have hear a few good thing about this film i be look forward to view it . while very pleased with the cinematography quality of the production i be disappoint with the poor writing . it important to realize that this be not an objective view but rather a very professional production burden with a bias in favor of islam . below be a few example of that bias . in the first half of the film and while the narrator be explain how islam move through the middle east and across north africa and scene of men mount on horse or camel be show rid through desert . and when mention of force be make it be downplay by note how most of those conquer saw little change in their daily routine and be happy to have new ruler . contrast this with late discussion of the first crusade where vivid scene of fight and death be show along with narration explain how horrible it be for the unsuspecting muslim who be attack in their peaceful town and village by the evil christian soldier from a europe just emerge from the dark age . in the ottoman empire section they discuss the military expansion of islam . but unlike the first half of the film where they have downplay the military aspect and refer to it a the islamic expansion and now the military aspect can not be ignore and it be refer to a the ottoman expansion . again contrast this with the treatment of the crusade where it be refer to a the christian army ( not european or french or italian ) even though the majority be mercenary and christian only because they be bear in europe . discussion of the advancement and addition make by muslim be numerous . the narrator wax admiringly about how the muslim be use paper when europe be still use parchment . and how there be book store with hundred of book in baghdad while a christian church in europe would have be fortunate to have have five parchment book . the fact that the muslim capture the technology of make paper in their imperialistic conquest be mention only in pass . this would be exactly like discuss the soviet and american space program of the 50 and 60 while dismiss the contribution of german scientist to both program . the narrator explain how the muslim assemble the world great library in baghdad . no mention make of the great library of royal library of alexandria in egypt and which pre date islam by some 800 year and and be plunder and ransack by conquer muslim . the fact be and much of what be claim to be of muslim discovery or creation be merely acquisition or assimilation . the film make a glowing description of the muslim dome of the rock in jerusalem . no mention be make of the fact that temple rock and the site of the dome and be the most important jewish religious site . this would be the same a build a synagogue over the kaaba in mecca . the point here be that this be a major event in jewish or islamic history yet no mention be make of it significance in history or the modern world . there be more but i will stop here . the preponderance of example demand conclude that there be a decidedly pro islam bias pervade this film . have the writing take a more objective position this could have be a documentary worthy of appreciation by generation to come . watch it for the photography but do not take the historical fact too seriously .