Opiniones de usuarios

Bonekickers is easily the worst BBC programme of 2008. That much is obvious: absurd, illogical, incomprehensible story lines; huge plot-holes and plot twists that make no sense; awful, cringe-worthy dialogue; downright wrong archaeology.

Yet, somehow I am compelled to watch it, week after week. Like a drug, it keeps me coming back for another hit, despite knowing how harmful it is to my braincells.

Quite simply, Bonekickers is the most hilarious show in ages. Utterly, insanely preposterous, once you stop taking it seriously it's incredibly funny. Treat each dreadful line of dialogue and each implausible coincidence as a joke -- or better still, a drinking game -- and you'll soon realise how fun this show can be.

If you're the sort who enjoyed "The DaVinci Code" or "National Treasure," you'll probably love this show. The plot of the pilot episode was absurd, but the way the characters reacted was wall crafted and within the realm of the possible.

The social commentary is palpable and perhaps too extreme to be taken seriously. While the first episode may be called by some anti-Christian, the real distinction is drawn between those of any faith who use organized religion as a means of domination and those who actually believe in the (usually peaceful) teachings of the faith.

I was especially drawn to the character of Viv (Gugu Mbatha-Raw) both because she's beautiful and because she is the outsider's bridge to the world of archeology the show supposes to portray ... though I haven't heard of any actual archaeologist recently being hunted by brainwashed, sword swinging thugs, so let's just admit this has as little to do with archeologists as Indiana Jones.

Okay, I'm a professional and not an academic, but even so. I've managed to avoid this series up until now, but last night featured the Roman Baths Museum and I had to watch it for the background. Pity the actors got in the way..... Not going to comment on the archaeology side (yeah I know it's fiction) but the whole thing was just nuts. And not in a good way either. I could have assembled a better plot from an Ikea flat-pack and the dialogue sounded like they'd shredded the script and picked up random lines off the floor. And the big surprise at the end? - anyone not get it before the programme was half over? And in answer to cake-26, I know of a few black archaeologists and worked with people from various ethnicities when doing work with the public, so the presence of Adrian Lester and Gugu Mbatha-Raw is valid but they are so under-drawn as characters as to be 2-dimensional. Hugh Bonneville played his part as if he was half-cut and I really wished I was too.

If you're hoping for an accurate account of history, or a spellbinding mystery, then this show will disappoint. If you want to have a fun, pointless show with strange plot points, poor directing and comical characters, then this show is perfect. The mysteries aren't that good, the older professor is a sexist pig and i think the young girl is only there so that she can ask questions so that the plot can be explained to the audience. An absolute riot, if you have a sense of humour.

It's the kind of show to watch with a group of friends that know little of history to find it interesting, or those that know so much, that the plots are awful. This is the kind of show that makes America's "Relic Hunter" look like a documentary.

I keep reading bad comments about Bonekickers and I really feel I must write a positive one.

To start with, i think it is important to say that I'm a professional archaeologist, with well over fifteen years experience. I have been lucky enough to work in several countries and on a variety of different periods sites.

First at all , YES! Bonekickers may have gathered some inspiration from Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code, maybe something (not a lot though) from the Indiana Jones series, and most likely a bit from Time Team. But in addition to this,BoneKickers is a mystery series. It just happens that the main characters are not police, journalists or detectives (or a retired lady that write about murderers), BUT a team of archaeologists that get themselves involved in a series of historical (fiction) mysteries…

And when you accept the reality, that is PURE entertainment, then you can enjoy it. At the end of the day, the series is not trying to be Indiana Jones, or Dan Brown's code, but just something different, that plays with uncommon mysteries.

So what if it is not unique, fresh, new, etc etc etc? It's really funny and when they actually show some archaeology, it is actually really well done.

In its own way, it is quite fresh (does anyone remember the last time that we saw a team of archaeologists on TV other than TimeTeam?).

I really hope BBC decides to push for a second series, I know a lot of us will be really happy with it!

Well done this time BBC!!!

Having read the comments on here to see if this show was worth watching i very nearly deleted it without even giving it a chance. You would think that the academics with a professional interest who have slated the show from the very first episode would welcome the exposure and interest in their field. What would they prefer 6 hours watching someone unearth a broken pot with a paintbrush? If you like ancient mysteries and alternative history theories and don't mind if the truth is embellished and exaggerated to help the story along then you will enjoy this. I have watched all 6 episodes in about 1 week which tells me i must have enjoyed it. Well done to the Beeb for doing something away from mainstream drivel. It will be a shame if there's no second series as i am looking forward to it already and with a bit more thought this could go from OK to very good there's certainly the scope.

Pretty good series. Too bad they did not do another couple seasons. Good premise. Little bit of history brought to life. Peaks your interest. The naysayers that rated low are people that like reality TV and never read a history book before, fact or fiction. Entertaining enough to enjoy. Imagination is awesome.

It had it's moments and I think they were all in the trailer. Hubby fell asleep through it and normally I would save it on Sky+ for him.

I didn't.

The cgi was dire, the acting was dire (even the rather yummy Adrian Lester couldn't save it) - oh and what was with the re-dubbing of Paul Nicholls??? I will give it a second chance next week but I am not holding my breath!!!

A lot of things I love are a little far fetched but usually have at least one toe in the waters of believability. This fell flat, the characters were all over the top, the lines in places were cringe worthy to say the least, and the storyline, possibly not the best choice for the first episode.

Appalling. Truly cringeworthy, patronising garbage! I happen to be a 1st Class Durham Archaeology graduate (ala the character on the show) and I am appalled that they have the nerve to name places, and institutions in association with this show.

Perhaps, perhaps, if no one had ever seen Time Team, the awful archaeological practice might have slipped us by.

But in the light of a more sophisticated audience and a viewing public who are increasingly curious about the past, this was gratuitous, misleading, dumbed-down rubbish which would not even have made it into the most fevered wet dreams of a young George Lucas! Leave Indy to the Americans and Time Team to Channel four.

Be original BBC!

********* Oh yes… one more thing… A professor, doesn't usually equate to a dirty old man who refers to women by virtue of their physique.

It is ironic that such a character exists in such a bland show. The BBC has lost the plot on 'PC' despite its best efforts, lost the plot on licence costs and lost the plot in this show!

There are too many uptight and unhappy people watching British TV these days! Previous comments from people complain about historical inaccuracies, poor acting and some people had the nerve to use their personal ideologies to slate this show. Firstly, I want to address the acting, anyone who complains about the acting really needs to think about what they are saying, in fact it wouldn't surprise me if these people who were complaining were actually Eastenders or Hollyoaks fans, shows which are famous for their Oscar worthy performances, I've seen better acting at a fitba match than those two shows! The acting is neither up nor down in Bonekickers, there is no obvious discrepancies in the acting, nor is there anything to get too excited about! The plot is interesting, the story, however, is not told well. CGI is not exactly blockbuster material, but then the show itself does not require it to be so, I mean why would we need state of the art CGI on an archaeological/dramatic TV show? Do we want the dirty items uncovered to look spectacular, or realistic? Historical inaccuracies are not a major issue when you consider that the show is not meant to be taken seriously. If you are wanting solid archaeological and historical fact then watch Time Team, don't complain about the fact the show is not Time Team! The show is meant to be fun, and interesting, comical and dramatic, did it deliver? Yes it did, I watched it from start to finish, and was not disappointed, nor was I excited. It was a darn site better than watching some of the drivel that is on TV just now!

Bonekickers is a poor man's Indiana Jones, but with less action and a lot less believable (and that's saying something if you seen Kingdom of the Crystal Skulls). The programme is about the fictional University of Bath archaeology department (the department not the university), and somehow this team find amazing discoveries and come across major conspiracies. The problems with the show are numerous. Firstly the programme takes itself too seriously and make out that it is a gripping thriller: it's not. The show is not well written, full of plot holes, bad dialogue and stereotypes. Whilst the West Country does have a rich history involving things from Stonehedge, King Alfred, the Rome Baths and the English Civil War, it is unbelievable that its involved with American conspiracy and having items like the true cross. What surprises me about the show is that Adrian Lester is in it, and he is a very good actor. He has been in Primary Colors, the Day After Tomorrow and Hustle. Some people have criticised the acting in the programme: I personally think that it is okay, nothing special. The show is not the worst one ever made, but there is a lot better around. The only good think about the show is it is made in the West Country which is under-representated in television, but it needed a stronger vehicle.

Having come to the IMDb page on Bonekickers after already having seen the series--a perfectly fine, better than average production, from which much pleasure can be derived--I can only assume that the extremely harsh comments about it here are the result of some kind of (probably informal) conspiracy, perhaps inspired by the content of episode one. The cast is attractive, the individual episodes work as adventures, and the characters' various back-stories add depth to the mix. For those who haven't actually seen the show, then, check it out: unless you identity with the villain in episode one, you may well enjoy the series, in which case (as an added bonus) you will also be amused (and intrigued) by the hostility being directed toward it here.

(1) I live in Bath and was thrilled to see a prime BBC drama set in my home city (2) Adrian Lester usually picks excellent parts, anything with him in is usually top-notch (3) This is created by the team that borough us Hustle & Life on Mars - truly superb drama (4) And despite many comments to the contrary, the premise for the season should have legs and could dramatically work

But this show is a complete and utter failure on so many levels we must wonder what everyone involved was thinking! I guess we all have "off" days.

In a sense, it is a series so bad, that it is almost fun to watch how awful it is. As they casually dig up priceless mythical artifacts all within a few miles of the city, usually within a couple minutes of saying "Let's Dig" at the first place they try.

Julie Graham and Hugh Bonneville are horribly miscast into badly conceived characters which will instantly convince you they have no acting talent at all - which isn't quite true - although it is undeniably the effect!

Watch only if you want to enjoy how poor writing and poor acting can actually be quite funny. Probably not best approached sober.

Having a moment to spare, I just thought I'd add something to the various comments about 'Bonekickers', even the though the show itself is ancient history now (weak pun intended).

I was personally connected with the show, right from its very inception, although I didn't actually work on it. The original idea was great fun, the pitch being to take 'Time Team' and turn it into an adventure show. I read the (unused) pilot script - it was very entertaining, with lavish historical recreations, devilish booby traps to imperil our heroes, OTT villains, and some ingenious uses of history, all delivered with a real sense of fun.

What really spoiled the show was the realities of TV production. It's a very, very long way from saying "hey, I've got a great idea for a show!" to getting that show broadcast, and on the journey 'Bonekickers' lost its way. It's a real shame because it could have been (and SHOULD have been) a great deal better than it turned out.

I'm glad at least a few people enjoyed it - and for those who hated it, I can only say that I think you (like me) would have much preferred the original concept for the show that now, sadly, will never see the light of day. But hey, that's show biz. Even Stanley Kubrick screwed up with 'Eyes Wide Shut' - it can happen to the best of them!

(BTW, my star rating is NOT for the show that was made, but for the show that I saw in my imagination when I read the unused pilot script.)

You should at least present all of the facts. Real archeologists and scientists use only the facts to present their information. The writers of this show select certain facts that support a narrative to lecture about something contemporary- and not in an intellectually honest way. Julie Graham's character shows sneering and smug contempt for those who do not share her views and her arrogance is very offputting. Like cops who "like" a perp and "find" only evidence to support that theory of guilt, she is dismissive of any opinions views or facts that challenge her conclusions. The writers are intellectually lazy propagandists who can't be bothered to take the extra steps to present a compelling, informative story. They choose instead to lecture the audience on the politically correct viewpoint - with all the subtlety of a cricket bat to the face. A waste of talented actors and a lost opportunity for a truly entertaing and educational adventure.

One day this programme might be unearthed as a classic, although I would not hold my breath. I think the BBC has buried this deep in the North Sea.

This series had a great pedigree. From the makers of Life on Mars. It has Adrian Lester, the star of Hustle. It took a pitch and phrasings from the Channel 4 archaeological show, Time Team.

It was going to add lashings of Indiana Jones intrigue and adventure with a battle of wits and treasure with a rival who was a better funded archaeologist. Adrian Lester described the show as CSI meets Indiana Jones.

What seemed like a great pitch for a TV adventure show came on screen as a damp squib. Julie Graham who played Dr Magwilde had all the charisma of a corpse.

Hugh Bonneville, playing Professor 'Dolly' Parton a character who likes a drink, probably wished he just stayed in the pub. Adrian Lester must have thought he should just go back to Hustle.

The first episode which dealt with a controversial storyline of modern day Knight Templars unleashing their own race war highlighted some of the absurdities of this show.

Something did not gel. What was supposed to be hip and exciting became turgid, dull, dreadful with actors speaking horrible lines.