Mankind: The Story of All of Us: Season 1
Metascore
66 out of 100

Generally favorable reviews - based on 14 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 9 out of 14
  2. Mixed: 5 out of 14
  3. Negative: 0 out of 14
view
per page
  1. New York Post
    Reviewed by: Linda Stasi
    Nov 13, 2012
    88
    This excellent series has too many of the usual experts and way too many ridiculous sound effects.
  2. Newsday
    Reviewed by: Verne Gay
    Nov 12, 2012
    83
    It aims for epic, and sometimes hits epic--but it's a bit shallow.

User Reviews

All reviews »
User Score
5.0 out of 10

Mixed or average reviews- based on 10 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 1 out of 5
  2. Mixed: 1 out of 5
  3. Negative: 3 out of 5
  1. heyitsmegrif4
    9
    A wonderful experience on the small screen excuse the soumd effects and enjoy yourself.
  2. hobbesdj
    1
    This series has great visuals, but other than that it is downright terrible. First, It completely skips over ancient Indian civilization (mohenjo-daro anyone?), an ancient people that every ancient historian considers vital to the development of world civilization. I was also equally amazed that the series skipped over the transformation of Rome from a Republic to an Empire (Julius Caesar and Augustus anyone?). Rulers have been calling themselves Caesars/Czars/Kaisers for thousands of years, but no mention of Caesar? Incredibly, the series also omits Charlemagne and the Franks (the group who would lay the foundations for France and Germany), the Byzantine Empire, and perhaps most incredibly of all, Napoleon. I find it absolutely mind-blowing that these subjects wouldn't be included in a history of the world. World War I and II were glossed over, and far too much time is spent on less important events like the invention of the crossbow. The American Revolution and Civil War are similar overblown in their effect on the world. Last but not least, many of the 'facts' presented are either untrue or simply opinions that would be ignored in the academic community. An example of this is the coverage of the American revolution - the involvement of the French is left out and the documentary describes the British surrendering solely to the rebels at Yorktown. In reality, the British surrendered to a mixed army of American rebels and the French army - a victory mde possible by the naval victory of the French over the British off the coast of Virginia. I had really hoped to show this series to my students but instead I will tell them that this is simply an entertainment show that is not to be taken seriously as a historical documentary. Other than Mike Loades I have never even heard of any of these 'historical experts'. I have absolutely no idea why Brian Williams from NBC, a news commentator, is featured in a historical documentary series. There is a plethora of respected historians who could have been consulted for this series - but instead the history channel decides to settle with Brian Williams and a few unknown authors. They should have consulted historians such as Kelly DeVries (UMD) as they did in other more serious historical documentaries. Stay away from this one if you want a serious historical overview of human history.… Full Review »
  3. Observer2
    1
    I've watched this series and saved the episodes for possible watching by visiting grandchildren. Having seen all the episodes through episode 15, my wife and I have decided that we wouldn't want our grandchildren to watch the series. Much of the photography is well done and the series is fairly entertaining, but we are dumbfounded by the number of historical factual inaccuracies and the burdensome biased political philosophy that is stated as historical fact. The writing is so bad, I tried to find out who the writers were. I discovered that no names are credited for the series, and I understand as I would want to hide my name as well. My wife and I have just deleted the series from my DVD.… Full Review »
See all user reviews »