Solidrariol Am I Missing Something?

Matrixiole Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

Connianatu How wonderful it is to see this fine actress carry a film and carry it so beautifully.

Cassandra Story: It's very simple but honestly that is fine.

jwsanfrancisco yes, I thought selleck was brilliant,but did not pass judgment on whether a man commanding well over 85 battalions(only 25 were actually American);those administrative skills would serve a person quite well in civilian life(Ike went on to a successful political career, as the _?_th president); so should Patton(trump look-alike?)also should have run,if he had lived?also a very good portrayal of a loquacious, bombastic field Marshall Montgomery who, as he put it, bested the normally taciturn Rommel(literally, desert fox booked for parts unknown when, Bernard, with champagne glass in left hand,& riding crop in right),quite literally delivered Rommel's head on a silver platter at kasserine Pass?

movie-viking Great to see Selleck has much more acting depth than the male cheesecake Magnum PI show (fun as it was).This IKE TV episode shows up on video racks and has gotten lots of praise. I plan to show it to my son who is upset that he has to report on President Eisenhower...(maybe he will see how cool E. was!!!) Yeah, the spoiler is...Ike decides to invade on June 6! What of the "marriage" between Hitler-Stalin??? It's a FORGOTTEN but potentially dangerous part of early World War 2 where Hitler and Stalin had a formal ALLIANCE! August 1939- to June 1941 when Hitler BROKE the pact and attacked the Soviets!!! Wonder what the Allies thought of that SCARY alliance of two major powers? Sorta like the Super Left Socialist "marries" the Super Right Socialist...Amazing concentration of power. Fortunately, this evil union broke up when Hitler "broke his vows" of nonaggression to Stalin.

im_veritas_photo Tom Selleck scores an honest tour de force in his portrayal of General Dwight David Eisenhower, Commander-In-Chief, Supreme Headquarters, Allied Expeditionary Force, European Theatre of Operations, in the weeks and final days leading up to June 6, 1944. (I am so proud to have gotten that entire title correct.) The plan for the invasion of Hitler's Europe was developed primarily by General Eisenhower, with the help of his allied staff. This made sense. Eisenhower was, as he himself admitted, primarily an organizer and planner. That he indeed was a supreme planner led to the ultimate success of Operation Overlord.Eisenhower had to fight hard, against fractious political forces, for Churchill's and Roosevelt's acceptance. They eventually granted Ike unfettered command of all the allied forces engaged in the landing at Normandy.Few people, myself included, really appreciate the mass of details which had to be coordinated for D-Day. Watch this movie and learn at least some of them. Almost three million troops crossed the English Channel to land in France on, and immediately after, D-Day. Nothing like this had, of course, ever occurred in all of human history. One can only hope nothing like it ever need occur again.This 2004 film has me convinced I'll always, from now on, carefully examine those "Made For TV" movies for gems like this one. All this praise for a movie that has not one bit of "action" in it. It's all docudrama, all about planning and preparation. It is better than anyone might predict.Tom Selleck was, as I indicated above, masterful. I have always liked him as an actor; now I truly admire his acting ability. Selleck belongs with the best.Kudos! A perfect movie, in every way. To hear me say that is really quite rare.

pax-18 I swear you come off feeling more sympathy for the Germans than the French after seeing this. There are serious omissions and out of context statements that portray the French in every which way possible in a negative light. Its so obviously tainted by current politics (and I'm sure Tom Selleck's conservative politics) its not funny. The one time in the show where Churchill makes the off comment about the French trying to impede their escape from Dunkerque. As if they were collaborating with the Germans at the time... Totally out of context I cant believe Churchill would've made that comment to Ike at all. It was probably completely made up for the show. See the great BBC docu series "History of WW2" for the context.The admiral in charge of French forces in the area at the time wanted to stay in the fight. He expected the Brits to fulfill their obligations in their alliance at the time and not abandon the field of battle. He didn't understand they couldn't fight on probably because being an admiral vs a land force general didn't help in his understanding the Germans had far superior tactics and there was no point in keeping up the fight and risk the capture of 400 000 allied troops by the Germans. The motivation was honest though not one of a backstabbing nature. The French admiral saw cowardice in his eyes. And he felt betrayed and abandoned by his British allies.But also the fact the French had to threaten the closure of the port (tho they had no means of really doing it) if the Brits didn't evacuate them on a 50\50 basis is a sad statement on the British leadership far more than the French leadership at the time. In the last days of the Dunkerque evacuation 100 000 french soldiers held the line while the remaining 40 000 brits got first dibs off the continent. Hows that for "surrender monkeys"? I seriously hope Americans will get a chance to see the BBC series dramatized documentary "History of WW2" and get a truer picture of what really happened. So that unlike the sad distorted comment by the main comment posted for this picture and the awful Ike program they can really get an honest perspective of what happened.