Rating: 
Summary: Weak Narrative, So-So History.
Review: Beevor's story of the final collapse of Nazi Germany is not great historical writing. The narrative reads as a catalogue of events without the binding literary thread necessary to weave a compelling historical tale. There is little development of the historical figures -- their stories are not fleshed out. You end the book knowing not much more about Zhukov, Guderian, Chiukov or Weidling than when you started. "The Fall of Berlin 1945" is weak alongside John Toland's "The Last 100 Days" despite greater access to German and former Soviet archival material.
I was uncomfortably unsympathetic to the thousands of German women so savagely molested by the undisciplined Red Army. While the German women were certainly innocent victims, I couldn't help but think of the pain wrought by THEIR fathers, brothers, husbands and uncles throughout the Soviet Union and elsewhere. German womanhood reaped what their menfolk had sown. That's not a very charitable point of view, but it's mine nevertheless. The exposure of the scale of wanton pillage perpetrated by the Red Army is probably the most valuable contibution of Beevor's book. It's a story that needs telling and should be explored further -- by a better writer!
Rating: 
Summary: Moral equivalency
Review: Antony Beevor's "Stalingrad" set high expectations for his follow up subject, a battle of equally epic proportions and almost unimagineable ferocity. While worthwhile reading, the book fails to surmount his previous work, and serves as little more than a consolidation of themes and facts explored by Cornelius Ryan and John Toland in earlier, more organized, and ultimately more readable books on the same subject.To be sure, the inherent confusion surrounding the battle makes a coherent work problematic; indeed, a historian who creates order out of chaos isn't necessarily reflecting reality. However, this book feels a bit ragged around the edges, and one wonders if it was rushed into print to exploit Beevor's earlier success. A number of readers (not surprisingly, many with Russian surnames) have taken great umbrage at Beevor's inclusion of numerous war crimes committed by Soviet forces--the scope of which have been documented for decades--concluding that a pro-German bias must surely be at the heart of these revelations. In addition to underscoring the raw passions that still remain, these reactions also display a rather startling naivete about the mutual ruthlessness of war as waged on the Eastern Front. Apologists for Soviet behavior against German civilians can make a compelling argument for moral equivalency, or, perhaps, even superiority; nonetheless, it might be worth recalling the photos of grinning Soviet officers shaking hands with their Nazi counterparts upon the successful partition of Poland in 1939, just weeks after the Sino-Soviet Pact cleared the way for mutual aggression--and World War II. As Churchill famously said, "If Hitler invaded Hell, I'd find something nice to say about the Devil himself." Antony Beevor has added the exclamation point.
Rating: 
Summary: Factual, gripping and significant
Review: This book undoubtedly came as a result of the tremendous amount of research done by Antony Beevor for his previous book, Stalingrad. Like Stalingrad, there is lot of new and significant information, which became available only after the fall of the Iron Curtain, in the era of Glasnost and Perestroika. This book is gripping because it follows several storylines and events in chronological sequence, right from New Year 1945 to the end of the war in Europe. In doing so, it presents a rich picture of the military, political and human conditions in this climactic struggle. This book also explains many significant facts, such as Stalin's ambitious plans for post-war political domination of Eastern Europe, his deliberate misleading of the Western Allies, and their incompetence in understanding his objectives. However, in my opinion, this book is not of the same calibre as Stalingrad. It suffers from poor organization making it at times difficult to follow the different story threads without having to flip back and forth. The book is chockfull of annoying quotations that detract from the flow of the material, which could well have been inserted as footnotes instead. All the maps are in the beginning of the book, instead of the part where the particular military event was taking place. And, unlike Stalingrad, where Mr. Beevor sets the stage for the 1942 Caucasus campaign by describing the 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union, there is no particular stage-setting in this book for the 1945 Berlin campaign. Instead this books has a starting point with the Russians just East of Warsaw without any description of the events in 1944 that led to this situation. Also, there is no particular effort to provide background information to those unfamiliar with the intricacies of the War. For example, the "July plot" is referred to with nary a footnote explaining to the unfamiliar reader that this was the 1944 plot to kill Hitler. Even to those fairly well versed with the War, it would be difficult to know, for instance, what the equivalent Army rank for an "SS Haupstrumfurher" would be, without a more detailed prior knowledge of the organization of the SS. There are several loose ends that did not get tied up at the end of the book. For example, we are left wondering what happened to Schorner's army in the south. One gets the impression that this book was hastily completed, leaving many questions unanswered. There are also a few glaring typographical errors. For example, in page 304 it is stated that Dekanozov heard from Rippentrop of the Wermacht's invasion of Soviet Union in 22 June 1942, when this event actually occured exactly one year before. The map on page xxi shows the position of the Soviet forces in the outskirts of Berlin in 20 April, when actually it was 22 April. Page 37 has an quote "we must escape to Alt-P. by cart". One wonder's if "Alt-P" is actually a place or a keystroke marker in Mr. Beevor's word processor. I have a strong feeling that there will be a second edition in the offing. Despite the flaws, this book is definitely worth reading and the experience is certainly an enriching one.
Rating:
Summary: Good book
Review: Some people have criticized the book for being too anti-soviet. Some others because it doesn't give exact data. About the first question, I think Anthony Beevor is not anti-soviet or anti-russian for his narration is very well supported with much documentation and, in fact, his conclusions are very similar to many other accounts. About the second question, it seems to be very difficult to give exact data (number of casualties, etc) for nobody has been able to do it so far. Nevertheless, there are several facts that let us know what happened, such as the number of east-german civilians who lived in West Germany after the war (7-10 Million).
The book, however, doesn't inquire into the mysterious question of why the goverment of US helped so much the soviets. It was obvious that eastern european countries would live under a foreign and unwanted communist dictatorship.
Rating: 
Summary: Superb book, troubling reviews
Review: I read this book in 3 days on holidays. I couldn't put it down Beevor has done it again, following up Stalingrad with a absolutely fantastic look at the last days of WW2 in the European theatre. What I find troubling is the the attitude of some of the reviewers who seem to be incapable of accepting that atrocities were committed by both sides on the Eastern front. Beevor clearly indicates that many of the German troops realised what was in store when the Soviets rolled into Germany as the Nazi chickens came home to roost. Hysterical reviewers here seem to be bent on insisting that Beevor's view is that the Germans were noble warriors while the Russians were savage beasts. Nothing could be further than the truth about this book. Beevor again praises highly the selfless courage of the ordinary Soviet soldier Read the book with an open mind. If you can't accept that it is possible that atrocities were committed not only by Germans but also against German's in WW2 don't bother to read it.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Overall Battle Picture
Review: Mr. Beevor tells an excellent story, giving an overall picture of the Russian conquest of Berlin in 1945. I did detect a few minor factual errors but, all in all, it's a very interesting read, telling both sides of the story. I would rather have seen less talk about the Americans and their plans but it seems that the author felt this was pertinent to Stalin's paranoia and fear that the Western Allies would take the Nazi capital first. The details of horrific rapes and other crimes committed by the victorious Soviets are not spared. I'd definitely recommend this story of one of history's greatest battles. I'm now looking forward to reading Beevor's previous work on Stalingrad.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent chronicle of war's darkest moments
Review: The Fall of Berlin provides both a military and human perspective on the end of Nazi Germany. ... I did not find it unreasonably sympathetic towards the German civilian population. It describes clearly what the Soviet soldiers did to German woman (and men) and how that was done in retaliation for what the Wehrmacht did in Russia. What comes through clearly is how savage the end of the war was because of the blind hatred of the Nazi and Soviet leaders. Because of their fanatical positions hundreds of thousands of soldiers and civilians needlessly died on both sides. Putting ideology aside--the human tragedy is of enormous proportion. One critisim of the book is the tendancy of the author to jump around from one perspective to another (anecdote to military strategy) almost in the same paragraph. It made the story tough to follow at times. Overall it is well worth reading and may hold important lessons for the future...
Rating:
Summary: a response
Review: Dear Editor, I found it disturbing that instead of balancing the spotlight review for this book by posting two opposing views, you picked instead two negatives reviews. The general discomfort of sympathizing with German civilians during the war is understandable, though my interpretation of Beevor's book was not so much a purely sympathetic book as much as an interest in looking at a well-worn story from a different light. In the half-century since the German defeat, this is the first popular history that explores the tragedies the Germans suffered as well. The sources for the book are accepted critical texts of the period. The Fall of Berlin remained the best-seller in England for many months after its publication, a country that suffered far worse than America in the war. Clearly, the British are interested in understanding different sides of the German experience during the Nazi period. In a sense your spotlight reviews perpetuate the stereo-type of all Germans being guilty for Nazis deeds. The Fall of Berlin 1945 is an effort to put a personal face on the civilians of the war instead of painting them all one color. For good reason, the Nazi atrocities are well documented. One hopes history remains an attempt to view all sides of an event. This book contributes to such an understanding.
Rating:
Summary: a response
Review: ...P>... The general discomfort of sympathizing with German civilians during the war is understandable, though my interpretation of Beevor's book was not so much a purely sympathetic book as much as an interest in looking at a well-worn story from a different light. In the half-century since the German defeat, this is the first popular history that explores the tragedies the Germans suffered as well. The sources for the book are accepted critical texts of the period. The Fall of Berlin remained the best-seller in England for many months after its publication, a country that suffered far worse than America in the war. Clearly, the British are interested in understanding different sides of the German experience during the Nazi period. ... The Fall of Berlin 1945 is an effort to put a personal face on the civilians of the war instead of painting them all one color. For good reason, the Nazi atrocities are well documented. One hopes history remains an attempt to view all sides of an event. This book contributes to such an understanding.
Rating: 
Summary: bad bad bad
Review: stupid biased and ignorant. a wate of time. Not recommended. try erickson or werth
| 
