Il ruolo fondamentale di Churchill durante la seconda guerra mondiale, la sua strategia in tempo di guerra e gli eventi della vita che lo hanno plasmato come una figura fondamentale dell'epo... Leggi tuttoIl ruolo fondamentale di Churchill durante la seconda guerra mondiale, la sua strategia in tempo di guerra e gli eventi della vita che lo hanno plasmato come una figura fondamentale dell'epoca, raccontati con le sue stesse parole.Il ruolo fondamentale di Churchill durante la seconda guerra mondiale, la sua strategia in tempo di guerra e gli eventi della vita che lo hanno plasmato come una figura fondamentale dell'epoca, raccontati con le sue stesse parole.
- Premi
- 1 candidatura in totale
Sfoglia gli episodi
Recensioni in evidenza
Churchill at War is a near perfect documentary about the Winston Churchill and the challenges of his time. Told through video news footage, archives, interviews, and theatrical recreations, this four part series is very well done. There is much we know about Churchill as the man who rose to become the arch-nemesis of Adolf Hitler in World War II and the face of Great Britain. I find many documentaries to be way too long and filled with unnecessary information. Even at four parts that is not the case here. This is as engaging as any motion picture. The actor who plays Churchill does not really look like him but the sound is uncanny.
I enjoyed the series while also recognising that it isn't everything that it could have been.
In terms of narrative, it faithfully hits all the major plot points of the Second World War. Though the pundits and 'live action recreations' are sometimes a hit, sometimes a miss.
The recolourised archival footage is truly spectacular. It brings the war from the myth of history to a lived human experience.
This is particularly relevant now. Democratic decline is a rising tide. One that we are only beginning to wrestle with (even outside obvious examples). Appeasement in the face of imperialist aggression is spoken of as the lesser evil. These are dangerous waters and they are not new. History must be understood if it is not to be repeated.
This is why I forgive the show for it's inclusion of politicians. Even those who probably have no right to be there.
The link that it makes from the past to the present (aided through colour footage) is enough for me to view their inclusion as having value.
Is the show a masterpiece? No. Did I enjoy it as someone with an interest in history. I did indeed.
In terms of narrative, it faithfully hits all the major plot points of the Second World War. Though the pundits and 'live action recreations' are sometimes a hit, sometimes a miss.
The recolourised archival footage is truly spectacular. It brings the war from the myth of history to a lived human experience.
This is particularly relevant now. Democratic decline is a rising tide. One that we are only beginning to wrestle with (even outside obvious examples). Appeasement in the face of imperialist aggression is spoken of as the lesser evil. These are dangerous waters and they are not new. History must be understood if it is not to be repeated.
This is why I forgive the show for it's inclusion of politicians. Even those who probably have no right to be there.
The link that it makes from the past to the present (aided through colour footage) is enough for me to view their inclusion as having value.
Is the show a masterpiece? No. Did I enjoy it as someone with an interest in history. I did indeed.
I'm interested in the real footage of the War and hearing the details of how Churchill lead Britain. I can do totally without the talking heads interrupting and giving completely pointless opinions, especially Boris Johnson and George W. Bush. Who thought that was a good idea?
Neither of those belong in any piece about Churchill.
I could do without any extras making statements about the obvious, it's a distraction and annoying. They should have had one narrator, seldom seen and it would have been much more tolerable. There are better documentaries but I would have found this one interesting if they'd left off the bad acting bits.
Neither of those belong in any piece about Churchill.
I could do without any extras making statements about the obvious, it's a distraction and annoying. They should have had one narrator, seldom seen and it would have been much more tolerable. There are better documentaries but I would have found this one interesting if they'd left off the bad acting bits.
This is a Netflix documentary so we get that treatment; talking heads and experts and, more unpalatable to me, staged re-enactments with actors on 'probable' scenes. It's high budget cable television.
The prewar portion may be the most informative in how it shapes the famous wartime Winston. Bullish, spectacular escape fueled by drive to tell the story about it in his South African adventure. Doggedly independent as he switches parties.
The wartime Churchill of valiant speeches, Dunkirk, and the Blitz, is well covered in inumerable films and TV. He really was the man of the hour, a bullish man insisting on a story of resistance against all odds. Fancied himself a strategist but bangled Gallipolli, Sicily was a mistake, and storytelling was really his strong suit.
We also do see several of his faults. His prewar defence of empire at all costs. Even in passing, his disastrous indifference to Bengal and the famine. And his ensuing sidelining, post Casablanca, as bigger men on the room took charge of the war.
It is very much a cinematic life he lived. Adept at both re-invention and stubborn independence. And of course a natural storyteller. He could have been a great filmmaker, and I can imagine him a figure like Welles or Hitchcock around set (and vice versa, Welles and Hitchcock may have been great wartime prime mnisters).
It was a matter of the world outside aligning with the man's story of who he views himself to be, to create the sense of destiny, and that was true of both FDR and Hitler.
The prewar portion may be the most informative in how it shapes the famous wartime Winston. Bullish, spectacular escape fueled by drive to tell the story about it in his South African adventure. Doggedly independent as he switches parties.
The wartime Churchill of valiant speeches, Dunkirk, and the Blitz, is well covered in inumerable films and TV. He really was the man of the hour, a bullish man insisting on a story of resistance against all odds. Fancied himself a strategist but bangled Gallipolli, Sicily was a mistake, and storytelling was really his strong suit.
We also do see several of his faults. His prewar defence of empire at all costs. Even in passing, his disastrous indifference to Bengal and the famine. And his ensuing sidelining, post Casablanca, as bigger men on the room took charge of the war.
It is very much a cinematic life he lived. Adept at both re-invention and stubborn independence. And of course a natural storyteller. He could have been a great filmmaker, and I can imagine him a figure like Welles or Hitchcock around set (and vice versa, Welles and Hitchcock may have been great wartime prime mnisters).
It was a matter of the world outside aligning with the man's story of who he views himself to be, to create the sense of destiny, and that was true of both FDR and Hitler.
I enjoyed with miniseries about the war years of Mr. Churchill, with the first episode about him actually fighting in the Boer War and in WWI and also orchestrating the Gallipoli disaster. Maybe that could have been expanded, but the focus of this documentary was WWII.
The remaining episodes tell in details the rise of Churchill during the darkest hours, his struggle to keep Britain fighting and his attempt to lure President Roosevelt in the fight.
When the US declared war in 1941, Britain and Churchill rejoiced only to realise that they were going to play second fiddle to the rising superpowers of the Soviet Union and US.
The last episode wraps things nicely showing how Churchill did not go gently when he - surprisingly to me - lost the elections in 1945 and how eventually he made a come back and still stands as one of the greatest protagonists of the XX century, no matter what some want you to believe and despite all his defects and mistakes - after all he was human.
The remaining episodes tell in details the rise of Churchill during the darkest hours, his struggle to keep Britain fighting and his attempt to lure President Roosevelt in the fight.
When the US declared war in 1941, Britain and Churchill rejoiced only to realise that they were going to play second fiddle to the rising superpowers of the Soviet Union and US.
The last episode wraps things nicely showing how Churchill did not go gently when he - surprisingly to me - lost the elections in 1945 and how eventually he made a come back and still stands as one of the greatest protagonists of the XX century, no matter what some want you to believe and despite all his defects and mistakes - after all he was human.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizChristian McKay who plays Churchill also plays Roosevelt in a documentary about FDR released in 2023 called FDR
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
Dettagli
- Data di uscita
- Paese di origine
- Sito ufficiale
- Lingua
- Celebre anche come
- Churchill at War
- Azienda produttrice
- Vedi altri crediti dell’azienda su IMDbPro
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 16:9 HD
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti