IMDb > "A History of Britain" (2000) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
 "A History of Britain" More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 9 reviews in total 

20 out of 21 people found the following review useful:
A fascinating journey through time, 21 May 2005
Author: George Parker from Orange County, CA USA

"A History of Britain" is a beautifully done 15x55 minute miniseries (5 DVDs) in which British Jew and Columbia University professor Simon Schama accompanies you in person and with narration on a journey through British history from the Iron Age through Winston Churchill. Not caring to paint his portrait of Britain with broad brush strokes, the eloquent Schama talks and walks you through time as he hops from one historical benchmark to another, pausing to explain each point in time, the forces at work, and its effect on history set against a backdrop castles and manors, cities and farms, queens and beggars, pictures and maps, relics and treasures, and locations spanning several continents. Schama doesn't spend time exalting Britain but delves into the harsh realities which both forged and bedeviled one of the world's great empires. "A History of Britain" serves up great gulps of information, assumes some knowledge of British history, uses words which may be unfamiliar to the average American audience, doesn't have enough show and tell visual aids to make for an easily assimilated presentation, and, unfortunately is sans captions or subtitles. However, the tradeoff between didactics and aesthetics is such that it should be an enjoyable and educational watch for anyone interested in British history. (A)

Was the above review useful to you?

18 out of 22 people found the following review useful:
Nicely done documentary, 19 January 2002
Author: John Morrison from Vancouver, BC Canada

The series exists on video as "A History of Britain I (3500BC - 1603AD)" and "A History of Britain II (1603 - 1776)". The following is based upon viewing the latter.

"A History of Britain II (1603 - 1776)". This series is probably more interesting for a non British viewer because of the time period: the emergence of Great Britain out of conflict between England and Scotland, the waning of the power of the monarch, the related growth of the power of the elected assembly, catholicism vs protestantism, civil war (parliament vs the monarchy), democracy as a means of mitigating the power of the monarch, exploration and growing relationships with the world beyond Europe.

It is a recent production (2000), it meets modern production values and it is not dry - typical handicaps of this genre. The presenter has a breezy style which you'll either enjoy or it will grate! He certainly knows his stuff and sticks to the broad themes. Fascinating stuff.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
HiStory of Britain, 25 August 2009
8/10
Author: Rindiana from Germany

...or rather fifteen cleverly constructed, flawlessly executed and lavishly produced deliberately personal one-hour essays on British history.

Schama's mixture of broad strokes and an often overwhelming wealth of information, narrated in a rather highbrow if stylistically splendid fashion by the host himself with a vaguely vain, but nonetheless likable air of ironic detachment and unbiasedness, may not be to everyone's taste, but proves to be a deeply satisfying way to spend an exciting 15 hours.

Keep in mind: It's A History, not THE History of Britain! Enjoy the often unpredictable connections Schama lays open without taking them for granted.

8 out of 10 history repeatings

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
Schama's Gripping Episode !, 1 October 2010
7/10
Author: Jade Smith from United Kingdom

Having recently watched the episode "A History Of Britain" with my fellow A-level class, i wanted to share my enjoyment on such a gripping documentary. I find myself able to agree with Schama's revisionist interpretation on the causes of the civil war. Simon's enthusiasm helped bring entertainment to the episode as well as portraying a picture into the audiences minds. However at times this "enthusiasm" came across as being slightly pompous and arrogant. But in comparison to David Starkey who uses more academic language, i found Simon Schama a lot easier to follow and understand. I think he did an excellent job at replaying the causes of the civil war and i would strongly recommend other A level students to watch this to help broaden their historical knowledge.

Was the above review useful to you?

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
What a fabulous series!, 12 August 2009
Author: yanshida from China

Simon Schama is not a revisionist; he's a reviver; a magical veterinarian, who has resuscitated a dead horse. And that's not simple. Kudos to Simon Schama and his fabulous series. A History of Britain is exactly that: a history, not the history. It's entertaining, exactly what the teaching of history should be; it bakes, rendering couch potatoes unstrung; and it's downright riveting. The BBC have always produced the best in documentary programming, and A History of Britain does not disappoint. If you have to beg, borrow or steal, it is highly recommended that anyone with half a brain dash off and purchase this jewel. Thank you and goodnight.

Was the above review useful to you?

1 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
An exciting take on British History..., 30 September 2010
8/10
Author: zdjones from United Kingdom

I recently watched the programme on the British Civil War. It is clear from the beginning that Simon Schama, the presenter, has taken on a revisionist view of the causations leading to the War which I personally agree with. I enjoyed Simon's dramatic presenting style and the visuals, for instance when he's standing on the battlefield where the Civil War took place, which are particularly useful in creating an image of events in your head. Some scenes of the documentary are filmed from above which helps to heighten drama and suspense. He is somewhat egotistical but I find this only adds to the entertainment value of the programme. I find Schama much easier to understand than his counterpart David Starkey who uses academic language that makes it much more difficult to follow. Overall, I enjoyed the video and found it to be an exciting and often quirky take on British history. I hope to watch more of the collection of 15 programmes in the future.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 8 people found the following review useful:
Not the easiest of programmes to follow...., 2 November 2006
6/10
Author: camelot2302 from Germany

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

After watching this mammoth series (15 programmes), I have come to the conclusion that Simon Schama is a great historian but he is not the easiest guy to listen to. He uses 10 words when 5 would suffice and he tends to ramble (well, he IS a professor!). Plus you are bombarded with so many times, dates, places and names that if you are temporarily distracted for a moment, you end up completely lost and you have to rewind back a few scenes to pick up the story again.

There are also some periods of history which I didn't think were necessary to include. He also dwells on particular incidents which to me don't seem that important in the whole scheme of things and he skips past things which I thought he should have spent more time on.

The DVD extras are pretty dire but then again, after 15 history programmes, what else could the BBC offer in the way of extras? I suppose not much.

On the whole, a well-made history series but it could have been a bit shorter, the dialogue tighter and more concise, and Schama could have cut his vocabulary a little. The man likes to talk on and on whereas I prefer my information to be short, concise and to the point. I found myself very bored in places and skipping big parts. I am an avid history enthusiast but I was disappointed by this box set. I expected more and got much less.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 9 people found the following review useful:
lol Slanted view of Britain, 13 July 2010
7/10
Author: machngunjoe from United States

The Host is maybe the dorkiest guy ever to host a documentary. But that is OK!

Make no mistake this is a history of Britain, produced by Britain, wrote by a Brit, and hosted by a Brit, and therefore it is a pretty biased view of their History. Lots of justifications without a debate, lots of claims of Divine Right. Also I believe this entire documentary is made for Brit's. For example there is a lot of "we" and "us" phrased in the hosts remarks, as if he is speaking to his fellow countrymen.

But I rented this knowing that I would get a favorable depiction of their history. I rented this as a starting point, because I knew nothing of early British history. So it is good so far. I have seen volumes 1-5, and think that if you, the viewer, are looking for a very basic starting point to investigate British History this is a good place to start, but I also feel if this was peer reviewed by Historians they would be up in arms about the slanted view they portrayed.

Plus, that host, Simon, reminds me of the perfect little schoolboy that sits at the front of class, never had a date in his life...just an all-around suck-up. His head swivels so much when he talks you would think he gets neck cramps after each take. But like I said earlier, I kind of like this. He is funny at times, and I think enjoyable overall. It just might seem dry to some, but that shouldn't be a big surprise.

Overall an enjoyable experience. But do not take it too, too seriously.

Was the above review useful to you?

13 out of 54 people found the following review useful:
Politically Correct History, 2 August 2003
Author: hborum from Washington, DC

Don't waste your money buying it and don't waste your time watching it. Two examples of the revisionist history that permeates the entire work: Covers the entire Napoleonic period with two or three side comments concerning that 20 plus years of World war. Uses the Duke of Wellington's description of the Battle of Waterloo totally out of context; as a description of the British social/political crises during the Napoleonic period. However, what would you expect from today's BBC other than a politically correct perspective of history?

Was the above review useful to you?

Add another review

Related Links

Amazon.com summary Ratings Awards
External reviews Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history