Jun. 5th, 2005
(no subject)
Jun. 5th, 2005 08:46 pmWas just watching the second/final part 'The Real Da Vinci Code' on ABC. Interesting, although probably not in the way other people might find it interesting.
Last Sunday evening, after the first part had been on, the was a show on about the Mona Lisa, which looked in part at its artist. At one point in the RDVC the host is talking to someone about the Last Supper and he starts on about Da Vinci and the type of person he was, and it's like "oh yeah, that's what that other show said". Deliberate programming or bizarre coincedence....
What I don't like about these docs that look at historical theories and such, if they feel superficial. They take this and that and present a conclusion that is either a major assumption or is based on more that what we've been given. A effect of trying to squeeze a lot of information into a 40 mins program format but it can be unsatisfying. On the other hand, one could also use the show as a basis to follow up on the subject if one is really interested. :)
They are certainly an handy source of ideas too.
Last Sunday evening, after the first part had been on, the was a show on about the Mona Lisa, which looked in part at its artist. At one point in the RDVC the host is talking to someone about the Last Supper and he starts on about Da Vinci and the type of person he was, and it's like "oh yeah, that's what that other show said". Deliberate programming or bizarre coincedence....
What I don't like about these docs that look at historical theories and such, if they feel superficial. They take this and that and present a conclusion that is either a major assumption or is based on more that what we've been given. A effect of trying to squeeze a lot of information into a 40 mins program format but it can be unsatisfying. On the other hand, one could also use the show as a basis to follow up on the subject if one is really interested. :)
They are certainly an handy source of ideas too.