...yes, yes, I know he's a national institution and all that, but I've now got too the stage where I don't bother watching his stuff now because It just feels very samey. I've been watching it for 30odd years now!!
I can't help thinking we need an injection of new blood, and a bit more ooomph injected into the BBCs natural history output!
bit more ooomph injected into the BBCs natural history output!
BBC natural history programmes are the best in the world, and that's not good enough for you ?
Maybe the Yanks can produce natural history programmes with a bit of " ooomph" for you..........impressive extravaganzas which maybe combine humour, daring feats, dramatic music, awesome visual/lighting effects, and other vital ingredients which are essential for top notch entertainment.
I'm more than happy to stick with the present BBC format which doesn't treat me like a complete idiot.
Between 'em, David Attenborough and John Peel justify the license fee from here unto eternity.
He's a legend, and I'm listening to the 5live podcast of his interview on Richard Bacons programme as I write this. I'll never tire of him and he ain't gonna be around forever.
We should be thankful that we produce great programmes such as his rather than 'britains deadliest ........'!
Is John Peel still on the radio ?
Well the BBC definitely get their money's worth ........ no one can deny that.
Is John Peel still on the radio ?
ok, have justified...
Is John Peel still on the radio ?
*blinks*
It looks like old Dave has a dodgy hip.
Who cares, he's still keeps me interested. He's ace & besides, who's gonna take his place?
where I don't bother watching his stuff now because It just feels very samey.
Kind of agree with you. I haven't watched any of his last 3-4 series for that reason but the latest one got off to a good start probably becuase the subject matter is a bit different. The fractal animals were completely new to me and the mega ice age put our current concerns about climate change into perspective.
I really enjoyed the program last night. I really like Attenborough, he's doing well for someone that's 84...I wonder how much more he'll do before he retires properly! 
He seems to have aged in the last 5 years (obviously he has but you know what I mean) but he has such passion and a long-standing depth of knowledge of just about anything that is living or has lived. I'd say his same-iness comes from familiarity of his voice, his style of delivery.
I understand what the OP is saying, but I can't think of anyone else who could fill his shoes. Maybe that's because the BBC know that everyone loves him and they're guaranteed viewers so no other presenters get a look in, maybe there is no replacement. In the last few years it has felt like every series of his work will be his last and that makes me sad.
I'm going to treasure him and his passion for the natural world while I can.
He is a living legend. He also has a voice that seems to be able to sooth hangovers away!
I don't tire of his work. After all these years he still conveys a sense of wonder at the natural world, and never lets his ego get in front of the subject matter - unlike the recent mini-series on tigers in Bhutan.
Few people are irreplaceable, he's one of them
i thought last nights show was brilliant
all his stuff is excellent very few programmes appeal to such a wide age range
his shows are the pinnacle of what the bbc does best- educational/historical/wildlife docs etc
hes just as passionate about evolution as dawkins but doesnt scare people off
filling his shoes would be a very tough proposition
After all these years he still conveys a sense of wonder at the natural world, and never lets his ego get in front of the subject matter
Did you see the Making Of... programme a couple of weeks ago? Lovely programme. He came across as really self-deprecating and earnest, almost shy, but still fascinated by the natural world and other peoples interest in it. Laughing and joking with the film crew, totally undemanding even when stuck half way up a mountain in bad weather. No ego or anything, he never talked about himself or what he'd done, it was always about others.
Afterwards I changed channel and found a lobotomised gibbon attempting to explain in neanderthal grunts and words of one syllable why he thought he was worth £200,000 a week to kick a bag of wind round a field... 
The OP must be trolling!
Few people are irreplaceable, he's one of them
We all are in our own special way iDave. Even you 
But, yes, I echo your sentiment.
He is amazing.
My kids watched "Life of Mammals" on the Yesterday channel on Thursday evening and were completely absorbed for the full hour. They loved it.
If he can occupy the minds of a 9 and 12 yr old he can't be doing too badly.
Wholeheartedly agree with iDave, I'm never bored watching or listening to his work, or almost any documentary by the BBC. The output is always wonderful and pushing the boundaries, and it's a damn shame that this is the last series DA will be doing .
I am old and remember Jacques Cousteau being the same. it seemed to go:
Absolutely amazing, absolutely interesting, absolutely respected, absolutely similar but slightly different to the last series, oh it is him again.
The OP must be trolling!
Nope - I really am rather bored of hearing his voice! I don't believe he's the only person capable of fronting the BBCs natural history output. They should give someone else a chance with their prime material rather than DA getting all the best gigs!
My 8 year old girl has no interest in Attenborough's programmes, but absolutely loves Steve Backshall and his Deadly 60 series.
And I'm tired of the BBCs obsession with getting the 'perfect helicopter shot' for HD broadcast!
He's ace & besides, who's gonna take his place?
I think Alan Titchmarsh has one eye on that gig 
Did you see his British Isles: A Natural History? Very good, I'd like his job
I was really disappointed with the show last night. I'm reading a book about the Burgess Shale fossils and they are far more exciting that the progamme described - e.g. Hellucigenia
i cant sleep without his voice in the background.... got about 35 hours worth of nature docs next to the bedroom dvd player, know the scripts off by heart and can imagine what animals doing what on the screen.... legend.
My 8 year old girl has no interest in Attenborough's programmes, but absolutely loves Steve Backshall and his Deadly 60 series.
David Attenborough's programmes aren't aimed at 8 year old children. Is that what you want ..... the BBC to replace Attenborough's natural history programmes with ones which appeal more to 8 year old
children ?
And since your 8 year old girl appears to be the deciding factor, why are you criticising "the BBCs natural history output" .... she "absolutely loves" the Deadly 60 series does she not ? .....that's produced by the BBC.
The BBC as well as producing the best natural history programmes in the world, probably also produce the best children's programmes in the world. Although to be fair they haven't got much competition in Britain - the privately owned TV companies don't even bother trying to produce decent kids programmes.......ITV gave up a very long time ago.
The BBC continues using the Attenborough format because it is what people want, and because it produces highly rated programmes which sell right across the world.
This topic has been closed to new replies.
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
