I was flipping channels and came across this dreck a little less than 1/2 way through. I started to watch and within seconds found myself saying, "How did that...?" " When did....?" "That's not right." "I'm not genius or expert, but WHAT THE....?" and so forth.VERY few of the actors looked much like their characters as if the casting director simply said, "If they're white and male, feh, it works. Oh, but put a pair of glasses on that guy."As other reviews have mentioned, poetic license is to be expected to some degree and honestly, with that much of a timespan to cover and all that material, one has to be realistic enough to know that you can't include every detail or you'd end up with a movie almost as long as the war itself. It's just not going to happen. But with that in mind, isn't it in everyone's best interest to get what you ARE covering more than a LITTLE right?The History Channel has become a joke. What was once one of the most fascinating and informative channels for us history buffs has become a hodgepodge of reality crap shows. It's heartbreaking, but my anti-TV executive rants are common in my reviews, so, here's more evidence to back up my beliefs. When they DO an actual history show, I guess we shouldn't expect much more from them than this. And this stinker is now 4 years old. Sheesh, now I'm starting to cry.

This is a good series, but it focuses 100% on famous figures like Churchill and Hitler and completely excludes everyone else. By doing so they've created a pseudo history which leaves the audience believing that Patton and McArthur were solely responsible for the allied victory during WWI. Patton for instance was not the 1st nor nor best tank commander during WWI and McArthur was not the 1st nor the only person to see the gap in the German lines during the Hundred Days Offensive. The Battle of Cambrai was actually the 1st successful tank mission and that was before Patton ever learned to drive a tank. Lt. Col. Walter E. Bare was the 1st person to see the gap in the German line not McArthur as this documentary claims. This series does have a lot of good information, but sadly anyone who doesn't know any better will walk away with a false sense of history.

I'm surprised at the History Channel for producing this piece of biased, oversimplified, and inaccurate trash.I don't think it's worth much in the way of analysis. The value judgments and errors range from minor to major.Eg., minor. More than once, we are shown Hitler destroying cities, first in Poland then in England, with B-17s. All right. I'm not a military history freak but wouldn't it have been easy to avoid a wince-inducing problem like that? Eg., important. You know why World War II started in Europe? It was all Neville Chamberlain's fault. England's PM "did nothing" while Hitler trampled Europe. But Chamberlainm, as usual, gets a bad deal. He went to Munich to meet with Hitler and prevent war. He returned with a treaty signed by Hitler that Germany would seek no more territory.Perhaps the worst thing Chamberlain ever did was wave that little piece of paper while the cameras rolled and declare "peace in our time." I doubt that a single pair of eyes in the civilized world hasn't seen that film clip repeatedly.Yet, Chamberlain had done exactly as much as the world could hope for. Lacking a crystal ball, what was he supposed to do at Munich -- prevent war by declaring war? At least it bought England some time to build up its military. And, after all, it was Chamberlain who followed through on his part with a declaration of war on Germany. Chamberlain simply can't be said to have done "nothing." I won't go on but do you want to know why Japan started its part of World War II? They simply wanted to "expand their empire." That's it -- period.There are shots of talking heads who are experts on the subject, including Richard Cheney and John McCain, who certainly qualify as enthusiasts if not exactly experts.What was the History Channel thinking? Shame on them. The series is suitable, however, for high school kids who no longer know who fought whom in the war.

My title says it all. There are many good aspects to this mini-series. The casting and acting is very good. The interview material is very good. The production value of the recreations is excellent with a few exceptions (the use of some images of modern warships comes to mind). Unfortunately, the accumulation of many small errors and some very large errors is enough for me to say that this show is not worth watching if you want solid information about the time period. Even if many of the factual errors has been corrected, there are many events and personalities that are mischaracterized in the narration. This could have been helped if the script had been vetted by bona fide historians. If it had been reviewed and approved by any historian at all, I would be very surprised.