If you are interested here are some interesting links that I hope to comment on in the next day or so.
Scholar Ben Worthington has weighed in to review the evidence and the scholarship, he seems to know those involved and otherwise has respect for them. I am not sure I agree with all of his points but his arguments are worth considering.
Here you will find a list of scholars who have also weighed in many of whom either expresses skepticism or in the least concern over the sensationalism of the documentary. I have not read all of these as of yet.
What I find stricking is that few are talking about what seems to be a certain attempt to rehabilitate "gnostic" or non-orthodox sources most of which are latter than the canonical Gospels in origin, and were discredited by early orthodox Christians as not representing the authentic tradition. Can archeology really replace apostolci witness? After all the version of Christianity this documentary tries to use for its own ends understood very well then need for the witness of at least some of the apostles.