User reviews

Come on folks. Every single historical book, movie or series has people come out who are self proclaimed experts in one way or another in the target subject, decrying the lacking of something factual or the inclusion of something non-factual. Historians don't all agree on everything...consumers of media and literature certainly wont.

History is written by those who control the printing presses of the news of the time, or by those who research the records of the time...records which were written by humans who often have agendas or biases.

Today is no different. Media bias is as bad as it ever was, and full of lies mixed with facts, misinformation and blatant acts of omission in order to shape the history of the future with the news of the day.

That said, anyone who 100% believes anything they didn't see or do themselves could easily be a fool.

This is a great series and is intended for the ignorant masses who know little about history...which is the vast majority of humans walking the earth, let alone Americans. It's a little glimpse in to the past assembled in an entertaining way and the target audience is people who are interested in a little "light" learning while being entertained.

The History Channel does this all the time and this series is comparable to anything the History Channel does, and the graphics and HD quality is first rate. I watch on a 1080P screen and watch Blue Ray DVDs, and this series straight off of Dish HD from FOX Business Channel is first rate production...in my "consumer" opinion.

I didn't see the first season, but only the two following ones. What's striking to me is what has already been expressed a few times here. It pretends to go beyond the common narrative. But in fact, it totally gives in to the common narrative! And doesn't go any deeper. It's well made and it's good, but only skin deep. The title is only a pretense, a bait. I don't dislike O'Reilley. He's the type of guy whom you can call "wholesome". He comes in all square. The series here are the same: no subtleties, but interesting nonetheless and fun to watch.

The way that they portrayed Grant was so historically inaccurate. Kilmeade and o'Reilly Are NOT historians and should just stay quiet, keeping their revisionist history to themselves.

Some of the most outstanding info yet on the Wild West. A previously unknown account of how facts get twisted over time by the hit and run (drive-by) media. I see that another reviewer has written unsubstantiated info about this series but quite contrary, its from a leftist group with the profound title of 'American Constitution'. They have no idea what that title means since they are Fachist to start with.

Just like the left, trying to get the opposite and most derogatory info out that they can with unsubstantiated statistics and so-called research. One can tell about these groups because of the way they chose names for themselves; it is always the opposite of what they say or proclaim they are. I'm sick of their slanted views and their unsubstantiated info. Just loud mouths trying to fill a lot of hot air balloons,i.e. reminds me so much of our current President.

In summary, Bill has written or co-authored numerous books that have made the New York Times best seller lists for months in a row. You can take these facts to the bank. Thanks Bill, there are far too many that appreciate your corrections of twisted history. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORKS.

I love watching this series! It show the Wild West as it was and was very informative!

I was very disappointed in the Jesse James episode of Legends & Lies, as were other Missouri residents I've spoken to who know his history better than most. WHO were your "experts?" People from places I've never even heard of. Not one from Missouri. Was there any contact with personnel from the James Farm, where there is an extensive museum with extensive information on - Jesse James. No. And what about the law enacted in Missouri that "barred from voting, civil offices, and even the pulpit anyone who could not swear that they had not engaged in any one of a list of 86 forbidden acts of rebellion." (cited from the American Experience website at www.PBS.com) In other words, men who had fought for the Confederacy. It wasn't even mentioned. And Zerelda as a driving force in what made them bad guys? Really? And it wasn't mentioned, as is cited in another review, that Jesse and Frank rode with Quantrill and his raiders, which is a HUGE oversight. Poorly done and sadly researched in my opinion.

I'm not a wild west expert by any stretch of the imagination, but I do know quite a bit about one of them. I've read / seen just about everything there is to see on Billy The Kid and The Lincoln County War. So I'll speak about that episode.

I watched that episode first because of the fact that this is a Fox News produced show. I found what I usually found with Fox, they don't out right lie or anything, but they don't tell the entire story at all. They leave out things and take "artistic" license with a lot of it. Which is fine, unless you are running a series which is supposed to tell the "truth" rather than Legend.

Dermot Mulroney was a great choice for the narration, and most of the experts are very well respected. I don't know what makes Bill O'Reilly an expert at all, other than the fact that he produced the show.

The Billy the Kid episode was deeply flawed, for example, when they show the part of Billy's capture at Stinking Springs they make it look like a town, when in fact it was barely a building. Also they make it look like there was a big gun fight between Billy and Pat, when in fact Billy gave up after Pat and his crew opened up on Charlie Bowdre, mistaking him for the Kid. They also make a lot of assumptions about Pat knowing Billy. When in fact he barely knew him, but that doesn't make for good TV does it.

I could go on, but basically this is like everything Fox News does and should be taken with a grain of salt. There are plenty of real documentaries out there if people are interested in the subject. I'd suggest watching those for a true historical account.

Actually I took issue with the episode featuring Jesse James too, mostly for some of the reasons as the previous comment. I take exception to what the previous comment said about Jesse James being connected with the KKK though. James was instead connected to the KGC, which stands for the Knights of the Golden Circle, whose aim it was to reignite the Civil War and the money they raised was solely for that purpose. In one of the group pictures of the James brothers, Frank James and others are seen displaying the sign of the Knights of the Golden Circle, which was two fingers over their chest.

In the episode featuring the Lone Ranger, there may be another explanation for Bass's accidental shooting of his cook. I just saw a documentary on the History Channel about the Winchester 700 rifle which has been misfiring for decades, until finally the courts are seeing a backlog of accidental shootings when the safety is released or the rifle is bumped.

When someone claims to be dispelling histories lies it would be best if they had information to offer that would bring the truth to light. Unfortunately, this show, which I was eager to see, only perpetuated many of the problems with historical research of the old west. Bill makes claims that are supposed to be laying down the truth for all of us in the dark. Problem is, he merely takes a point of view on an issue that is still undecided by both historians and historical information and proclaims it to be established fact now that he has said so (Thanks Bill, glad you could do that for us!).

How does Bill O'Reilly know more about Doc Holliday and Wyatt Earp than the hard working researchers who have dug and dug in order to bring forth the most information possible to this point? Obviously he doesn't, but the problem is that this doesn't stop him from delivering his claims with bloviating conviction.

If a person watches this show for entertainment, great; there are a lot of westerns I enjoy that are factually mistaken. But if you watch this to learn something, PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE, for your sake and the good of our collective community intelligence, do no repeat what you see on this show and assume you are passing along wisdom.

This series is ironically named "Legends & Lies," for it not only perpetuates lies and myths but it is notable for its many important omissions. In fact, it is on the level of a school book primer. For example, the episode on Jesse James doesn't mention his association with a KKK-like white supremacist group for which his robberies were fund raisers. This is a glaring omission and reveals the lack of knowledge of its writers, narrators and researchers. If you don't know about this side of James, you know nothing, because it was his sole motivation before, during and after the Civil War - to help this organization create a slave empire and see the South rise again. It did not mention his joining Quantrill's Raiders, either - a vicious and barbaric guerrilla group noted for its atrocities. Nor did it mention the millions in gold he'd accumulated to fund his cause, which is reputedly still out there to be found. Also not mentioned - terribly important - is the fact that the man buried as James looks nothing like him and was just a fall guy enabling James to make a clean escape from justice. Just examine the photo of the man said to be James in death and compare it to his known photos and you can see this for yourself. Yet O'Reilly and his associates seem totally unaware of this side of the story. I could go on but I think I've made my point. And this kind of thing is true of all the episodes I've seen so far - but I have another gripe, too. The acting is horrible. (Likely non-union, by the way.) It is so corny as to distract from the story and present an inaccurate picture of true events. The narration is monotone and often overshadowed by the overly loud background noise and annoying music score. This series is the worst of all supposed Western era expose shows popping up everywhere on cable TV these days and - shame on you, Bill O'Reilly - reflects a lack of proper research and respect for the documentary genre itself. This is sophomoric stuff, to be kind, with the pompous pretense of presenting much more. There is much more to reveal but this show doesn't begin to get at the truths rarely told about the legendary characters it chooses to showcase. In fact, I haven't seen one new fact presented on this show. This series is just a dull rehash of familiar and faulty fairy tales.

Having done military history for over 40 years, and been involved in multiple movie, documentary, and museum productions, I can truthfully say saddles and bridals were wrong, total wrong firearms used, with a complete mismatched hodgepodge mess of them in a same scene or even shot. Principal actors cannot act, and they cannot ride at all. Background setups were totally inappropriate for the era and area.

Your history lesson is close, but not correct. If you're going to teach history, which I assume is what you're trying to do, you failed horribly.

Truthfully the only thing pleasant about this episode was the narrator's calm voice.

You set documentary making back 50 years.

Facts NOT in dispute and easily verified: Southern States issued Declarations of War citing the main cause (and in some cases 'only cause') for War being the Northern States failure to accept and recognize:

• that Slavery was right and just,
• Escaped Slaves should be returned to their owners,
• people who were Slaves were subhuman and therefore not only was it ok to 'own' them, but that those who were 'free' should not be allowed any human rights such as the ability to own land or bring charges in a Courtof Law.

Despite the series layout focusing on individuals rather than underlying motivations, the myths are not debunked and are rather reinforced wrongly as fact in some cases. Worse, revisionis history in attempts to incorrectly identify States Rights as the main cause for bloodshed is embedded insidiously throughout.

A more accurate portrayal would showcase the difficult position of; plantation owners faced with the harsh reality that they would no longer be able to maintain his land without Slave, the plight of the poor farmer who hoped to have wealth of his own and without Slavery sees his future crumble to dust, and finally the basic rationale of many at the time... simply put that Slaves must not have souls or be truly human because if they were then all involved in ownership, buying, selling, and trade of slaves would be guilty of heinous sin. That included parents and grandparents, husbands, wives, etc. as a heartbreak of that precluded the possibility. This was something they just couldn't believ, so they turned a blind eye. There is a quote along those lines I can't quite recall at the moment, but it essentially says as otherwise good Christians, their treatment of Slaves as less than even animals certainly would damn them to hell so they must be less than human.