Evolution of Evil (2015) User Reviews

Inaccuracy during some stories

[iainhart · 7/10 · 25 April 2022]

I found this pretty good to explain a lot of what happened but found some inaccuracies.

The Stalin episode showed trovsky being exhumed but failed to say he didn't die until 1939 and in the show they talk about his assassination with a gun shot and not an ice pick!

With a few other stories they left out major information but generally explain why these people were considered the worst!

huge Bias and "evil, all evil" type of narration.

[MadLane_Original · 7/10 · 10 April 2022]

It's good that each episode is about this huge names but many times you start getting annoyed by the bias and how much it keeps being said "evil, they did this that evil evil"

A very good show

[Ripley666 · 9/10 · 18 July 2021]

This is an excellent show which showcases the stories of some of the most prominent tyrants of the 20th century. I binge watched the entire series on Amazon Prime in 2 days. Highly recommended!

Educational

[JustUs2001 · 10/10 · 21 January 2022]

Well done and very educational about the fact that the most evil regimes throughout history have been those who fall for the lies of socialism or communism. Those who agree with those ideologies become consumed with power thus exhibiting fascist ideologies. We've seen it again and again with Germany, USSR, Cuba, Haiti, Venezuela... even now with the rise of the radical left in the US and almost everywhere else throughout the globes first world nations.

Biased and exaggerated moments

[tiannajohnson · 1/10 · 22 February 2022]

Trigger warning: rape mentioned.

I can only assume people rating it high are only just interacting with these histories or are Americans because there were loads of things in these documentaries that were completely out of context or they honed in on something small and exaggerated a lot. At one point in the first episode a contributor said that Gadaffi was the most prolific rapist in history and this is really not true. Not when people like Ghengis Khan existed. They should have condemned his actions without telling a straight lie. None of the contributors did were necessary voices or authorities on the subjects, definitely not enough to speak in such absolutions. There were times when they got Americans to speak about situations when they were not legitimate contributors to any point e.g. Finding the wife of someone who died on a plane to talk about the impact when the plane crashed instead of the people who were in the town and lost half their community. Considering that this community still exists and you can literally walk in and ask folks questions I found it bizarre that to measure impact they found someone who's husband was an innocent bystander instead of in the direct firing line. They then framed it that this was an attack on the US when the plane crashed in Scotland and people from 19 nations died in the attack. Either they had a really low budget and couldn't interview someone in Scotland or they're using these facts to fuel nationalism, it's a really weird documentary.

Just in general it was really poor documentarian practice. And this was a string of docuseries I'm watching for research and its definitely the worst out of all of them I'm watching. Please do not take the facts in this series as law, do some more reading, Google the claims (especially when contributors seem to ridicule something, these tend to be the moments where some context has been removed) and keep interacting with history documentaries. I promise there are good ones!