In a time awash with fake news on Facebook and Twitter, you don't expect to watch a historical film, with great actors and a massive budget, distort history so blatantly and disrespect the greatest Briton of all time.

This is another example of "fake history" by the film industry. It is a shame that many people will watch this hoping to learn something only to be fed this drivel. Churchill was a supporter of Operation Overlord in 1945. He thought, correctly, that it couldn't work in 1942 or 1943 but by 1945 he was fully on board with the need to go back to France.I can't complain about the acting. Everyone does very well but that fact that is it utter crap is a big issue. Avoid.

Complete nonsense - totally inaccurate & unacceptable, unentertaining; boring; awful dribble.For a man with such a momentus impact on the conduct and execution of the war. Who did more; often by sheer force of will and personality; than any other individual to defeat the nazis. To depict him as an indecisive leader with no control; respect or authority over his troops - wracked with misgivings over the d day landings is pure fiction which is not just unentertaining but downright insulting.Avoid it.

El problema es que me ha sorprendido para mal. Nunca me habría imaginado un Churchill así. El cómo ponerle a los pies de los caballos. La película la ves y bueno está bien, si bien es cierto que se hace larga. No es una película que se la vea nada más empezar que es una obra maestra, todo lo contrario. Desde el comienzo se la ve que es una película normal. Una cosa que veo es que no se adentra mucho en la guerra, sino más bien en el personaje. No le importa no contar lo que paso, más bien quiere mostrar el personaje y la gente de alrededor. Pero con ello, la película no tiene un gran clímax. Los actores están muy bien, si es lo que buscaba. Yo creo que va a sorprender a mucha gente.Tiene una iluminación que es capaz de pasar de planos muy bonitos a planos muy mal iluminados. Sobre todo cuando la cámara rueda ventanas. Hay veces que no distingues al actor.La dirección no está mal llevada. No es una maravilla pero bueno. No llega a aburrir pero tampoco te engancha demasiado. Los planos no son bonitos, son normales, no sabe usar la cámara.Bueno es una película que la ves y te olvidas The problem is that it has surprised me for the worse. I would never have imagined a Churchill like that. How to put at the feet of horses. You see the film and it's good, although it's true that it's long. It is not a film that can be seen at the beginning, it is a masterpiece, just the opposite. From the beginning it is seen that it is a normal movie. One thing I see is that he does not go deep into the war, but rather into the character. He does not mind not telling what happened, rather he wants to show the character and the people around him. But with that, the movie does not have a great climax. The actors are very good, if that is what I was looking for. I think it will surprise many people.It has an illumination that is able to go from very beautiful planes to very badly illuminated planes. Especially when the camera rolls windows. Sometimes you do not distinguish the actor.The address is not badly worn. It is not wonderful but good. It does not get boring but it does not hook you too much. The plans are not pretty, they are normal, he does not know how to use the camera.Well it's a movie that you see it and you forget