4.5 stars. Rated PG-13, for dramatic intensity and war sequences
By Derrick Bang • Originally published in The Davis Enterprise, 12.29.17
Even knowing the outcome, thanks
to the obvious historical record and ongoing pop culture reminders, director
Joe Wright and scripter Anthony McCarten maintain a remarkable level of
stomach-clenching suspense during every moment of this enthralling drama.
Scene by scene, amid political
clashes and confrontations, we endure palpable panic: Are our memories faulty?
Will it all go wrong?
No, of course not. But the total,
we-are-there immersion is quite impressive.
Darkest Hour takes place during a tempestuous
several weeks in the spring of 1940: from May 10, when 65-year-old,
hard-drinking Winston Churchill is named to replace Neville Chamberlain as the
British Prime Minister; to June 4, in the aftermath of the Dunkirk miracle that
gave additional weight to Churchill’s “We shall fight on the beaches” speech in
the House of Commons.
Fans of this period in British
history are enjoying an embarrassment of riches; we’ve now experienced these
events from strikingly different points of view, thanks to summer’s Dunkirk, television’s The Crown and now Wright’s Darkest Hour.
As depicted by McCarten — a
double Oscar nominee, as scripter and producer of 2014’s The Theory of Everything — Churchill’s rise to that galvanic speech
was anything but assured, and Chamberlain was far from disgraced and impotent,
after being shunted aside. He and Viscount Halifax (née Edward Frederick
Lindley Wood) remained relentless in their quest for appeasement by offering a
treaty to Hitler, even as — particularly
as — Western Europe’s countries fell, like a row of dominoes, against the Nazi
assault.
And Chamberlain’s influence was
considerable, as he still controlled the Conservative half of the House of Commons,
all of the members fully prepared — in blinkered, knee-jerk fashion — to vote
party over conscience, thereby stripping Churchill of his new position. (And
boy, doesn’t that resonate these
days, on this side of the pond!)
The political infighting is both
fascinating and horrifying, but the film’s true power comes from Gary Oldman’s
sublime portrayal of Churchill: one of those rare performances that is so
thorough, so all-consuming, that it ceases to be acting. As far as I’m
concerned, Wright and McCarten somehow found the means to resurrect Churchill,
so he could star in his own story.


