Ben Fogle's Extreme Dreams
Paul Saunders
Last week's programmes were all about selecting people for various
expeditions. This week is the Himalayas expedition, which started last
night. It's on at 6:30pm-7pm every weekday night on BBC2, and will probably
continue with the different expeditions throughout the coming weeks.
If anyone missed last night's programme, what happened is that initially
they were delayed and made a late start. One of the team suffers from an
illness that she hasn't told anyone about which is causing her to walk very
slowly and is slowing everyone else down. They ended up walking in the dark
and encountered a landslide due to bad weather. One of them had a very dodgy
moment and slid some way down the slope. They ended up not reaching the
destination where their tents had been set up (conditions too dangerous to
continue at night) and managed to find accommodation in a village instead.
So the scene is set for day two, where they won't have a full night's sleep
and will have to make a very early start to try to catch up with their
schedule.
Those are the facts, these are my opinions...
To begin with, while I found the selection process last week a bit tedious,
the real thing is a lot more interesting. And I'm pleased to say that so far
there are none of the usual tantrums and reality TV nonsense that we've come
to expect (although that may change as the going gets tougher). They seem
like reasonable people and are getting on with the task in hand.
Two criticisms though.
Firstly, why did they select someone with an illness who was likely to have
problems doing this challenge? Apparently she thought the first 10 minutes
would be hard but then she'd get used to it, which of course she didn't.
From the snippets at the end of last night's programme it seems that the
rest of the team do find out about her illness and that her presence could
prevent them from reaching their goal. This does seem like the kind of
reality TV mentality designed to cause problems.
Secondly, the delay at the beginning of the expedition. Sure, it was caused
by the usual issues of planes, traffic delays etc, but can't they anticipate
these kinds of things? Surely this is not the first time anyone's ever
visited Nepal? One might argue that this is bad planning on the programmers'
part. Sure it makes it more exciting because it forces the team to race
against time, but given that the team is made up of inexperienced, unfit
people who've never done this sort of thing before, isn't that just adding
unnecessary extra pressure to an already difficult challenge?
I couldn't help noticing that the route they showed indicated that they
walked uphill into the mountains before descending to the river to do some
"unavoidable" rafting, because there was no path along the river. Yet the
river flowed in the opposite direction to that which they'd been walking! It
seems they didn't actually need to do that, it was just added to give them
the rafting experience. Given that they'd made a late start, surely they
could have given that bit a miss! Or at least started the rafting experience
halfway down the river instead? Or maybe I was reading the map incorrectly,
it wasn't that clear.
But in spite of these issues, it's looking quite good so far.
Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/pg/nedd-fechan-falls/nedd-fechan-falls.html
PeterC
> Just a quick update in case anyone missed the first thread about this.
>
> Two criticisms though.
>
> Firstly, why did they select someone with an illness who was likely to have
> problems doing this challenge?
It seemed that she hadn't been taking her medicines.
There was possibly an element of deliberate 'drama' in the choice - pick
some one who will fail, but equally good if she does make it.
As it would seem, another member of the group will be taken out. How fast
did they get there - altitude sickness at 2-3000m?
>
> Secondly, the delay at the beginning of the expedition. Sure, it was caused
> by the usual issues of planes, traffic delays etc, but can't they anticipate
> these kinds of things? Surely this is not the first time anyone's ever
> visited Nepal? One might argue that this is bad planning on the programmers'
> part. Sure it makes it more exciting because it forces the team to race
> against time, but given that the team is made up of inexperienced, unfit
> people who've never done this sort of thing before, isn't that just adding
> unnecessary extra pressure to an already difficult challenge?
>
I assume that the filming is done 'as is' - can't do a Bradbury on this as
there isn't time.
The crew must be fit, with having to get ahead, film, carry the equipment.
> I couldn't help noticing that the route they showed indicated that they
> walked uphill into the mountains before descending to the river to do some
> "unavoidable" rafting, because there was no path along the river. Yet the
> river flowed in the opposite direction to that which they'd been walking! It
> seems they didn't actually need to do that, it was just added to give them
> the rafting experience. Given that they'd made a late start, surely they
> could have given that bit a miss! Or at least started the rafting experience
> halfway down the river instead? Or maybe I was reading the map incorrectly,
> it wasn't that clear.
>
I found the diagrams of the route a bit confusing. Also, that must have
been an 'easy' bit of the river - novices on a G4?
> But in spite of these issues, it's looking quite good so far.
>
Yes, a sort of 'impending disaster movie'.
--
Peter.
You don't understand Newton's Third Law of Motion?
It's not rocket science, you know.