Ancient Apocalypse (2021) User Reviews

Fascinating

[catmailing · 7/10 · 15 November 2022]

Journalist Graham Hancock brings us the compelling idea that advanced civilizations existed on Earth as far back as the last Ice Age and that our technological knowledge was wiped out through apocalyptic events. He acts as a guide, bringing us to ancient ruins and discussing the advanced knowledge it would take to build these structures, along with his theories on why academia is getting our history wrong.

Unfortunately, this series employs a continuous soundtrack of music and booming sounds, which makes the dialogue difficult to hear and understand. I would much prefer to hear the information Graham has researched so thoroughly rather than cheesy sound effects.

Brilliant

[darthrhodes · 10/10 · 13 November 2022]

Follows the theme we are a species with amnesia, that the Younger Dryas event some 12,800 years ago caused a climate catastrophe co-insiding with the end of the last ice age, which saw sea levels rise 400 feet and subsequently wiped out some 50 to 60% of the human race. Each episode is dedicated to an ancient megalithic site, which Graham Hamcock and other experts believe to be much older than present archaeological theory suggests. Each site carries its own myth and folklore, from biblical and other religious stories of great floods, to oral tradition tales of falling stars. If your mind isn't bogged down in the "we were hunter gatherers until 6000 years ago", narrative. Its worth a watch.

Watch it and make your own mind up

[vitezslavbecka · 10/10 · 17 November 2022]

Look, honestly it seems that the major pushback to this is just a bunch of whining, while the show honestly stays very grounded. It shows factual developments, great renders, really great writing.

The animations are a great and inspiring feat. He is not suggesting anything ridiculous, and it is a truly fun ride. Just check it out, then go on to explore on your own. Books like Sapiens or Dawn of Everything are great examples of the general shift in human history perception.

Let us not get blocked by many old archeologists who cannot let go of their way of seeing the world.

This is proposing points we must explore further, and then decide, whether they are valid or not. That is all the presenter asks for, after all.

Archeogeologicalmythology

[AEROMONK · 15 November 2022]

I had fun binge watching this series. The clear antagonists here are archeologists, and though I hadn't followed the drama between the creator, Hancock, and them, it's pretty clear they have ticked him off royally. I found myself being drawn into his antipathy, especially when he was barred from visiting the mound site in Ohio. I also found that dismissing myths of cultures from being factors when formulating hypotheses regarding dig sites within the cultures from which those very myths originate to be an odd, odd choice. What a very odd omission. Literary criticism can incorporate all manner of help extrinsic to the texts in question via New Historicism and such, so it seems that at least considering other disciplines, especially hard sciences such as astronomy (not to mention ancient myths) could be a benefit.

Eventually I began to tire of the archeological villainy, but that could be due to the binging. Perhaps the scientific community could be less cold shouldered. It wouldn't be the first time it has been (or in this case might be) wrong. See Louis Pasteur, John Snow, John Leal, et al.

As someone who has learned about ancient cultures in public education social studies forever, over and over and over, it never made sense that such immense advances hobbled half-frozen out of the ice-age in furs and suddenly into history. The notion that an advanced civilization may have germinated a second post-ice-age civilization actually makes a lot more sense. Sorry. Too many pyramids. Too much obsession with stargazing. Too many similarities between myths: all between ancient cultures that would have had no clue what other cultures on another continents were up to. Fertile crescent explanations always seemed insufficient.

Hancock is clever and thoughtful and energetic enough to have won my admiration. He has weaved a compelling (man, I hate this word lately) "narrative" to neatly sum up much of what we in the public schools have been learning in smattered doses for ages. And to his credit, he did not suggest aliens or lizards or giants, so this graceful and articulate essay feels consistent and cogent. I hope he inspires young archaeologists to keep exploring and to also be amenable to integrating other sources than what's in the dirt. I do not feel like Hancock is archeology's Castaneda, as he seems to be regarded. He's a bit more on the great big ol' icy ball than that.

There is nothing to see here

[grdan7 · 1/10 · 15 November 2022]

A guy with clear obsession against archeologists (he mentions this word 1000 times per episode) because they believe in facts and not at myths.

He has no proof of anything, he does some hypothesis unable to validate them. Archeologists can find proofs from million years ago inside the layers of a simple stone.

I wanted to believe that an ancient advanced civilization exists but if this the best someone can do to persuade me then there is no hope.

Finally, there is nowhere the "bad archeologists'" opinion about why they believe what they believe (the facts and NOT some myths). He only blames them for everything they believe (that is based on real facts) and we dont even hear what they have to say about it.

Netflix provides the platform, Hancock Delivers

[danielbowen-29226 · 10/10 · 22 November 2022]

A condensed review of some of the most fascinating locations in ancient history. Thoroughly enjoyed every episode and would recommend to anyone with a keen interest and those with a fleeting interest. It's bite sized enough to watch without knowledge and in-depth enough for those with existing knowledge.

Graham provides interesting points throughout and while there will always be questions left unanswered, the whole point is to ask the questions. My favourite episodes are 1-2 and 4 but all are great. He breaks down the history and ancient cultures really nicely too with a lot of ancient text and stories included.

A Theoretical Approach

[sjs-18637 · 4/10 · 12 November 2022]

I personally do think that this documentary is bias, however Greg Hancock does point out the field of academia is particularly susceptible to pushing down theories. He does make good enough points about how imperialistic nations failed to account for non western civilization on their research. Also the notation of a flood appearing in mythology isn't a terrible theory, but to accurately prove this theory is another matter. It could be multiple events that occurred to be the causation of a and it is a worth examination of these things. However to completely dismiss any idea, is simultaneously just as bad as ultimately pure belief without skepticism. In other words, it has been a interesting watch. He does tend to throw around theories without proving anything, but they are interesting theories. To make the show better perhaps there should be another opinion such as a academic scientist and they're belief in his theories and their own perspective.

Originally, I voted this much higher. However the last couple episodes of this series completed derailed my belief in his hypothesis, as he often mentions reoccurring comets which cause the "ice age." Not to mention he fails to describe his entrenched views points.

really thought provoking show - cannot wait for season 2

[albaraa-65989 · 10/10 · 22 November 2022]

It is saddening to see that the scientific community is not scientific anymore, where ideas should be debated and exchanged on a regular basis; the scientific community follows a somewhat of a tribalism while at the same time dismissing of ideas that are different from theirs. AP definitely provides the shunned pov that many 'scientist' seem to ignore and list as pseudoscience.

His theory of the apocalyptic event that happened around 11000 years ago is plausible and the theory aligns well with the evidence presented. And I believe the theory presented by the main stream scientists are equally plausible compared to Graham's theory.

I'm no more a pseudo-scientist than a dolphin is a pseudo-fish

[onze-kris · 1/10 · 11 November 2022]

Yeah you read that right.

Made it to episode 4 where he discredits himself.

A dolphin is not a fish. Did he want to say that he isn't a scientist.

He says earlier that he believes that there is proof of an ancient civilization despite what everyone else says.

So I get that. But with the claims he makes during the first three episodes he isn't helping himself.

The narrative is drawn out... and than doesn't really say anything surprising.

Well he is obsessed with googling himself. And doesn't have issue that the specialists say that you should take in what he says with care.. The series isn't helped with him posing for drone shots. While a narrative is building up to another empty statement/unanswered question

Finally and I try to watch episode 4... and adjust my rating if there is an improvement... So far it has talked about structures not much more. And while they certainly are baffling... there is almost nothing else shown or talked about.

Where are all the items from these times??

How old are they dated?

Again utterly disappointed in a series about this matter.

Thought provoking and extremely interesting

[yhbnxqzzp · 10/10 · 22 February 2023]

I find it interesting those willing to discredit Graham so quickly , he isn't here to give you the answers but he's done an amazing job of presenting you with real information to help you open your eyes to the fact that we don't know everything about our history , why are mainstream archeologists so quick to discredit him when a lot of his claims made in this DOCUSERIES have solid ground to stand on, why can't they engage and instead of accuse him actually prove him wrong? If you are not willing to open ur eyes to another possibility other than your own you will never see the truth. Please watch this series for yourself and then decide if it's possible. Not if it's true, if it's possible who are we to say it's wrong. We don't know our history.

Good title for exercising critical thinking

[bjorn-791-485613 · 18 November 2022]

Plenty of examples here where things are made to seem true just by association by statements that appear to support the arguments made, but really are just used for only that purpose in many cases.

Graham obviously is not doing this to save humanity from ignorance, and I do agree that old ways of thinking should be challenged, but this is just another example of how not to do it.

Graham is clear in his statement that he is a journalist, not archeologist or scientist. If he truly had the motivation to expose the "lies" from established archeologists, why not get the credentials and beat them at their own game?

Worth a watch for that purpose, educational material for critical thinking.

Mind opening

[mindedifice · 10/10 · 2 December 2022]

For any curious mind that wants to know more about our past, this documentary reveals wonderful monuments, much older than well known monuments such as the pyramid of Giza. And not only presents these monuments, but analyzes them in ways that reveal the complexity of those minds that have realized them. It makes the viewer realize how many more hidden treasures are on this Earth, and how little we've explored them.. and how much more we could do to understand them. It truly excites and opens your mind to new possibilities.

As for the arguments behind his ideas about the ancient civilization, they are all empirical. He collects data from various sites, and in various ways, puts the information together and builds a story out of them. There is nothing extravagant in his methods, quite the contrary, they are quite sensible and rational. For those that criticize him merely because he did not earn a degree in this domain, remember centuries ago, people like Leonardo da Vinci were revolutionizing the world and there was no one to call them a fraud because they had no University diploma. In fact, I am most glad that there are individuals like Graham, who dare to use their whole creativity and imagination to explore and learn about the world, without the invisible chains imposed by our society.

Just a load of BS

[juanquaglia · 1/10 · 23 November 2022]

It's a shame Netflix includes and promotes content like this. Documentaries should be based on facts. The point is to document reality. But "Ancient Apocalypse" is more interested in pushing absurd claims. It tells us about a "theory" that a mysterious advanced civilization existed before us and got extinct.

To any reasonable person that "theory" would sound ridiculous, considering that, if that were the case, that civilization would have left plenty of evidence of its existence, that archeologists would have found.

Basically, this documentary is just a new spin to the old "The pyramids were built by aliens" claim. To anyone who have been misled by this documentary, I'd recommend researching how the pyramids were actually built, because that's known already. There's no mystery there anymore.

For me, a comfortable show.

[ronpierce-04515 · 9/10 · 28 May 2023]

I've always admired archeology. Always will. Inversely, I very much enjoyed this show. I've always believed there are plenty of worlds right here to discover if we accept that we can't possibly know everything. This show points at what I've always thought too. Ice age peoples were advanced. Ancient knowledge or "shamanic" knowledge as I like to carefully label it, is evident throughout the treasures of the ancient world - through the continuum. Graham is brilliant in his cross-referencing, toward nothing more than preserving these places for the importance to all of us that they remain.

P. S.: Episode 6, I kinda wish folks would stop calling it Serpent Mound. It's not a serpent.

Wrong focus

[fiasofiaeinarsson · 1/10 · 7 December 2022]

Interesting, sure. I love hidden secrets!

However the focus of this series (I lasted nearly one episode, granted) seems not to be to inform or discover, but to blame and miscredit. Much time is put on whining over who doesn't believe in him, as a "scientist", which he obviously isn't. He claims that he knows this, and still does not comprehend the critics her receives... If this had been "published" on YouTube, fine, but financed by Netflix makes me want to end the subscription.

It reminds me of those mysterious "science"-books, about self-combudtion and alien-sightings I used to love as a child, it does not belong here!

Can't tell a dolphin from a fish?

[minniehahn · 1/10 · 31 January 2023]

Really. "I am no more a pseudoscienctist than a dolphin is a pseudofish". I guess the intent was to say he was a journalist, not a scientist? Is that better and more credible??

So, on that note, why would I listen? We have all see the propaganda and lies that journalists have presented over the past few years. What's his agenda?

Not that I disagree, but I do dislike the ego-stroking that seems to be part of the intro to this episode.

Dude, stroke yourself in private where that is acceptable....

I found this series to be lacking any validation or real "meat" that I was hopeful to see. I did not find it even remotely as compelling or as entertaining as Ancient Aliens.