Chernobyl: HBO Miniseries

[Chance]

Do you have any recommendations for books or videos which do have more technical information which is correct regarding this disaster?

I finished this not too long ago and it was an interesting read. I don't have a clue if it was accurate or not, but the author has a PhD in nuclear engineering from Georgia Tech, so... hopefully that's a good sign. Go Yellow Jackets.

[Baldanders]

OK, I was interested in this, until I started reading some of the critical pieces about it....does it actually have a scene where a woman's newborn child dies from radiation a few hours after being born, therefore sparing the mother radation poisoning because the child "absorbed" the radation? Which was emanating from her still-alive husband? That makes the "Glock 7" seem like great research.

Also, "trial scenes" where the corruption and stupidity of what happened is exposed in dramatic testimony, despite the fact the trial in the aftermath featured no such thing, and the Soviets religiously avoided the creation of any public spaces were the failures of the state could be exposed throughout their entire history?

I'm sorry to piss on anyone's parade, but it sounds like pseudoscientific anti-nuclear scaremongering to me. I will still check at least the first ep, someday, but it's moved lower on my list.

[TAZ]

OK, I was interested in this, until I started reading some of the critical pieces about it....does it actually have a scene where a woman's newborn child dies from radiation a few hours after being born, therefore sparing the mother radation poisoning because the child "absorbed" the radation? Which was emanating from her still-alive husband? That makes the "Glock 7" seem like great research.

Also, "trial scenes" where the corruption and stupidity of what happened is exposed in dramatic testimony, despite the fact the trial in the aftermath featured no such thing, and the Soviets religiously avoided the creation of any public spaces were the failures of the state could be exposed throughout their entire history?

I'm sorry to piss on anyone's parade, but it sounds like pseudoscientific anti-nuclear scaremongering to me. I will still check at least the first ep, someday, but it's moved lower on my list.

You should actually watch it before passing judgements.

It’s TV as in pretend, make believe, years of activity condensed into 5 hours so lots of artistic license. It’s not advertised as a technically accurate series, but I thought it did a good job.

I didn’t take it as anti nuke scare mongering, but I’m pretty dense.

I saw it more as a commentary against idiotic political correctness that was so toxically prevalent under communism and is now becoming toxically prevalent across the globe.

[Baldanders]

You should actually watch it before passing judgements.

It’s TV as in pretend, make believe, years of activity condensed into 5 hours so lots of artistic license. It’s not advertised as a technically accurate series, but I thought it did a good job.

I didn’t take it as anti nuke scare mongering, but I’m pretty dense.

I saw it more as a commentary against idiotic political correctness that was so toxically prevalent under communism and is now becoming toxically prevalent across the globe.

I will certainly wait until viewing before issuing a real judgment, but any show that includes the scene I described above is going to have problems keeping me immersed in the story. I am one of those rare English majors/teachers who think technical accuracy is quite important, at least to the level of portraying basic science in a relatively realistic manner when it is an important part of what drives a tale. (I blame Heinlein, not that he was 100% accurate, particularly when it came to Einstein's theories) IME, a consistent lack of technical accuracy usually is part of a generally lazy approach to storytelling that tends to fall back on cliches.

I don't chuck all works aside for problems in this area. The sections of "Fight Club" which consist of the narrator expounding about the merits of various firearms come across like a virgin talking about sex, for instance, but it's still a great book. But those sections aren't really vital to that narrative. The errors here seem like they are central to how the story is developed.

But I'm picky enough that the lack of using sights to aim made me stop watching "The Walking Dead."

[Shoresy]

I saw a much heavier message regarding the Soviet mentality of perception trumping reality (until reality rears its head and FORCES you to address it) than anything regarding post-Chernobyl nuclear energy.

JM2C; I may be suffering from the same "dense" condition as @TAZ

[ccmdfd]

I didn't pick up on any anti-nuclear power messages from the show.

In fact during the trial scene, the main protagonist calls it "beautiful" when a reactor is working in its normal state.

He also points out that this type of accident is highly unlikely, if not outright impossible, in reactors built in Western countries. Russia is the only country in the world which builds a graphite moderated, water cooled reactor with a positive void coefficient and no containment building.......

Thus the main things I felt the show was trying to convey to the audience was the idiocy of the Russian way of doing things; from cheap construction to poor management and poor handling of the disaster, as well as the plight of all of those ordinary people dealing with one of the most extraordinary events to ever happen. "A situation never experienced before on this planet" (or something similar) is what the main protagonist called it.

The producers, as well as the actors have said in many interviews that their goal was not an absolute historically accurate depiction of the event.

cc

[critter]

I will certainly wait until viewing before issuing a real judgment, but any show that includes the scene I described above is going to have problems keeping me immersed in the story. I am one of those rare English majors/teachers who think technical accuracy is quite important, at least to the level of portraying basic science in a relatively realistic manner when it is an important part of what drives a tale. (I blame Heinlein, not that he was 100% accurate, particularly when it came to Einstein's theories) IME, a consistent lack of technical accuracy usually is part of a generally lazy approach to storytelling that tends to fall back on cliches.

I don't chuck all works aside for problems in this area. The sections of "Fight Club" which consist of the narrator expounding about the merits of various firearms come across like a virgin talking about sex, for instance, but it's still a great book. But those sections aren't really vital to that narrative. The errors here seem like they are central to how the story is developed.

But I'm picky enough that the lack of using sights to aim made me stop watching "The Walking Dead."

In a nutshell...

Those who are already afraid of or are against nuclear energy probably will get what they wish for, though it's in no way preachy. I mean that'll be their takeaway regardless though it's a much larger story. Others will likely see a good presentation of the themes of human fallibility, corruption, incompetence, cover up, fear as well as extreme bravery and utter selflessness..

[Chance]

From BBC News:

Russian state TV is working on its own version of Chernobyl, a series based on the worst nuclear accident in history.

The NTV drama will deviate from the acclaimed HBO series - and from historical reality - by claiming that the CIA was involved in the disaster.

Director Aleksey Muradov claims it will show "what really happened back then".

HBO's miniseries, which concluded on Monday, received the highest ever score for a TV show on IMdB, as well as a 9.1 rating on Russian equivalent Kinopoisk.

But in an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda, Russia's most widely-read tabloid, Mr Muradov said his version of the show "proposes an alternative view on the tragedy in Pripyat".

"There is a theory that Americans infiltrated the Chernobyl nuclear power plant," he told the paper. "Many historians do not rule out the possibility that on the day of the explosion, an agent of the enemy's intelligence services was working at the station."

The Hollywood Reporter reports that the Russian culture ministry has contributed 30 million rubles ($463,000; £363,000) to the show.

[ccmdfd]

So it's the Russian version of a 911 truther film?

[blues]

From BBC News:

You mean it wasn't the Israelis?

(Soviet) Russia will never change. If it wasn't for 19th century writers and composers, vodka and (some) women, there'd be no use for them at all.