Churchill film 2017 review of a new perspective.

This week, my husband and I went to see a long awaited film. ‘Churchill’ who was First Lord of the Admiralty in the first World War and the Prime Minister in the second World War.  My husband along with many others believes that Winston Churchill was the greatest Britain ever. I am afraid that I have not been so generous in my beliefs.

This film does not do Mr Churchill any favours, in terms of the portrayal of his character and his decision making of D-Day.

Brian Cox did a fine job representing his character and although I was aware of his heavy drinking, smoking and his black dog depression. The film brought home to me a picture of an old, unhealthy leader who was not in touch with the modern warfare of the time. I understood the symbolism of the seas of blood, relating to the disastrous attempt to open a second front at Gallipoli during the First World War. It was clear to see, this had a wounding and deep psychological effect on Churchill as he had backed this campaign, much to his regret.

Danny Webb as General Alan Brooke, John Slattery as Eisenhower and Julian Wadham as Montgomery gave a good performance as supporting cast coming across as far more decisive than Churchill who appeared as a dangerous irritant and a very loose cannon.

By contrast, his wife Clementine, played by a rather good Miranda Richardson, is portrayed as a strong determined woman, who will not take his nonsense.

There was one scene I struggled to either believe or understand. King George V1, played by James Purefoy was portrayed as visiting Churchill to dissuade him from his plans for them both to sail alongside the men to the Normandy Beaches. Kudos to Churchill for wanting to stand by the brave men of Britain. However, I question did this actually happen? If so, it would have been an act or irresponsible lunacy on both parts.

In summary, I enjoyed the film very much and it certainly gave my husband and me, a lot to think about.

Are you planning to visit the cinema any time soon? Let me know via Twitter or Facebook !

 

 

 

 

Film review: Going in Style

Following a glorious sunny Sunday afternoon sitting in our garden which is incidentally alive with the colours of spring. My husband and I decided to complete our day’s reverie with a visit to the cinema.

Going in Style film reviewEarlier in the day I had noticed an advertisement in the supplement about this week’s essential viewing and sure enough the names of Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman caught my eye. Having seen and enjoyed many of their previous films, we knew that we were in for a treat. We were not disappointed, as they teamed up with Alan Arkin in the film production of Going in Style, directed by Zach Braff.

The film put me in mind of Last Vegas, the bucket list and a number of other films that portray adorable senior citizens who have reached a point in their lives when they are reflecting on their limitations. The three elderly gentlemen all used to work for the same steel company, but in a twist of fate their company is taken over and the pension fund raided to pay off the company creditors, leaving them with very little income other than their state payments.

Having been caught in the crossfire of a real bank raid, Joe (Michael Caine) decides to encourage his mates to join him on a bank raid of their own. Just to collect the pension that is owed to them of course.

‘Going in Style’ was well cast and as expected from three Oscar winning actors, was very well acted. At times it was a little emotional but certainly not over the top. The plot was interesting and at times amusing to the point of myself laughing out loud at some of the capers the trio got involved with.

A likable easy film to watch for some light entertainment.

Have you watched ‘Going in Style’ yet? Let me know via Twitter or Facebook !

Viceroy’s House – film review

My husband and I enjoy our regular trips to the cinema to watch the latest films. This week we went to watch ‘Viceroy’s House’, which is directed by Gurinder Chadha.

Viceroy’s House story line

British rulers of India. After 300 years, that rule was coming to an end. For 6 months in 1947, Lord Mountbatten, great grandson of Queen Victoria, assumed the post of the last Viceroy,  charged with handing India back to its people.

Mountbatten lived upstairs together with his wife and daughter. Downstairs lived their 500 Hindu, Muslim and Sikh servants.

As the political elite took their seats to wrangle over the birth of independent India, conflict erupted throughout the House and a catastrophic decision was taken with global repercussions.

Source: Pathe International

Gurinder ChadhaThe Director, Gurinder Chadha gave a very good account of the refugee crisis which serves to reinforce the current crisis and highlights the plight of citizens who are caught up in a divide and rule mentality.

The film touches on the difficulties of the leaders of different faiths coming together to agree on the least destructive outcome and yet we are led to believe that Winston Churchill was the secret architect of the havoc, that finally divided India with the subsequent creation of Pakistan. This disturbed me somewhat, so I have decided to read more about the speech that Churchill made on March 6th 1946 as part of a discussion on the topic of Indian independence.

Hugh Bonneville was well cast as Lord Mountbatten, in his role as the last Viceroy of India.  However, I could not keep my mind from wandering back to his role in Downton Abbey. Gillian Anderson got my vote for her strong portrayal of Edwina Mountbatten as a compassionate and outspoken women.

Viceroy's House

Overall an interesting historical drama, that has certainly got me thinking.  However after watching the film, I don’t feel like I have gained an in-depth understanding about the events that took place in 1947, so I will undertake further reading to gain a greater insight into the Independence of India.

Have you been to the cinema to watch Viceroy’s house? Let me know via Twitter or Facebook !