Quite long ago I saw the film Battle of Britain (1969), which is a film about the Battle of Britain in 1940. At the end of the movie, I wondered whether or not Churchill purposely sacrificed London in order to protect RAF bases?
The movie depicts how Churchill was the aggressor. The RAF bombed Berlin first, as a provocation, which leads to the Luftwaffe bombing London and other cities instead of RAF bases. The movie paints Churchill as a provocateur, who purposely bombed Berlin, in order to provoke Hitler and make him divert away from his original plans of bombing RAF bases. In the end of the movie, Churchill saves the RAF but London endures much destruction
I searched around for a bit but haven't found any concluding answers.
So is this movie true in its depiction and did Churchill deliberately sacrifice London?
I answered [a similar question] (https://www.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/7jjpil/did_churchill_goad_hitler_into_the_blitz/) a little while back; in broad terms the picture of the RAF on the brink of defeat at the end of August is somewhat exaggerated, and the Luftwaffe's switch of emphasis to London was not solely due to the RAF's raid on Berlin. There were political elements in the decisions, but it's too simplistic to see it as a calculated move resulting in Hitler making a poor decision in anger.