I think the show "America the Story of Us" is an ok show but of course like every show isn't going to have every thing about traditional muzzleloaders correct. The reason you won't be satisfied is because you guys know more than the History Channel about muzzleloaders. I think this show coming out will spark people's interest into our sport. They'll come around here and they will learn that what they saw on tv was wrong. And probably 95% of the people who watched that show don't even pay close attention to the guns they just look at it as a gun. So the extra effort isn't needed by them. These shows aren't made for people like us to enjoy. They are for people who know absolutely nothing about history so it's good to have them maybe learn something. Also the last episode I agree was rather boring but that wasn't that interesting of a time in history.fort fireman said:
-
Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.
We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.
Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103
America - The Story of Us flubs!
- Thread starter ADK Ephraim
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Emet Huntsman
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 499
- Reaction score
- 0
"They are for people who know absolutely nothing about history so it's good to have them maybe learn something. Also the last episode I agree was rather boring but that wasn't that interesting of a time in history."
My issue is not so much with the muzzleloader (in)accuracies, but precisely what you stated. If the idea is to give people who "know absolutely nothing" about the history of the U.S. of A. a better knowledge/understanding, then why not be as accurate as possible about all of what they are portraying. I do not think it is acceptable to present false information because in doing so, the learn nothing!
Further, this was a most exciting time in American history -- the expansion of the country from a third-rate agrarian culture to a world industrial power in so short a time was unprecedented in world history.
My issue is not so much with the muzzleloader (in)accuracies, but precisely what you stated. If the idea is to give people who "know absolutely nothing" about the history of the U.S. of A. a better knowledge/understanding, then why not be as accurate as possible about all of what they are portraying. I do not think it is acceptable to present false information because in doing so, the learn nothing!
Further, this was a most exciting time in American history -- the expansion of the country from a third-rate agrarian culture to a world industrial power in so short a time was unprecedented in world history.
mikee51848
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Mar 8, 2005
- Messages
- 1,599
- Reaction score
- 2
I thought I saw flintlocks being used by blue-coats during the Civil War segment. But hey, I just joined the History Channel membership. For $12 a year I get some neat "gifts", including a 1776 medal I can use as a golf ball marker. 
atriot:
atriot:A few years back the History Channel did a series on the Northwest Passage. Started back east with lavish production and worked their way out to the west coast. By the time the production crew got to the west the budget was pretty well used up.
A friend of mine worked with them during filming at Fort Ross and the Petaluma Adobe and they used much of his stuff for props and costumes.
The soldiers, known as "leatherbacks" for their heavy leather waistcoats were actually "Naugabacks" for the filming... :hmm:
A friend of mine worked with them during filming at Fort Ross and the Petaluma Adobe and they used much of his stuff for props and costumes.
The soldiers, known as "leatherbacks" for their heavy leather waistcoats were actually "Naugabacks" for the filming... :hmm:
- Joined
- Aug 5, 2008
- Messages
- 905
- Reaction score
- 20
miss. crow is from kennet mo. you can throw a rock into Arkansas from there and after her long recovery from drugs Missouri is not very proud of her so how could she have any pride in anything :cursing:
I preamble this by saying that I did not work on "America the Story of US" but I have produced dozens of programs for The History Channel.
The following is a general response to some of the posts on this thread, and perhaps it will shed light on the general subject of cable documentary production.
1) Most networks do not produce the shows you watch on them. The shows themselves are produced by one of any number of productions companies across the country that produce for History, Dicovery, etc etc etc.
2) The Narrator does not write the script or detirmine what is said. They are actors, and are paid to read words.
3) Some producers know more about history than others. I pride myself on the details that get right on the shows I work on. Some know less. But there is one thing we all share; we're running on budgets that are not unlimited, we are running on schedules that do not always allow a surplus of time; television shows, good and bad, are hard to make. It is not work for the weak of heart.
4) Content - I saw someone use the expression "Wartoons". I think that's cute actually. But in all seriousness, I produced all of the episodes of "Battle 360" and "Patton 360" and wrote half of the episodes of both. I can tell you that as a result of so-called "Wartoons" a generation of video-gamming youths now know the names of "Enterprise", "Halsey", "Guadalcanal", "Patton", "Metz", etc etc etc. I can also tell you that these programs were popular with the veterans interviewed, etc etc.
The following is a general response to some of the posts on this thread, and perhaps it will shed light on the general subject of cable documentary production.
1) Most networks do not produce the shows you watch on them. The shows themselves are produced by one of any number of productions companies across the country that produce for History, Dicovery, etc etc etc.
2) The Narrator does not write the script or detirmine what is said. They are actors, and are paid to read words.
3) Some producers know more about history than others. I pride myself on the details that get right on the shows I work on. Some know less. But there is one thing we all share; we're running on budgets that are not unlimited, we are running on schedules that do not always allow a surplus of time; television shows, good and bad, are hard to make. It is not work for the weak of heart.
4) Content - I saw someone use the expression "Wartoons". I think that's cute actually. But in all seriousness, I produced all of the episodes of "Battle 360" and "Patton 360" and wrote half of the episodes of both. I can tell you that as a result of so-called "Wartoons" a generation of video-gamming youths now know the names of "Enterprise", "Halsey", "Guadalcanal", "Patton", "Metz", etc etc etc. I can also tell you that these programs were popular with the veterans interviewed, etc etc.
The Parson said:
I agree. I didn't watch all of them because the innaccuracies bothered me. For example, I don't think Dorothea Dix was even mentioned in the Civil War section eventhough she was a worthwhile historical player. I'm pretty sure they laid all the credit for the Civil Rights movement at MLK's feet. Although he did die for it eventaully, there was a lot of grass roots organization taking place and without that, King never would have been able to make his famous speech.
I do admit that there were things I didn't know in it and I can see how it could grab someone's interest, I'll give them that. But it would only have taken just a little more work to do a hell of a lot better job.
As the old saying goes "much hard work is lost for the lack of a little more."
GreyWhiskers
69 Cal.
kilborn,
After reading your post in the welcome forum, I was hoping you would contribute to this topic. :thumbsup: GW
After reading your post in the welcome forum, I was hoping you would contribute to this topic. :thumbsup: GW
MikeChapin
58 Cal.
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2005
- Messages
- 2,183
- Reaction score
- 6
I understand all the points you made. My gripe is with the people who review the various programs for content. I doubt I will see any program that will say the Holacost did not happen. On the other end of the scale the program on Jedidiah Smith was great even though some of the actors ran around with T/Cs.
The "Little Ice Age, Big Chill" program was great until you reach the last 15 minutes. The obligatory bow to global warming was completely contradicted by the previous hour and forty five minutes. Someone should have caught that.
The Story of Us should have been about four times longer than it was. It glossed over too much and left the wrong impression in many places. I know there are economic reasons for the production of these episodes but I feel they should have been called on it.
BTW: I saw and thoroughly enjoyed both "Battle 360" and "Patton 360".
The "Little Ice Age, Big Chill" program was great until you reach the last 15 minutes. The obligatory bow to global warming was completely contradicted by the previous hour and forty five minutes. Someone should have caught that.
The Story of Us should have been about four times longer than it was. It glossed over too much and left the wrong impression in many places. I know there are economic reasons for the production of these episodes but I feel they should have been called on it.
BTW: I saw and thoroughly enjoyed both "Battle 360" and "Patton 360".
Grey Whiskers said:
GW,
Thanks for that. Another thing to consider about a show like this is its hard to pack the entire history of the United States into a 12 hour storyline that would make everyone happy.
And to the poster who liked the 360 series; Thanks!
-Sam
- Joined
- Apr 3, 2004
- Messages
- 15,602
- Reaction score
- 19
I just saw this, If your anyway responsable for "Battle 360" and "Patton 360" wow and thank you! Those two programs were the best thing I've seen on that channel since Band of Brother reruns. I wish more programs were as good and factual as those two were. It's tough to watch "Battle 360" without a lump in the throat. :hatsoff:
Swampy said:
Swampy,
That is very nice of you to say. I was a producer on all of the episodes of both Battle 360 and Patton 360. I also wrote about half of the series. I am very proud of these two programs; particulary the season about USS Enterprise and her crew. The greatest reward of course was meeting and interviewing the veterans; some of whom have already passed away. Certainly a highlight of my career so far. Among other programs I was also a producer on Wild West Tech. I miss that one. And Shootout! which was also a lot of fun.
Thanks for your kind words!
-Sam Dolan
Guest
WildatHeart said:I thought I saw flintlocks being used by blue-coats during the Civil War segment. But hey, I just joined the History Channel membership. For $12 a year I get some neat "gifts", including a 1776 medal I can use as a golf ball marker.
In fact, there were flintlocks used during the Civil War, by both the North and the South, but more so by the South. This was especially true early in the war. I doubt there were a lot of Northern troops using them, but I do know there were some.
As I understand it, most of the recreations or reenactments, for this program we shot out of the Country, and thus is it likely that that answers for issues of costuming and weapons. But yes, some flintlocks were used in the CW; mostly by Southern forces, and mostly in the first year or so of the war. I may be wrong, but I think Wilson's Creek has a flintlock attributed to that battle and perhaps even more strange is that I believe there is a Brown Bess attributed to Shiloh.
It is my understanding that a Tennesee Regiment was at least partially armed with flintlocks during the early war years.
It is my understanding that a Tennesee Regiment was at least partially armed with flintlocks during the early war years.
The Parson said:
Unfortunately, the growing view seems to be the opposite of this. (Please bear with me, I'm not very good at putting my thoughts into words) I'm currently attending college and I keep seeing and hearing things that truly cause me concern. Even though we owe much of our current high quality of life to this very history and the struggles made by our forebearers, the common view seems to be that people of European ancestry (especially men) have done, and can do, no good in the world. According to this view, all our problems began with the advent of agriculture, the Industrial Revolution was pure evil, and the idea of nobility in westward expansion is akin to blasphemy. Although horrible atrocities have been - and by someone, always will be - comitted, the people protesting and criticizing this history would not have the luxury of doing so if these events had never taken place. I fear that this glossing over and PC rewriting of history books, as it has been said before, will only lead to repeats of our past mistakes. Besides that, what does a nation have if there is nothing in its past but shame? When you remove a people's pride in themselves and their history, what do they have left? (arguably, there's a past mistake right there) I hope I haven't pushed the boundaries of acceptable forum discussion nor bored anyone to death with this attempt at speaking something that troubles my mind :v
Emet Huntsman
40 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 8, 2008
- Messages
- 499
- Reaction score
- 0
It takes people willing to stand up for what is right, even in the face of criticism and possibly worse. That you are in college and see the "wrong" that is being perpetrated on your generation by those who demean the greatness of this nation gives hope to the future. :hatsoff:
