The filmmakers question a report issued by the Yale Child Sexual Abuse Clinic, at Yale-New Haven Hospital, which found Dylan not credible after interviewing her.

[11] Ronan Farrow alleges in the documentary that Allen offered to pay for his college tuition but only if he denounced his mother and sister, which he declined to do.

[7][12][13] Included is an interview with actress and model Christina Engelhardt, who claims she became romantically involved with Allen at 17 and believes that she was the inspiration for Mariel Hemingway's 17-year-old character in Manhattan.

[25] Tony Lyons, President of Skyhorse Publishing, called it a "blatant appropriation of Mr. Allen's intellectual property" that he described as "unquestionably copyright infringement under existing legal precedent.

On February 21, the day the series was aired on HBO, Woody Allen and Soon-Yi Previn released a response to the documentary, stating as follows:"These documentarians had no interest in the truth.

The website's critical consensus states, "Allen V. Farrow unearths new evidence in a well-known case to craft a compelling —if one-sided—indictment of society's complicity in upholding powerful people over seeking justice for those they've wronged.

[31] Los Angeles Times critic Lorraine Ali wrote that the series is "a comprehensive, convincing and ultimately devastating documentary that threatens to burn what's left of [Allen's] career and legacy to the ground.

[32] Brian Lowry of CNN wrote, "despite the painstaking research, viewers might come away not entirely sure what they 'know,' as opposed to what they believe", but said that "even a generous reading of Allen's behavior, however, casts him in a troubling light.

"[34] Eric Deggans of NPR wrote that the series holds Allen's "past behavior up to modern sensibilities in a way that makes him look terrible", but that "questions will remain about what may be left out, absent the direct participation of the man accused of so much.

"[12] Hadley Freeman in The Guardian commented that Allen v. Farrow "sets itself up as an investigation but much more resembles PR, as biased and partial as a political candidate's advert vilifying an opponent in election season."

Freeman observed that Ziering and Dick had been criticized for "putting advocacy ahead of accuracy" in their 2015 documentary about campus rape, Hunting Ground, which "used discredited data".

[35] A Globe and Mail reviewer wrote that viewers get "a complex and sometimes confusing picture of the family dynamic", with Mia Farrow "controlling" the narrative, and that there is an "attempted evisceration of Allen's denials, but some of it is unsupported."

[13] The Dutch newspaper De Volkskrant asserted that anything that could exonerate Allen was "systematically pushed aside",[36] while NRC Handelsblad concluded that the miniseries is partial to the point of being "blunt propaganda" by "activist" directors, "void of all pretense of journalistic integrity".

She noted that both "have offered strikingly different versions of growing up in the Farrow household in the past, and [they] are cursorily dismissed on camera by their white siblings.

"[39] Actor Alec Baldwin and comedian Bill Maher criticized the series for failing to give Allen's side of the story.