Titanic's Achilles Heel History Channel

  • Thread starter Parks Stephenson
  • Start date
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Some of you may have seen the article in today's Sunday Telegraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/10/nwreck110.xml

This reminds me of a similar article that hit the AP wire before last year's "Titanic's Final Moments: Missing Pieces." That article did not accurately predict what the show would be about and I have my doubts that this one will, too.

I haven't seen the "Titanic's Achilles Heel" yet, and I know that the Telegraph reporter hasn't, either. I know that he interviewed the show's producers, who revealed only part of the programme's content. I know the part that I played during filming, but have no idea how it will be presented in the final cut. Also, I am aware that I may not know everything that was filmed. Therefore, I'm not going to rush to judgment until I've had a chance to watch the show myself.

We're a week away from the broadcast date. I'm not going to have much more, if anything, to say until I watch the show along with everyone else. I would caution you against believing anyone who claims to know what the show is all about, even if that opinion shows up in print.

Parks
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
It would be disappointing if the author of the Telegraph were correct about what's being done with the show. I've seen some of the backlash showing up in my e-mail and people already stating that they are not going to "waste their time" watching the show.

Since I tend to be septical of newspaper critiques...especially when theres no way the critic/author could have possibly seen the show...I guess I'll be one to "waste my time" by watching. In other words, I'll be seeing for myself if it's really the hatchet job the article and the rumour mill is claiming it to be.
 
S

Sally Butler

Member
A new documentary to be aired soon suggests Titanic may have been a poorly build ship. The documentary write-up in a Britsh newspaper hints that the ship had a structural weakness and would have been particularly vulnerable in a huge sea.
I remember reading a while back the horrific storm Olympic, Titanic's sister ship was caught in, and survived. Mark Chirnside I believe did an excellent article on that event.
I find it strange that Olympic which would have had the same ‘structural weakness’ as Titanic, didn’t breakup herself in those high seas and sink.
This appears to be a ‘must see’ documentary.
Here is that article I read today.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/06/10/nwreck110.xml
 
  • Like
Reactions: Cam Houseman
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
To reiterate a point that Parks was trying to make: Don't judge the show by the article written about it by a guy who couldn't possibly have seen it yet.

Think for yourselves, Watch it for yourselves and judge for yourselves. Don't let the Telegraph or the rest of the media do it for you.
 
Steven Hall

Steven Hall

Member
Micheal, this is what I said once before about these shows. It's not those that contribute to the show that later edit it.
That online article is an example of what I said months ago.
I was not taking a cheap shot at Parks or his research back then. It simply comes down to how the shows are promoted by people often with little or no interest in Titanic.
But I wish those involved the best for the show.
And that's all I have to add to the topic.
 
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Steve,

I don't hold a grudge against you. You posted something, I responded, you explained my misunderstanding, and as far as I was concerned, that was that. Yes, I'm defensive about the shows I have appeared in, but I am willing to listen to well-reasoned critical opinions. I myself voiced my own critical opinion about last year's show through an article for the Commutator.

More on the Sunday Telegraph article. I just learned that the reporter was given the questions that the show would raise by the producers, but was not provided with any of the conclusions. The reporter was left on his own to fill in the blanks. As you might imagine, there's a lot of room for misconception there and given the nature of the media, probably a natural tendency toward the sensational.

I have to tell you, after reading the Telegraph article, I myself have concerns about the programme. But, I have faith that the producers will deliver a quality product, so I'll be patient until I can watch the show myself.

Parks
 
J

Julie Goebel

Member
June 17? That is great - it's my birthday. However it is also Father's Day and my husband won't want to watch it. Now we just need to figure out whos special day is more important...
 
Samuel Halpern

Samuel Halpern

Member
That's a no-brainer Julie.
Happy
 
D

Denise A. Hunyadi

Member
Hi, Julie! Father's Day is special, of course, but you know how special Titanic is, too. I think you can meet both your Father's Day and Titanic "obligations," because the History Channel special will be shown more than once within a 24-hr. time frame.

Check the History Channel web site for the schedule for "Titanic's Achilles Heel." Note that HC will repeat the special more than once on Monday, June 18th:

http://www.history.com/shows.do?episodeId=225262&action=detail

Hopes this helps!

Denise
 
P

Parks Stephenson

Member
Sunday is Father's Day, so I can make my wife and kids watch the show (for once).

Either that, or I can be nice and not subject them to the torture of yet another Titanic show.

Parks
 
Michael H. Standart

Michael H. Standart

Member
>>Michael, did you get the private post I sent you?<<

Yes, and I e-mailed a reply. I don't have any way of knowing if you ever got it because I'm not using my own rig and I'm not sure that sending e-mails from the web side of my account will always work.

>>It simply comes down to how the shows are promoted by people often with little or no interest in Titanic.<<

And who sometimes don't even have any involvement with the show. I still remember the media hack job that was done with the Missing Pieces documentary and the out of context hash that was made of Dr. Ballard's response. What I've seen so far in this case appears top be no different, yet an awful lot of premature opinions are being formed over it.
 
L

Luke Owens

Member
Unfortunately, I don't seem to have received it. Could you send again? Thank you!

Luke
 
Steven Hall

Steven Hall

Member
BELFAST TELEGRAPH
The Titanic was doomed before leaving Belfast, say film-makers.
Tuesday, June 12, 2007

By Linda McKee

"The Titanic was doomed before it ever set off on its maiden voyage, according to the makers of a new history documentary.
They say structural flaws in the legendary Belfast-built ocean liner would have made her vulnerable to stormy seas - even if she hadn't struck the iceberg on her maiden voyage.
The flaws were uncovered by researchers who filmed and analysed previously undiscovered sections of keel. They insist these would have reduced the length of time the vessel could have remained afloat after hitting the iceberg on April 14 1912, condemning hundreds of passengers and crew to the icy waters before rescue craft could arrive..............."

Was Titanic sunk by a flaw in its construction? - Local & National - News - Belfast Telegraph

belfast, belfast news, telegraph, northern ireland, newspaper, news, jobs, sport, classifieds, homes, property, business
web.archive.org
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top