Arthur C. Clarke's Mysterious Universe

Rating:
Summary: the amazon review is wrong....
Review: I saw these shows and they were intelligently written, hosted by a well known author who treated each subject seriously, and offered conclussions that were logically made based on the investigations of those interviewed. That's what I call good television, and would be right at home on PBS.

Rating:
Summary: This brilliant documentary deals in facts with interviews
Review: The reviewer that criticised this outstanding series by wanting "re-enactments" must not have watched it. This is not that type of show. This is a serious documentary series dealing in facts,not fiction and there is proof offered to show the facts and truth of so many mysteries.
There are interviews with experts detailing the facts and that is the great thing about this documentary series- they tell the truth that other more fanciful television shows don't.

For example,they prove that a famous film of a "flying saucer" crossing the mountains is in fact a Cessna aircraft by taking the highlights from each frame and putting them together.
This Cessna film is still portrayed in the TV show "In Search Of" as a flying saucer despite it being proven to be an aircraft.
Arthur C Clarke's Mysterious Universe also has interviews with people that show how they created crop circles and how this myth of crop circles has spread.

Arthur C Clarke keeps an open mind but,unlike other shows,his show deals in real information and not the tall stories of other shows like "In Search Of" and "Unsolved Mysteries".
Those shows needed product to keep going season after season. Arthur C Clarke's show,being a short term series,didn't need to and told the truth. It deserves praise for that and is well worth buying.

Rating:
Summary: Far more intelligent than the usual claptrap
Review: Typically, you can spot a pseudoscience show when the narrator begins by asking questions: "Did so-and-so see a ghost at ... ?" "Are extraterrestrials abducting humans ...?" "Is it possible for people to see the future ... ?" etc., etc. The questions are raised, addressed vaguely, and then the conclusions are left utterly up to the viewers' prejudices. In short, such programs tend to be safe little vehicles for the mongering of nonsense.

Well, this series of Clarke-introduced programs begins with questions, also, but with a different impact. The questions become hypotheses which then are tested. The questions are raised, challenged and - although never entirely dismissed - their details sometimes are debunked or discredited. That's in keeping with the scientific bent of Sir Arthur, whose work I've admired for 40 years, and whose views I generally share (although I still think the jury is out about life on Mars!).

As far as TV production goes, this is all meant to be tantalizing and entertaining. But it's all several steps higher on the IQ ladder than the pandering programs that purport to "investigate" the paranormal but truly sell superstition to the masses. My only displeasure with this disc is that it is too short (despite 156 minutes), and offers little documentation in the "special features" area. I want more - but, as these were issued in 1995 and Sir Arthur is not as active as before, we're unlikely to see any more beyond this intriguing series.