PUNTUACIÓN EN IMDb
8,1/10
6,3 mil
TU PUNTUACIÓN
La increíble historia del épico viaje de cuatro mil millones de años de la vida en la Tierra cobra vida en esta serie de Steven Spielberg y el equipo detrás de «Nuestro planeta».La increíble historia del épico viaje de cuatro mil millones de años de la vida en la Tierra cobra vida en esta serie de Steven Spielberg y el equipo detrás de «Nuestro planeta».La increíble historia del épico viaje de cuatro mil millones de años de la vida en la Tierra cobra vida en esta serie de Steven Spielberg y el equipo detrás de «Nuestro planeta».
- Reparto principal
- Nominado para 1 premio Primetime Emmy
- 2 premios y 14 nominaciones en total
Explorar episodios
Argumento
¿Sabías que...?
- CuriosidadesCGI effect sequences were done by Industrial Light & Magic or ILM, the same company that created the computer effects of the Jurassic Park and Jurassic World film series. According to paleontologist Bhart-Anjan Bhullar, a scientific consultant who worked with the ILM team, some of the animal models seen in the series could have been based on those seen in the Jurassic World films, albeit heavily updated to resemble real prehistoric animals rather than movie monsters. Bhullar suggested that ILM was aware that the Jurassic films had a mixed reputation among paleontology enthusiasts because the creatures seen in the films were not designed to be scientific (such as the oversized, scaly "raptors" that hark back to 1970s and 1980s depictions), so they tried to "get it right" with this series, and there was a lot of back and forth between the scientists and animators. Nevertheless, online paleo-communities have noted that some of the CGI animals presented in the series are still not up to 2020s scientific standards and feature odd mistakes like inaccurate skull shapes and body proportions. A few mistakes can be chalked up to science advancing while the series was being developed: the armored fish Dunkleosteus is shown with a long, slender body, though a 2023 study argued it would have been significantly shorter and more robust in life.
- PifiasIn one shot of the Arandaspis fish swimming near a reef, a scene supposedly set 475 million years ago when fish were just beginning to evolve, a present-day fish can be seen among the coral in the background.
Reseña destacada
While comparison to both "Walking with Dinosaurs" and "Prehistoric Planet" is unavoidable it isn't the most fair way to judge a show. Both of the aforementioned shows are the cream of the crop of prehistoric documentary series and at least one of them also holds a fair bit of nostalgia for a lot of people (me included). It is unavoidable that in at least some ways any prehistoric documentary series would fall short if held to such high expectations. Being worse than those shows doesn't automatically make a show bad.
With that out of the way, let's actually try to review this series in an as objective way as possible.
First off, visuals and sound design. They're good, great even. The CGI could have been better but is still more than adequate. The animation is a bit floaty on occasion and if you really pay attention to it it will slightly break the immersion. I find the soundtrack to be great, it doesn't bother me or pull me away from the action and on at least a couple occasions I was actively appreceating it. Animal and surrounding sounds are fine, nothing stood out to me as bad, which is really all it needs to do. I also really like Morgan Freeman as a narrator.
The storytelling choices leave me a bit puzzled though. First of all, there is the addition of modern filmed documentary bits, which to me feel really unnecessary. They could have just made 30 minute episodes instead of padding the runtime in this very strange way. Because shooting nature documentaries isn't cheap or easy. Another problem with these are that they often aren't new for frequent documentary viewers and break your immersion.
The documentary is very informative and explains a lot of interesting concepts extremely well. The way it explained the great dying (Permian extinction) was amazing for example. There are some things that could have been improved though. The time period we find ourselves in often isn't made clear, especially in the first few episodes this can be annoying. They also tend to jump from here to there a bit too much, instead of just going chronologically.
It covers a lot of different species and stories per episode, which is great. I do wish that they would have been a bit more original in their choice of creatures instead of going for the more well know ones. There are a few mistakes (conscerning science and realism) but nothing terrible in my opinion.
I've focussed a lot on the "bad". But let me make clear that this series really isn't a bad one, not even in the slightest. It does fall short when compared to the giants that "Walking with Dinosaurs" and "Prehistoric Planet" are, but has a lot of merit in its own way and definitely deserves to exist and be watched.
With that out of the way, let's actually try to review this series in an as objective way as possible.
First off, visuals and sound design. They're good, great even. The CGI could have been better but is still more than adequate. The animation is a bit floaty on occasion and if you really pay attention to it it will slightly break the immersion. I find the soundtrack to be great, it doesn't bother me or pull me away from the action and on at least a couple occasions I was actively appreceating it. Animal and surrounding sounds are fine, nothing stood out to me as bad, which is really all it needs to do. I also really like Morgan Freeman as a narrator.
The storytelling choices leave me a bit puzzled though. First of all, there is the addition of modern filmed documentary bits, which to me feel really unnecessary. They could have just made 30 minute episodes instead of padding the runtime in this very strange way. Because shooting nature documentaries isn't cheap or easy. Another problem with these are that they often aren't new for frequent documentary viewers and break your immersion.
The documentary is very informative and explains a lot of interesting concepts extremely well. The way it explained the great dying (Permian extinction) was amazing for example. There are some things that could have been improved though. The time period we find ourselves in often isn't made clear, especially in the first few episodes this can be annoying. They also tend to jump from here to there a bit too much, instead of just going chronologically.
It covers a lot of different species and stories per episode, which is great. I do wish that they would have been a bit more original in their choice of creatures instead of going for the more well know ones. There are a few mistakes (conscerning science and realism) but nothing terrible in my opinion.
I've focussed a lot on the "bad". But let me make clear that this series really isn't a bad one, not even in the slightest. It does fall short when compared to the giants that "Walking with Dinosaurs" and "Prehistoric Planet" are, but has a lot of merit in its own way and definitely deserves to exist and be watched.
- tibovl
- 26 oct 2023
- Enlace permanente
Selecciones populares
Inicia sesión para calificar y añadir a tu lista para recibir recomendaciones personalizadas
- How many seasons does Life on Our Planet have?Con tecnología de Alexa
Detalles
- Duración1 hora
- Color
- Mezcla de sonido
- Relación de aspecto
- 16:9 HD
Contribuir a esta página
Sugerir un cambio o añadir el contenido que falta
Principal laguna de datos
What was the official certification given to La vida en nuestro planeta (2023) in Canada?
Responde