It shows no sources, glosses over the leaps of generations and seems to need to find something amazingly out of the ordinary, when everyone who does genealogy knows how ordinary everyone is ,so nothing like the UK series,
I had notifications for it from Ancestry.com....and suspected it would be full of lots of 'golly's'..'wows'...and gee whizzes.....B celebrities and no substance.
actually you have described it to a T, there pasta. Susan Sarandon is next, I consider her someone of integrity and so I hope she has more to say about it instead of just 'gee wow' and 'Oh My gawd', lol
I don't 'do genealogy' but am interested.....but not in these programmes. The British versions were much better.
Seems terribly unlikely to me that those two film stars have amazing family histories with incredibly famous forbears.......a witch of Salem and the Sun King ?
I can't believe it.
Don';t forget this was made for the American market where the interest span of the average American viewer is far less than their British counter part.
It makes you wonder, and this applies to the British programme as well, how many people are researched before one is found that has suitable ancestry to build a programme around.
I could be the most successful film star around but the majority of my ancestors were farm laborers and wouldn't make for an interesting programme.
They blatently miss out proving any research and gloss over several generations. The British show does tend to come across as thoroughly researched and slightly less dramatic. They have produced a tree that must have been compiled centuries ago and literally yaken someone else's research and conclusions. I know it isn't a science but it's not that easy either.