Frozen Planet

[Mr Pee]

No such committee exists of course and the lemurs did not adapt - they were adapted by natural selection.

So they did NOT adapt- but they WERE adapted by natural selection. Which is precisely what David Attenborough means.

[John Skelton]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KSUYsx9WiGk/TWt8RTlXKGI/AAAAAAAAAO4/zyDTNA5coX0/s1600/Picture%2B004.jpg

adopted by natural selection

[Serial_Apologist]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KSUYsx9WiG...ture%2B004.jpg

adopted by natural selection

Reminds me of a cartoon depicting a zoo scene. Outside a cage marked "Man-eating Tigers - Feeding time 2 pm" a large crowd gathers. On the wall above, a clock indicates the time: 1.57 pm.

[BBMmk2]

I am greatly impressed by this series to. MrsBBM was quite upset when the Orca pulled that seal of the ice. Well, all part of nature and can be cruel.

[amateur51]

So they did NOT adapt- but they WERE adapted by natural selection. Which is precisely what David Attenborough means.

So why does he imply otherwise, or is that only in HD oh luminary of West Sussex?

[amateur51]

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-KSUYsx9WiG...ture%2B004.jpg

adopted by natural selection

[Nick Armstrong]

I watched it yesterday evening. Amazing pictures, and all the better in HD. Like others on the thread, I felt the music complemented the visuals and was not intrusive.

Have been persuaded by comments here to try this series - as mentioned on other threads, I have found the muzak makes recent Attenborough series unwatchable.

I'm watching the current episode on BBC1hd - truly dazzling photography, indeed ! I was also relieved that the first sequence (polar bear trying to find seal lair in the ice, seals outwitting it...) had no music at all It then started up again, sub-Prokofiev jollity to accompany gambolling polar bear cubs... I still don't think it's necessary to have this sort of manipulation, but hey! some composer is earning a living, and it's not too intrusive as others say (they've toned it down since other series), plus there are gaps so it's not unrelenting.

Worth it for the MIND-BOGGLING images (these illuminated sea gooseberries !!!!!!! )

[Chris Newman]

Originally Posted by Decantor.
I can't deny that it was all addictive viewing, but I felt it ran close to being 'over-presented', a lily gilded. And I envy those who watched in HD: I did too, but my eyes are too old to reap the benefit!

Originally Posted by Chris Newman
I do not know. Here is an eighty-five year old man who has dedicated his life fighting for wildlife, wildernesses AND the arts. He fully realises that mankind has made a total pig's ear of this planet and most of us are determined to drag every other species down with us. Quite rightly Sir David is equally determined to get his vital message across even though he knows it is almost certainly too late.

And I do not understand. The implication of the post above seems to be that we should evaluate a programme on national TV on the strength of the age and achievement of its front-man, and on its subtext as an addendum to An Inconvenient Truth. Is Frozen Planet being screened in China?

In detail: most of the "pig's ear" was wrought before the damage was perceived, and Brits are already paying a high price for the remedy; and I have never met anyone "determined to drag down" other species (apart from harmful bacteria and viruses).

Are we then to offer our critiques of BBC programmes with a mind only to the political implications? Is Wagner never to be redeemed? I don't understand.

I apologise for any delay in my answer. I certainly have forgiven Wagner for the wrong sort of politics on the line. I believe he ticks us off often enough in his masterpieces. What I meant was to acknowledge that Sir David, rightfully I believe, has used his venerated position to make the most important point of all to all of us. His point, and the one I meant to emphasise, (which is more important than all the arts, sciences and man-made creations) is summed up in this programme here which has reappeared on the schedule:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00pdjmk/Horizon_20092010_How_Many_People_Can_Live_on_Planet_Earth/

Sorry, I could not find it at the time decantor asked his question.

I hope the programme is shown on all channels and not just BBC4.

[decantor]

My thanks, Mr Newman, for your eventual response - we're all well used to delays in the post - and the link. Unfortunately, I lack the time to watch the iPlayer video right now, but hope to do so in the near future. Meantime, may I offer, by way of a reciprocal enlightenment, a little reading matter......

http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/01/thank-you-matt-ridley/

[mercia]

I loved the penguin stone-stealing episode .............. those brilliant back glances ....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3oxYH2hW7Y0D's

[BBMmk2]

What an array of life there is under the sea ice!!

[Chris Newman]

My thanks, Mr Newman, for your eventual response - we're all well used to delays in the post - and the link. Unfortunately, I lack the time to watch the iPlayer video right now, but hope to do so in the near future. Meantime, may I offer, by way of a reciprocal enlightenment, a little reading matter......
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/11/0...u-matt-ridley/

I agree with Matt Ridley that global warming is just one of the problems facing the world in the 21st Century and that it has been promoted at the expense of others of equal importance. He is not entirely true or accurate in all of the statistics he lobs at us (after all, we can all play that game); well, his talk was first given some time ago and events can be overtaken. The expanding world population (the point of David Attenborough's talk) is not caused by global warming and should be of immediate concern. Another matter that needs rapid resolution is the fast-approaching, likely collapse of the world's natural carbon dioxide/oxygen cycle as we chop down more forest (the lungs of the world) in our pursuit of meat and grain to feed the growing human hordes. Mr Ridley is right to say that too much emphasis has been laid upon global warming but he leaves us open to governments following the complacent laissez-faire approach of the likes of Norman Lamont.

[decantor]

I agree with Matt Ridley that global warming is just one of the problems facing the world in the 21st Century and that it has been promoted at the expense of others of equal importance. He is not entirely true or accurate in all of the statistics he lobs at us (after all, we can all play that game); well, his talk was first given some time ago and events can be overtaken. The expanding world population (the point of David Attenborough's talk) is not caused by global warming and should be of immediate concern. Another matter that needs rapid resolution is the fast-approaching, likely collapse of the world's natural carbon dioxide/oxygen cycle as we chop down more forest (the lungs of the world) in our pursuit of meat and grain to feed the growing human hordes. Mr Ridley is right to say that too much emphasis has been laid upon global warming but he leaves us open to governments following the complacent laissez-faire approach of the likes of Norman Lamont.

Well, Norman Lamont is far longer ago than the Ridley piece! That apart, there is nothing in your post with which I can sensibly take issue. I have now watched (for the first time) the entirety of that Attenborough programme and found it compulsive viewing - thank you for the link, which was worth waiting for. However, if I am entirely honest, I am still not sure how any of this relates to my original comments on Frozen Planet, though I accept the point made somewhere upthread that the programme aims to turn information into entertainment.

[Stillhomewardbound]

What we saw on screen was jaw-droppingly wonderful - I admire enormously the skill, courage, and patience of the cameramen who reveal to us things we could never see with our own eyes. But I did have some reservations about the programme as a whole. With such startling and powerfully beautiful images before us, do we really need mood music? Rather as in Coast, where a swelling score tries to convince us that every cliff and wave is a drama, I thought the soundtrack was subtly manipulative without quite ever being intrusive - which was maybe what was intended. And the sainted Attenborough's voice-over occasionally verged on the melodramatic - did anyone count how many times we were told in hushed tones that something was "the ----est on the planet"? There was enough material for a whole new edition of the Guinness Book of Records.

I can't deny that it was all addictive viewing, but I felt it ran close to being 'over-presented', a lily gilded. And I envy those who watched in HD: I did too, but my eyes are too old to reap the benefit!

I'd chime with all that you say. The whole point, it seems to me, about such documentaries is that we have a ringside seat for a place we're not meant to be. That was what was always so absorbing about DA's hushed commentaries, but now, sin of sins, he is over emphasising the dram that speaks for itself and yes, that music is way too 'World of Disney'. It really is not fair on the film makers who work so hard to capture these moments.

[Nick Armstrong]

I'd chime with all that you say. The whole point, it seems to me, about such documentaries is that we have a ringside seat for a place we're not meant to be. That was what was always so absorbing about DA's hushed commentaries, but now, sin of sins, he is over emphasising the dram that speaks for itself and yes, that music is way too 'World of Disney'. It really is not fair on the film makers who work so hard to capture these moments.

Agreed completely. The music is less intrusive than on some other DA shows over the last few years which I found unwatchable due to the over-egging with music and comm. But still... well, Shb you put it precisely.