I haven't watched all the films either. I am basing my opinion on the last few sentences in the conclusion of this video:

" In November 1989, the Berlin wall collapsed, and the Cold War was finally over. A new era of freedom had begun.

"But the shape that freedom is going to take would be defined by the victors, the West, and as this program has shown, the idea of freedom that had now become dominant in the West was deeply rooted in the suspicion and paranoia of the Cold War.

"Next week's film shows how this idea spreads to take over politics itself, because it seemed to offer a new and better alternative to democracy. What it actually leads to is corruption, rigidity , and the dramatic rise of inequality.

"And we will come to believe that we actually are the strange, isolated beings that the Cold War scientists had invented to make their models work. This bleak vision, far from liberating us, would become our cage."

I did read a summary of the series on Wikipedia, that looks to me to be pretty objective, based on how the first episode was summarized. According to Wikipedia, the series ends with a critique of Isaiah Berlin's concept of "negative liberty", that is the idea that the function of government should be limited to preventing people from using force against one another. The documentary advocates "positive liberty" meaning (I gather) that democratically elected governments can legitimately re-distribute wealth and impose regulations on commerce.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia:

"In essence, the programme suggested that following the path of negative liberty to its logical conclusions, as governments have done in the West for the past 50 years, resulted in a society without meaning populated only by selfish automatons, and that there was some value in positive liberty in that it allowed people to strive to better themselves.

The closing minutes directly state that if western humans were ever to find their way out of the "trap" described in the series, they would have to realise that Isaiah Berlin was wrong and that not all attempts at creating positive liberty necessarily ended in coercion and tyranny."

Here is a link to the whole article:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Trap_(television_documentary_series)

I would contend that there is no such thing as "positive liberty", because the granting of false rights to certain people necessarily infringes on the true rights of others.

Proponents of "positive liberty" contend that everyone has the right to an education, to health care and housing, etc, and that the majority in a democracy may force society as a whole to provide these things to everyone. But this directly contradicts the idea that every individual has a natural right to life, liberty and property, which must not be taken away by any mob or any government.

Perhaps there is some value in the way this documentary explores the role of paranoia in convincing people to go to war, and the mistaken idea that freedom can be imposed on one country by another (i.e. the neo-con agenda), but I think this legitimate critique of the misuse of the concept of freedom and of fear tactics in a foreign policy context is by far outweighed by the anti-freedom socialist domestic policy message that dominates these films.