Trailer released. Brian Cox is Winston Churchill
m.youtube.com
And its also just been announced that Mark Strong will play German nuclear scientist Werner Heisenberg in upcoming movie about OSS spying on Nazi Germanys nuclear research program.
empireonline.com
Hollywood loves them some World War 2
More WWII kino is always appreciated desu
Why not more WWI kino instead?
Isn't there another Churchill coming later this year? Why do topics always have to get twin movies ugh
This
Give me Verdun, give me the Eastern Front, give me the Somme.
Shit, give me the first battle of the Marnes
>tfw Verdun will never be depicted in a major film
Why even live?
John Lithgow is best church hill. Also his new show trial and error is the next great TV comedy.
manlymovie.net
Who else can't wait for dis?
Too hellish. Would be blasted for being "too unrealistic".
who gives a shit about Churshill again?
When will a movie be made about the battle of castle Itter/the one time in ww2 where American men and German men fought side by side?
Shameless self bump
The goys need to be reminded
second bump
Tbh we need more eastern front of ww2 since 90% of the war was there
Hitler?
I'm cool with eastern front ww2 kino. I'm just more a ww1 buff.
Hitler and Stalin sittin in a tree, K-I-S-S-I-N-G
Ivan spotted
because americans were not as important as in WWII
He's not wrong though.
why is every biopic the same?
Cause muh Nazis le ebil
Wonder Woman takes place in WW1 but Sup Forums wont stop whining about it
who even cares about churchill. 100 % serious. Do they expect to make the films budget back with only people aged 80+
...
>Cause muh Nazis le ebil
>EATG has Russians shooting each other for retreating not 10 minutes in
Wutev
Sure the Soviets did 75% of the fighting against the Germans on land, but the western allies did 70% of fighting against the Luftwaffe and 90%+ of the fighting against the Kriegsmarine, so overall UK/Canada/USA combined did more
how else would they stop their soldiers from retreating?
they were fucking pussies
t. Pulls """stats""" out of your ass
Hollywood doesn't mind making Communist Russians look bad, as long as there evil is secondary to German Fascists/hitler
change "white man" with "Jew" in the 2nd panel and both of these will be true
Keep on scrambling, scrambler
Agreed that the Russkies were cowardly when fighting the Nazis
This must be b8
well weren't they?
are you being ironic?
cuz first 2 years of war millions of them surrendered to germs
And yet, those cowards still kicked the shit out of the "master race"
look at where most German aircraft losses came from
Yeah, with our help
What help?
And the help of dozens of other countries, Russians got mauled as it was let alone no one else being involved
>Ivan education
**The US contributions to the Soviet Union through lend-lease accounted for a measly 1.3% of the USSR war budget**
>A total of $50.1 billion worth of supplies was shipped, or 17% of the total war expenditures of the U.S. In all, $31.4 billion went to Britain, **$11.3 billion to the Soviet Union**, $3.2 billion to France, $1.6 billion to China, and the remaining $2.6 billion to the other Allies.
That's chump change, and they provided it for 4.5 years (March 11, 1941 and ended in September 1945). Not exactly the saviors you're claiming they are. For comparison, in a single year (1945) Russia spent 17 times that ($192 billion). If we assume the 11.3 billion was spread out equally, then the US contributed a measly 2.5 billion in 1945. That equates to a total US contribution of 1.3% of the USSR war budget.
the usa supplied like 30% of russias logistics
Reminder that the Germans did not even inflict a 2:1 kill ratio on the Soviets in WW2
The differences in deaths were from the Germans killing loads of civilians/prisoners
"Muh zerg rush" is a total myth
Fake news
Try 2% you might be right
The Battle of the Dnieper had almost 2.7 million casualties, with over 4 million troops deployed. Not only is that a pretty insane casualty rate, but it's got an argument for being the single largest and bloodiest battle ever, including the largest river crossing and largest aerial assault (it gets very difficult to classify, as some of these WW2 battles are so big they get considered campaigns in their own right).
And no one outside of Eastern Europe or Academia has ever heard of it. Meanwhile, we get another movie about Dunkirk.
>Using Wikipedia as a source
Why are you guys alway use the word 'Russia'
it's Soviet Union
Like Ukraine and Kazakhstan did less during ww2 then these mongol inbreeds
i'm from Kazakhstan myself and we have a lot of ww2 vets
Don't let your dreams be dreams.
>we get another movie about Dunkirk.
what's stopping slavs from making their own Private Ryan
oh wait, not a single decent movie came out of eastern europe
as if it matters what their gdp is when they cant produce enough trucks
>brings up GDP when it has nothing to do with what we're talking about
The US' help is just very heavily exeggerated.
I thought you were the other guy posting about gdp. Looking at some actual stats, I'm getting 400k trucks sent to russia while they only produced around 200k. 320k may have actually got there and they had more than 200k from means there than production. Seems pretty significant.
>actual stats
According to soviets own documents they got 170k Trucks while they produced almost a million. And in the big scale it really isn't. You can't claim the soviet won because the US sent trucks.
Both sound shitty