Robert J. Maxwell This docudrama covers the period from Germany's invasion of Poland in 1939 to the end of the war in Europe in Spring, 1945, and concerns the interactions -- both personal and political -- of Winston Churchill, Franklin D. Roosevelt, and Josef Stalin.Kids, this war was called "World War Two". The reason it's called "World War Two" is that it came after "World War One." Churchill was the Prime Minister of Great Britain. He was short, fat, bald, and smoked cigars. He was a good guy though, even though he smoked. Stalin smoked a pipe and combed his hair straight back and had a vicious mustache. But he always smiled, even when he was murdering friends. He was a "communist" but was on our side at the time. Franklin D. Roosevelt was one of the presidents of the United States. He smoked too -- cigarettes in a holder. He would never be elected a president today because he smoked. He couldn't walk either. They'd tear him apart in the press; he wouldn't have a prayer. The moral to this is that if somebody offers you a cigarette, don't take it, unless it has no label and is wrapped at both ends. Then it's okay. Thank you for your attention.The miniseries is necessarily sketchy but not hard to follow. Most of the dialog must have been taken from formal speeches or personal memoirs because that's exactly what it sounds like. The director uses a split screen to suggest some of the communications between the three leaders. And while some of the meetings are skipped (Quebec, Casablanca) others are covered in more detail (Teheran, Yalta). At the meetings, everyone sits around a table and speaks very diplomatically, sometimes making small jokes that break the tension. It could be shown in a class on communications. "We agree with you, though we are of course concerned about the Baltics" means, "Keep your Commie nose out of Yugoslavia." It quickly becomes clear that, although Churchill and Stalin are both fighting a common enemy, neither trusts the other. Roosevelt is in the middle, always the worried optimist.Considering the limitations both of the material and the medium, you have to give this an extra point or two. It's not only a lesson in geopolitics but it gives us a glimpse into the personalities of the three eponymous lions, and each has a chance to present his point of view. Stalin was a terrible thug, of course, but that has nothing to do with the subject matter dealt with here.

Andre Raymond Keep your children away from this sorry production, lest they be put off WWII history forever.The three principals are too well known to play the parts in this particular production. Their twisted make-up and sometimes dreary imitations of the famous personages take attention away from the central heart of the story, which is (or should be) the evolving relationships of three countries and leaders.This IDEA was interesting, but the execution becomes dreary in the long run. It should have been kept to under ninety minutes. Instead of a shorter, punchier piece this becomes a rambling mess.The idea that this is a proper representation of history can easily be challenged. The newsreel footage does not adequately contextualize the diplomatic exchanges between the three leaders of that war.For hard core WWII history buffs only.

Mark Hone I'm afraid that I couldn't get past the miscasting of Bob ('Gor Blimey, Guvnor') Hoskins as Churchill and Michael Caine as Stalin. As soon as they appeared the whole credibility of the movie went out of the window for me, I'm afraid. It's one thing to have star names but when their presence distracts attention from the dramatic production itself, you are in trouble. Bob Hoskins has many qualities, but giving a convincing portrayal of Churchill isn't one of them. He looks woeful beside Albert Finney's performance in the HBO/BBC 'The Gathering Storm' or Simon Russell Beale (albeit too young) in the BBC mini-series 'Dunkirk'. Anyone interested in the events portrayed in 'When Lions Roared' should see the superb BBC/US co-production 'World War II: Behind Closed Doors' (2008)instead. This features archive footage, interviews with participants and convincing dramatized reconstructions to tell the story.

skallisjr Since this just appeared on DVD, I rented a copy and screened it with my wife. She said, "This was taken from a stage play, wasn't it?" Basically, it showed the interactions between FDR, Stalin, and Churchill. But the interactions were "conversational," even though from the screen display the three principals were often actually separated by thousands of miles. The background of battle/newsreel footage probably makes it confusing to younger viewers.The film conveys a lot of the undercurrents of the relationship between the three men, but it helps to have lived during the war years. It's entertaining for those who have an appreciation of the personalities involved, but it might be confusing for a viewer who's trying to gather historic data.