I thought the first episode was an amazing exercise in tension and film-making, but all the ones after that were mostly drawn out and boring IMO. I'm not really a fan of serialized shows though to be fair, I'm more into movies.

I do....I do not follow the anti-nuclear lobbists/scaremongers without fact checking as some do.

=======================
Look into Thorium Salt reactors...they have their own problems(see below), but the waste they produce is a small amount of lower level waste that is easy to store and takes many less years to become "safe". They also have failsafe "plugs" built in that drain the reactorif it gets too hot and prevents any meltdowns from occurring, and they require lesser shielding/smaller space "footprints" when built.

Also newer "mainstream" designs have more safeguards in place as well, and make less waste(some can even recycle said waste again and again to reuse most of it) overall.

======================
As for waste in general, it could be stored EASILY(we have newer tech to do so besides just metal drum storage) but NIMBYs BLOCK all future proposed sites and let it SIT in power plant reactor rod pools because "Not in my backyard"...even when they proposed a site in the Yucca Mountains FAR from people.
======================
And do you know WHY reactors fail so much(besides human error like with the OP post's subject matter)? Because most reactors are OLD FLAWED DESIGNS and we cannot build new ones which are MUCH SAFER because of NIMBYs and environmentalists blocking such.....leading to the very problems/dangers they seem to not want to happen.
===========================================
To natural gas/water/solar, all have problems of their own:

Gas will run out someday, takes more to produce the same amount of power as modern nuclear plant designs, etc.

Water: Can only be produced in certain areas, and that power usually must be used locally due to difficulty in storing excess power in the grid/system. Also dams mess with the local enviroment.

Solar: Some plant types kill birds, the plants produce less power than nuclear, it's also hard(like with hydro) to store the energy generated, energy can only(for now) be collected during the day, etc.





1. I don't think anyone should kill innocent people regardless of nation/reason.

2. Solar will only be good if(as you said) we can store the power for use elsewhere/at other times/etc.

Few things, if I may.

First -the profit gain is in definition of capitalism, which is just a reflection of shared human nature, thus can't be avoided by, say, switching to opposite model. In other words any authority type is affected by this. And because higher profit (planes) wins over lower profit (sticks), there can be either competition or submission. Or fairy tales, ofc;

Second, nuclear technology has been vastly improved, reasons not excluding profit losses from such events, so the lessons were more likely learned. Still everything new contains mistakes to be paid with blood (in worst case), price of progress;

Third, Europe greatest nuclear operator is France - yet I doubt that the danger correlates with amount of the stations, rather than with the qualitative aspect of how these stations are serviced and operated (same reason behind incident on Chernobyl NPP), which, unfortunately, points at your country. Thus the most sane approach here, given also the price point and country financial credibility, is the shut down of all Ukraine reactors and import of safe "European energy" from France or other countries. Other possibilities did exist (aka cooperation), but were crossed by your country political course since its foundation.

Fourth, specifically want to stress that in no place in this post - above or below, I lay the responsibility for this on you personally.

Fifth, about traitor, cyber police and patrol - its extremely unlikely that Russia and West Europe will be happy about another nuclear blow out. At least logically, I see nobody of benefit from a "traitor" there. Except again, your country, - unfortunately.

He only told you the truth, which is verifiable. It doesn't mean that the truth is not extremely sad or, given your country political direction in the last 20 years, avoidable.

I am very confident that 99,99% of "Russian human being" including me, would wish for this territory be restored. But that is given all current conditions, which are perfectly reflected in your post - realistically unrealistic. You probably understand what purpose NPP played (Duga) for what reasons, and know the nationality of the one actually responsible for the tragedy. I've personally met a lot of such, self-assured, over-bones career ladder climber type, of different nationalities. Such mentality is often seen in higher govt ranks in nearly all empires: USSR, USA, Japan, etc. presumably due to the quantitative effect such people give, with emotional side often discarded; but not in NPP case.

Best regards and with peace, your collapsing dissolving rotten russian terrorist and hacker.

I can recommend this de-faking of the series.

Interesting video, but even the presenter from it seems to equate stereotypes(even if untrue ones) with lies. Maybe this is some sort of a language barrier.

EDIT: He also points out the "unrealistic" bridge scene. Again the parents/kids went to sleep at around 9PM and woke up at 2AM. After 5 hours of sleep they were woken up by an explosion that shook the ground. I remember that whenever I wake up in the middle of the night due to an earthquake, I just can't get to sleep immediately afterwards. If anything I'm wide awake in a full alert state. I wouldn't find it too far fetched for some people to be drawn to the bridge to see the radiation lights better. And of course they wouldn't just abandon their wide awake children at home. They used the event to make a night out of it.

EDIT2: Also I loled at how the "lie detected klaxon" didn't appear when he was talking about the lady scientist. Only about 10 seconds later, when he called her "a strong and independent woman". Don't let some MeToo snowflake choose to misinterpret that, or the clip will end up downvoted to hell. :))

EDIT3: Are the subtitles messed up? At 17:00 he talks about the scene where the colonel/general drives a car to make the correct reading of the radiation, choosing to spare his men should there actually be any danger. This was one of my favorite scenes from the series, but the guy seems to take offense at it. Saying what "inhumane generals"! WTF?

EDIT4: OK... the more I'm watching this the more this guy starts nitpicking things. In the beginning I was actually intrigued by the clip, but this ends up being just a rant. :(

EDIT5: And I almost forgot this, the helicopter crashing is mentioned and the "lie detected klaxon" starts blaring out. Because the event happened six months later after the explosion, not 2-3 days later, and because the helicopter didn't crash due to the radiation, but because the rotor hit a crane. If the guy would have actually watched the series in HD from Netflix, and not some bit starved encode he pirated, he would have noticed that the helicopter actually hits the crane... Okay I'm wasting my time. I'm done, 20 minutes in.

IMHO stereotypes are acceptable, if they are either numerous and marked as such by the film being pure work of fiction which very loosely tries to mimic connection with existing history (think "Capricorn One"); or if they are very few to give outlining accent (think "Armageddon" with Lev Andropov in Ushanka hat, which cross-referenced Salyut 7** repairs, where Dzhanibekov collected water condensate with improvised rags***); none of which is here.

Near the end there is a conclusion, where video author attempts to find a logical reason as to why the film is filled with such a dense stereotype wall ("a visually appealing candy bar with questionable contents"), that the chance of that being random is virtually a null, - its because the younger natives, who did no historical fact checks, believing the "stereotypes" leave comments with very common statements. Thus the effect on totally random people is pretty much per-programmed and thus, payed and wished by undisclosed side.

Either way, there is a positive aspect, if such creations (regardless where they originate from) cause healthy opposite reaction, which sparks interest from the general public about true state of the event.


About bridge: AFAIK video author meant specifically as to historical inaccuracies - that the bridge scene is work of fantasy including the earthquake itself. A similar event on the planet of Avatar would pass the criteria, for example.


** https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Salyut_7
*** (interview fragment, russian) https://youtu.be/Wxhv6GOLZqE?t=2355

EDIT1: (addressed above)

EDIT2: he said that the woman was completely work of fiction from start to the end; which would mean the klaxon should sound the whole time? Btw, it looks like it was his own creative attempt at marking the fiction, here he uses same "no signal" as scene effect in his STALKER zone food review (in russian) as a parody to army food comparisons by yt user "Solid": youtube.com/watch?v=8t4eIhbpUkA

EDIT3: you mean 16:36 (Pikalov)? He says two things:
1. that Pikalov used special vehicle, not regular car (as in film), which debunks film line to portray operation as unserious and chaotic;
2. that Pikalov indeed risked his own life instead of his subordinates (accurate by film), which however clashes with film line to portray commanding staff as inhumane and despotic. So, by displaying that scene, film shoots itself in the foot.

EDIT4: no question? The guy's father was Chernobyl liquidator, which may explain his interest. As of "nitpicking", because there is an evident success of the nitpicks, they do seem to work.

For example, I used this wonderful photo of city of Bucharest and applied the yellow-filter with color desaturation to it in GIMP, trying to mimic the gamma at 18:18 NPP. The result is in attachment - and I am literally nobody in gfx - but I think it worked.

EDIT5:

Here: youtube.com/watch?v=v2CbeAOj8f4

Quote from description: "The helicopter crash in episode two isn't all wrong, but it took place after the initial two weeks of recovery — not, as the episode suggests, in the immediate wake of the explosion. In a statement to Men's Health, Mazin said it was one of the few events that had to be moved around chronologically.

"I wanted people to know that this was one of the hazards that these pilots were dealing with — an open reactor. Radiation was flying over it," he (Mazin) told the site. " end Quote

Another source: https://www.unilad.co.uk/film-and-tv/hbo-and-skys-chernobyl-includes-a-lot-of-innacuracies-about-worlds-worst-nuclear-plant-disaster

Quote: " Another discrepancy between the show and real life is with the helicopter in episode two, which appears to fall out of the sky after flying too close to the radioactive core.

While a helicopter crash did take place, it was actually a couple of weeks after the initial disaster – but considering Mazin had to squeeze all of the details into five hours, I think we can forgive the chronological inaccuracy."

As of Netflix: Netflix is available in Russia, but due to the quality it provides locally for the money, its quite unpopular. More: https://www.translatetheweb.com/?ref=TVert&from=&to=en&a=https://news.rambler.ru/other/39836504-pochemu-netflix-v-rossii-ne-tak-i-nuzhen/

As of him being pirate using bit-starved encode: logic tells me he used low-res blurred samples in his video due to "DMCA and Fair Use" contradictions on youtube, plus

Speaking of wasting time: I have forgot to warn you, that my time is also not free and you owe me exactly 1 Royal Canadian Mint gold coin. :-) Please package it and send it via an ip delivery parcel to /dev/who_needs_it. Take care.

gog forum just being itself, had to send my post to paste bin and link it here because nothing got posted - then all my send attempts appeared --> combined into one huge post.

TL;DR ignore this post please.

It's been said before, here in this thread, that this is a historical drama. This isn't a documentary. So, the stereotypes and historical inaccuracies are all excusable due to the medium.

In the movie Valkyrie, are you suggesting that real Col. Claus von Stauffenberg didn't actually speak perfect English with an American accent?

Well technically he spoke in German, if you watch the start. :P

I always find it ridiculous when dialogues that are supposed to take place between foreign people in a foreign language are dubbed with English with an accent. Why would two Russians converse with a bad accent, when they both speak Russian? Or why would German Nazi-soldiers converse among themselves in English with a bad German accent? They would speak German.
What the viewer hears is just a translation. Why does Hollywood often feel the need to stick an accent on that translation?

TRUE, and I normally don't hold the language thing about movies but my god, could you have possibly found a worse actor to play that part!? XD I actually like Tom, but miscast is the understatement of the year. Pauly Shore would have made a more convincing Col.

Oh and on a side note. Mel Gibson got a lot of praise in "Passion of the Christ" for using authentic language, but I've read a lot of articles of linguistics scholars who said that was definitely NOT the language spoken in that area at that time.

Tom Cruise is past the point where he might be passed for a role. If he is interested in starring in your movie, you'd better thank your lucky star.

Guilty Pleasure: I am psyched for Top Gun 2.