• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Hamza Strictly Birds of Prey (1 Viewer)

I enjoyed it. A bit woke, I suppose, as is the BBC's wont these days - could have done without the references to Strictly (I don't quite understand why people involved in the non-entertainment side of TV participate in things like that, at least not until they can be ridiculous without any risk of failing to be taken seriously in their real job, ie John Simpson). But it fell on the right side of wokeness I'd say. I can't deny it was nice to see a minority individual with an enthusiasm for and expertise in filming wildlife - even birding in London as I do, I've seen only a very few non-white birders. Hamza came across as having a genuine interest in the subjects he was filming, the footage was of really high quality, and obviously the main subjects are fascinating in their own right.

How the hell does he keep stuff from getting into those magnificent dreads when he's out in the field though? That little hide in the final segment of the programme seemed just big enough to fit him in - sans dreads!

They ought not to have pussyfooted around certain sensitive topics - when the chap studying the golden eagles said "we have a real problem with persecution" he ought to have said it in plain bloody English ie. lots of them get shot. But an enjoyable watch overall. I'd happily watch a Part 2 featuring goshawk, merlin, honey buzzard, short-eared owl, coastal or cliff-nesting peregrine...
 
I enjoyed it. A bit woke, I suppose, as is the BBC's wont these days - could have done without the references to Strictly (I don't quite understand why people involved in the non-entertainment side of TV participate in things like that, at least not until they can be ridiculous without any risk of failing to be taken seriously in their real job, ie John Simpson). But it fell on the right side of wokeness I'd say. I can't deny it was nice to see a minority individual with an enthusiasm for and expertise in filming wildlife - even birding in London as I do, I've seen only a very few non-white birders. Hamza came across as having a genuine interest in the subjects he was filming, the footage was of really high quality, and obviously the main subjects are fascinating in their own right.

How the hell does he keep stuff from getting into those magnificent dreads when he's out in the field though? That little hide in the final segment of the programme seemed just big enough to fit him in - sans dreads!

They ought not to have pussyfooted around certain sensitive topics - when the chap studying the golden eagles said "we have a real problem with persecution" he ought to have said it in plain bloody English ie. lots of them get shot. But an enjoyable watch overall. I'd happily watch a Part 2 featuring goshawk, merlin, honey buzzard, short-eared owl, coastal or cliff-nesting peregrine...


You have ruined the ending for me.....lol
 
A very enjoyable watch & seemed to have been a big hit with those I know. I certainly wouldn't describe it as woke, which I feel is being unfair here.
 
I also wouldn't consider the Strictly references woke, but I do wish the BBC would recognise that a lot of people really don't care about Saturday night popular entertainment and would rather it didn't intrude into nature programmes that ought to be making strong points about things like BOP persecution instead. You can't imagine it being on the commentary of Planet Earth....

John
 
To most folk Hamza is from Strictly Come Dancing. He won the 2022 series, over 9 million people watched the final. If it gets Strictly fans watching nature programmes then it is worth a few dancing references.
If it turns more nature programme watchers off nature programmes it isn't. I'll have to watch to see how bad the level of reference is and as someone who was already aware of Hamza's ability with a camera I'll cut him a bit of slack but like continuity announcers developing on-air personalities this is a thing to be resisted wherever possible. Just do the job and leave the rubbish out.

John
 
If it turns more nature programme watchers off nature programmes it isn't. I'll have to watch to see how bad the level of reference is and as someone who was already aware of Hamza's ability with a camera I'll cut him a bit of slack but like continuity announcers developing on-air personalities this is a thing to be resisted wherever possible. Just do the job and leave the rubbish out.

John
This is a trend I'm noticing now. Particularly you tube vloggers/specialist interest channels.
They are no longer happy to just present an authoritative view on their specialist subject, which they can be good at.
Instead we get this whole drama around the subject relating to the presenter's personal problems, funny but irrelevant things that happened in their day.
All in a bid to churn out more material, link in whatever is trending, and presumably make more money.
I can see us getting extremely bored with it, very quickly!
 
To most folk Hamza is from Strictly Come Dancing. He won the 2022 series, over 9 million people watched the final. If it gets Strictly fans watching nature programmes then it is worth a few dancing references.


I agree.

It is what makes him. However unnecessary I think it is or others here it is him bringing that Strictly audience to us that matters.
 
This is a trend I'm noticing now. Particularly you tube vloggers/specialist interest channels.
They are no longer happy to just present an authoritative view on their specialist subject, which they can be good at.
Instead we get this whole drama around the subject relating to the presenter's personal problems, funny but irrelevant things that happened in their day.
All in a bid to churn out more material, link in whatever is trending, and presumably make more money.
I can see us getting extremely bored with it, very quickly!


I both agree and disagree with this. There is this trend but I am not sure If I think it is a good thing or bad. Strictly audiences watching this will be astonished if they saw the level of bird of prey diversity we have in Britain but at that same time if that presenter gets bored they move on and the audience forgets.
 
I both agree and disagree with this. There is this trend but I am not sure If I think it is a good thing or bad. Strictly audiences watching this will be astonished if they saw the level of bird of prey diversity we have in Britain but at that same time if that presenter gets bored they move on and the audience forgets.
I don't think it feeds both ways though... if you like Chris Packham, and he goes onto doing something massive and International, like strictly, or takes part in the Olympics, you watch the international event and support Chris Packham.

But If you are mad about Strictly or tennis, and the greatest of all time, Federer say, does a documentary on cheese making, or renovating a chalet, you aren't going to be that interested.

Otherwise we would be inundated watching strictly stars doing a whole raft of "less popular" things. The popularity flows upwards more than downwards.
It's how Celebrities and their audience numbers rise and fall.
 
Last edited:
I must be strange. I don't like nature programs with in this case 'birds of prey' in the headline then showing plenty of footage of the presenter talking about what they are watching when we could be shown the footage instead. Can we have programs with no 'Nodding heads' just a voice over explaining anything of interest with100% wildlife footage.
Pet gripe Steve Backshall having it written into his contract that 65% of his program should consist of just his sweaty face:ROFLMAO:
 
I must be strange. I don't like nature programs with in this case 'birds of prey' in the headline then showing plenty of footage of the presenter talking about what they are watching when we could be shown the footage instead. Can we have programs with no 'Nodding heads' just a voice over explaining anything of interest with100% wildlife footage.
Pet gripe Steve Backshall having it written into his contract that 65% of his program should consist of just his sweaty face:ROFLMAO:


That happens a lot with Springwatch when there is more footage of the presenter watching the subject through binoculars rather than of the subject itself.

Are you serious about Steve Backshall? I don't mean the sweaty face!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top