Darkest hour

[Phil Bullock]

Went to see this on its release date yesterday evening. The reviews are right... If the period of history is of interest to you then go and see it you will not be disappointed. Don't expect Cgi and other flummery....it's based on the performance of the actors and is excellent.

[Purley Oaks]

Yes, confirm all that. Phil, saw it yesterday. Think there was a touch of CGI with the small boats and some aircraft shots, but nothing major. Wonderful performance by Gary Oldman as the man himself.

Mal

[Phil Bullock]

Cheers Mal

 

Yes I guess Heinkel 111s are short supply these days!

 

Phil

[Legend]

Yes totally absorbing . Gary Oldman is totally believable as Winston Churchill.

 

Was there some poetic licence in the film or did Churchill actually go on the underground to find out people’s opinions?

[Edwardian]

Very much enjoyed it.

 

I was impressed with the way the film-makers created a back-drop of dirty, smoke blackened London and the grey, desiccated, old men who sat in Parliament, which all helped to generate a tangible sense of despair and defeatism.  Tired old men governing a tired old country, still haunted by the ghosts of the Great War.  The film made it seem a wonder that we did not give up, and, of course, that it was the determination and force of personality of Churchill that tipped a very finely balanced situation.   

 

It also made it seem a great leap of faith on, first Churchill's part, and then everyone whom he persuaded. All the more impressive when you reflect that, after the point at which the film ends, we still had the Blitz and over 18 months of standing alone to come before anyone could really say whether fighting on had been the right decision.  Unless, of course, you accept that to go down fighting is better than survival at any cost, which was Churchill's central message in the film.

 

Very well done, I thought.

[Phil Bullock]

Yes totally absorbing . Gary Oldman is totally believable as Winston Churchill.

 

Was there some poetic licence in the film or did Churchill actually go on the underground to find out people’s opinions?

 

I reckon that's poetic licence !

 

The film has pushed a visit to the Churchill war rooms to the top of my must do list...

 

http://www.iwm.org.uk/visits/churchill-war-rooms

 

Phil

[Phil Bullock]

Very much enjoyed it.

 

I was impressed with the way the film-makers created a back-drop of dirty, smoke blackened London and the grey, desiccated, old men who sat in Parliament, which all helped to generate a tangible sense of despair and defeatism.  Tired old men governing a tired old country, still haunted by the ghosts of the Great War.  The film made it seem a wonder that we did not give up, and, of course, that it was the determination and force of personality of Churchill that tipped a very finely balanced situation.   

 

It also made it seem a great leap of faith on, first Churchill's part, and then everyone whom he persuaded. All the more impressive when you reflect that, after the point at which the film ends, we still had the Blitz and over 18 months of standing alone to come before anyone could really say whether fighting on had been the right decision.  Unless, of course, you accept that to go down fighting is better than survival at any cost, which was Churchill's central message in the film.

 

Very well done, I thought.

 

And we would probably ended up in a very different place if Edward VIII had not abdicated.

 

The Crown is well worth watching on Netflix too...

 

Phil

[Edwardian]

And we would probably ended up in a very different place if Edward VIII had not abdicated.

 

The Crown is well worth watching on Netflix too...

 

Phil

 

Right there on both counts!

 

I did think George the VI was particularly well cast in Darkest Hour

 

And, of course, the film depends for its success entirely on how Oldman performed as Churchill.  Brilliant. 

[Calimero]

He was known to just disappear and ask the public their views, whilst the Underground scene might not have occurred it is in character.

 

Went to see it yesterday and had to explain to someone, who was tutting, after that there has to be some artistic licence based on fact and that if the film was made based on all actualities it would be a tediously boring film!

[DavidB-AU]

I finally got around to seeing it over the weekend. If Gary Oldman doesn't win an Oscar for this I'll be very disappointed. And I'd never have picked Ben Mendelsohn as being able to play George VI but it was done really well.
 
The scene on the Tube was very amusing and was in character even if it never actually happened. While the train was 1959 stock, the interior was nicely fitted out to resemble 1938 stock. Even with the suspension of disbelief it did grate a bit that riding one station from St James' Park to Westminster took around 6 minutes. I don't think the Tube was that slow even in 1940!  
 
Something that puzzled me was the Tube map when Churchill is asking how to get to Westminster. There was only a fleeting glimpse of it but it didn't look like the 1933 Beck map, the 1935 map with the oversized interchange diamonds or the 1940 map with the interlocking interchange rings. Was it completely made up for the film?

 

I was a bit miffed about the way the 30th Brigade was portrayed in the Siege of Calais, supposedly suffering 60% casualties and then being ordered to fight on in a suicide attack with no chance of relief. In fact the 30th only suffered about 300 dead and 200 wounded (many of the wounded were evacuated by sea) before being overrun, with around 3500 being taken prisoner. The Germans twice offered them the chance to surrender and both times Brigadier Nicholson refused. Nicholson survived the siege and died as a POW.

Cheers
David

Edited January 15, 2018 by DavidB-AU

[Phil Bullock]

Thanks for combining threads David

 

As you say some suspension of belief is needed. As for the OSCARs are they American based? If so what chance a British actor playing a quintessentially British part in a time period that the Americans had little or no direct historical influence on? Ed Murrow and a speaking part for Trueman are the only US involvement I recall in the film. Forgive my cynicism and I would like to be proved wrong of course - his performance undoubtedly merits the highest recognition! 

 

Phil

[rockershovel]

Very much enjoyed it.

 

I was impressed with the way the film-makers created a back-drop of dirty, smoke blackened London and the grey, desiccated, old men who sat in Parliament, which all helped to generate a tangible sense of despair and defeatism.  Tired old men governing a tired old country, still haunted by the ghosts of the Great War.  The film made it seem a wonder that we did not give up, and, of course, that it was the determination and force of personality of Churchill that tipped a very finely balanced situation.   

 

It also made it seem a great leap of faith on, first Churchill's part, and then everyone whom he persuaded. All the more impressive when you reflect that, after the point at which the film ends, we still had the Blitz and over 18 months of standing alone to come before anyone could really say whether fighting on had been the right decision.  Unless, of course, you accept that to go down fighting is better than survival at any cost, which was Churchill's central message in the film.

 

Very well done, I thought.

This is right at the top of my “must see” list.

 

It needs to be remembered that the “tired old men, haunted by the ghosts of the Great War” were actually perfectly correct; the Empire COULD NOT afford the cost of another major war, COULD NOT fight effectively when it came, and (had the Germans not invaded Russia within months of the Japanese attacking America, combined with Hitler’s militarily-pointless decision to declare war on America) in all probability WOULD NOT have succeeded.

 

My late parents were given to the view that “we had not won, though we would line up with the victors at the end”

[Metr0Land]

Not sure if the bit about Churchill on the tube was factual but there was the Mass Observation Survey which involved ordinary people keeping diaries and staffers going out into the public to record what people were actually saying.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-Observation

 

This was also the basis for the late Victoria Wood's fact-based drama Housewife 49

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housewife,_49

[rockershovel]

Not sure if the bit about Churchill on the tube was factual but there was the Mass Observation Survey which involved ordinary people keeping diaries and staffers going out into the public to record what people were actually saying.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass-Observation This was also the basis for the late Victoria Wood's fact-based drama Housewife 49https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Housewife,_49

It might also be a sort-of reference to Stanley Baldwin, who was generally believed to have regular chats with the Station Master when commuting to London, and enjoyed a great reputation for gauging the mood of the country

[Nearholmer]

I’m looking forward to seeing this, but from the point of view of London Transport trivia:

 

Having made the trip about seven zillion times, I know full well that St James’s Park to Westminster is a subsurface route, so wouldn’t have been by tube stock, whether 59 or 38 anyway.

 

I saw Mr Oldman being interviewed about it by, er, um, Jonathan Ross, possibly, and I was hugely impressed by what a down-to-earth, unpretentious chap he is. Very unlike some American starlet on the same show, who clearly thought that the world would be grateful to hear her commonplace witterings.

[Phil Bullock]

It might also be a sort-of reference to Stanley Baldwin, who was generally believed to have regular chats with the Station Master when commuting to London, and enjoyed a great reputation for gauging the mood of the country

 

Gauging the mood of the country? Could only be on a model railway thread!

 

Phil

[Nelson Jackson]

Saw this the other day and thought it was just amazing.

[jjb1970]

I'm looking forward to seeing this one, it sounds like it is a far better film than the other recent film on Churchill.

[Horsetan]

Was somewhat surprised to see this apparently available on DVD in Sainsbury's Apsley last Friday. I thought DVD release had to wait a few weeks/months until cinema time had been exhausted!?

[Metr0Land]

Not always the case these days - it depends on who the distributors think the market will be and whether they'd go to cinema or not. Sometimes the dvd is held back, other times not.

[Horsetan]

Not always the case these days - it depends on who the distributors think the market will be and whether they'd go to cinema or not. Sometimes the dvd is held back, other times not.

In that case, I'll buy the DVD. Unlikely to darken the door of a cinema.

[Phil Bullock]

In that case, I'll buy the DVD. Unlikely to darken the door of a cinema.

 

Are we talking of the same film I wonder? Dunkirk and Churchill are both out and Dunkirk has been prominent in Sainsburys over Xmas. Beware of these pale imitations

 

Phil

[Horsetan]

Are we talking of the same film I wonder?...

Sainsbury's was plugging the Darkest Hour DVD quite heavily.

[Phil Bullock]

Interesting - web forecasts Feb or March 2018 as release date. Please give a shout if it is available

 

Phil

[Metr0Land]

It's on pre-order at Amazon UK (other conglomerates available). I couldn't see a release date.