Sir David ...what are we going to do without him? (1 Viewer)

[ghostrider]

I'd forgotten about Terry Nutkin he was great.
When i first met my wife's friends, one of them said i looked like Terry Nutkin. She didn't know i was a birdwatcher and a watcher of the really wild show. Her face was unforgettable when i told her i knew who he was and was offended. I forgave her.

I see what you meen about Nick Baker, I do like him and the saggy frog thing was brilliant. Dead frogs were interesting.
And Harry Hill's send up was wonderful.

 

[da2m]

I see what you meen about Nick Baker, I do like him and the saggy frog thing was brilliant. Dead frogs were interesting.
And Harry Hill's send up was wonderful.

now theres a thought, harry hill, he's turned YBF around. BADGERS!

 

[Mickymouse]

Please not Harry Hill, I'd sooner see Clarkson doing it.

Mick

 

[ghostrider]

Just the thought has me in stitches. Remember Staligmites(hand up) and Staligtites(hand down).

 

[ghostrider]

Please not Harry Hill, I'd sooner see Clarkson doing it.

Mick

Clarkson ooh no.
Here comes the Peregrine travelling at 130mph to catch the lowely pigeon wich can only manage 40mph, poor thing.
But it looks fantastic as it forces the pigeon into the outside lane and gets run over. Then it sits on a pylon while the crows pick on the carcass.

 

[Mickymouse]

Clarkson ooh no.
Here comes the Peregrine travelling at 130mph to catch the lowely pigeon wich can only manage 40mph, poor thing.
But it looks fantastic as it forces the pigeon into the outside lane and gets run over. Then it sits on a pylon while the crows pick on the carcass.

Lol, exactly.
I don't think anyone can replace Sir David so I think the Beeb should get an unknown to do it, how to find the right one I have no idea.

Mick

 

[ghostrider]

We could have a reality tv show. "There's something about Sir David" No we really shouldn't go there.
And Ben Fogle would probably be a judge. NO NO NO I'm really sorry i suggested this. I'll be saying Lenny Henry is funny next!

 

[J Moss]

NOT Chris Packham! Far too geeky. I find him embarrasing to watch!

 

[Silvershark]

We could have a reality tv show. "There's something about Sir David" No we really shouldn't go there.
And Ben Fogle would probably be a judge. NO NO NO I'm really sorry i suggested this. I'll be saying Lenny Henry is funny next!

Right...if anyone from the BBC reads this they'll probably take that idea and it will be all your fault lol All the big brother rejects piling up to be a part of the show...yup if that ever happens wildlife documentaries really will go down the drain! :scribe:

Though I have to say, I think it would be funny seeing Clarkson's do a wildlife documentary on peregrines lol

 

[abagguley]

Isn't there any violence and sh@gg1ng in the world you live in

If you need to ask that, you've clearly never had a night out in Birmingham

 

[Touty]

Though I have to say, I think it would be funny seeing Clarkson's do a wildlife documentary on peregrines lol

It was alluded to in the first programme in the new Top Gear series when he was chatting to Jamie Oliver, as well as the Countryside Stewardship scheme option he went in for covering the barley field behind his house, the Leicas he was wearing when he, May and Hammond went "car watching" on the M40 (by the look of things) and the odd phrase here and there in his columns. Don't shout it out but I think that JC actually knows (and, importantly, enjoys knowing) a lot more about UK wildlife than he likes to let on.

There are a few of his type around in the journalism world. They are what I call "chequebook contrarians" ® who make money by expounding outrageous and politically-incorrect views in counterposition to received norms. This safely tickles the "yeah!" area of rebel behaviour in the brain of the reader / viewer without having to indulge in dangerous self-exposure.

That's my theory, anyway. I should have gone for "mee-jah studies" at Poly.

 

[Colin]

It seems from reading this thread that different people prefer different presenters and it would be difficult to get a consensus on a replacement for Sir David. What about a composite presenter made up from the best bits from the many suggested in this thread. In other words, the voice of ....., the face of ......., the hands of ........., the knowledge of .... etc. Over to you.

 

[mothman]

I've had a few conversations about tbis. If they want a 'new attenborough', long term, rather than a jobbing presetner, then it has to be someone with an academic background like Attenborough's, to have the credibility to carry the weight of knowledge across. That only leaves Uhlenbroek. Virtually all of the rest have backgrounds in children's TV or as cameramen. I think the public does, just, still want a zoologist or biologist.

Unfortunately, however, since the BBC went to bed with Discovery and turned all their productions into the modern equivalent of Gentle Ben (contrived cutesy storylines, anthropomorphic dubbing, heavy editing to remove any scenes of sex or actual blood, a focussing on pretty cuddly things or stuff with big teeth, and a subtle eradication of any notion of evolution, all to please the USA market), anyone could now do Attenborough's narration in recent shows. He doesn't actually 'present' anymore, does he?

My heart sank when i read the Times re this new show, and the BBC guy saying it was about 'extremes of predatorial enviornments', and the 50% of life that has to kill for a living, and how they wanted to convey the "emotional" aspect of predators and their prey. So, it sounds like we're in for another show full of lions and killer whales and sharks *almost* killing things before any blood is edited out, and cutesy stories of lost little wildebeest calves who always manage to survive and arrived here through immaculate conception. All to the backdrop of a towering orchestral score that tells when to be impressed with their new camera mounted on the nose of a gnat. While actually telling us absolutely sod all about the natural world.

OMIGOD!! This could have been written by me!!

The worst feature about today's natural history programs is the fact that they are a dissident set of clips of various individual animals taken on different days (and probably years) all linked together to make a story that may or may not have happened.
The recent Wildebeest programme on the BBC was a prime example of this crap.

 

[Xenospiza]

It was alluded to in the first programme in the new Top Gear series when he was chatting to Jamie Oliver.

He indeed mumbled he was a member of the RSPB. Doesn't quite rhyme with eating Ortolan Bunting, but at least he knows what it is.

 

[Touty]

OMIGOD!! This could have been written by me!!

The worst feature about today's natural history programs is the fact that they are a dissident set of clips of various individual animals taken on different days (and probably years) all linked together to make a story that may or may not have happened.
The recent Wildebeest programme on the BBC was a prime example of this crap.

The other worrying thing, though I've lost the reference, is that evolution and the geological timeframe are being deliberately written out of documentaries made on both sides of the Atlantic, or produced in two formats ("evolutionist" and non-) to create programmes acceptable on channels owned by (or receiving advertising from) what I'll call (for the sake of brevity) "the religious Right".

(OT It's at moments like this that you realise there is fundamentally little hope for humanity when many people believe that their "reward" is yet to come in an "afterlife" and the here-and-now is but an entréé.)

 

[Xenospiza]

The BBC nature documentaries are broadcast by the "Evangelical Broadcasting Association" in the Netherlands, which obviously leads to some censorship (don't mention that birds-of-paradise influenced Wallace's ideas of evolution) – or some very cryptic reasoning ("it was thought apes started using tools after leaving the forest").

 

[KnockerNorton]

If you need to ask that, you've clearly never had a night out in Birmingham

Oh I have, never again!

I see where the votes for packham are coming from, but there's something about him that i don't like, he comes across as a bit aggressive or arrogant, a bit too earnest. Baker's better, but he's a bit too far the other way, like a primary school teacher (and Packham's maybe the bitter deputy head!). Both know their stuff though, although I'll never forget seeing Packham get stung on the Countryfile photo competition when he held up a picture of a 'Colgatia' caterpillar and remarked just how much it looked like a squeeze of toothpaste....KLANG!

If Ben Fogle, Bill Oddie or Titch get it, I'll sell my telly. Titchmarsh has that annoyingly patronising way of speaking that goes down well on afternoon TV with Fern Britton, but hardly carries authority. That series of his was narrated like he was doign Jackanory.

Harry Hill would be hilarious to see - someone should do a mash-up on YouTube.

 

[KnockerNorton]

It seems from reading this thread that different people prefer different presenters and it would be difficult to get a consensus on a replacement for Sir David. What about a composite presenter made up from the best bits from the many suggested in this thread. In other words, the voice of ....., the face of ......., the hands of ........., the knowledge of .... etc. Over to you.

As Harry Hill himself would say: there's only one way to settle it....FIIIIIIIIIIIIGHT!

 

[Touty]

The BBC nature documentaries are broadcast by the "Evangelical Broadcasting Association" in the Netherlands, which obviously leads to some censorship (don't mention that birds-of-paradise influenced Wallace's ideas of evolution) – or some very cryptic reasoning ("it was thought apes started using tools after leaving the forest").

I find it amazing that the BBC allows its material to be "messed with" in such a manner. Is it just that the subtitles don't correspond to the voiceover?

(OT It's interesting to remember which were the first (and almost still the only) European countries to indulge in systematic overdubbing of anything other than children's programmes: Italy, Germany Spain and Portugal. What do those four have in common? I'll give you a clue: MHFS. Apart from pretty well accounting for the dire state of English-speaking in the four countries concerned it's now big business. The Italian overdubbing industry is worth €2 billion a year.)

 

[mothman]

Oh I have, never again!

I see where the votes for packham are coming from, but there's something about him that i don't like, he comes across as a bit aggressive or arrogant, a bit too earnest. Baker's better, but he's a bit too far the other way, like a primary school teacher (and Packham's maybe the bitter deputy head!). Both know their stuff though, although I'll never forget seeing Packham get stung on the Countryfile photo competition when he held up a picture of a 'Colgatia' caterpillar and remarked just how much it looked like a squeeze of toothpaste....KLANG!

If Ben Fogle, Bill Oddie or Titch get it, I'll sell my telly. Titchmarsh has that annoyingly patronising way of speaking that goes down well on afternoon TV with Fern Britton, but hardly carries authority. That series of his was narrated like he was doign Jackanory.

Harry Hill would be hilarious to see - someone should do a mash-up on YouTube.

A well known Wildlife Photographer/presenter friend of mine has worked with Packham on many occasions and really rates him highly as a nice bloke and a knowledgeable professional.