[US Navy Vet]

I thought that it was "reasonable" and Pretty Free of "Revisionism". Watching Episode No 3 tonight.

[MomwithHope]

Yes, we are watching right now and have been DVRing it. It’s pretty good.

[MacNaughton]

It sux. The production sets, music, actors, many of the commentators, and some totally misplaced archive footage. Youngsters who don't know much about that period of world history, i.e., high school graduates after 1980, might benefit from it.

Until someone presents more info about the Tommy who had Hitler in his sights and didn't shoot, I call B-S. I thought the bit about Hitler trimming his moustache to allow a gas mask seal interesting - also wonder if it was true.

Agree with all the comments about the Enfield/Mauser and B-17. I'll add 1 - Patton riding on the M3 Stuart tank which was developed until around 1940.

Needed more info on Stalin, but after all, this is the Hitler Channel.

Didn't know about the role of the Japanese in WWI or their presence at the Treaty of Versaille. I will have to follow up on that.

[Captainpaintball]

The casting was good...

[The Great RJ]

More or less true to history, but I noticed a lot of small things that were not historically accurate. For example Patton riding a tank in WW-I... the tank looks like a WW-II Stuart tank and nothing like the WW-I Renaults. Chamberlain flew to meet with Hitler in a BOAC passenger plane not the Lancaster bomber shown in the movie.

[Jack Deth]

Since when did a young George Patton ride into battle in WWI on the back of a Stuart light tank/fast reconnaissance vehicle?

Way too many wrong rifles and erroneous aerial film clips with B-17s, P-51s and 47s portraying German aircraft. Though back stories of major characters and battles look solid with not a lot of revisionism.

Overall consensus: B

[Bratch]

HOW WRONG IS THE HISTORY CHANNEL ABOUT STALIN? LET'S COUNT THE WAYS

---

Whether politically motivated or just looking for an intriguing tagline, the History Channel's claim that "World War I made Stalin a man and World War II made him a tyrant" is absolutely, 100% factually wrong in every which-around-way you want to look at it.

Yes, Stalin had been a tyrant for nearly four decades before the war, but it is also a fact that Stalin was a "man" long before World War I and -- how's this for irony -- Uncle Joe was at his least tyrannical during World War II.  

[gusty]

I watched the first hour on Sunday and had to turn it off because of the constant string of historical inaccuracies. It was like the research was done by a room of 5th graders. It was absolute dreck. Just a few of the stupidities uttered or portrayed.

- Portrayed the use of poison gas in 1914, reality it was 1915

- Made Gallipoli seem like the battle lasted a few days at most, reality it was over many months.

- Stated the reason for the Villa punitive expedition was the murder of mining engineers, did not even mention Columbus, NM.

-Stated that the Bolsheviks overthrew the Czar, reality the Bolsheviks overthrew Kerensky, not the Czar.

-Stated that after the Bolshevik Revolution, the Germans were able to move troops to the Italian Front for the Battle of Caporetto, reality Caporetto occurred in 1916, not the winter of 1917-18.

- Stated in 1914 the Allies were just Britain, France, and Russia, no mention or map reference that Serbia was even involved in the war.

- Stated that the Ottoman Empire was in the war from the beginning, wrong.

- Had a general ask Churchill for his resignation as First Lord of the Admiralty. Only the Prime Minister would of been in the position to do it.

- American troops were armed with Lee Enfield SMLE’s, while the British were using Springfield 03’s

This was only the first hour, I'm afraid to find out what other idiocies were uttered in the next 4 hours.