Deadliest Warrior

I was alerted to this show in an episode of “You Have been watching” and in Charlie brooker’s Accompanying Article. I was intrigued and despite the poor reviews thought I’d have a look.

The format is this, take two warriors from history, compare their skills and weapons and then put them into a simulation to see who would win in a fight. Bravo bought this and so I was spared trying to find “other” sources. In fact, the only episode bravo didn’t show was the final abandonment of good taste with the IRA and the Taliban in a 5 on 5 fight. No, I’m serious, that was the last episode.

Now, normally I like this sort of thing, historical warriors and study of tactics and weapons intrigues me and the vs. element was a nice hook. Shame this largely fails on the first part.

The problem stems from this being a Spike TV production, so it is designed to entertain first and if you learn anything on the way they unreservedly apologise. Each show has two experst from each warrior demonstrating up to 5 signature weapons in combat. Not a bad idea, my first gripe is that it is all about the weapons, armour is sometimes covered and tactics are hinted at, but you don’t get the impression that aspects like training and tactics are even considered (Something which we even got on Showdown: Air combat).

Next is the weapons tests themselves, each weapon is pared with an equivelant from the other warrior and compared, in this they are remarkably incosistant, surely to accurately compare weapons they should eb tested in similar circumstances, and sometimes they are, usually on ballistics gel torsos, but other times we have tests on wooden targets, or skulls, or pigs vs ballistics gel, in short, trials obviously designed to show each weapon in its best light, but it irks my inner scientist. Second on the weapon test is that this could have provided some interesting history in how these weapons were adopted, origins and some general historical info (Such as how various pieces of asian weaponary is adapted from farm equipment for example). This is glossed over with a preference to seing a weapon in action and shouting “AWESOME!” it gets particularly tedious in contest such as Mafia vs. Yakuza and Green Beret vs. Spetsnaz, seeing what a halbeard or a Maori shark toothed club can do is actually vaguely interesting, but a gun, we know what that does, puts a hole in a person.

Finally its the experts themselves, and this is a criticism of the show rather than the people, who I’m sure are perfectly nice. They’re encouraged to smack talk each other through the show and it just makes the whole enterprise childish and tedious, yes the whoel series is pub argument territory anyway, but the “Oh yeah, well we can totally beat that” element just makes all the experts look petulant. The best experts were the two ex-Spetsnaz, who tolerated the bravado of the green beret equivalent with what looked like tired boredom. The closest they actually got to smack talk was when one finally caved and quietly murmered that he felt that the Green Beret training was a little too soft. This playground jibing is tedious when its enthusiasts, such as in Pirate vs Knight, but it gets somewhat uncomfortable in contests like Gladiator vs Apache, where the Apache was represented by an actual apache, yes, they’re an existing culture of people, while the Gladiator was covered by enthusiasts, the whole “My hobby is better than yoru culture” thing just didn’t sit right at all.

I’ll try not to extend this rant too far when I mention that Shaka Zulu never stood a chance in the battle against William Wallace since the version of Wallace used was the fictional one from Braveheart.

I know I’m dumb, I was warned, repeatedly. But I still expected better. Don’t know why, but I did. And you know what else, I watched it all, all of it. Why? I don’t know. Self Loathing perhaps.

On the forums they put forward suggestions for season 2. Mine are as follows:

Glasgow Ned Vs. Manchester Scally

A 5 on 5 bout obviously, who is the most irritating and possibly harmful small time criminal? The ned weapons could include kitchen knife, empty glass Irn-bru bottle, half brick and a plank of wood. The smack talk would be worth the admission price alone.

Chartered Accountant Vs. Estate Agent

Who would win in a fight to the death. I’d just like to see it happen.

Or better yet, lets leave what vestiges of reality we have behind

Klingon Warrior Vs. Peacekeeper Commando

Can the wild warrior spirit of the Klingons beat the Cold military organisation of the peacekeepers?

Spartan from Halo Vs. Space Marine from warhammer 40k

Both are genetically engineered armoured super soldiers, but will Spartan discipline beat the rabid faith of the marines?

And finally

Starfleet “Redshirt” Security Vs Imperial Storm trooper

One is good at dying, one can’t kill a fricking ewok, will the redshirt not die or will the storm trooper hit something.

Joking aside, I think this would suit the absurdity of the series, get some people dressed up as ficional warriors, do tests on weapons (Assisted by special effects) and do a mock battle.

I think that might be a distinctly watchable show