Who here doesn't like David Attenborough?

Candie wrote: »

I won't hear a single word against DA, he's an absolute legend. He's got a singular talent for presenting these programmes. There's no one else like him.

I like Brian Cox, but he's no Attenborough.

I prefer the idea of the other Brian Cox, the Scottish actor, presenting wildlife programmes. They'd be very angry and violent, lots of lions ripping zebras to shreds, that kind of thing.

I really think the BBC should put me in charge of wildlife programming...

here NOT hear

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I have great respect for David Attenborough and think the shows he has presented/narrated are some of the finest nature/natural history documentaries ever produced. The BBC is second-to-none when it comes to making these programmes.

That said I find the hero-worship of Attenborough a bit odd. Attenborough has led a truly charmed, enviable life working for a state broadcaster surrounded by expert naturalists and cameramen. The British taxpayer and BBC employees are the people due most of the credit imo.

Disagree - its Attenborough's narration and tone that sets the mood for the shows. His personality and sense of wonder and fascination demands respect. Granted had a good life, I'm happy for him. He deserves it for highlighting what many wouldn't have seen without him.

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

I have great respect for David Attenborough and think the shows he has presented/narrated are some of the finest nature/natural history documentaries ever produced. The BBC is second-to-none when it comes to making these programmes.

That said I find the hero-worship of Attenborough a bit odd. Attenborough has led a truly charmed, enviable life working for a state broadcaster surrounded by expert naturalists and cameramen. The British taxpayer and BBC employees are the people due most of the credit imo.

i dont think he has been a BBC employee since the 70's.

Brian Cox is ok but I can only handle him in small amounts, his last series was alright but ended on a great note with that episode at the Global Seed Vault. He tends to get himself involved in petty battles on social media with the likes of Deepak Chopra far too often, gives them unnecessary platforms to feel "persecuted by big bad scientists".

Attenborough I've loved since as far as I can remember growing up and watching his stuff on BBC and when Network 2 frequently showed his stuff on weekdays.

It's his clear enthusiasm, professionalism and love for the subjects that really makes his nature documentaries a cut above the rest, for me. Even watching an interview with him you can see him go off on an interesting tangent or story when someone asks him about a random species or plant.

Though so much work comes from the latest technology and the crews he works with, Attenborough frequently points them out and gives credit to all the people who contribute to make his shows possible.

It's not that he was just some presenter for nature shows at one point at the start, it's that he was a huge nature nut who lost interest in being the director of programmes at BBC and wanted to actively work on nature documentaries. Kind of amazing he's adapted so much with pretty much all forms of television and video formats.

As for who doesn't like him, I once lived with a girl who came into the room where a bunch of us were watching Planet Earth. She was baffled why we were "watching a boring show with a creepy old man talking" where she then demanded that the boyfriend turn it over because Grey's Anatomy was about to start.

Hopefully, there's still plenty of years and work left in the man. That voice is what I associate with "warm and lovely", just relaxing to listen to.

Maireadio wrote: »

I'm not that keen on Cox as a presenter. He tries too hard to convey wonder and that's very distracting. He inserts himself in front of the camera too much too.

Kind of a common thing with documentaries about abstract concepts or in the case of history programmes, people that lived or events that occurred yonks ago. The audience would quickly zone out if it was just star maps and panning shots of marble statues, so the camera is forever fixed on the presenter as they prattle on.

Agricola wrote: »

Kind of a common thing with documentaries about abstract concepts or in the case of history programmes, people that lived or events that occurred yonks ago. The audience would quickly zone out if it was just star maps and panning shots of marble statues, so the camera is forever fixed on the presenter as they prattle on.

Some of them go really over the top though, make it way too personality driven, rather than letting the subjects take centre stage.

I like Iain Stewart, the Scottish presenter of geology programmes. I think he strikes a good balance between giving the show a 'face' and not getting in the way of the info.

Duggy747 wrote: »

Brian Cox is ok but I can only handle him in small amounts, his last series was alright but ended on a great note with that episode at the Global Seed Vault. He tends to get himself involved in petty battles on social media with the likes of Deepak Chopra far too often, gives them unnecessary platforms to feel "persecuted by big bad scientists".

Brian just isn't as likeable as Attenborough. He's a bit smarmy and know it all but is well able to present the data he's talking about, he's clearly a smart man. To the BBCs credit that's what makes their documentaries work so well. They find real scientists that are good at explaining things and present them in the best possible light. A person might not like Brian Cox but they respect he knows what he's talking about.

With Attenborough he's clearly extremely intelligent but he's got such a pleasant way about him that it's never overbearing, he always accessible to everybody. No one will ever come close to his character, he will go down in history as a teacher of the people.