Darkest Hour (2017)

[baumer]

Discuss (will this get Oldman an Oscar nom?)

[filmlover]

Great performance, not great movie. Movies like this aren't my cup of mojo typically, but I hoped Joe Wright would create something more dynamic than what we usually get. Not so, as it's mostly dry and slow-moving, and feels like it's trying to do for Churchill what Spielberg did for Lincoln a few years back without being as successful (the scene later in the movie where Churchill visits the Underground, the cringe). None of the blame can be placed upon the actors, especially an unrecognizable Gary Oldman, who is really great and disappears into the part (it's unlikely he'll be making my Best Actor ballot when the BOT awards happen in about two months though). It's always watchable and professionally made but overall there's really not a whole lot to it other than a great lead performance. C+

[lilmac]

Funny for me personally that we have Oldman, Streep and Day-Lewis in theaters at the same time. These are my top 3 favorite actors. 

[Webslinger]

Darkest Hour is pretty much what one would expect from its trailer and pedigree: a sufficiently interesting period piece elevated by its acting and craftwork. Winston Churchill’s life has enough noteworthy events to cover several movies, so the filmmakers’ decision to focus squarely on his first weeks as prime minister amid the backdrop of the Dunkirk evacuation allow viewers to gain a clear understanding of Churchill’s defining characteristics from a small but crucial sliver of his life. The proceedings do occasionally feel stuffy, but director Joe Wright imbues the film with enough visual flair to enliven otherwise stodgy scenes, and the acting is top-notch. While performances are solid up and down the cast, it’s mostly a showcase for Gary Oldman, an oft-underappreciated actor who excels in the glare of this film’s spotlight. His physical transformation and mimicry of his subject are impressive enough in their own right, but he also succeeds in finding and illustrating the quirks, vulnerabilities, and nuances that make his character tick. Whether it’s the best leading male performance of the year is debatable, but he’s certainly in the conversation. It’s far from the best film in the well-tread World War II drama subgenre, but it’s a solid study of a crucial moment in history that gets plenty of mileage from its lead actor. 

 

B+

 

Stray Thoughts:

- I also re-watched Dunkirk this morning, so it was a little difficult not to compare the two films as this one unfolded. Darkest Hour is definitely standing in that film's shadow, and I hope the Oscar nomination count for each film reflects that point.

 

- I'm never looking at peace signs the same way again. 

 

- I really hope the Academy doesn't waste a Supporting Actor nomination on Ben Mendelsohn. He's fine in the film, but I couldn't help but wish there had been some way to get Colin Firth to play the role instead. His George VI pales in comparison to Firth's.

[That One Girl]

On 12/24/2017 at 12:16 AM, filmlover said:

the scene later in the movie where Churchill visits the Underground, the cringe

 

What?  That scene was great.

[Lordmandeep]

Its hard to figure out whether this film is actually good or frankly its Churchil is such a massive historical figure his words just overshadow the rest of the film.

 

 

This was interesting as I did not relaize how close England came to surrender and frankly this films brings some grounded reality to the legend of Churchil.

 

My point is if you are a fan of Churchil this is a must see. 

 

[Barnack]

28 minutes ago, Lordmandeep said:

This was interesting as I did not relaize how close England came to surrender and frankly this films brings some grounded reality to the legend of Churchil.

 

I think at one point it was going to be pretty much Italy, Germany, Russia against England almost all alone in term of big power. Would have been really easy to surrender/accept to stay out of it and yes there is some legend of England of that moment and is leadership I think.

 

The movie was really cinematic, but after a while, I was waiting for the build up to the speech to end to have it, it is hard to play with some of the "suspense" for such an historical known moment, it is competent all around but not reaching any greatness.

[WrathOfHan]

8/10 | B

[somebody85]

Goes well with Dunkirk and Oldman deserves the awards for that performance (though I had a hard time understanding his slurred mumbling quite often - but I could always follow what was going on). He completely transformed himself for the role.

Thought the phone and train scenes were great and liked Lily a lot too.

I dunno. It's not a movie I'd want to rewatch but the ending is uplifting and any mention of Dunkirk immediately brings me back to that film. The US looks pretty bad on that phone call though...."horses"

B+

Edited January 19, 2018 by somebody85

[somebody85]

Comparing it to something like The Imitation Game though....I much preferred that.

Kind of funny how two films about the same incidence came out in the same year. It's a good history refresher.

[Cap]

Very dry, but compelling. Thought it wouldn’t been better as a stage play. 

[Goffe]

Subway scene was embarassing. Overall? Forgettable biopic with a touch of simplistic working-class morals. 4/10

Edited January 27, 2018 by Goffe

[CoolioD1]

Gary Oldman gives a great transformative performance humanizing a fearless leader put under immense pressure during wartime as Boss Nass. 

Edited January 27, 2018 by CoolioD1

[WrathOfHan]

6 minutes ago, CoolioD1 said:

Gary Oldman gives a great transformative performance humanizing a fearless leader put under immense pressure during wartime as Boss Nass. 

what did you think of the underground scene

[CoolioD1]

3 minutes ago, WrathOfHan said:

what did you think of the underground scene

i've worked a lot with focus groups recently and it reminded me too much of that. don't wanna think about work at the movies jesus christ.

[CoolioD1]

but honestly separating it from that i thought it was a cute scene idk. racism was one of churchill's favourite hobbies though so him palling it up with that black dude was pretty funny.

[aabattery]

Less 'gobble gobble' from Oldman than I was expecting, but still a pretty goofy performance overall. 

 

Had some nice moments though. Dunno. I like how Joe Wright shoots things, but a lot falls flat for me. Except Pride and Prejudice. That movie rules.

[filmlover]

5 hours ago, aabattery said:

Less 'gobble gobble' from Oldman than I was expecting, but still a pretty goofy performance overall. 

WOULD YOU STOP INTERRUPTING ME WHILE I AM INTERRUPTING YOU?!

 

I'm still kinda annoyed this got a Best Picture nomination.

[DAJK]

Gary Oldman was fucking fantastic in this. The rest of the movie however was incredibly one-note and somewhat meandering, espeicallynduring the second act. It felt like the movie only had one thing to say, only one piece of conflict, which is fine for a movie as long as they can keep with good ways of conveying that conflict. But WW2 has been done so much better in so many other films, and the fact that visually every scene this movie bled together, with some of the same shots even being re-used, made this feel like a very unfocused biopic.

 

It's technically well made, and all the performances are good. But it just didn't feel very dynamic. The sheer importance of the true story keeps it interesting, but this wouldn't have gotten near a BP nomination if it weren't for Oldman

 

B-

[aabattery]

4 hours ago, filmlover said:

WOULD YOU STOP INTERRUPTING ME WHILE I AM INTERRUPTING YOU?!

 

I'm still kinda annoyed this got a Best Picture nomination.

 

Eh. Hard to get mad when it's clear a lot of people genuinely do like it a lot. I know my parents did.