The devil, as always, is in the details. The series is devoted, logically, to the history of the Second World War. And all fronts are given more or less equally. Well, except that the West paid a little more attention. China, Southeast Asia, North Africa, Poland and France, Battle of Britain (in the sky), Eastern Front, Overlord, etc. Well, the political aspect - Allied conferences, the ambitions of imperials like Mussolini, etc.
Cons. First, the assessments of Western politicians, not even historians, prevail. There is not a word about the Munich Agreement, for example, but about the collusion of Stalin and Hitler and two totalitarian regimes is repeated not obtrusively, but regularly. Naturally, the main cause of defeats on the eastern front is muddy and frost. However, for the sake of justice, it is said about the growing skill of the Russians. . .
To the Japanese, even some sympathy slips. However, it is also about China, whose role in World War II is subject to rethinking, because the war was fought, because there are some battles, and China accounts for a third of all the victims of the war, but its battles are almost unknown here. The bombing of Germany, which did not have much military significance, is declared controversial, and the violence against 90,000 German women by Soviet soldiers is mentioned indisputably. Although not only was it not encouraged, but it was persecuted, about which not a word is said.
In addition, it is not easy to draw conclusions from the film about the scale of the fighting. Because the timing is that the Battle of Midway, that Battle of Kursk is about equal. In addition, the British and Americans fought against the Germans and Japanese all over the world.
In addition, a lot of naturalism in the form of mutilated corpses and free selection of chronicles - the seasons do not correlate with reality. The Battle of Kursk is chronically accompanied by snow. But the war is not dealt with ideologically - the analysis of German Nazism and Italian fascism is extremely weak, let alone Japanese militarism. Plan Ost, the Holocaust - all this is, but clearly a second plan.
On the other hand, the analysis of battles is quite sane, no serious battle is missed, and it is difficult to chronicle from different parts of the world, including Burma or Ethiopia. Therefore, the series can be recommended to fans of military affairs, but those engaged in history. I'm not sure. Moreover, the subtitle “The Price of Empire” is slightly justified, and its meaning remains obscure. Which empire? German, British, Soviet or American? Is this the cause of war or its consequences? Let's assume everything. But it is in this context that it would be worthwhile to abandon “objectivity” – this would be more honest, especially since the subjectivity and ideological determination of assessments still slips through some trifles. . .
