I'm watching 'Deadliest Warrior' on Spike TV right now (an American Channel). This week it's Samurai vs. Viking Warrior. Looks like its a weekly series (Tuesday evening) with the goal, ahem, of determining who the ultimate winner would be.
Some pretty fun tests of weapons and techniques, e.g., they just cut through a couple of (dead) pigs with a viking sword, and then the Katana failed to cut the Viking chain mail, and so on.
Anyone else see this?
I saw the Apache vs. Gladiator episode. I suppose it was somewhat entertaining, but overall, I really disliked the show. I found the comparisons between items to be pretty absurd and not deeply considered. I don't expect to watch any more episodes.
i think its a dumbed down history show to get MMA people interested in some sort of history. i watched a few previews and just kinda shrugged it off. I'm waiting for the pirate vs the ninja episode (hehe not saying there is one but its always the classic who vs who)
Chuck Russell wrote: |
i think its a dumbed down history show to get MMA people interested in some sort of history. i watched a few previews and just kinda shrugged it off. I'm waiting for the pirate vs the ninja episode (hehe not saying there is one but its always the classic who vs who) |
I find it entertaining, right or wrong historically I can at least enjoy the presentation. I'm finding it very interesting how many TV shows are popping up in regards to this stuff.
Brian K. wrote: |
I'm finding it very interesting how many TV shows are popping up in regards to this stuff. |
Good point. And that is a good thing.
I'm hanging out for the "Welsh Longbowman vs 155 Howitzer crew" should be cool
*sarcasm mode disengaged*
*sarcasm mode disengaged*
Nat Lamb wrote: |
I'm hanging out for the "Welsh Longbowman vs 155 Howitzer crew" should be cool
*sarcasm mode disengaged* |
Or HMS Victory versus the Bismark. :p :lol:
Fun if not taken too seriously and a lot of the results would depend on the quality of matched up equipment i.e. cheap badly sharpened katana versus what quality maille ? Or whatever other mismatched stuff not representative of period quality equipment ! Too good being as non-informative as not good enough: Bottom line, very anecdotal, maybe fun but not very scientifically valid tests.
Last edited by Jean Thibodeau on Tue 14 Apr, 2009 11:41 pm; edited 1 time in total
Nathan Robinson wrote: | ||
Good point. And that is a good thing. |
Some show will come along sooner or later and try to present things from the point of historical accuracy. Problem with that is, one only need look through this forum to realize how much debate is to be had over what is historically correct. No matter what they come up with, unless it is super vague (and boring), someone will always find accuracy criticism in it. They are probably doing the right thing by just trying to be entertaining and planting the seeds of interest in peoples minds to research further.
Vassilis Tsafatinos wrote: |
Some show will come along sooner or later and try to present things from the point of historical accuracy. Problem with that is, one only need look through this forum to realize how much debate is to be had over what is historically correct. No matter what they come up with, unless it is super vague (and boring), someone will always find accuracy criticism in it. They are probably doing the right thing by just trying to be entertaining and planting the seeds of interest in peoples minds to research further. |
If you've read my posts on similar subjects, you'll see that I agree with you and have said the same things time and time again. And you'll note that I was careful with my critique of the show in my post above to make certain that I indicated my own feelings and reactions to it and said nothing about historical accuracy. Television is a medium of entertainment and isn't suited for anything deeply educational. Having said that, this show did not entertain me. We're on the same page :)
I've seen two episodes so far and I'm not particularly impressed. The two I've seen were littered with incorrect terminology and the reenforcement of stereotypes. A show like this can only present the high points, but that should be done correctly and isn't very hard to do, no harder than what's presented in these shows. Typical History Channel unfortunately.
I have seen one on tube... Not particulary impressed, too. I much prefer programs with minus pathos and adrenalina searching texts, and more information: I don't think that a tv show can be (and nether should) a college's lesson, but in some passage is like watching "American Gladiator" or "Robot Wars"...
I saw the show for the first time this weekend. I wasn't expecting much of it, so I can't really say I'm disappointed. The bottom line is the whole samurai vs Viking or any other of these random warrior match ups simply CANNOT be answered. There are too many variables and the result is going to be different every time. And like Nathan stated, the show is meant to entertain; not educate. Personally, I found the show at least somewhat entertaining. I liked how they added bones and organs to the ballistics gel models and the high speed cameras added more to it visually. And I at least wasn't disgusted to the point where I was yelling and swearing at the TV like I find myself doing with the History Channel lately.
Nat Lamb wrote: |
I'm hanging out for the "Welsh Longbowman vs 155 Howitzer crew" should be cool
*sarcasm mode disengaged* |
Welsh longbowman? Now THAT'S funny :D
Jean Thibodeau wrote: |
Or HMS Victory versus the Bismark. :p :lol: |
"Lookout! Vot is zat in frront of uss?"
*CRUNCH*
"Drriftvood, mein herr!"
I heard some friends talking about the show, and one thing bothered me. I don't know that I'd call a Roman gladiator a warrior as such. An entertainer? Yes. An athlete? Yes. A warrior trained (or versed) in fieldcraft in addition to fighting? Probably not.
It would've been neat if they'd done something about the different types of gladiator (myrmillo, retiarius, secutor, etc.), but I suppose that'd have been a different show.
Sadly, the first thing that went through my mind hearing about the matchup of an Apache and a gladiator had more to do with aircraft than anything else. An AH-64 would probably go to town on a Gloster Gladiator though, and wouldn't be terribly entertaining. (I'm pretty sure the Gladiator only had rifle-calibre MGs.)
It would've been neat if they'd done something about the different types of gladiator (myrmillo, retiarius, secutor, etc.), but I suppose that'd have been a different show.
Sadly, the first thing that went through my mind hearing about the matchup of an Apache and a gladiator had more to do with aircraft than anything else. An AH-64 would probably go to town on a Gloster Gladiator though, and wouldn't be terribly entertaining. (I'm pretty sure the Gladiator only had rifle-calibre MGs.)
J.D. Crawford wrote: |
I'm watching 'Deadliest Warrior' on Spike TV right now (an American Channel). This week it's Samurai vs. Viking Warrior. |
Nathan, I should have been more clear that I was supporting your position and only adding to it. I reread my post and realize that some things may have come across wrong.
I found the Apache vs Gladiator episode on You Tube and watched it in six parts today. It was interesting and entertaining. I learned a few things I did not know. I did not know the Gladiators used the scissor, cestus and sica in the arena. I would have thought these just fantasy weapons. The testing of weapons on simulated flesh and real animal flesh too was very objective and will prove a valuable reference source. The only part a thought was of no value was the computer generated combat results at the end but that part was only the last six minutes.
After seeing this first episode I am interested in seeing all future ones. It is certain that some valuable insight will be gained.
Edit: I saw episode 2, Viking vs Samurai on You Tube. Parts 1 though 5 are very interesting. Part 6 is the stuff video games are made of. I would have liked to have seen more extensive testing and more accurate measurement for the transfer force to the body through armor with various weapons.
I found the Apache vs Gladiator episode on You Tube and watched it in six parts today. It was interesting and entertaining. I learned a few things I did not know. I did not know the Gladiators used the scissor, cestus and sica in the arena. I would have thought these just fantasy weapons. The testing of weapons on simulated flesh and real animal flesh too was very objective and will prove a valuable reference source. The only part a thought was of no value was the computer generated combat results at the end but that part was only the last six minutes.
After seeing this first episode I am interested in seeing all future ones. It is certain that some valuable insight will be gained.
Edit: I saw episode 2, Viking vs Samurai on You Tube. Parts 1 though 5 are very interesting. Part 6 is the stuff video games are made of. I would have liked to have seen more extensive testing and more accurate measurement for the transfer force to the body through armor with various weapons.
I wish they had done Knight vs Samurai and settled the debate once and for all! :P
Just watched the samurai vs. Viking episode. Not gonna lie, I feel less intelligent now. The constant banter between "teams" was just annoying.
My favorite part was when they show that the katanta can't cut through mail in the first part, then at the end in their "video" the samurai is slicing the buhjeezus out of the viking. They can't even keep their facts straight between tests to video!
All in all, I was disappointed in the "historical accuracy", was not entertained, and I will be sure to miss future installments.
My favorite part was when they show that the katanta can't cut through mail in the first part, then at the end in their "video" the samurai is slicing the buhjeezus out of the viking. They can't even keep their facts straight between tests to video!
All in all, I was disappointed in the "historical accuracy", was not entertained, and I will be sure to miss future installments.
The next one will be a Spartan vs. a Ninja. How stupid and pointless can they get? It's like a bad car crash-I know I shouldn't look but I can't help myself. I don't know which is worse-SPIKE or "The History Channel." THC's latest farce is "Battles B.C." It is done in a "300" style that makes it even more irritating and absurd.
Page 1 of 11
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum