BootDigest Such a frustrating disappointment

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Baseshment I like movies that are aware of what they are selling... without [any] greater aspirations than to make people laugh and that's it.

Chirphymium It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Bryan Palencia I don't usually like TV shows, but I do like this one. The reason I don't like TV shows that are fiction (ex. Fringe, V) is because since their presented through the medium of commercial television; they basically have to have some sort of mass appeal (or it at least should seem to). And regretfully television producers think that the world is made up of not so smart people; and since there are people who are blissfully unaware of what's out there they actually play this part. But this TV show is just one of the programs on the History Channel that actually tries to inform you, while at the same time tries to entertain with surreal background imagery. Some of my favorite episodes show Nostradamus so seemingly drugged, that he looks like he's gonna vomit in that bowl that he's trying to see visions in. And that's how innovative it is; you wouldn't dare see something as surreal as that on Fringe, or V. Those shows make you think you're getting something different, but it's truly all the same. And I realize that there are some people who get turned off by this, but I appreciate being taught a few things by scholars who know what they're talking about (most of the time). And as a side note: if you think you're getting something different on Fringe or V, watch the movies Twelve Monkeys, or L.A. Confidential, and then you'll really see something different (film, much more than television, doesn't hinge on mass appeal). And if you know its different, but still watch shows like that because that's all there is; at some point we have to get mad and refuse to watch it. And that's as simple as that. I realize that I might get blacklisted for going off topic, but at least I took a chance.

Stir007 I believe that as the series plays out each episode. Each episode is well rounded and solid. Connecting me, the viewer, back to present day and to the fact that it may have been told previously to us. "The Nostradamus Effect" is a show that makes you think- so use your brain. Have we been warned before? Clearly other academics are telling us that we have been. So the question remains- When will the End begin? And what are YOU going to do when the Earth decides to take back what is hers?I think you show view the remaining episodes to air and make your decision then- and not in haste.A decision made in haste can be a wrong one.

lysergic-acid As others have already mentioned, this is media sensationalism at its worst and its most shameless. The show purports to merely present the "evidence" for various doomsday theories and apocalyptic prophecies, without arguing for or against the views expressed. For the less critical-minded, this might seem like an honest attempt to provide an unbiased view of all the available information, and letting the viewer make up his own mind about the facts. But in practice, this seems to be the show producers' way of avoiding any responsibility for the accuracy or validity of the claims/theories they present.A 45-minute TV program can't possibly present _all_ the information that there is to examine on any controversial issue. There's always a practical limit on the amount of information that one is able to convey in any given medium. This is a limitation faced by all journalists and documentary makers. And, in truth, most audiences don't want to be presented with every scrap of info pertaining to a topic, or they'd be inundated with useless trivia, unfounded rumors, or outright fabrications. Like it or not, the media is a filter for the information that the public consumes. It is their responsibility to perform this duty with honesty and integrity. That means doing thorough research and, most importantly, verifying the authenticity/verity of the information they present.On any given controversial topic—such as apocalyptic themes in human culture—there's likely to be only a handful of genuine authorities and knowledgeable experts for every thousand quack jobs or charlatans. Correspondingly, there will be truths, half-truths, and blatant falsehoods told about each issue. It's the documentarian's job to filter out the cruft and present only the most plausible theories based on substantiated facts. It is NOT the media's job to present, both, scientific theories and conspiracy theories in even parts. Unfortunately, this program does not do even that. It seems that the producers at History Channel have firmly decided that the truth is not as entertaining (read: sensational) as unfounded speculation put forth by the lunatic fringe. So, like "MonsterQuest", "The Nostradamus Effect" dedicates its entire program length to presenting spurious/unscientific speculation and interviewing hack authors of books advancing such ludicrous theories.Regardless of the show's disclaimer, by giving a completely one-sided account of the issues presented (shows like National Geographic's "Is It Real?" at least give equal time to scientists/skeptics) and always skewing the evidence to favor the most outrageous interpretation possible, they are in effect promoting specious and scientifically unsound theories and irrational thinking. Making this all the more reprehensible is the fact that History Channel tries to present itself as an educational network while it shamelessly panders to the lowest common denominator, making programs that discourage critical thinking and promote self-delusion.

kyleholcomb1 Did the History Channel really just sensationalize--nay, legitimize--religious doomsday theory? "Hey, look at our dramatic, high dynamic range, increasingly-slowing slomo, computer-with-128GB-of-ram-generated, Roland-Emmerich-worthy disaster footage. Now that we have your attention, guess what: this guy, name-o da Vinci, had a hunch hundreds of years ago that the world would end, and that his idea is related to some of the all-too-relevant prohetic work by this dude with the cool-guy name-o Nostradamus. We think we're onto something. Behold: the even more cool-sounding 'Nostradamus Effect.' " Weak.Included in the introduction is the disclaimer that the History Channel neither affirms nor discredits the notion of prophecy (comforting, isn't it?), but only gives evidence procured by conspiracy theorists and religious nuts. It's insulting to my intelligence, and serves as an unfortunate reminder that all media--even respected sources--are under pressure to conform to standards set by the lowest common denominator.In the book Fark, by Drew Curtis, in which all media sources are cleverly categorized, this would most likely be filed under the header, "Too much time for nutjobs."