This week, I attended a New York Times Film Club screening for the New York City Premiere of the new historical drama, “Darkest Hour” starring Gary Oldman.
Synopsis
When Winston Churchill becomes Prime Minister of England, will he order his military to combat Hitler or will he choose to negotiate a peace treaty?
Story
In early May of 1940, Adolph Hitler is encroaching throughout Europe. It looks like he will take Belgium – and if he does that, is France far behind? The citizens of England are understandably worried; they are beginning to lose faith in their Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain. Seeing the tide turning against him, Chamberlain steps aside and King George installs Winston Churchill (Oldman) as the nation’s new Prime Minister. But it is not without some controversy; the King has reservations about Churchill. Professionally, the man is something of a hawk and personally, he’s known to be a bit of a lush.
Now in charge, Churchill soon finds he’s inherited no bed of roses. Visiting France, he’s stunned to learn that they have no plan to confront Hitler’s troops. Seeing he may have to support France in addition to defending his own country, the nascent Prime Minister is alarmed to find that his nation’s military will be no match against Germany’s and they will be spread particularly thin if they are forced to fight for two countries. Desperate, he asks United States President Roosevelt for some assistance, but this proves fruitless. Just weeks into his term, Churchill is hearing rumblings of dissent in his Parliament.
Against his best instincts, Churchill starts listening to some of his advisors who strongly recommend they take up Italy’s Mussolini on his offer to serve as a broker between England and Germany to negotiate a peace treaty with Hitler. As loathe as Churchill may be to this notion, the reality is that if his soldiers try to fight Germany, they will suffer massive casualties and the nation will wind up losing faith in its new leader. Once word comes that Belgium has fallen, Churchill must make a decision: either concede or talk the Parliament into putting up a fight against the German forces. Is this something that Churchill is worth risking at this point in his political career?
Review
It is rare to have multiple biopics about the same historical figure in one year. This past Spring, “Churchill” was reviewed; over the summer, “Dunkirk” was released (not directly about The British Bulldog himself, but close enough); now, we have, “Darkest Hour” – which wags will likely refer to as “Darkest Two Hours”. But make no mistake: both the Prime Minister and that point in the history of the world are quite rich with material for many motion pictures, books and even television mini-series. Churchill himself was legendary for many reasons, including being quite a character (for better or worse).
The problem for some who try dramatic adaptions to their chosen medium is this: in real time, the events were thrilling moments but condensing them to movies while keeping the dramatic tension can prove a challenge when the outcome is already known. This is the main problem with “Darkest Hour” – while there’s a war raging on in Europe, the conflict has to do with the internecine battles within the British Parliament as well as Churchill’s own personal doubts. Conveying that on-screen is difficult to say the least and the way the story arrives at its resolution is hard to swallow; the final scene where Churchill speaks before Parliament tries to be exhilarating but winds up more underwhelming.
Regarding the performances, Oldman is being touted as a possible award nominee for his portrayal of Churchill. Much of the time, however, it appears as though he is letting the extensive make-up do a substantial amount of the work. His gravelly utterances at various points can be hard to comprehend, especially when he is mumbling – particularly odd since the character was known as a great orator. Kristin Scott Thomas, on the other hand, goes sorely under-utilized as the Prime Minister’s wife; although she portrays Mrs. Churchill as a doting and dignified supportive influence, her role is distressingly minor. However, the classic, fragile beauty of this actress never goes unnoticed.