Read User Reviews and Submit your own for Darkest Hour

4

jondavisJan 9, 2018

2 hours of missed opportunities. Elements of the film are complete fiction and completely dismiss established characterizations of events. There is also some absurdities. The idea that the British government was somewhat indifferent to the2 hours of missed opportunities. Elements of the film are complete fiction and completely dismiss established characterizations of events. There is also some absurdities. The idea that the British government was somewhat indifferent to the idea of going to war with Hitler until a little girl on a subway train convinced Churchill to stick it to Adolph is insulting to viewers. Watch THE GATHERING STORM and IN TO THE STORM for a better depiction of this time. This film, along with DUNKIRK, are piece of hyper-patriotic British war propaganda that alter history to make defeat, retreat and capitulation look heroic. These films insult the contributions made by French and American and other allies. Churchill is portrayed as a comical buffoon. SKIP IT!… Expand

3 of 3 users found this helpful30

All this user's reviews

9

TVJerryDec 26, 2017

A film that's mostly people sitting in rooms talking relies on good writing and strong performances to make it effective. Luckily, this film has both. Sure, Gary Oldman nails the look and style of Winston Churchill, but he goes beyond that toA film that's mostly people sitting in rooms talking relies on good writing and strong performances to make it effective. Luckily, this film has both. Sure, Gary Oldman nails the look and style of Winston Churchill, but he goes beyond that to create a character with complex presence and emotional depth. If you saw DUNKIRK, then you know about the massive effort to evacuate the British army from the coastal town in France, while the Nazis are threatening their destruction. This film takes place behind the scenes in London, when Churchill strives to save the troops, while planning to lead Britain into the war….all despite massive political opposition. Oldman is in almost every scene and his charisma (both as the Prime Minister and as an actor) carries the weight with award-worthy skill. He brings this challenging situation to life and makes the circumstances much more enthralling than you might expect.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

8

DukeJonFeb 23, 2018

An exciting and moving film that is also a testament to the acting ability of Gary Oldman. The editing and cutting between scenes is masterfully done, particularly the "looking up into the sky" moments. Some very moving sequences,An exciting and moving film that is also a testament to the acting ability of Gary Oldman. The editing and cutting between scenes is masterfully done, particularly the "looking up into the sky" moments. Some very moving sequences, particularly the speech at the end and the section showing the defenders of Calais. A great film.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

9

IraSNov 26, 2017

"Darkest Hour" is excellently written, cast, and acted.

It depicts the desparate "behind the scenes" British parliamentary activity as the Germany was defeating the UK and France during what became known as the Battle of France or the Fall"Darkest Hour" is excellently written, cast, and acted.

It depicts the desparate "behind the scenes" British parliamentary activity as the Germany was defeating the UK and France during what became known as the Battle of France or the Fall of France in May/June 1940. "Darkest Hour" concentrates on Winston Churchill's actions leading up to Operation Dynamo - the evacuation of British soldiers (and the soldiers of other Allies as well) and the British and French armies were crumbling before the German onslaught. I recommend reading these Wikipedia entries before watching "Darkest Hour":
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/May_1940_War_Cabinet_crisis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunkirk_evacuation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Ariel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Cycle… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

10

AxgrinderDec 23, 2017

The movie covers the first few weeks after Winston Churchill becomes Prime Minister of the UK, and Nazi Germany's invasion of France. No battle scenes, guns or explosions. Just great acting, and an interesting story that makes you wonder whatThe movie covers the first few weeks after Winston Churchill becomes Prime Minister of the UK, and Nazi Germany's invasion of France. No battle scenes, guns or explosions. Just great acting, and an interesting story that makes you wonder what the world might have become had England capitulated. One of this year's finest movies. Kudos to both Gary Oldman and Lily James (who plays Churchill's secretary). Makes you want to know more about this amazing man, who is an English icon, but almost completely unknown to younger generations of Americans. Makes for a nice companion piece to Dunkirk, without the confusing timelines. Ben Mendelsohn's portrayal of the speech impaired King George VI is both credible and strikingly different from the impression given in The Kings Speech. The underground war room London is now a museum open to the public and well worth seeing if you have the chance.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

8

masterchief247Dec 27, 2017

This was a very emotional inspiring movie about a man who overcame opposition and failure to save his country from destruction. It did have some slow moments, but they did not overshadow the good. This movie is what is good, right, andThis was a very emotional inspiring movie about a man who overcame opposition and failure to save his country from destruction. It did have some slow moments, but they did not overshadow the good. This movie is what is good, right, and sacred about our society.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

7

MattBrady99Dec 31, 2017

"Will you stop interrupting me while I am interrupting you!"

'Darkest Hour' is this years 'Lincoln'. Both films star a well respected actor who is unrealizable and brings one of the best performances of their career. History sure dose repeat"Will you stop interrupting me while I am interrupting you!"

'Darkest Hour' is this years 'Lincoln'. Both films star a well respected actor who is unrealizable and brings one of the best performances of their career. History sure dose repeat itself.

It's quite shocking more actors have played Winston Churchill than James Bond, Spider-Man, and Doctor Who. Lets not forget we had another movie about Winston Churchill early this year named 'Churchill' staring Brain Cox. However, my excitement for Oldman to play the British bull dog was high, because I knew he's gonna stick his teeth into this meaty role, and he sure did. Gary Oldman was absolutely terrific and not once will you guess it's him. The level of humility, fear, and rage Oldman brought to role makes you see another side to Churchill. Almost like an inside look. He continues to be a legend and this is his finest hour.

Ben Mendelsohn, Kristin Scott Thomas, and Lily James all delivered solid performances in supporting roles. Each character has a major role in Churchill's life. Leaving a strong impression on me.

Without giving away too much, but there's a great scene in the film where Churchill goes onto the subway for the first time. He meets regular people and listens to them in person. It's probably one of the best scenes I've seen this year.

The cinematography was really stunning and Joe Wright directs the hell out of it. Even through some scenes go on a little bit too long for it's runtime. There's a lot of dialogue heavy scenes which may turn some people off, which it did for me at times.

Overall rating: Any British or history buff will really enjoy this one. It's a well crafted movie that's doesn't feel like one of those TV made films you sometimes get.… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

9

moviecritic68Feb 21, 2018

Took me awhile to go see this film but it was worth the wait. I'm kind of a history buff so my rating may be high for some's liking but personally I thought it is worthy of it's nominations for the Oscars. Outstanding lead role portrayed asTook me awhile to go see this film but it was worth the wait. I'm kind of a history buff so my rating may be high for some's liking but personally I thought it is worthy of it's nominations for the Oscars. Outstanding lead role portrayed as was supporting roles. The negative raters should be ignored ... probably hated history class in school :)… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

9

MustardaFeb 26, 2018

Churchill was a very complex character, very difficult to deal with like most genius normally are. His strong personality and drive are probably responsible for saving England and the movie is very clear portraying that. The performance isChurchill was a very complex character, very difficult to deal with like most genius normally are. His strong personality and drive are probably responsible for saving England and the movie is very clear portraying that. The performance is Oscar level by Gary Oldman, but Kristin Scott Thomas is also brilliant, as was the real-life wife. A very emotional movie, carefully directed and powerfully acted, one of my year favorites and a must-see for any History lover!… Expand

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

8

antcrtJan 28, 2018

The journey from confidence, to doubt, to purpose is so well handled, that even those who know everything about Dunkerque, Churchill and his speech will find inspiration at the end of this movie. What an amazing accomplishment.

2 of 2 users found this helpful20

All this user's reviews

6

GreatMartinJan 3, 2018

This is a hard review to write because though Gary Oldman might give ‘the performance of the year’ along with winning an Oscar for his role in “Darkest Hour”, the movie itself is boring, too soon after the “Dunkirk” movie which this alsoThis is a hard review to write because though Gary Oldman might give ‘the performance of the year’ along with winning an Oscar for his role in “Darkest Hour”, the movie itself is boring, too soon after the “Dunkirk” movie which this also deals with. “Dunkirk” deals with what went on in front of the camera and “Darkest Hour” concentrates on behind the scenes. Sort of remembering the outcome and having seen it just a few months ago are two different things.

Oldman’s makeup as Prime Minister Winston Churchill is masterful as he doesn’t resemble the man at all but he becomes the heavy drinking, heavy cigar smoking, and orator of the first order. He is faced not only with having to make a decision that will affect his country and its citizens but he is also facing the other powerful men in his government who are talking of making a peace deal with Hitler.

Oldman is surrounded by excellent actors like Ronald Pickup as Neville Chamberlain, the previous Prime Minister, Ben Mendelsohn as King George VI, Stephen Dillane as Foreign Secretary Halifax along with Kristin Scott Thomas as Churchill’s wife and Lily James as his new secretary.

There is one scene of Churchill riding the tube, being recognized and talking to the people whose fate he must decide which is fun and moving from the beginning to the end. It, also, leads up to one of his most famous speeches “We shall fight” that, after all these years, is as moving as delivered by Oldman as it was delivered by Churchill himself.

The directing, screenwriting, photography and music are a little slipshod taking away from many of the scenes but the performance by Gary Oldman holds the film together and makes “Darkest Hour” worth seeing.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

BrianMcCriticDec 22, 2017

I'm a sucker for films about historical leaders during war time. Darkest Hour was riveting throughout with the performance of a lifetime by Gary Oldman. He is a sure fire Oscar nominee and has a real shot at winning. The film didn't hit me asI'm a sucker for films about historical leaders during war time. Darkest Hour was riveting throughout with the performance of a lifetime by Gary Oldman. He is a sure fire Oscar nominee and has a real shot at winning. The film didn't hit me as much as Spielberg's Lincoln did but it's not far behind. A… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

7

moviemitch96Dec 24, 2017

Yes, it is a by-the-numbers biopic, but that's easily forgiven thanks largely in part to the stellar performances, obviously most notably from Gary Oldman's commanding lead performance. I will truly be stunned if he doesn't win the Oscar forYes, it is a by-the-numbers biopic, but that's easily forgiven thanks largely in part to the stellar performances, obviously most notably from Gary Oldman's commanding lead performance. I will truly be stunned if he doesn't win the Oscar for this! Even supporting turns from Kristen Scott Thomas and Ben Mendelsohn to name a couple others make the film all the more worthwhile. Overall, it's definitely a superbly acted and gripping look at Winston Churchill and the events that surrounded him during WWII.… Expand

1 of 1 users found this helpful10

All this user's reviews

9

yosemiteJan 9, 2018

This is a borderline great film. I gave it a 9 only because I don't know how close to actual history it clung to. Gary Oldman's portrayal of Churchill is Oscar worthy. He is in 90% of the film and is just great. The photography is spot on asThis is a borderline great film. I gave it a 9 only because I don't know how close to actual history it clung to. Gary Oldman's portrayal of Churchill is Oscar worthy. He is in 90% of the film and is just great. The photography is spot on as is the directing and film editing. Telling the story through the eyes of Churchill's secretary was a good choice. The theater I went to seated 36 people. About 25 showed up and they were all "over 60". Does the under 60 group even know who Winston Churchill was ???… Expand

5 of 6 users found this helpful51

All this user's reviews

9

ProteusDec 25, 2017

Oldman. Makes. Churchill. Lovable. See the movie for that alone. Merry Christmas.

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

9

section20mi6Feb 23, 2018

With Gary Oldman's never-seen-before stellar performance, Darkest Hour certainly reminded us how politicians during wartime used to be honorable and righteous. The power of language throughout the film is a dominant driven force to underscoreWith Gary Oldman's never-seen-before stellar performance, Darkest Hour certainly reminded us how politicians during wartime used to be honorable and righteous. The power of language throughout the film is a dominant driven force to underscore the imminent danger that faces one nation and to boost morale in the people during extreme circumstances.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

6

GittoploFeb 27, 2018

The movie had all the right ingredients to be a classic. Epic setting and great actors. Unfortunately, the final concoction was somewhat lacking. It explored a little here and a little there but no final KO punch. This was not Garry Oldman'sThe movie had all the right ingredients to be a classic. Epic setting and great actors. Unfortunately, the final concoction was somewhat lacking. It explored a little here and a little there but no final KO punch. This was not Garry Oldman's best performance, and he is one of my fav actors, but the fault isn't his. As a big history buff, I expected more detail, more intrigue and some new insights.

The truth is it is quite average when it comes to suspense, action and you do not feel the gravity of the Darkest Hour. I would have preferred if more themes were explored. As it is, it might as well be named Much Ado About Nothing. Will I ever watch it again? No. Will it be remembered as a classic? No. Is it worth a watch? I guess so. It is certainly better than other Oscar contenders.… Expand

3 of 4 users found this helpful31

All this user's reviews

5

LuccaSSCFeb 23, 2018

I have to say I'm pretty disappointed. Yes, Gary Oldman is one of the best things in this movie, but that doesn't mean much, really. His acting is OK, at best. His voice keeps reminding me of South Park's Cartman and he is always eitherI have to say I'm pretty disappointed. Yes, Gary Oldman is one of the best things in this movie, but that doesn't mean much, really. His acting is OK, at best. His voice keeps reminding me of South Park's Cartman and he is always either whispering of shouting. He looks like a caricature of Winston Churchill from a sitcom, honestly. The directing is bland, but there are some interesting shots sometimes.

The script is the worst part. Darkest Hour is basically two hours of men in suits talking to each other. Filmmaking is so incredible because it allows you to tell stories through dialogue and images. But Darkest Hour tells its story entirely through dialogue, so there's no reason for it to be a film. Every information you get from this movie is conveyed through dialogue. They should have just made a radionovela instead.

I have to give credit where credit is due, though. The makeup is amazing.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

3

CTHReviewsMar 8, 2018

While Gary Oldman certainly deserved the Oscar for Best Actor, as well as the film winning an Oscar for Makeup & Hairstyling, the majority of the film is very boring and badly paced.

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

3

weemeeMar 11, 2018

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. Good enough film, but Gary Oldman was not convincing, there have been much better portrayals of Churchill. Kristin Scott Thomas completely unbelievable and also the actor playing the king. The scene on the tube with the token black man quoting classic literature and sitting with a white girl, just wouldn't have happened 78 years ago. insulting political correctness and completely spoiled the film for me. Things were very different then, so please don't insult your audience.… Expand

2 of 3 users found this helpful21

All this user's reviews

10

GinaKDec 12, 2017

Although this film is very traditional, I really enjoyed it. Gary Oldman gives a great performance as Churchill and he has an excellent supporting cast. In its way, it is a propaganda film, but it is also solid and engrossing in itsAlthough this film is very traditional, I really enjoyed it. Gary Oldman gives a great performance as Churchill and he has an excellent supporting cast. In its way, it is a propaganda film, but it is also solid and engrossing in its story-telling and a lot of fun for history buffs especially. I liked it a lot better than the Dunkirk film, but perhaps it is a bit too perfect. Somehow the film doesn’t encourage you to realize that things could have gone very wrong if the British had not been lucky enough to have the right leader at the right time and one to whom the right things happened {like his serendipitous first and only trip on the London “Tubes”).… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

5

robbywarren93Feb 10, 2018

Gary Oldman gives a great performance, Lily James is also really good. The cinematography looks great and there's some funny humor sprinkled in throughout. But this movie is one only history fanatics will find interesting. I am not one ofGary Oldman gives a great performance, Lily James is also really good. The cinematography looks great and there's some funny humor sprinkled in throughout. But this movie is one only history fanatics will find interesting. I am not one of those people at all.… Expand

3 of 5 users found this helpful32

All this user's reviews

1

BrightestHourJan 20, 2018

The very first time I left the cinema early. Tonally awkward from the start - expected a historical drama rather than a comedy of manners - which would be fine if it had anything to offer beyond caricatures as antagonists and Gary Oldman'sThe very first time I left the cinema early. Tonally awkward from the start - expected a historical drama rather than a comedy of manners - which would be fine if it had anything to offer beyond caricatures as antagonists and Gary Oldman's performance, which was a fine piece of work I believe, though I couldn't tell in the midst of this raging garbage fire of a movie. I'm still beyond surprised that even "We will fight them on the beaches", among the impactful speeches of the entire 20th century, falls flat. Avoid with a wide berth if you have any knowledge of the historical facts, enjoy movies that try not to hit every cliche in existence or generally prefer movies that go beyond pandering to the very lowest of lowest common denominators.… Expand

2 of 4 users found this helpful22

All this user's reviews

8

LynJan 15, 2018

Wow, this doesn't even make the critics' top 100? That's surprising, considering Gary Oldman's amazing performance. If you appreciated "Dunkirk," definitely see "Darkest Hour" as a behind-the-scenes, "other side of the story." The majority ofWow, this doesn't even make the critics' top 100? That's surprising, considering Gary Oldman's amazing performance. If you appreciated "Dunkirk," definitely see "Darkest Hour" as a behind-the-scenes, "other side of the story." The majority of the movie -- dimly lit and talky, sort of like "Lincoln" -- is probably more "interesting" than "exciting." But the dramatic payoff brought a tear to my eye.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

preciouskikiJan 7, 2018

Stirring, well-paced, gorgeously photographed, and entertaining with occasional bursts of good humor, "Darkest Hour" is a must-see movie for people of all ages. Never dry or boring, it illustrates the entire man, both his flaws and his finerStirring, well-paced, gorgeously photographed, and entertaining with occasional bursts of good humor, "Darkest Hour" is a must-see movie for people of all ages. Never dry or boring, it illustrates the entire man, both his flaws and his finer qualities. We need more movies like this.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

9

shpostalDec 30, 2017

I had my reservations about seeing this movie, but since Gary Oldman was playing the part of Churchill, I figured it was worth a shot. First, I am not a fan of Churchill. For those of us who know a little WWI history, the manI had my reservations about seeing this movie, but since Gary Oldman was playing the part of Churchill, I figured it was worth a shot. First, I am not a fan of Churchill. For those of us who know a little WWI history, the man was responsible for the inexcusable needless slaughter of 25000 or more British sailors and soldiers in the invasion of the strip of dirt called Gallipoli that jutted out into the Dardanelle straits, leaving them to horrific fates by the Ottomans, who easily defended the strait. Churchill belligerently refused to withdrawal until it was already marked as one of the most pointless and brutal massacres in WWI history. He would never admit wrongdoing for this event, and in my view should never have been a politician ever again. But "Darkest Hour" is historically quite accurate, and I was pleased to see the disaster of Gallipoli was not ignored. Nor was his heavy drinking. However, with Hitler's imminent takeover of France and the east side of the channel, and a state of war already declared, for this brief period Churchill did act appropriately. Neville Chamberlain was pathetic. He had flown to Berlin at Hitler's behest to end up allowing the dictator to take Austria and the Czech Republic free and clear in exchange for a "pact" that he naively thought would bring the U.K. "peace in our time". Even when Hitler violated the agreement by invading Poland and resulted in touching off the European theater of WWII, (Japan well on her way in Manchuria since 1937), Chamberlain and fellow coward Viscount Halifax would sue for a wilting borderline treasonous "deal" with the Germans, even after having been royally suckered. Pacifism is one thing - when the mightiest army of the history of the world up to that time was on the verge of attempting the complete annihilation of your nation, however, to be so cowardly was indeed a war crime in itself. Churchill refused to kowtow to this effort by Chamberlain and Halifax, and it was his steadfastness and determination along with the support of the British population that would ultimately persevere, draining the Luftwaffe dry and forcing Hitler to abandon plans for a full scale invasion. Oldman is terrific, as are the supporting cast. There is almost no real war action but the tension in the month before the Battle of Britain was to commence is palpable. Great care was taken to present as accurately as possible the historic events, and as a person who loves history but is sick to death of the immediate spin and **** that accompanies every aspect of our lifetimes, I appreciated the attempts to exclude any one "favorable" propaganda spin over another. It's a gripping tale, and well worth the time.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

AvrilNov 23, 2017

Joe Wright's Darkest Hour is a masterpiece. Anchored by a career best performance from Gary Oldman, stunning cinematography and one of the mosy beautiful musical scores you will hear this year, Darkest Hour is bold, beautiful and one of theJoe Wright's Darkest Hour is a masterpiece. Anchored by a career best performance from Gary Oldman, stunning cinematography and one of the mosy beautiful musical scores you will hear this year, Darkest Hour is bold, beautiful and one of the best of the year.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

HelenHDec 31, 2017

Wow. This is THE FILM to see. It's simply gripping and despite knowing how it will end it kept me on the edge of my seat the whole time. Masterful acting - it makes you feel with its characters. I definitely recommend.

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

5

The3AcademySinsDec 9, 2019

I found The Darkest Hour to be kind of a boring let down. Gary Oldman does give a great performance, but this movie is essentially a lesser Dunkirk. Now, I don't mean to say that the political arguments and behind-the-scenes maneuvering ofI found The Darkest Hour to be kind of a boring let down. Gary Oldman does give a great performance, but this movie is essentially a lesser Dunkirk. Now, I don't mean to say that the political arguments and behind-the-scenes maneuvering of Winston Churchill is bad. A lot of political thrillers are quite exciting! This movie just doesn't have a whole lot of consistency on when to deliver its punches. This is not a terrible movie, this is not a great movie, its just incredibly middle-of-the-road.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

mrdr4gonJan 29, 2018

Darkest Hour is a film that missed its true calling as a Sunday afternoon TV movie. It certainly plays like it was created for television, with the lack of any real visualization of the script other than pointing the camera at the actors andDarkest Hour is a film that missed its true calling as a Sunday afternoon TV movie. It certainly plays like it was created for television, with the lack of any real visualization of the script other than pointing the camera at the actors and having them wave their arms around as they speechify or proving a hindrance that massively tests a person's patience and willingness to pay attention. Another cinematographic grievance is the film constantly using dolly shots whenever it's not just people standing talking in a room, which isn't anything you notice immediately but it's definitely annoying after a while.

The cast is OK other than Oldman, who's legitimately great turn as a fat, balding, alcoholic Michael Caine is one of the better interpretations of Churchill being performed on screen. The film feels very fluid and almost jaunty at first but it does drag on way too long, the whole screenplay doesn't really have any excuse for how uninteresting it manages to be with its material because it's based on some of the most dramatic events in history. The little touches of cliche that permeate the mess of storytelling created, such at the random interest in Churchill's typist so that we don't feel like he's spending the entire film talking to himself, or the vilification of Neville Chamberlain and Lord Halifax, in order to give the film an actual antagonist, drive me up the wall. Maybe I'm being harsh on the film because Churchill might have actually been very personable with his typist and maybe Chamberlain/Halifax were horrible for the war effort post-Chamberlain's resignation, but honestly that'd be worse for my judgment of this film, because it makes me inherently doubt it's own historicity purely on the basis of it making plausibly historical elements feel cliche.

A few other elements rubbed me the wrong way. There's a scene where Churchill literally decides the fate of the country on polling random strangers on the London underground, which must be the most cringeworthy scene in the history of film. It feels like the writer(s) of this film ran out of ways to perpetuate the themes of the script, so came up with some outlandishly hamfisted way of getting the point across that blows any pretence of realism out of the water. This movie somehow had me on the side of the people that history proved wrong, just on the basis that they were the ones that made the best arguments in the script. I think that's a bit of a problem if you're supposedly making a film based on true events, to be perfectly honest.

Also, as an aside, I hate the cliche that this movie also revels in of historical films about famous people where they get eureka moments off of some offhandedly mentioned dialogue to come up with what they're most known for instead of them just doing so out of long arduous thought. It's kind of insulting to the intelligence.

Despite all of this, I can't say I hated the movie as a whole, Oldman is great in this, there's a few interesting or well created scenes and a couple of small laughs here and there, and I didn't feel like I'd completely wasted my time. So there's that.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

4

whoischarlotteFeb 1, 2018

Gary Oldman = amazing performance, great humour, great! The film = not fantastic. It didn't full me in, I lacked the interest in this story. I was happy to learn more British history but I struggled to concentrate with this. My boyfriendGary Oldman = amazing performance, great humour, great! The film = not fantastic. It didn't full me in, I lacked the interest in this story. I was happy to learn more British history but I struggled to concentrate with this. My boyfriend loved it. If you're really interested in this piece of history you'll probably really enjoy this. For me, it wasn't very good. Oldman is gonna take that Oscar next month though, of course.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

Tommy8kinsDec 4, 2017

In the Q&A that followed the BAFTA screening for this superb film Gary Oldman called this a love letter to the British people. That seems appropriate for a wonderful telling of a brand new aspect of what made Churchill the greatest man of theIn the Q&A that followed the BAFTA screening for this superb film Gary Oldman called this a love letter to the British people. That seems appropriate for a wonderful telling of a brand new aspect of what made Churchill the greatest man of the last century and perhaps of all time.

Because this film shows us just how much pressure Halifax and weaker members of the British establishment, put on Churchill to do a deal with Adolf Hitler. A deal that would have preserved the British Empire instead of bankrupting it to the tune of £145 Billion. (Junkers please note). You will learn much about Britain and Churchill and the crisis of May 1940 in this terrific film.

Gary is as absolutely spell binding just as you would expect him to be. What you might not expect is an equally amazing performance by Ben Mendelssohn as King George (Ben was the the bad brother in Blood Lines). Lilly James is also super as the long suffering secretary to to Winston and Kristen Scott Thomas almost steals each scene as Clemmie, Winston's wife.

The film isn't perfect. The scene on the London Underground was silly and irritating and more money should have been spent on the computer graphics. But I still give this a score of 10 because of something unexpected.

The film is emotional. I felt myself choked up on 3 occasions not just because I am a Brit who loves the story but because Joe Wright takes us into the hearts of the characters and makes us feel their fear, their hope and their pain.

Lastly the film is a wonderful reminder that Britain is special and different. It cannot be taken away that we did stand alone, without hope, without support from the USA, when all seemed lost. A salient reminder to remoaners that Europe often needs Britain. This is a cracker of a film. Don't miss it.… Expand

1 of 2 users found this helpful11

All this user's reviews

10

ledaumasDec 22, 2017

Inspiring movie written and acted in an entertaining way that you understand what’s going on. What was so moving was the patriotism of the common cause against Hitler. Churchill saw that giving in to a tyrant meant being vanquished with noInspiring movie written and acted in an entertaining way that you understand what’s going on. What was so moving was the patriotism of the common cause against Hitler. Churchill saw that giving in to a tyrant meant being vanquished with no reason to live. We were in tears watching Churchill forge ahead to overcome what others almost gave up on. That period in time had the same characters in the 1940s that 2017 has now, the greedy trying to overtake the weak. We need another Churchill now...… Expand

2 of 5 users found this helpful23

All this user's reviews

7

Brent_MarchantDec 16, 2017

While the stellar portrayal of Gary Oldman is a bona fide stand-out, backed by an array of fine supporting performances, the overall product is a little too talky and drawn out to captivate, given that it's based on a story that truly shouldWhile the stellar portrayal of Gary Oldman is a bona fide stand-out, backed by an array of fine supporting performances, the overall product is a little too talky and drawn out to captivate, given that it's based on a story that truly should engross viewers. With a little too much emphasis on the domestic politics behind this British wartime drama, the film becomes bogged down and, frankly, a bit boring. See it for the work of the film's brilliantly depicted protagonist, but don't be surprised if you come away from it a little disappointed overall.… Expand

1 of 3 users found this helpful12

All this user's reviews

0

MarcAureleDec 23, 2017

This movie is borderline with insulting. So bad I left the theater after twenty minutes.

3 of 21 users found this helpful318

All this user's reviews

7

Compi24Jan 2, 2018

A classic case of supreme acting and directorial talent committing themselves to and performing circles around a script that only occasionally matches their efforts. Now, don't get me wrong - the script's final act is quite good, and theA classic case of supreme acting and directorial talent committing themselves to and performing circles around a script that only occasionally matches their efforts. Now, don't get me wrong - the script's final act is quite good, and the narrative at hand holds a handful of fascinating historical facts. But, generally speaking, the narrative elements only feel about half as epic and historic as they should. This still doesn't stop the movie from being eminently watchable, though. Thanks in no small part to the aforementioned, potentially career-defining performances and directorial work from Gary Oldman and Joe Wright, "Darkest Hour" ultimately shakes out to being a rewarding and enjoyable watch.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

AxeTDec 31, 2017

Sure handed seriously crafted historical portrait drama is educational if also dry and slow but not to the detrimental effect the incredibly over-rated and poor "Dunkirk" is, and this is brought up because this film deals with the same eventsSure handed seriously crafted historical portrait drama is educational if also dry and slow but not to the detrimental effect the incredibly over-rated and poor "Dunkirk" is, and this is brought up because this film deals with the same events but in vastly different perspective (the two movies could even serve as companion pieces in schools with this being the behind the scenes dialogue driven government maneuvering and that being the visceral non-verbal soldiers and civilians battlefront, but the former standing alone is inadequate for commercial cinema). Gary Oldman is extraordinary and unrecognizable and surely deserves an Oscar nom not for makeup and diction, but for delivering a man's greatness.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

6

AproxxAug 19, 2018

I knew nothing when I watched "Dunkirk" about that time.

The movie felt flat for me And then I just watched this movie, which is the opposite of Dunkirk. No action and all plot/characters. And this movie is as good as this type of movieI knew nothing when I watched "Dunkirk" about that time.

The movie felt flat for me

And then I just watched this movie, which is the opposite of Dunkirk. No action and all plot/characters.

And this movie is as good as this type of movie can be, in my opinon. Good. I just believe that if we could combine both we would have the best war movie ever...which this is not… Expand

0 of 3 users found this helpful03

All this user's reviews

6

CarFan1999Jan 31, 2018

Darkest Hour is directed by Joe Wright and stars Gary Oldman, Kristin Scott Thomas, and others. This movie isn't necessary a biopic about Winston Churchill's entire life. Instead, the movie focuses on Churchill as he first comes into power upDarkest Hour is directed by Joe Wright and stars Gary Oldman, Kristin Scott Thomas, and others. This movie isn't necessary a biopic about Winston Churchill's entire life. Instead, the movie focuses on Churchill as he first comes into power up to the point of the Dunkirk evacuation, he deals with the doubts many people have about him, and it shows the process of how he made many of his great speeches. In addition, it shows the debates he has with other members of parliament over Hitler, whether Britain should fight on or sign a peace agreement. In many ways, this is a political drama in addition to a biography.

In a sense, this movie is a companion piece to Dunkirk, as this movie mainly shows the conflict from Churchill's point of view while that movie showed the conflict from the soldiers point of view. The best part of this movie is Gary Oldman. He does a terrific job playing Churchill. He shows both charm and charisma. Unfortunately, the story is a let down. It's a very interesting story, but it would've worked better as a tv mini-series or normal documentary. As a film, the story feels as if parts and details were cut out or shortened and it makes the overall film feel rather dull and a little disjointed in areas.

In the end, Darkest Hour benefits from a terrific performance from Oldman, but apart from him, there's not much else to see unfortunately.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

TrevorsViewJan 5, 2018

First order of business, I say Gary Oldman (The Dark Knight, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) deserves to win the Oscar for Best Actor! The range of his vulnerability as Winston Churchill truly comes out through the fear echoed behind his eyes andFirst order of business, I say Gary Oldman (The Dark Knight, Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy) deserves to win the Oscar for Best Actor! The range of his vulnerability as Winston Churchill truly comes out through the fear echoed behind his eyes and voice, a haunting disappearance into the role.

All other ways Darkest Hour crafts Churchill should guarantee amazement, starting with the latex prosthetics used to transform Oldman into the man of the hour: a flawless milestone in Hollywood makeup design. Pretty much right away his lesser known arrogant side comes out, especially once he presses his controversial decisions to push the UK’s attack on Nazi, Germany. He publicly flaunts his odd plan by making a V handshape for the reporters, backwards by the way, which he later learns means not victory, but “up your bum.” So the balance between Churchill’s funnier, personal traits and his positive well-known qualities earns its appreciation. Our present age could use a more complete Churchill depiction, a man who shares our president’s most prominent commonalities, both good and bad.

Alongside scene-stealer Oldman, the rest of the cast generates desperate, yet compassionate performances, particularly in how the underrated actress Kristin Scott Thomas, (The English Patient) attentively complements Oldman as wife Clementine Churchill.

Beyond the people, the technicians also achieve great heights without being too greedy onscreen. Production designer Sarah Greenwood (Anna Karenina, Atonement) recreates the lovely detailed historical setting by enclosing squares and circles upon a pressured Churchill. Likewise, the soft cream colors by cinematographer Bruno Delbonnel (Amélie, Inside Llewyn Davis) set up singular stark backlights to diffuse the overall appearance of what looks like an old historical tape painted by British pride. The feature’s desaturated look soon finds a rupture in its style in the heavy moment of Churchill’s first live speech, when a deep red light floods the room. Then in the post production process, massive letters tick each day by the screen as the lives at Dunkirk are at stake. Everyone's past mental scars can be seen purely by these visual decisions to enhance the feature.

Unfortunately, despite the suggested idea of pressure, the meat of the pressure leans too far toward a one-sided British monarchy. Practically no representation goes to the contributors of England's condition beyond some old news footage. The screenplay by Anthony McCarten (The Theory of Everything) does show every character fighting back whatever tough challenge they started together, though you still may want to sit back a little away from the script’s very bad breath. Clementine in particular has a quarter-baked subplot never resolved despite a pre-established anticipation for closure. All the other women either stay chained behind typewriters or at the husband’s bedside, as if cinematic diversity just fell backwards seventy-five years.

Like other hopeful Oscar contenders, the attempt to inspire here stretches too hard, especially in the final speech. It’s understandable why it took on a PG-13 rating to appeal to a profitable market, although most teenagers will find it boring, while others may find it predictable, since the script’s fear of national failure triggers an insignificant response from the target audience. Seriously, the potential in Darkest Hour’s kite rides with the wind rather than against it.

You can always count on Americans to do the right thing after they’ve tried everything else, except director Joe Wright (Anna Karenina, Pride & Prejudice) lazily relies on historical news footage to establish the era, one of the several examples that demonstrates a small imagination; ironic since Wright attempts to focus in on Churchill’s message of courage.

Perfect World Pictures ultimately thinks striking gold will guarantee financial and critical success, with the assumption that the Oscars still set their prioritized sights on British WWII era biopics. Considering the massive change the Academy’s gone through lately in terms of membership, Darkest Hour instead looks desperate alongside its winter release. Therefore, the film’s inner quarrel between the past and present loses sight of the future.

As a bonus, in this review, I slipped in three quotes from Winston Churchill and two quotes from Donald Trump. Can you find them?… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

BroyaxNov 17, 2018

Churchill méritait bien un film dédié à sa gloire et son opiniâtreté, ses talents d'orateur et son sens de la formule mais son portrait ici ne se borne pas à un simple panégyrique : ce singulier personnage était un fumeur et un buveurChurchill méritait bien un film dédié à sa gloire et son opiniâtreté, ses talents d'orateur et son sens de la formule mais son portrait ici ne se borne pas à un simple panégyrique : ce singulier personnage était un fumeur et un buveur invétéré mais aussi et surtout un animal politique. Avec le recul, il est incontestable qu'il a été l'homme de la situation dans ces temps troublés et ces... heures sombres.

La grande qualité du film qui se focalise sur le mois de mai 1940 est de montrer la débâcle elle-même vue du côté britannique : l'Europe de l'ouest tombe alors sous le rouleau compresseur de l'agression nazie via sa "blitzkrieg" stupéfiante de rapidité et d'efficacité. On ne voit pourtant que très peu de séquences de guerre : les mauvaises nouvelles qui ne cessent de s'accumuler suffisent à retranscrire cet état d'urgence et d'effondrement imminent... y compris après l'évacuation réussie de Dunkerque.

C'est une chose que le film de Christopher Nolan n'a jamais réussi à rendre dans son "Dunkerque" d'ailleurs. Le Royaume-Uni se retrouve donc isolé face à l'ogre allemand avec à cette époque sans doute un seul homme capable de lui tenir tête, de résister... bien que le Premier Ministre ait quelque difficulté à se faire entendre dans ce gouvernement de coalition dont il a la charge...

L'interprétation de Gary Oldman y est pour beaucoup ; on sait l'acteur très doué et tout ce maquillage n'était à mon avis pas nécessaire mais après tout, cela rajoute encore à ce portrait criant de vérité. On peut regretter du coup qu'on ne suive pas Churchill pendant toute la guerre, de même que son passé ne soit qu'à peine abordé ou évoqué.

La séquence dans le métro est certainement de trop par son caractère surréaliste et ressemble davantage à une vision de la "communication" de notre époque qu'on a maladroitement plaquée, placardée ici via un agenda SJW assez ridicule (mais que fait cet homme noir dans la rame de métro au juste ?). De même pour la dactylo (la très jolie Lily James) dont le rôle sert un autre agenda (féministe celui-là) plus ou moins dissimulé.

Quoi qu'il en soit, le film reste passionnant et très bien fait ; il alterne la grandiloquence, le désarroi et l'émotion avec talent. L'espérance et la fierté aussi, celle d'un peuple inquiet mais combatif. Un peu (beaucoup) comme les si beaux discours de Winston Churchill en somme.… Expand

0 of 2 users found this helpful02

All this user's reviews

8

DubeauJan 14, 2018

This movie will makes people think of Lincoln, but also the Dunkirk movie. The performance of Oldman is by far amazing, inspiring. And his portrait of Churchill is human and touching. The story focus on the political side of the events inThis movie will makes people think of Lincoln, but also the Dunkirk movie. The performance of Oldman is by far amazing, inspiring. And his portrait of Churchill is human and touching. The story focus on the political side of the events in Britain, and in that sens, just enough of the war is said and showed. And it does use some scenes for emotional effect, rather then historical. So no, it's not a true historic film, But it has the quality of showing how hard it was to stand as politician in a period of conflict. It put some perspective to a movie like Dunkirk. I don't know if it was intentional or an opportunistic move, but the timing is good. I give it a 78% because of Oldman and the actors around him.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

5

Slovenly_MuseAug 31, 2018

A beautifully-shot, cinematic retelling of the least interesting aspects of the least interesting events taking place during WWII. Gary Oldman's prosthetic makeup gives a strong performance as Churchill. Ultimately, the film fails to make aA beautifully-shot, cinematic retelling of the least interesting aspects of the least interesting events taking place during WWII. Gary Oldman's prosthetic makeup gives a strong performance as Churchill. Ultimately, the film fails to make a point or an impression.… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

2

IlyaMurometsApr 13, 2019

This review contains spoilers, click expand to view. This movie was hard to keep awake to! It took a great story & made it so boring, one dimensional & in reality not factual in many parts. OK Oldman was OK playing Churchill , but did he really mumble that much? It was drab , unimaginative , overrated , & a waste of time. Will watch it when insomnia kicks in ! It's a huge dissapontment!… Expand

0 of 1 users found this helpful01

All this user's reviews

8

BHBarryDec 30, 2017

“Darkest Hour” stars Gary Oldman, was written by Anthony McCarten and was directed by Joe Wright. This as most know is the story of the early days of World War II as Great Britain struggled with the results of the appeasement stratagies of“Darkest Hour” stars Gary Oldman, was written by Anthony McCarten and was directed by Joe Wright. This as most know is the story of the early days of World War II as Great Britain struggled with the results of the appeasement stratagies of Neville Chamberain, his fall from grace and the appointment of Winston Churchill as his successor who led his country and the Allies to a victory over Nazi Germany. But more than anything, it is the vehicle in which Mr. Oldman is given the opportunity of an actor’s lifetime to play Mr. Churchill so convincingly that the film becomes more like a documentary rather than a fictionalized version of what took place in Europe in the days preceding Britain’s entry into the war. I give the film an 8 based mostly on Mr. Oldman’s portrayal of Mr. Churchill but also because of the interesting and informative manner in which the film is presented.… Expand