Man Vs. Wild

Well we have Survivorman season 2 to look forward to. Personally I like both shows.
 
My two cents, after having watched the first episode with Bear in the Moab.
It`s clear that the series is meant as a general information to people who don`t know anything at all about survival, but i find it also quite clear that the man is there almost purely in the role as an entertainer. Sure enough, he knows alot about survival, but he doesn`t really get the opportunity to show much of it. But then, i think that`s one of the precepts of the show. He is airlifted into the area, meant to hike until he finds civilisation.

And i do believe it`s ATFK from M.O.D. that he`s using aswell.
 
He does some unnecessary stuff, HOWEVER, some of those things put people in survival situations, and that is what he is trying to show you. For example, some one out on a hike and gets themselves up on a "table rock" and can't get down. We all know how easy it is to climb up things than it is to climb down. So what he said "IF" you find yourself in this situation where you have to jump down, you want to keep your feet and legs together and absorb the shock with your feet first and roll to one side or the other and transfer the shock to your thighs, hip and the finally rolling over to your upper back/shoulder area. For some of you it's called a PLF parachute landing fall. Just don't turn it into a PFL.:D I could go on for longer, but you have to listen to what he is saying, he will say "if you find yourself in this situation, position this is what could or can be done.....No I don't agree with everything he does, but the program is trying to get ratings and risky stupid stuff is what most people want to see. I like survivor man because he is out there on his own, he doesn't have any camera operators to help or bail him out if he gets to deep.
In addition, as far as the UNIT last night, he didn't start a fire with the fire bow that fast, remember its TV.
 
As far as Bear and Les both go, their shows must have some entertainment, risks, whatever to stay viable.

Most of us, in these forums, would probably prefer seeing more detail and explanation. For us it would be great, but, for the average Tv watcher it would be boring and they would change channels to "flip this house" or a re-run of CRIBS.

Of the two, I think Les does a little bit more explaining, "how to skin the rabbit" type of stuff. They could really do a service, and post more details on their website, show the storyline, and allow the person browsing their site to "drill down" to extra detail layers. How to start the fire with bow and drill, how to avoid hypothermia by building an adequate shelter....etc. etc. etc.

In the TV episode they may show how to snare a rabbit, but on their website they could go further and show how they built the snare, placed it, pros and cons of location. just add that extra layer.
 
Just my opinion but both seem staged. I have watched Escape to the Legion, Surviorman and the new Man vs Wild.

Escape to the Legion is was more, Never give up with Grylis proding guys on.

Survivor Man.....lot's of batteries, no knife and prepared with no gear what so ever.

The new Grylis, Man vs Wild I haven't seen much but the cliff jump in the Utah desert, wrap your head up funny and trek on.

All in all it may be staged but it is Thought Provoking and can make one think about the little things that may come in handy.

Wet matches means no fire or a $5.00 magnifing glass you forgot you packed. Space Blankets, maybe not much for heat but they don't weight anything and carrying a couple could be shelther lining and insultation.

What to eat, where to drink....Years ago there was a Thing called the Boy Scouts Of America where you got a little bit of training.

While I don't figure anyone was in much danger in any of the above series I do believe they all have some great info to make one think, do I have this just in case, What if I need string, did I pack Paracord and if I did why. Why carry a fixed blade, a large folder and a small pocket knife.

These Real Time TV shows may be entertaining to some, a joke to others and just might get some couch monkey thinking, what If.

Jest is, will it ever happen to you or I ...I doubt it but if it did you watched a few episodes of McGiever and had your wits about you when the SHTF and you are stuck.

Karsten
 
Both shows, IMHO, are good. I like them for both entertainment and educational value. I love the outdoors and this kind of stuff intrigues me, but my experience in bushcraft is extremely limited - I live in the city and get to the mountains to bike, hike, and camp once in a while. Would I swim down a narrow canyon in stagnant water not knowing where it leads or how deep it is? No. Would I know how to "dig" for water in the desert? Not necessarily. Did I know that you could actually make a fire from a spark from an axe blade? Not before an episode of Survivorman. So for the average guy like me, these shows do provide me with some survival basics to think about and leaves me to wonder about the gear these guys use (like the knife in question).
 
darklight943 said:
Both shows, IMHO, are good. I like them for both entertainment and educational value. I love the outdoors and this kind of stuff intrigues me.
Click to expand...

Me too, I take away from them what I can, and the fact that we notice things we wouldn't try is actually a good thing. both those guys are younger and in better shape than I.
I do like looking around where they are, and trying to figure out how i would handle it, before they give the answer.

I missed the first couple of minutes of the MOAB episode, how does Bear stage his "Situation"? Does he give a possible way he got stuck, like Stround does?

Tomorrow (Friday) on Man vs. Wild is Costa Rican Jungle, hey maybe he will stumble upon Les's beach camp and make improvements to it! :thumbup:
 
IMHO, I think both shows are bad news. If they're trying to educate, then why don't they stop when they encounter a situation, give in to a monologue delineating all of the options along with the risks associated with those options, and then decide on a course of action and give the reason for their decision. To me, that is education. But to say you're going to eat a raw bird egg and give salmonella about as much time as it takes to say the word is foolishly ignorant if it's about education, esp. when he then goes on to cook the next egg. Same with drinking ground water. And I really don't care what his prior experience is or how young he is or what great shape he is in -- if he does get salmonella or something like amoebic dysentary, he is going to be hurting BIG TIME. To me, both shows are little more than entertainment, and I think to presume them to be anything more is dangerous. Just my .02.
 
Don't forget to lump Ron Hood in on this. He must be an idiot too because he makes mistakes and shows them on his DVDs. Throw the bums out!

The fact is all three of these guys get out from behind the computer and actually step outside. Salmonella? With chicken eggs about one in 20,000 has SE on the inside of the raw egg. The shell may have picked up SE from the bird. Salmonella shows up in about 2 days but generally doesn't have much of an effect on healthy active age people. Since "eggs are the gold standard of protein" it is worth the risk when rescue is a few days away. Fast food restaurants should be avoided if you are really concerned with salmonella. Historically they present the bigger risk.

BTW my TV has an off/on switch and a device for choosing another channel. That way I don't have to sit through a program I don't like.
 
on_the_edge said:
IMHO, I think both shows are bad news. If they're trying to educate, then why don't they stop when they encounter a situation, give in to a monologue delineating all of the options along with the risks associated with those options, and then decide on a course of action and give the reason for their decision. To me, that is education. But to say you're going to eat a raw bird egg and give salmonella about as much time as it takes to say the word is foolishly ignorant if it's about education, esp. when he then goes on to cook the next egg. Same with drinking ground water. And I really don't care what his prior experience is or how young he is or what great shape he is in -- if he does get salmonella or something like amoebic dysentary, he is going to be hurting BIG TIME. To me, both shows are little more than entertainment, and I think to presume them to be anything more is dangerous. Just my .02.
Click to expand...

This is very true.
You preface your post with ..."If they are trying to educate"....
Well, frankly, they never make that claim , and I think that is where people take issue with these shows, they believe it's a "how to" show, for esucational purposes, when that is not the intent. It an extreme adventure show. Like watching a show about climbing Mt. Everest, they don't stop to tell us how to climb.

If so, it would then be more like a "course" and would go along rather slowly. they have to pack an entire adventure down into 1 hour. They are telling an adventure story (reality tv) with some survival stuff thrown in for interest, not vice versa.
Each one of us in this forum would be fine with that "stop and explain in detail" format, but we are probably 2% of the viewing audience. The other 98% of the viewers are people who watch 'Survivor' thinking that is really what survival is about.
Check out one of the hunting shows on OLN. they don't stop to show us the cartirdge and how the safety operates and how to sight in the scope, they are telling a story about the hunt, just as Survivorman and Man vs. Wild are telling a story about the Adventure.
Otherwise only survival nerds like us would be watching, and the show would get cancelled pretty quickly.
We are not gonig to learn how to hunt watching OLN, and we are not going to learn how to survive A-Z watching Les and Bear.

We had this same discussion about SurvivorMan, we went to their website and watched the shows, read reviews, no where, I repeat NO WHERE do they indicate they are trying to teach anyone, or provide anyone with an education. They are merely describing what THEY are doing, given their situation. They don't claim to follow any given teachings, they don't claim they will always take the proper course of action, in fact, their only claim is that they will be this so called "adventure" and we get to ride along and watch them.
Paraphrasing one of those famous legal disclaimers:
"Your survival situation may vary"

Like SurvivorMan, Man Vs. Wild is a story, video journalism, about Bear Grylls, going from Point A to Point B, and along the way showing what HE does to get through HIS ordeal. From the offiical website:
Man vs Wild staring Bear Grylls is a new series airing this fall by the The Discovery Channel. The show will follow adventurist Bear Grylls and survival through conditions unimaginable to the average man.

It doesn't say that Bear Grylls will show people what to do to survive.

I personally think they take some risks, on purpose, like swimming under the log jam, to spice it up, kinda like "insert action moment here". They are adding drama. :eek:

Maybe one day someone will do a "HOW TO" on Survival, step by step series.
I would envision it more on OLN, on Saturday afternoons when all the other "how to" shows air.

BottomLine: Some poeple may be tuning-in assuming it is a "how to survive" show, when it is not.

I'll be sitting in front of the TV at 9pm, to watch Bear battle snakes and disease in the jungle. Maybe he'll eat a tarantula or something? :D
 
2dogs said:
Well put Skunk.
Click to expand...


I would have to agree, It is just for the most part entertainment like any stupid Reality TV. But in this case there are tid bits in there that get tossed out for those that care and take things more serious than American Idol.

I am sure a lot doesn't get shown for legal issues that might come up. Something like "Guy jumps off house after Mad Wife took ladder away" Well, he saw it on Man vs Wild so he jumped off a 3 story house.

Myself, I would rather watch something that makes me think, what if and do I have something to cover that in the bag. If these shows inspired as many people that have posted here to get out and learn something they did a good job.

What's that show with the stupid stunts for $50,000......Thats useful entertainment at it's best:jerkit:

Karsten
 
mycroftt said:
On a related note, I wonder what brand of T-shirt he wears and whether he chose that brand for good absorbency - you know, for when he cuts it into a strip and urinates all over it and wraps it around his face and head.
Click to expand...


Interesting...that. He states that he is very dehydrated. (dark yellow urine) that urinates on his shirt, but, amazingly, the shirt isn't discolored. hmmmm also notice that the shirt was completely soaked. Go out back and take a leak on your shirt and you will notice that you really can't completely soak it like he supposedly did. I think that scene was a reasonable suggestion that he pantomimed doing while during a break in filming somebody soaked his shirt in water for him.
 
2dogs said:
Well put Skunk.
Click to expand...

Thanks 2dogs,
I need to stop typing and go to bed earlier, 11:27pm EST on that one, and lecturing about a survival show..maybe I need a life! :confused:

Sorry for the novel.

Man vs. Wild , 9pm tonight.
Knife in one hand, beer in the other, I'll press the remote with my toes. ;)

We'll have to start a thread for each episode to comment on the good, bad and ugly of it all. We still may learn something, yet.

later
 
SkunkWerX said:
This is very true.
You preface your post with ..."If they are trying to educate"....
Well, frankly, they never make that claim , and I think that is where people take issue with these shows, they believe it's a "how to" show, for esucational purposes, when that is not the intent.


It doesn't say that Bear Grylls will show people what to do to survive.
Click to expand...


Hmmmmm......you are wrong. I DVR'd the "jungle episode", and thought I had heard him make some kind of "this IS how to survive" type of comments. I just went back and checked - here's a quote by Bear from the beginning, just before he parachutes in

"I'm going to show you the skills you need to survive out here"

Skills to survive, like -

1. Climbing a 100 foot tree by the vines around it, to find out that it's just jungle all around you.

2. Using a vine to rappel down a waterfall rather than walk around it

Those are the two that I thought were kind of dumb. But I did like the way he described how he was starting the fire, and the 1st shelter. The raft seemed to work better than I thought it would, also.

But yes.....I do agree that it's mainly entertainment, but he certainly did claim that this was educational - he was going to "show you the skills you need to survive out here". I think some of the skills would help you survive, some would probably get you killed or seriously injured..........just hope that you pick the right ones I guess!

:)
 
Can anyone guess the mystery knife in the Costa Rica episode. I thought it was a SOG but I was wrong I have searched some other makers and none seem to have anything like it. Guesses anyone.
 
12Bravo said:
Can anyone guess the mystery knife in the Costa Rica episode. I thought it was a SOG but I was wrong I have searched some other makers and none seem to have anything like it. Guesses anyone.
Click to expand...

I thought SOG at first too, but there was a bottle opener on the back of the blade behind the serations. Reminded me of the old $5 survival knives that had the ball compass tail cap and the junk survival gear inside. Using a rock as a batton, right on the serated spine, didn't seem like the best idea either.

Heres another question regarding the Costa Rika eoisode. Is it just me or does he seem to go over the top with some items? His shelter was huge, as was his bow / fire drill.
 
The knife had a bottle opener like Rupestris said. Also the bottle opener seemed to be sharpened like a skinning knife, it might also serve as a seat belt/cord slicer when the knife is still in the kydex sheath. The tang was extended beyond the rubber checkered handle. The serrations on top of the blade look useful (not a false edge). I thought either SOG, Cold Steel, or maybe even TOPS. I kind’a of also cringed a bit when he used the stone to whack on top of the perfectly good (sharp) top, but he probably gets the stuff for free and then junks them after ward, so maybe it is something he just found in a flea market somewhere. The blade is not the best for batoning, you cut your baton stick more than the object. The bow did seem a bit too big, and the shelter was enormous.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top