touring the Chernobyl area on a motorbike

I’m glad people who lived in the Soviet Union at the time are as impressed with this show as I am

...with at least one notable exception.

Resignation was the defining condition of Soviet life. But resignation is a depressing and untelegenic spectacle. So the creators of “Chernobyl” imagine confrontation where confrontation was unthinkable—and, in doing so, they cross the line from conjuring a fiction to creating a lie. The Belarusian scientist Ulyana Khomyuk (Emily Watson) is even more confrontational than Legasov. “I am a nuclear physicist,” she tells an apparatchik, in Episode 2. “Before you were Deputy Secretary, you worked in a shoe factory.” First, she’d never say this. Second, the apparatchik might have worked at a shoe factory, but, if he was an apparatchik, he was no cobbler; he has come up the Party ladder, which might indeed have begun at the factory—but in an office, not on the factory floor. The apparatchik—or, more accurately, the caricature of the apparatchik—pours himself a glass of vodka from a carafe that sits on his desk and responds, “Yes, I worked in a shoe factory. And now I’m in charge.” He toasts, in what appears to be the middle of the day: “To the workers of the world.” No. No carafe, no vodka in the workplace in front of a hostile stranger, and no boasting “I’m in charge.”

The biggest fiction in this scene, though, is Khomyuk herself. Unlike other characters, she is made up—according to the closing titles, she represents dozens of scientists who helped Legasov investigate the cause of the disaster. Khomyuk appears to embody every possible Hollywood fantasy. She is a truth-knower: the first time we see her, she is already figuring out that something has gone terribly wrong, and she is grasping it terribly fast, unlike the dense men at the actual scene of the disaster, who seem to need hours to take it in. She is also a truth-seeker: she interviews dozens of people (some of them as they are dying of radiation exposure), digs up a scientific paper that has been censored, and figures out exactly what happened, minute by minute. She also gets herself arrested and then immediately seated at a meeting on the disaster, led by Gorbachev. None of this is possible, and all of it is hackneyed. The problem is not just that Khomyuk is a fiction; it’s that the kind of expert knowledge she represents is a fiction. The Soviet system of propaganda and censorship existed not so much for the purpose of spreading a particular message as for the purpose of making learning impossible, replacing facts with mush, and handing the faceless state a monopoly on defining an ever-shifting reality.

In the absence of a Chernobyl narrative, the makers of the series have used the outlines of a disaster movie. There are a few terrible men who bring the disaster about, and a few brave and all-knowing ones, who ultimately save Europe from becoming uninhabitable and who tell the world the truth. It is true that Europe survived; it is not true that anyone got to the truth, or told it.

https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/what-hbos-chernobyl-got-right-and-what-it-got-terribly-wrong

*funny* how life works out sometimes: just about everyone stood on that bridge perished soon afterwards... two of the suicide mission divers are still alive apparently.

it might have been better to include bigger groups of scientists and portray the group-think that really went on and the trouble some of them got into for being outspoken. And lots of other niggles. But I'm just glad to see some decent drama for once!

I knew that was Masha Gessen before I clicked the link.

I mean, same.

especially since she consulted on and handled the Russian dialogue in The Americans

I'm usually a little cranky about the addition of dramatic elements or taking poetic license when it comes to the actions of characters based on real life or composite figures so I understand the impulse to complain, but some of those gripes are in the realm of not understanding how creative nonfiction works versus documentaries

Now, the real complaint would be how the characters act as if they're in an American/British drama as opposed to a Russian one, right

If only Jared had employed that fucked up accent he used in the expanse, I might have believed that scene where he said: Just hoy a bit o' fucking sand an' barium on it lad :p

boron even.

Now, the real complaint would be how the characters act as if they're in an American/British drama as opposed to a Russian one, right

Yeah, it's minor and I get it, but it does irk me a little (esp. when one actor used "bloody" as a profanity). I joked with my wife that when Jared reads the report in Russian in the second episode he should have looked up and said in English "I don't understand a word of this!"

I don't think it would have been improved by actors employing uniform daft commie accents throughout, although some tried to at times. It might have been improved if everyone spoke in Russian/Ukrainian, but I thought some of the strongest performances where from actors speaking in their normal accents.

I'm on my phone excuse spelling

there was a moment in the trial when skarsgard kinda grunts "let him finish" and it feels a lot like bootstrap bill is saying it. it took me out of it for awhile.

i guess bootstrap bill had a five pointed red star attached to his face so

The firefighter character is played by the actor who attempts to take over leadership of the crew in The Terror.

Cal, The lead Scottish miner was called Trevor in Eastenders (never a name I've known any Scotsman to have, tbh)

I'm usually a little cranky about the addition of dramatic elements or taking poetic license when it comes to the actions of characters based on real life or composite figures so I understand the impulse to complain, but some of those gripes are in the realm of not understanding how creative nonfiction works versus documentaries

tbh I think she did a good job of underlining that there's a difference between streamlining events/life for art, and mischaracterizing them, and that for her it mostly fell on the wrong side. (also it's not like she's unfamiliar with the medium!)

This also makes me wonder how far I could make any room in conversation with my staunchly Republican father who loves this show about the very obvious parallels to global warming and how his guys are treating it.

For that level of hairsplitting it's odd to criticise the scene where Shcherbina threatens to have Legasov shot if he doesn’t tell him how a nuclear reactor works and go on a riff about a supposed fear of shooting in other uncited characters when in fact Scherbina doesn't threaten to have him shot. He actually threatens to have him thrown out of the helicopter — which seems much more obviously hyperbolic and less "this scene is to show it was a society ruled by fear of the gun".

I also wonder if she missed some of the class implied by the British accents — I definitely got where class distinctions were supposed to lie in a way she says is wholly missed.

The bit where it does ring right is that ultimately it was the system itself to blame and that only partially comes across on screen at the expense of pointing at Dyatlov and co. I think that's fundamentally groping towards the same point as the "Game of Thrones was sociological storytelling until it wasn't" article that did the rounds a couple of weeks ago.

Yes, any careless and arrogant arsehole could have filled Dyatlov's slot and the system was churning out Dyatlovs by the score. But at the same time, it was actually Dyatlov and had he not acted the way he did in the chain of events, the explosion really might not have happened. Getting across both aspects is a tricky balance to strike, especially in a drama.

*reportedly acted, I guess

Mazin here v. much on the "it was fundamentally the society not Dyatlov The Villain" side of the fence, so he at least tried to get it over https://www.joe.ie/movies-tv/chernobyl-creator-explains-the-actions-of-dyatlov-the-man-who-insisted-the-test-took-place-671472

Just an aside, I think this was a really great use of ~television entertainment~ and it’s been a while since I’ve been this engrossed, moved, and thoughtful about wtf we’re doing here. Hope this wins a ton of awards and we can get more things of this caliber.

Was there any hype or anticipation for this? Seems to have come out of nowhere.

it does seem like that

finished ep 2
this show is emotionally destroying me by degrees
;_;
it is so good

Best TV thing I've seen for ages.

Listening to the soundtrack in isolation today, that lifted my mood.

Was there any hype or anticipation for this? Seems to have come out of nowhere.

My feeling is that this was a deliberate move on HBO and Sky's part. From an entertainment point of view, it does a fantastic job of making everyone forget about Game of Thrones and stop speculating about what HBO will do now its huge cash cow is gone. "We'll do this," say HBO and Sky, quietly, pushing Chernobyl at you and blindsiding you completely. But if they'd said beforehand that they were going to do that, people would have started watching Chernobyl with that in mind.

Although I could be giving them too much credit.

It's not worth much but it's worth noting that the show apparently is already the the highest rated (per imdb) TV show of all time, above the two Planet Earth docs, Breaking Bad, etc.

Yes, I feel like Sky in particular has always had something to hammock Game of Thrones to try and prevent churn on their pretty poor Now Entertainment package.

Most years has been quite forgettable; I wonder if even they knew what they had on their hands

bit insensitive to pull the cement mixer right up to the graves with the grieving widows right there! can you wait like 20 minutes, guy?

i'm sympathetic to the gessen article. there is quite a bit of heroic cornballism going on, and it would have been interesting to see more of the hierarchical deference that surely existed particularly among the apparatchiks, but it feels uncharitable. the very first scene of ep 1 explicitly dismisses the idea of dyatlov as the only, or even most responsible person. it's announcing it right up front: this is a TV drama, about particular characters, but they were not the only ones.

also her point about the shoemaker-turned-functionary feels a little undermined by slava malamud's unearthing of the photo of the actual coal minister who was... a former coal miner? NOT an office dude?

if you think this was a case of dramatic license gone mad you should see the liberties taken by that drama series gessen was a consultant on!

I really like Gessen as a writer and even though I largely disagree with that article I think the whole "this one person represents all the scientists" is a bit of a leap, plus it's a bit of a hero narrative, with a sprinkling of "if only they'd listened to the one woman" which obviously has noble roots but I'm not sure bureaucracy and idiocy on the scale of this event is more specific than the human condition.

Even before I knew the facts of that character the writing there felt a bit pushed and modish. A tiny bit. Fuck it tho, it is an amazing show.

I haven't enjoyed a HBO mini-series as much as this since the John Adams one and am quite happy to accept it's flaws and divergences from actual events.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-48559289

But in an interview with Komsomolskaya Pravda, Russia's most widely-read tabloid, Mr Muradov said his version of the show "proposes an alternative view on the tragedy in Pripyat".

I can't wait for this version where capitalist mind control undermines the integrity of reactor core..

One columnist declared the show a plot to undermine Russia's current atomic agency.

louise menschokov?

with a sprinkling of "if only they'd listened to the one woman"

I definitely saw it as a chance for them to cast a woman in a major speaking role. Which I think is something Mazin suggests in the podcast.

for sure. i can see that. i guess it might be more interesting or bold to have given her some flaws tho, imo.

i present the apex of chernobylposting - "Steamed Core" pic.twitter.com/7bIxsMQFJ8

— Comrade Valentina ☭ (@leftistthot420) June 8, 2019

for sure. i can see that. i guess it might be more interesting or bold to have given her some flaws tho, imo.

Agreed. She's not really a character at all.

Watson didn't have too much to work with but I thought the feigned accent was a bit incongruous and unnecessary, especially with mostly the rest of the cast speaking in their normal accents.

Fuck it tho, it is an amazing show.

The review that got it right was iirc the NYTimes, which basically said here's what it gets right, here's what it gets wrong, but none of that really matters because it's so good and the broader beats are pretty accurate.

Anyone listen to the companion podcast with the creator and Peter Sagal from NPR? I assume it's serious, but his voice unfortunately is pretty inextricably linked to comedy.

That's the podcast I was talking about. I agree that it's a bit weird to hear them talk so chirpily about it.

interesting we don't have a dedicated thread for the TV drama. Anyway, I gave my dad the DVD at Christmas and I'm not sure where this comes from but he insists on pronouncing it 'SHER-nuh-bill' despite that not being how anyone says it in the show. Who says it that way???

It's a strange phenomenon. I have friends who have been in Beijing for years but still somehow call it "Beizhing"

how are you meant to say it?

'Bay-Djing'?

You can try to match the sounds / tones if you like

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUIaFSbQ5nc

But this is a better approximation than "Beizhing"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GlHsHe1jRQk

I'm not sure my ear can discern the difference between that and the 'wrong way' other than a harder 'j' sound?