Guerras Mundiais

Do not watch this series expecting a comprehensive study of both World Wars a la Ken Burns's Civil War. It's not. However, it presents a cause-and-effect survey of how connected the two wars were.

First the negative: This program focuses on a few key figures yet totally omits any mention whatsoever of Eisenhower. How do you cover D-day without at least mentioning the name Eisenhower? Eisenhower was the ONLY 5 star general, yet two others in this program erroneously wore 5 star insignia.

Positive: Jeremy Renner did a great job narrating. The series is educational and worth watching. Although it's imperfect, I learned a few things from this series. I like how it treats both World Wars as one conflict because it was. The Treaty of Versailles wasn't a peace treaty at all and set the stage for resumption of fighting.

This series will leave you hungering for more, in depth programs that once were offered by The History Channel before they chose to waste our time on such nonsense as Pawn Wars.

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.

There are numerous inaccuracies in this re-creation. Two of the most glaring are the singling out of MacArthurs and Patton, while General Eisenhower and Admiral Nimitz aren't even mentioned. The war in the Pacific was primarily a Naval war, and that effort was led by Nimitz. Even MacArthur's retaking of the Philippines was only possible because the Navy and Marines cleared the way across the Pacific. General Eisenhower was the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, and his contributions were the key to the victory in Europe. Patton was a superb battlefield commender, but lacked the judgment necessary for a position such as that held by Eisenhower. Patton is the kind of guy you want in the lead when you have to "go", but you never want him making the decision whether or not you should "go".

Just watched this new show on the USA history channel.... any of my American friends - watch out this does not go into the full details of WW1 in fact it gave 10secs about how ww1 breaks out (none of the months of before it breakout) - it takes a directors artistic license as what was happening to a younger Stalin,Hitler,Churchill,Paton as in what 'they'(director/writers) think what they were doing during the WW1 era... and not the real facts. if you watch it - beware it is annoying how they concentrate on future ww2 good/bad leaders - go watch 'The World At World' (BBC series instead - think it covers about 20 DVD's) which is pure facts not director's license. Sad this new show came out on memorial day in USA TV - bit miff as a history buff.

The show should be called - 'WW1 & WW2 - how leaders were shaped'. Don't Expect to learn history on this show - take it with a pinch of salt and not bible.

Paul

The Germans made continental war because they had not fleet. They had not fleet because the treaty of Vesailles did't allow it. Tanks and Airplaine could be built in secrecy in Hangars, which is much more difficult with ships. The negotiations after world war One were still held form a colonial perspective, which led to all the following problems. Borders and Lands were traded by the winning Nations like pieces of cake on a market. Italy and Japan, in World War One on the side of the Alliance were cheated, which led to the following conflicts. The War between Japan and the USA was the first war about Oil. All in all, cheesy acting, but good history telling.