Oh ffs gabi - is it a twig or a giant tropical redwood you've got stuck somewhere uncomfortable? Not ALL nature documentaries have to (or can) be megabudget Attenborough-voiced examinations of the animals and nothing but. (And, BTW, there were and probably still are plenty of people who thought that Attenborough getting crawled all over by a bunch of gorillas was just a bit of presenter showboating that didn't educate you in any way about the animals).
Sure, some of the Danger Men Adventure Antics on this Papua New Guinea series were excessive, but surely there is also a case to be made for showing exactly how bloody difficult (and dangerous) it can be to do real biology/zoology in the field, not to mention trying to film all those amazing animals. In a way it's "truer to life" to actually see the vast amount of effort, logistics and expense involved in doing stuff properly.
(Also - along with most of the women I know I developed rather a crush on some of these investigators - shan't say which ... is it possible that women of your acquaintance felt the same and you're feeling a little spurned?
Myself I watched in amazement (even though I HATED the music and didn't rate the voiceover script much either) at these extraordinary creatures and landscapes, rejoiced in seeing real scientists get incredibly excited about them and explain a bit (OK a teeny tiny bit) about the process of identifying them, why new species are so important etc, and thought the programmes actually did an unusual and half-decent job in exposing some of the inherent tensions between preserving wildlife and meeting the needs of local people.
The cuscus was brilliant, the giant woolly rat not bad either, the birds astonishingly beautiful, and the sort of "biosphere in the sky" right at the top of that ridge one of the most breathtaking sequences ever filmed.
and to those who feel sick at watching a man covered in moths - how did you react to (slightly idiotic) Danger Man trying to let a frog hop off and it going SPLAT right onto his FACE
??
