Legends & Lies

When someone claims to be dispelling histories lies it would be best if they had information to offer that would bring the truth to light. Unfortunately, this show, which I was eager to see, only perpetuated many of the problems with historical research of the old west. Bill makes claims that are supposed to be laying down the truth for all of us in the dark. Problem is, he merely takes a point of view on an issue that is still undecided by both historians and historical information and proclaims it to be established fact now that he has said so (Thanks Bill, glad you could do that for us!).

How does Bill O'Reilly know more about Doc Holliday and Wyatt Earp than the hard working researchers who have dug and dug in order to bring forth the most information possible to this point? Obviously he doesn't, but the problem is that this doesn't stop him from delivering his claims with bloviating conviction.

If a person watches this show for entertainment, great; there are a lot of westerns I enjoy that are factually mistaken. But if you watch this to learn something, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, for your sake and the good of our collective community intelligence, do no repeat what you see on this show and assume you are passing along wisdom.

Actually I took issue with the episode featuring Jesse James too, mostly for some of the reasons as the previous comment. I take exception to what the previous comment said about Jesse James being connected with the KKK though. James was instead connected to the KGC, which stands for the Knights of the Golden Circle, whose aim it was to reignite the Civil War and the money they raised was solely for that purpose. In one of the group pictures of the James brothers, Frank James and others are seen displaying the sign of the Knights of the Golden Circle, which was two fingers over their chest.

In the episode featuring the Lone Ranger, there may be another explanation for Bass's accidental shooting of his cook. I just saw a documentary on the History Channel about the Winchester 700 rifle which has been misfiring for decades, until finally the courts are seeing a backlog of accidental shootings when the safety is released or the rifle is bumped.

Come on folks. Every single historical book, movie or series has people come out who are self proclaimed experts in one way or another in the target subject, decrying the lacking of something factual or the inclusion of something non-factual. Historians don't all agree on everything...consumers of media and literature certainly wont.

History is written by those who control the printing presses of the news of the time, or by those who research the records of the time...records which were written by humans who often have agendas or biases.

Today is no different. Media bias is as bad as it ever was, and full of lies mixed with facts, misinformation and blatant acts of omission in order to shape the history of the future with the news of the day.

That said, anyone who 100% believes anything they didn't see or do themselves could easily be a fool.

This is a great series and is intended for the ignorant masses who know little about history...which is the vast majority of humans walking the earth, let alone Americans. It's a little glimpse in to the past assembled in an entertaining way and the target audience is people who are interested in a little "light" learning while being entertained.

The History Channel does this all the time and this series is comparable to anything the History Channel does, and the graphics and HD quality is first rate. I watch on a 1080P screen and watch Blue Ray DVDs, and this series straight off of Dish HD from FOX Business Channel is first rate production...in my "consumer" opinion.

I didn't see the first season, but only the two following ones. What's striking to me is what has already been expressed a few times here. It pretends to go beyond the common narrative. But in fact, it totally gives in to the common narrative! And doesn't go any deeper. It's well made and it's good, but only skin deep. The title is only a pretense, a bait. I don't dislike O'Reilley. He's the type of guy whom you can call "wholesome". He comes in all square. The series here are the same: no subtleties, but interesting nonetheless and fun to watch.

Having done military history for over 40 years, and been involved in multiple movie, documentary, and museum productions, I can truthfully say saddles and bridals were wrong, total wrong firearms used, with a complete mismatched hodgepodge mess of them in a same scene or even shot. Principal actors cannot act, and they cannot ride at all. Background setups were totally inappropriate for the era and area.

Your history lesson is close, but not correct. If you're going to teach history, which I assume is what you're trying to do, you failed horribly.

Truthfully the only thing pleasant about this episode was the narrator's calm voice.

You set documentary making back 50 years.