. Yes you will always get your haters when the sequel isn't as good as the original, but lets face it nothing is. This show simply needed better marketing to make it clear it is NOT in anyway like myth-busters. The science of the show is limited and far between, where as the show focuses on stories (not myths!) from history about a certain subject each episode. The weak glue holding together the reason for the show is to analyze 6 (random number??) events in history that involved the shows theme that episode. This sounded great in the trailers!

What you actually get however is stories. Long drawn out, poorly told stories often acted out in scene that's cheesy, dull and often filled with casual racism.

Don't get me wrong, some of the stories are quite interesting, but how they are told to you via the build team is just upsetting and corny.

For people we know are naturally funny, intelligent and interesting at telling the "myths", they somehow manage to make every serious real life event seem like a sitcom, constantly waiting for a punchline that never arrives. It hurt my eyes and ears to see the heist in which some old British men bust into a vault. What passes for 'humour' in the states clearly likely just enrages any real British folk with their appalling clichés.

What happened guys? I don't want to rag on you and the producers, but this show really needs a spit shine to pull out those good moments and great ideas, and really bring this up to par for a 2016 production.

We often barely see the build team, you know, building. They are often confined to god awful acting and cartoon like realities to tell a tale. Some of the really interesting stories have clearly been well researched and really grasp you and pull you "down the rabbit hole" you want to know more, you want to see the theory tested.. but then it ends, like sex without an orgasm. Abruptly cutting to a "hey that was a story you liked now lets rate it" pointless arbitrary system in which they give numbers to randomly picked features of the event etc.

WHY? Why 6? Why rate out of 10? Why place in some weakly held together ranking system, which isn't a surprise if you can do basic maths throughout the show, because that makes it science?

I'm open to the idea of trying something new, and I don't want to sound negative to the whole show, it's just hard not to when what limited hype for a show crushes your hopes when the final product arrives. Please just clean and buff the wheel, don't try reshape it.

I'll say now in a spoiler free way, the episode on con artists.. just skip it. It's dull, tedious and has 0 science in the entire episode, it's just storytelling done bad. All the facts in this episode can be found in a 10 second Google search. Sadly reading Wikipedia will likely be more entertaining.

Well I guess if this show is set for a season 2 it really needs to pick up it's game. Look how well grand tour did, just because its got the big 3 doing what we all know and love them doing. We liked myth-busters because science is fascinating, terrifying, fun, and also something we can see & prove in real life. We loved the build team for their natural reactions to things (censored though they often were), their quirky humor, and their mistakes which made them human and relate-able. We'd love to see more of them, and less of Hollywood please.

Will I return down the rabbit hole like Alice? Only after I've fallen asleep...

• Gunji