PBS Video - "Nazi Mega Weapons: Jet Fighter Me 262"

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear All,

There appears to be a tendency for concerns such as PBS to do extremely superficial documentaries, this one included. It is a terrible jumble of old film footage; clumsy reenactments of events that try to summarize points but in and of themselves, such events never took place; minimal effort CGI; video of new-build Me 262 White 3 that somehow converts from 1-place to 2-place in the same flight; and really disjointed story telling of the 3 areas upon which the film focuses: Kahla/Walpersberg, St. Georgen/Bergkristall, and the carapace structure at Mühldorf. The storytellers take on a gee-whiz attitude. Missing is any really substantive history of the Me 262, itself. It is a muddled mess of poor information.

When I see a mess like this, all I can imagine is that some company staff member who hasn't a clue is given the assignment of doing a documentary on "X" and, by the way, there isn't a real research budget to actually learn the subject. The bad thing here is that this stuff is foisted on the public as being fact and, seeing as many probably know even less than the staff member, it is likely accepted as such. Shame on PBS and others for putting such tripe together.

Regards,
Richard

[Dan O'Connell]

I completely agree with Richard. They probably could have done better had they stuck with ONE issue, case in point Kahla REIMAHG. A fascinating story by itself, yet it was left hanging in the wind, having barely touched on it. The entire hour would have been better suited to a better coverage of it. The entire presentation left far more questions than answers, in the vast amount of disjointed material they attempted to present.

They would have done a far better job had they bothered to even ask ANY of the very credible individuals on the subject, yet I knew no one listed in the credits.

Perhaps it was best suited towards eight year old school boys, to give them something to talk about in the school halls the next day, further confusing the entire issue.

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Dan,

Markus Gleichmann provided the underground tour of the Walpersberg. His group wrested control of the mountain from Patrick Brion's group in a bitter fight a few years back.

Rudi Haunschmied, who spoke about St. Georgen/Bergkristall, wrote, along with 2 other authors, a well-researched book entitled St. Georgen - Gusen - Mauthausen, Concentration Camp Mauthausen Reconsidered.

Gleichmann was viewed by both Brion and Dr. Klaus W. Müller as not well versed on the subject of the Walpersberg. Müller, who is still alive and who had helped build the runway on top of the Walpersberg, wrote, along with Willy Schilling, the book Deckname LACHS: Die Geschichte der unterirdischen Fertigung der Me 262 im Walpersberg bei Kahla 1944 / 45.

The other film spokespeople I'd never heard of myself.

The major problem with the documentary is in its production, which is childish, at best. It shows a great lack of depth. The film editor did a real hack job. One technique used was to take someone supposedly in the know and act as a tour guide for someone who'd never been involved with the subject and bringing the information presented down to grade school level. For instance, there was the revelation to be slowly unveiled as to how the Germans got the Me 262's up from the perimeter buildings to the top of the Walpersberg. Brushing away some leaves, they "discover" a bit of the remains for the rail system. It's "Wow!, would you look at that! We've just unearthed something fantastic!" It would have been a whole lot better if the audience had been treated as adults. The "late" decision for Fritz Sauckel to decide to build an airstrip on the top of the Walpersberg was laughable.

And then there is the disjointed placement of historical film footage. While discussing Bergkristall, they show high domed tunnels, as if these had been built at Bergkristall. But, similar high domed tunnels were seen being built at the Walpersberg earlier. Frankly, I have no idea where either set of footage was actually taken and, because of the very poor presentation, I couldn't trust what was being presented.

It's like finding a worm in an apple. Once you find one, how many others are there? And, this presentation was loaded with them.

Regards,
Richard

[Dan O'Connell]

Hello Richard,

Now that you have refreshed me with those names, I do recall them. I believe you also have both books in your library, and I do not.

Granted, the production was juvenile in presentation, hence my reference to eight year olds.

The viewing audience would have been far better served if the production "team" had simply asked knowledgeable people, such as your self, for back ground information. A few hours study, on ONE subject, such as REIMAHG. would have resulted in a far better presentation.

[edwest]

Dear Richard and Dan,


As someone who follows the media, and Hollywood, on a regular basis, along with knowing something about how things get done, this is outrageous but not a big surprise. The History Channel being another example. After the real news began to turn into infotainment around the same time the internet took off, people were let go. In-depth reporting was gradually turned into sound bites. More and more, the focus became "what will bring in the ratings."

So, it pains me to watch something called history given the most superficial treatment and without the necessary detail to present the subject matter well. Someone is offering books about the Luftwaffe that are nothing more than compilations of wiki articles. This does not mean the end of real scholarship and real research, but if they can bring in the ratings while keeping budgets (and even accuracy) low, and get away with it, they will.

And hopefully, some youngsters will see some of this, develop a further interest, like I did, and find out that there's much, much more to the story.



Best,

Ed West

[Dan O'Connell]

Well said Ed.

[Richard T. Eger]

Dear Ed and Dan,

The History Channel perhaps 20 years ago turned out really good WW II histories. They pretty much stuck to historical film footage. There wasn't the dumbed down glitz that we have ended up with today. I've got a lot of those programs on VHS tape. If today they'd stick with historical film footage and spent their time and money on actual research, it would be wonderfully refreshing. There is so much more we know today than what we knew 20 years ago.

As for programs like Ice Road Truckers, Pawn Stars, and American Pickers, I do enjoy them, but they really aren't history and perhaps should be on a separately named channel. Like its "history" cousins of today, IRT tries to build excitement when, in reality, nothing untoward may actually have happened. Still, just seeing the give and take of the participants is fun. Pawn Stars gives mini-history lessons, so you actually learn something. As for American Pickers, it does get rather repetitive, sort of like American Idol - long in the tooth. And no, I'm not a fan of the latter or any of its ilk. As I said, these ought to be on a separate channel.

Regards,
Richard