The Spirit of the Age: 7 credible historical TV series
"Chernobyl"
Drama, historical | 4.72 out of 5 on MyShows | 1 season | 2019
In April 1986, the Unit 4 reactor at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant exploded. The series "Chernobyl" is a story about the accident, its aftermath, and how the true causes of the incident were hidden and how one man fought to uncover them.
"'Chernobyl' is a series about people. About people who lived peacefully and happily in a young and bright town, who did not even think about the disaster and its consequences. It seems that the authors put another great truth into the series. One can draw a parallel to what is happening today. Scientists are sounding the alarm, and humanity continues to destroy the planet more and more for its own interests. I would like to believe that because of misunderstandings between people it will be possible to avoid the destruction of all life on Earth", — Glass.
"A wonderful, powerful and scary series. Many thanks to the entire team, who - it shows! - has worked very carefully and respectfully on the series. Thank you to the screenwriter, who rekindled interest in the painful topic of Chernobyl. Thank you to the terrific actors who really got into character. Thank you to the director, production designer and numerous consultants who were able to create such a stunningly authentic atmosphere. And special thanks to Hildur Gudnadottir for a soundtrack of inhuman power and horror. Thank you for reminding us about the disaster in Chernobyl and the people who, sometimes at the cost of their lives, eliminated the consequences of this catastrophe" - rony-robber.
"I can't even say anything, there is a lump in my throat after the final shots. Perhaps, it is really one of the best series ever created", — floureed.
Add the TV series "Chernobyl" to your list
"Hatfields & McCoys"
Drama, romance, western | 4.2 out of 5 on MyShows | 1 season | 2012
The series tells the story of a feud that nearly led to war between the states of Kentucky and West Virginia. Anse Hatfield, nicknamed the Devil, and Randall McCoy were close friends until the end of the Civil War, after which both returned to their homes, Hatfield to West Virginia and McCoy to Kentucky. That's when gradually growing tensions and misunderstandings begin to lead to the very real war between the Hatfield and McCoy clans. Their feud makes international headlines, the governors of their states quarrel, and finally the U.S. Supreme Court intervenes.
"Great series! Excellent historical drama, I watched all 3 episodes in one sitting. Very well conveyed the atmosphere of that time era", — drumoff_k.
"Very much liked this series. Short, but eventful with enough revealed characters. It's interesting to see how pitting grudges and misunderstandings led to irreconcilable feuds, murders, blood feuds. People abandoned their principles for revenge. Meaningless. Even when everyone begins to realize that no one needs it, they continue to feud. It's very interesting", — skairas.
"It's an interesting series, in terms of American folklore, and in terms of this whole village life. Here's your family, and it's a fairly hostile world around you. Is it possible for a loner to survive in it? Day labor, choosing jobs between a shovel and a carbine", — Citokos.
Add the TV series "Hatfields & McCoys" to your list
"Wolf Hall"
Drama, historical | 3.89 out of 5 on MyShows | 1 season | 2015
England in the late 1520s. Ambitious lawyer Thomas Cromwell finds himself at the epicenter of intrigue and treachery in the court of King Henry VIII. Born into the family of a humble blacksmith, Cromwell manages to become the chief advisor to the king, who is still unable to produce a male heir. Because of this, Henry wants to annul his twenty-year marriage to Catharine of Spain and marry Anne Boleyn, which is opposed by the Pope and almost all of Europe. What will Cromwell do?
"A beautifully crafted series with excellent detail that lends itself to quiet realism. The protagonist turns his silence into a mirror that allows us to examine the era and its mores", — derxot.
"Fascinating. Since it turns out there are three books [on which the series is based - note], now I want to read them to find out the ending. But I understand why the series ended at that point. They wanted to show Anna's story specifically, so they did. But the series, my goodness. Probably the best historical I've seen", — SpringSpark.
"As someone who is interested in the personality of Henry VIII and the Tudor era, I really enjoyed this series. A different look at Henry and his wives through the eyes of Thomas Cromwell, the most controversial character in English history. Unlike the same Tudors, this series doesn't evoke a sense of Spanish shame, and Damian Lewis really looks like Henry. There are no complaints about the other actors either. The series looks very organic", — Sprat.
Add the TV series "Wolf Hall" to your list
"Band of Brothers"
Drama, action, military | 4.58 out of 5 on MyShows | 1 season | 2001
The story of Easy, 506th Regiment, 101st Airborne Division, U.S. Army, from their first training in 1942 to the end of World War II. The young paratroopers face the horrors of war by participating in many legendary battles: they landed in Normandy, participated in Operation Market Garden, liberated a concentration camp, and were the first to enter Hitler's mountain hideout in Bavaria.
"The series is really strong. I cried at the end. The afterword of the participants is just gorgeous. I think it's the best war series, although I'm not an expert in them. HBO are just good", — uaSolare.
"Great series. I highly recommend the seriesThe Pacific (The Pacific). Same time, same war, same young guys, same drama. Other actors, other enemies, other conditions, other side of the world. Everyone who liked "Brothers in Arms" will also like "The Pacific". Who watched the last episode (Points) carefully, could notice that in one of the episodes the veterans watched a documentary about the Pacific Ocean. After watching the series I recommend, you begin to perceive this episode in a different way", — fcktoreal.
"Legendary series, I always cry at the end. Lewis Nixon, Carwood Lipton, and David Kenyon Webster are my favorites. The cast is amazing - so many wonderful actors, even in minor roles", — id440426744.
Add the TV series "Band of Brothers" to your list
"Isabel"
Drama, historical | 3.91 out of 5 on MyShows | 3 seasons | 2012—2014
The series follows the life of Isabella I, Queen of Castile, who brought prosperity to Spain and promoted geographic discovery, but also drenched the country in blood by persecuting heretics. The show's writers explore how Isabella's character was formed and the hardships she went through to become one of the most memorable rulers in history.
"It's still such a shame to part with them all. You get so used to the characters over three seasons and unconventionally long episodes. And it's a pity that everything ended this way, and what happened next was not shown to us", — ajcrvr.
"A wonderful historical series! The only minus is that the series go on 1.5 hours, very dragged out", — yanaempress.
Add the TV series "Isabel" to your list
"Mad Men"
Drama | 4.09 out of 5 on MyShows | 7 seasons | 2007—2015
New York City in the '60s. The series is about the Sterling Cooper advertising agency and its creative director, Don Draper, who stays in a coveted position thanks to his sophistication and talent. From the outside, he looks like a happy father and husband to a beautiful former model. However, Don is not at all who he seems to be.
"The first seasons, to be honest, did not immediately pull in so much, watched, I admit, a little background, but also Of course, I'm sure I can find something to pick on in terms of character lines, but why? Mad Men, which the further you go, the harder it is to tear yourself away from, is so layered and alive that it makes no sense: everything here is brilliant, everything here breathes and speaks, and the understatement fits quite well. Greatest elaboration of the nuanced embodiment of the period, terrific characters where essentially we're only watching them interact throughout the seasons, and terrific stories from each of them in particular. A total pleasure", — Bullseye0901.
"It was very, very interesting to watch life in the 50s and 60s in America: the Kennedy assassination (both of them), the "moon landing", the assassination of M. L. King, the Vietnam War, etc. The way housewives and those girls who worked lived. What freedom and privileges men enjoyed... It was extremely interesting to see. Thank you to the creators", — NataliaDavydova.
"I watched the series so long ago that today it is more relevant than 7 years ago. A beautiful masterpiece, from start to finish and completed. Everything is very logical, beautiful and clear", — januarism.
Add the TV series "Mad Men" to your list
"The Crown"
Drama, historical | 4.55 out of 5 on MyShows | 6 seasons | 2016—...
The Crown series follows the life and reign of Queen Elizabeth II: from her marriage in 1947 to the early 21st century. Every two seasons, the actress playing the British monarch changes, as the character gets older: for example, first Elizabeth was played by Claire Foy, then Olivia Colman, and in the last parts of her role is played by Imelda Staunton.
"Terrific series, perfectly opens a person's eyes to the complexity of the situation of people of the royal family, who themselves did not choose such a fate, that this is not a beautiful fairy tale life, but a life deprived of almost freedom of choice, andeveryone in this family has to sacrifice everything for the sake of the country, so I think to some extent they are dreaming of an ordinary human life; literally opened the curtain of the life they actually live", — micinakr.
"I put this series off for a really long time because I knew it would be something really worthwhile. And so I fell out of life for a week - I couldn't tear myself away. My husband was watching it in bits and pieces, started reading wikipedia - and I told him: "Don't spoiler!!!". Of course, something I knew, but it was still very interesting", — damoritat.
"Terrific series. I was far from the royal family, well there is and there is, but to go so deep into history, with such amazing actors, against the background of historical events, just wow!" — marinagee.
Discuss this news
I do not argue, this series is gorgeous, the best about the accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, but there are many different inaccuracies and fictions in it - after all, this is an art series.
"Historical shows are rarely accurate: authors often neglect facts in favor of fictional events to make the plot more interesting and dramatic. But sometimes the story doesn't need to be embellished. We are talking about seven series, the creators of which made a choice in favor of authenticity."
And the first one on the list is Chernobyl. After that, it is very difficult to take this collection seriously, although all the presented series are very good, and they can be safely recommended for viewing.
And then I immediately see "Chernobyl", in which a lot of things were added\ removed \ changed just to create interest and drama.
As well as other series from the selection. Especially about the authenticity in the TV series about kings and queens it is not necessary to talk) Fact - Isabella was the queen of Castile, persecuted heretics. Do we know for sure about her personal problems and difficulties? No. But this does not prevent us from looking at the assumptions that are hidden behind the facts in the series)
I hope you caught my thought))
"Pashka was looking for the very middle ground between truth and falsehood, which he could believe himself. Drlm if you don't believe yourself, how will you convince others?" (c) Kir Bulychev - "Prisoners of Yamagiri-Maru"
It is clear that there is no "spirit of the epoch ", there is a VISION by the authors of this very "spirit ", which they successfully put in the heads of those born in this century with a beautiful picture.
For factual authenticity, go to the documentary genre. Well, if you study history according to the worst works, then who is to blame for you.
When I see naked Tula sea miners in the TV series Chernobyl, I don't have any association with reliability anywhere. And it is not I who am studying the history of art works, but those who consider Chernobyl and similar series to be the truest truth - do not confuse
And let's not talk about who puts who when and what in their head, there have always been fools, so now don't shoot a movie (a rhetorical question)
Well, what is the rhetorical question to answer?! I generally think that patriotic movies should be shot, but besides that, you should also be able to shoot it (as well as propaganda, of course) :)))
An infusoria who lives in her own world and refuses to accept constructive argumentation and someone else's opinion)
There is also the Pacific Ocean, also associated with World War II
Chernobyl and the Crown are also some of the best TV series based on real events
What are you talking about?))
Admins make a selection for showers with DOCUMENTARY series))
The outrage was caused by the inappropriate use of the term, no more.
Like all other historical series. Do you really believe that in "Crown " all these events took place behind closed doors? And about Henry or Isabella, who were half a millennium ago? There are only facts there - he is the king, she is the queen. Ruled for so many years. The facts are over.
All historical hood. serials have some one or two facts, the rest is all the speculation of the writers. That's why they are works of art and NOT documentary series.
Chernobyl does not describe events, but simply makes assumptions about what happened based on the fact. The fact is the explosion at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant. Everything else is speculation and fiction. Including the alleged "authentic" struggle. And for some reason you still can't figure out the terms in any way..
You see, you were born - this is a fact, and then I can come up with anything about you, because it will be a work of art! Tell me, will you be satisfied with such "reliability "?
Still, at the expense of Chernobyl, you are overreacting, I was in Chernobyl as an official tourist on an excursion and there are speculations in the series, but there are not as many of them as you are trying to present.
If you want to shoot a work of art, I will comment that this is how you see it and ask what you based your assumptions on. Or as a royal family, I will refrain from commenting at all))
And if you want to shoot a documentary (!) movie or a TV series - then I will already begin to arise that everything is a lie)))
If I overdo it, then just a little. It is enough that they invented at least a dozen significant events, truthfully showing insignificant trifles for greater reliability. I have already written to another user that there is a simple manipulation here, like with horoscopes, but it is really effective.
What kind of documentary? I immediately wrote - artistic! So I can twist facts, rearrange them in places by time, invent some at all, because it's all just an artistic assumption! As an Estonian basketball player, an ardent communist in the movie "Upward Movement" was made an anti-Soviet and almost a traitor to the Motherland! Well, what?! It's a feature film, yeah
I think that's exactly what those who create the worst films are doing) for the "artistic context " exaggerate, escalate more drama, etc. Who is interested in watching a dry story?) More precisely, those who are interested are looking for a documentary right away or just go to read scientific articles...
Once you are already wound up, is there at least one "authentic" art series for you?))
I'm not against exaggerations and forcing drama, but if you shoot based on real events, you still need to stick to the basic facts, and not make some of the key characters black or, as in the case of Chernobyl, too young. And most people don't care about what happened in the Middle Ages! But Chernobyl is a tragedy! And many are familiar with this tragedy firsthand. Do you think they are pleased when they are blatantly lying about them and these events, passing everything off as declassified archival data?!
No, there are no such things in principle. No movies, no TV shows. If the work is artistic, it is no longer authentic. But if the authors try to stick to the facts, inventing only character dialogues, then this one can be called more reliable than those where just one fact is taken as a basis, and all other events are fiction. This did not happen with Chernobyl.
The main facts - adhered to, and you about the age of Shchadov - honestly? In general, it does not change the essence of the story in any way. The essence of the story is much more global - an attempt to conceal a huge tragedy, which is why there are more consequences.
Unfortunately, the majority in general do not care about the Middle Ages, and even more about the Chernobyl tragedy! As well as the story itself. Many do not know what happened in the 90s, not to mention something further besides the fact of some kind of accident at the Chernobyl nuclear power plant in the 80s.
There was no "brazen" lies. There were exaggerations, there were cranberries. What do you think is a blatant lie?
The first thing that comes to my mind from inconsistencies: Ulyana Khomyuk is the only invented character, although HBO immediately stated that she is a collective image of many scientists, and naked miners are an absolutely inappropriate scene, yes it was hot and they were without respirators, but still not naked. Well, Dyatlov and Bryukhanov were made completely antiheroes, although they were rather victims of the regime.
You can continue to sort out by frame what is false, what is true (but is it necessary to do this in an art series?) - but the liquidators, their actions and the memory of them are pretty well provided and not a bit blackened. On the contrary, many abroad who did not know anything about this tragedy at all and began to be interested in it, and Google the facts, and not blindly believe the series!
That's the key. Nobody in the hood. he does not invent film adaptations only dialogues. There are no such films. A lot of things change gender / actions / places of events for more drama. Stick to the facts and schedule all the events thoroughly - these are already two different genres in cinema.
Well, what "basic facts " did the creators of the series adhere to? The explosion and its liquidation, evacuation of Pripyat - and that's it! In this regard, yesaaaa! The series is 100% authentic! :)))
You are now trying to attribute to the government what did not happen. If they told in the series that the government did everything at once - that would be a blatant lie)
In the series, they just thickly hint that it was necessary to urgently run for help to the West in general and the USA in particular! And the consequences would be many times less! And this is a blatant lie! :))
You're trying to justify avoiding panic at the expense of civilian lives. Evacuation, which takes place a day after the event, can no longer be a priori " in a short time ". I would say that it even loses its meaning, because the radiation did not wait for them to leave the city. I don't even want to know in which textbooks, this inhibition of elimination can enter as something good.
In the series, it is thickly hinted that nothing can be hidden and everything comes out. Especially the incompetent leadership of the country.
"minor mistakes" - I would call the change of age of the character in the series, and not a deliberate lie to the whole country that "there was a minor accident nothing serious")
And of course it was the leadership in the USSR that was incompetent! You made my day!!!! :))))))))
On the shoulders of whom the organization really fell - I didn't say a single crooked word. Who from the government stood and led the liquidation? One Shcherbina? What did the authorities do? Did they keep the media inside the country and TV sets with a picture "nothing serious"? The first hours and days are the most valuable time that was not used.
I don't understand what you're talking about "after evaluating the events, you started getting everything you need...apply evacuation measures...". I even Googled it on purpose, I was wrong - the evacuation began not in a day, but in 36 hours. One and a half days!
The explosion that destroyed the reactor on the same night and the fire does not stop. What additional assessments are needed? They are done when you have already taken out the civilian population, canceled parades in the vicinity, took all the first measures to eliminate it and it did not help.
It wasn't about the functionality of the NPP. And in the mandatory tests that were conducted, which did not provide that " something would go wrong ". Another stone in the same garden.
It is incompetent! Even in the constitution of the USSR after this disaster, and then the countries of the post-Soviet space fixed responsibility - for hiding or not bringing information about an environmental disaster to the population.
And once again I repeat: knowing what happened and what consequences it led to, it's easy to reason "how I would have acted on the spot.." and the like. At that time and under those circumstances, the Government of the USSR acted clearly and quickly as much as possible.
And turn on the logic at last! To organize not just evacuation, but also the resettlement of an entire city - this is not the level of local government, this is just the level of Government! To provide liquidators with everything necessary and recruit these liquidators is also not a pound of raisins! Shcherbina alone would not have coped, and he had no time. He supervised the liquidation.
This word was the beginning of the discussion. And I explained that. And you should have read it, according to your words. If you 're not lying
Only about secrecy, evacuation and lies, I advise you to score "1979 accident at the US nuclear power plant". The accident is comparable to Chernobyl, as a result of which 50% of the power unit melted. The materials are completely classified until now. Evacuation began only a few days later. The evacuation was voluntary. None of the civilians received any compensation. The American government is still lying about the effects of radiation and emissions on people and the environment.
And now ask yourself the question - why haven't the Americans made any film about this tragedy yet?
I Googled in the Russian Federation, it seems they just took the Soviet article as a basis - article 237, too.
I turn on logic and am not going to turn a blind eye to the fact that the government demanded experiments, while being absolutely unprepared for the consequences and slowing down and hiding this catastrophe from civilians by my actions. It's wild for me. Most likely you live far away in Russia, and absolutely do not care that the population living in the district still meets with the consequences.
Evacuation is already scheduled in advance when it comes to dangerous objects. Just take it and follow the instructions. It was specially slowed down, as you noticed earlier, so as not to disperse the panic.
And no. It doesn't work that way. America did a shitty job in 1979. The USSR coped shitily in 1986.
Answering your question - there is a TV series on the topic for 2022, I really haven't watched it. And so I understand you too)) And as a counter-question - why is there no reliable worst film from the post-Soviet space? I understand for the same reason that you are hinting why there is no American film about Three Mile Island?)
And yes, Shcherbitsky was lying when he said that Gorbachev ordered him to hold a parade. There is not a single evidence in favor of this, except for the memoirs of his wife and confidants. Gorbachev denied it. Which Ryzhkov confirms in his memoirs.
And what does that change? Shifting the responsibility of the government from hand to hand? Parades have been held in infected cities, and that's what matters.
By the way, why did you block me and want answers to questions when you ignore them yourself?))
I can't even give you a dislike, but you sculpt yourself, what kind of kindergarten.
Then remember what you wrote a year ago or earlier. And you'll see your rotten insides when you look in the mirror.
But when khokhlukha dresses up in white clothes, insulting the word "khokhol", not forgetting to write "orcs", "rusnya", "Mordor" and so on, and without getting out of the this Mordor, it's kind of weird.
Just write it not to me, but to Madame from Ukraine.