The Darkest Hour Film
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.0 -
Enjoyed the film but as history it was terrible.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.
nearly everything you would have learnt about history was wrong.
Churchill didn't invent and mastermind operation dynamo.
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.
Labour effectively put Churchill in power by refusing to serve in a national government under Chamberlin.
Chamberlin started re-arming in 1938. Too late but he saw the threat and wasn't an appeaser in 1940. He knew he was dying and back Churchill until his death.
One stop on the circle line takes about 50 seconds, not 10 minutes. And Churchill never got a tube or bus in his life.
Churchill did have support in the tory party, just not all of it.
It is spot on with Churchill as a man with depression, a drink problem and doubts not trusted by many and sometimes with good reason.
But also as a great war leader and great orator who saw the fascist threat long before many others.31 -
Great post henners1
-
Thanks for the spoilers about the Circle Line scene, Henry! Not worth watching it now.13
-
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
0 -
Sorry, they did get the right rolling stock though.hawksmoor said:Thanks for the spoilers about the Circle Line scene, Henry! Not worth watching it now.
9 -
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.Henry Irving 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.
0 -
Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.Jints said:
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.Henry Irving 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.
I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.0 -
Legs had goneHenry Irving said:
Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.Jints said:
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.Henry Irving 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.
I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.10 - Sponsored links:
-
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.
0 -
Don't kid yourself, Zulu had as much artistic licence as the other two you mentioned.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.
5 -
That's why I said it was of the same ilk.Greenie said:
Don't kid yourself, Zulu had as much artistic licence as the other two you mentioned.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.0 -
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.2
-
It is worth seeingStig 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.
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.2 -
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.1 -
Bit close to the bone.blackpool72 said:
Legs had goneHenry Irving said:
Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.Jints said:
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.Henry Irving 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.
I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.0 -
.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.0 -
A light hearted reference to jj.Alwaysneil said:
Bit close to the bone.blackpool72 said:
Legs had goneHenry Irving said:
Indeed. If only we had an expert on Gallipoli on this site to give us more information on that.Jints said:
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.Henry Irving 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.
I think Attlee was the 2nd to last man to be evacuated from Gallipoli too.
Not sure how you interpreted it0 - 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.0
-
And why might that be?hoof_it_up_to_benty 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.
I don't think you'll get very far as a film critic.
0 -
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
1 -
You have to look who won the 1945 election (the war wasn't over btw) and why before saying "ungrateful nation".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
The nation and serving soldiers in particular elected Churchill's deputy because his party offered a welfare state.
It was nothing to do with being ungrateful. People wanted change and not a return to the pre-war status quo.6 -
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.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
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.1 -
1945 election was 5 July, war ended 15 August.0
-
It's a film.Airman Brown said:
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.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
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.0 -
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.Henry Irving said:1945 election was 5 July, war ended 15 August.
1 -
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 1945.0
