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

The film makes a home in your brain and the only cure is to see it again.

This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

The storyline feels a little thin and moth-eaten in parts but this sequel is plenty of fun.

The goal of the film was to put a human face on the tragedy of Guernica, the market town in Northern Spain that was destroyed by German bombers during the Spanish Civil War. Unfortunately, the romantic narrative was far-fetched, and the dialogue was often strained in this labored, slow-paced drama.The filmmakers were successful in conveying the complexity of the Spanish Civil War. The opposition of the fascist "loyalists" supporting Franco versus the "republicans," who were allied with Stalin, was well presented. But the film failed to convey the idealism of the Republicans. It was the passion of the Republicans to preserve their government against a military coup that captivated the world in the 1930s. Yet the passion was inexplicably missing in the film.The main character was an American journalist named Howell, who was evidently modeled on the British writer George Steer who broke the story of the atrocities at Guernica. But Steer, along with other like-minded writers like Ernest Hemingway and George Orwell, also witnessed the passion of ordinary people resisting the forces of fascism in the 1930s. Where was the passion in this film?The character of Teresa, who was a censor, was essential for demonstrating the uses of propaganda. But her character did not demonstrate to Howell why the cause of the Spanish Civil War was important in taking a stand against European fascism. The filmmakers seemed unaware of how important it was in the 1930s to resist another nation turning to fascism. That SHOULD have been the main focus of this drama.In the final analysis, the romantic intrigue was not compelling or believable. And despite the beautiful photography of Northern Spain, the true soul of the nation was not captured in "Guernica."

The fates of Henry - a cynical American correspondent who has lost his soul - and Teresa, one of the Republic's censors and in charge of overseeing the news that journalists can send abroad, cross in Gernika. Although this movie talks about romance in a time of war there is no heart at all, the acting is so so and the whole movie is a big bubble from another based on true events film and in this case drama, war and romance doesn't work that great and some of the characters were pretty retarded this isn't a film to recommend to see or even buy just skip it and go watch a much better war film for example Fury or something that has good direction, actors and script. Guernica gets an 3 out of 10 by me.

James D'Arcy plays an American journalist who is stationed in Guernica in 1937. The German Condor Legion is active and the war is raging all around, but the Republic have strict orders to only allow good new3s out and as such all journalists are censored to the point of mere mouths for propaganda. Meanwhile he sort of falls for Teresa who is one of the censors, but her Soviet boss, Vasyl (Jack Davenport) is also romantically committed to her and does not take kindly to the dalliance. We also have the brilliant Burn Gorman playing a NKVD agent who is deliciously ruthless (great piece of casting too) and he brings some welcome spice to the proceedings. What follows are the events that put Guernica on the map – 'for all the wrong reasons'.This is a really well made film with some great performances (accents aside) and high class CGI and a nice attention to detail. The love interest is good but not really going to be legendary and some could say that the bombing was under done, but I found it to be about right – we don't need loads of screen time of people suffering to make the point. In English, Castilian, Basque and some German with good to average sub titles, this is a film that is very much worth checking out.

Guernica could have been one of my all time favorites but unfortunately, as it happens too often these days, the culmination was badly executed. The first act is wonderful, a perfect setup for the upcoming events in the movie, with breathtaking cinematography, decent script and superb acting. The sets and the costumes were top notch, whoever could pull this off with 5 million deserves utmost respect. The first 30 minutes really feel like you're watching one of those great classics and I was pretty convinced that this movie is going to be ten star material. Unfortunately, as the movie progresses past the second act, it starts to lose its charms. The focus turns on the love story, which somehow manages to be underdeveloped, despite the huge screen time that it has. From there on, we have a cascading chain of blatant clichés which, combined with a final act that feels disjointed, really ruin the whole experience. Now if you pay attention, you'll notice that the final act is where we lose the German perspective. A scene on a bomber, a pilot reaction or even the German colonel watching the ongoing bombardment from a far would've kept this perspective alive and could've added some needed dramatic effect. Instead, the focus falls entirely on the events occurring in Guernica, which wouldn't be so bad if the whole act wasn't filled with severely overused clichés. All in all, this is a pretty decent war drama, which could've been something really special, had the writers come up with more original ideas.