Ancient Apocalypse Review: Is the Movie Based on True Story?
Have you watched the Netflix movie Ancient Apocalypse? If not, and you are planning to watch but before watching you want to know the negative and positive reviews of the Ancient Apocalypse then you have visited the right place. In this article we will discuss the review and whether this movie is worth watching or not.
In the Netflix series Ancient Apocalypse, the 72-year-old tries to put together a full picture of the early human civilizations that may have existed before the time that historians and archaeologists study. Ancient Apocalypse, a Netflix documentary series that many people were looking forward to, started on Friday, November 11.
The six-part documentary series looks at Graham Hancock’s journey and the record of his trips all over the world to find an advanced ancient civilization. We have everything you need to know about Graham Hancock before you watch the first episode, which came out today.
What is Ancient Apocalypse All About?
What if we’re wrong about everything we know about the past? Graham Hancock is a journalist who goes to archaeological sites all over the world to find out if a much more advanced civilization than we thought existed thousands of years ago. The Younger Dryas Impact Hypothesis is the main point of the series’ main argument.
It was a time in Earth’s history when the environment changed quickly and violently. Some people think it could have been caused by a huge asteroid hitting the Earth. One of these people is Graham Hancock. More specifically, he thinks that this may have led to the many “great flood myths” that can be found in the earliest records of many cultures.
- ‘A Christmas Story Christmas’ Review: A Worthy Movie to Stream!
- Top Gun: Maverick Review: Is It Worth Watching This Movie?
- Capturing the Killer Nurse Review: A Worthy Movie to Stream!
Audience Review About Ancient Apocalypse
- Some reviewers say that he doesn’t talk to people who are “accredited” in their field, but on the show, he has talked to archaeologists who have been studying those sites for years. In the episode where he goes to Indonesia, he shows off a person who went to Caltech. lol Even though most of them didn’t go to college in the United States, that doesn’t mean they don’t have a valid professional opinion on the subject or that their education from their home countries doesn’t count. Saying this is just ignorant and very biassed.
- This is one of the most interesting shows I’ve seen on Netflix in a long time. Graham Hancock does a great job of showing us some of the most amazing megalithic structures in the world and asking questions about when they were built. I read a review on this site that said this documentary series is bad for academia, which is not true at all.
- The first episode made me think of Von Daniken right away, but now that I’ve seen the whole thing, I’m interested. Since Gobekli Tepe has changed the way we think about history, it seems like there is still a lot to learn about the late Paleolithic and Mesolithic periods. When you add in the flood stories that most Neolithic and Chalcolithic people from around the world told, Hancock’s idea that modern people have lost their memories seems to be true.
- He was clear and honest enough to say right away that he was an investigative journalist whose main job is to look into things and put together information from different points of view. He says right out that he is not a scientist, but it is clear that he works with archaeologists, geologists, and other scientists.
- It seems like a lot of these reviews are just opinions. Most of the review was based on feelings instead of a more disciplined mind that would have helped it be more objective. I wouldn’t really trust a review that says someone is “arrogant” or has a “superiority complex.” These are just people’s opinions, and I wouldn’t put much stock on them.
Ancient Apocalypse Review: is It Worth Watching This Movie?
Graham Hancock, the host of Ancient Apocalypse, raises red flags from the very first episode with his repeated insults directed at scientists, historians, and archaeologists. The British journalist and “pseudo-archeologist” has a great contempt for experts in the field in which he has spent the previous thirty years working and has even written twelve books.
It becomes obvious why once you hear his thoughts about prehistoric history. Hancock explains his theory regarding ancient civilizations throughout the course of the eight roughly half-hour-long segments that make up the Ancient Apocalypse.
He thinks that at the time when historians think all people were hunter-gatherers, there was an advanced society that predated known civilizations and fed into ancient Egypt, Mesopotamia, and Mesoamerica. To support his claims and discover the whereabouts of this “lost civilization,” he travels to Turkey, Malta, Indonesia, and the Bahamas throughout the course of the documentary.
Hancock frequently presents his thoughts in a very authoritative and accurate manner, however, they are essentially completely speculation. Even he recognizes at times how theoretical his ideas are and how little he can actually demonstrate.
Since it airs late at night on the History Channel or Discovery, between shows about Hitler and UFOs, it truly has the feel of that kind of made-up history. And using Joe Rogan as a source for your docuseries generally erodes someone’s credibility. While some of the incidents are more believable than others, his entire theory is academically dubious. Watch Movie Trailer:
Ratings of Ancient Apocalypse
When judging a show, everyone looks at its rating. Most of the time, the best way to know if a show will continue to air is to look at how well it does in the ratings. As your rank goes up, your chances of making it are better. The show has a good IMDb rating of 8.0/10 and a good audience rating of 57% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Comments are closed.