Customer Reviews: Read 1 more reviews...
 The Monsters look real October 13, 2006
4 out of 4 found this review helpful
This may be the shortest chapter of the walking with... series, but it shows very good how life was before the dinosaurs. The animals seem here, look more realistic than in any other part of the series. I will liked more if the program lasted more than three chapters; but I still liked the way it was done, so I can't give this program less than five stars.
 Walking with... January 30, 2006
8 out of 11 found this review helpful
This is the third "Walking With..." DVD series I have watched, after "Beasts" and "Dinosaurs". but I did not like it as much as the other two. Technically it is just as good, but it is not as strong as them - the problem is that it covers a time period that the lay public (alright, everybody who is not a paleontologist) knows little or nothing about. People know about dinosaurs (or at least know the names) and can relate a bit to ancient mammals, but to early reptiles and amphibians? In my opinion, this would have been a good reason to expand on the animals shown and add a few more specimens in six or eight episodes, instead of cramming as much as possible in only three episodes - it would have been better popularization, I think. I wonder if something like "Walking (Flying?) with Birds" or "Walking (Standing?) with Plants" would be like if they had done them...
Very Good but Very Brief January 16, 2006
24 out of 25 found this review helpful
Tim Haines and BBC have really spoiled us with their work on Earth’s prehistoric life. Both “Walking with Dinosaurs” and “Walking with Beasts” were models of an almost perfect balance between hard science and popular entertainment. With the bar set that high, a minor disappointment is inevitable, regarding this latest forage into the planet’s evolutionary past.
Let’s put the record straight: the “Monsters” series enjoys the same high standards of craftsmanship and educating-entertaining value as its predecessors. The species chosen to illustrate the drama of life’s evolution, are quite representative of the surrounding fauna, the “stars” of their time. Their stories are well constructed and develop in a seamless manner from one period to the next. And the “intermissions” with the time-clock ticking and the species changing before our eyes, give a very good picture of life’s continuity and the marvels of evolution.
But we would like to have more, much more. Why not having a six-episode series for the six periods of the palaeozoic era? The answer is obvious: costs constraints. That realization does nothing to allay our hunger. Sure there are enough scientific data to enable the series’ creators to construct complex and marvelous stories for each period. And to prehistoric life enthusiasts, Cambrian arthropods and Devonian fish (where is Dunkleosteus?) are as fascinating as Permian mammal-like reptiles.
Furthermore, the series, following the tradition of the “Walking with...” sagas, creates dramatic stories by presenting fascinating animal behaviors which I suspect lack solid scientific justification. Educated guesses, an indispensable part of paleontology, can push the “poetic license” card a bit too far, even for non-scientists. I understand of course the principles of inference, but I think that they overdid it this time
Despite the above grudges, the series manages in three episodes to convey the richness and fascination of life’s evolution on Earth, for the first 300 million years of its existence. The animals’ CGI are usually of the highest quality, but unfortunately for the computer guys, they already have spoiled us and we expect nothing less. And a measly 90 minutes of material manages to create many regrets for what might have been, if the BBC people gave it the time and money necessary.
 Nice idea but.... January 12, 2006
5 out of 12 found this review helpful
It is a good idea to look at life on Earth before the dinosaurs, however, I am not so sure that having Kenneth Brannagh deliver the narration in the style of 'The fight for the domination of the Earth had begun' was an entirely good idea. I did not feel that this was up to the standard of 'Beasts' and 'Dinosaurs', although the special effects were as you might expect, very good.
An impressive lay view of prehistoric life. January 5, 2006
8 out of 10 found this review helpful
It is the case with all natural history programming that an element of "sexing-up" will always take palce. If a triceratops for instance was shown eating all day instead of fighting for territory, nobody would watch. The BBC is usually quite good at avoiding this angle as much as possible and in this case seems to strike the same good, tried and tested balance. As usual the visual effecs are stunning and the information delivered well. In regards to the earlier comment, I didn't get the impression from my university that thsi was ever designed to be a voyage thorough history overlooking the evolution of vertebrates, simply an eye-opener on what was previously tought to be less exciting than the more obvious choice of dinosaurs. I would recommend this to any young palaeontologist's out there or anyone even faintly interested in the amazing world that existed millions of years before the dinosaurs came along.
|
