Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

The Darkest Hour Film

Went to the Cinema on Friday to watch it, great film. I’m not strong on history so I’ve learnt a lot and all I can say is thank Christ we had Churchill as PM otherwise things would’ve been very different today.
«13456

Comments

  • There's a new films thread.
    Have seen the film twice, and it's great, but the New Films thread is the one for you I think.
  • JamesSeed said:

    There's a new films thread.
    Have seen the film twice, and it's great, but the New Films thread is the one for you I think.

    I know but I thought this deserves a thread seeing this film is referring to the 2nd world war as well.
  • Great post henners
  • have only been to the cinema twice in recent years - went to the reclining seats one at bluewater - v good.

    i thought it was great - the tube scene was a bit silly i thought and didnt need to be in there - my only citique

    agree with @Henry Irving regarding the history aspects

  • DiscoCAFC said:

    Went to the Cinema on Friday to watch it, great film. I’m not strong on history so I’ve learnt a lot and all I can say is thank Christ we had Churchill as PM otherwise things would’ve been very different today.



    Attlee was a far stronger character than portrayed (he was field officer in WW1) who Churchill respected. Attlee won the war at home as Churchill won the war overseas.

    Ironically, Attlee fought in the Gallipoli campaign, masterminded by Churchill and which cost him his position in the cabinet. Even more ironically, Attlee believed that it was a great strategy and failed only because it was poorly implemented on the ground. He believed Churchill was a bold strategist as a result.
  • Jints said:

    DiscoCAFC said:

    Went to the Cinema on Friday to watch it, great film. I’m not strong on history so I’ve learnt a lot and all I can say is thank Christ we had Churchill as PM otherwise things would’ve been very different today.



    Attlee was a far stronger character than portrayed (he was field officer in WW1) who Churchill respected. Attlee won the war at home as Churchill won the war overseas.

    Ironically, Attlee fought in the Gallipoli campaign, masterminded by Churchill and which cost him his position in the cabinet. Even more ironically, Attlee believed that it was a great strategy and failed only because it was poorly implemented on the ground. He believed Churchill was a bold strategist as a result.
    Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.

    I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.
  • Sponsored links:


  • DiscoCAFC said:

    Went to the Cinema on Friday to watch it, great film. I’m not strong on history so I’ve learnt a lot and all I can say is thank Christ we had Churchill as PM otherwise things would’ve been very different today.

    Things *are* very different today..!
  • edited February 5
    Darkest Hour was a 'film', not a documentary, and was afforded as much artistic licence as the writer/ director saw fit, and much like Dunkirk it was a poor one.
    Zulu, of the same ilk, was an infinitely superior film to the previously mentioned offerings.
  • Greenie said:

    Redskin said:

    Darkest Hour was a 'film', not a documentary, and was afforded as much artistic licence as the writer/ director saw fit, and much like Dunkirk it was a poor one.
    Zulu, of the same ilk, was an infinitely superior film to the previously mentioned offerings.

    Don't kid yourself, Zulu had as much artistic licence as the other two you mentioned.
    That's why I said it was of the same ilk.
  • I haven't seen the film, but want to. Just that picture of Oldman as WC that was paltered all over the buses a few weeks back was enough to do that. Unlike Henry, I'm not in a position to comment on the historical accuracy of this particular picture, but it is something that worries me about historical movies: For too many people films are their only source of reference and what's shown on the screen becomes, for them, the true course of events. I'm all in favour of films depicting 'real' events, I just hope people watch then with a health dose of openness to the fact that there may be other interpretations.
  • Stig said:

    I haven't seen the film, but want to. Just that picture of Oldman as WC that was paltered all over the buses a few weeks back was enough to do that. Unlike Henry, I'm not in a position to comment on the historical accuracy of this particular picture, but it is something that worries me about historical movies: For too many people films are their only source of reference and what's shown on the screen becomes, for them, the true course of events. I'm all in favour of films depicting 'real' events, I just hope people watch then with a health dose of openness to the fact that there may be other interpretations.

    It is worth seeing
    Oldman is very good as WSC and as a portrait of him as a real person rather than a legend it is good.

    The Tory MPs are cartoon characters.

    Ok the tube scene never happened but it's a device to show that the public were all behind WSC.

    That too is debatable as Mass Observation showed.
  • I went to see it last week as I'd been given a gift card for Christmas. Firstly, couldn't get over how damn expensive it is to see a film now (bear in mind the last time I went to the cinema was to see Django Unchained 5 years ago) £12.75 for a regular uncomfortable seat. Only left me with a couple of quid for pick n mix.
    The film was very good, though, apart from that tube scene.
  • Jints said:

    DiscoCAFC said:

    Went to the Cinema on Friday to watch it, great film. I’m not strong on history so I’ve learnt a lot and all I can say is thank Christ we had Churchill as PM otherwise things would’ve been very different today.



    Attlee was a far stronger character than portrayed (he was field officer in WW1) who Churchill respected. Attlee won the war at home as Churchill won the war overseas.

    Ironically, Attlee fought in the Gallipoli campaign, masterminded by Churchill and which cost him his position in the cabinet. Even more ironically, Attlee believed that it was a great strategy and failed only because it was poorly implemented on the ground. He believed Churchill was a bold strategist as a result.
    Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.

    I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.
    Legs had gone
    Bit close to the bone.
  • Redskin said:

    Darkest Hour was a 'film', not a documentary, and was afforded as much artistic licence as the writer/ director saw fit, and much like Dunkirk it was a poor one.
    Zulu, of the same ilk, was an infinitely superior film to the previously mentioned offerings.

    .

    I don't think you'll get very far as a film critic.
  • Jints said:

    DiscoCAFC said:

    Went to the Cinema on Friday to watch it, great film. I’m not strong on history so I’ve learnt a lot and all I can say is thank Christ we had Churchill as PM otherwise things would’ve been very different today.



    Attlee was a far stronger character than portrayed (he was field officer in WW1) who Churchill respected. Attlee won the war at home as Churchill won the war overseas.

    Ironically, Attlee fought in the Gallipoli campaign, masterminded by Churchill and which cost him his position in the cabinet. Even more ironically, Attlee believed that it was a great strategy and failed only because it was poorly implemented on the ground. He believed Churchill was a bold strategist as a result.
    Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.

    I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.
    Legs had gone
    Bit close to the bone.
    A light hearted reference to jj.
    Not sure how you interpreted it
  • Sponsored links:


  • Yeah but Close encounters of the third kind and ET were accurate accounts of history. So it’s not often they get it wrong innit.
  • Redskin said:

    Darkest Hour was a 'film', not a documentary, and was afforded as much artistic licence as the writer/ director saw fit, and much like Dunkirk it was a poor one.
    Zulu, of the same ilk, was an infinitely superior film to the previously mentioned offerings.

    .

    I don't think you'll get very far as a film critic.
    And why might that be?

  • He was not elected as PM again 1 year after the war ended ? Ungrateful country . Surprised he lived as long as he did. Whiskey at breakfast and bottle of champagne at lunch not exactly the healthiest of diets if you believe the film
  • edited February 5
    ct_addick said:

    He was not elected as PM again 1 year after the war ended ? Ungrateful country . Surprised he lived as long as he did. Whiskey at breakfast and bottle of champagne at lunch not exactly the healthiest of diets if you believe the film

    Two months after the war ended. People threw stones at him at Walthamstow dogs during that campaign, he was so unpopular with many working class people. Clearly he was a national icon and war hero too. I enjoyed the film but the way it was portrayed it was only Labour that wanted him in, which as Henry says isn’t true.

    In addition there were only 154 Labour MPs returned in 1935 (the previous election) and 400-odd Tories and National Liberals, but you’d never have thought that from the parliamentary debates portrayed.
  • 1945 election was 5 July, war ended 15 August.
  • ct_addick said:

    He was not elected as PM again 1 year after the war ended ? Ungrateful country . Surprised he lived as long as he did. Whiskey at breakfast and bottle of champagne at lunch not exactly the healthiest of diets if you believe the film

    He was in 1951 though.

  • ct_addick said:

    He was not elected as PM again 1 year after the war ended ? Ungrateful country . Surprised he lived as long as he did. Whiskey at breakfast and bottle of champagne at lunch not exactly the healthiest of diets if you believe the film

    Two months after the war ended. People threw stones at him at Walthamstow dogs during that campaign, he was so unpopular with many working class people. Clearly he was a national icon and war hero too. I enjoyed the film but the way it was portrayed it was only Labour that wanted him in, which as Henry says isn’t true.

    In addition there were only 154 Labour MPs returned in 1935 (the previous election) and 400-odd Tories and National Liberals, but you’d never have thought that from the parliamentary debates portrayed.
    It's a film.
  • 1945 election was 5 July, war ended 15 August.

    It ended in Europe in May, as you know, and that was the trigger for the election to be called because Attlee said he would withdraw from the coalition.
  • The war did not legally end until 1991

    ;)

    But in all seriousness the collapse of Nazi Germany and the fact that more or less all British forces (the only exceptions being those in colonies in the Far East but otherwise mainland UK was no longer under threat) was the trigger for the election in 1945.
Sign In or Register to comment.