REVIEW: In "Darkest Hour," Gary Oldman Delivers the Performance of his Career

When Gary Oldman was approached by Joe Wright to star as Winston Churchill in “Darkest Hour,” Oldman had one caveat: Kazuhiro Tsuji had to do his makeup.  If you’re not familiar with Gary Oldman, well, you don’t watch many movies, I guess, but at any rate, here’s Oldman, and here’s Oldman as Churchill:

Gary Oldman, left, and Gary Oldman as Winston Churchill, right.

That’s a pretty drastic  difference.  Now if you’ve never watched an episode of SyFy’s “Face/Off,” let me tell you… this is the work of an artist.  Oldman’s entire body had to be transformed with a fat suit, and his whole face had to be done in such a way that it could hold up to close-ups and wouldn’t interfere with Oldman’s performance, but rather enhance it.  The shocking thing is how successful it is.  I can see why Oldman requested Kazuhiro Tsuji.  For a job like that, you need the best, and Tsuji pulled it off with such precision that he must, in fact, be the best. 

So let’s talk about the movie.  I shouldn’t have to say this, but I will anyway, just in case: don’t get your history lessons from movies.  Movies are lousy at teaching history.  Movies are make-believe, and the people who make them get to make stuff up.  They’re good at making stuff up, they enjoy it, and the goal is that we enjoy the stuff they made up.  That’s as true if you’re watching an historical drama as it is if you’re watching a fantasy film.  You know how movies based on books are never the same as the books?  Same principle.  So don’t go into “Darkest Hour” expecting the history to be entirely accurate.  It isn’t.  But that’s not what’s important when we talk about a movie.  What’s important is whether the movie is good.  And in this case, it is.

The movie is set during the early days of Churchill’s Prime Ministry, in 1940, when the usual policy toward Hitler was appeasement, believing that sooner or later he would stop, that he would behave with honor and decency in at least some measure.  Churchill’s predecessor, Neville Chamberlain, believed this, and so did his allies in Parliament.  But Churchill wasn’t having any of that.  Winston Churchill was a man who understood that sometimes it’s necessary to take a stand.  That having an enemy wasn’t as bad as not having a self. 

The film explores Churchill’s struggle; he has Nazis knocking on the door.  He has half of Parliament and much of his own cabinet against him.  King George VI isn’t crazy about him either.  And almost the entire British Expeditionary Force is trapped at Dunkirk, pinned down by Nazis on land and in the air – a mess he inherited.  There are bitter decisions to be made, and it takes a leader with broad shoulders to take on that kind of responsibility, to make those impossible choices.  Oldman plays Churchill as a man who was private conflicted, but publicly confident and self-assured.  I believe that is the burden of every leader. 

A poor leader wears that conflict publicly, creating doubt and uncertainty in those around them, and casting suspicion upon the entire apparatus.  A good leader shows certainty and confidence, even if they don’t feel it; and in so doing raises morale and galvanizes people into action.  Churchill was a man of appetites: cigars, alcohol, food.  He was also a very intelligent man, eloquent and wise, who understood persuasion.  He was theatrical, in just the right amount; he knew how to inspire. 

You might ask what the story is, here, in the film.  The film takes place from Churchill taking the office of Prime Minister, to the successful rescue of the men from Dunkirk and the “We Shall Never Surrender” speech.  What it shows, in that window, is a man everyone is wary of, whose apparent desire to go to war against Germany scares the hell out of Parliament, slowly winning over his detractors, or maneuvering them into corners, and taking control of a difficult situation.  Cleaning up a mess he inherited.  It’s a fine thing to watch if you can handle a quiet drama about political maneuvering.  I found it very powerful.  

All of this works, of course, only if Gary Oldman’s performance, and Kazuhiro Tsuji’s makeup, can deliver.  Oldman is indisputably one of the best actors working today.  He studied footage of Churchill, listened to his voice, looked at his mannerisms, his walk, the expressions on his face, and he tried to soak all of that up and find the man.  In various interviews he talked about how he felt in some sense that he was not only standing in Churchill’s shadow, but in the shadow of every actor who has portrayed him down through the years, from Albert Finney to Brendan Gleeson.  

Oldman’s up for an Academy Award for this performance, and it’s self-evident from the film why he’s the favorite to win.  You forget who it is you’re looking at, you just accept him as Churchill and go along for the ride.  For some, the film may not have the kind of story they like, leaning more heavily on the strength of Oldman’s performance.  But if you appreciate acting for the art that it is, and you want to see a great one at the height of his craft, I recommend Darkest Hour.