Read Mixed User Reviews 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

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

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

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

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

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

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

5

tropicAcesDec 22, 2017

Oldman is great, the film around him is just OK. What could have been covered in 90 minutes is drawn out to 125 and character motivations flip on a dime. Oldman, buried beneath all that makeup, should finally hoist his long overdue Oscar, butOldman is great, the film around him is just OK. What could have been covered in 90 minutes is drawn out to 125 and character motivations flip on a dime. Oldman, buried beneath all that makeup, should finally hoist his long overdue Oscar, but that is all this film will ever be remembered for.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

5

McGillotineJan 17, 2018

I think we can all come to the conclusion that Gary Oldman is a great character actor, the likes of which may only be seen once within our lifetime and that is performance as Prime Minister Winston Churchill is yet another testament to thisI think we can all come to the conclusion that Gary Oldman is a great character actor, the likes of which may only be seen once within our lifetime and that is performance as Prime Minister Winston Churchill is yet another testament to this fact. However that being said the Darkest hour by itself is a fairly dull and otherwise boring film. Now i went into this film fairly blind per say, i didn't watch any trailers but as a self-described scholar of World War II history i had a fairly rough idea of where the film would go and for the most part I was correct and dissatisfied with what i saw. To put it bluntly this film is nothing more than senseless propaganda, as in the saluting the American flag to Star-Spangled Banner kind of propaganda that you're typically subjected to in just about every Hollywood war flick. My main problem with is film is the mainstreamed story for the sake of creating a plot arc for the character of Winston Churchill rather than the historical Winston Churchill. But I suppose in that being said a historical based film mocking the ineptitude of one histories most weakest military leaders wouldn't make for good ticket sales. But to where credit is due the film does make fair reference to the Gallipoli campaign from WWI a colossal failure on the part of Churchill. In the end the film plays out in typical narrative function hero rises, hero loses, hero redeems himself, hero saves the day which you'll no doubt see countless times this year.

History aside the film is otherwise pretty 'meh' and forgettable even now two days on, i'm a hard time recalling what is saw. The film establishes its need pretty early on for flashy set pieces and there there enough pretty props to satisfy everyone's belief that film takes place during the second world war from the streets of Britain to Churchill's Bunker and while it's nice it doesn't help the fact that the story is pretty weak. Direction overall is pretty average too, and going back across trailers and posters Joe Wrights name is plastered all over them whose claim to fame includes 'Atonement' a decent film and 'Pan' yes that sh*tty Peter Pan film released in 2015. So if this film attempted to build hype train around his name then i certainly wasn't getting on board.

Aside from potentially becoming the film that will give Gary Oldman his long awaited Oscar I can't see much point in recommending or otherwise watching this film again. Performances are decent, Oldmans a standout, direction is average and the plot is a propaganda driven mess that i wouldn't mind if it weren't so boring.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

RatedRexJan 18, 2018

There are a handful of roles that will almost automatically set an actor up for an award nomination. Show me the actor who plays Richard Nixon, FDR, LBJ, Queen Elizabeth and Winston Churchill, and I'll show you an actor who's being consideredThere are a handful of roles that will almost automatically set an actor up for an award nomination. Show me the actor who plays Richard Nixon, FDR, LBJ, Queen Elizabeth and Winston Churchill, and I'll show you an actor who's being considered for an award. And if you look back through cinema history, I would bet that more actors have gotten award nominations for playing Churchill than for any other historical figure. Gary Oldham's performance was decent, but not earth-shattering. To be honest, I got tired of hearing Oldman's voice, which was audible on the screen, pretty much, non-stop. In the end, "Darkest Hour" lacked drama, suspense. and, most of all, emotion.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

MahmusSep 25, 2020

I was led to believe that Gary Oldman was in this movie and yet he's nowhere to be seen. What a scam.

This was fine. It's a very theatrical movie with lots of yelling that can get annoying, but the performances are all good, especially ofI was led to believe that Gary Oldman was in this movie and yet he's nowhere to be seen. What a scam.

This was fine. It's a very theatrical movie with lots of yelling that can get annoying, but the performances are all good, especially of course the completely unrecognizable Gary Oldman (more like Gary Old Man am I right?). The makeup is mindblowing.

It's unfocused and inconsistent in its style, but mostly makes up for it with a very strong third act, a delightful, though undoubtly fictional scene in a subway (let's just say the real Churchill would probably not have shaken hands with a black man) and Oldman's wonderful, though very hammy performance as Winston Churchill.… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews

6

Movie_FreakAug 29, 2020

Darkest Hour was fine, I guess. Gary Oldman is brilliant and the makeup is great. But as a whole movie, it just didn't stand out. It was just like The Imitation Game in 2014, classic oscar bait (although the imitation game was much betterDarkest Hour was fine, I guess. Gary Oldman is brilliant and the makeup is great. But as a whole movie, it just didn't stand out. It was just like The Imitation Game in 2014, classic oscar bait (although the imitation game was much better film). It didn't delve into Churchill's life deeply and was just boring and tedious in many parts. It was a mechanical direction and storytelling, which just didn't captivate or gain my attention that much. It's definetly really good in some places and Gary Oldman deserved an oscar. The production values are stunning and it manages to have a solid first half of the film (which was the only part of the film which was consistently good). But the second half was nothing new to the biopic genre and it just wasn't creative enough to be worthy of a Best Picture nomination instead of The Florida Project or The Big Sick… Expand

0 of 0 users found this helpful00

All this user's reviews