Darkest Hour | Winston Churchill and King George VI Consider a Peace Deal 

And light bulbs are still fra-gi-lay things nevertheless!

Shame the film was frankly, just silly.

never noticed that

@@deepzepp4176 shame you have no taste

@@Whatever611 Same to you.

Fact. While Colin’s portrayal of the George VI in The King’s Speech is the best imo, he doesn’t look like him at all.

@@icyprincey Yeah Colin absolutely nailed his speech, and mannerisms, but 100% agree that Mendelssohn looks a lot more like him.

Mendelssohn hesitates slightly in his speech once in a while; to me it seems as if he's controlling his stutter. If so, brilliant move by the actor.

Ben is absolutely incredible, he is such an underrated actor. To the above comments about looks, completely agree Ben looks more like King George, but it was requested that in the Kings Speech the actor who portrayed The King had to be British, ideally English.

Ben Mendelssohn is a true acting talent. He was an amazing baddie in Rouge One - truly carried that film lol.

@@kathrynswynford God saved this King to save England.

The chemistry between the two actors was brilliant. I was in awe of the confidence that King George VI had in Churchill, and the way that they sat together companionably like close friends. Even at the end when Churchill cracked a joke, and the way that King George VI responded. That was a relationship that they both can depend on. I envy that.

He was the second string King anyway. Edward the VIII would never have had a war.

@@karlheinzvonkroemann2217 Maybe it's because Edward VIII wanted Hitler?

And he was really friends with Halifax but supported Churchill when he needed it most.

I was thinking that too. He really looks like King George VI.

He’s definitely got the slim face which Colin Firth and the guy from the Crown didn’t have.

@@rubberducky4074 the house of Windsor have iconic weak chins. Colin Firth had way too much face. Too solid a jawline. Ben has the face of a Royal.

Its the chin and the nose i think. Especially in the shadows you'd think its actually him

Most older Aussie men look like this lol. They all characteristically have big ears/ big noses and weak jaws. Prince/ King Charles reminds me of many older men I see here in Australia. Might have something to do with their lineage/ genetics and the fact that their parents and grandparents originally hailed from England.

and that is what we in history biz...call DESTINY

Absolutely. A shy man called on and stood up to his destiny. More impressive than those well equipped for such a part.

The King stayed in London during the whole war. When the Queen Mother was told to leave the country with the Princesses, she famously said "the children will not go without their mother, I will not leave without the King and the King will never abandon his people" even when Buckingham Palace was bombed, they stayed put in the Palace. I admire the Queen Mum when she said "now I can look the East End in the eyes"

Our greatest ever king he led his people through their darkest hour with such honour and determination

It’s easy to forget the stabilising impact of the constitutional monarchy over the years. And the connection of Queen Elizabeth II to the war had an impact on her reign. Britain and the whole world was lucky we had that Prime Minister and that King at that time.

@@bonkerslez91I don’t think he was our greatest King, (that title would have to go to Alfred the Great), but I do think he was the greatest modern king and definitely among the top 3 non Anglo Saxon we’ve ever had. Only outdone by Henry Curtmantle and Henry V.

They never teach real history in school. There is a lot of lefty teachers who teach anti British stuff. I actually learnt real history only after I left school.

@@dlmdee Whatever, Dilemma!

@@dlmdee Go figure the tin foil conspiracy theorist would support the fascist King who would have sold this country to hitler. Why don't you just crawl back to the daily wire channel with your likeminded kin?

His daughter Queen Elizabeth (RIP) profited from his tutelage and example. A great and underrated historical figure. A normal man inserted into a position he didn't want or need but yet he rose to the challenge

@@dlmdee u on about the nazi supporter right?

@@dlmdee sounds like a lot of baloney my guy

It’s a two way street. Her Late Majesty advised many a Prime Minister during her reign. Especially as the years went on and her experience reached many decades. I’m told the monarch expresses opinions LC recommendations, and advice to the PM during their weekly meetings.

@@jernbek1 Its obviously not her fault but the last prime ministers werent really shining to be honest. I mean just imagine how frustrating it was to the Queen to work with someone like Boris Johnson while she also worked with Churchill.

@@sultankebab1587 I wonder what the late queen felt about the changing nature of politics/politicians.

King George had one thing going for him. He didn't have the huge ego that caused the downfall of so many. He knew he needed people.

It is strange to realise that politics is a family business for Royal family

Yeah I never remember his name, Ben uh Mendlesohn (I can barely remember it now between reading your comment and writing this haha. Always been bad with names though. But great with faces and every little detail about people I ever met or seen even briefly, and my thoughts and opinions of them.) But always though him a talented actor who's been in the scene like forever and done such a range of roles. Australian and other. He also looks and has mannerism of one of my long time aussie friends brother and brothers friend to a striking similarity. Who was always a wild crazy sob too lol, who had the craziest evil looking green eyes I ever did see too haha, possibly only with the exception of those of that guy I see in the mirror. :)) But yeah and he doesn't seem to get alot of of praise or recognition for it, or maybe doesn't want or take it idk. (Which is good, I'd respect, as I hate all the celebrity worship and praise heaped on freaking entertainers these days and hate how they come out lecturing us on real world matters like they're some sort of authority it but anyway)

They should have made peace. WW2 could have been avoided.

@@ecofilm100 Hitler would never have stopped. Then there's the Japanese to consider.

​@ecofilm100 and the horrors of the nazi state would have gone on unopposed. I apologise if your statement was sarcasm.

@@hammer1349 At the time of peace talks, the nazis had no intention nor planning to commit genocide.

​@ecofilm100 wow, that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard

Holy shit, that was one hell of a battle your Grandad was in! He must have been a fine man. The Exeter took at least seven 283 mm shells and kept going like the boss she was!

@@jamiestewart48 Yes he was a fine man . He'd been in the navy 23 years up until the start of ww2. He was trying to put a fire out with the commander when a shell burst in front of them killing a stoker and he himself lost an eye. Spent time in Falklands hospital and then in Montevideo where he was visited by Lady Effingham Drake who gave him a silver teapot to bring back for my Gran as she was 40 while he was away . When he got back he was missed joining the crews for the parade of the 3 ships companies in London hence standing with the crowd. There was a draw for some sailors to have lunch in the London Guildhall which he also missed but after he met Churchill the King and Queen Lady Astor took him to her Mayfair mansion and he had lunch with her. What a story.

“England expects every man to do his duty” Rest in peace to him -Sincerely, an American

That ship should have been on the bottom of the Atlantic by all accounts. Captain langsdorff was in awe of her refusal to disengage.

*humour

Many don't realise the vital role the King & his Queen played in keeping up the morale of the British people during WWII. Ben Mendelsohn was able to demonstrate, beautifully, the King's resolve to stay & meet the challenges of that period & in so doing provided a good example and the importance of having a sense of duty, to his daughter which she espouse when she became Queen later on. We must never forget that we are, mostly, the product of our upbringing.

Do you know him well enough to call him Ben, Jamie?

He used to speak much slower and with a different inflection, apart from that the portrayl is quite good indeed.

Agreed. I feel he did the role way more justice than Colin Firth.

Not a hint of stammar though

Balls to the wall, Brits are the best. Time we revitalised the bulldog spirit, not the racist right-wing rot we see in the Tory party, but true grit to get the country out of the gutter.

There are more English speakers in the US and India than there is in all of the UK.

@@kake1604 Kinda missed the point, but yeah, this is technically true 🤷‍♂️

@@ltdowney I didn’t. I’m not a fan of language purists.

woodrobin's comment had nothing to do with being a 'language purist', whatever that is, but different groups of English speakers have 'ways of talking' that are different from each other, e.g. New Yorkers speak completely different from Alabaman's, and woodrobin was pointing out the King was using "British understatement". You've heard of British understatement, haven't you? @@kake1604

A kind man, a good friend to his PM, a beloved King and a clearly doting father. A King who wasn't meant to be King, but was a great king in his own right and the father to a wonderful queen as well

@@lucyhardy-styles-shield2728 to me he’s our greatest ever king to lead his people through the toughest times the way he did was incredible

@@bonkerslez91 his daughter was an amazing queen and I hope his grandson can do a decent job as well

@@bonkerslez91 I don't particularly like monarchies..but here was a man never meant to be monarch and with none of the training to be one who nevertheless rose to the occasion and a momentous occasion it was - with a speech impediment, with his powers and place in Britain questioned from the beginning, he showed an immense resolve and courage in the face of adversity - he truly embodied British willingness to bear the unbearable, bravery and resistance.. he was the king Britain needed at the time

@@johnkirk1772even when Buckingham palace was bombed he refused to abandon his people to me that’s a king

I do too. He was great in The Outsider.

@@erihor86 Loved that show but I wouldn't have remembered it without reading your comment.

Back in his Australian career, he was often the "hero" of the film.

@@casbot71 he was always the bad boy or the nerd from what i remember

@@boxedlife789 Not much choice for actors in Australia at that time.

And they didn't leave London for safety, after Buckingham Place was hit. She said that she was relieved that now she could look the East Enders in the face. Every day, the King and Queen used to go out and walk through the rubble from the night before, and talk to people.

Both Sagittarius

absolutely bonkers to think that the Queen's first PM was born in 1874, and the last in 1975. a full century between Churchill and Truss.

@@arseface2k934 Not really bonkers, it's pretty usual for people to live 80+ years these days. It's expected that there'd be such an overlap.

@@Red1Green2Blue3 well if the numbers don't impress you, then simply going from Churchill to truss should be enough to depress you

​@@arseface2k934 I mean someone that is 20 years old today could conceivably know someone born in 1945 and will, in 23 years know someone born in 2045 and only be 43. But yes, Truss and Johnson are an embarrassment.

German geordies

The bootlicking of the royal family is the reason the indigenous Britons have been kept down for so long and the situation we’re in now. They colonised and us indigenous get all the blame.

​@TheCasualJacobite Queen Mother was a Scot and Elizabeth was many generations removed from the Georges.

wow, sounds like something that totally happened and isnt just some made up story to sound bad a***

Winston was an old soldier. He had fought in Sudan and in the trenches.

And if theyd known how the world and the UK in particular would turn out, none of those men would have fought.

​@vodeankandosii3982 Yes they would have

Indeed. Sometimes you have to slow down and let someone apolitical, with a deep love of country, remind the elected official of both their duties to the people.

@@AmericanVoyages Well not just that, he was on an island alone, and the KING himself brings a life boat, and mind you the King then still had quite a lot of power, is why Winston perks up, he now has the backing he needs.

@@negativezero3107 He had the same power our current monarchy does. All that's changed since the war is the way we perceive them and how much they engage with the public.

A Firgurehead Monarch still has tremendous political capital via the affection and support of the people.If the Monarch says something, they listen. As Social Media like Twitter and Reddit demonstrates today, getting enough of the masses behind something can turn the tide of support.

if all kings were worthy, yes.

Brave ?😂 sitting in his bunker. Shit comment

Agreed.Oldman is up there with the best no problem.

The King of Norway was a huge boost in this time period. Dude spent copious amounts of time lamblasting the Collaborator government as being a "fake government" and officially endorsing the Resistance. It was a morale boost for the Resistance and a thorn in Quisling's authority, since it made the common people question and balk at *every* thing he did.

🇬🇧👑🫡

So true.... Fate.

Edward VIII was shipped off to the West Indies because it was feared that he could be a puppet leader if Hitler had invaded,

@@tomhaskett5161 good thing that the Royal Family wasn't whisked to Canada because he believed that Great Britain had a fighting chance against Nazi Germany after they stood alone against their tyranny during the early parts of the Second World War.

true

If Edward does not Abdicate, there is no Queen Elizabeth.

Not when they're all liars now.

Without Winston Churchill as PM, the War Cabinet would have entered into negotiations with Hitler, using Mussolini as an interlocutor, in 1940. The will of the British people to resist, along with the crucial support of the Commonwealth countries -- Canada, Australia, New Zealand, chief among them -- would have been lost. The Empire countries like India would not have provided the two million-plus troops in the east to oppose the Japanese when they entered the larger war in 1941. The Empire would have collapsed, as an "every man for himself" mentality prevailed. No meaningful American aid would have been forthcoming from the Roosevelt Administration, and when Hitler inevitably broke his agreement with HM Government, Britain would well and truly have been alone without the leadership and will to fight on. Without British troops and leadership, and without the island itself serving as an unsinkable aircraft carrier, American military intervention in North Africa or western Europe would have been close to impossible in the 1940s. Without American "lend-lease" and Allied diversions in North Africa and Italy, there is a better than even chance the Wehrmacht might have outright defeated the Soviet Union in 1942-43, or at least forced a stalemate on the eastern front. Japan would have had a free hand in the British and European colonies in East Asia and the southwest Pacific. The United States would have been ideologically, economically and geographically isolated, and fascist sympathizers in South America would have been emboldened. The world would have been a much nastier, uglier and darker place. The consequences for European Jews, the Chinese, the Poles, the Koreans and many others would have been apocalyptic. Indian democracy would have been stillborn, with fascist sympathizers taking over from the British colonial administration. Humanity would be far worse off in ways we cannot even imagine in 2022.

@@egosumhomovespertilionem2022 Precicely, also remember, there was a sizable portion of the upper class in Britain with close relations to Germany, and viewed Communists as a greater threat than the Nazis. The Royal family was of German descent, as was some of the Gentry. Churchill and his obstinacy gave heart to the British people and it helped saved Britain. Who knows what would have happened if Britain folded? But it would have most likely been a very different world.

@@derjaeger3321 King Edward was a big nazi sympathiser, who knows what would've happened if he had stayed on the throne

Churchill destroyed Britain with his unnecessary war with Germany. Over 400,000 dead young men, millions more wounded which led to mass immigration and the cultural/racial tensions today as Britons are made into a second class citizenry.

@@daniellee2343 unnecessary? if you think Britons are second-class citizens today, you don't want to imagine what it would be like in a nazi world. what was unnecessary was our involvement in WW1, there was plenty of opportunities for good relations between Britain and Germany in the decades leading up to war, but neither side took the extra step.

You reminded me of a verse from the bible stating this very truth

When Elizabeth Queen Mum was suggested that they move to Canada, she said "I will not go without the King, and the King will never go."

The best prime minister in the last hundred years. And he was just a Sir. Then came the Baroness and their successors. Now GB is no longer there... 😢

And it was these traits that made him the right man, in the right place, at the right time.

Yeah. Britain was truly alone until Barbarossa.

@@jtgd Yeah, like they didn't have the backing of the entire empire behind them, oh no, we Canadians didn't send pilots, planes or convoys to the UK, oh shit no. Likewise the Australians did nothing or the millions of soldiers in the Indian army, truly alone, FFS read a history book.

@@JB-yb4wn I get what you mean, but I think what is trying to be said when saying “Britain was alone” is how despite the aid from the Empire Britain wasn’t in a position to really use it. Britain wasn’t a militaristic Empire (relying more on trade and the threat of power rather than massive mobilisation). As such while the Empire was imperative to Britain defence, the fact of the matter was that the heart of the fight was in bombing distance of a gigantic war machine, with the Empires resources too stretched to fully safeguard the British Isles and guarantee its security. To say Britain was alone is a massive oversimplification and is bad History, it undermines the huge valiant efforts of Canada, India, Australia, New Zealand and everywhere else in the Empire. But it is trying to define what was a very sad fact; while Britain’s empire was large it was difficult to mobilise its resources effectively to fight Germany as if it was a large alliance of nations. British and collaborator manpower and might was needed to police the Empire and travel and deployment of Empire and dominion troops took time. Britain fought alone in massive speech marks in Europe as the Empire supported it, but also had to support its huge international obligations too

@@JB-yb4wn You're being a bit disingenuous. Australians were stationed in Africa and the South Pacific and Canada couldn't send enough fighter planes. England was THE battlefront for western society. They were going to be invaded by the Germans. No one apart of the colonies could come in and just save England. They needed a former colonial newly formed superpower and Hitler's stupidity to turn on Stalin to do that.

Oh sir Churchill was hitler. He just comitted mass genocide on India which your entitled self may not remember. Wiping out 3 million Indians from earth. Oh such a nice brave man.🙂

Well, he did; and yes, he was lucky - and he knew it. Clementine.

She was his love and support. They adored each other.

When d day came the Brits, having invaded France stopped and, to a man, brewed a cuppa, to the Americans astonishment.

Exactly, friend. 26 million Russians died so that 450k brits save the Europe.

The only thing that worried churchill was the uboote

Invading across the channel with the RN around. 🤣

@@Eric-kn4yn What could possibly happen? 😂

There's been no English monarch for over 300 years.

@@bayousbambino427 I stand corrected. British monarch. Thankyou.

You use more commas than Andrew's daughters have goofy fascinating hats. Charles III couldn't declare war on Harry's real dad.

@@stacyhamilton2619 Edited out mistaken commas. thankyou. Yes, the leading monarch has power to declare war and peace, as well as commander in chief of all British military, can enter into treaties, can order anyone arrested, has full power of parden both before and after a crime and parden can be confidential, all land grants are subject to prerogative to take back, is absolute head of Church of England.

@@dpetrano the English monarch is commonly seen as a figurehead only...in the case of Elizabeth and her dad..very much loved...the English king or queen only consults with prime minister...he or she does not have any "real power" ... hence the sovereign can not make policy can not make treaties ect...ect...