Movie Review The Darkest Hour

The Darkest Hour (2017) 

Directed by Joe Wright 

Written by Anthony McCarten 

Starring Gary Oldman, Kristen Scott Thomas, Lily James, Stephen Dillane, Ben Mendelsohn 

Release Date November 22nd, 2017 

With the release of the movie Darkest Hour starring Gary Oldman, there has been a new reckoning with the legacy of Sir Winston Churchill, one that has brought to light some of Churchill’s more horrific qualities. On his podcast Revisionist History, journalist Malcolm Gladwell reflected on Churchill with specific criticisms about the legendary Prime Minister’s policies toward India, policies that many feel were driven by Churchill’s Hitler-like disdain for the Indian people. Then there was the policy of strategic bombing in Germany which may have actually extended the war by two more years even as Churchill is recalled as that war’s great, heroic leader.

There is also talk of Churchill’s treatment of black people and women, none of it flattering. These revelations have cast a pall over the legacy of one of largest and most vaunted figures of the 20th Century. Thus, the release of a movie which chooses to focus on making the Prime Minister's legacy more suitably entertaining, it’s natural to cast a side eye at such a movie. Or one may be driven to madness trying to balance the notion that Darkest Hour is a very good film but one which aims its greatness at a figure who may not be so great, or at the very least, not worthy of such historic hagiography.

May 1940

Darkest Hour stars the inimitable Gary Oldman in the role of Prime Minister Winston Churchill. The story picks up in May of 1940 in first days in which Mr. Churchill inherited the office of Prime Minister from the deposed Neville Chamberlain. Churchill was no one’s first choice, a suspicion confirmed by King Edward (Ben Mendelsohn) early in the film when he asks why Lord Halifax (Stephen Dillane), his choice for Prime Minister, had passed on the job.

Churchill is the only candidate that both parties in Parliament will accept as a war time Prime Minister, despite what the King describes as a litany of military failures dating back to World War 1. Even with Churchill being offered and accepting the position, it’s barely a day before backbiting and jockeying for position to replace him begins, all the while Europe is falling quickly as German Panzer tanks decimate Holland and Belgium and begin an assault on France that will eventually lead to the beaches of Dunkirk and England’s "finest hour."

Find my full length review on the Geeks Community on Vocal 

Movie Review: The Theory of Everything

The Theory of Everything (2014) 

Directed by James Marsh 

Written by Anthony McCarten

Starring Eddie Redmayne, Felicity Jones, Charlie Cox, Emily Watson, David Thewlis 

Release Date November 7th, 2014 

Published November 5th, 2014 

Why does "The Theory of Everything" exist? Where did it come from? Why is it here? Not even Stephen Hawking could explain that. 

We have "A Brief History of Time," Errol Morris's remarkable documentary on the life of Stephen Hawking. It is the definitive story. "A Brief History of Time" combines Stephen Hawking's life and work as they should be, fully intermingled in time. Cross-cutting Stephen's childhood with bits of his theory, shifting between interviews about his past to his present theories, flows brilliantly with the way Stephen Hawking sees the world. It is timeless. 

"The Theory of Everything," on the other hand, is a linear, conventional, Hollywood biopic with all the soft edges and soft focus of classic hagiography. Eddie Redmayne suffers for his art as he contorts himself into an exceptional bit of mimicry. But for what purpose? Redmayne is a fine actor, but he doesn't give us anything new about Hawking. Redmayne and director James March merely recite Hawking’s life in image and dialogue. 

"The Theory of Everything" is based on the book by Jane Hawking, Hawking's first love and mother of his three children. The film is likely to make up for her diminished role in "A Brief History of Time," in which she chose not participate back in 1991. That’s nice, but it doesn't make the film all that more compelling. Jane is sweet and smart and above stalwart in the face of Stephen's many setbacks. But as played by Felicity Jones, she doesn't seem to have much inner life. 

Jones is a lovely actress who is left bland by the demands of a script. The story makes her out as both a saint and a victim who suspended her own life in favor of Stephen's, only to see him move on in a relationship with his nurse after 20-some years of marriage. That's not to say that this passage in the film has much drama to it either. The marriage breakup is followed by Jane immediately finding love again. She and Stephen are able to find friendship and peace without any seeming messiness. 

"The Theory of Everything" is a pretty movie with a pleasant score, a gentle sense of humor and a highly professional polish. So what? What is all of the polish in the world going to reveal about one of the most remarkable minds in history? Hawking's work is his most remarkable legacy. Here his theories are given  short shrift in favor of a kitchen-sink melodrama about potential or perceived marital infidelity. Even though it is based on fact, it’s the least interesting aspect of his life. 

Give me black holes and String Theory over marital morality plays any day of the week. You can have your gossip about who may have cheated on whom and when. I want to know more about time.

That's why "A Brief History of Time" makes "The Theory of Everything" irrelevant. In “Brief History” we get both a biopic (minus the gossip) and Hawking’s work. The work, not his love life, makes Hawking someone on which to focus a movie.