The hero

Rating: 6/10 (31 December 2017)

As I arrived in the theatre to see Darkest Hour I happened to sit next to a British couple who proceeded to tell me they had to come because Churchill was their hero. This is precisely the point. This is not a movie about the start of WWII or about battles or diplomacy. It is entirely about the nomination of Churchill to be Prime Minister by a skeptical George VI and about how he managed to stay in power despite the disdain of his Conservative party and the desperate situation Britain faced as Holland, Belgium and France were overrun by the Nazi Blitzkrieg.
Churchill had been disdained by Conservatives and many other Britons ever since his Gallipoli disaster during WWI and also because of his rather fickle association with any British political party, whether Conservative or Liberal. Churchill was also suspect in the ranks of Labour because of his dedication to British Imperialism and his brutal dismissal of all Indian strivings for independence. Churchill had no following but the story is about how he created a following among the British people, one which would only last for five years at most.
The film takes place during only a few weeks prior to the rescue of the British troops at Dunkirk. There are no battle scenes to excite the public. There is only his mental gymnastics to defeat the enemy, not Hitler but Lord Halifax and the former Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain who sought negotiations with Hitler about a peace deal.
Churchill in a mood of despair even agreed to preliminary feelers to the Axis through Mussolini about a deal, but he at the same time worked for the evacuation of the British armed forces at Dunkirk, perhaps persuading Hitler thereby to let the British flee back home from the danger of annihilation.
The acting by Gary Oldman is superb, the best Oldman has ever achieved. But the film has several doubtful features. First, the belated support Churchill found with King George is ascribed to the king's fear of having to leave Britain for Canada, a move for safety which would also make the monarchy weaker than ever, something not desired after the abdication of Edward VIII to marry "the woman he loved." Secondly, Churchill's ride to Westminster to deliver his defiant speech against peace with Hitler took place according to the movie on the London tube where he discussed his dilemmas with ordinary Britons whose names he took down and referred to in his speech a few hours later. I tend to doubt the historical accuracy of these two events, especially the tube ride.
In the end Lord Halifax, while admitting defeat in the face of Churchill's triumph in Parliament in rejecting anything but blood, sweat and tears, spoke the theme of the movie and of Churchill's whole career. Halifax told Chamberlain who was dying of cancer, that Churchill had mobilized, not Britain and its armed forces, but something evidently more important: he had mobilized the English language. This was an offhanded tribute from someone who disdained Churchill but had to admit his success in oratory, a sort of Cicero for 1940. He expressed the high moral beliefs of Englishmen and Englishwomen in the face of German brutality and monstrousness. Thus Churchill emerges in the film as the hero. The needed support from America would only come with America's entry into war after Pearl Harbor. In 1940 FDR would and could do nothing for Britain. Churchill and FDR needed to thank Japanese Imperial aggression for their own salvation.
Thus the movie is only for a very specialized audience, more interested in Churchill as a person than in military affairs. This means its appeal with necessarily be limited to those who seek real understanding, not mere entertainment.