Celebrity Race Across The World; Chris Packham: Is it Time to Break the Law?

“When I first watched Race Across the World in 2019 I marvelled that here was a travel show that didn’t involve celebrities getting paid to go on holiday. How naive. Apologies. Because now, obviously, there’s Celebrity Race Across the World. Of course there is. Does it work as well as the original, given that’s about ordinary people unable to use phones or credit cards and relying on the kindness of strangers, when these lot are already famous and Mel Blatt was recognised as a singer from All Saints? Yes and no.”
Carol Midgley, The Times

“It’s almost irrelevant that the racers this time around are famous; this version of Race Across the World is just as compulsive and wonderful as the one about normos like us. Still, whether they’ll run into a kind fan with a bed/food/a lift to offer remains to be seen. I’d rather that than more taxis, though.”
Emily Baker, The i

“The stakes are lower when celebrities are involved, rather than members of the public, but it is still an enjoyable show because the format is so strong. And we can study the family dynamics. For Emma [Judd], the journey is a chance to spend time with her son [[Harry Judd], who left home to be a pop star aged 17. She likened his departure to a bereavement, and is clearly delighted to have her boy back. “This takes me back a bit,” she said, peeling an apple for him. “Do you want soldiers tomorrow for breakfast?””
 Anita Singh, Telegraph

“Four teams began a 6,200-mile journey from the Moroccan city of Marrakesh to Tromso in Celebrity Race Across The World (BBC1). But they first had to answer a tricky but vital question: where the hell is Tromso?”
Roland White, Daily Mail

“Could nice Chris Packham from the telly, the guy who seems to be Attenborough’s obvious successor as our leading presenter of epic natural history series, really risk throwing all that away by turning up to an oil refinery with a hacksaw and a plan? His final interviewee, Just Stop Oil and Extinction Rebellion co-founder Roger Hallam, thinks a revered public figure being “banged up” could be the tipping point the movement needs. In the end, Packham does not make TV history by publicly announcing his intention to commit an imprisonable offence, though he does reiterate his support for climate activists who cross that line. There is one obvious reason to hope he doesn’t get himself sent to jail: it would stop him making programmes as honest, as challenging and as urgently relevant as this.”
Jack Seale, The Guardian

“Packham felt guilt at being part of a generation of conservationists who have “completely failed” to protect the planet. He invoked Emmeline Pankhurst’s “deeds not words”. He wasn’t advocating blowing up pipelines or anything in which people might get hurt, but he has reached a point where he considers law-breaking the “ethically responsible thing to do”.It’s a valid debate, but it sometimes felt underpowered. Roger Hallam, co-founder of Extinction Rebellion, seemed to suggest Packham should get himself banged up in prison because “major things” happen when public figures “lead”. Possibly, but it could scupper his career at the BBC. It’s probably why we watched this on Channel 4.”
Carol Midgley, The Times

“All the way to the end, the doc pretended Packham was still making up his mind about how to respond to global warming, leading to the inevitable big reveal. Well, Packham, is it time to break the law? “I’ve reached the point where I now consider it the ethically responsible thing to do,” he concluded. It was presented as a bombshell, akin to the bit in The Masked Singer when the mystery guest removes their headgear. But it was the only possible outcome of a documentary (and presenter) that wore its heart on its sleeve. What a pity Packham didn’t set the stunts to one side and make the case for direct action. When it comes to the climate crisis, there is surely no room for games or gimmicks.
Ed Power, The i

“Is Packham dangerous or naïve, using his platform to suggest the possibility of violent action? He’s certainly ignoring the BBC’s directive that stars associated with its shows – he has been the face of Springwatch for years – should be cautious about expressing political opinions. There was a desperation to him that felt slightly uncomfortable to watch. Some of it was carefully framed for the cameras – a shot of him with head in hands, despairing after an interview with Lord Lilley, who challenged his claims about rising global temperatures.”
Anita Singh, Telegraph