In May 1940, the fate of Western Europe hangs on British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, who must decide whether to negotiate with Adolf Hitler, or fight on knowing that it could mean a humiliating defeat for Britain and its empire.
During World War II, as Adolf Hitler's awesomely powerful Wehrmacht rampages across Europe, the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Neville Chamberlain, is forced to resign, recommending Winston Churchill as his replacement. But even in his early days as the country's leader, Churchill is under pressure to commence peace negotiations with the German dictator or to fight head-on the seemingly invincible Nazi regime, whatever the cost. However difficult and dangerous his decision may be, Churchill has no choice but to shine in the country's darkest hour.Written by
Director Joe Wright, who is British but has a deep affection for the United States and spends a lot of his time there, suggested that this film is directly relevant to the country's political turmoil under the leadership of maverick business billionaire Donald J. Trump and the concern this was causing for the rest of the world. He said, "There's a big question in America at the moment: what does good leadership look like? Churchill resisted when it mattered most, and as I travel around America I am really impressed and optimistic at the level of resistance happening in the U.S. at the moment. After George W. Bush was elected, it wasn't the same level; there was more apathy then. Now people are very vocal and that's really positive." See more »
Disclaimer in closing credits: "The depictions of tobacco smoking contained in this film are based solely on artistic consideration and are not intended to promote tobacco consumption. The Surgeon General has determined that there are serious health risks associated with smoking and with secondhand smoke." See more »
This film covers a period of real tension and drama. So why does the film have to invent fiction to tell the story? Perhaps modern film making prioritizes a flowing narrative over the truth, but to misrepresent so many people telling the story accurately would have provided more than sufficient content staggers me.
Oldman plays his part as written well. Chamberlain and Halifax are quite unconvincing though and many of the scenes are so unrepresentative of what would have happened in the Britain of 1940 ruins the fictitious plot line.
The number of historical inaccuracies are currently beyond counting, and many unecessary, for example Chamberlain was in pain in May 1940, but had yet to be diagnosed with cancer, and when he was he remained ignorant of the fact because his doctors elected not to tell him. Overall a huge let down.
70 of 109 people found this review helpful.
Was this review helpful to you?
| Report this