Change Your Image
skyking-14
Reviews
The Cases of Mystery Lane (2023)
Dropped in the first 10 minutes
LAME, really lame.
Anything that starts with spouses lying to each other while pretending to be happily married is a non-starter for me. If you don't engage the viewer in the first few minutes, the movie fails.
This is, by far, the worst Hallmark mystery outing I've seen. From the beginning, the characters are just not likeable, and they seem so superficial that there is no connection to draw you in. I found the main characters to be annoying, and immediately non-sympathetic. A guy who wants to be a private investigator but is too worried about disappointing his wife by letting her know his desires, and a wife, too self-centered to take the time to listen when he asks to talk?
I realize that Hallmark is having to reach to replace the familiar stars who have moved to GAF, but this wasn't even a "foul ball", it was a "swing and a miss!"
Battles BC: Moses: Death Chase (2009)
Guesses and theories
"Relying principally on Biblical references, this program portrays Moses as a shrewd general who created the Biblical events traditionally considered divine miracles."
Not really. They tell you the Biblical references and then posit guesses and theories. I lost count of the number of "In point of fact..." comments, followed by guesses and supposition, without any actual facts!
So many times they say "We don't know..." and then present yet another theory. The one thing that is clear from the beginning is that they have started from the assumption that there is no God, and therefore there has to be a "rational" explanation for everything. This is a fundamentally biased approach to the story.
Much in this episode could actually be viewed as pushing an anti-Semitic viewpoint.
Lost U-Boats of WWII (2024)
Don't do what they do!
This is a mildly interesting story, and I can see the plausibility of their theories, however, there is a very real flaw in their approach that makes it less credible in my eyes. Repeatedly, they are finding and casually handling, what they believe to be munitions from WWII. In reality, this would be an incredibly DANGEROUS thing for them to do!
Any such unexploded ordinance, submerged for 70-plus years, would be highly unstable and unpredictable. It might be totally inert and safe to handle... it might explode in your hand with the slightest jar! You simply can't know, which is one of many reasons why diving the wreck sites of military ships is often controlled or discouraged.
That they repeatedly do so, without any comment on the potential hazard, leads me to wonder if they are simply uninformed, reckless, or well aware that what they are handling is not real?
History's Greatest Mysteries: The Phoenix Lights Phenomenon (2023)
Give me a break!
This stuff gets so old! Filled with half-truths, and just look at the "experts" they bring on, and they look like just weird people! Seriously, these folks often look like they were cast by The X-Files!"
At one point in this episode, these folks who have no military experience start spouting performance stats they probably Googled about military aircraft defense flares and then totally ignore any effect on those flares caused by wind or other environmental conditions.
They always make a big deal about "UFOs are real!", as if that really means anything. "UFO" stands for Unidentified Flying Object, nothing more, nothing less. It is NOT synonymous with extraterrestrial. It is simply an object that has been observed, flying in the sky, that the observer couldn't identify what it was. Many now famous military aircraft were previously reported as UFOs. Bringing in a bunch of folks who look like they were picked up at a seance, or a homeless shelter doesn't lend credibility.
Sadly, the "History" channel, is just that, history!
History's Mysteries: JFK & PT 109 - A Hero in Question (2002)
What a load of...
First, I will state that I am a Conservative Republican, and I disagreed with many of JFK's political positions, and I blame him for the mess that was the Vietnam War. I was a child when he was assassinated, and I'm a life-long student of World War II history. I admired his service, and his heroism, during WWII.
This is a mockumentary staffed with "experts" who are almost all too young to have a clue, and they fire off their disparagement like fireworks on the 4th of July! A number of their comments let their personal prejudices take center stage.
Multiple statements early on are historically inaccurate, including the claim that PT Boats were the primary naval presence in the Pacific after Pearl Harbor, when in fact, it was submarines.
The infamous "racing into dock" episode is misrepresented as some type of unforgivable anomaly when, in fact, it was common practice that crews tried to be first at the pier because they got refueled and released first. Anyone who has ever served in the military has seen similar traditions develop. No commander would've court-martialed an officer in wartime for something like this!
All this effort to question the heroism of someone who never had to serve, who volunteered, pressed for combat duty. It's pathetic. Most laughable is the attempt to claim that the Japanese Destroyer Captain was attempting to avoid the collision, rather than attempting it! That's just an insane assertion! PT boats were made of plywood and any Japanese Captain would leap at the chance to ram one! This one claim alone attests to the incompetence of the "experts" commenting here!
They talk about Kennedy confessing his responsibility to another PT boat captain, but never recognize the fact that EVERY captain accepts responsibility for what happens to his ship, as well as the testimony of that other captain that what Kennedy was doing was common practice. Again, taken out of context and misrepresented.
The prejudice continues to be highlighted as they try to paint Kennedy's attempts to seek rescue as somehow, defying Navy regulations, foolhardy, reckless, and then admit that no effort was being made by the Navy to search for survivors. They continue to credit the coast watcher for sending natives out to look for survivors, while conveniently ignoring Kennedy's island to island excursions are the only reason they contacted him!
Seriously, everyone involved in this project should be barred from participating in future documentaries! They are better qualified to be discussing ancient aliens and UFOs.
An interesting, and suspicious, claim is that Kennedy's 2nd in command had already written a detailed position report before Kennedy carved his message on the famous coconut. Really? Why are we only hearing this now, and how credible is it really? Think about it. Unexpectedly dumped into the water, multiple swims between islands and this guys supposedly has both a pencil and useable paper for a detailed message on a desert island??? LOL.
Now we get to the idea that both General MacArthur and Admiral Halsey wanted Kennedy stripped of his command for losing his boat. Really? Are we supposed to believe that two of the men most concerned with prosecuting the war in the Pacific gave a damn about the loss of one plywood PT boat? Seriously? Especially MacArthur, who had escaped blame for the lack of preparedness of his command in the Philippines, despite the warning of the attack on Pearl Harbor!
This program is nothing less than a second assassination attempt on JFK, this one a character assassination. It should be removed from streaming as a disservice to those who really want to understand WWII and the battle of the Pacific.
Quincy M.E.: Guns Don't Die (1982)
Hollywood went insane earlier than I realized.
I loved this show back in the day, but now I realize how long ago Hollywood lost their minds about guns. The entire episode is full of the faulty arguments for gun control that Liberals are pushing today. The idiocy of blaming inanimate objects for the choices made by the people who misuse them! Every time the gun changes hands in this episode, it does so ILLEGALLY, but NO, it's not the fault of the criminals, it's all on the gun!
"That gun's already killed three people." No, three people have killed with that gun. The gun has no brain, it makes no choices. Hollywood loves guns when they make violent movies but hate them for everyone else.
Greatest Tank Battles (2010)
The History Channel as it once was
This is a solid, fact-based, historical documentary. The sort of fare that made History Channel what it was at its best. I won't go into how far it's fallen here, but these were better days.
There are only two flaws that I really take issue with here,
#1 is that returning from each commercial break seems to lead to a reiteration of the final 60-90 seconds before the commercial break. This is redundant, and annoying.
#2 is that when the eyewitness is a non-English speaker and requires translation, the volume of the non-English speaker, and the sound effects are higher than the translation, making it very hard to hear and understand the translation. This requires turning on Closed Captioning to be able to understand what's being said.
One humorous element here is the German tanker who repeatedly proclaims how much better their tanks were than the Sherman and how the Sherman had no chance, was easy to defeat, etc. Yet, they LOST!
Cold Case: Time to Crime (2005)
Emblematic of Hollywood anti-gun propaganda
The key theme here is to trace the origins of the murder weapon, a Mac-10 submachine pistol which is capable of firing on full-automatic. One press and hold of the trigger can empty the gun. They repeatedly portray this weapon as being readily available and cheap to purchase ($89) at gun shows, and with no background check. In reality, fully-automatic weapons require a federal permit to purchase, and are very expensive to purchase. The only way to buy this weapon cheaply and with no background check is to buy it on the street from criminals.
Whether by ignorance, or malice, (I'm inclined to think the latter) Hollywood continues to this day to ignore facts when discussing the availability and misuse of guns in a police procedural.
Air Warriors: Spitfire (2019)
Well done mostly, but with a gaping hole.
This documentary oversimplifies the fatal switch in German strategy from targeting RAF fighter resources to their terror attacks on London. They make it seem a considered, strategic decision, but that's not what it was at all. It was an ego-driven act of revenge.
It started with a German bombing raid that got lost and opted to jettison their bombs over what turned out to be a part of London, despite existing orders that the British capital was not to be attacked without specific orders from Hitler. This understandably angered Britain, who retaliated with a bomber strike on Berlin. Faced with the humiliation of the bombing of Berlin, the decision was made to switch the target to London. NONE of this important linkage was included in the production, though it could've been covered in less than 60 seconds. That's just lazy!
2036 Origin Unknown (2018)
The fundamental logic flaw goes unnoticed
As often happens with movies like this, the fundamental logic flaw of the plot is overlooked. The AI sees the problem of human violence and seeks to prevent it by committing acts of violence that far exceed anything in human history!
That idea is like treating a hang nail with execution!
It's stupid, it's Hollywood drivel. It makes one wonder what was being consumed as the movie was written!
On all other technical aspects from direction, special effects and acting, it was delightful, but the entire storyline is simply nonsense. The fundamental idea that souless AI could be better than humanity, while wiping out humanity in the process, is an evil concept at its core. Those who suggest otherwise, are part of the problem, they seek to fix!
Sacred Sites of the World: Templars (2016)
Sadly typical of many religion related "documentaries"
While mildly entertaining, it's rife with historical error and nonsensible assumptions. As is constantly asserted, it retains the myth of a hostile Christian force launching an assault on the peaceful Muslim population, while ignoring the fact that Muslim leaders had been waging a war of occupation and conversion against non-Muslims since at least the year 630, more than 400 years before Pope Urban II called for the First Crusade!
It later goes on to discuss the fall of the Templars, and blindly accepts at face value, the "confessions" of those members who admitted to initiations including sexual acts, desecration and devil worship as "having to be taken seriously" because they were in the trial record, but ignoring, (not even mentioning) the reality that these "confessions" were obtained under torture. None of those would stand up in a modern court.
They even proceed to speculation by twisting the spelling of a word into suggesting they secretly converted to Islam! I also noted that a number of the "experts" quoted are from England, where there is an institutionalized anti-Catholic bias that is frequently reflected in their media productions. A case in point is that while I love British Mystery series, I'm frequently irritated by the realization that whenever they present the character of a Catholic Priest, they are inevitably shown to either be engaged in a sexual affair, a molester, or a murderer. They are NEVER presented in a positive light, and this cannot but discredit the spin put on Catholic-themed "documentaries" in which they participate.
FBI: Most Wanted: Iron Pipeline (2022)
Anti-gun propaganda telling lies
Once again, Hollywood falsely portrays the AR-15 as a fully automatic weapon, which it is NOT. You simply cannot "spray" multiple rounds with a single trigger press like they portrayed here. The reason that is important is that the AR-15 operates exactly like any semi-automatic weapon, one trigger, one round. It is NOT a machine gun. Attacks on the AR-15 are backdoor efforts to attack ALL semi-automatic weapons, including pistols and shot guns. It's a backdoor effort to undermine the Constitution like attacks on ammunition, pressuring banks to not make business loans to gun and ammunition manufacturers etc. It's an effort to disarm a public that they know won't accept their long-term goals. Every tyrannical and Socialist government has started with disarming the population. Look it up.
Engineering the Future: Perpetual Power (2022)
Climate Change Propaganda
Off the bat, this episode starts talking about the fundamental flaw of intermittent renewable energy, the lack of storage capacity. They talk about one summer where a heat wave impacting both California and surrounding states that resulted in rolling blackouts. While discussing this issue, they totally avoid any mention of the problems resulting from California pushing the transition to EVs at the time this occurred! Rather inconvenient to mention that, I suppose!
They then go one to present a number of fanciful, impractical, or unsalable alternatives to battery storage. The most practical is the water battery method using hydroelectric dams, but it should be borne in mind that massive dams are generally NOT referred to as "renewable" energy because of the other environmental damage they cause through the rapid flooding that can wipe out entire species and threaten fisheries, among other negative impacts. The Swiss plant moves massive amounts of water between two lakes at different elevations, and one has to wonder what this moving back and forth could do to the stability of the two dams, as well as the mountain sides themselves? It's only been operating for a year or two, so it's too early to tell.
Probably the dumbest idea is the cranes stacking and then unstacking a massive tower of bricks. Like anyone is going to want one of THOSE in their skyline! Not only is it ugly, one can only imagine the potential dangers of having tons of concrete constantly in motion near inhabited buildings and what the vibration of all those blocks being put down might cause.
Of course, they also repeatedly comment about the ability to store wind and solar as the "only way" to replace fossil fuels, when nuclear power is already proven and there are new designs that can't melt down and even use existing waste as fuel, solving two problems at once!
It's hard to take the urgency of climate change seriously when the strongest advocates refuse to discuss the single off-the-shelf technology that we KNOW can replace fossil fuels NOW.
The 101 Events That Made The 20th Century (2018)
Flawed history
I particularly wanted to comment on a specific portion, but was not given the opportunity. So, concerning events 35-24, I will point out several significant flaws. In the discussion of birth control pills, they really whitewashed the record of Margret Sanger, holding her up as a paragon of women's rights when in fact, she was a self-avowed racist who praised the racial theories of Adolph Hitler.
While praised for giving women "control over their own bodies and sexuality", there was no note that she also supported the forced sterilization of women who were minorities, poor, or intellectually disabled (Eugenics). The difference between Margaret Sanger and Adolph Hitler was more a matter of degree and presentation than of character!
Moving on to the OJ Simpson case, they ignored the conflict of interest for the Judge who was married to the superior of one of the key prosecution witnesses and used the civil finding to imply criminal guilt without any mention of the reality that the burden of proof for a civil case is minimal, compared to a criminal case. Civil cases are often defined by sympathy rather than evidence. I studied Criminal Investigation, and I'd have likely voted "Not Guilty" had I been on the criminal jury because of the misconduct of the police, and the incompetence of the prosecution.
Finally, the discussion of the attack on Pearl Harbor included a comment that "NOBODY understood that aircraft carriers would dominate the war..." when in fact, the Japanese planners DID understand exactly that and the entire plan was designed with the hope of knocking those carriers out!
Most of the "experts" quoted seem to be Australians, and I've found a consistent history of anti-American bias in "documentaries" done from an Australian perspective. They consistently seem to come from a liberal bias.
Points de Repères: Cuba, bras de fer nucléaire (2017)
Interesting, but filled with speculation
To a point, this can be an interesting series, but when they reach their "turning point" they leap into speculation, and in this episode even into inaccuracy! They say the submarine "Commander" chose to not follow procedure and launch his torpedo, when in fact he DID follow procedure by NOT firing. There were two additional officers, who had to agree with the Captain, for the launch authorization to be valid. The 2nd in Command and the political officer. In the event, it was Vasili Alexandrovich Arkhipov, NOT the Captain, who refused authorization.
In addition to the factual errors, one can only speculate what might or might not have happened if any single circumstance had changed or any single person had died or not been available for a specific event. The assumption of what any other person would've or would've not done in that situation is pure fantasy. Intellectually entertaining? Perhaps, but certainly not intellectually informative!
American Mystery: Triangles (2019)
Mildly entertaining if you don't take it seriously
This "documentary" follows a familiar pattern that has long plagued the conspiracy theory oriented content that the Travel Channel has sunk to. Half-truths and theories presented by fringe "experts" and contributors, largely lacking in credibility and a tendency toward confirmation bias. Credible scientific and investigative reports tend to be dismissed and contradicted with speculation not supported by actual evidence, and historical record is often distorted.
As an example, take the loss of the cargo ship El Faro. This was used to back up a theory about magnetic field interference which "caused the ship to veer from its course", when the official report and onboard data recordings confirm that the ship was always on it's intended course and simply sailed straight into the teeth of a hurricane because the Captain was reliant on out of date weather reports. The ship was also outdated and unsuitable for the weather conditions encountered. As I recall from watching a documentary on the actual accident investigation, water-tight integrity was also compromised by an unsecured hatch or door that allowed flooding which resulted in the ship's engines losing sufficient oil pressure to remain running, and they shut down, dooming the ship. In the end, this accident presents no actual mystery at all! Sadly, this is typical of these types of shows that are now plaguing not only the Travel Channel but the History Channel as well.
Planes That Changed the World: A380 Superjumbo (2015)
Something of a propaganda piece
While the show presents an interesting view into the process and challenges of developing the A380, it leaves the viewer with the impression of a "huge gamble that paid off". In fact, Airbus never broke even on the A380, let alone turned a profit. Boeing turned out to be right, and the hub and spoke model has largely been replaced by more direct flights on smaller, more economic aircraft. Many A380 orders have been cancelled, and production ended ahead of schedule. Several existing aircraft have even been scrapped.
As a sub-note, it pointed out the huge disadvantage of a widely distributed, multinational production model. Illustrated in this case by the expensive fiasco of the wiring components being designed too short for installation!
Mayday: North Sea Nightmare (2021)
Excellent show but the investigators missed the mark
The fundamental truth, here, is that this near miss happened because engineers made a decision to put automation over the inputs of the pilots and provided woefully inadequate warnings to that effect!
Any autopilot that does not disengage when the pilot drastically changes the control or power settings is fundamentally unsafe and should never be certified for use in commercial aviation. At the time of this incident, the Saab 2000 was the only commercial aircraft that did this. I don't recall if it was before this or after, but one Airbus model also had this fatal flaw.
Making the issue worse on the Saab, the autopilot status indicator was just "AP<" displayed in green letters when engaged and white letters when NOT engaged. At the very least, it should've been in RED letters when off, but even that is inadequate!
The investigators missed the mark in criticizing the pilots for not noticing and understanding the "ding-dong" warning chimes when they tried to take control, that were supposed to alert them that the autopilot is still engaged. "Ding dongs" are basically saying nothing more than "Something's Wrong!" and do nothing to provide useful information about what to actually DO about it! It's basically the aircraft equivalent of the "idiot light" on the car dash! There is no excuse for reliance on bells and chimes in the modern age, when they could be easily replaced with a verbal warning like "autopilot engaged". In the same way, we can replace the ambiguous "bank angle" with the far more useful "bank right" or "bank left" as required to return to level flight!
Atomic Age Declassified: Born with the bomb (2019)
Load of socialist propaganda
A common thread through this series starts with the first episode, where they misrepresent US war planning to respond to a Soviet attack as if it was intended to be a preemptive strike. The discussion totally ignores that the experience of WWII clearly indicated that the Soviet government and military were totally indifferent to human lives, as opposed to their agenda. Soviet Generals had admitted to then General Eisenhower that when the Soviet Army encountered a minefield that they attacked as if it wasn't there. A concept that shocked American Generals.
There was a very real fear that the Soviets would launch a first strike, and the war plans were built around that expectation. That was the entire purpose for operation "Chrome Dome" which had armed B-52s airborne at all times. Had the US war plan envisioned a "first strike" there would've been no need to keep the bombers on airborne alert.
Disrupt & Dismantle with Soledad O'Brien (2021)
Bigotry writ large
The promos say it all. This is a clearly a political propaganda piece like CRT, designed to divide Americans and sow more discontent. Inflammatory words, hot button issues. This is propaganda, NOT "news" or "documentary". Ms. O'Brien should be ashamed to be affiliated with this product. She was once far better than this!
Law & Order: In God We Trust (2005)
Good show, but it totally misrepresents the central issue.
I don't expect Hollywood writers to understand exactly what it is to be a "born again" Christian, but it might have been helpful to speak to some theologians before writing this script. I have never heard a single pastor preach that God's forgiveness releases you from the temporal consequences of your actions. In fact, Christ himself, when asked if it was legal to pay the tax, responded with "Render unto Caesar, that which is Caesar's and render unto God, that which is God's." In this context, the punishment of the body under the law for the murder was "that which is Caesar's" while the punishment of the soul, is "that which is God's".
At the Crucifixion, Christ was raised on a cross between two thieves. One who mocked him and one who sought and received his forgiveness. But both still died on their crosses. If God's forgiveness was intended to spare the forgiven from human punishment, the "good" thief should not have died.
If I max out all my credit cards gambling, then confess my sin of gambling and change my ways, would any reasonable person insist that the credit card companies should wipe out my debts? Of course not! The premise here is no more reasonable, and probably really reflects a bigoted view from the writers, of those who call themselves "born again".
Combat Ships: The battle of lete gulf (2020)
Revisionist history of the Battle for Leyte Gulf
It is clear very early on that the prevailing narrative starts with the assumption that Adm. Halsey screwed up in pursuing the Japanese "decoy" force of aircraft carriers. This is fundamentally incorrect in the context of the information and experience available to the American commanders at the time of the event.
The narrative notes, and then promptly ignores, that Halsey's orders, as drafted by Adm. Nimitz specifically authorized Halsey to put pursuing the main battle force as a higher priority than protecting the beachhead, and that is exactly what was done. Since Dec. 7th, 1941, the term "main battle force" was understood to mean the Japanese carriers. Nobody at the time had any way of knowing that by this point in the war, this force was now a toothless tiger. Any competent naval commander had still to take this threat very seriously!
At the same time, they portray Adm. Kurita's withdrawal of the Center force as a deceptive tactic, rather than a genuine intent to withdraw, a position which is not supported by Japanese records. Records indicated that Kurita only resumed course for Leyte after being ordered to do so by higher command. He had already lost his resolve and only returned to the original plan because he feared loss of face more than failure. This lack of resolve would prove even more decisive at the crucial point in the battle.
The assumption that Halsey would send a force in pursuit of the carriers while leaving TF 34 behind to guard the landings should never have made sense to any of the commanders, as Halsey's own flagship was part of TF 34. That he would remain behind in such circumstances beggars belief!
The show goes on to portray Halsey as delaying turning around his force for an hour because he took personal offense as a misinterpreted message from Nimitz but fails to recognize that such action could not have been taken until all aircraft attacking the Japanese aircraft had been recovered, a process that likely took longer than the supposed hour's delay!
Moreover, at approximately 300 miles north of the battle scene cruising at a maximum of 30 knots, it's unlikely that departing an hour earlier would've cut off the retreating Japanese force. A force that was retreating because American commanders, fighting at a clear disadvantage, displayed far more courage and resolve than did the aforementioned Adm. Kurita in command of a far superior force.
The Japanese decoy worked because they dangled a threat which could not be ignored, in the face of a commander who knew better than anyone, the danger that threat potentially posed. If a man approaches your children on the playground waving a shotgun, you don't ask yourself if the gun is loaded, you respond as if it is! Nimitz was reportedly upset with Halsey's actions, and it's a very human reaction, but I'm sure Halsey reminded him later that it was Nimitz who included that authority in his orders! Before the fleet sailed, clearly, BOTH commanders viewed the Japanese carriers as an overwhelming threat. It is both unfair, and frankly dishonest to look back on it later and pretend otherwise!
Incident at Loch Ness (2004)
Total waste of time
Stuff like this should come with a warning label. Any "film" that starts with apparently hand-held camera work, is going nowhere fast. Clearly not worth the impact on the environment that filming it required.
Death in Paradise: Switcharoo (2020)
I'll have to give it a "Little" time to see if he grows on me.
I've watched from the beginning, and I've been a little disappointed at some cast changes among the supporting characters (I miss Florence and Dwayne in particular), but DI Parker is the first of the detectives that I've really found hard to stomach. In my mind, he's overplaying the quirky into downright annoyingly weird.
Maybe he will improve as he gets more into it, but for now, I'm not sure if I will make it through the rest of season 9. Pity.
Mysteries of the Abandoned: Mystery of the Alien Base (2021)
Mildly interesting but overly dramatic at the expense of facts
The first story has to do with RAF Bentwaters in the UK. This was a Royal Air Force owned, but US Air Force tenant base during the Cold War. I was stationed at nearby RAF Lakenheath during some of the events they discuss here. RAF Bentwaters was the home of the 81st TFW during the Cold War. The program posits a strategic nuclear mission for the wing that is fundamentally incompatible with the aircraft types assigned. F-86 and F4 tactical fighters were assigned during the years leading up to about 1980 which would've served in an air defense mode. These were later replaced by A-10's in a close air-support role. In no scenario would these aircraft have been assigned such a ludicrous mission as outlined in this show. If nuclear weapons were indeed stored at this base, they would've most likely been small tactical nukes intended to be deployed against tanks or infantry on the battlefield rather than in a general exchange that would've necessitated bailing out over water and being picked up by submarine as they claimed.
It's always interesting to note and then google the names of the "experts" they trot out because you often find many of them have questionable credentials on the subjects they are discussing!