I don't think you actually got the point of that post.
Anyway, it's not like Les Stroud is in any real big danger himself. It's pretty naive to think that Les Stroud was out there risking his life for entertainment, while Bear Grylls isn't. Both are out there pulling stupid stunts, and both men do have safety around them. Even Les said in one of his episodes that he has a safety crew following him around all the time.
Point is, both are fake in that regard, but Bear actually does it in an entertaining way.
No, Bear has an entire camera crew sitting right next to him the entire time. You think he is hungry so has to eat snakes? He's not hungry at all. He has an entire camera crew and director following him through the jungle. They "cut" the scenes, say okay now, when you do this scene we want you to crouch here, move like this, we want to get this angle, etc. It's 100% fake and acted. Except for him killing animals for no reason whatsoever (he's not hungry), nothing he does is real.
Survivorman, on the other hand, actaully is out there alone surviving. He has a crew that's close enough to him where if he gets into bad trouble, he can call them and they can pin-point his location and fly there quickly. He is alone, though, and the reason why he's not as entertaining, is because he's actually surviving by himself and showing you how to survive. There's no camera crew following him, no director, he's really hungry and hunting his food, he actually has to make his shelter from scratch and live in it, he has to actually make it across an area by himself and survive days until he reaches that destination, and actually doing things one needs to do in the wild to survive.
There's a huge difference.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hammerlock2.0
His show may be fake, but the man is not.
Even with the camera cuts and an invisible safety rope, the guy has balls. Plus I never thought the show was real because it says in the very beginning that it's not. And it's on TV. So these were my first two clues.
As you said, he has camera cuts, camera crew, food, shelter, safety ropes, etc. It's all just for entertainment, which is okay, all TV is for entertainment. However, those that dislike his show and instead like Survivorman do so because Bear's entire show is fake, where as Survivorman is actually out there by himself, having to really hunt his own food and make his own shelter, and actually survive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFC_OWNS
the killing of animals that are predators is not fake, but the fake stuff would be useful too i imagine if you used in real life. i dont think he would try komodos though because only steve knew how to handle them
The fake stuff wouldn't be useful. It's all extremely exaggerated and overdone. All the major risks he takes and all these big leaps and climbing down these big holes and rolling down this mountain and all this would just get you injured and hurt, and would waste so much needful energy that you'd die of starvation/exhaustion way too fast.
That's why his show is more "entertaining" than Survivorman, it's like a flashy TV show in the wild, it's not actually Surviving or doing anything that remotely relates to surviving in the wild. Nearly everything he does would hurt you more than help you.
__________________
MMAF Hall of Fame Inductee
Debater of the Year - 2009
MMAF Graphics Champion
No, Bear has an entire camera crew sitting right next to him the entire time. You think he is hungry so has to eat snakes? He's not hungry at all. He has an entire camera crew and director following him through the jungle. They "cut" the scenes, say okay now, when you do this scene we want you to crouch here, move like this, we want to get this angle, etc. It's 100% fake and acted. Except for him killing animals for no reason whatsoever (he's not hungry), nothing he does is real.
Survivorman, on the other hand, actaully is out there alone surviving. He has a crew that's close enough to him where if he gets into bad trouble, he can call them and they can pin-point his location and fly there quickly. He is alone, though, and the reason why he's not as entertaining, is because he's actually surviving by himself and showing you how to survive. There's no camera crew following him, no director, he's really hungry and hunting his food, he actually has to make his shelter from scratch and live in it, he has to actually make it across an area by himself and survive days until he reaches that destination, and actually doing things one needs to do in the wild to survive.
There's a huge difference.
As you said, he has camera cuts, camera crew, food, shelter, safety ropes, etc. It's all just for entertainment, which is okay, all TV is for entertainment. However, those that dislike his show and instead like Survivorman do so because Bear's entire show is fake, where as Survivorman is actually out there by himself, having to really hunt his own food and make his own shelter, and actually survive.
The fake stuff wouldn't be useful. It's all extremely exaggerated and overdone. All the major risks he takes and all these big leaps and climbing down these big holes and rolling down this mountain and all this would just get you injured and hurt, and would waste so much needful energy that you'd die of starvation/exhaustion way too fast.
That's why his show is more "entertaining" than Survivorman, it's like a flashy TV show in the wild, it's not actually Surviving or doing anything that remotely relates to surviving in the wild. Nearly everything he does would hurt you more than help you.
Once again you missed the point.
Bear is entertaining.
Les is not.
Bear makes for good tv.
Les does not.
Bear does things out of the ordinary.
Les does exactly what we did as boyscouts. Nothing more, nothing less.
So what if Bears shows are set up? Who cares? Bear is a former special forces soldier. He has climbed everest at 23. He has done all sorts of things like that. Les? He lived in the wild for a year for their honeymoon? Big whoopty doo.
Oh and Les has a crew following him all the time. They're not even far away. Don't be naive, there are insurance companies, safety regulations and contractual safety obligations at work here.
Bear is entertaining.
Les is not.
Bear makes for good tv.
Les does not.
Bear does things out of the ordinary.
Les does exactly what we did as boyscouts. Nothing more, nothing less.
So what if Bears shows are set up? Who cares? Bear is a former special forces soldier. He has climbed everest at 23. He has done all sorts of things like that. Les? He lived in the wild for a year for their honeymoon? Big whoopty doo.
Oh and Les has a crew following him all the time. They're not even far away. Don't be naive, there are insurance companies, safety regulations and contractual safety obligations at work here.
I never said Bear's entertainment show wasn't entertaining. I said the reason why many like Survivorman better is because he's actually surviving, it isn't fake, where as Bear's is 100% fake. He's never in danger, he's never in any positon that would even be considered dangerous. His leaps over cracks in the ground and his rolls down hills and his crazy things are all acted, none of it is real, he's not doing anything dangerous. It would be like saying Jason Statham is in constant danger during his movies. Both Jason and Bear have entertaining shows, but they are both completely, 100% fake.
It is you who is missing the point, not me. I'm not saying his show isn't entertaining, I'm saying the reason why many like Survivorman more is because his show is real, where as Bear's is not and is acted like a movie is acted, none of it's real, and people generally have more respect for someone actually out there doing it, rather than pretending to do it like Bear does.
Also, no, Survivorman doesn't have a crew following him. They are close enough to where they can reach him swiftly via flying, incase anything happens. They monitor his location, etc. He is, in fact, alone though, and is not fed/sheltered/watched over the whole time he's out there.
Either way, it's just a TV show, I like both shows. It's just you asked the question "why do people like survivorman more" or something like that, and that's just my answer to your question.
__________________
MMAF Hall of Fame Inductee
Debater of the Year - 2009
MMAF Graphics Champion
I never said Bear's entertainment show wasn't entertaining. I said the reason why many like Survivorman better is because he's actually surviving, it isn't fake, where as Bear's is 100% fake. He's never in danger, he's never in any positon that would even be considered dangerous. His leaps over cracks in the ground and his rolls down hills and his crazy things are all acted, none of it is real, he's not doing anything dangerous. It would be like saying Jason Statham is in constant danger during his movies. Both Jason and Bear have entertaining shows, but they are both completely, 100% fake.
It is you who is missing the point, not me. I'm not saying his show isn't entertaining, I'm saying the reason why many like Survivorman more is because his show is real, where as Bear's is not and is acted like a movie is acted, none of it's real, and people generally have more respect for someone actually out there doing it, rather than pretending to do it like Bear does.
Also, no, Survivorman doesn't have a crew following him. They are close enough to where they can reach him swiftly via flying, incase anything happens. They monitor his location, etc. He is, in fact, alone though, and is not fed/sheltered/watched over the whole time he's out there.
Either way, it's just a TV show, I like both shows. It's just you asked the question "why do people like survivorman more" or something like that, and that's just my answer to your question.
"I don't get why people liked Les Strouds survivorman better." was rhethorical. I wouldn't argue taste. That is the first point you missed. The second point you missed was that it was all about entertainment value, not about what they do and don't do.
As for your points, you have just made the assumption that you can manipulate your way in this discussion by saying things like "100% of Bears shows are fake, just like Jason Stathams movies" without actually providing evidence. Either you provide evidence, or we'll just simply agree that you are making this up.
Wondering what kind of side dishes to enjoy while watching the fights tonight. I'm thinking maybe home made baked beans with bacon, onion, and some little smokies or small pieces of kielbasa
What Are You Doing Right Now!!!?
Linear Mode
