andyk-70846
Joined Jan 2017
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Reviews5
andyk-70846's rating
I like the disasters chosen. I think they are well explained and the step by step method works well. It doesn't present the human failures as obvious and that anyone would have seen them as problematic.
What I find almost comical is the interviewees interactions with the "magic table". The interviewees were obviously directed to pretend to be watching something occurring on the table while there was nothing there. They conjure up inquisitive interested looks that have no bearing on what is eventually CGI'd in. Having nothing to focus on, their eyes stare off into this confined space over the table. When something dramatic happens, like an explosion, they don't change their expressions they just seem mildly interested in some spot perhaps in the center of the protected image. During these times I study their looks and try to figure out how they could have done that part better. No answers yet.
I really like the show but it needs a sequel, "Reenactment Annoyances Autopsy".
What I find almost comical is the interviewees interactions with the "magic table". The interviewees were obviously directed to pretend to be watching something occurring on the table while there was nothing there. They conjure up inquisitive interested looks that have no bearing on what is eventually CGI'd in. Having nothing to focus on, their eyes stare off into this confined space over the table. When something dramatic happens, like an explosion, they don't change their expressions they just seem mildly interested in some spot perhaps in the center of the protected image. During these times I study their looks and try to figure out how they could have done that part better. No answers yet.
I really like the show but it needs a sequel, "Reenactment Annoyances Autopsy".
I saw the title and decided to give it a try. I'm three episodes in and I really like it. I'm am Yank but I recognize some of the performers and I think the acting is great as is the writing. I do not normally watch "unscripted" TV but I am culturally aware enough to know the premise of each of the shows.
They do a great job of identifying and mocking the ingredients of each of the show types, for example on a cooking show to claim a recipe was from your grandmother.
All the skits I've seen deserved a chance, and most succeed, but the skits are short enough that when the gag isn't working for me, the skit is over soon enough that I don't become irritated. "Lip Island" I'm looking at you.
They do a great job of identifying and mocking the ingredients of each of the show types, for example on a cooking show to claim a recipe was from your grandmother.
All the skits I've seen deserved a chance, and most succeed, but the skits are short enough that when the gag isn't working for me, the skit is over soon enough that I don't become irritated. "Lip Island" I'm looking at you.
This show is like a sine wave in that it's up then down. But being a big Matt Berry fan I'll ignore the downs. I have only watched through episode 2. Crazy amount of cameos as well as some of Berry's former collaborators. But I was most happy when I got to hear again, "Hello Steven, this is Clem Fandango. Can you hear me?"