This is the story of the rise and fall of the Third Reich told like the drama it really was: through the personal relationships of the movers and shakers of the Nazi Party.
Stars:
Jonathon Michaels,
Conan Sweeny,
Steve Munroe
THIRD REICH: THE RISE & FALL tells the story of Hitler's Germany through rarely seen films of the people who were there. Immersive and evocative, it takes viewers inside the Germany of the ... See full summary »
Apocalypse: The Second World War(2009) is a six-part French documentary about the Second World War. The documentary is composed exclusively of actual footage of the war as filmed by war ... See full summary »
Colorized historical footage in ascending order of World War 1. Not only the relatively known Flanders and France battles, but also the generally unknown Italian-Austrian, ... See full summary »
Stars:
Mathieu Kassovitz,
François Arnaud,
Ferdinand Foch
I was fine with subtle pro us narrations through out the series but the bias was appalling in the last episode 'war in the pacific'. It is structured in a way so as to justify the american use of nuclear weapons on civilian population. It tries to draw a picture that america had no other option other than to go for nuking thousands of civilian population to end the war. The justification given is that an invasion would have caused a lot of american life's being lost , now what if the British and the Russians thought this way there was no need for the battle of bulge or the prolonged fights in Berlin they could have just bombed out the civilians with conventional bombs forcing Germany to surrender so that military life's could have been saved. What sort of stupid justification is that isn't there any differentiation between civilian and military life and how does it help to differentiate us from the Nazi line of thinking. Remember japan never attacked any US civilian targets while it could have easily done that in the early days of the war. What is more shocking is there is no remorse or moral questions asked about the use of nuclear weapons but in the case of Dresden bombings the narrator is very particular in questioning the moral lineage of the British officer who headed the operation
2 of 3 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this
I was fine with subtle pro us narrations through out the series but the bias was appalling in the last episode 'war in the pacific'. It is structured in a way so as to justify the american use of nuclear weapons on civilian population. It tries to draw a picture that america had no other option other than to go for nuking thousands of civilian population to end the war. The justification given is that an invasion would have caused a lot of american life's being lost , now what if the British and the Russians thought this way there was no need for the battle of bulge or the prolonged fights in Berlin they could have just bombed out the civilians with conventional bombs forcing Germany to surrender so that military life's could have been saved. What sort of stupid justification is that isn't there any differentiation between civilian and military life and how does it help to differentiate us from the Nazi line of thinking. Remember japan never attacked any US civilian targets while it could have easily done that in the early days of the war. What is more shocking is there is no remorse or moral questions asked about the use of nuclear weapons but in the case of Dresden bombings the narrator is very particular in questioning the moral lineage of the British officer who headed the operation