I get that General Candy is a caricature of Winston Churchill and that he represents the old genteel ('obsolete') way of fighting wars, but I didn't see anything derogatory in the performance. In fact I'd be honored by such a heroic portrayal. But in documentaries about this film they say that the British Government, and Churchill himself, didn't want this film to be made. They weren't prepared to censor/ban it, but they made it known that they didn't like it. In one documentary, Martin Scorsese implies that the filmmakers Powell/Pressburger lost their chances of getting a "K" (knighthood) due to this film.

Was it just because the film is subtly criticising the old polite ways of warfare, implying that we need to stoop as low as the other side? That theme is apparent, but I didn't think it was overdone. It was just enough to plant the question in our heads, leaving us free to disagree and side with Gen Candy if we wanted. Maybe the social attitudes toward the war in 1943 were too volatile to bring up this issue at all?

Or could it be that one of the main sympathetic characters is a German soldier? Again I don't see an issue with this especially when he forcefully denounces the Nazis in that great speech at the end. But again, I don't know, maybe tensions were too high in 1943 to even suggest a friendship between a British & German soldier like we see here. One way or another, great film. Maybe a bit too far ahead of its time. But then again, war is always the same.