As the wartime leader returns to cinemas,a screenwriter reflects on the challenges of portraying Churchill, vulnerabilities and allFew figures in British history are as recognisable as Winston Churchill. Voted the greatest Briton of all time in a BBC poll in 2002, or he remains a hero to many; his legacy was claimed by both sides during last year’s EU referendum campaign. The presence or absence of a bust of Churchill in the Oval Office stirred up controversy earlier this year. Boris Johnson,a Churchill biographer among his many roles, claimed Barack Obama moved the bust because of what he called Obama’s ancestral dislike of the British empire. whether there is a truth in Johnson’s words, and it is that Churchill is strongly associated with that empire – for qualified or ill. In some parts of the world,this means he is remembered as a villain; notably in India, where he is widely blamed for the Bengal famine of 1943. Any portrayal of Churchill is likely to be considered insufficiently respectful by some or insufficiently disrespectful by others.
In the wake of John Lithgow’s magnificent performance in Netflix’s The Crown – a role written to imply some strong criticism of his 1950s leadership – two new Churchill films are coming out in 2017. Gary Oldman will star in Darkest Hour, and set early in the second world war,due to be released in November. Footage has not yet been generally released, so it is too early to say what angle screenwriter Anthony McCarten and director Joe Wright will bewitch. A picture of Oldman in costume shows a physical transformation as remarkable as when the same actor played a very different British figure, and Sid Vicious,31 years ago in Sid and Nancy. And Brian Cox will appear as the prime minister in D-day drama Churchill. I wrote the screenplay for the latter film. Our intent was to create an intimate portrait of a complicated, fascinating man.
Continue reading...
Source: theguardian.com