Far from film's darkest hour, and Oldman's finest hour

Rating: 8/10 (13 January 2018)

Have a real fondness for biopics, regardless of the treatment of history and their subjects for some. Consider Winston Churchill one of the most interesting and extraordinary 20th century, and history in general, figures and Gary Oldman one of the best actors working today that in recent years deserved more roles more worthy of his talents. The rest of the cast are also talented and while Joe Wright is hit and miss for me a few of his films are good to outstanding.
'Darkest Hour' was to me a very good film (the best of Joe Wright's films post-'Hanna'), and there is much more to it than the "Oscar bait" that a lot of films and performances getting multiple award attention get untruly and unfairly dismissed and what 'Darkest Hour' is likely to be dismissed as in the future. There is also much more to it than the universally acclaimed, and more than deservedly so, lead performance. Sure, its approach to history is dodgy to say the least (true of quite a number of biopics), but as a film on its own there are a lot of great qualities.
By all means 'Darkest Hour' is not perfect. The effects do look fake and personally really do wish that the female roles were as strongly written as the male ones. The male characters have a lot of meat to them, while Lily James especially has a role that's underwritten and almost thankless.
There are a couple of instances where the narrative isn't so strong. The phone conversation with Churchill and Roosevelt does contradict and distort Roosevelt himself and the relationship between the two. More problematic was the much criticised London-tube scene, feels like it goes on forever and takes the meaning of farcical too far.
Gary Oldman, nearly unrecognisable, is just extraordinary as Churchill and, although he is one of the best, most underrated and most versatile actors today with many great performances under his belt, this is his finest hour, a performance not just deserving of multiple awards but it is one deserving of an award sweep if it's not too late to be considered for an Oscar nomination (if so, he's been completely robbed). He makes Churchill a compellingly real figure, one that has struggles with his fame and power and not just a powerful figure important for his decisions, and not an impersonation or caricature.
The rest of the cast support him beautifully, Kristin Scott Thomas is affectingly elegant and stately, and her chemistry with Oldman is suitably tender. Ben Mendelssohn and Ronald Pickup (as a more conflicted Chamberlain as usually painted) are particularly good of the male support. Despite her charm, James doesn't have enough to her role to shine properly.
Visually, 'Darkest Hour' looks great. The period detail is both beautiful and atmospheric, the detail gotten spot on. The photography is inventive and striking. Wright's direction is not subtle (pretty bullish actually), Wright has never been known for subtlety, but it is a confident, playful and passionate directing job, with some emphasis on seriousness but not overly-so, some of his best since 'Atonement'. The music is stirring but at other times lyrically soothing and suitably sombre on occasions.
Furthermore, 'Darkest Hour' is thoughtfully and confidently scripted, while there are playful elements the darker and murkier side is emphasised more. Churchill's speeches have the inspiring power that they should do and the historical events that should wrench the gut do so but in a relatively restrained way. The story is compelling, what could have been stuffy and dull is actually lively and with a dark bullish and bold approach that still takes it seriously. It is very familiar and there is not much new to what we already know, but the approach 'Darkest Hour' takes is very much different to what one expects.
Overall, very good film with a few drawbacks but also an extraordinary performance from Oldman. 8/10 Bethany Cox