Hernán

I really wanted to like this series, but with all of the flashbacks and jumps forward in time, I'm getting seasick. Just tell a story and don't try to be so clever. They make this same mistake in the series El Marginal.

This playing around with the timeline isn't clever; it's highly annoying and takes away from what could have been a great narrative. They have squandered a big budget and some fine actors by resorting to film school tricks.

The show is entertaining and the actors do a good job. However, it is very unrealistic. Native Mexicas are depicted as good-hearted people (like Rousseau's Noble Savage) who accidentally sacrifice and oppress other humans without bad intentions. If you ignore this absurd premise, it is a good show.

I am personally in love of the conquers. Thanks Amazon for bringing us these hansome and charismatic men to the screen. As a Mexican I have read about the history and being in the hot spots in Mexico City, but watching it in tv helps a lot to understand it. Even so, is too soap opera style.

I was impressed by the historical accuracy of 'Hernán' in spite of what I thought were too many flash-backs and flash-forwards. The series presents what I think is a balanced approach to the Conquest (or Invasion) of México. The Spaniards are neither heroes nor villains, but men in search of wealth, and the Mexica (not 'Aztecs', thank God) are neither savages nor victims, but men defending their homes against superior fire power. I particularly liked the appropriate use of the Nahuatl and Mayas languages in addition to Spanish, even though all three must have changed significantly in the last 500 years (about the same period of time that English has evolved from Shakespeare) NOTE: the word 'Aztec' was not used by anyone at the time of the Conquest, but came into use almost 300 years later, ina history of México published in Italy by a Franciscan who had be expelled from México.

Starting with bad points:

• They decided to use permanent flashback, there is no beginning, no middle and no end to the story, it is all messed up, unbearable. It is a very poor choice, specially because the history of the conquest was to slowly discover that there was a quasi mythical city in a middle of a continent.
• It is an amazon production, so they bend history a bit in order to fit their liberal stereotypes (Europeans bad, Christians bad, Muslims good etc ...) but not too much (and these strong women lovers forgot about Maria de Estrada).
• The production want us to believe that Spaniards massacred thousands of cholulan just for fun ...because "Europeans bad" I guess. The fact is that Cholula was a trap, the Spaniards were about to get massacred so they (over)reacted the way they did. Later on, Alvarado massacre was much more disputable however motivated by his hatred for local tradition (kid sacrifices etc ...).
• Obviously Cortes never had a muslin girlfriend, and if muslins weren't very popular in Spain, it was because Spaniards just liberated themselves from muslins after 8 centuries of domination (I wish liberal production mentioned that more often but .... "Muslims good" I guess).

Good points:

• Except few exceptions mentioned above, they really try to stick to the history even with tiny details. We got more of the point of view of the Conquistadors but there are a lot of fantastic descriptions of the very diverse pre-Columbian societies.

So it is fantastic to have a fairly accurate visual depiction of what were the fascinating pre-Columbian civilizations and this incredible moment of history. But in order to understand I recommend to study the history of the conquest before watching the show because of the permanent flash back/forward. I would have gave a 10 stars if the history was in order.