Genius of the Ancient World

Western audience need to ask for better informative documentaries or drama if you will. If the producers continue to harp on the cliched narrative of cast hierarchy and fancy the roamance of Indian proverty sadly it would be the audience which will be the loser.

Bettany falls for the same cliched beaten down path nothing much to offer in terms of content but a clever effort to hide that incompetence behind the colorful india.

The first episode is basically footage taken from a movie interspersed with a talking head visiting a few random historical sites and filler places

In the second episode the narrator tells us that we need to see Egypt from space in order to understand. You'd think we would see Egypt from space, right? Wrong. We see a talking head blabber on and then randomly jump to a conclusion. The story progression reminds me of Harold & Kumar Go to White Castle

This is hard to watch. It is Hollywood crap. Make a story overly complicated and unfocused and pass it off as grand. This series is nothing but filler

Bettany Hughes's three-part series profiles three very different thinkers - Buddha, Socrates, and Confucius - and assesses the major contribution they have made to different philosophical and religious traditions.

Content-wise, the programs are extremely good: Hughes interviews several experts in Buddhism, classical philosophy, and Confucianism; and visits several of the ancient sites associated with all three of them. Although the arguments are sometimes difficult to follow - especially in the Buddhist program - they are crisply advanced by a presenter who possesses an obvious enthusiasm for her subjects.

And yet there is a strange feeling of similarity about all three programs, despite the diversity of subject-matter. We witness Hughes tramping across various locations in her skirt and long boots - in China and India especially, she looks particularly incongruous when compared to the people surrounding her. This is not really a criticism per se, but it does suggest that all the arguments are filtered through her western consciousness. At the end of each program, she tries to assimilate all three thinkers' ideas into a universalizing paradigm; although very different in conception, they should appeal to "humanity." The effect is to make the programs appear like the visual equivalent of an Introduction to Civilizations course; if we understand what these belief-systems are, we can become more "human" in our world-view. The conflation between universalism and westernization is evident; and reasserted in visual terms through Hughes's ubiquitous presence on screen.

In truth, some of her arguments are a little tenuous. In the Buddha program, she claims that Buddhism could be embraced by merchants, which would seem to equate it with capitalism. Yet one of the central tenets of Buddhism is the need to renounce earthly values and search instead for a spiritual truth. This quality is what renders it to attractive to believers across cultures. M

GENIUS OF THE ANCIENT WORLD is acceptable as an introductory series, but has to be viewed through the ideological prism within which it has been conceived.

It was a successful production, they describe the people and beliefs in a very comprehensive manner and accompanied by experts. It is better to focus on the interior.

In trying to show buddhas journey,dint understand why they kept showing Indian poverty, found no connection of that with the story and that has not been done for Socrates or Confucius.

If wanting to show the country, show the good and bad, India is only shown in bad light.If wanting to show suffering, show for all countries.

Buddha and Confucius episode are low on information