I thought that "Churchill" looked okay, but with middling reviews, I wasn't going to go out of my way to see it. It was only when I caught part of it at work that I began to get really interested in it.
This film isn't a biopic, so I think that the title is misleading. Instead, it tells the story of D-Day from the perspective of the eponymous hero. It ends up being rather interesting. It's obviously from more of a political side, so there are no battle scenes. Instead, the suspense comes from Churchill's moving speeches and the intense arguments that he has with other leaders. The dialogue is also very quick, with humor sprinkled in throughout. It's nothing amazing, but it is solidly done.
Brian Cox's performance as Churchill is actually really good. I think he nails the mannerisms required of him, and he delivers the dialogue perfectly. The costuming/make-up team did a good job of making him look like Churchill, but you can still tell it's him by a little bit, unlike Gary Oldman in the other Churchill film being released this year. John Slattery and Miranda Richardson are both good in their supporting roles, too, however, I thought that James Purefoy overacted in his role. The cinematography is good, but not anything special, as it accomplishes what is the bare minimum and not much more.
Overall, I thought that "Churchill" was better than most said it was, but it still wasn't anything particularly special. It was an interesting account of what an interesting man did during an interesting time.
Big Tuna's Rating: B
How Did I Watch It?: In theaters.
Had I Seen It Before?: No.
Would I Watch It Again?: Maybe.
I am a huge movie fan that wants to tell people about my very varying taste and opinion of film.