14 reviews
Another exceptionally objective docuseries from the new master of historical shows.
As a Brit, I can appreciate that my reaction and perspective to this series & the Vietnam war in general is wildly different from anyone in the US. Conversely, since my country opted not to engage in the conflict, we weren't really educated on it any real detail - so broadly speaking, even as a bit of a history dweeb, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to any of the decades-long western battles against communism.
That's why I'm especially grateful to the talents of Brian Knappenberg.
Rather than portraying 9/11, the Cold War or in this latest fine entry into his canon as a 'rah! Rah! America!' Indulgence, he's proactively evenhanded, fair & draws remarkably detailed and articulate accounts from people who were really there. Yet despite the density of information & intelligence with which it's done, it's still accessible to even a Luddite like me.
It's powerful, powerful stuff - and while I can absolutely 100% appreciate that this must be deeply grating for a lot of those in the states, as a fascinated outsider? It's quite an excellent entry into the mountains of existing work covering this engrossingly chaotic period in modern human history.
Bravo.
As a Brit, I can appreciate that my reaction and perspective to this series & the Vietnam war in general is wildly different from anyone in the US. Conversely, since my country opted not to engage in the conflict, we weren't really educated on it any real detail - so broadly speaking, even as a bit of a history dweeb, I'm pretty ignorant when it comes to any of the decades-long western battles against communism.
That's why I'm especially grateful to the talents of Brian Knappenberg.
Rather than portraying 9/11, the Cold War or in this latest fine entry into his canon as a 'rah! Rah! America!' Indulgence, he's proactively evenhanded, fair & draws remarkably detailed and articulate accounts from people who were really there. Yet despite the density of information & intelligence with which it's done, it's still accessible to even a Luddite like me.
It's powerful, powerful stuff - and while I can absolutely 100% appreciate that this must be deeply grating for a lot of those in the states, as a fascinated outsider? It's quite an excellent entry into the mountains of existing work covering this engrossingly chaotic period in modern human history.
Bravo.
- FONYMAHONEY
- Apr 29, 2025
- Permalink
Some comments are unfair to say that the series presented Ho Chi Minh as a leader who only wanted to turn Viet Nam communist. Very early on (I think latter part of Ep 1 or Ep 2 onwards), they narrated how Ho Chi Minh banked on the USA history's of struggle for independence against Great Britain, and hoped that the US would likewise support Viet Nam's fight against the French. It also recognized that in Viet Nam, the war was known as an "American War" instead of "Vietnam War", acknowledging the dominant US-centric perspective in calling it the latter.
For the most part, I found this documentary balanced, only because when I find myself sympathizing (?) with one side, it would give another perspective that makes you realize that none of those involved were innocent - they all have blood on their hands for having no regard for non-combatants/civilians. It's materials like this that give us a chilling reminder that war is never the answer.
For the most part, I found this documentary balanced, only because when I find myself sympathizing (?) with one side, it would give another perspective that makes you realize that none of those involved were innocent - they all have blood on their hands for having no regard for non-combatants/civilians. It's materials like this that give us a chilling reminder that war is never the answer.
I really enjoy this kind of documentary, especially because its length - over five hours - allows it to take its time and properly explore a story from as many angles as possible.
What struck me most, personally, was that I ended up feeling sympathy and even a kind of sorrow for both sides. The filmmaker makes a real effort to stay as neutral as possible, showing the motivations - and especially the suffering - on both sides of the conflict.
One real eye-opener for me was what happened to the South Vietnamese who had worked with the Americans, after the US defeat and the communist takeover. It was shocking to see the consequences they faced. And what's more, the country is still divided in many ways because of this war - emotionally, politically, socially.
Neither side is painted as the bad guy.
What struck me most, personally, was that I ended up feeling sympathy and even a kind of sorrow for both sides. The filmmaker makes a real effort to stay as neutral as possible, showing the motivations - and especially the suffering - on both sides of the conflict.
One real eye-opener for me was what happened to the South Vietnamese who had worked with the Americans, after the US defeat and the communist takeover. It was shocking to see the consequences they faced. And what's more, the country is still divided in many ways because of this war - emotionally, politically, socially.
Neither side is painted as the bad guy.
- bertinabruintjes
- Apr 30, 2025
- Permalink
There have been several documented series covering the subject matter over the decades , but this one ( in my humble opinion ) is the most concise . It doesn't skirt around the truth and in particular the lies from both sides . And there were lots of falsehoods by both and successive administrations about what was being done " over there " . Episodes three and four encapsulated the worst of what was being carried out , both in Vietnam and in America in 1968 . I'm disappointed that the producers didn't critique the over promoted and utterly hopeless Westmorland in more detail , as he more or less brought the whole thing to its knees and cost the lives of thousands of American servicemen and woman , not to mention the millions of Vietnamese civilians who were brutalised on a daily basis . The delicious irony of including the biggest draft dodger in history , John Wayne , was not lost on me.
A series for the ages.
A series for the ages.
- TomatoesareRotten
- May 1, 2025
- Permalink
As a British Army veteran with a longstanding interest in the Vietnam War, I approached Turning Point: Vietnam with the hope that it would offer a rich, balanced perspective on one of the most politically and morally complex conflicts of the 20th century. Unfortunately, what unfolds is a disappointingly narrow and overly Americanised narrative, filtered through a distinctly modern lens.
This series seems more interested in drawing parallels with today's ideological and cultural debates than offering a sober, historically accurate examination of the war itself. It applies 21st-century sensibilities to 20th-century geopolitics, and in doing so, misses the nuance, context, and texture that this subject demands. It felt less like a documentary and more like a vessel for contemporary messaging-at times bordering on revisionist history.
What's particularly jarring is the near-total absence of Vietnamese voices, both from the North and the South. The conflict, after all, was fought on their soil, among their people, and with devastating impact. The series gives little space to understanding the motivations of the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong beyond standard Cold War tropes, and barely touches on the tragedy of South Vietnam's fall. There's a living history here that is fading fast, yet the documentary doesn't seem interested in preserving or exploring it.
Likewise, Australia-America's most significant ally in the conflict outside of South Vietnam-is not mentioned at all. Over 60,000 Australians served in the war, with more than 500 killed. Their absence from this series further underscores the US-centric lens through which the entire conflict is portrayed. There's also scant reference to other contributing nations, such as South Korea, Thailand, or the Philippines, nor any deep analysis of the international ramifications of the war on post-colonial Asia.
The Vietnam War was never just a 'bad chapter' in American history, it was a global flashpoint, the culmination of colonial collapse, Cold War paranoia, and regional resistance movements. Any serious documentary on the subject should strive to examine not just what happened, but why, from all angles.
In the end, Turning Point, Vietnam feels like a missed opportunity. At a time when first-hand accounts are still possible, and when global perspectives are more accessible than ever, this series retreats into a familiar, overly simplified narrative. It does a disservice not only to viewers but also to the complexity-and humanity-of those who lived through the war on all sides.
This series seems more interested in drawing parallels with today's ideological and cultural debates than offering a sober, historically accurate examination of the war itself. It applies 21st-century sensibilities to 20th-century geopolitics, and in doing so, misses the nuance, context, and texture that this subject demands. It felt less like a documentary and more like a vessel for contemporary messaging-at times bordering on revisionist history.
What's particularly jarring is the near-total absence of Vietnamese voices, both from the North and the South. The conflict, after all, was fought on their soil, among their people, and with devastating impact. The series gives little space to understanding the motivations of the North Vietnamese or Viet Cong beyond standard Cold War tropes, and barely touches on the tragedy of South Vietnam's fall. There's a living history here that is fading fast, yet the documentary doesn't seem interested in preserving or exploring it.
Likewise, Australia-America's most significant ally in the conflict outside of South Vietnam-is not mentioned at all. Over 60,000 Australians served in the war, with more than 500 killed. Their absence from this series further underscores the US-centric lens through which the entire conflict is portrayed. There's also scant reference to other contributing nations, such as South Korea, Thailand, or the Philippines, nor any deep analysis of the international ramifications of the war on post-colonial Asia.
The Vietnam War was never just a 'bad chapter' in American history, it was a global flashpoint, the culmination of colonial collapse, Cold War paranoia, and regional resistance movements. Any serious documentary on the subject should strive to examine not just what happened, but why, from all angles.
In the end, Turning Point, Vietnam feels like a missed opportunity. At a time when first-hand accounts are still possible, and when global perspectives are more accessible than ever, this series retreats into a familiar, overly simplified narrative. It does a disservice not only to viewers but also to the complexity-and humanity-of those who lived through the war on all sides.
- roderickmorrison-40759
- May 2, 2025
- Permalink
Started out watching this and only on episode 1.
Already not even 20minutes in the foundation has been laid that Ho Chi Ming wanted to turn Vietnam into a communist country and that is what started the war.
Are we just going to leave out the letters he sent to the President of the USA asking for Vietnam to be free of French rule in consideration of the documents signed at the end of WW2? That Ho Chi Ming asked the USA for help? Not Russia, not China. After being ignored then labelled communist they took the French in themselves.
They didn't want a war, they wanted their homeland to be theirs again.
If the truth prevails throughout I will happily come back and edit this review. I will continue to give forward with the documentary but I just had to get this out there.
Already not even 20minutes in the foundation has been laid that Ho Chi Ming wanted to turn Vietnam into a communist country and that is what started the war.
Are we just going to leave out the letters he sent to the President of the USA asking for Vietnam to be free of French rule in consideration of the documents signed at the end of WW2? That Ho Chi Ming asked the USA for help? Not Russia, not China. After being ignored then labelled communist they took the French in themselves.
They didn't want a war, they wanted their homeland to be theirs again.
If the truth prevails throughout I will happily come back and edit this review. I will continue to give forward with the documentary but I just had to get this out there.
- najagogoddard
- Apr 29, 2025
- Permalink
I had to pause my viewing of the 1st episode...as it seems to be a disingenuous account of the war so far, with few proper foundation laid.
Yet another US centric history of, what they call in Vietnam, the American war. Most of their modern history is trying to gain independence from the French, even seeking support from the US. When that wasn't forthcoming Ho Chi Minh turns to the obvious support he can get from his communist neighbours. In other words he's not an out right communist, he uses communism as a vehicle for independence. This isn't even touched on in the programme.
Hopefully the rest of the episode and series are better.
Resuming to episode 2 - better, maybe should have started with the historical background.
Yet another US centric history of, what they call in Vietnam, the American war. Most of their modern history is trying to gain independence from the French, even seeking support from the US. When that wasn't forthcoming Ho Chi Minh turns to the obvious support he can get from his communist neighbours. In other words he's not an out right communist, he uses communism as a vehicle for independence. This isn't even touched on in the programme.
Hopefully the rest of the episode and series are better.
Resuming to episode 2 - better, maybe should have started with the historical background.
Netflix's documentary Turning Point: The Vietnam War presents itself as an in-depth exploration of one of the most controversial conflicts of the 20th century. Yet, from the perspective of a Vietnamese viewer-or anyone familiar with the historical complexities of the war-it quickly becomes clear that the film suffers from a familiar flaw: it is yet another Western attempt to retell Vietnam's history through the eyes of the invader, not the invaded.
The documentary, while polished and emotionally compelling, centers heavily on the American experience. We are introduced to the anguish of U. S. soldiers, the political turmoil in Washington, and the ideological confusion that permeated American society during the 1960s and 1970s. It devotes significant time to describing the disillusionment of the U. S. military and the trauma faced by returning veterans. These are valid human experiences, yet their overwhelming emphasis shifts the focus away from the actual victims of the war-the Vietnamese people whose land, lives, and future were devastated by nearly two decades of foreign aggression.
Crucially, the film fails to accurately present the war's origins. It frames the conflict largely as a Cold War miscalculation, a domino-theory-driven campaign against communism. This narrative downplays and distorts the essential truth: the Vietnam War was a war of national liberation against a neo-colonial invasion. Vietnam's struggle was rooted in centuries of resistance to foreign domination. Yet in Turning Point, the war becomes just another chapter in America's internal moral reckoning-its ethical "turning point"-rather than a fight for sovereignty led by the Vietnamese themselves.
Furthermore, the documentary's portrayal of the North Vietnamese government and the National Liberation Front (NLF) lacks nuance and balance. The North is repeatedly referred to as a "communist regime backed by the Soviet Union," with little acknowledgment of its deep legitimacy among millions of Vietnamese. Meanwhile, the South Vietnamese government is subtly whitewashed-depicted as a fragile, misunderstood state caught in a geopolitical crossfire, rather than what it truly was: a puppet regime propped up by American military and financial support, riddled with corruption, and lacking popular support.
Perhaps the film's greatest flaw lies in its absence of authentic Vietnamese voices. While it includes brief commentary from a few Vietnamese individuals, their presence is superficial at best, often relegated to side commentary or edited in ways that support the film's broader American-centric narrative. The voices of Vietnamese historians, former resistance fighters, civilians affected by bombing campaigns, or those suffering from the long-term effects of Agent Orange, are conspicuously absent. Without these perspectives, the film becomes not a dialogue, but a monologue-a one-sided retelling that prioritizes Western emotional closure over historical truth.
In the end, Turning Point: The Vietnam War is less a documentary about Vietnam than it is about America's attempt to grapple with its past mistakes. It repackages the Vietnam War as a tragic American dilemma, rather than a criminal and costly war waged against a determined people seeking self-determination. While it may appeal to an American audience searching for moral clarity, it fails to serve as an honest or balanced historical document.
For Vietnamese viewers, and for those who believe in the importance of historical truth, this documentary is a reminder that history told by the powerful often omits the voices of the oppressed. Until Vietnamese narratives are given the space they deserve in international media, the world will continue to consume a version of the Vietnam War that is, at best, incomplete-and at worst, dangerously misleading.
The documentary, while polished and emotionally compelling, centers heavily on the American experience. We are introduced to the anguish of U. S. soldiers, the political turmoil in Washington, and the ideological confusion that permeated American society during the 1960s and 1970s. It devotes significant time to describing the disillusionment of the U. S. military and the trauma faced by returning veterans. These are valid human experiences, yet their overwhelming emphasis shifts the focus away from the actual victims of the war-the Vietnamese people whose land, lives, and future were devastated by nearly two decades of foreign aggression.
Crucially, the film fails to accurately present the war's origins. It frames the conflict largely as a Cold War miscalculation, a domino-theory-driven campaign against communism. This narrative downplays and distorts the essential truth: the Vietnam War was a war of national liberation against a neo-colonial invasion. Vietnam's struggle was rooted in centuries of resistance to foreign domination. Yet in Turning Point, the war becomes just another chapter in America's internal moral reckoning-its ethical "turning point"-rather than a fight for sovereignty led by the Vietnamese themselves.
Furthermore, the documentary's portrayal of the North Vietnamese government and the National Liberation Front (NLF) lacks nuance and balance. The North is repeatedly referred to as a "communist regime backed by the Soviet Union," with little acknowledgment of its deep legitimacy among millions of Vietnamese. Meanwhile, the South Vietnamese government is subtly whitewashed-depicted as a fragile, misunderstood state caught in a geopolitical crossfire, rather than what it truly was: a puppet regime propped up by American military and financial support, riddled with corruption, and lacking popular support.
Perhaps the film's greatest flaw lies in its absence of authentic Vietnamese voices. While it includes brief commentary from a few Vietnamese individuals, their presence is superficial at best, often relegated to side commentary or edited in ways that support the film's broader American-centric narrative. The voices of Vietnamese historians, former resistance fighters, civilians affected by bombing campaigns, or those suffering from the long-term effects of Agent Orange, are conspicuously absent. Without these perspectives, the film becomes not a dialogue, but a monologue-a one-sided retelling that prioritizes Western emotional closure over historical truth.
In the end, Turning Point: The Vietnam War is less a documentary about Vietnam than it is about America's attempt to grapple with its past mistakes. It repackages the Vietnam War as a tragic American dilemma, rather than a criminal and costly war waged against a determined people seeking self-determination. While it may appeal to an American audience searching for moral clarity, it fails to serve as an honest or balanced historical document.
For Vietnamese viewers, and for those who believe in the importance of historical truth, this documentary is a reminder that history told by the powerful often omits the voices of the oppressed. Until Vietnamese narratives are given the space they deserve in international media, the world will continue to consume a version of the Vietnam War that is, at best, incomplete-and at worst, dangerously misleading.
- bgauhoang21
- May 2, 2025
- Permalink
Very manipulative and deceptive "documentary". It does this by omission of important facts and misleading viewers who do not know history.
I do not have interest to spend time on enumerating these. I will just mention one that is crucial. The war was started in 1959 by North Vietnamese government backed by Chinese and partly by USSR. That government wanted to gain influence over whole of Vietnam. It tried by Geneva Accords in 1954, but these were not signed by South Vietnam. South Vietnam was an internationally recognised state. It was forbidden by international law to invade an independent country by force (UN, 1945). US got directly involved in 1965 (under Lynden Johnson, after 1963 assassination of Kennedy). Then North Vietnam and their militant hand Viet Cong in the south became heavily supported by USSR. So who broke international law? North Vietnam and Chinese government with help of USSR (ring a bell from current events?). We can debate the way of heavy-handed help of USA to a sovereign country of South Vietnam and its gruesome civilian casualties, but it does not change the real aggressor.
So I dare you to study history regarding Vietnam war and then watch this documentary. You might not want to finish.
I do not have interest to spend time on enumerating these. I will just mention one that is crucial. The war was started in 1959 by North Vietnamese government backed by Chinese and partly by USSR. That government wanted to gain influence over whole of Vietnam. It tried by Geneva Accords in 1954, but these were not signed by South Vietnam. South Vietnam was an internationally recognised state. It was forbidden by international law to invade an independent country by force (UN, 1945). US got directly involved in 1965 (under Lynden Johnson, after 1963 assassination of Kennedy). Then North Vietnam and their militant hand Viet Cong in the south became heavily supported by USSR. So who broke international law? North Vietnam and Chinese government with help of USSR (ring a bell from current events?). We can debate the way of heavy-handed help of USA to a sovereign country of South Vietnam and its gruesome civilian casualties, but it does not change the real aggressor.
So I dare you to study history regarding Vietnam war and then watch this documentary. You might not want to finish.
If history is an objective recounting and analyzing of facts, this series is the very opposite of that.
Its producers have unleashed a tendentious, self hating and manipulative "documentary" that, from the get-go, spares no effort in portraying the USA as the aggressor and antagonist in a conflict it had no business interfering in.
Brushing aside as insignificant such factors as Soviet post WWII expansionism which saw it expropriating Eastern Europe for itself, the attempted placement of missile bases near US soil and gradual takeover and exploitation of country after country worldwide, the miniseries attempts to debunk the ridiculous notion of a communist conspiracy by suggesting a far more plausible one- an American conspiracy.
If the show is to be believed, the Americans, beguiled in their ignorance ("nobody knew where Vietnam was") by a cunning, malicious leadership, were actually the bad guys, terrorizing the poor, misunderstood natives in an attempt to swindle them of their homeland.
Never mind that the USA never had any motive or interest in furthering its hold on Vietnam other than the stated and obvious one- to hold communism at bay; there are always plenty of sinister, mysterious evil figures lurking in the background in the form of Presidential advisors etc. To shift the blame to... not the innocent Vietcong who are simply caught in the crossfire and entangled against their will.
Do yourself a favor and stick to those documentaries that stick to facts rather than spinning a fiction as this one does.
Its producers have unleashed a tendentious, self hating and manipulative "documentary" that, from the get-go, spares no effort in portraying the USA as the aggressor and antagonist in a conflict it had no business interfering in.
Brushing aside as insignificant such factors as Soviet post WWII expansionism which saw it expropriating Eastern Europe for itself, the attempted placement of missile bases near US soil and gradual takeover and exploitation of country after country worldwide, the miniseries attempts to debunk the ridiculous notion of a communist conspiracy by suggesting a far more plausible one- an American conspiracy.
If the show is to be believed, the Americans, beguiled in their ignorance ("nobody knew where Vietnam was") by a cunning, malicious leadership, were actually the bad guys, terrorizing the poor, misunderstood natives in an attempt to swindle them of their homeland.
Never mind that the USA never had any motive or interest in furthering its hold on Vietnam other than the stated and obvious one- to hold communism at bay; there are always plenty of sinister, mysterious evil figures lurking in the background in the form of Presidential advisors etc. To shift the blame to... not the innocent Vietcong who are simply caught in the crossfire and entangled against their will.
Do yourself a favor and stick to those documentaries that stick to facts rather than spinning a fiction as this one does.
Sorry, but I watched twenty minutes of the first episode and was not impressed. No mention of the years of brutal French occupation of Indochina. The documentary just seems to randomly skip to various parts of a long and complicated timeline, which started well before JFK's involvement. I'll continue watching to the end, but my benchmark for a comprehensive take, is Ken Burns' 1917 documentary 'The Vietnam War'. Containing 18 hours of original footage, interviews with former American and Vietnamese soldiers and real life stories of American and Vietnamese families directly affected by the terrible conflict. Oh! And the music of Bob Dylan and Marvin Gaye takes you back to 60s America. Understanding the perspective from both sides of a historical and pivotal moment in American and Vietnamese history is vital if we are to avoid making the same mistakes in the future.
Turning Point: The Vietnam War presents itself as a comprehensive documentary, but upon closer examination, it becomes evident that the series is more manipulative than informative. While the production quality is high, with compelling visuals and a somber tone, the content selectively portrays events, leading to a skewed understanding of the Vietnam War.
The documentary notably omits significant aspects of the conflict, such as the brutal French colonial history in Indochina and the complex motivations of various factions. By focusing predominantly on American involvement and perspectives, it neglects the broader geopolitical and cultural contexts that are essential for a nuanced understanding of the war.
Furthermore, the series tends to simplify complex events, presenting them in a manner that aligns with a particular narrative. This approach not only misleads viewers unfamiliar with the intricacies of the Vietnam War but also does a disservice to the memory of those who experienced it firsthand.
In essence, while Turning Point: The Vietnam War may serve as an entry point for some, it falls short as an objective historical account. Viewers seeking a balanced and comprehensive understanding of the Vietnam War should consult additional sources to fill in the substantial gaps left by this series.
The documentary notably omits significant aspects of the conflict, such as the brutal French colonial history in Indochina and the complex motivations of various factions. By focusing predominantly on American involvement and perspectives, it neglects the broader geopolitical and cultural contexts that are essential for a nuanced understanding of the war.
Furthermore, the series tends to simplify complex events, presenting them in a manner that aligns with a particular narrative. This approach not only misleads viewers unfamiliar with the intricacies of the Vietnam War but also does a disservice to the memory of those who experienced it firsthand.
In essence, while Turning Point: The Vietnam War may serve as an entry point for some, it falls short as an objective historical account. Viewers seeking a balanced and comprehensive understanding of the Vietnam War should consult additional sources to fill in the substantial gaps left by this series.
- sean-43554
- May 2, 2025
- Permalink