Joe Wright 'Darkest Hour' Interview: Creating a Real Winston Churchill
Winston Churchill
Given that Oscar season is upon us  itâs hardly surprising that Darkest Hour is being pushed  first and foremost  as an awards showcase for Gary Oldman  who excels in the thunderous role of  Winston Churchill . But the film works so well because of the care its director Joe Wright (Pride & Prejudice  Atonement  Anna Karenina) takes in balancing the British prime ministerâs big  theatrical public presence with his more tormented inner life. Darkest Hour follows  Churchill  in May 1940   his  first month in office  as  he  seeks to balance the desires of  his  political party  which wants to avoid mass bloodshed on the scale of World War I  against  his  own resolute belief in resisting Nazi Germany at all costs.  Churchill  was seen by the party (and by Britainâs King George VI) as a warmonger responsible for the disastrous Gallipoli Campaign in the last war. But  he  doubted  himself   too:  Wright  depicts  the leader  wondering if  his  demands of âvictory at all costsâ from  his  country were too much. Related Story Darkest Hour Is a Thunderous Churchill Biopic The Atlantic talked to  Wright  about crafting a fresh portrayal of Churchillâs character  the typical pitfalls that come with making a biopic of a well-known public figure  and whether audiences might see any present-day parallels in Darkest Hour. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. David Sims: Recently  thereâs been such a glut of Winston Churchills on screen. Were you worried about that at all going into Darkest Hour?
 Joe Wright : I wasnât  because they hadnât happened [yet]. When I started working on the movie  it was like January 2016  and so The Crown hadnât aired  Dunkirk hadnât happened  a  Churchill  movie hadnât happened  and so I felt like I was being quite original  really. It seemed like one of those ideas  like Pride & Prejudice  that was so obvious it was surprising. Because there hadnât been a Pride & Prejudice movie  thereâd just been the TV series  and there hadnât been a  Churchill  movie. But really  I just responded to the screenplay and the story  about a man who is placed in this impossible position where no one wants him  and who suffers a massive crisis of confidence and doubt. And through doubt  he discovers wisdom. I responded to that on a personal level  and then  it âs Churchill . Sims: But it is interesting to think about  his  interiorityâthatâs not something  Churchill  stories usually touch on as much. Wright: Especially in England   Churchill  is this giant bronze statue sitting on a plinth 15 feet high. [This was] the opportunity to bring  him  down from that plinth  and instead of facing the icon  facing the man who has been reappropriated by so many different parties.  He âs become a kind of icon of British nationalism  and I donât think thatâs who  he  was at all. So I wanted to reclaim  him  as an individual  and say  this man  was deeply flawed  profoundly complicated  and at this point in history  he  kind of saved the world. Those flaws are integral to  the man  and to  his  achievements  and thatâs what I find really interestingâthe idea that our flaws and our virtues are kind of the same thing.
Sims: By  his  flaws  do you mean  his  stubbornness  and  his  bellicose nature? Wright: Yes  and his extraordinary will  really. Will is a dangerous thing  and can be detrimental as well as a virtue. Sims: The image youâre talking about   him  as this iconic symbol of Britishness â¦ I didnât really know that [when  he  took office]  he  was greeted with such suspicion in Parliament. Wright: He was one of the first great [public-relations] prime ministers: The whole look  the hat  the cigar  the âVâ for victory  was all carefully considered. We have this idea that  he  was always the embodiment of the bulldog spirit  but actually thatâs not the case. Thatâs one of the things I think people might find interesting and new about this movie: how suspicious  his  own party was of  him   and that it was this moment that turned and defined  him   and defined our history. Sims: Because  he âs an unproven person coming into office  in a lot of ways. Wright:  He âs not trusted.  He âs made a lot of mistakes.  He âs had a long parliamentary career;  he âs been in Parliament since  his  20s.  His  policies on womenâs suffrage   his  policy on Indian independence  and what happened in the Gallipoli Campaign [of the First World War] was a complete disaster. The invasion of the Dardanelles was a great idea militarily  but time slipped away from [British forces] and they didnât act quickly enough. And when it became apparent that things werenât going to go as planned   he  should have withdrawn  but  his  will forced it forward and caused many deaths. Thatâs what I mean by will being a detriment as well as a benefit.
Sims: So when the script comes to you  whatâs the process like for casting  Churchill ? Because so many thesps have bitten into the role. Wright: Which is the dangerâI donât want another thesp biting into it. A lot of those guys of a certain age kind of look right. But when casting  you can either choose someone who looks right or someone who has the essence of the character. And I always think itâs wiser to choose the latter. I always had this idea that  Churchill  should be a dynamo of energy.  He  walked fast;  he  was a little man. Sims: You always think of  Churchill  as hulking. Wright: Right  and from all the footage I was watching  physically and mentally  he  was incredibly energized to the point that you think  he  might short-circuit and collapse  and thatâs probably when the depressions came. So I wanted someone with a kind of intensity  and Gary has always had  and still has  that intensity as an actor. So then the question became about the physical transformation  which is less of an issue to me than the character transformation. Gary and I talked  we discussed options  and we thought this guy Kazuhiro [Tsuji] would be the man to see. He was retired  living in a warehouse in downtown Los Angeles  making sculptures  and we went to see him. And over a period of five months  we developed the exact balance between looking like  Churchill  and getting Gary âs performance. Sims: Was it hard to win Gary over  or was  Churchill  something  he  was ready to sink  his  teeth into?
Wright: I think  Churchill  was like a dog in the corner that was always there  and that Gary was always kind of turning away from. And yet  finally  he had to address it. I felt that maybe heâd be the kind of actor whoâd do his thing and Iâd arrange everything around him. And that didnât sound great  but I was interested to have a front-row seat to Garyâs performance. And then what I discovered is that heâs an actor who wants direction  and so it became a very close collaboration. We made the film together  we walked through it together  and it was one of the most gratifying creative partnerships Iâve ever experienced. Sims: With Ben Mendelsohn as George VI  thatâs another character whoâs been recently done in The Kingâs Speech and The Crown. Wright: The obvious choices were British  and the fear was that weâd get a lesser version of Colin Firth. So I knew it had to be a kind of off-center choice. I was looking at Ben  and they look kind of similar  in profile. And George had a temper  and Ben has that kind of vital energy. And the fact that heâs not British was actually kind of important to that. Sims: Just because thereâs less reverence for it? Wright: Yeah  just because he didnât come with the British baggage. Iâm not necessarily a royalist. Iâm not necessarily a republican in the British sense  but when dealing with the royal family youâre always dealing with the institution of monarchy. And actually  what Ben brilliantly brought to it was a sense of dealing just with the individual â¦ this very specific individual in this very specific time in this very specific dilemma.
Given that Oscar season is upon us  itâs hardly surprising that Darkest Hour is being pushed  first and foremost  as an awards showcase for Gary Oldman  who excels in the thunderous role of  [TGT]  . But the film works so well because of the care its director Joe Wright (Pride & Prejudice  Atonement  Anna Karenina) takes in balancing the British prime ministerâs big  theatrical public presence with his more tormented inner life. Darkest Hour follows  Churchill  in May 1940   his  first month in office  as  he  seeks to balance the desires of  his  political party  which wants to avoid mass bloodshed on the scale of World War I  against  his  own resolute belief in resisting Nazi Germany at all costs.   [TGT] was seen by the party (and by Britainâs King George VI) as a warmonger responsible for the disastrous Gallipoli Campaign in the last war. But   [TGT]   doubted   [TGT]    too:  Wright  depicts  the leader  wondering if  his  demands of âvictory at all costsâ from  his  country were too much. Related Story Darkest Hour Is a Thunderous Churchill Biopic The Atlantic talked to  Wright  about crafting a fresh portrayal of Churchillâs character  the typical pitfalls that come with making a biopic of a well-known public figure  and whether audiences might see any present-day parallels in Darkest Hour. This interview has been edited for length and clarity. David Sims: Recently  thereâs been such a glut of Winston Churchills on screen. Were you worried about that at all going into Darkest Hour?
 Joe Wright : I wasnât  because they hadnât happened [yet]. When I started working on the movie  it was like January 2016  and so The Crown hadnât aired  Dunkirk hadnât happened  a   [TGT]   movie hadnât happened  and so I felt like I was being quite original  really. It seemed like one of those ideas  like Pride & Prejudice  that was so obvious it was surprising. Because there hadnât been a Pride & Prejudice movie  thereâd just been the TV series  and there hadnât been a   [TGT]   movie. But really  I just responded to the screenplay and the story  about a man who is placed in this impossible position where no one wants him  and who suffers a massive crisis of confidence and doubt. And through doubt  he discovers wisdom. I responded to that on a personal level  and then  it âs Churchill . Sims: But it is interesting to think about  his  interiorityâthatâs not something  Churchill  stories usually touch on as much. Wright: Especially in England   Churchill  is this giant bronze statue sitting on a plinth 15 feet high. [This was] the opportunity to bring  him  down from that plinth  and instead of facing the icon  facing the man who has been reappropriated by so many different parties.  He âs become a kind of icon of British nationalism  and I donât think thatâs who  he  was at all. So I wanted to reclaim  him  as an individual  and say  this man  was deeply flawed  profoundly complicated  and at this point in history  he  kind of saved the world. Those flaws are integral to  the man  and to  his  achievements  and thatâs what I find really interestingâthe idea that our flaws and our virtues are kind of the same thing.
Sims: By  his  flaws  do you mean  his  stubbornness  and  his  bellicose nature? Wright: Yes  and his extraordinary will  really. Will is a dangerous thing  and can be detrimental as well as a virtue. Sims: The image youâre talking about   him  as this iconic symbol of Britishness â¦ I didnât really know that [when  he  took office]  he  was greeted with such suspicion in Parliament. Wright: He was one of the first great [public-relations] prime ministers: The whole look  the hat  the cigar  the âVâ for victory  was all carefully considered. We have this idea that  he  was always the embodiment of the bulldog spirit  but actually thatâs not the case. Thatâs one of the things I think people might find interesting and new about this movie: how suspicious  his  own party was of  him   and that it was this moment that turned and defined  him   and defined our history. Sims: Because  he âs an unproven person coming into office  in a lot of ways. Wright:  He âs not trusted.  He âs made a lot of mistakes.  He âs had a long parliamentary career;  he âs been in Parliament since  his  20s.  His  policies on womenâs suffrage   his  policy on Indian independence  and what happened in the Gallipoli Campaign [of the First World War] was a complete disaster. The invasion of the Dardanelles was a great idea militarily  but time slipped away from [British forces] and they didnât act quickly enough. And when it became apparent that things werenât going to go as planned   he  should have withdrawn  but  his  will forced it forward and caused many deaths. Thatâs what I mean by will being a detriment as well as a benefit.
Sims: So when the script comes to you  whatâs the process like for casting  Churchill ? Because so many thesps have bitten into the role. Wright: Which is the dangerâI donât want another thesp biting into it. A lot of those guys of a certain age kind of look right. But when casting  you can either choose someone who looks right or someone who has the essence of the character. And I always think itâs wiser to choose the latter. I always had this idea that  Churchill  should be a dynamo of energy.  He  walked fast;  he  was a little man. Sims: You always think of  Churchill  as hulking. Wright: Right  and from all the footage I was watching  physically and mentally  he  was incredibly energized to the point that you think  he  might short-circuit and collapse  and thatâs probably when the depressions came. So I wanted someone with a kind of intensity  and Gary has always had  and still has  that intensity as an actor. So then the question became about the physical transformation  which is less of an issue to me than the character transformation. Gary and I talked  we discussed options  and we thought this guy Kazuhiro [Tsuji] would be the man to see. He was retired  living in a warehouse in downtown Los Angeles  making sculptures  and we went to see him. And over a period of five months  we developed the exact balance between looking like  Churchill  and getting Gary âs performance. Sims: Was it hard to win Gary over  or was  Churchill  something  he  was ready to sink  his  teeth into?
Wright: I think  Churchill  was like a dog in the corner that was always there  and that Gary was always kind of turning away from. And yet  finally  he had to address it. I felt that maybe heâd be the kind of actor whoâd do his thing and Iâd arrange everything around him. And that didnât sound great  but I was interested to have a front-row seat to Garyâs performance. And then what I discovered is that heâs an actor who wants direction  and so it became a very close collaboration. We made the film together  we walked through it together  and it was one of the most gratifying creative partnerships Iâve ever experienced. Sims: With Ben Mendelsohn as George VI  thatâs another character whoâs been recently done in The Kingâs Speech and The Crown. Wright: The obvious choices were British  and the fear was that weâd get a lesser version of Colin Firth. So I knew it had to be a kind of off-center choice. I was looking at Ben  and they look kind of similar  in profile. And George had a temper  and Ben has that kind of vital energy. And the fact that heâs not British was actually kind of important to that. Sims: Just because thereâs less reverence for it? Wright: Yeah  just because he didnât come with the British baggage. Iâm not necessarily a royalist. Iâm not necessarily a republican in the British sense  but when dealing with the royal family youâre always dealing with the institution of monarchy. And actually  what Ben brilliantly brought to it was a sense of dealing just with the individual â¦ this very specific individual in this very specific time in this very specific dilemma.