Not seen it myself, but I followed your link to the official site Skybird, and read the synopsis of the film, and that was enough. It said:
'The film opens in 1935. Under the looming shadow of World War Two.'
What? The looming shadow of WW2, in 1935? That's a pretty long shadow! Even the Spanish Civil War hadn't started at that point, and the Supermarine Spitfire hadn't been
designed in 1935, let alone
built. So that's got the 'reality alert' alarm bells ringing right from the start.
Reading that, sort of reminded me of that other travesty of a film set in WW2, The English Patient. Critics lauded all over that, and accordingly, I took my mum to see it when it came out. We, and indeed many others in the cinema, were actually laughing out loud at how bad it was, right from the supposedly dramatic opening scene, the one where the nurse sees her friend's vehicle hit a mine, and then spots her glasses on the road from about quarter of a mile away; a scene which elicited the comment from a girl sat in front of me: 'F*cking hell, she's got good eyesight!'.
As noted, I can recall lots of people in the cinema who were literally falling off their chairs laughing at the preposterous storyline and ridiclulous errors in it, but I was more bothered about how anyone could make a film and have Fiennes doing his usual simpering weed character in the main role, when they had an actor of Willem Dafoe's skill and quality at their disposal too. So I hope it isn't another one of those.
I suspect it will be though, but I'll reserve judgement until I've actually seen it.
Chock