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.

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.

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.

I'm not a wild west expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I do know quite a bit about one of them. I've read / seen just about everything there is to see on Billy The Kid and The Lincoln County War. So I'll speak about that episode.

I watched that episode first because of the fact that this is a Fox News produced show. I found what I usually found with Fox, they don't out right lie or anything, but they don't tell the entire story at all. They leave out things and take "artistic" license with a lot of it. Which is fine, unless you are running a series which is supposed to tell the "truth" rather than Legend.

Dermot Mulroney was a great choice for the narration, and most of the experts are very well respected. I don't know what makes Bill O'Reilly an expert at all, other than the fact that he produced the show.

The Billy the Kid episode was deeply flawed, for example, when they show the part of Billy's capture at Stinking Springs they make it look like a town, when in fact it was barely a building. Also they make it look like there was a big gun fight between Billy and Pat, when in fact Billy gave up after Pat and his crew opened up on Charlie Bowdre, mistaking him for the Kid. They also make a lot of assumptions about Pat knowing Billy. When in fact he barely knew him, but that doesn't make for good TV does it.

I could go on, but basically this is like everything Fox News does and should be taken with a grain of salt. There are plenty of real documentaries out there if people are interested in the subject. I'd suggest watching those for a true historical account.

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.