Year Million (2017) User Reviews

Needed More Scientists

[dncorp · 7/10 · 23 June 2017]

Needed More Scientists to add more credibility.

Instead we got a Comedian, and other Non Scientists (Real Scientists that fully understand their Science, can explain their Science to anybody in Non Scientific language).

We also got many speculations of what "Will Happen", just like long ago "Flying Cars" would be in every garage. (I don't have a "Flying Car" yet, do you?).

Interesting shot in the dark

[samcliffe · 7/10 · 16 April 2022]

I feel like they think they know too much about something that they know nothing about, basically predicting the future is not something you can really do it could be completely different than this mind uploading could be complete bull**** but let's hope that god is real and none of this shit is true as been in a virtual world seems weird as hell.

A mind blowing trip to the future.

[Blasfemo · 7/10 · 19 June 2017]

Gotta admit that I wasn't expecting "Year Million" to be as good as it is. I was thinking to just watch how it is, maybe it's gonna be acceptable but no. It's more than acceptable. This could really be our future! A.I., colonization, automation & living forever are just a few of the topics shown in this outstanding documentary. 8/10 which is really good.

in response to this...

[st_stoimenov · 13 March 2019]

"Sci-fi writers make their money thinking about the future and hypothesizing about how future existence might look if technologies and trends were carried to their logical conclusions."

If that estimation is even half- accurate than the show itself must be way worse than I thought.

Even the most rudimentary understanding of the nature of the social and political animal the human being is, and even the most basic social and/or political sciences literacy stipulate that this rather imbecilic habit of extrapolating today's tendencies, or at least those among them deemed as the most evident and most viral, into the distant future is undoubtedly amongst the most dull and irresponsible prognosis methods.

2 Good Parts, Many Not-So-Much

[gelf-2 · 6/10 · 19 June 2017]

Actors and production did well but the writing is as if a science teacher from the 50's saw the present and picked a path forward and lock-stepped into. Bad – at every step they assume united single way forward. Evolution diverges and species or societies or technologies develop. One subculture could go back to Nature to evolve bodies while minds safely backed up. Also, why would entering the 'metaverse' be one-way. Upload a copy, re-print a body or cyborg avatar as needed. Safer if that Carrington Event or rogue Gamma Burst wipes the Cloud Reality. Bad – only see one solution to each problem. Bad – assume can't save Terra, assume can't up efficiency etc… i.e. A solar array at a LaGrange Point could supply all our energy for centuries. Dyson swarms or Spheres not the only way. What about fusion power? Contraterrene? Heck, since 'deep future' Void Energy Taps? All of these questions and those in the show handled better for decades, by short fiction writer especially. Great cast and production. WEAK writing and choices.

An Exciting Consideration Of The Future

[atlasmb · 9/10 · 7 June 2017]

Want to have your mind expanded? Or completely blown? "Year Million" takes a look at how the future might play out, given the current status of technologies and real concerns about quality of life.

Sci-fi writers make their money thinking about the future and hypothesizing about how future existence might look if technologies and trends were carried to their logical conclusions. This show looks to "a far future" and asks viewers to consider some surprising and startling possibilities.

In the first two episodes of this mini-series, we consider the dramatic changes that advances in robotics will bring. Our culture can expect significant changes in the next twenty years; but what might occur in hundreds of years? Will robots replace many humans? Will they threaten the existence of humans? Will they merge with humans?

Also considered are the consequences of medical research that promises longer life spans. Nanotechnology may eventually promise near immortality. Genetic advances may promise designer children. The combining of human and machine may blur our definitions of humanity, especially if the contents of the human brain can be digitized.

Will people be able to download the contents of their brains into robotic bodies? Will people be able to visit or actually live in digitized (virtual) worlds? Will cryogenics allow people to be reanimated in the future, when medical advances allow more choices or a cure for disease?

Will off-world travel and colonization be the salvation of mankind?

With any new technology comes new ethical questions. Will technology advance faster than the ethical systems designed to deal with them? Will we be able to retain what makes us human? Do we know exactly what those things are?

"Year Million" is both exciting and scary. A fantastic voice over facilitates the journey through a myriad of musings and questions.

A fun thought experiment, more science fiction than science fact.

[ugeh37 · 7/10 · 19 November 2018]

Well produced and entertaining. I liked this series because it played with some of the more wild speculations of modern science. They didn't dive deep and kept it more lighthearted and fun. So if you're looking for a hardcore science show, you won't like this one.

But if you're up for a cocktail party level conversational presentation on the subjects of AI, Dyson Spheres, digital immortality, space exploration and colonization, this one's for you.

The Future Looks Dim

[shanewebbie-00471 · 10/10 · 13 February 2023]

I thought the film Year Million was absolutely one of the best documentaries I've seen in awhile. The Dyson Sphere theory is great. Scientists have already identified a G-type star far from our reach that fluctuates in and out of light at different rates of speed. For me, that's proof enough that there is life out there. Once we harness the power of our nearest star, we will move onto distant ones because ultimately power is what it takes to keep things in motion.... if I lived in the future my main focus would be space exploration I would travel to the furthest reaches of the galaxy searching for life. It would be the greatest adventure mankind has ever taken...

Extremely interesting but with few cons.

[bartoszrabiej · 7/10 · 18 April 2020]

Really interesting story, i learned quite a bit of possibilities of the future. Lady in the red glasses (comedian of some sort i guess) incredibly annoying. Other than that pretty good show!

Mind blowing !! To be honest a bit scary at times too.

[sreejith-30589 · 10/10 · 1 May 2020]

The team did a great job in bringing together experts from different parts of the world to discuss the future of humanity. The visuals are great too ! I would love to see more such shows on T.V.

Technology has always been the double edged sword. With the advent of technologies which are predicted in the show we would surely need regulatory bodies for its use. A board educated well in that topic. ( And the education part is a must)

Fascinating possibilities.

[Ashitaka137 · 10/10 · 13 May 2021]

Amazing Docu-fiction; great job for the narration by Laurence Fishburne. Surprising that there wasn't a second season; really hope they make it happen. This is a very interesting vision of the future. They should remaster this season, and put it out again on streaming; it would be a big hit, especially now.

A science-fiction show at best, not bad but it's not a science show either.

[nathan_furnal · 5/10 · 12 June 2017]

The show had great potential but it is lacking in several areas to be great.

I think the biggest problem -maybe my expectations were too high- is the lack of actual science, you get interviews and interventions from a lot of people who are completely unfamiliar with robotics, engineering, economics, etc. It's like asking your neighbor's opinion and frankly it's quite tiring. I believe the show would gain from explaining the different technologies they present in greater details.

Because of that, the show doesn't know where to go, is it science- fiction, is it actual science? Based on facts or assumptions? Trying to tangle the lives of fictional characters with a documentary is tricky and it sometimes feel like a cheap feeling grab to get the viewers involved. If I wanted drama, I'd watch a drama, I don't understand the need for the character's story arc, it feels forced. Because you simply jump from their story that serves the purpose of introducing the technologies to the audience, it doesn't feel (pardon the pun) organic and ruins the story-telling.

Finally, the show suffers from what could be called "americanisms" : everything is tremendous, crazy, on the verge of a massive discovery, etc. The use of constant superlatives actually weakens the viewers' understanding of what is important and what might be less important. "This is science and not science-fiction", "It's a question of when an not if". I could go on but you get the gist of it. What am I watching, a sales pitch? In the end this is probably the biggest disservice to the series.

So, I'm not strongly against it, the message is interesting and I believe it comes from good intentions. But this is not a science show, there is a lot of prediction and telling you how something will happen but very little factual explanations. A lot of people who give their opinions instead of sticking to facts or fact-based insights.

I just hope we'll have something better in the future.

P.S : Lose the comedian(s), they're supposed to be the "relatable" audience member, they just seem out of place and their interventions are strangely paced as well.

Year Million

[bombersflyup · 8/10 · 21 September 2018]

Year Million is a terrific science fiction documentary series. A theoretical and enjoyable look at what might happen in the very distant future, with narration from the appropriate Laurence Fishburne from the "The Matrix."

I disagree with some of the other reviews, it has the right blend of comedians and scientists and such and a great group of people too. The swarm theory's scary to me, more so than the AI taking over as I tend to disagree with the majority on most things. This website's an example of that, my opinion already irrelevant. Though instead of choosing not to watch these films and shows that everybody loves, I would be subject to living a horrifying existence, because that's the majority choice. I hope the AI doesn't become self-aware or as they refer "the singularity" when they begin evolving themselves, when it's out setting up the inhabitance of another planet for us, as it's not restricted in its lifespan.

amazing

[harley_quinn_wb · 10/10 · 11 February 2020]

Such an interesting topic for a show for tech lovers

This is an insult to our intelligence.

[jczxrzjfk · 2/10 · 26 June 2017]

Caveat: I only managed to get through one episode of this, maybe it gets better, but I doubt it.

This feels like someone ripped off one of the ripoffs of the, admittedly quite good, near future horror/sci-fi anthology "Black Mirror". Except instead of having some decent social commentary being the payoff, or at the very least a twilight zone type twist at the end, the show pretends the reward is that it has "educated" us with it's fear/wondermongering about it's completely improbable sci-fi future. I gave this show a chance because I thought NatGeo had decent programming, sadly I was mistaken. Fortunately there are already a few reviews that deal with some of the major flaws, but I still have a few selected gripes about this show to force upo-, I mean, to share with the reader.

Despite the claim the show's opening makes, that "this is not science fiction" this show manages to be nothing if not a jumble of common science fiction tropes. If the show was still critical and thought provoking that wouldn't be so bad by itself, but instead of actually rigorously looking at the possibility of these things happening, the show handwaves all the hard science to have random people -no-name comedians among others- talk about things clearly outside of their area of expertise in some lame attempt to justify the show's grandiose claims. Often the show meanders off tangent to make some halfhearted pondering of human nature or some other such nonsense, seemingly dedicating more time to talking about the past than justifying why the future is going to play out in this manner. The show's claims hurdle past ludicrous and head straight into wacko territory faster than a speeding hyperloop car. In the first episode only a few minutes in they just casually state how the singularity will obviously happen and robots will rise up and become the dominant species and yada dada yada, throughout it all the only impression I could get was that the writers are either insane, or that they plagiarized the plot of the episode from some crappy airport paperback sci-fi. Really barely anything they state actually seems to be constrained by logic, it's a schizophrenic mess of tangentially related subjects somehow leading to each other. One example of this is how in the first episode it's stated that a cellphone is somehow an AI, and AI has gotten better lately, therefore humanoid robots taking over is an inevitability... Yeah I'm as puzzled as you by the logic on that one. The show is riddled with that kind of thing, any decent points made are lost in a sea of bullcrud.

Another thing that ticks me off about this whole thing is that the show said that the the future will be "practically unrecognizable". Yet the show looks like the most uninspired sci-fi shlock some art student came up with for their graduation project. Everything is neon, gaudy, and glow-y when there's no reason for it, everyone looks like they fell out of some 90s cyberpunk parody with all the tech they have jammed into and on their their body, and cars look like they were on the way to some Asian street race they are so riced out with neon. There is nothing at all convincing about any of it, none of it makes any sense. Like we are supposedly a few hundred years into the future and practically nothing changes but superficial crud which we could realistically create using only technology available to us today? Honestly if I was actually into design as more than a passing fancy I think I might have had an aneurysm from how appallingly little thought went into depicting this future.

All I can say is that in my opinion this show is a pile of dog droppings which only insults and misinforms it's viewers. This kind of crud belongs on the new history channel with ancient aliens and occult Hitler show, not from a publication that is at least seemingly respectable such as NatGeo.

Quite possibly the dumbest show ever made

[billmayes-65191 · 1/10 · 20 January 2020]

Not counting daytime television this maybe the dumbest show ever put on television

Comedians? Really?

[nhm23 · 2/10 · 24 August 2021]

I'm sorry but this thing was so awful even the soothing voice if Lawrence Fish Fishburne couldn' save it. Script is all over the place and most of the speakers are comedians. How the hell should they know a damn thing about AI or the future?

Add more scientists and you might have something worth it.

This is full of it

[robincrowley-11394 · 1/10 · 13 January 2022]

Some good theories, but just way too far fetched from possible or doable at all. These scientists have no idea about life or what being human really means. Get some Sci Fi fans join together with some quantum physics theorists and let them eat a few psychedelic mushrooms and there you go! That's the best description of this Nat Geo's series!

Interesting but limited in scope and a bit pop

[arx00 · 5/10 · 8 November 2021]

"In the new era, thought itself will be transmitted by radio." Marconi

They did not mention Marconi so far (episode 5) or other visionaries such as Aldous Huxley, William Mitchell or William Gibson.

This show is interesting but one dimensional where they discuss the potential technology leaving aside social, political, psychological and even biological aspects of life. Things are also presented in a pop style where scientists and artists make multiple brief comments and often complement the basic narrative spoken by L. Fishburne. There is no effort to delve deep into any topic.

What put me off was there was not one biologist or a psychologist/psychiatrist on the show. Possibly these people would strongly object to many themes promoted on the show. But if you will argue that we shall exceed our biology then at least bring one biologist aboard and let her/him speak.

Our lives are not only biological but are shaped by scarcity and by real and potential conflicts. We often want everything but are limited by economic/physical scarcity or social rules yet Year Million does not go into such topics. I am pleased to meet some of the speakers for they were smart and witty but overall this show was not an intellectual success.