Jump to content

Chernobyl HBO


TwiceHorn

Recommended Posts

19 hours ago, Bama Chick said:

I don’t know that I have ever watched a show or movie that has made me feel actual frustration like this one does. I’ve watched stuff that’s made me feel tense or scared or anxious or sad or nervous but this - especially the first two episodes when everyone is in denial and won’t admit what’s going on - makes me feel like I’m waiting at the DMV or something.

<cloakroom>You realize this is what AOC wants to do to America, right?</cloakroom> .

*ducks and runs for cover* . JUST KIDDING.

Started watching and got caught up last night.  Fantastic show.  I just wish I could binge watch the whole thing.

I want to go on a bender with the miners.  "Now you look like the minister of coal!"

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That article is very slanted and if you take a gander at the author’s Twitter feed and google him and you will discover he’s a pro nuclear power shill and has lobbied for nuclear energy groups in the past.

The show runner also commented on some of his tweets pimping the article you linked and pointed out things he got wrong and let people know the author hadn’t seen anything but the trailer for the show when he wrote the article.

The guy also has taken heat for pushing misleading information about the Fukushima meltdown and had to issue a retraction.

Not exactly the most unbiased source.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/20/2019 at 9:31 PM, Bama Chick said:

One of the stories is about the firefighter’s wife, Ludmilla.

Knowing how her story ends, every time she was onscreen I was muttering “Get out of his room!!!”.

The first scene that she enters the hospital and sees her husband, was that a dream sequence of what she expected him to be like?  Because he was functioning fine and they were playing cards and laughing.  Maybe I misunderstood it, but that's what I took it as, compared to what he turned into.  The cement at the burial, damn if they really watched that......holy fuck that's brutal.

Also, didn't we find out she was pregnant literally 30 seconds into the beginning of the first episode?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, mulletpelini said:

The first scene that she enters the hospital and sees her husband, was that a dream sequence of what she expected him to be like?  Because he was functioning fine and they were playing cards and laughing.  Maybe I misunderstood it, but that's what I took it as, compared to what he turned into.  The cement at the burial, damn if they really watched that......holy fuck that's brutal.

Also, didn't we find out she was pregnant literally 30 seconds into the beginning of the first episode?

The whole reason she was awake was to puke in the toilet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No it was real.  They explained on the podcast that the effects are delayed a bit, so you have a period of time where you feel fine.  


They also specifically explained it in the conversation between Boris and Valery in the courtyard.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That article is very slanted and if you take a gander at the author’s Twitter feed and google him and you will discover he’s a pro nuclear power shill and has lobbied for nuclear energy groups in the past.

The show runner also commented on some of his tweets pimping the article you linked and pointed out things he got wrong and let people know the author hadn’t seen anything but the trailer for the show when he wrote the article.

The guy also has taken heat for pushing misleading information about the Fukushima meltdown and had to issue a retraction.

Not exactly the most unbiased source.


He’s an advocate yes, but he showed his work. You know this show is historical fiction right? For instance Ulana wasn’t a real person. Doesn’t make it any less awesome, btw.

There’s no such thing as an unbiased source.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Kel Varnsen said:

Why didn't they just put those guys out of their misery? Did they think they could cure them? 

Not cure. My guess is that they wanted to learn how the process worked in humans.  

Edited by Dolemite
Link to comment
Share on other sites



He’s an advocate yes, but he showed his work. You know this show is historical fiction right? For instance Ulana wasn’t a real person. Doesn’t make it any less awesome, btw.

There’s no such thing as an unbiased source.


But there are degrees of bias.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Buzzrock said:

 


He’s an advocate yes, but he showed his work. You know this show is historical fiction right? For instance Ulana wasn’t a real person. Doesn’t make it any less awesome, btw.

There’s no such thing as an unbiased source.

 

I’m pretty pro-nuclear power and even I think he dismisses a lot of issues.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/21/2019 at 10:02 AM, Fozzz said:

There is no way that a "thermal explosion" could release anything approaching that much energy.  I know there was some speculation about a potential nuclear detonation, but if you have read anything about how those devices work, you would realize that an exploded nuclear reactor turning into an atomic bomb is extremely far fetched.  That kind of reaction is very difficult to bring about.

Well they also thought there was no way for the reactor to blow, “impossible!”  

Not a stretch to think their math was off at the time and that is what they believed and said. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being biased is one thing.

Deliberately pushing a spun narrative and being forced to retract it because you get called out for being full of shit - IE his “articles” on Fukushima - is a whole other kettle of fish.

And that entire article pushes a narrative onto the show that he has just flat made up. He claims that the overwhelming death toll from Chernobyl has been exaggerated and that more people have died of “fear of Chernobyl” than from the aftermath.

Putting aside the specious “fear of Chernobyl” argument, let’s say he’s right. So what? He’s arguing against a position and using this show as it’s champion and he hadn’t even seen the show. And from what we’ve seen on the show, it’s not exaggerating the death toll at all.

He has a biased viewpoint and he’s using a popular television show as jumping off point to be contrarian to push his view all while claiming he’s arguing against a narrative the show isn’t even pushing.

TL:DR - the article starts from a place of bad faith and takes a swan dive into biased advocacy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is one of those shows that I really look forward to watching yet at the same time I almost dread it because it makes you feel so bad for the people sacrificing themselves and the horrible ramifications of something like this happening again...

  • Hook 'Em 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Mileslong said:

This is one of those shows that I really look forward to watching yet at the same time I almost dread it because it makes you feel so bad for the people sacrificing themselves and the horrible ramifications of something like this happening again...

Also makes me feel like a pussy cause I don't know if I would do the same

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also makes me feel like a pussy cause I don't know if I would do the same


The divers nutted up, but would have died had no one stepped up. Someone would have been forced to do it.

The miners didn’t have a choice, or would have had to kill a Party official and then hide.

Still, to do your job under those circumstances is impressive.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think from the standpoint of a parent, which a lot of these volunteers probably were, you're thinking, "'I've got to do whatever I can to save not only my kids, but their kids generations from a real catastrophe here."  So it's not as much bravery as it is, just preserving a way of life for your family.

I don't consider myself that brave of a person, but when it comes to my kids, I'm jumping in front of a bullet without hesitation.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, mulletpelini said:

I think from the standpoint of a parent, which a lot of these volunteers probably were, you're thinking, "'I've got to do whatever I can to save not only my kids, but their kids generations from a real catastrophe here."  So it's not as much bravery as it is, just preserving a way of life for your family.

I don't consider myself that brave of a person, but when it comes to my kids, I'm jumping in front of a bullet without hesitation.

 

Soviet mindset had something to do with it, too. 

Edited by Deej
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Damn the costume people did a good job.  The people on the show look exactly like that video.  And those poor bastards who had to clean up the graphite.  The video says that 40 minutes was enough to kill them.  The firetrucks absorbed so much radiation that it's still not safe to get near them.

Edited by kevwun
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 5/12/2019 at 7:17 PM, TwiceHorn said:

Sort of a layman' explanation of the test.  Nuclear reactors boil water with their heat, which makes steam.  The steam is piped to turbines or turbogenerators to make electricity.

The electricity from the generators was also used to power cooling pumps to circulate cooling water to keep what happened from happening.

As a backup, they had diesel generators to make electricity to power the cooling punps.  But, it took so long to get the diesel generators going that there was danger of the reactor overheating.  Oddly, because of the reactor design, the overheating danger was highest at lower power output.

So they had this idea that maybe the turbines spinning down (they don't just stop) would provide adequate electrical power to run the coolling pumps until the diesel backups could be brought on line.  They were going to test this theory by cutting steam to the turbines, letting them spin down, and see if the residual power was sufficient to power the cooling pumps for that period before the diesel backups could be brought online.

So, among a comedy of errors, they started the test with the reactor at low power and when the cooling ability dropped off, it began to overheat quickly, as the RBMK design is wont to do.  And this type of overheating happens so fast that it generates a lot of superheated (T>>212F) steam, which is dangerous, "explosive" stuff.  It was the expanding superheated steam that blew up the reactor core, and, because there was no containment, big fucking mess.

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A bit of a Chernobyl geek but not enough to know it all. Read a few books mostly fiction. Not an amateur historian by any stretch. My current critique is I wish it was subtitled. It has the art film style with the dark drab color hues but it loses me on the English spoken. I am curious how accurate the misinformation and denial is. I know it’s historical fiction as some characters are an amalgamation, so it’s hard to know what’s fact and what’s artistic license.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, troph said:

A bit of a Chernobyl geek but not enough to know it all. Read a few books mostly fiction. Not an amateur historian by any stretch. My current critique is I wish it was subtitled. It has the art film style with the dark drab color hues but it loses me on the English spoken. I am curious how accurate the misinformation and denial is. I know it’s historical fiction as some characters are an amalgamation, so it’s hard to know what’s fact and what’s artistic license.

Some time ago, provoked by watching some British/Irish shows, I had to turn on closed-captioning to understand.  Now its a way of life for me. I have to turn it off for sports, and that's it.  Wife scoffed at me at first, now she's down with the sickness too.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also good for similar reasons is BBCs “Hiroshima” from 2005 which does a pretty good job of looking at the bomb from a lot of different perspectives without really telling you how you should feel about it.  Also streamable on Netflix.  Trailer below.

https://m.imdb.com/videoplayer/vi3760522009

Edited by Goredho
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, troph said:

A bit of a Chernobyl geek but not enough to know it all. Read a few books mostly fiction. Not an amateur historian by any stretch. My current critique is I wish it was subtitled. It has the art film style with the dark drab color hues but it loses me on the English spoken. I am curious how accurate the misinformation and denial is. I know it’s historical fiction as some characters are an amalgamation, so it’s hard to know what’s fact and what’s artistic license.

Read this thread. Increases my appreciation for the show. Also, as other posts have mentioned, I recommend listening to the podcast that follows the episodes. 

  • Like 8
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Read this thread. Increases my appreciation for the show. Also, as other posts have mentioned, I recommend listening to the podcast that follows the episodes. 

Wow. That’s awesome! I’ll check out the podcast. In a perfect world I’d want Russian born actors speaking Russian but based on her critique or lack of one really I’d say pass given. I do think the cinematography might be in more drab colors than actual life, but I could be wrong.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, troph said:

I do think the cinematography might be in more drab colors than actual life, but I could be wrong.

The Soviet Union wasn't known for their flair. It looks like what I'd expect to see in communist government buildings. The Kremlin is a magnificent palace. Hospital No. 6, not so much.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That thread and the related reviews are excellent. He even got a response from one of her producers of the show on some of the very few errors that he noted through the first 3 episodes.

 

Amazingly two of the suicide squad guys are still alive today (the third lived to 2005)!

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some time ago, provoked by watching some British/Irish shows, I had to turn on closed-captioning to understand.  Now its a way of life for me. I have to turn it off for sports, and that's it.  Wife scoffed at me at first, now she's down with the sickness too.


My family has had CC on for years (I actually thought most people did this). I will say it takes away from the story because you get to the point you are just staring at the bottom of the screen. Love it for most things - but for certain movies we definitely turn it off.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.



×
×
  • Create New...