Weak investigation show that seems plausible, but isn't.

spewy29167

Get a famous person, any famous person that died in unusual circumstances, especially murdered or committed suicide. Find some actual experts and pay them handsomely, or any kind of pseudo expert. Now clutch at straws about what happened, things that were possible, but didn't actually happen. Never have any satisfying outcome at the end of the show that's any more likely or has any more evidence than the original accepted theory.

After that make a new likely theory that then undermines your previous likely theory. Make things seem likely by only ever putting forward one side of the argument.

For example they said Hitler 'could have' escaped Berlin to the Berchtesgaden from a besieged Berlin. Nice theory, other than the allies had already taken the Berchtesgaden area, I doubt he was ever going to escape to allied territory. Duh.

They spent two seasons trying to sell the plausible idea that Hitler escaped to Spain and then by submarine to South America, but they then undermine themselves with season 3 with new north or south from Berlin theories.

These new shows are an insult, deliberately targeting demographics to 'research' controversial subjects to make them seem plausible in the same way that Japanese school WW2 history is, there are no lies as such, the lies are in what's omitted. Confusing and distorting real history for money.

score 4/10

spewy29167 4 January 2018

Reprint: https://www.imdb.com/review/rw4022909/