Bests & Worsts Reviews from Amazon

I literally just read a 1 star review of this movie because the person was offended by Churchill (Oldman) lighting up a cigar. That person obviously overlooked the entire movie over the fact that Churchill did smoke cigars, often. Anyway... I digress. If Oldman does not win the Oscar for best actor for his portrayal, I might just have to quit watching movies (which would make me very sad). His performance was so stunning. There was never a time during the film that I didn't think I wasn't watching the actual Winston Churchill. Just the mannerisms, posture, detail to the voice of Churchill, Oldman's portrayal was perfection. The outstanding makeup only added to Oldman's performance. I did read some reviews that said this movie was completely historically inaccurate. My response to that is: A) it's not a documentary, and B) the major points were accurate. My husband is an avid student of WWII history, and he felt the movie was phenomenal. It's Hollywood, they are going to dramatize things. If you want complete historical accuracy, watch a documentary. The cinematography was very interesting. It matches the movie's title poster. Very lighted on Winston, but a feeling of a vignette of darkness around him. Sometimes the effect was softer, and others it was very sharp and contrasting. I felt this added some emotional depth to the movie, and added some insight to how isolated he felt during his first days as PM. I am probably going to watch The King's Speech, Darkest Hour and Dunkirk in that order on the same day...