When Prehistoric Planet first premiered in 2022, it vaulted natural-history storytelling into a new era by marrying cutting-edge visual effects with immersive narration and the scientific authority of the BBC Natural History Unit. Its first two seasons (about dinosaurs and narrated by Sir David Attenborough) were met with near-universal acclaim for their astonishing CGI realism and evocative depictions of life 66 million years ago. With Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age (a five-episode Apple TV+ production released in late 2025) the series pushes those ambitions further by shifting its gaze from Mesozoic giants to the Pleistocene Epoch, a period when woolly mammoths, sabre-toothed cats, giant bears, and an array of remarkable megafauna roamed an Earth shaped by ice, wind, and climate upheaval. While this shift represents an exciting new chapter, the result is as impressive visually as it is uneven scientifically and narratively.
On a purely visual level, Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age sets a new bar for prehistoric CGI. From snow-blown tundras to sprawling grasslands, the environments feel convincingly alive, and creatures (whether dwarf elephants or giant bears) exhibit detailed fur animation, muscular motion, and behavioural nuance that rarely feels artificial. It is clear that most of the environments and some of the species are real, yet you never question the reality of the CGI animals. The series achieves moments of real cinematic power such as a herd of mammoths trudging through whiteout storms, or a scimitar-toothed cat stalking its prey through frost-etched grass, these scenes transcend typical nature documentary fare. The sequences rival modern wildlife films in sheer spectacle, aided by Hans Zimmer-led scoring that punctuates dramatic beats with emotional resonance. Technically, the production also makes interesting choices behind the scenes. For instance, the use of technical reference puppetry to aid animators in achieving naturalistic movement highlights a commitment to handcrafted detail, a choice that distinguishes this series from pure computer generated imagery and reinforces the marriage of artistry and technology in bringing extinct creatures to life.
One of the most noticeable changes from earlier seasons is the narrational voice. Long-time fans of Prehistoric Planet (and other natural history documentaries) may miss the authoritative calm of David Attenborough. For Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age, the producers opted for actor Tom Hiddleston, known for dramatic roles but less associated with documentary voiceover. While Hiddleston’s delivery is polished and expressive, it sometimes leans toward theatricality rather than the grounded educational tone Attenborough perfected, at times blurring the line between factual narration and dramatic storytelling. This tonal shift contributes to the series feeling more like a cinematic adventure than a rigorous scientific exploration, a choice that will delight some viewers and frustrate others.
Aesthetics aside, the science must also be judged! Overall, Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age incorporates up-to-date palaeontological research and leans on consultations with specialists to depict behaviours and ecosystems. It avoids simplistic portrayals. For example, focusing not just on predator-prey chases, but on social dynamics within herds and the environmental pressures these animals faced. Yet this ambition is unevenly realised. Some episodes fall back on broad, outdated tropes such as the depiction of more extreme climates than current palaeoclimatic data supports, reducing the complexity of Pleistocene climates in favour of dramatic contrast between ice and desert. In other cases, the series simplifies timelines and geographic context, presenting scenes that suggest contemporaneity between species that actually lived in different regions or epochs. This can confuse viewers unfamiliar with geological nuance, undermining the show’s educational credibility. A further scientific critique is the treatment of human-environment interactions. Although Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age ends by acknowledging humans as part of the extinction story for some megafauna, this theme is often side-lined or underemphasised. In an era where climate change and anthropogenic impacts are central to environmental discourse, the series’ reluctance to fully integrate these human narratives feels like a missed opportunity to link ancient extinction phenomena with present-day conservation concerns.
Structurally, Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age opts for a vignette approach, with each episode spotlighting different environments and species. While this allows a dazzling variety of creatures and landscapes, it sometimes sacrifices depth for breadth. Episodes can feel rushed, with little time for sustained focus on individual animals or long-term narrative arcs, a marked contrast to earlier Prehistoric Planet seasons and classic documentaries like Walking With Beasts, which often spent more time building stories around specific animals or family groups. This brevity, coupled with a tendency toward ‘safe’ resolutions (where conflict often ends on upbeat or predictable notes) further softens the emotional stakes. Some may feel that this pattern of happy endings diminishes the realism expected in wildlife storytelling, where survival is uncertain and harsh outcomes are part of the natural world.
Despite these shortcomings, Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age remains an accessible entry point into Pleistocene life for general audiences, and its stunning visuals may inspire further curiosity about Earth’s deep past. The show’s broad appeal (from curious adults to younger viewers) helps introduce palaeontology and ancient ecology to new eyes. However, the series’ educational impact is blunted by its lack of clear contextual framing at points. Without consistent geographic cues, timeline markers, or explicit scientific exposition woven into the main narration rather than relegated to end-episode segments, some viewers may come away with a fragmented sense of when and where these creatures lived. In the broader context of prehistoric media, Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age occupies an intriguing middle ground. It is far more scientifically informed and visually sophisticated than many animated or dramatised depictions, yet it doesn’t fully embrace the rigor and narrative discipline of traditional educational documentaries. Compared to Walking With Beasts (my benchmark for prehistoric storytelling), Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age dazzles in spectacle but occasionally falters in scientific precision and narrative cohesion.
So what is the final verdict? Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age is a technical and aesthetic achievement, a visual feast that revives extinct worlds with unprecedented detail and cinematic flair. Its portrayal of Ice Age megafauna is often breath-taking, and its production values set a high standard for future prehistoric storytelling. Yet beneath this surface lies a more complex legacy. The series occasionally prioritises dramatic effect over scientific precision, sacrifices narrative depth for episodic variety, and soft-pedals the role of humans in shaping past ecosystems. These choices make Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age entertaining and inspiring, but also less incisively educational than it could have been. In the end, Prehistoric Planet: Ice Age is best appreciated as a gateway (a way to spark interest in ancient life) rather than a definitive account of the Pleistocene. For viewers seeking uncompromising educational rigour, supplementary materials (such as reading) or more specialised documentaries may be necessary. But for those who want to be visually transported into a long-lost world of giants and extremes, this season delivers in spades. What were your thoughts on the series?
If you liked this post and enjoy reading this blog, please consider supporting me on Patreon where you will also gain access to exclusive content. If you enjoy reading my blog, why not subscribe using the form below?
