has anyone seen the "deadliest warrior" show ?

pallas · 27th July 2009, 08:40 PM

i dident know what forum to put this in but this show, although more often than not grossly inaccurate and rather hokey, is one of the few shows that even deal with ancient warriors and their weaponry. just wondering what everyones view is on this show, like it? hate it?

M ELEY · 28th July 2009, 06:14 AM

I personally like it, despite it's limitations. As a collector whose occupation is in medicine, I can appreciate the sort of CSI effects being displayed. I particularly like when they demonstrate different weapon attacks on that fake torso complete with circulating blood. Gory, but it gets the point across. I have only caught a few episodes, but in general, they seem to be fair with their opinions...but opinions they are. No one would really know who would win a real fight between the two protagonists, even if one culture possessed superior weaponry or armor. Adaptation and strategy have a huge affect as well, after all. So an Apache war club bounces off a gladiator's helmet? That same club delivered to the neck or face would be devastating...

sabertasche · 29th July 2009, 06:20 PM

I find the show typically hollywood hooie

. Vikings vrs Samurai??

The one episode I found most outlandish was the Roman Gladiator vrs the Apache Indian - who was the most dangerous or just really, really rude

I found the fight senarios insane and the stereotypes rampant. Apparently all gladiators are body builders with no cardio fitness or brains and the Apache are sneaky.

It's hard to take the show seriously although the weapons tests have lots of blood and guts flying everywhere which makes for great eye candy. (expensive transparent ballistic gel heads and torsos with coloured organs which spout fake blood and tissue when crushed, penitrated and otherwise abused).

Not very educational, sadly, my nephew believed all of it (which explains his history marks).

Greg

Jim McDougall · 29th July 2009, 07:12 PM

I have always dreaded these 'katana vs. rapier' type fiasco's, despite the video game type of scenario from an entertainment point of view projecting interesting perspectives. Since I have always thought of myself as a historian for my passion in studying every conceivable aspect of the subject, it is difficult for my feeble imagination to comprehend these kinds of contrived situations.

I am however inclined to find Mark's interpretation very well placed, and although I generally do not like to focus on the physiological dynamics of the use of weapons, it is indeed fascinating when considered forensically. It is an unpleasant reality that sometimes must be considered when trying to understand a weapon or its form and the practical application of its elements.

It always has amazed me in many movies, the complete inaccuracy of fistfights for example, where most of the blows would most definitely result in much more than a trickle of blood from the corner of the mouth. In other more 'realistic' examples, it seems to have become increasingly popular to revel in gore. It does not seem that such realism would need to be shown graphically to carry the plot or drama, but the sensationalism is what appeals to the modern social phenomenon of voyuerism.

I once read through a facinating reference on the actual physical aspects of sword combat with rapiers and duelling, and the nature of the wounds that would be experienced. It was extremely well presented, enough so that the reader was inclined to remain entirely objective, and was incredibly educational. For example, I did not know that duellists typically chose daybreak or early hours for duelling to avoid eating before combat. Presumptively this was to avoid mortal infection in the case of abdominal penetration.....obviously probably not necessary effective, but it does suggest the awareness of peritonitis.. pretty good I thought for Renaissance medical knowledge.

It sounds as if the demonstrations in the film would have been better served if matching somewhat feasible opponents, at least from the same period.

Another topic I have seen covered in archaeological perspective is the forensic examination of human remains from battle sites, and reviewing the types of wounds reflecting both weapon forms and the likely methods in combat.

All best regards,
Jim

pallas · 29th July 2009, 11:27 PM

there are rumors of a mountain man vs mongol and sikh vs conquistador matchups next season

Rick · 30th July 2009, 03:23 AM

Deadliest Catch is more my speed .

A different kind of combat .

Jim McDougall · 30th July 2009, 05:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pallas

there are rumors of a mountain man vs mongol and sikh vs conquistador matchups next season

Oh no!!!!

Rick, 'Deadliest Catch', you Cod guys! now theres tough!!!!

27th July 2009, 08:40 PM	#1
pallas Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 53	has anyone seen the "deadliest warrior" show ? i dident know what forum to put this in but this show, although more often than not grossly inaccurate and rather hokey, is one of the few shows that even deal with ancient warriors and their weaponry. just wondering what everyones view is on this show, like it? hate it?

28th July 2009, 06:14 AM	#2
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,097	I personally like it, despite it's limitations. As a collector whose occupation is in medicine, I can appreciate the sort of CSI effects being displayed. I particularly like when they demonstrate different weapon attacks on that fake torso complete with circulating blood. Gory, but it gets the point across. I have only caught a few episodes, but in general, they seem to be fair with their opinions...but opinions they are. No one would really know who would win a real fight between the two protagonists, even if one culture possessed superior weaponry or armor. Adaptation and strategy have a huge affect as well, after all. So an Apache war club bounces off a gladiator's helmet? That same club delivered to the neck or face would be devastating...

29th July 2009, 06:20 PM	#3
sabertasche Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Vancouver, BC Posts: 149	I find the show typically hollywood hooie . Vikings vrs Samurai?? The one episode I found most outlandish was the Roman Gladiator vrs the Apache Indian - who was the most dangerous or just really, really rude I found the fight senarios insane and the stereotypes rampant. Apparently all gladiators are body builders with no cardio fitness or brains and the Apache are sneaky. It's hard to take the show seriously although the weapons tests have lots of blood and guts flying everywhere which makes for great eye candy. (expensive transparent ballistic gel heads and torsos with coloured organs which spout fake blood and tissue when crushed, penitrated and otherwise abused). Not very educational, sadly, my nephew believed all of it (which explains his history marks). Greg

29th July 2009, 07:12 PM	#4
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 9,947	I have always dreaded these 'katana vs. rapier' type fiasco's, despite the video game type of scenario from an entertainment point of view projecting interesting perspectives. Since I have always thought of myself as a historian for my passion in studying every conceivable aspect of the subject, it is difficult for my feeble imagination to comprehend these kinds of contrived situations. I am however inclined to find Mark's interpretation very well placed, and although I generally do not like to focus on the physiological dynamics of the use of weapons, it is indeed fascinating when considered forensically. It is an unpleasant reality that sometimes must be considered when trying to understand a weapon or its form and the practical application of its elements. It always has amazed me in many movies, the complete inaccuracy of fistfights for example, where most of the blows would most definitely result in much more than a trickle of blood from the corner of the mouth. In other more 'realistic' examples, it seems to have become increasingly popular to revel in gore. It does not seem that such realism would need to be shown graphically to carry the plot or drama, but the sensationalism is what appeals to the modern social phenomenon of voyuerism. I once read through a facinating reference on the actual physical aspects of sword combat with rapiers and duelling, and the nature of the wounds that would be experienced. It was extremely well presented, enough so that the reader was inclined to remain entirely objective, and was incredibly educational. For example, I did not know that duellists typically chose daybreak or early hours for duelling to avoid eating before combat. Presumptively this was to avoid mortal infection in the case of abdominal penetration.....obviously probably not necessary effective, but it does suggest the awareness of peritonitis.. pretty good I thought for Renaissance medical knowledge. It sounds as if the demonstrations in the film would have been better served if matching somewhat feasible opponents, at least from the same period. Another topic I have seen covered in archaeological perspective is the forensic examination of human remains from battle sites, and reviewing the types of wounds reflecting both weapon forms and the likely methods in combat. All best regards, Jim

29th July 2009, 11:27 PM	#5
pallas Member Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 53	there are rumors of a mountain man vs mongol and sikh vs conquistador matchups next season

30th July 2009, 03:23 AM	#6
Rick Vikingsword Staff Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 6,293	Deadliest Catch is more my speed . A different kind of combat .