Skip to comments.Has anyone been watching the "History Channel's" Mini-Series "The World Wars"?
Posted on 05/28/2014 3:13:51 PM PDT by US Navy Vet
And if so what did everyone think?
awesome. loved it. pretty true to fact as well.
It is OK but has some really obvious goofs such as showing American troops and German troops shooting Lee Enfields.
Also shows Patton chasing Mexicans on a car and (technically they didn’t say that is how he killed them but you clearly are meant to think so) despite the fact that he killed them with a pistol in a gunfight.
They show Churchill with what looks like a .45 auto. I can’t say for sure that he never had one but it would look a lot more authentic if he was using a broomhandle Mauser.
Quite a bit of similar errors tho the history over all may be OK.
I thought the early history of Hitler was interesting, if factual. That is the problem with anything anymore, TV, Internet, everything is open to “revisionism”.
Yeah I saw the “German” “Enfields” too.
I am enjoying it. I have my doubts about Hitler cutting his moustache with a knife due to it not allowing him to seal his gas mask during the attack.
I truly like the way they portrayed Neville Chamberlain as foolish for his persistent denial of Hitler’s movement throughout Europe. Reminds me of todays liberal and Al Qaeda. Head in the sand.
They left a few important things out. The biggest was the rescue at Dunkirk.
I clicked to another channel when they showed a German B-17 bombing Poland.
That’s bad even by History Channel standards...
They also showed the ultra rare left handed Enfields.
They somehow did show Mussolini using a Carcano. Actually I am not sure what the Italians used in WWI but it probably was a Carcano.
I’ve been watching all day. Not bad. Not one once of bullshit that our government spews today.
If I’ve already watched “The World At War”, what do I gain from watching this?
I haven’t, but, was it aliens?
Could have done without that idiot McLame’s snide remarks about Patton...actually, could do without McLame and Panetta’s “commentary” altogether and that would bring the show up a notch or two.
Otherwise, quite informative...
They get the Russian Revolution wrong. No mention of the February Revolution, so leaving the impression that the Bolshevik coup d’etat in October 1917 was the whole revolution when it was not. They also have Stalin welcoming Lenin at the Finland Station and playing a leading role, when he was barely even there (it was Trotsky who ran that show). Fairly shoddy seems to me, plus the actors playing the leaders, both young and old, are uniformly lifeless and the re-enactments are mostly lame.
Other than that, lotsa fun.
Bull. The B-17 took Germany down. If it was an area occupied then so be it.
The thing that gets on my nerves is the History Channel has taken to showing “rerun” scenes within the show. I saw the scene of Hitler trimming his mustache in the trench three times in the same episode. It’s almost like they didn’t have enough footage to fill out the show. Kind of like the old Batman episodes only they do the “refresher” to bring you up to speed after every commercial break.
Maybe that’s being picky but it’s annoying to me.
Pretty entertaining. Wish they showed more of a young Stalin.
I watched a good bit of it last night. Other than hardware inaccuracies, which every show will have, it’s a good series. They are giving short shrift to the changes in Japan that turned them from a democracy to a militaristic society. They also didn’t give enough attention to Stalin’s USSR, although I will admit they made no apologies for him.
It is a whitewash.
It opened with the false myth of a Wall street guy jumping out the window. Friedman and Schwartz long ago looked at the death rates and checked news paper reports and there is ZERO evidence of any more suicides or Wall Street types killing themselves due to the crash. Heck the NYTimes did not call the stock market crash one of the top stories of 1929 in its end of the year review that year.
Then they neglect the admiration the American left had for the national socialists in Italy and Germany.
The History Channel is fun to watch. But it is biased left wing history and always slanted.
You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll wonder who was fighting who and with what!
PS: Is there any movie you haven't seen?
At least they didn't show it bombing Pearl Harbor.
I enjoy the mini marathons of W at W. One I’d like to see is WW II - GI Diary.
Any Barbra Streisand movie.
You need a copy of the March 1906 Cosmo.
Was it one of the ones that was forced down and they recycled?
I read the Germans had a bunch of US planes they “re-used”.
You are my hero.
The World at War is the standard by which all war documentaries are measured.
From a tactics perspective, nothing beats, “Battlefield.”
I miss the gulf war and world war 2 channel as history once was. I also miss when A & E was a higher brow channel.
No, they were showing a B-17 when Germany invaded Poland in 39’.
Not an He-111 or an Do-17, a 4 engine B-17...
Battlefield is a good one too, good info on the armies, leaders, and equipment as well as the history.
Would that be the famous Flying Festung?
I remember when The History Channel was called “The Hitler Channel.”
It was good and we learned a few things that surprised us. Seemed to be factual. About 1/2 way in I was starting to see a bias towards liberal commentors (that includes Powell) then I saw Rusmsfeld. The intro by El-Presidente kind of made me want to puke, but other than that....
The jap aegis missile cruiser was a big screw up as well.
Some factual errors concerning Russia. In the episode one they stated that Lenin deposed the tzar. Actually, Lenin arrived in Russia after the tzar had already abdicated due to the February revolution. Lenin and the Bolsheviks took power with a coup in October and promptly killed Nicholas II and his family.
My thought was that the creators of the mini-series didn’t have the time or desire to explain all the details, so they went with a really short version. Otherwise I am getting ready to watch episode 3 tonight.
Very interesting details on the young Hitler. I wonder how the Brit that had him in his sights and let him go felt later, if factual?
If they can’t get simple things like that right, I figure it’s not going to be worth my time.
I think I saw several reruns of the same three episodes while I was recuperating in a hospital room after gall bladder removal over a few days. Felt like I was in some of those battles being half doped up.
I agree. Added to that series is that many of the major players were still alive and were interviewed.
In the WWI scene where Patton was on the back of a tank directing the assault - does anybody know if that was supposed to be a French tank? I didn’t think we even had our own tanks at that point - but I haven’t studied WWI as much as I should.
I noticed that all the Germans in the opening scenes were firing custom made left handed Mausers as well.
There was also a Battlefield: Vietnam. I learned so much about that war I never knew before.
Actually, I enjoyed some of the stuff about younger Hitler and Churchill, Churchill and Chamberlain. Holding my breath to see if tonight they’ll show all the Soviet spies in FDR’s administration. /s
I don’t think they identified them but they should have been French Renault tanks. They did look right but I am no expert.
Patton did ride the tanks into battle but according to his biography he was sitting on the front of the tanks and running back and forth to communicate as they did not have radios in the tanks.
I hope that is a joke. lol
Unaware of that one, I’ll have it by the weekend. Thanks!
very true, it used to be a really good channel
I think they said Patton had light Italian tanks.
I love it and learning a lot. However, how on earth did history know of the British officer who had Hitler in his sites - but let him go? They knew the Brit’s name, so I’m wondering how they came about this account.