Darkest Hour film critique- by iwatched…

Full text transcript of Darkest Hour film critique

Hello, Internet. My name is Llave, and I watched The Darkest Hour, which is directed by Joe Wright, who also directed Pride and Prejudice, Anna Karenina and Atonement. His latest is also a period drama set early in World War Two with the Russia appointment of Winston Churchill as prime minister, who then must decide to carry on the fight against Hitler whilst the rest of his war cabinet believes he should surrender and begin peace talks negotiations. What’s funny is every now and again in the film industry, we do get films that are released quite close together, but made by completely different people, which basically have the same premise and the same M.O.. Last year we got Churchill with Brian Cox as the big man himself.

This year we’ve got darkest hour with Gary Oldman, with all the prosthetics and all of that stuff, which I’ll come back to later. Now, of the two films, I do think Darkest Hour is the more entertaining film. It’s more engaging. And I want to say it’s more schmaltzy in a way. Now, you can either take that as a positive or a negative, whereas Churchill was very much more straight laced and stoic and repressed in its approach to Winston Churchill. What I think makes darkest hour more entertaining is its presentation. From a filmmaking perspective, it’s more aesthetically pleasing. I think it’s more inventive with its editing. As an example, early on in the film, there is a montage of him preparing one of his speeches with his secretary, which is being delivered at the same time.

I really like that. There’s also some graphical elements with the date popping up in big text every now and again. I like that too. And the overall tone of the film is much lighter. Despite the fact that it is the darkest hour, there are moments of levity which I don’t want to spoil, but it is very welcomed. But it never loses sight of the fact that it was a very desperate and grave time for us Brits. And that’s important for films of this nature, especially when it’s a smidgin over two hours long. It’s got a good flow to it. It’s always engaging and entertaining as it recounts events that happened through May 1940.

But funny enough, my favourite moment in the film is actually one of the quieter moments when Churchill and his secretary, played by Lily James, who is brilliant by the way they share a moment together when the soundtrack just completely disappears and there’s very little dialogue between them. It’s just them looking at each other and it’s absolutely terrific. Which brings me on to the performances and Gary Oldman, who doesn’t love Gary Oldman. He is brilliant as Churchill. And obviously he’s been aided with all of these prosthetics on a few occasions. I did think that you could tell where the prosthetics ends and where Oldman starts, but overall, it’s a completely transformative performance from him.

He is typically very, very good and he is being strongly tipped to get an Oscar win for this one. But on that note and on that argument, I see no reason why Andy Serkis shouldn’t also be nominated for best actor for his performance as Caesar. At the end of the day, it’s the performance behind the make up, whether it’s digital or real, that should win the Oscar. And I actually think that Andy Serkis should win. Regardless of that, though, Gary Oldman is terrific as Churchill.

He’s got the mannerisms down and when he delivers his speeches, he can’t help but feel patriotic and proud. Oh, yes, but it’s not just his performances which should be noticed. Stephen Dillane and Robert Pick Up are terrific as Halifax and Chamberlain. I already mentioned Lily James, who is fantastic.

I also really like Ben Mendelsohn’s performance as King George, whose character has a meteor part in this when compared with Churchill. But then as a trade off, Kristen Scott Thomas is underused as a clemmy, which is a shame because she is typically good with what she’s been given. My only other criticism of the film is there is one scene in particular which feels completely out of place in context with the rest of the film. I said earlier that it’s very schmaltzy and that’s when the film is at its most schmaltzy.

It’s really weird. I don’t think that this ever happened. And I talked to my dad, who pretty much confirmed that at that stage in the war that wouldn’t have happened. It just feels very contrived. But I will say that once that scene is over and it gets back on track, it ends really well in a really patriotic, typically good