I feel like this is something that would make me cry about the terrible inaccuracies as a history major.
[QUOTE=Trunk Monkay;45012001]yea seems like they were more looking at the political figures of the war rather than actual commanders.[/QUOTE]
Except in the second episode they go into the Japan. Hell in the first one they outline why Japan separated from the Allies and basically set the stage for them joining the Axis.
[QUOTE=Zezibesh;45008115]Watched the first episode. Entertaining, but doesn't deserve to be called a documentary. Still, it taught me a few new things that I'll be sure to research via actual documentaries.
Even among the inaccuracies I think the funniest part is the amount of commercial breaks. Is this what American TV is like?[/QUOTE]
What are commercial breaks like in Suomi? Are they less frequent compared to our TV?
I think I recall a couple of WWII reenactor friends rant about the inaccuracies of weapons or equipment used in the show or something
Could be a different show though
Yea the M3 Light Tank being in a WW1 scene is pretty silly. I mean the Bovington Tank Museum has a working replica of a Mark IV tank that they could've just used but I guess they didn't have much of a budget.
[editline]6th June 2014[/editline]
This looks really silly in general tbh
[QUOTE=zupadupazupadude;45014306]Yea the M3 Light Tank being in a WW1 scene is pretty silly. I mean the Bovington Tank Museum has a working replica of a Mark IV tank that they could've just used but I guess they didn't have much of a budget.
[editline]6th June 2014[/editline]
This looks really silly in general tbh[/QUOTE]
I'm pretty sure theres also a scene with a russian running with an ak and one with a post-war t54/type59
[QUOTE=Nestophales;45014332]I'm pretty sure theres also a scene with a russian running with an ak and one with a post-war t54/type59[/QUOTE]
I do wonder why they make these kinds of series when they can't even get the money to portray things accurately.
It's not like the History channel hasn't done this terrible inaccuracy shit before though:
[IMG_thumb]http://i.gyazo.com/33d106eb1120c96f99e2ac219e42947e.png[/IMG_thumb]
If you haven't seen this, it's the history channel trying to do all of Roman history on a budget. The problem is that they completely gloss over really important stuff and massively over-estimate the importance of other stuff. Such as having an entire episode dedicated to Spartacus despite there being no concensus amoung historians as to the actual course of his rebellion but completely missing out the fall of the republic and the civil war.
I wonder more about why they make such mistakes. I'd get the whole subpar plot thing due to them not hiring competent writers, but making blatant mistakes like putting tanks and guns into wholly different eras opposed to those they were created in.
Honestly, what the whole genre could use is a more grand yet universal method of chronologically showing every aspect of all the players in the wars and what became of them when the guns went silent. It'd probably be the biggest epic ever constructed by television, but I'd rather like a realist display of things the way they were for both the masterminds of the era as well as the common men from all countries, rather than the romanticized and innacurate versions that are most often delivered. They just don't serve justice to the people that dived and lived throughout that part of the century.
[QUOTE=croguy;45015156]I wonder more about why they make such mistakes. I'd get the whole subpar plot thing due to them not hiring competent writers, but making blatant mistakes like putting tanks and guns into wholly different eras opposed to those they were created in.
Honestly, what the whole genre could use is a more grand yet universal method of chronologically showing every aspect of all the players in the wars and what became of them when the guns went silent. It'd probably be the biggest epic ever constructed by television, but I'd rather like a realist display of things the way they were for both the masterminds of the era as well as the common men from all countries, rather than the romanticized and innacurate versions that are most often delivered. They just don't serve justice to the people that dived and lived throughout that part of the century.[/QUOTE]
My guess would be limited budgets and possibly a lack of knowledge on the part of the people directing the scenes.
I watched the middle episode of this last week.
It was complete hogwash. Incredibly watered down, they skimmed over so much, were relatively inaccurate on many things. They focused so much on the "great person" stuff, manufactured personal drama between leaders, the effects were pretty shit, the awful dubstep opening music. Things like "With Russia as Hitler's ally, Germany controlled most of the world and only true freedom of Democracy could stand in his way" made me cringe.
[QUOTE=redBadger;45013064]I still found it funny that Hitler was speaking to his men in english[/QUOTE]
That's really common in American television though, we rarely have bits where people have to actually read the subtitles.
[QUOTE=redBadger;45013064]I still found it funny that Hitler was speaking to his men in english[/QUOTE]
It's an English language network that broadcasts to a primarily English speaking country, it makes more sense to keep the dialogue in English than to put it on as what would essentially be white noise with subtitles to most of their audience.
[QUOTE=asteroidrules;45017443]My guess would be limited budgets and possibly a lack of knowledge on the part of the people directing the scenes.[/QUOTE]
It must really have a limited budget... at 43:30 in the second episode, they use the Battlefield 2142 music for the Belgrade map...
The best part about it the M3 Stuart World War 1 scene is fucking Patton is on the back like "Ye boi lets kill us some fuckin Huns"
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
