Comment on Inaccuracies

duckduckohno@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• tetris11@lemmy.ml ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  1. The reactor’s kill switch worked fine, but another reactor reacted to it
  2. None of the Soviet’s spoke fluent BBC english at the time
  3. All the scientists were squashed into a single organism called “supafrique” who was the main antagonist
  4. The level of radiation blasted into the atmosphere was greatly exaggerated by captain planet
  5. Superman sealed up the hole in less than 10 minutes
  6. Chernobyl is actually pronounced "Churro-nob-yell"
  7. Everyone who was underwater and worked to kill the reactor actually gained telepathy later on
  8. It was actually hard to write this list. This was a great tragedy.

  source
• Fedizen@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  his hand had 8 fingers

  source
• JohnDClay@sh.itjust.works ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Here’s a podcast from the show writers on the compromises and consolidations they needed to do for the mini series.

  youtu.be/rUeHPCYtWYQ

  source
• repungnant_canary@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Check out this YouTube channel: youtube.com/@thatchernobylguy2915

  source

  • nyctre@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    That’s the historical drama, not a documentary, tho

    source

    • repungnant_canary@lemmy.world ⁨3⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      You are indeed correct, some artistic freedom is definitely expected from that kind of series. But relying on Russian propaganda sources and making Legasov a hero doesn’t qualify as artistic freedom but misinformation. Also the representation of the soviet reality was at least inaccurate - my dad who was raised in the former soviet block summarised it as “representing how Americans think it was not how it truly was”.

      Chernobyl is a good and very interesting series and it’s good that it raises at least some awareness about the catastrophe. But imo it could be more technically and historically accurate without losing its attractiveness.

      source