Cubussoli Very very predictable, including the post credit scene !!!

Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

PiraBit if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

Raymond Sierra The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Suzie Bogus It's hard to believe that people are trashing this show for adding real history to the science. To one reviewer especially, I say that those who think history is just fluff are doomed to repeat it, badly. This show isn't just Mythbusters reheated. It was never intended to be. It builds on the Mythbusters' pragmatic analytical approach and adds a fascinating context of real history. The information is presented in a lighthearted, but still articulate way, with a good dose of actual science. If you're a well rounded person who loves Science AND loves history, you'll love this show.

Slavjan Andonovski To start off, there's great potential in this series, I hope it keeps going and growing , and that the show runners listen in on what people want to see improved. Of course, it's also great to see the gang back together in this new "Mythbusters 2.0", although it's less myths, and more comparison of the best stories that fit the theme of the episode.The story telling and comparison concept is also one of the major problems that I have with the show. Instead of the way it is now where the majority of the program is story telling and skits, and the minority is science and experimentation, I would like to see this be the other way around. It's the talents and creativity of the trio that I'm most interested in seeing be put to good use like when Grant built his octocopter, even if it means cutting it down to 1 story per person, and/or shortening episode length.Maybe it's because of the concept of the show, but every episode seems to drag on for too long. If the show were to remain the same, I think it would greatly benefit from a 30-35 minute run time per episode, instead of the current 45 minute one. Remember, it's about quality, not quantity.Again, I do hope that Netflix reads what I and others have said, and implements these suggestions in one way or another, because they could take the show from being just alright, to being great.A benefit of the doubt, 7/10.

justin-74-890942 I'm a huge fan of these guys and have been since they first appeared in Mythbusters. I enjoyed the last season of that show, but felt like losing these three was a big loss.Therefore I'm super happy Netflix threw some bucks at them and got them their own gig, and it's a great time revisiting a gang who feel like old friends now - already this show gets a big pass from me. My issue here really is with the presentation. Each subject they cover is LADEN with silly over-the-top sketch performances by the gang that easily eat up 60-70% of the screen time, with only 30% left over for the actual meat of the science. I realize that I'm in the minority of the public who find the tech stuff fascinating and the fluff, well, fluffy, but I could really do with a lot less "estrogen crazed Hitler dancing through the tulips" (in an especially egregious example of this from the "world war 2 crazy weapons" episode) and more fun experiments-gone-wrong. If they had cut out, for example, all of the "Farting Germans at a Cafe" and "Hitler gets boobs" feature-ettes from that episode they could have packed in at least a few more crazy weapon schemes which I would have found WAY more interesting. To summarize, I watch a TON of hilarious sketch comedy shows already, when I want science I want to turn to these guys. Dial back the "acting" just a bit and you've got a winner.

Sam Cannon White Rabbit Project is the next project out of the "B team" of the now-finished show Mythbusters. Grant, Tori and Kari team up again to explore a variety of different themes and scenarios, with the same amount of stunts and gadgets.Essentially, each episode explores a certain topic. For example, episode 2 explores six different prison breaks, before ranking them on an arbitrary scale from worst to best. In order to do this, the show uses a mixture of replicating the thing in question, docu-drama style explorations of the history/origin of the thing in question, comedy skits with the team and/or actors, and interviews with experts in the field.The most pressing issue is that in many ways the show feels downscaled compared to mythbusters. There are less 'experiments' in this show compared to mythbusters, the show uses a lot more stock footage and low budget docu-drama segments than mythbusters ever did, which kinda sucks to be honest. In many ways, the show talks more than shows.While that is a letdown, it doesn't make the show 'bad' in any way. Tori, Grant and Kari are all still highly entertaining to watch. Their on-screen chemistry holds up, cheesy jokes and all, and when they do do stunts, those stunts are pretty impressive. Stuff like re-making a makeshift hot-air balloon, for example, or training a pigeon to drive a drone by tapping on a touchscreen. There's some good stuff in here.Also, a MAJOR plus due to the Netflix format is that the editing is far better and less annoying. If you remember Mythbusters, there was a lot of repetition in that show due to the ad breaks. If you were watching the show on DVD, the narrator would often say the same thing twice in a row because an ad break was supposed to be there in between. There's no issue here, and the show flows perfectly with no breaks or issues in pacing.If you have a Netflix account, this is certainly worth the watch, especially if you or your kid liked Mythbusters back in the day.