Wakko
Well-known member
Has anybody seen Chernobyl (TV Mini-Series 2019)? I've just finished watching the final episode and wow, I liked it a lot.
For now just on HBO GO (their kind of Netflix) I guess. If you don't have it, they have a one-month-for-free offer for new users (just like Netflix, and you can unsubsribe after that to not pay for the next month).
I really liked 2 things about it:
- excellent description and explanation of the accident and the method behind it
- the condemnation of elevating ideology over humanity, which was actually the reason for sooo many problems in the USSR and former Eastern Block, and which is veeeery relevant just about now, but for completely different parts of the world
Not in service area.
HBO GO is only supported in the U.S. and certain U.S. territories.
There is the usual level of stupidity, which is to be expected from western production. KGB everywhere (and people seriously expecting to be shot - in the 1980's!), the dumb portrayal of the miners (my uncle was a miner in the 1980s), that 'it will kill all known universe' megaton threat added for dramatic effect, or Shcherbina threatening to have somebody thrown out of a helicopter (OMFG). I think it would be unrealistic to expect the actual reality from western production, they're not equipped for that - and it would be weird and difficult to understand for their viewers. Imagine a western audience watching some of the revered classics of Soviet cinematography, like Irony of Fate*, or Moscow doesn't Believe in Tears, or any of the Soviet-era war movies (Belarussian Station or Officers for example) those movies are sooo great, yet completely incomprehensible for the culturally different westerners. So I think they did as good a job as they could, and what I liked was that it was completely about the Soviet people, they didn't try to smuggle in some US uebermensch helping the poor backwards Soviets clean up their mess and save the president or whatever... One of the main heroes is the vice-chairman of the Soviet government - now that's a kick into the face for the anti-soviet propaganda.So ultimately, this leads me to believe that it's pretty naked propaganda piece.
Wait, what? They claim this?! Who the fuck paid for such nonsense? Greenpeace?I've considered making time to watch Chernobyl, but viewing some clips from it turned me off that idea, despite the series' apparent strong dedication to visual detail.
Chief among that was the story of a potentially 2-4 megaton explosion, which is an outright physical impossibility, followed up by the claim that it will destroy Minsk, which is ludicrous even if the preceding already impossible scenario is assumed. Sprinkled on top of this are the usual myths of three divers. ... First, the reactor can't explode as an atomic bomb—that's dumb anti-nuclear fear-mongering. Second, the statement requires a thermonuclear explosion, for which the material doesn't even exist in the reactor. Third, there's an extra adding of several more orders of magnitude just for kicks.
So ultimately, this leads me to believe that it's pretty naked propaganda piece.
I don't think anything in the show was meant as being anti-nuclear. I'm a fan of nuclear energy (living about 20 km away from an NPP myself), I'm pretty sensitive to the anti-nuclear nonsense, and I didn't feel any of it while watching the show. The accident was presented as a result of human error aggravated by the systemic deficiencies of the Soviet system (which is true IMO).Wait, what? They claim this?! Who the fuck paid for such nonsense? Greenpeace?
Pretty much (but I'm not a physicist). It adds some details to the already excellent explanation found in the 5th episode of the show.is this accurate?
Why exactly would a show written by a psychology major know internal details on nuclear reactors?I've considered making time to watch Chernobyl, but viewing some clips from it turned me off that idea, despite the series' apparent strong dedication to visual detail.
Chief among that was the story of a potentially 2-4 megaton explosion, which is an outright physical impossibility, followed up by the claim that it will destroy Minsk, which is ludicrous even if the preceding already impossible scenario is assumed. Sprinkled on top of this are the usual myths of three divers. ... First, the reactor can't explode as an atomic bomb—that's dumb anti-nuclear fear-mongering. Second, the statement requires a thermonuclear explosion, for which the material doesn't even exist in the reactor. Third, there's an extra adding of several more orders of magnitude just for kicks.
So ultimately, this leads me to believe that it's pretty naked propaganda piece.
What would a random American psychology major know about anything at all about 1980s Soviet Union? That many visual queues are very high-quality and apparently painstanickly researched and re-created has primed me to believe the writer and producers care a lot about detail, which gives some indications that their choices are deliberate.Why exactly would a show written by a psychology major know internal details on nuclear reactors?
But does that not make things worse?What would a random American psychology major know about anything at all about 1980s Soviet Union? That many visual queues are very high-quality and apparently painstanickly researched and re-created has primed me to believe the writer and producers care a lot about detail, which gives some indications that their choices are deliberate.
Though this has very little to do with technical details of reactors, because 'can reactors explode in multi-megaton explosions?' and 'can a few megatons destroy cities 200 mi away?' are very basic questions. Dramatic license over technical details is things like putting a lot of extra blood on irradiated people so the audience has a something more to latch onto and elicit emotive reactions. That's not realistic to the dangers either, but it's very understandable and even appropriate given the medium. But when one already has very high plausible stakes and yet chooses to exaggerate them by many orders of magnitude, which so happens in a way that parrots some very common anti-nuclear myths in a ludicrous way, I think it's understandable to expect that it was done deliberately to push a corresponding agenda.
Honestly, I have a certain pet peeve with people assuming random TV Shows have an intentional political agenda when often I think it's because a lot of politics are just a reflection of who we are as people and some of that shows in writing even when unintentionally.You're right that it's not good way to evaluate a show overall. It's more of a normal process to deciding what whether to watch something, a typical part of it is basing one's expectations on excerpts from it. That's far from super-reliable, so I would fully expect people that actually watched it, such as @Wakko to have a much clearer picture of the show's overall worth.[l
I don't think in a multi-million show with numerous experts in the role of advisors, there could be such a 'numerical mistake'. I think it was added for dramatic effect, otherwise western audiences might find the whole thing just a far-away problem that doesn't concern their golden bubble at all. Though going right to megatonns is pretty weird.So yeh, I can totally see him doing "calcs" and messing up as there's nothing that says he's even semi decent at that type of thing.
I'm with you on this one, though that is actually even worse. The agenda is by now automatic. All the bullshit about the Soviet Union, all the propaganda and myths are by now so ingrained in the western population that they come quite naturally. I didn't mind it in this show because Chernobyl was clearly a problem caused by the rot of the system, and anyway there were too many great things in the show to be spoiled by the mindless insertion of various myths (KGB didn't just go around shooting people in the 1980's, nobody was to be thrown out of a helicopter, for that one had to go to the US protege Pinochet, etc...).Honestly, I have a certain pet peeve with people assuming random TV Shows have an intentional political agenda when often I think it's because a lot of politics are just a reflection of who we are as people and some of that shows in writing even when unintentionally.
Heh. You have more faith in the competence of TV channels then me. The amount of multi million movies with atrocious stories has made me question the judgement of these types of people or at least made me wonder if individual screenwriters have a lot more influence then I'd expect.I don't think in a multi-million show with numerous experts in the role of advisors, there could be such a 'numerical mistake'. I think it was added for dramatic effect, otherwise western audiences might find the whole thing just a far-away problem that doesn't concern their golden bubble at all. Though going right to megatonns is pretty weird.
Guess people get Stalin's era USSR mixed up with 70s/80s Russia. Bit of a difference IMOI'm with you on this one, though that is actually even worse. The agenda is by now automatic. All the bullshit about the Soviet Union, all the propaganda and myths are by now so ingrained in the western population that they come quite naturally. I didn't mind it in this show because Chernobyl was clearly a problem caused by the rot of the system, and anyway there were too many great things in the show to be spoiled by the mindless insertion of various myths (KGB didn't just go around shooting people in the 1980's, nobody was to be thrown out of a helicopter, for that one had to go to the US protege Pinochet, etc...).
The propaganda that is in Chernobyl is IMO the usual level that can be found in the better western production. Nowhere near Red Sparrow (that movie spoiled Jennifer Lawrence for me) and certainly nowhere near current everyday reporting about Russia. You know what is interesting? Here in Slovakia, most people my age and older, the ones who actually lived during communism long enough to remember it, don't harbor any ill will towards the Soviets. We were all in it together and in the end they had it worse than we did. It's the younger generations who, without their own memories, can be massaged by the anti-Soviet propaganda, that usually very easily transfers into anti-Russian propaganda and then outright Russophobia.
That's not unfair in general, but past a certain point of untruths of sufficient magnitude, I have trouble believing such a thing happens unintentionally. I mean, it's obviously not impossible, although contrary-wise unintentionally pushing a dumb agenda does not remove it from happening.Honestly, I have a certain pet peeve with people assuming random TV Shows have an intentional political agenda when often I think it's because a lot of politics are just a reflection of who we are as people and some of that shows in writing even when unintentionally.
Received interweb wisdom: "the younger the blogger, they more they have personally suffered under [Soviets/Stalin/etc.]."You know what is interesting? Here in Slovakia, most people my age and older, the ones who actually lived during communism long enough to remember it, don't harbor any ill will towards the Soviets.
Moscow doesn't Believe in Tears,
I can see why they enjoyed it - and it's certainly one of the more understandable Soviet movies, less dependent on cultural traits not found in the West. Even so, I've seen reviews which were screaming about how the movie denigrated women and how it was too patriarchal, and others that were in all seriousness trying to find KGB in it... it was really funnyI generally agree with you, but that film won an Academy Award. Western people did watch it and, if not "get it," at least enjoy it.
I can see why they enjoyed it - and it's certainly one of the more understandable Soviet movies, less dependent on cultural traits not found in the West. Even so, I've seen reviews which were screaming about how the movie denigrated women and how it was too patriarchal, and others that were in all seriousness trying to find KGB in it... it was really funny
Guess people get Stalin's era USSR mixed up with 70s/80s Russia. Bit of a difference IMO
For many people in the West, Stalin's era never ended. Never mind Poland.
To be honest, there are such people in Russia, too (only they'll get mad for the opposite reasons)They'll get mad if you tell them otherwise too.