Reviews & Ratings for
WW III: World War III (TV) More at IMDbPro »Der 3. Weltkrieg (original title)

13 out of 14 people found the following review useful:
1989 - The tension between East and West is at it's peak. The chance for a hot war is more realistic than ever before..., 3 December 2002

Author: lycka18 (petber2000@gmx.de) from Hannover, Germany

This fake documentary is both interesting and exciting. Who doesn't wonder how our world would look like today if the wall didn't come down in 1989? Would everything still be as it used to be? Or would the east march against the west?

The documentary sets off when the tension is at it's peak in 1989 shortly before the Berlin Wall came down. A man from East Berlin escapes over the wall into West Berlin - the eastern soldier on patrol has two choices: let him escape or try to shoot him. He decides himself for shooting him, which means that he has to shoot into the West. This is like the trigger for the whole conflict.

This documentary is well made, and in the typical interview and report style. It pictures our fear of that time, when we all were scared of a hot war between the two world powers. Sometimes the interviewed people can't hide a smile about the fake stuff they say, but this is barely noticeable. The background sticks closely to the true story until 1989 and the results were more than realistic at this time.

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
documentary fiction at it's finest, 2 September 2010

Author: nsanbizkt from United States

Wow, I was really impressed with this movie. It takes actual events, speeches & interviews then pieces them into a movie that to be honest, I really did not expect to be very good. Once it started, I had to watch the rest of it, even though I was very busy. I would pause it and come back to it. Well done! I'm surprised it's not well known. Very realistic and anyone that knows the history of the cold war can very easily see how this was a possible outcome and real threat. Thank God it didn't turn out this way. The speeches of George Bush were from the Gulf War. Which were cut and input perfectly to match a movie based in a separate region and situation. I'm impressed. Robert Stone should consider working for the government, he could easily manipulate the masses... lol.

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Excellent, thought-provoking production for those interested in the Cold War era., 19 February 2011

Author: humbleradio from Tokyo, Japan

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Contrary to what some find objectionable or even biased, the Soviet Union was, at that time, literally on the brink of what is depicted to have happened in this faux documentary.

I found this production unbiased and well-researched, showing that many within both the Soviet politburo and military were against any military action, as were their counterparts in the west, but that an alternative was impractical for their survival.

The use of news footage reminds us that the events shown did happen. Of course, they are not linked to the events depicted - sometimes occurring in different regions or even countries. But their use does show us that the human condition is very fragile and governments and populations can explode into erratic, violent directions sometimes with little more than fine print writing on the proverbial wall.

As someone who not only lived through that era, but served in a capacity to have access to many events that went unreported, I can say without fear of contradiction that this film does not even scratch the surface as to the amount and severity of close calls and opportunities for war which have occurred.

Many times by luck and others by the action of even a single individual prevented what might have been a third world war.

All in all, I found this to be a wholly believable scenario of a Cold War 'what if...'.

0 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
First is very good, 16 November 2009

Author: rf_mikael from United States

I liked the first half a lot because I generally like such "alternative history" mocumentaries - it's not for everyone though. I agree with grimmig-1 on many points, he obviously knows what he is talking about. Of course, NATO had an overall advantage in the quality of conventional forces. But this did not matter, because NATO never had sufficient forces to stop Soviet/Warsaw Pact forces by conventional means only. Such a strategy was too expensive, especially for the Germans. A better strategy, at the least for the Europeans, was to rely on American nuclear arms to deter/stop eastern armies. And, of course, Americans have made it clear early on that they would not hesitate to use nuclear forces first... Overall, an enjoyable movie.

Add another review

Related Links