Atlas of Cursed Places (2020– ) User Reviews

I like it

[chompygator · 7/10 · 22 January 2021]

Some people are finding inadequacies and fault in the host and his narration. I think, as is often the case, their comments merely reflect their own. I kind of enjoy the more accessible language, and find it refreshing, more entertaining, and much less stodgy than most docu-narration. All of this makes the show more appealing to a broader and, likely, a more youthful audience. Certainly, that's a good thing.

I've been fascinated my entire life by all of the subjects so far presented in this production, and though I may be sliding towards feeling more than a little disappointment about some of the mystery being taken away, I'm satisfied that there are possible and plausible answers to some of these enduring questions. I think some people need to just chill a bit and just accept this for what it is - entertaining education on subjects not in standard curricula. I'd be happy as hell if my kids wanted to watch something like this, and I enjoy it too. It's disappointing, but haters gonna hate. :P

What's been bugging me lately, and it's not limited to this show, is the irrational editing-out of things like human anatomy, as if it's something shameful. Classical art having nipples (both male and female), and butt cracks blurred over is absolutely ridiculous, especially on a National Geographic production. I don't want to get started on a rant about that, but it would be worth it!

Not good ...

[Reviewer99 · 5/10 · 11 January 2021]

Watched the Bermuda Triangle episode. They would have been better off with a narrator and someone interviewing the experts off camera. This comes across like someones diary entry.

BTW the PBS show NOVA (Season 3, Episode 20 The Case of the Bermuda Triangle) debunked the Bermuda Triangle "mysteries" back in 1976.

Science as a Weapon

[bysterbusch · 5/10 · 5 March 2021]

I really enjoy the interesting take on studying paranormal subjects as it's a different point of view. Unfortunately, as we've seen too much of lately, science is being used intermittently to fit a narrative and it's laden with constant mainstream speak against society and its traditions.

Docu-posing

[quantum-nic · 1/10 · 10 December 2020]

Just awful, as soon as the world's most annoying voice over started my heart sank. This series pretends to be a scientific look at superstitions and paranormal myths but is filmed more like a fiction. The viewer is drowned in slow motion shots of the presenter doing not terribly much while he narrates very little of consequence. In fact the series over all is more interested in Sam than the actual content he's meant to be investigating, as he poses in the dark in set piece rooms. Is this how we make data crunching look edgy now rather than showing what actual hard work looks like? Or is it just over compensating for the fact that clearly a team of researchers has already cribbed the data for him? When people are interviewed who have actual facts to expound they're either overlaid with over the top music or we're left struggling to focus on their data thanks to wobbly camera angles. Moreover, the information that does get brought in is scanty and spread out over multiple advert breaks. Very, very little is achieved in the time slot compared to other programs tackling the same subject. The longer I watched this the angrier I began to feel that this is how Nat Geo is treating its viewers now. Remember when Nat Geo used to be respected for it's well researched and well presented content? Yes, I'm struggling too, as it seems like such a long time ago now. Seriously, decide what you are and do it properly NG, you're either a documentary or you're a fiction, make your mind up and respect your content as well as the intelligence of your audience.

Nothing new to be found...

[bjoernhund · 1/10 · 18 December 2020]

...in 2 ways. 1) the historical "evidence" of the various cases bring forth nothing new to the table. For this I'd give the show 2 stars, but.... 2) The presenter comes across as an arrogant, low-IQ jock. Therefore detracting the show even further down to "a big fat 0" stars. Conclusion and advice: Don't waste your time on this.

NatGeo says it all

[jraychretien · 1/10 · 10 December 2020]

I should have known exactly what this was going to be when I saw "NatGeo". The narrator tries to "hip" with lines like "Hell ya Bro! Lets go look for Atlantis". He also sounds very uneducated about many areas with often silly speculation and commentary. This is a superficial "history" show at best but more a way to sell advertising time. Really has been such a waste of your time that I made the effort to warn others. If you read very little and you find wrestling has challenging stories then you may find this very "educational". LOL

Great Presentation

[katlady-53156 · 10/10 · 27 December 2020]

Very entertaining and gives some extra information about places that I have watched on shows before but he finds some interesting extra tidbit of information. Episode 4 on the swamps of LA was very interesting and on point with the fact that we humans really screwed the pooch on how we treated the area. I am looking forward to more of them.

Two stars for the unintentional comedy content, one for some of the scenery

[glornt · 4/10 · 11 December 2020]

Host Sam Sheridan is no Josh Gates (not setting the bar very high here), but where Josh makes bad jokes that are sometimes funny, this show relies more on the incorrect usage of big words: "Apocryphal" in a context clearly indicating that "Apocalyptic" is probably what he meant, "Hydrocarbon" rather than "Radiocarbon" dating, etc.

Interestingly, and possibly tellingly, there are (at least at the time of this review) no writing credits for this show. Is Sam just winging it without a script? Net Geo describes him as an "author and adventurer", which for me makes his poor word choices even funnier. But hey -- he must be tough and cool, because he has tattoos! Plus, he uses mild profanity, too -- what a rebel!

Ragging on the host, while fun, isn't the entire point of my review. If you are entertained by unintentional comedy, you may find this show worth watching.

I did have to dock it one star for the inclusion (in at least one episode) of Michael Schermer, "professional skeptic"; this guy's such an arrogant tool that he brings down any show in which he appears. Also annoying is how the host acts like an enthusiast of the episode's topic, only to "turn skeptic" himself at the very end. Skepticism is fine, but be consistent -- poke holes along the way, don't just say "there's probably nothing to it" after spending 40 minutes (of air time, not to mention travel and production time) chasing down inconclusive (in either direction) leads. If Schermer becomes a regular guest, I won't be sticking around; otherwise it's mostly harmless, silly fun.

Another useless show that fails to answer its' own questions!

[cdeanroane · 1/10 · 23 December 2020]

Much like Josh Gates Expedition X and it spin offs and other copycat shows. This show is even worse coming from National Geographic. You would think Nat Geo would give quality programming, but is has not been the case for the last 15 years. Each year Nat Geo lowers the standards bar of the programs it produces. Even the host of this show is dull to listen to. To add insult it injury he seems to not to even know what he is talking about most of time but sure loves to drink while he is working. Please Nat Geo pull the plug on this show as it is waste of your resources to produce such trash, and sending this host all over the world is biggest waste of your money that you beg people to donate to Nat Geo.!

Annoying host wrecks possibly interesting history

[sja-awesome · 1/10 · 3 February 2021]

The disc of this show sounded neat,using logic,science,intelligence,facts and new tech to solve what ancient people called curses. But nope..Annoying host wrecks possibly interesting history. He seems very bro-ish and high and more interested in himself then the history. The science isnt really science,its kinda bs. Maybe this is the kind of production that they are trying to get the younger weeb generation to watch? I dont think they give a F about history, they are the ones trying to get it erased! Ill stick with historys greatest mystories, treasures decoded and the like..

Disappointed

[katharinamcfarland · 1/10 · 30 December 2020]

Typically National Geographic is honest, direct, and fact based. This demonstrates a lack of investigation, statements made about politics that are unrelated to the show, and bizarre behaviors.

Folklore fun meets disturbing reality - in all the best ways

[MarigoldRz · 10/10 · 30 December 2020]

I was expecting a cheesy, paranormal-filled sensationalist show. Man, was I wrong. It's incredible how fascinating they made this. It investigates local folklore around the country and world, showcasing places marked by seemingly unnatural calamity. The host takes you on-site into the eyewitness and historical accounts, and brings it to light in a sceptic's lens with modern experts; these hard facts are perhaps more disturbing than the tall tales. This isn't just a few folks telling the same old tall tales or a skeptic trying to ruin the fun of legends. What you actually learn will blow you away. Enjoy the adventure.

Just an arrogant journalist swaggering around the country looking down on everyone

[antoniojaguilar · 1/10 · 4 January 2021]

Like the title says, this series isn't really about curses or geography or anything like that. It's just an arrogant journalist swaggering around the country looking down his nose at locals. Basically every episode ends with a synopsis more or less saying "all the bad things are the fault of capitalism and the locals are just too stupid to get that so they blame a curse". I tried to give the series a real chance but it got too tedious after four or five episodes so I gave up.

Not great

[darkdementress · 1/10 · 3 February 2021]

Interesting history but the host is really annoying. He seems like a arrogant man child. Like yo bro im so awesome dude man. Look at me travel and slowly talk about dude brah bro stuff and pretend its history...

Yuck. No thanks!

Hack Fraud Wannabe RationalWiki Show GueStarring Dim-Witted Michael Shermerst

[gursugalip · 3 January 2021]

Well !! It is quite eponymous with my review title. A tatooed, cool, muscle guy trying to seem edgy-sciency by spewing meaningless words like rational, plausaible, mundane, human mind playing tricks, mass hypnosis, myths. Oh and of course Occam's Razor, because nobody can be the edgy-sciency guy without uttering it. As another reviewer has said half of the show is slow motion shots of the presenter babbling those nonsense; "In fact the series over all is more interested in Sam than the actual content he's meant to be investigating, as he poses in the dark in set piece rooms." Someone just described RationalWiki as "Rationality is their flag, not their method." This show trying to emulate it is just the caricature of a caricature. It is absolute disaster.

Way to try and make a buck...

[nimitz541 · 1/10 · 30 December 2020]

What a great way to try and make a buck off other peoples work guys!

This just seems to be someones get rich quick scheme off recycled stories. Truely horrible. If you have no new evidence for even ONE episode, get off the stage.

A JOKE

[archkarate · 1/10 · 16 May 2024]

It is interesting to see the worlds mysteries to be Ruined by an annoying host. Everyone knows that no one knows what the bermuda triangle is. He just yaps and yaps and doesn't know anything plus he just makes the build up for nothing in the first episode "theres no explanation" I will continue to watch because it is goofy now i will spam to get the remaining characters roses are blue violets are yellleh hehe haha i'm so funneh Orngs and bonnys, too fruitis beloved for thur sweetnis and versitiliti. Orngs ar joosy, tangy, an packd with vitamin C, wile bonnys ar creamy, potasum-rich, an provid a qwick energi boost. Wethir enjoyd as a snak, blendd into smoothis, or incorprated into deserts, these fruitis add vibrnt flavr and nutrishun to any meal.

Great show should get another season

[jade_To_My_Roses · 10/10 · 13 January 2021]

Loved blend of mystery and science and how long standing curses,legends, myths are tackled with scientific approach to prove there is explanation and reason behind things happening and coincidances, while not completely disputing allure of mysters' what if. Well done combination of paranormal/supernatural exploration and history that in similar shows become hard believable, forced charade, while in this one it provided gripping narrative host delievered in entertaining and educational manner. Learnt so many new things! Scenery was eerie and atmospheric which was aesthetically pleasing to watch. It felt like being transported into the regions and being part of the chase. Cant wait for season 2!

very good

[cbogan-52319 · 10/10 · 4 January 2021]

This show presents interesting subjects and it is enjoyable to watch

Sheridan's Giving People Some Voice Over Profits Above Everyday Lives.

[terryapo · 8/10 · 24 September 2023]

Sam seems to wiggle beneath the original curses to the greed behind their beginnings. Unfortunately for the areas involved, deathbed curses never stopped anyone from pursuing the American dream of riches. At times it involved unforseen circumstances like the cutoff of nutrients to the Louisiana swamps and bayous by the building of levees on the Mississippi River to help control flooding damage. But high and large it's been the unwavering greed of lumber, and the Coal, Oil, and Petroleum companies that has cursed people and the environments. At least Sheridan's cameras focused attention on some of the victims destroyed by avarious.