Tankmanc
Joined Nov 2015
Welcome to the new profile
Our updates are still in development. While the previous version of the profile is no longer accessible, we're actively working on improvements, and some of the missing features will be returning soon! Stay tuned for their return. In the meantime, the Ratings Analysis is still available on our iOS and Android apps, found on the profile page. To view your Rating Distribution(s) by Year and Genre, please refer to our new Help guide.
Badges3
To learn how to earn badges, go to the badges help page.
Ratings2
Tankmanc's rating
Reviews1
Tankmanc's rating
My area is WWI and its immediate aftermath, so I can only speak with any authority on Episode 1. It takes a different approach from that with which English-speakers are familiar, but manages to convey the broad sweep of the story. To begin with the Austrian Gunther Burstyn's Motorgeschütz is unusual but an argument can be made for it. On the other hand, there's nothing to support the implication that Burstyn's vehicle in any way influenced the French or that the French had even heard of it.
French bias? Well, all three writer/producers are German and live in Germany, but the production companies are, I think, French. It should be remembered that French and British tank development took place at the same time, so to begin with the French story is perfectly justifiable, if unusual in the English-speaking world.
The Episode's biggest problem is that is littered with historical errors large and small and makes some dubious and debatable assertions. Soldiers described as Austrian are actually Italian, and supposed Germans are Austrian. The British tanks are shown in a completely random chronology, but that's quite usual in such documentaries. On the other hand, a lengthy reference to the French Renault FT is accompanied by film of the American Ford Three Ton tank, and what we are asked to believe is film of a battle on the Western Front is actually footage of manoeuvres in the USA in the 1920s featuring tanks that didn't take part in the War. Producers of films on this subject often have to make do with such material as is available, but one gets the impression that this one contains howlers that the makers just haven't spotted.
So this just about keeps pace with historical fact, and it might be that the layman would not be troubled by many of the inaccuracies. Good use is made of the diaries of tank designers and commanders (a few odd translations notwithstanding) and the Curator of the British Tank Museum gives a good performance as in-vision commentator.
On the whole, this is let down by some poor research and careless production. I wouldn't recommend that anyone use it as a serious reference. A missed opportunity.
French bias? Well, all three writer/producers are German and live in Germany, but the production companies are, I think, French. It should be remembered that French and British tank development took place at the same time, so to begin with the French story is perfectly justifiable, if unusual in the English-speaking world.
The Episode's biggest problem is that is littered with historical errors large and small and makes some dubious and debatable assertions. Soldiers described as Austrian are actually Italian, and supposed Germans are Austrian. The British tanks are shown in a completely random chronology, but that's quite usual in such documentaries. On the other hand, a lengthy reference to the French Renault FT is accompanied by film of the American Ford Three Ton tank, and what we are asked to believe is film of a battle on the Western Front is actually footage of manoeuvres in the USA in the 1920s featuring tanks that didn't take part in the War. Producers of films on this subject often have to make do with such material as is available, but one gets the impression that this one contains howlers that the makers just haven't spotted.
So this just about keeps pace with historical fact, and it might be that the layman would not be troubled by many of the inaccuracies. Good use is made of the diaries of tank designers and commanders (a few odd translations notwithstanding) and the Curator of the British Tank Museum gives a good performance as in-vision commentator.
On the whole, this is let down by some poor research and careless production. I wouldn't recommend that anyone use it as a serious reference. A missed opportunity.
Recently taken polls
1 total poll taken
