The West par Robert Redford

"From the ashes of the Civil War", comes a period of rapid settlement of the American West. Much of the West was controlled by tribes of Indians, but it offered one solution to the festering resentment and conflicts that followed the war.

Also, there were some rebel soldiers who continued to fight against Northern supremacy and order. Jesse James and his gang began to terrorize and strike at Northern interests.

This is how "The American West"--an eight part series executive produced by Robert Redford--begins. With voice overs and reenactments, the show details the beginnings of what becomes a two-front war that General Grant wages from Washington.

The credentials of the historians who add their remarks are impressive. There certainly is a wealth of academic inquiry available to the makers of this show. Still, this is a true story that seems to be painted with a broad brush. And it does not answer some key questions about the motivations and actions of some of the actors in this vast drama.

It does, however, establish a basic framework that viewers can build upon with personal reading and further scholarship. As always, history is a complex matter, and the outline provided by this series leaves plenty of room for a more refined understanding.

I have to admit, when I watched this series, I was jarred by some of the inaccuracies I could see without being a specialist in the West. The costumer cut corners and used the same uniform for Custer over the entire series. Yes, he was a general at one point. But this rank ended after he was mustered out of the volunteers. When he came back into the regular Army is was as a Lieutenant Colonel. During this time, the time with the 7th Cavalry, he would not have worn a general officer's rank on his shoulders. The costumer obviously either was told to save money or paid insufficient attention to detail. Viewers will likely never find out. Then too there is the detail of John Tunstall being portrayed as an American when he was British by birth and presumably by speech. So when I read all of the other historical inaccuracies listed in these reviews, I wonder what else was wrong and if so much was wrong, then what was the point of The American West. Clearly not historical accuracy. In fairness, I did learn some new facts, only to have them disputed on these pages. With so much doubt cast about the facts, the viewer can only speculate about the slant and underlying purpose of The American West. When they could have known better, why did they produce something that is fraught with controversy? Good entertainment, but incorrectly classified if The American West is labeled as a documentary.

I've rarely seen so much over-the-top bashing by a bunch of petty self-important internet no-it-alls, and that's saying something!

Where there are clear, provable and MEANINGFUL inaccuracies I would be interested to hear from the film makers why they portrayed something a given way. But in SO many instances above people are repeatedly using words like ashamed, appalling, embarrassing, laughable etc. over the most trivial and meaningless details. Not in a "ha, ha, I saw a flaw" way, but in vicious condemnation of the entire series. I don't get it, why the vitriol? And that's from a guy who generally passes on hollywood fiction passed off as "based on a true story", which this for the most part is not.

This mini-series produced by Robert Redford puts together some of the most iconic figures and events in the old American West highlighted by Jesse James, Billy the Kid, Wyatt Earp, George Armstrong Custer, Crazy Horse, and Sitting Bull starting from the end of the Civil War to the Oklahoma land rush some 25 years later. It ends with a surprising final connection between Wyatt Earp and John Wayne. The recreations are compelling enough and expertly made for a TV production. The actors portraying the historical figures are relative unknowns. In fact, the series use a mix of historians and much more famous actors as talking heads to explain the significance of the events. As for its history educational value, this show cherry-picks the most compelling stories of the most compelling characters. It lays it out in order which gives the widely known stories their proper place in the chronological order. This helps to give them context and a surprisingly effective flow. It is able to paint a vast epic picture of a changing world.

This review is based on the version shown in Europe under the title "Robert Redford's The West". I'm not aware of any differences apart from the title and I'd be surprised if there were given the skimpy production values of the series. The series of eight one-hour shows sets out to tell the tale of the West through six lives Custer, Crazy Horse and Sitting Bull, Jesse James, Billy the Kid and Wyatt Earp. We get a narrative over reenactments interspersed with to-camera pieces from lots of actors who appeared in Westerns and some actual historians. I found the series very disappointing. The recreation of the Little Big Horn would embarrass a troop of amateur re-enactors. More substantial is the myriad inaccuracies and omissions. In telling the tale of the James brothers I don't recall a mention of the Younger Brothers. We're shown a map of the Battle of the Little Big Horn that shows Reno's and Custer's advances but doesn't show Benteen's nor is he mentioned in the narrative. Billy the Kid's escape all happens on the ground floor. There's no Pete Maxwell in Pete Maxwell's bedroom when Billy is shot. The viewer is given no context as to why either man was in the room (the link being Maxwell). As presented Morgan and Virgil Earp are shot on the same night. Others more knowledgeably than myself have and could point out many more flaws in the series. Did I learn anything? Yes. A young John Wayne met an elderly Wyatt Earp.