Prohibition (2011) User Reviews

Excellence throughout.

[planktonrules · 9/10 · 19 June 2012]

This is the latest documentary series from Ken Burns--the docu-god for Public Broadcasting. Not surprisingly, with his amazing reputation for perfection, he was able to once again get many of America's top actors to provide their voice talents to the shows--such as Tom Hanks, Sam Waterston and Blythe Danner. And, like so many PBS documentaries, Peter Coyote narrates more than capably.

The miniseries consists of three episodes. The first is about the background leading to Prohibition--the temperance movement and problems with alcohol over-consumption. It also ends with the implementation of the Constitutional Amendment. Part Two is about the practical aspects of the law. The difficulty in enforcement is due to a lack of widespread support, loopholes in the law as well as the way the law actually ENCOURAGED the growth of organized crime. Part Three is about the rising dislike of the law that led to its repeal.

Overall, it's yet another very good series by Ken Burn and is among the best shows you can find on the topic. Well worth your time--and it manages to make an educational show fun...of sorts.

A 101 Course in Prohibition.

[KidNorway · 8/10 · 2 May 2017]

Prohibition took place in the early 1900's, was unpopular, and was repealed. That was the extent of my knowledge on prohibition. Ken Burns proved that such a big part of our country's history is worth taking a closer look at.

The storytelling is excellent, with interviews of and narration by folks you'll likely recognize. The archival footage is eye-opening and heartbreaking. The comic relief is perfectly timed, and the facts presented here linger on the mind long after the TV is off.

Personal preference will dictate whether the film's length outlasts its charm. I usually like things short and sweet, but I couldn't hold myself to a single episode in one sitting. However, at 5 hours it'll probably wear down the patience of some viewers.

The only other downside I can think of is that some points are overly expounded upon, while other enticing tidbits will be mentioned briefly but not fully exemplified. I almost doubled the length of one episode by continuously pausing and googling something for more clarification.

Of course, that could've been Ken's plan all along.

Very good, but with an element oddly missing

[barleysinger · 9/10 · 31 July 2014]

I really liked the fact that this documentary went deeply into the history of what led up to prohibition; the social normality of drinking alcohol and the slow change from 'temperance' (moderation not drunkenness) over to full abstinence, etc. The push toward alcohol prohibition was interrupted repeatedly, it was melded into other political issues like women's right to vote, and fused into the new version of US Christianity that had swept the nation. It was also part and parcel with deep racism and xenophobia - often aimed against the very migrants it was *claimed* to be there to help. Prohibition was supposed to stop poverty and make life safer, but it did the opposite - it destroyed the 5th largest industry in the nation (and other reliant jobs) creating mass unemployment at a time with no government unemployment system. It created organized crime (which is tied now to drug prohibition).

The view of the local bar as being a center of commerce and community for the lower classes (who did not have private clubs) was not the view held by those who saw alcohol as the central evil of their era. But then they wanted easy answers... not accurate ones.

People in that era were told (in the first mass political propaganda machine ever) that alcohol was the cause of all their social ills; that domestic violence, prostitution, poverty, gambling, and many other things were all due to the bottle. They were told that with no alcohol people could be made 'better' & society would be better. All would be well. Somehow few people questioned the information they were getting, but then they had not experienced that sort of propaganda before.

There was a good discussion of the long era in which the prohibitionist movement grew, and of the sudden increase in alcohol production, and the result of the rise of groups that were against drinking or let alcoholics help each other stay sober.

THE MISSING PART? However there was no discussion at all of *why* so many people in that era drank to excess, or why any substance (or other obsession) becomes the center of self destructive behavior. After all,you can't sell anything to people - including excessive amounts of alcohol, to people who won't swallow it down.

The *why* of all substance misuse is nearly always tied into feelings of emotional pain and the desire to escape them; hopelessness, despair, trauma, and a desire to have a mental 'vacation'. Looking at things in this way is less popular than anger. It doesn't let people have easy answers to complicated problems, or give them people to vilify. It fails to let them 'off the hook' when it comes to looking at their entire way of life. Anything can be used this way, including ideologies and theologies.

The fact is that nearly all the people in that era lived in abject poverty & had no real rights. There were no government enforced rights at all : no workers rights, no right to equal housing, there were no unemployment benefits or disability system. Child labor was common and sweat shops were normal. Jobs paid so little that you could starve to death while fully employed, working 12 hour days. People were worked extreme hours, in dangerous conditions, and could be fired for anything (including being too sick to come to work, having a kid to care for, or for refusing to do a thing that was wrong or even illegal). You could be fired for not going to the employers church (see the job requirements 'Dwight L Moody' met, when hired by a relative).

Empires of money were made by people willing to do 'all the wrong things' for cash. The employees & employers knew this; and that all jobs were like that so you could not quit a job & find better treatment. Nobody was willing to say no to greed or on the job cruelty. After all, the entire prohibition movement came into being in a US shaped by men like Daniel Webster (who believed the poor were poor because of their inferiority, their race, their original nationality, and that the US should be CLASSIEST and keep voting a privilege of the wealthy... education too). It was not a good thing to be poor in a world shaped by folks like Webster.

Read "The Jungle" for a look at US migrant life in the early 20th century. The migrants in it found the US was not the new wonderful world they had hoped for. It was terrible, dirty, and filled with poverty. They rapidly discovered that nobody could be trusted in the cities, that most US city people were con artists who preyed on each other constantly and had no ethics; that jobs were hard to get & easy to lose; that their family members died of poverty (the cold, starvation, lack of medical care) surrounded by people who COULD help but would not. At the end of the work day (or in despair over no work) many chose to disappear into a bottle. Knowing what they faced at home, men stayed at the bars, fearing going back to the pressures of their impoverished family. Yet nobody was campaigning to STOP the conditions that sent people off to drink in order to cope.

It was easier to blame booze and ban it (and more satisfying as you could feel superior) than it was to go after the CAUSES of mass alcoholism and address them, by reeling in the abuse of power and addressing poverty.

It still is easier to use the blunt instrument of the law to deal with the societal results of greed and cruelty, and it is still done everyday.

Greatest Legal Miscalculation of 20th Century America Documented in Outstanding Burns/Novick Film

[classicalsteve · 10/10 · 8 October 2011]

My favorite comment in this documentary is offered by Pete Hamill, American journalist, novelist and essayist, who said basically if you want people to brush their teeth, pass a law banning toothpaste. And then people will do everything they can to acquire toothpaste illegally, and they'll brush their teeth just to spite the law. The unforeseen consequence of Prohibition is that once you take away a person's right to do something that people have always done, people will feel the desire to want it much more intensely, in the same way if you deny a child all sweets, the kid will be sneaking chocolate inside his jacket sleeves. Hamill later says he doesn't drink, but he would probably take a swig in front of a government building if the law ever forbade him from doing it. Encouraging moderation is not the same as banning something completely.

The other comment worth noting concerns repeal crusader Pauline Sabin who had been entrenched in republican politics prior to 1928. Republican congressmen would vote to adhere to the strictest of prohibition laws as laid out by the Volstead Act and then go to one of Sabin's parties demanding a drink. She concluded that the United States had become "a Nation of Hypocrites", which is the title of the third installment of Burn's documentary. Sabin becomes an unlikely hero who would sway the country against Prohibition and the eventual repeal of the 18th Amendment of the Constitution, the only amendment so dignified. Ironically, Daniel Okrent points out that today alcohol is somewhat harder to come by than during Prohibition because of liquor laws, underage drinking laws, etc. When alcohol was strictly forbidden, there was nothing in place to regulate it, except for raids on speakeasies and private distilleries.

Based in part on Daniel Okrent's "Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition", Ken Burns and Lynn Novick's "Prohibition" is a thoroughly entertaining, simultaneously humorous and "sobering" look at one of the strangest episodes in American legal history. The documentary is in three parts, the first chronicling the birth of the temperance movement which began in the 1820's almost a century before the ratification of the 18th Amendment. No question that alcohol was a problem for some people, mostly among the rural poor, but the temperance movement decided alcohol itself was the problem and vowed its eradication by the late 19th century. The first part ends with the ratification of the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution prohibiting not only the sale but importation of alcohol. Part two concerns the passage of the Volstead Act designed to enforce the amendment, and the immediate consequences of trying to stop people from drinking, and the antithetical results, such as lawlessness and bribery. The third and most sobering of the episodes chronicles many of the unintended consequences, such as the violence erupting in Chicago and the night club craze. The documentary ends with the movement for the repeal of the 18th Amendment.

The unforeseen catastrophes of the 18th Amendment which were designed to heighten American morality and assuage drunkenness turned America into one of the most alcoholic-driven nations among the industrialized world. Americans drank more booze, partied more, got more drunk, and flaunted the law more often during Prohibition than at any other time in the nation's history since after the Civil War, even as compared to the present time. Possibly only the 1960's are somewhat comparable to the mayhem of the 1920's.

The irony of ironies that the decade begun by the Temperance Movement's victory with the passage of the 18th Amendment to the US Constitution in 1919 would be nicknamed the Roarding Twenties and the Jazz Age. This was not a decade known for drinking milk. This was a decade characterized by cocktail glasses in the hands of flappers dancing on tables to the evocative music of Duke Ellington and Count Basie. Men would be raising giant mugs of frothy beer in underground establishments called speakeasies. Only Prohibition allowed the likes of Al Capone and Lucky Luciano to become wealthy gangsters, almost movie stars by today's standards. The leaders of the Temperance Movement, particularly the Woman's Christian Temperance Union and the Anti-Saloon League, were appalled when their daughters ran off to speakeasies and night clubs to partake of the forbidden fruit. Strangely, Prohibition helped usher in the Night Club culture of America which has continued unabated ever since. All the great night clubs famous for their booze, music, and dancing such as the Cotton Club and the Stork Club, were incepted when alcohol was supposed to be illegal.

For some reason, I didn't think Prohibition permeated into so many aspects of American life during its enforcement from 1920 through 1932. People could open small businesses in their basements and make a fortune through bootlegging, and then be hauled away under the Volstead Act. The rise of the Chicago Gang syndicate became a prototype for similar syndicates across the country, all vying for their bootlegging territory. At one point, citizens were legally compelled to snitch on neighbors suspected of bootlegging. The story as presented by Burns/Novick is as compelling as any action thriller being produced today. A great movie of American history, with all the elements that make a great story. Essentially it's a legal thriller with sex, violence, and lots of booze. Lots of it.

Another Winner From Ken Burns

[Calaboss · 10/10 · 9 October 2011]

When it comes to making full coverage documentaries, you can't beat the work of Ken Burns. "Prohibition" is another fine illustration of that.

This five and one half hour mini-series, shown in three parts on PBS and available on DVD, never bogs down. That's pretty amazing right there. I would think it difficult to have that kind of running time and not have at least a couple spots where the story gets boring. It never does, and is a tribute to Ken's film making ability.

"Prohibition" describes how we got there, what it did to our country, and why the 18th Amendment, banning booze, became the only Amendment to be repealed. It was doomed to fail from the start, but nobody saw it at the beginning. It almost single-handedly brought about organized crime in America, a problem that has yet to be repealed.

Ken Burns covers it all very well, and his good name in these documentary efforts never fails to bring in the big names for voice-over work. In this case, Tom Hanks, Patricia Clarkson, Adam Arkin, Jeremy Irons, John Lithgow, etc., etc..

(Although it was never mentioned, I couldn't help but think of the parallels to modern day marijuana laws. When you have a product that millions of Americans want and you make it illegal, the money from that product goes to gangs that provide it, and with that, all the violence that goes along with those gangs. You can't legislate morality, as the 18th Amendment surely showed. And pot is much less harmful than alcohol.)

Another great job by Ken Burns.

Fascinating look at an important chapter in the USA history.

[TxMike · 4 October 2011]

I just finished watching this 3-part series on PBS. It is timely to add comments because this is such a fascinating film.

I grew up mostly in the 1950s and 1960s, and as a young adult was aware of the "prohibition era" but really knew nothing about it. Seeing this film puts lots of things into perspective.

On the one hand, the concerns about alcohol consumption were, and still are, real. What the film shows so clearly is that the "solutions" didn't solve anything, plus many new problems were created. A new criminal enterprise was spawned, and there simply were not enough law enforcement people to monitor, arrest, and try those in the booze smuggling business. It was doomed to failure, and we are better off today as a result.

As history now witnesses, prohibition failed. It was replaced by laws which, instead of making production and sale of alcoholic beverages illegal, make it illegal to be drunk in public or perform certain activities while under the influence. Which should have been the approach all along.

I can't help thinking of prohibition alongside the current Tea Party movement. While both of them have certain admirable goals, in both cases you can't charge ahead with a tunnel vision that neglects all the other things that will be impacted.

When I read about the evils of drinking, I stop reading.

[nickenchuggets · 9/10 · 3 January 2023]

It might be a bold statement, but I personally feel that Prohibition was arguably the biggest mistake America ever made, with the possible exception of the Vietnam War. Ken Burns, already well known for making a great deal of extremely high quality films and documentaries about a variety of subjects (including the aforementioned one), has once again delivered a riveting and deeply interesting experience that no history aficionado should miss. Although this series is shorter than many of his others, it's no less intriguing as it delves into how the movement to get alcohol banned in the United States actually started almost a century before the amendment banning it was passed. We learn how it was endorsed by a lot of different groups of people (many of them women), and they all had different reasons for wanting to see it go. Many priests had heard countless stories of women being abused by their husbands, ordinarily mellow people being turned into brutes, and children being neglected all because of drinking. Many had seen how beer and wine could ruin not just one person, but whole communities. The film does a great job of showing every conceivable angle to the story of prohibition, and discusses in detail how people, many of them Irish and German immigrants who loved to drink, tried their hardest to make sure it wouldn't go anywhere. Many bar and saloon owners were convinced such a ridiculous act would never happen, as the federal government was too reliant on taxes paid by these establishments. Meanwhile, once prohibition actually came into effect, people who were law abiding citizens before the act became criminals just to get what they viewed as theirs in the first place, and those who were already criminals became even more wealthy, as many new opportunities were opened. Of course, you can't talk about this era and not bring up the mobster aspect of it. Thugs like Al Capone (who was sometimes seen as someone much more respectable than just a thug) ran huge, elaborate bootlegging operations that encompassed entire cities, had their minions kill or threaten anyone who stood in their way, and left a legacy on america that's still talked about now. Burns also masterfully explains how the horrendous flu pandemic of 1918 and the First World War, both of which left millions dead, contributed to a much more flippant and hedonistic way of living which resulted in flappers. Women came to realize that life was short and you can die at any moment, so they dove into a sexualized lifestyle that made their Victorian parents quite angry. Despite the fact that prohibition was tearing the country apart, people were still breaking the law left and right and drinking whenever they wanted to. Thousands of speakeasies were operated all across america. These carefree times would eventually come to a tragic and sudden end in 1929, when a stock market crash caused the most dire emergency america had faced since the Civil War. This is just a small selection of the things talked about in this documentary. If you're like me and you've already seen Burns' masterpiece on the vietnam war (probably the best thing he ever did), you'll feel right at home. The same narrator is here, and there's more than enough archive footage. All I can say is if you like to drink, and especially if you don't like to, then this is for you.

Ken Burns' latest docu: goes great with ice and a twist of lime

[joker-4 · 8/10 · 5 March 2012]

Daniel Okrent's "Last Call: The Rise and Fall of Prohibition" and Ken Burns and Lynn Novick's "Prohibition" mini-series were two similar projects that began together resulting in two different end products. Together, both provide a rather detailed account not only of Prohibition's place in American history, but the events leading up to such, the results of repeal and the long-lasting societal impact of the entire matter. Separate, both are still strong, informative and entertaining yet each tend to focus on different themes that sometimes do not intermingle and the result is noticeable.

Ken Burns, in his trademarked fashion, intermingles fantastically- original photos and video with colorful interviews from subject-matter experts and first-hand histories over-laced with celebrity voice-overs, makes learning hip and brings about a passion for a dark, but necessary, time in American history. Burns' documentary was too light in certain instances where a deeper look at American history would have benefited the story. Okrent's novel definitely fills in such details that Burns either ignored or edited out but was definitely too heavy at times with whole sections coming across as a historical text book rather than an entertaining narrative.

Burns, and Okrent as well, enlighten 21st-Century audiences to the fact that Prohibition, what can be now considered a silly arrangement, was not only responsible for the rise of Jazz, the introduction of mixed drinks and the invention of speed boats but also led to very beginnings of the Civil Rights Movement and the outright success of Women's Suffrage.

Naturally, Burns provides much attention to that of the gangsters of the era, particularly Chicago's Al Capone. But again, he provides just enough details for a satisfactory display of information yet fails to get deeper. Similarly, this occurs when discussing the role of the Church and the Prohibition movement. Dry Congressmen and Senators knew how to convince their Baptist and Methodist ministers to use the pulpit to condemn the evils of alcohol, particularly in the Mid-West states.

Likewise, Prohibition was an outcry not just against alcohol but also against the rise of poor immigrants filling America's urban centers. The Irish, the Germans, the Italians, all known for enjoying wine and spirits, and all Catholics, became a scary threat for "decent, Protestant country folks". Cutting off immigrants from their alcohol was a way to ensure that these new Americans were productive members of society, not a burden of filthy drunkards. Burns did not spend too much time on these ideals.

However, Burns attention to detail and crafting of a narrative tale is shown in his vision and with what is presented. He does keep entertainment at the forefront of his documentary, much like what he has done in the past, especially with his must-see Baseball series. Some indirect humor is presented with history playing the comedian to a more naïve time. Burns does get political with some of his views, but at no time are such views sobering enough to prevent the viewer from seeking out a drink.

Very Interesting, as expected

[carol-spears · 9/10 · 6 May 2015]

I watched this several years after it had been first aired at my local library. It was a nice situation to see it in. Some of the library patrons who were also attending had relatives and such who were involved in the "industry" during the featured years.

The librarian had to make sure that we were sickened, or at least spooked by pointing out that all of the photographs of dead people were of real dead people and not staged.

Some of the prohibition people were just simply nuts.

Nothing makes crime like the de-legalization of something that most people can handle or will handle anyways.

A very thorough look at prohibition from all sides

[benm-41751 · 9/10 · 23 April 2018]

This huge three-part series covers a lot of ground on not only the failed prohibition laws in the US but also of America's turbulent love affair with alcohol.

I'll Drink To That!

[strong-122-478885 · 6/10 · 14 December 2013]

What's this? America, a nation of drunkards? Impossible!

Through 100s of vintage photographs and newsreel footage, plus interviews with historians and celebrity narration by Peter Coyote, this well-researched, often-revealing 3-part documentary gives the viewer an in-depth, up-close look at the sheer preposterousness of "Prohibition".

This documentary clearly shows how the likes of "Prohibition" (which was strictly enforced for 13 years, from 1920 - 1933) limited human freedom and turned millions of otherwise law-abiding American citizens into literal criminals (as well as two-faced hypocrites) overnight.

Though President Woodrow Wilson (a Democratic) vetoed Congress for imposing the 18th Amendment on the country's taxpayers he was inevitably over-ruled and "Prohibition" prevailed throughout the terms of the following 3 presidents, Warren Harding, Calvin Coolidge, Herbert Hoover (all Republicans) until Franklin D. Roosevelt (a Democratic) had it promptly revoked and abolished upon his election to presidency in 1933.

To think that such a disastrous act of folly such as "Prohibition" could actually go into effect and exist for 13 years (in the 20th Century) truly boggles the common-sense thinking of a rational mind. But, it did. And, boy, did it ever create an utter, nation-wide mess of nonsense (that was clearly destined for failure) like nothing anyone had ever experienced before.

Ken Burns: Prohibition - Ken does it again

[Bernie4444 · 10/10 · 16 December 2023]

This is an excellent six-hour presentation. I knew a lot about the time. Or at least I thought so until this presentation. The details and pictures bring time and problems to life. Now we can see the problems of this day as a reflection of prohibition and its side effects.

A lot of information well presented gives you the fee that you lived through that time.

We have a strange collection of readers that you would never have guessed they would be: Patricia Clarkson John Lithgow Campbell Scott Sam Waterston

Includes the following episodes: "A Nation of Drunkards." "A Nation of Scofflaws." "A Nation of Hypocrites."

Narrator Peter Coyote Based on a book by Geoffrey C. Ward A PBS production.

Fun, smart, well made and educational - but not as deep as some of Burns' work

[runamokprods · 7/10 · 26 November 2014]

Any Ken Burns documentary is going to be smart, well made and educational. This one is also fun (in the plus column), but lacks the emotion, ambition and power of his very best work, like "The Civil War" or "The Central Park Five".

Made with a ton of great movie footage and stills, and lots of tid-bits about the history of drinking in America -- it's out of control pervasiveness among men, especially working class men, that led to the push for prohibition that puts the now ridiculous seeming constitutional amendment in a somewhat more understandable light. That in turn explains the odd confluence of its backers, from religious conservatives, to well meaning social progressives looking to save the poor from themselves, to blue-blood WASPS who hated working class immigrants who drank more openly, to women fighting for the right to vote, and who saw how often alcohol contributed to domestic violence.

The film also does a great job in showing how a law that tens of millions of Americans will simply ignore is much worse than no law at all, as it sows the seeds of disregard and contempt for the law, as well creating a fertile ground for criminals to give people what they want in a black market. Much the same arguments are going on right now about other "vice" laws, from marijuana, to prostitution, to proposed laws on fatty and sugary foods.

One of the central questions of any democracy is how much and where does the government have a right to intrude into people's lives for the greater good. It's an important and complicated question, and one the series does a good job of raising.

But at over 5 hours it starts to run a little thin, and the points and stories start to get a bit repetitive. I'm glad I saw it, and enjoyed myself quite a bit, but unlike many documentaries by Burns (and his equally talented brother Ric), I don't think I'll feel a need to re-watch it anytime soon.

Disappointing and morally ambiguous

[dierregi · 3/10 · 20 April 2019]

By the same director, I watched the two series about the Vietnam war and WWII with great interest. I was very much looking forward to this one, too.

I don't know much about the real history of prohibition, even if countless movies were made about that period of the American troubled history.

The general idea I got was that prohibition was a bad idea and it just contributed to the strengthening of criminal organisations, especially in the Chicago area. However, I did not know how it came to be a law.

Turns out, there was a huge problem with alcoholism in the US. Linked to the macho culture and traditions of the European immigrants, alcohol promoted "social" moments reserved to men, who often squandered their wages at the saloon. In its wake followed poverty, domestic abuse and cirrhosis.

The fight was very much between the rural protestants (dry) and the city-dwellers of all other religious denominations (wet).

After the first episode, that sets the story in motion - albeit very slowly and with an overdose of American politics I found tedious - the documentary starts to hint at the fact that prohibition was mainly a conservative idea (therefore bad) and that the bootleggers were good people, because they provided customers with a product customers were perfectly entitled to buy.

This is just like suggesting that the sale of of hard drugs should be legal, because nobody has the right to interfere with the self-destructive instincts of individuals. That is a fact, but when these instincts interfere with a reasonable functioning of society, I find it highly objectionable.

I don't like the morally ambiguous stance of the story and I also find the minute details fo the politics behind it quite boring. Perhaps best suited to a liberal, American audience or just not well made.

Amazing Story. How could Probition Ever Existed? This film makes clear the roots of the insanity of prohibition.

[ChetXBuck · 2 January 2012]

I've always wondered how the US ever passed laws prohibiting alcohol. Such an amazingly common thing today, it would be like banning caffeine or soda. This six hour story is told well from all sides and it provides clarity as to the insane and radical motives behind the Volstead Act and how it backfired in every way. While the video and photos are all rather dated being from the 1910s and 1920s, the interviews of experts, historians and people with real-life stories really come together well. The narration is also great and uses some of the best names in the film business.

This is a long series, about 6 hours. Ken Burns' direction is poignant and well-paced. It gives you time to think about the meaning and the historical impact of each chapter of this story which touches on many decades.

I feel I know understand an important part of American history that never made sense to me. Concepts like "Bootleggers and Baptists" being aligned and the role of the gangsters in society become crystal clear after viewing this film. I had no idea how vicious and immoral the attacks on Al Smith were by the Herbert Hoover camp. Politics and police seem violently corrupt in this era. You learn a lot about life, laws, religion and politics in a difficult and bitter era (the Great Depression). Most importantly, you are reminded of the fact that US was built on Freedoms--and Prohibition is such an amazing violation of this. It's a historical guidepost to preserving our freedoms going forward.

The story of the Roaring 20s, flappers, the speakeasy, the rum-runners, and ironically, how the post-prohibition era was favorable to women and equality and stories I'd never imagined.

FDR had three priorities when he took office: 1) regulate the banks, 2) cut federal spending, 3) legalize beer. He won by a landslide. On a funny note, Utah voted to repeal the Volstead Act rather quickly. Amazing given that that state has spend the last 80 years trying to restrict it! This three DVD series is worthy of a weekend of your time. Thanks PBS for this fine historical film and Ken Burns for another amazing tale.

solid doc from Burns

[SnoopyStyle · 7/10 · 22 January 2017]

Documentarian Ken Burns creates a three-part five and a half hour series on the subject of prohibition. The first part sets up the alcohol culture and the rise of the temperance movements which coincided with women's suffrage. The fight for prohibition takes on the anti-immigrant sentiment. This part is the most fascinating for me and where I learned the most. The other two parts handle the enforcement and eventual repeal. Those parts are done by everybody who does gangsters and booze running. There are still some fun new tidbits but this documentary series feels front-loaded. This certainly has the Ken Burns style and his attention to good story telling. He continues to be a great asset to any history class in America.

Interesting Topic, But It Gets the Biased PBS Treatment

[verbusen · 6/10 · 9 October 2011]

You know, it's OBVIOUS, that this was done by PBS. Within the first 5 minutes the term spousal RAPE is used! Hey I came here to learn about prohibition, sheesh! All the people contributing in the first episode are all liberals. I mean can we get some freaking balance in this stuff with PBS? They hurt themselves by being so liberal. Cases in point. They talk about all the political sides who supported temperance but they never use the word "liberal" and never use the word "communist" I mean you know what part I am talking about when they say "progressive" and "radical".

Also, the old drunk looking dude makes the sly comment that now Jesus would be put in jail for turning water into wine. Hey smart guy, Jesus did not SELL the wine. Why did they have to go there? Looking at the credits while typing this John Lithgow, Tom Hanks, Sam Waterston, this program is loaded with liberals, are there any non liberal contributors in this? Look up Noah Feldman's wiki page, he is in most of this episode as a commentator expert, that guy is a poster child leading elitist liberal.

For full disclosure, I am a drinker, non evangelical, and I happen to live in a Muslim country thats dry and break it's laws in much hazard to myself because I want a drink. I'm only putting this review out here to raise the case that PBS is not the unbiased network it has always said it is. It would serve it's own purposes better if it was truly open minded. Stop with the NPR "all things considered" treatment, talking down to us, you wont convince us that you are correct anymore. Interesting material, definitely done to entertain a liberal viewership which I guess is all PBS has left, it's a shame that all things were NOT considered. 6 of 10, I learned that the bible thumpers got us an income tax in an alliance with "progressives".

I have about zero trust that this series will cover all bases or just focus on the lower class's drinks like beer. Lets see where they go with wine and hard liquor which the rich enjoy now. They mention Kennedy's (JFK) grandfather but lets see them mention his father Joe Sr, frankly I cannot see how they could NOT mention him, but it IS PBS so anything is possible when liberals write their own history.

Did not allow viewers to come to their own conclusions

[nulla00 · 5/10 · 13 July 2018]

Was hoping to hear more about the Kennedy clan and their bootlegging activities. Kennedys as a topic were largely avoided for whatever reason. Also, I'm not sure I agree with some of the conclusions of the commentators. When we make alcohol legal, we make a form of temporary insanity legal. How can people be then be held legally accountable for their actions while inebriated when this is legally permissible? How can we measure the health care burden on society at large and the increased insurance premiums we all have to shoulder as a result of the legalization of something that is addictive and fundamentally bad for us? I think the conclusions of this documentary were entirely too one sided and somewhat simplistic.

Politically angled and subjective

[ameda-01095 · 23 August 2019]

Dont think ive ever seen anything in my life that is trying to be a documentary that is taking such a huge political stance. I would assume watching for 1 hour (i stopped after that) that I would get to see freedom fighters in a debate vs possibly an unhealthy drinking habits but no, it was just piling and piling on about the negativity of drinks, having a good time and that it would immediatly mean you would go home and rape, hit your wife and not being able to hold your job. "A great local American hero using her hatchet to attack saloon owners as they are the most corrupted dark people on earth and she was fighting for her last waking moment against alcoholism.". Wtf?

ENJOY YOUR DRINK BUT DRINK WITH MODERATION. Go for quality over quantity.

Interesting Doco

[Gerardrobertson61 · 7/10 · 29 May 2018]

Found this series on Netflix and was totally fascinated by it, especially seeing I am an Australian where we never had any prohibition laws. To me, Prohibition was something that happened in the 20's and 30's, and included gangsters, mobsters and cops shooting each other and stealing their liquor, however the characters that lead up to Prohibition in the late 1800's and early 1900's are fascinating. I found this series to be another great documentary and I recommend it, 8/10

An alcool-centred take on the 1920's in the US of A.

[Giz_Medium · 7/10 · 2 November 2020]

I hate the idea of netflix, their business model, and just about everything that makes it redundant with your public library and possibly an excuse to stop funding them. That being said, ken burns documentaries are really cool and a friend told me about them after watching them on netflix, so I guess, it can be a good way to find out about documentaries ? like your library collection. Ken Burns seems to be doing amerikan-centric historical documentaries that seem to deeply cover a subject, like the dust bowl, or the prohibition era here. This documentary starts with the history of drinking culture in the US, as well as the history of sobriety culture, from the middle of the 19th century to the prohibition era itself and it's reppeal, divide in the three parts, the first being about the various campaigns to ban the saloons, then alcohol itself, then the prohibition and immediate black market set in tones of the puritan angloamerikans against every other social group, most notably the german amerikans who made most of the beer. It then follows the rise of the mafia, who went from petty crimes to managing the alcohol business, the difficulties and lack of political will to enforce prohibition, and finally, the campaign building for the reppeal itself. What is surprising is that, unlike other documentaries by ken burns, no link is being made to the current situation, in many ways a repetition of past mistakes, and in this case, the historical transfer of funding from the enforcement of alcohol prohibition to the current war on drugs.

More Anti-American Propaganda to Burn

[artpf · 1/10 · 6 December 2013]

Throughout American history, heavy alcohol consumption has been a pervasive part of its national social character. However in the 1800s, a growing Temperance movement arose determined to oppose the destructive habit by any means necessary. This series tells the story of this crusade until it achieved its ultimate goal of passing the 18th Amendment of the US Constitution which imposed prohibition. After that victory, the series covers this social reform's disastrous unintended consequences that encouraged clandestine drinking and organized crime while undermining civil liberties and society's respect for the law in ways that still reverberate today.

This series couldn't be more biased or more hateful if it tried.

It's basic premise is that Americans are a bunch of drunks when meanwhile Europeans drink far more than we do!

Take a trip to England and see whose stumbling out of the pubs pissing on the streets and barfing in the alleys before dusk! The French have the highest cirrhosis of liver on the planet and in Italy a 6 year old can buy a bottle of wine. In Eastern Europe, vodka is served 24/7. In Japan it's accepted for a successful businessman to wander the streets falling down drunk. But somehow, once again, Americans are the bad ones.

It's the worst pseudo documentary I have ever seen.

How does money get raised for this kind of propaganda?

A hugely informative six-hour documentary

[Leofwine_draca · 7/10 · 1 December 2017]

PROHIBITION is the first in a series of epic documentaries I'm about to watch from the acclaimed American documentarian Ken Burns. So far I think I'm on to a good thing: this is a classy, highly informative documentary with a six-hour running time that absolutely flies past thanks to the extremely high level of interest from beginning to end. Famous Hollywood stars are brought in for voice-over narration at times, but this is mainly about narrator Peter Coyote charting the rise and fall of the Prohibition era from its origins in the women's liberation movement of the mid-19th century through to the bloodstained, gangster-focused climax in the Great Depression of the 1930s. A wealth of fascinating photographs from the era accompany the light and informal narration, and the viewer comes away feeling like they've learnt everything there is to know about the topic.

Fanatics in Action

[leftbanker-1 · 7/10 · 24 March 2022]

The world's worst historians are those who rely on anecdotal accounts. Right out of the starting gates, one "historian" relied upon in this series is Catherine Gilbert Murdock who comes across as a bad impersonation of Dana Carvey's church lady. "My great grandmother remembers as a child walking the streets of Philadelphia and crossing the streets so she wouldn't have to cross in front of a saloon because it was so scary...because that was the face of alcohol consumption." Really? There was no other aspect to alcohol beyond your great grand-mother's childhood shady remembrances?

The entire temperance movement seems spurred by spinster religious fanatics with unhappy home lives, buzz-kill bores who hated the fact that anyone else may have actually been out there enjoying life.

Informative documentary

[Marcus-Aurelius90 · 14 August 2017]

Another great documentary series from the legendary Ken Burns. This series explores the era of Prohibition, why the Eighteenth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution was thought to be needed, what effects it had and why it was eventually repealed. Issues include the temperance movement, Female suffrage, income tax and of course the arising criminal element involving people like Al Capone. Widespread defiance of the law (by otherwise law abiding people that self identified as "scofflaws") and its inability to deal effectively with the violent crime wave it engendered, eventually led to its repeal thirteen years later.

IMDb states the running time as 360 minutes however the version I saw was 309 minutes. I've also seen versions that were only 260 minutes, so beware of the different versions if you use it for study purposes.