Critical response On the
review aggregator website
Rotten Tomatoes, 62% of 13 critics' reviews are positive. On
Metacritic the series has a score of 60 out of 100, based on 4 critics, indicating "mixed or average reviews". Neil Genzlinger from
The New York Times observed that the series did not contain startling revelations about its principal subjects, although certainly gave them a modern-day relevance.
Linda Holmes writing for
NPR ridiculed the series for dull presentation, corny re-enactments and ineffective narration. She criticized the production for feeling "a lot like a tricked-out version of an elementary school filmstrip" and suggested that the series might be popular among those who accepted
Donald Trump as one of the experts. Geoff Berkshire from
Variety criticized the series for "overblown recreations backed by bombastic music, combined with tepid performances by the re-enactors and rudimentary writing". Mentioning the series' "ostentatious style [that] begins to grate within the first 30 minutes", he scorned "the talking heads [that] simply feel like filler" and the particular style of padding out the runtime when "the viewers are subjected to the customary recap of the previous segment after every ad break." He concluded that unlike the game-changing icons it intended to celebrate, the series failed to leave its mark. Verne Gay from
Newsday gave the series "C" grade for "self-serving, obvious or of the fortune cookie variety" tips dispensed by the guests and for the lack of subtlety and historic context. On another hand, he praised the well-produced, although often static, recreations. ==Home media==