I just watched the Aztecs episode as I am 1/2 Zapotec. The narrator was horrible. He murdered the names and words of so many things. Clearly he did not do his homework. Just sad.
54 Reviews
Just wow
glennhg-7455714 November 2018
Good for people with little exposure to history, but overall disappointing.
kat-9705311 April 2020
The first thing I need to address here is the narration: why can't a narrator learn to pronounce ANY names even remotely correctly? I get the impression that they handed the script to the narrator and just told him to pronounce names and places however he felt was natural? Come on, that's bad practice. Coaching him on at least semi-accurate pronunciation would have taken a few minutes of writing or coaching. Make some effort.
The historical accuracy can also be called into question for several episodes. Sometimes the expert will say something (like about how Ancient Roman leaders' reputation for sexual indiscretion is probably not historically accurate and shouldn't be viewed that way), and then the narrator will directly contradict what the academic just said ("Caligula's sexual appetite was only rivaled by..." - like they just said not to say that, come on!). Furthermore, there is almost no historical nuance introduced into this piece. They take the (very likely out-of-context) opinion of one academic professional and just go with that for the whole rest of the piece even though many things are not agreed upon by historical scholars. Occasionally they address this, but not nearly often enough to be academic in any way.
The historical reproduction is DEEPLY inconsistent. At times I'm impressed with the effort they put in, at others I'm appalled with the anachronism and absurdity of their portrayals (apparently all historical women, including Ying Dynasty era women, wore modern makeup and tube tops, who knew?).
The lack of effort, sensationalism, and over-simplification of historic events are very clear for this show. For people with little understanding of historical empires, this could be a titillating initiation that hopefully would prompt more research and interest, but for anyone who already has an interest in the nuance, complexity, and accuracy of history, this series with likely be deeply frustrating.
The historical accuracy can also be called into question for several episodes. Sometimes the expert will say something (like about how Ancient Roman leaders' reputation for sexual indiscretion is probably not historically accurate and shouldn't be viewed that way), and then the narrator will directly contradict what the academic just said ("Caligula's sexual appetite was only rivaled by..." - like they just said not to say that, come on!). Furthermore, there is almost no historical nuance introduced into this piece. They take the (very likely out-of-context) opinion of one academic professional and just go with that for the whole rest of the piece even though many things are not agreed upon by historical scholars. Occasionally they address this, but not nearly often enough to be academic in any way.
The historical reproduction is DEEPLY inconsistent. At times I'm impressed with the effort they put in, at others I'm appalled with the anachronism and absurdity of their portrayals (apparently all historical women, including Ying Dynasty era women, wore modern makeup and tube tops, who knew?).
The lack of effort, sensationalism, and over-simplification of historic events are very clear for this show. For people with little understanding of historical empires, this could be a titillating initiation that hopefully would prompt more research and interest, but for anyone who already has an interest in the nuance, complexity, and accuracy of history, this series with likely be deeply frustrating.
Not adequate to be called documentary
cahitsitki25 September 2019
Shamefully inaccurate
libby-norris27 December 2018
Go to any library to realize how insultingly false episode 3 really is. The producers conveniently claim that they offer the most recent information about ancient Egypt, but that still doesn't justify the falsehoods about Ramses II and the reasons for the fall of the Golden Age of Egypt. The set design and costumes are comedic. If you want comedy, this is the place.
Visuals and verbals
angel_saciel14 December 2019
I realized with sadness that a lot of viewers turned off because of the visuals.
Let me tell you that it is indeed an issue of finances. There were no special actors hired for this project, only us experts to give the historical context. Not a single of the historical scenes has been made especially for this documentary, we had to deal with what footage there were.
I told them repeatedly that the footage of the Manchu was misleading, that they used battle footage of what was obviously the Shang Dynasty and that the dude in the Confucius bit is wearing Buddha beads.
But that was what was available. There is almost no available footage of Sun Tzu, Confucius was probably too expensive (the movie with Chow Yun Fat is pretty nice) and the majority of movie footage is always centered on the Manchu.
I am sad that many of you didn't make it to the fourth episode. Let me tell you I tried my utmost to be as historically accurate about the Qin Dynasty and its archaeology as possible.
Let me tell you that it is indeed an issue of finances. There were no special actors hired for this project, only us experts to give the historical context. Not a single of the historical scenes has been made especially for this documentary, we had to deal with what footage there were.
I told them repeatedly that the footage of the Manchu was misleading, that they used battle footage of what was obviously the Shang Dynasty and that the dude in the Confucius bit is wearing Buddha beads.
But that was what was available. There is almost no available footage of Sun Tzu, Confucius was probably too expensive (the movie with Chow Yun Fat is pretty nice) and the majority of movie footage is always centered on the Manchu.
I am sad that many of you didn't make it to the fourth episode. Let me tell you I tried my utmost to be as historically accurate about the Qin Dynasty and its archaeology as possible.
Informative and captivating show
nmradiance23 February 2022
I felt compelled to write this after seeing all the negative reviews for this show, which really isn't a bad show after all is said and done.
First of all, I've watched numerous historical documentaries and I've learned something new about each empire while watching this series, which is the important thing. While they don't cover every empire throughout history (I expect due to budgeting issues), they do touch upon interesting periods and people through 5 major empires most of us learn about. The historians interviewed were knowledgeable and engaging.
The drawback to the show is the lack of theatrics and graphics, which for me could be overlooked since my attention was mostly held by the narrator and historians. It did, however, provide nice visuals to accompany the narration and represented the costumes of the era.
In summary, if you want a deeper delve into a specific empire of interest, watch a 45 min episode and I promise you'll learn something new!
First of all, I've watched numerous historical documentaries and I've learned something new about each empire while watching this series, which is the important thing. While they don't cover every empire throughout history (I expect due to budgeting issues), they do touch upon interesting periods and people through 5 major empires most of us learn about. The historians interviewed were knowledgeable and engaging.
The drawback to the show is the lack of theatrics and graphics, which for me could be overlooked since my attention was mostly held by the narrator and historians. It did, however, provide nice visuals to accompany the narration and represented the costumes of the era.
In summary, if you want a deeper delve into a specific empire of interest, watch a 45 min episode and I promise you'll learn something new!
Terribly inaccurate
mikebowker-760503 February 2019
I teach World History so I am always looking to watch documentaries over the content that I teach. Within 3 minutes of episode 1, the first inaccuracy is stated. Talks about how Julius Caesar ordered games in the Colosseum yo celebrate him returning to Rome. Ummmmm......It's construction began 100 years after he was killed. I stopped it right there. Not interested if they can't even get something that is so elementary.
That's not Caesar!
wayneclose17 November 2018
Glossing over hundreds of years of istory and showing random portraits of the wrong people is doing a great disservice to your audience. We watched episode one (Rome) and my biggest complaint is the portraits shown were rarely the person being discussed at the time. Mispronunciations were rampant i.e. Pompey (Pom-pee) was pronounced "Pom-pay" like the town. Important facts were omitted such as Marc Antony was married to Octavian's sister, the perfect excuse for attacking the bigimistic couple as an affront to Roman virtue. Not to mention the fact that Antony was giving away Roman provinces to his bastard children as birthday presents. I could go on but you get the idea.
Inaccurate and Sensationalist
ImpartialThirdParty14 October 2018
At this point, it goes without mentioning how this series has failed to be historically accurate. Of the first season, I only managed to watch the first 20 minutes of the sixth episode, and that was really all it took for me to hate this series. I can recall three issues I have with this specific episode.
1. The whole "spectacle" of sacrifice was absolutely sensationalized and completely contradicted everything the historians were revealing.
2. The narrator mispronounced/hispanicized every Nahuatl word that came up in his script, which is really more revealing of the script writer's lack of knowledge on how the Mesoamerican tongue was spoken, or they just failed to communicate with the narrator.
3. A clip of an Incan Sapa Inka on a litter was shown when the power of Aztec emperors was being discussed.
I'm 100% positive there are many more errors that I'm missing in this review about this episode. If anyone is looking to be even minimally educated about the empire being reported on, I highly recommend for you to stay away from this monstrosity of a documentary.
No mention of the Persian empire, are you kidding?!
kamiar-5006016 December 2018
Utter Garbage
sanyalprateek14 October 2018
Games of power, hierarchies, plots and conspiracies
mirellecelandinemattiew28 October 2018
Learning through this series that nothing has changed since Roman times, Greeks, Egyptians ... the struggle for power and conspiracies are always there from the earliest civilizations. Beautiful series, very interesting.
Trite narration over inaccurate, jumbled footage.
kikokun-547-66501723 October 2018
I watched episode 6 (Cortes and the Aztecs, apparently?), and it was truly appalling.
While the narration more or less goes over the "historical facts", the video is showing scenes from some other documentary about Pizarro and the Incas!!
May I suggest another episode about Napoleon's invasion of Russia, with footage of Hitler's Wermatch advancing towards Stalingrad?
Simply laughable, gives a bad name to the word "documentary".
Skip it!
Thumbs down
akoutsoulieris13 October 2018
Episode 2 was a let down. I couldn't even finish it. First, on Ancient Greece, the people that were being interviewed with Italians in a museum in Rome. Was no one available in Greece that day? Also, the narrator kept saying names incorrectly. I know Greek names can be difficult but that's one more reason to get a Greek!
I can't even.
Michele-Young7012 December 2018
Happy I watched it!
mruderman-7444725 October 2018
Terrible innacurate
m-cyclops21 May 2020
There are many errors, inaccuracies, and sensationalism. The chapter on the Aztecs (which ruled in North America not in Central America) is the worst, telling more the story of Spanish invasion and depicting Mayan -no Aztec- ruins
So many inaccuracies
mexica_princess723 October 2018
1.Mexico isn't Central America, it's located in North America.
2. So many Mayan temples such showing Chichén Itzá while talking about the Mexicah, which is pronounced meh shee kah (not mejica). Two different cultures.
3. What takes the cake is the ridiculous usage of Inca footage and making it pass as Mexica (Aztec). Extremely lazy of the creators of this serie. Very disappointing indeed.
2. So many Mayan temples such showing Chichén Itzá while talking about the Mexicah, which is pronounced meh shee kah (not mejica). Two different cultures.
3. What takes the cake is the ridiculous usage of Inca footage and making it pass as Mexica (Aztec). Extremely lazy of the creators of this serie. Very disappointing indeed.
Impressively Inaccurate
haleyaylward-5403712 October 2018
So much of this is inaccurate, in both spoken word and visually. Much of the art shown is blatantly unrelated to what is being spoken about at any given time. Things created for Augustus are shown to be attributed to Julius Caesar. They breeze over most of the history, only focusing on small and largely insignificant details that do not lend themselves to a greater understanding of the histories covered. At some points they treat historical suspicion as historical fact, which is never good.
Intrigues, insanities and passions for power
felixarmando-9396416 October 2018
Watching this series means understanding the incredible situations that power, infamy and greed create. The struggle for power, the psychological pressure of Julius Caesar before his brutal murder in the episode on the Romans or the defeat and tension of Vercingetorix besieged by the Romans in the episode on the Celts. Well done and well narrated ...
Appallingly inaccurate.
marytorcat12 November 2018
In the Introduction to the episode on China, supposedly about the First Emperor (259 BCE - 210 BCE) who ended the Warring States period and unified China, shots of The Forbidden City were included leading any historically uninformed viewer to assume it existed during that time. Construction didn't even begin until the 1400's....CE!! This is so irresponsible, so egregious, that I will not watch further. The problem is obviously not one of insufficient financing, a lot of money has been spent on this nonsense. So many young people get their history from films and "documentaries" these days.....what a disservice this does to them.
inaccurate
viperjose14 October 2018
So much inaccurate information .. 1000 native troops ??? wtf its not even close to the real number which is 280,000 native mexican against the aztec.
there's also so much more to the invasion of mexico such as the chichimeca war but i guess it doesn't matter.
there's also so much more to the invasion of mexico such as the chichimeca war but i guess it doesn't matter.
something but nothing much
esparcadia12 April 2020
So many images and a bit of acting...and interviews by historians but not of the culture being shown! Why not? Are there no Greek historians who could shed light on the events being shown? Of course. But instead we are subjected to two Italian academics, one who does not speak English and the other who is barely comprehensible. But the main issue is that they are incompetent historians making statements that are patently false!
The main issue is that there are so so many misstatements/ false assumptions, and just plain mistakes when discussing ancient Greek history!
So the script is just plain sophomoric. Now for a highly distracting aspect.
The background incidental music is just plain annoying.
In sum, this is the kind of programing that gives netflix a bad reputation.
Sad.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
