Disaster Autopsy

As I started to watch my rating for this show just kept dropping. Who's bright idea to add a fake 3d display. Oh those poor people, hey pretend you are rotating it, ok now pretend to look interested.

In many cases they showed something on the fake 3d table, but never the full shot for the viewer, so if you watch on a smaller screen you are missing any detail they are showing.

This gimmick sucks, since you already have the 3d models, it would have been better to have an actual screen where they can pinch, zoom and rotate in real time.

If there is a 2nd season of this, which I wouldn't mind, please junk the fake 3d thing. It looks goofy and it is extremely distracting. Whoever decided hey this is brilliant needs to be fired and never allowed to touch a production again.

The shots of the professionals (very knowledgeable people) examining computer generated images and/or pretending to control the recreation is extremely annoying. For one, there's far too many of these shots. Secondly, the people aren't really looking at anything so it's rather pointless to include shots of them pretending they are. Other then that it's a decent show. Only 5 stars though for this glaring and extremely ignorant inclusion that makes the show nearly unwatchable. Watch with your eyes closed or have it on the background while doing something else. Also, occasional explanations of items that are already well know (an airplane needs speed to generate lift) as if the viewers are stupid.

I like the disasters chosen. I think they are well explained and the step by step method works well. It doesn't present the human failures as obvious and that anyone would have seen them as problematic.

What I find almost comical is the interviewees interactions with the "magic table". The interviewees were obviously directed to pretend to be watching something occurring on the table while there was nothing there. They conjure up inquisitive interested looks that have no bearing on what is eventually CGI'd in. Having nothing to focus on, their eyes stare off into this confined space over the table. When something dramatic happens, like an explosion, they don't change their expressions they just seem mildly interested in some spot perhaps in the center of the protected image. During these times I study their looks and try to figure out how they could have done that part better. No answers yet.

I really like the show but it needs a sequel, "Reenactment Annoyances Autopsy".

Treats it viewers like we're dumb. Also, disingenuous. For example, with the Columbia disaster, it was known from the very start of the mission what had hit the wing, and they spend so much time playing dumb being like "is it this" making it seem like that's how the actual investigation went. They start the episode with a straight up lie that the mission had gone well, when in fact people on the ground were spending the entire mission trying to figure out how the wing strike would affect reentry.

Also the weird table thing. Just show us the animation, no need to see random people in the background of it, they're just distracting.

The show does a good job of analyzing various disasters, with a number of 'experts' offering their opinions of what might have caused the event to take place. However, the shows presents these experts as looking over some sort of (non existent) holographic table on which CGI images have later been superimposed, to make it look like like that is what the experts are seeing. The experts are also interviewed siting on stools which are clearly in front of some green screen on which a computer image is projected of a warehouse of some sort, perhaps to give it an air of industrialized importance. Often, multiple 'experts' are shown simultaneously peering intently at where the graphics are to be added later, when very likely there is only one of them filmed at a time and they are then added together later in editing. Alas, these shenanigans do take away from the show.