EarDelightBase Waste of Money.

Libramedi Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

CommentsXp Best movie ever!

Sienna-Rose Mclaughlin The movie really just wants to entertain people.

buoy-75707 This is a very unique documentary of the West. True the focuse is too heavy handed on Native American and poor treatment of minorities, but I believe most is probably accurate. What I felt was missing were the characters that shaped the Legend of the West. The characters that hundreds of movies were made about. This was a scientific observation and not anything entertaining. No Billy the Kid, Jesse James. No Wyatt Earp or Geronimo. Wild Bill Hickok ? Crazy Horse ? Bat Masterson ? The Donner Party ? All missing thus this leaves you highly disappointed.

WildBullWriter This documentary mini-series does a decent job of covering such a huge, complex subject in 9 episodes (about 10 hours of time). I like that appropriate focus and time given to American Indians, who played such a crucial role in the story, and to other groups like Latinos, blacks, and Chinese immigrants who played vital roles, as well.(I'm also offended by a number of reviewers who complain that too much screen time is given to Indians and minorities. These same reviewers complain that whites aren't credited enough for their courage and virtues in subduing the "wild west" and "civilizing" the Indians. The irony is that these reviewers are the very sort of racist people who caused so much trouble and misery while the real history was being played out!)On the whole, I do recommend watching this mini-series.

nospheratu333 In response to the ludicrous comments of the aforegoing jingoistic 'type': The writers of The West must have had more than a few facets of their mammoth piece right in order to elicit such a typically moronic right-wing-styled response in its appeal to nationalistic myth, grand-narrative delusion and brazen stereotype positing. Not to mention - the ironic circumstance of contending that 'we' as the Caucasiatic race are being slighted in some way, in order to showcase the romanticised moanings of other races. The series does no such thing... in fact it habitually (and necessarily) DOES turn about much of the essential Ameri-myths of Frontier and Manifest Destiny (and sundry others), which have been/are so central to your much lauded and generalised "natioanl consciousness". The series, in the main, does NOT disparage these! - nor is there essentially any need to - since they're not altogether bad, of course.So, once you're finished waving your flag about, and - somewhat ironically - prattling on about the reductive "black and white", perhaps consider that an expansive narrative like The West MUST contain motifs and themes... it cannot present a comprehensive or 'complete' history (there is no such thing)... and is perfectly entitled to present perspectives that don't accord with someone-or-other's ideal of a 'balanced' account. 'Balance' is NO objective reality, and shouldn't be thought of as 'existing' as a universal truth awaiting insertion into subjectively-conceived narratives - not even quality history docos such as The West. As far as I could ascertain, The West does NOT prefigure or predetermine to depict white settlement as inherently disastrous in any event. It is celebrated as much or as far its nasty consequences are elucidated. And, the perspectives of native peoples OUGHT factor decisively anyway - it is no narrative flaw of The West to present this perspective... especially when facts abound to corroborate.Also, to the aforementioned 'patriot' who seems fond of collectivising white America concerning all that overstated 'swell'stuff like "fighting communism" and "winning two World Wars" ... you're okay with maintaining the 'we' for all the OTHER stuff too, right? The West does present narrative, production and continuity issues for me also, but I'm loathe to be allied to a K.P. such as thee.

Joe Garrick Burns and Ives combine to produce a work that's very much up to Ken Burns' standards. As a viewing experience, it's everything you'd expect.And then there's the content.Much has been made about the supposed bias of Burns' presentation of the history of the west. A lot of time was spent on the way the US treated the indigenous populations, on the crimes of the US military, on the theft of lands, and the systematic attempts to eradicate native cultures. The loss of the age before white settlement is lamented. Is this a balanced perspective? Maybe not, although I don't think it's as biased as other reviews would have you believe. The triumphs of the west are told as well as the losses. Not all whites are painted as evil, nor are all natives painted as innocent. Events are often just told as they happened, and the viewer is left to draw their own conclusions. A lot of the content doesn't concern native Americans at all. More important that all of that, however, is that it's a story that needs telling. Americans have been indoctrinated with romantic fictions about the west for over a century. Giving Burns a chance to tell the other side of the story doesn't seem too much to ask. A few Hollywood movies that paint the indigenous people of America before westward expansion as noble savages - also a pleasant fiction, incidentally - does not make up for a century of bias, misinformation, and outright lies taught to American schoolchildren. What's worse is that for the most part, these fictions are still taught to American schoolchildren. At nearly nine hours, The West is an experience that will take up several of your evenings, but it's nine hours that may change the way you think about American history.