Release calendarTop 250 moviesMost popular moviesBrowse movies by genreTop box officeShowtimes & ticketsMovie newsIndia movie spotlight
    What's on TV & streamingTop 250 TV showsMost popular TV showsBrowse TV shows by genreTV news
    What to watchLatest trailersIMDb OriginalsIMDb PicksIMDb SpotlightFamily entertainment guideIMDb Podcasts
    OscarsEmmysToronto Int'l Film FestivalHispanic Heritage MonthIMDb Stars to WatchSTARmeter AwardsAwards CentralFestival CentralAll events
    Born todayMost popular celebsCelebrity news
    Help centerContributor zonePolls
For industry professionals
  • Language
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Watchlist
Sign in
  • Fully supported
  • English (United States)
    Partially supported
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
Use app
Episode guide
  • Cast & crew
  • User reviews
  • Trivia
  • FAQ
IMDbPro

White Rabbit Project

  • TV Series
  • 2016
  • TV-PG
  • 48m
IMDb RATING
6.9/10
1.8K
YOUR RATING
Grant Imahara, Tory Belleci, and Kari Byron in White Rabbit Project (2016)
White Rabbit Project
Play trailer1:33
1 Video
13 Photos
Reality TV

Scientists investigate unusual events from pop culture, science and history.Scientists investigate unusual events from pop culture, science and history.Scientists investigate unusual events from pop culture, science and history.

  • Stars
    • Tory Belleci
    • Kari Byron
    • Grant Imahara
  • See production info at IMDbPro
  • IMDb RATING
    6.9/10
    1.8K
    YOUR RATING
    • Stars
      • Tory Belleci
      • Kari Byron
      • Grant Imahara
    • 25User reviews
    • 2Critic reviews
  • See production info at IMDbPro
  • Episodes10

    Browse episodes
    TopTop-rated1 season2016

    Videos1

    White Rabbit Project
    Trailer 1:33
    White Rabbit Project

    Photos13

    View Poster
    View Poster
    View Poster
    View Poster
    + 9
    View Poster

    Top cast83

    Edit
    Tory Belleci
    Tory Belleci
    • Self - Host
    • 2016
    Kari Byron
    Kari Byron
    • Self - Host
    • 2016
    Grant Imahara
    Grant Imahara
    • Self - Host
    • 2016
    Benjamin Cavanagh
    • Liam…
    • 2016
    David Mayman
    • Self - CEO: Jetpack Aviation
    • 2016
    Lucy Beresford
    • Self - Psychologist
    • 2016
    Leslie Kendall
    • Self - Curator: Petersen Automotive Museum
    • 2016
    Peter Spindler
    • Self - Commander: Scotland Yard (ret'd)
    • 2016
    Brian J. Ford
    • Self - Biologist & Author
    • 2016
    Greg Gage
    Greg Gage
    • Self - Neuroscientist
    • 2016
    Bob Romaneschi
    • Self - Hot Air Balloon Engineer
    • 2016
    Kris Dorr
    • Self - Vinyl Record Specialist
    • 2016
    Tim George
    • Self - Auto Historian
    • 2016
    Reverend Gadget
    • Self - Electric Custom Car Builder
    • 2016
    Aron Koscho
    • Self - CEO: Applied Tesla Technology
    • 2016
    Günter Wetzel
    • Self
    • 2016
    Aaron Blaisdell
    • Self - Animal Psychologist
    • 2016
    Tom Kaye
    • Self - Citizen Sleuths Team Leader
    • 2016
    • All cast & crew
    • Production, box office & more at IMDbPro

    User reviews25

    6.91.8K
    1
    2
    3
    4
    5
    6
    7
    8
    9
    10

    Featured reviews

    7justin-74-890942

    I'm probably in the minority, but I'd like more SCIENCE and less SILLY.

    I'm a huge fan of these guys and have been since they first appeared in Mythbusters. I enjoyed the last season of that show, but felt like losing these three was a big loss.

    Therefore I'm super happy Netflix threw some bucks at them and got them their own gig, and it's a great time revisiting a gang who feel like old friends now - already this show gets a big pass from me.

    My issue here really is with the presentation. Each subject they cover is LADEN with silly over-the-top sketch performances by the gang that easily eat up 60-70% of the screen time, with only 30% left over for the actual meat of the science. I realize that I'm in the minority of the public who find the tech stuff fascinating and the fluff, well, fluffy, but I could really do with a lot less "estrogen crazed Hitler dancing through the tulips" (in an especially egregious example of this from the "world war 2 crazy weapons" episode) and more fun experiments-gone-wrong. If they had cut out, for example, all of the "Farting Germans at a Cafe" and "Hitler gets boobs" feature-ettes from that episode they could have packed in at least a few more crazy weapon schemes which I would have found WAY more interesting.

    To summarize, I watch a TON of hilarious sketch comedy shows already, when I want science I want to turn to these guys. Dial back the "acting" just a bit and you've got a winner.
    4nathanlross

    Utter Disappointment

    This show was setup to look great, it had all the makings of a great show. a great cast, great premise and its on Netflix, a great media outlet!

    Somehow it came out sub par. And i was very disappointed by this. The show is clearly not myth-busters 2.0 something most fans were in many ways expecting. Yes you will always get your haters when the sequel isn't as good as the original, but lets face it nothing is. This show simply needed better marketing to make it clear it is NOT in anyway like myth-busters. The science of the show is limited and far between, where as the show focuses on stories (not myths!) from history about a certain subject each episode. The weak glue holding together the reason for the show is to analyze 6 (random number??) events in history that involved the shows theme that episode. This sounded great in the trailers!

    What you actually get however is stories. Long drawn out, poorly told stories often acted out in scene that's cheesy, dull and often filled with casual racism.

    Don't get me wrong, some of the stories are quite interesting, but how they are told to you via the build team is just upsetting and corny.

    For people we know are naturally funny, intelligent and interesting at telling the "myths", they somehow manage to make every serious real life event seem like a sitcom, constantly waiting for a punchline that never arrives. It hurt my eyes and ears to see the heist in which some old British men bust into a vault. What passes for 'humour' in the states clearly likely just enrages any real British folk with their appalling clichés.

    What happened guys? I don't want to rag on you and the producers, but this show really needs a spit shine to pull out those good moments and great ideas, and really bring this up to par for a 2016 production.

    We often barely see the build team, you know, building. They are often confined to god awful acting and cartoon like realities to tell a tale. Some of the really interesting stories have clearly been well researched and really grasp you and pull you "down the rabbit hole" you want to know more, you want to see the theory tested.. but then it ends, like sex without an orgasm. Abruptly cutting to a "hey that was a story you liked now lets rate it" pointless arbitrary system in which they give numbers to randomly picked features of the event etc.

    WHY? Why 6? Why rate out of 10? Why place in some weakly held together ranking system, which isn't a surprise if you can do basic maths throughout the show, because that makes it science?

    I'm open to the idea of trying something new, and I don't want to sound negative to the whole show, it's just hard not to when what limited hype for a show crushes your hopes when the final product arrives. Please just clean and buff the wheel, don't try reshape it.

    I'll say now in a spoiler free way, the episode on con artists.. just skip it. It's dull, tedious and has 0 science in the entire episode, it's just storytelling done bad. All the facts in this episode can be found in a 10 second Google search. Sadly reading Wikipedia will likely be more entertaining.

    Well I guess if this show is set for a season 2 it really needs to pick up it's game. Look how well grand tour did, just because its got the big 3 doing what we all know and love them doing. We liked myth-busters because science is fascinating, terrifying, fun, and also something we can see & prove in real life. We loved the build team for their natural reactions to things (censored though they often were), their quirky humor, and their mistakes which made them human and relate-able. We'd love to see more of them, and less of Hollywood please.

    Will I return down the rabbit hole like Alice? Only after I've fallen asleep...

    • Gunji
    9coaster1921

    Not Mythbusters, but it's still good!

    First off this isn't Mythbusters. The format is very different, but this isn't a bad thing.

    Each episode centers around a theme, where the team compares and ranks 6 loosely related ideas (e.g. speed, heists, scams, etc.) Usually, for each idea there is storytelling interspersed with builds of contraptions used in the story. It's surprisingly entertaining, however, and the team is far more entertaining than they ever were on Mythbusters, where Adam and Jamie usually worked on the main myth of the episode and the stories of the myths weren't at the forefront.

    Sometimes the stories are a little rushed in order to fit all 6 ideas in, and I wish they would spend more time on the builds, however, but that doesn't ruin it for me. In Mythbusters, I didn't particularly enjoy the sections the team did, but here they're so much more interesting to listen to. This show is nice and really surprised me, as I expected it to be very different than it is. Definitely worth a watch!
    7sullybolly

    Make it more about the science and/or shorten the run time.

    To start off, there's great potential in this series, I hope it keeps going and growing , and that the show runners listen in on what people want to see improved. Of course, it's also great to see the gang back together in this new "Mythbusters 2.0", although it's less myths, and more comparison of the best stories that fit the theme of the episode.

    The story telling and comparison concept is also one of the major problems that I have with the show. Instead of the way it is now where the majority of the program is story telling and skits, and the minority is science and experimentation, I would like to see this be the other way around. It's the talents and creativity of the trio that I'm most interested in seeing be put to good use like when Grant built his octocopter, even if it means cutting it down to 1 story per person, and/or shortening episode length.

    Maybe it's because of the concept of the show, but every episode seems to drag on for too long. If the show were to remain the same, I think it would greatly benefit from a 30-35 minute run time per episode, instead of the current 45 minute one. Remember, it's about quality, not quantity.

    Again, I do hope that Netflix reads what I and others have said, and implements these suggestions in one way or another, because they could take the show from being just alright, to being great.

    A benefit of the doubt, 7/10.
    7TedStixonAKAMaximumMadness

    "White Rabbit Project"- An uneven but entertaining spiritual successor to the incredibly popular "Mythbusters." Good fun, but rough around the edges at times.

    One of the most beloved and wickedly entertaining pieces of pop- culture in recent memory, "Mythbusters" was a small phenomena. Mixing real science with laugh-out-loud humor and an excellent cast of real-life characters, the series thrilled audiences for well over ten years and even after cancellation, it remains a fan-favorite for many a television viewer. So it should come as no surprise that a sort-of spiritual successor or follow-up would happen. And we get that in "White Rabbit Project", an entertaining but sometimes uneven new Netflix series starring the "Mythbusters" build-team of Kari Byron, Tory Belleci and Grant Imahara. While it has a small slew of issues holding it back from sheer perfection, I do think that the show is off to a promising start, has a lot of room to grow, and should it be renewed for a second season, it has the potential to get better and better.

    Each episode follows our hosts as they explore and discuss a topic, whether it be comic-book superpowers, long-fabled future-tech or even just real-life scam artists. We explore different aspects and examples of each topic and how they could be recreated in the real world or be accomplished. Along the way, we are treated to friendly banter, the occasional skit and plenty of likable chemistry with our three leads.

    I'll definitely admit that perhaps the biggest part of the appeal here is the fact that we've finally rejoined the build-team after their absence in the final episodes of "Mythbusters", and the leftover love for that series that fans have. And it's part of what makes the series all the more palatable even when it falters at time. Byron, Bellaci and Imahara are endlessly likable and entertaining and have an absolutely wonderful sense of companionship on screen. The topics discussed are very fascinating and it's a lot of fun seeing them doing oddball things like turning roaches into technical cyborgs or discussing the topic of heists.

    But that being said, I can't help but feel that the series is way too unfocused and uneven at times. To the point that some episodes just don't work. The show has a very frenetic pace and it never really stops to let you appreciate the science of what's happening. Therefore it can be hard to really get a handle or invest yourself. I also think there's a bit too much "qwirkiness" and "style" going on for the show's own good. Yes, it's fun seeing an occasional skit or seeing Grant dress up in a supervillain's outfit. But we don't need a five-minute scene to introduce an episode or a prolonged scripted scene of acting to introduce a segment. It's just got too much filler. I'd rather see more deliberate and streamlined episodes with a greater focus on and more breathing room for the actual experimentation.

    But that being said... it's still a very decent show. Even if abbreviated, the science is fascinating. The topics are often very fun and quite varied. Our hosts are just a blast and a half and are consistently enjoyable to watch. And there's a lot of untapped potential beneath the surface that keeps you invested and hoping for more. So hopefully it'll do well enough to get more episodes ordered. I know I'd love to see more, and I think newer installments will get progressively better. It might not quite live up to the sheer perfection that was "Mythbusters"... but it's a worthy unofficial follow-up.

    "White Rabbit Project" is a solid 7 out of 10 for me.

    Best Emmys Moments

    Best Emmys Moments
    Discover nominees and winners, red carpet looks, and more from the Emmys!

    More like this

    America's Next Top Model
    5.7
    America's Next Top Model
    MythBusters
    8.3
    MythBusters
    Julieta
    7.1
    Julieta
    Motor MythBusters
    6.4
    Motor MythBusters
    Assassin's Creed
    5.6
    Assassin's Creed
    Mythbusters Jr.
    7.1
    Mythbusters Jr.
    Creature Features
    8.4
    Creature Features
    The Man in the High Castle
    7.9
    The Man in the High Castle
    MythBusters: The Search
    4.1
    MythBusters: The Search
    Savage Builds
    8.0
    Savage Builds
    MythBusters: There's Your Problem
    MythBusters: There's Your Problem
    Crash Test World
    7.8
    Crash Test World

    Related interests

    Kim Kardashian in The Kardashians (2022)
    Reality TV

    Storyline

    Edit

    Did you know

    Edit
    • Trivia
      The three hosts started this project after their release from mythbusters over a salary dispute.
    • Connections
      Referenced in AniMat's Crazy Cartoon Cast: Howard & Grant (2020)
    • Soundtracks
      Theme Composition
      by Ned Beckley

      Published by Gaga Music Pty Ltd

    Top picks

    Sign in to rate and Watchlist for personalized recommendations
    Sign in

    FAQ15

    • How many seasons does White Rabbit Project have?Powered by Alexa

    Details

    Edit
    • Release date
      • December 9, 2016 (United States)
    • Country of origin
      • United States
    • Official sites
      • Official site
      • Official Twitter
    • Language
      • English
    • Also known as
      • Проект Белый кролик
    • Production company
      • Beyond Productions
    • See more company credits at IMDbPro

    Tech specs

    Edit
    • Runtime
      • 48m
    • Color
      • Color

    Contribute to this page

    Suggest an edit or add missing content
    • Learn more about contributing
    Edit pageAdd episode

    More to explore

    Recently viewed

    Please enable browser cookies to use this feature. Learn more.
    Get the IMDb App
    Sign in for more accessSign in for more access
    Follow IMDb on social
    Get the IMDb App
    For Android and iOS
    Get the IMDb App
    • Help
    • Site Index
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • License IMDb Data
    • Press Room
    • Advertising
    • Jobs
    • Conditions of Use
    • Privacy Policy
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, an Amazon company

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.