Unduly Harsh Criticism

@daddy I'm thinkn this exact same thing. My nephew is in high school and initially had no interest in watching this, but apparently got kinda hooked. My sister told me he got his friends to watch the last part with him and now they seem legit interested in history for the first time. Their history teacher won't even teach them about the holocaust, he just tells them to define terms or do homework in class, and this is at one of the better public schools in the city--magnet. WISH I waz kidding! I am into history a lot, it's always what I like to learn most about, so I think the criticism for this show is fair to a good degree. However, I think some of it might be coming from the (understandable) underestimation of exactly how few people have access to accurate historical information. If I had to bet, based on the style and pace of the show, (and the narrator--hawkeye?), this wasn't meant for the people who knew every detail about that 30 year period, but instead for the people who only had limited info as to what may have happened in the past and less of a desire to hear about it. I know that those students leaving that history class are gonna want to go home and play GTA or somethin, not "compensate" for all that history they're missin!

So I agree that it's not a perfect show, they never can be, and I wish they'd had a better budget or distributed the funds better in production. It needed some tightening along with the fact checking (TO SAY THE LEAST). However, my nephew just learned more history than his teacher would give him and also learned that history can be interesting. My sister says he wants to "discuss" WWII with me when he next sees me to learn more and he knows I've studied a lot about it. I wouldn't trade the foot in the door for any other tv programming for him TBH.

I agree that it's great this series is getting younger folks more interested in history, my feeling is that they could have done this while still getting the facts right. And getting the facts straight doesn't mean they had to film more scenes, spend more money, etc. It would be in the writing and narration. As, for example, when the Japanese are moving on the Philippines, point out that this was just one part of an attack all over Asia, not imply it's the main one. That is an extra one or two lines, and wouldn't cost tons of money.

The uniforms and equipment issues are debatable, and I agree that you can't expect them to have all airplanes, tanks, etc. just perfect. But they could have used newsreel films to show the correct things, which wouldn't have cost tons of money. And a few things, like using the wrong helmets, is pretty obvious. If they're going to use one type, why not just get it right, and use the other one? Presumably, they got all this stuff from rental houses, war surplus, or whatever. I just think they could have done all the great things, like getting people more interested in history, while still getting their facts straight. If you're going to try to educate people, what's the point, if you don't get it right? Just make a fiction film or something. They didn't have to film more scenes of other battles or anything, just use what they had, but don't scramble the history. You can say that the big picture is correct-- we won, Hitler lost, etc., but the details are important, too. I think that is the main complaint of people on this board-- that with all the great resources of the History Channel, they muddled the facts. It could have been such a great series otherwise. And why is it harder to use the correct facts than incorrect ones?

As someone who is a huge WW2 history buff/ nerd I agree with you. There are many historical inaccuracies in this show (read my thread), but the fact that this show sparked the interests of so many kids is great. I mean the History "Hitler" Channel back in the '90s sparked my interest World War II as a kid, so even though this show has some falsities I liked it a lot and am glad they are returning to their roots.

I mean when I was a kid I watched all of the countless programs on the history channel about World War II. Then I went to my library and starting checking out books and reading them in my free time... which also lead to a life long passion for reading. I can honestly boast that I have more World War II books on my two large book shelves, nook, and in storage than any B&N book store I've been in and most public libraries. all of this passion was sparked because of shows like this when I was a kid. So if this show helps kids find the same passion for history that I have found I am all for that!

I take the opposite conclusion, this series did NOT spark and interest in history, it merely demonstrates that there is a market for a well produced history series. The fact that such a flawed show could get such interest simply because it has some decent editing and production as compared to earlier presentations proves that a well produced, accurate show would do very well.

So perhaps this will inspire the History Channel to go back to its roots and hopefully do so with a higher quality production value.

If they can't get the smallest detail right how can we trust them on the bigger ones?

Let me begin by saying that I don't really mind if budget constraints forced the producers to "cheat" in cases of using wrong weapons, equipment, etc. Purist like myself do notice this stuff (like when they showed the Germans using post war Soviet T-62s). But then again, I would argue filmmakers shouldn't go in for reenactments in the first place, as they really serve no useful purpose and waste money, money they could have used to do something actually useful, like hiring fact checkers.

For there is no excuse for not getting their facts right. That is simply inexcusable, especially when it happens time and time again. If I didn't know any better I would have to assume this was done by some high school dropouts. Had this script been published in book form the publisher would have had to withdraw it from circulation and then send the whole sorry lot to the recycler (or as in the case of Atari and its ET game, to a secret landfill somewhere in Utah.)

If it encourages people to develop an interest in history, that's great. But if I were to choose between a good documentary and a dreadful documentary sparking someone's interest, I'd choose a good one. I just can't accept the notion that since it sparks people's interest we ought to give it a pass for what a turkey it is.

And I would send this one to the cornfield, hoping everyone would eventually believe it was all just a bad dream....

_______________________________________
Resolutely Analog In A Digital World!

"And I also think that the series will compel people to learn more about this time period that otherwise would not. "

Unfortunately life experience has taught me to be more cynical than you are. True, some will seek out more information on the subject. But most won't. They'll come away thinking they know a lot about what happened when in reality they were only presented with a superficial overview that was often historically inaccurate. For example the show made it appear as if the night of the long knives led to Hitler coming to power when in reality it was the other way around. Hitler was handed power in a 'democratic' process and later consolidated his power by purging his enemies. I think the distinction is important for young people to understand, that tyrants sometimes come to power by essentially peaceful means. They need to understand that just as freedom can be maintained through the ballot box it can also be surrendered that way.

Ah yes, your dumbed down, intellectually lazy American children will watch this and now believe that Hitler was rejected by the Austrian army, that Lenin and the Bolsheviks overthrew Tsar Nicholas of Russia, and --most important of all!-- Patton' s mounting a machine gun on a motorized car was one of the greatest military innovations of the early twentieth century (I can almost hear the USA! USA! Chants coming out of America's suburbs right now).

Then again, this is only relevant as a discussion point if we believe these overfed, medicated, cognitively deficient kids were able to sit through the six hours of this documentary in the first place.