Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Seraherrera The movie is wonderful and true, an act of love in all its contradictions and complexity

Calum Hutton It's a good bad... and worth a popcorn matinée. While it's easy to lament what could have been...

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

CathodeRayTubesRock This series can be commended for trying to tackle and combine WWI and WWII. Most historians agree that WWI directly led to WWII. However, this writers constant combining and oversimplification of important facts and events leads to inaccuracies and just straight falsehoods. If you are going to invest several hours watching World War 'history', your time would be much better spent watching "The World at War" series.

STEPHEN SEALE First of all, I will start off by saying that this film had a few redeeming qualities, including good narration and decent production quality. That having been said, the film was filled with historical inaccuracies and over-simplifications. It is, of course, understandable that when one is trying to cram both world wars into only six hours it is impossible to give everything as detailed a treatment as possible, but there were whole theaters or campaigns of WWII that were either glossed over (the Russian front, the Balkan campaigns, and most of the Pacific Theater), or ignored entirely (the North African campaigns). In brief, here are a few other issues (not by any means an exhaustive list): -Italy was not suddenly controlled by the Allies after its surrender. There were German troops on the peninsula who contested every mile of the Allied advance and it took us two years to fight our way up the peninsula.-The wrong peninsula is highlighted when the Gallipoli campaign is discussed in the series.-The Bolsheviks did not overthrow the Tsar. They overthrew the provisional government that had overthrown the Tsar a few months previously.-The Germans did not go through the Maginot Line when they attacked France, and they didn't go after the Low Countries as an afterthought after finishing off France. They attacked France through the Low Countries to begin with. It would not have taken much effort to mention that the attack on France went through the Ardennes Forest of Belgium and that it was easier to go that way as the Maginot Line only protected the French border with Germany, and not with Luxembourg or Belgium.There are dozens of other errors in the film- far too many to go into all of them in this review. The one positive thing is that it was interesting and might get students interested in learning more. If they do seek to find more they might get the real history if they do their research, as the History Channel failed to do. I think some of the historians who were involved in this should hang their heads in shame. I am almost surprised H.W. Brands was involved (though to be fair he was being interviewed and may not have known how bad it was going to be- on the other hand, he was involved in the writing of the textbook "American Stories" which is a sub-par text).

abhishekkulranjanrao One can really preempt the tenor of the "documentary" when it begins with Obama showering platitudes about sacrifices of the Allied forces and the atrocities of the "Evil Powers" and how history has been redefined.The basic agenda of this documentary is to show American Military as the Salvation Army and they really make no bones about it. With McArthur and Patton shown as some sort of Demi-Gods with unmistakable swagger and pride and Churchill depicted with similar brush, only makes the subtle very obvious.Like any other history buff, I appreciate objective view of history even if it invites lacerating self introspection. Propaganda's weakness lies in its inability to mask the contradictions and this documentary is full of contradictions and haphazard attempts to self aggrandizement. 4/10

Dennis Ver Mulm This production is rife with oversimplification and inaccuracy. As previously noted, important events from both WWI and WWII are missing in their entirety, making it difficult, if not impossible, for an informed viewer to comprehend even the broad strokes of these significant world events. Film clips used to illustrate the narration are often not properly selected and, as a result, do not accurately portray the events being described. The time-line of events is frequently so out of order that it's impossible to establish a coherent chronology of events. Dramatization for effect is one thing, but the creators of this production have employed artistic license to the degree that this documentary is neither informative nor entertaining. The World Wars was obviously written by someone whose knowledge of history is solely a product of the American education system. The writer should have picked up and read a few history texts first! This was absolute garbage. I watched it once and was so steamed, I've deleted all the episodes from my DVR. This won't be part of my library, and I'd suggest that those who haven't seen it save six hours of their lives.