Hitler and The Nazis: Evil on Trial (2024) Netflix

[odanny]

This is a 6 part documentary on the rise of Nazism to its ultimate disintegration in a bunker in Berlin.

While I have some issues overall with it, they are fairly minor of the overall product, which succeeds on many levels.

Colorized footage. 98% of the actual footage has been colorized, the small percentage in B&W is from inside the concentration camps, and I can certainly respect that. Some of the footage is 1080p, much is 360p, and much more is somewhere in between. They did a great job of this on the video throughout, I was impressed.

Actual audio from the Nuremberg trials. They say that over 1200 hours of audio from the trials remains, but only about 30 hours of video exists. The audio in both the actual footage and the recreations (with actors as top Nazis) is all using the actual audio from the trial. It is so clear that I didn't realize at first it was all the actual audio. Sounds like it was recorded yesterday.

The audio and readings of William Shirer, an author and reporter who wrote a book "The Nightmare Years: 1930-1940" (and many more acclaimed titles) and that book is the origin of Shirer speaking in this documentary. who lived in Nazi Germany for much of the 1930's, leaving in 1940 when he knew it was unsafe to remain. Again, I thought this audio of his observations there was an actor reading it but it is the real deal. It's all Shirer himself, probably the most knowledgable journalist anywhere in the world on the Third Reich during and after the war.

The format of the show is the rise of Hitler using actual footage and actor recreations. and it skips back and forth between Nuremberg in 1946 and where in the story they are, with observations of various historians throughout.


Some minor quibbles are the actor recreations were a bit cheesy at times when some historian is speaking about what was happening.

And speaking of historians, they have some very accomplished ones speaking, including Richard Evans and Omer Bartov, who both have written extensively on the Third Reich. My biggest problem was the inclusion of the shireking woman with the nails on chalkboard voice, why does Netflix do this? I think it is intentional because there is one of these people in every documentary I watch. Is it to make sure the viewer does not nod off?

I would rate it about 8.25 out of 10.

 

[0311]

This is a 6 part documentary on the rise of Nazism to its ultimate disintegration in a bunker in Berlin.

While I have some issues overall with it, they are fairly minor of the overall product, which succeeds on many levels.

Colorized footage. 98% of the actual footage has been colorized, the small percentage in B&W is from inside the concentration camps, and I can certainly respect that. Some of the footage is 1080p, much is 360p, and much more is somewhere in between. They did a great job of this on the video throughout, I was impressed.

Actual audio from the Nuremberg trials. They say that over 1200 hours of audio from the trials remains, but only about 30 hours of video exists. The audio in both the actual footage and the recreations (with actors as top Nazis) is all using the actual audio from the trial. It is so clear that I didn't realize at first it was all the actual audio. Sounds like it was recorded yesterday.

The audio and readings of William Shirer, an author and reporter who wrote a book "The Nightmare Years: 1930-1940" (and many more acclaimed titles) and that book is the origin of Shirer speaking in this documentary. who lived in Nazi Germany for much of the 1930's, leaving in 1940 when he knew it was unsafe to remain. Again, I thought this audio of his observations there was an actor reading it but it is the real deal. It's all Shirer himself, probably the most knowledgable journalist anywhere in the world on the Third Reich during and after the war.

The format of the show is the rise of Hitler using actual footage and actor recreations. and it skips back and forth between Nuremberg in 1946 and where in the story they are, with observations of various historians throughout.


Some minor quibbles are the actor recreations were a bit cheesy at times when some historian is speaking about what was happening.

And speaking of historians, they have some very accomplished ones speaking, including Richard Evans and Omer Bartov, who both have written extensively on the Third Reich. My biggest problem was the inclusion of the shireking woman with the nails on chalkboard voice, why does Netflix do this? I think it is intentional because there is one of these people in every documentary I watch. Is it to make sure the viewer does not nod off?

I would rate it about 8.25 out of 10.

Just finished watching it. Holy Shit!

 

[Votto]

This is a 6 part documentary on the rise of Nazism to its ultimate disintegration in a bunker in Berlin.

While I have some issues overall with it, they are fairly minor of the overall product, which succeeds on many levels.

Colorized footage. 98% of the actual footage has been colorized, the small percentage in B&W is from inside the concentration camps, and I can certainly respect that. Some of the footage is 1080p, much is 360p, and much more is somewhere in between. They did a great job of this on the video throughout, I was impressed.

Actual audio from the Nuremberg trials. They say that over 1200 hours of audio from the trials remains, but only about 30 hours of video exists. The audio in both the actual footage and the recreations (with actors as top Nazis) is all using the actual audio from the trial. It is so clear that I didn't realize at first it was all the actual audio. Sounds like it was recorded yesterday.

The audio and readings of William Shirer, an author and reporter who wrote a book "The Nightmare Years: 1930-1940" (and many more acclaimed titles) and that book is the origin of Shirer speaking in this documentary. who lived in Nazi Germany for much of the 1930's, leaving in 1940 when he knew it was unsafe to remain. Again, I thought this audio of his observations there was an actor reading it but it is the real deal. It's all Shirer himself, probably the most knowledgable journalist anywhere in the world on the Third Reich during and after the war.

The format of the show is the rise of Hitler using actual footage and actor recreations. and it skips back and forth between Nuremberg in 1946 and where in the story they are, with observations of various historians throughout.


Some minor quibbles are the actor recreations were a bit cheesy at times when some historian is speaking about what was happening.

And speaking of historians, they have some very accomplished ones speaking, including Richard Evans and Omer Bartov, who both have written extensively on the Third Reich. My biggest problem was the inclusion of the shireking woman with the nails on chalkboard voice, why does Netflix do this? I think it is intentional because there is one of these people in every documentary I watch. Is it to make sure the viewer does not nod off?

I would rate it about 8.25 out of 10.

Looks like Democrats are getting ready

Do you kids have lawyers yet?

 

[luiza]

Anything about the Fake bunker suicides ?

Adie and Eva always laughed merrily when they heard that story as they relaxed at their mansion fortress in Patagonia .
As did their protectors the CIA .

 

[Zavulon]

I'll watch it, but I'm almost sure that they just tried to depict Hitler as something exceptional in the Western (or world's) history. As if Hitler was somehow different from Napoleon, or Charles XII, or Sigismond II or as if Jewish fate in Germany was somehow different from their fate in many other countries earlier.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

Thanks. I wil have a look at this. You might want to check out Rise of The Nazis. A BBC production. its a very good account of what went on.

 

[odanny]

Thanks. I wil have a look at this. You might want to check out Rise of The Nazis. A BBC production. its a very good account of what went on.

It looks to be excellent, and Europeans usually do better on these topics than American prodictions.

I can't remember if I've seen this series before but want to if I haven't.

Rise of the Nazis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Tommy Tainant]

It looks to be excellent, and Europeans usually do better on these topics than American prodictions.

I can't remember if I've seen this series before but want to if I haven't.

Rise of the Nazis - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

There is a lot of crossover. Evans is on both and especially the young German guy. I cant read his name but he talks like a Bond villain.

 

[odanny]

So I just bought the first season on Prime for $5.89, and realize that I have seen this series, and I did like it. One thing I can say is the Hitler depicted in this series is far more accurately represented than the Netflix Hitler. They really got Hitler right in this one.

I can't remember how much footage was used in this one, but I can say this one I liked slightly more, because it took a deeper, chronological look at their rise, versus the swtching between the present and ongoing Nuremberg trials, which made the overall scope of the Netflix series much narrower (and maybe less informative). But there was a lot of excellent colorized footage on Netflix.

I'll compare again when I finish the first season.

 

[Flopper]

This is a 6 part documentary on the rise of Nazism to its ultimate disintegration in a bunker in Berlin.

While I have some issues overall with it, they are fairly minor of the overall product, which succeeds on many levels.

Colorized footage. 98% of the actual footage has been colorized, the small percentage in B&W is from inside the concentration camps, and I can certainly respect that. Some of the footage is 1080p, much is 360p, and much more is somewhere in between. They did a great job of this on the video throughout, I was impressed.

Actual audio from the Nuremberg trials. They say that over 1200 hours of audio from the trials remains, but only about 30 hours of video exists. The audio in both the actual footage and the recreations (with actors as top Nazis) is all using the actual audio from the trial. It is so clear that I didn't realize at first it was all the actual audio. Sounds like it was recorded yesterday.

The audio and readings of William Shirer, an author and reporter who wrote a book "The Nightmare Years: 1930-1940" (and many more acclaimed titles) and that book is the origin of Shirer speaking in this documentary. who lived in Nazi Germany for much of the 1930's, leaving in 1940 when he knew it was unsafe to remain. Again, I thought this audio of his observations there was an actor reading it but it is the real deal. It's all Shirer himself, probably the most knowledgable journalist anywhere in the world on the Third Reich during and after the war.

The format of the show is the rise of Hitler using actual footage and actor recreations. and it skips back and forth between Nuremberg in 1946 and where in the story they are, with observations of various historians throughout.


Some minor quibbles are the actor recreations were a bit cheesy at times when some historian is speaking about what was happening.

And speaking of historians, they have some very accomplished ones speaking, including Richard Evans and Omer Bartov, who both have written extensively on the Third Reich. My biggest problem was the inclusion of the shireking woman with the nails on chalkboard voice, why does Netflix do this? I think it is intentional because there is one of these people in every documentary I watch. Is it to make sure the viewer does not nod off?

I would rate it about 8.25 out of 10.

Have to give it try although I don't usually like colorized version. Most often they get the color wrong, particularly early colorizations where blue skies have a greenish look and brown eyes are reddish.

 

[Tommy Tainant]

I'll watch it, but I'm almost sure that they just tried to depict Hitler as something exceptional in the Western (or world's) history. As if Hitler was somehow different from Napoleon, or Charles XII, or Sigismond II or as if Jewish fate in Germany was somehow different from their fate in many other countries earlier.

It was different. It was industrialised..

 

[odanny]

I can't compare Rise of the Nazis with Hitler and the Nazis, two completely different styles.

I prefer Rise of the Nazis style, it is the more traditional, chronological style and I prefer llistening to their historians, the information is much more detailed on the Nazis themselves, whilst the other is three pronged: Nuremberg trials, actual footage, and a mix of historian opinion and re-enactment.

Both are very well done, and there were things I really liked about both.