The Party and Country Are Against Margaret | The Crown (Olivia Colman, Gillian Anderson)
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 23 июн 2024
- Margaret (Gillian Anderson) asks the Queen (Olivia Colman) to help dissolve parliament because they are on the brink of war. The Queen reminds Margaret that her party and the country are against her.
From Season 4, Episode 10: War
Stream The Crown on Netflix! www.netflix.com/us/title/8002...
The Crown is based on Queen Elizabeth II as a young newlywed faced with leading the world's most famous monarchy while forging a relationship with legendary Prime Minister Sir Winston Churchill. The British Empire is in decline, and the political world is in disarray, but a new era is dawning. Peter Morgan's masterfully researched scripts reveal the Queen's private journey behind the public façade with daring frankness. Prepare to see into the coveted world of power and privilege behind the locked doors of Westminster and Buckingham Palace.
#TheCrown #TheCrownSeason3 #QueenElizabeth #OliviaColman #SceneCity 
Кино
The Queen handled this situation so well. You cannot escape the consequences of one’s actions.
what a baby
T: “The decision to dissolve parliament is in the gift of the Prime Minister. It is entirely within my power do this if I see it fit”.
Q: “You are correct: technically it is within your power to REQUEST this. But…”
A great scene well acted by two fabulous actresses.
She certainly nailed the voice better than anyone I’ve ever heard…I got so sick of her overbearing,droning preaching when she was Prime Minister and celebrated with a victory dance when they kicked her out…
Responsible for the vast majority of economic and political direness we're afflicted with today. People thing that Mark was worst thing she ever gave birth to - no, neoliberalism is the worst thing she ever gave birth too.
@@hoilst265 You’re definitely preaching to the choir here… My grandfather always said that she begrudged him his old age pension and he decided to live as long as he could just to spite her…He was 90 when he died…
This didn't age well
@@hoilst265blaming a conservative for liberals. That's a new one 😂
@@AFS-ht7bg We were blaming a Conservative for conservatives actually…The term liberal is a bit different in the UK too… For example,it’s possible to have left wing views without being a woke idiot…
She was just clinging to power. The Queen was right
can barely recognize Gillian Anderson (re X Files)-she is marvelous!!!
Preferred her in Bleakhouse - but that could be I wasn’t fond of Maggie T
My God how I loathed this woman, the Queen had the patience of a saint! 🙏❤
I think Gillian Anderson nailed MT better than Meryl did
I haven't watched Streep's portrayal, but even great actors act best when acting their type.
They were both brilliant.
Totally
Only if you think Mrs Thatcher was bigoted, self-serving and spoke funny.
@@stephenclues2948 That’s exactly who Thatcher was lol
two award winning performances...
It was time to go for the PM. She was fighting to hold on to power.
She and her friend Reagan destroyed our societies. We are still living under the economic nightmare their ideology has created.
The "wut" heard round the world
Thanks a lot for uploading this scene
i am sorry to say it but she was a better Margaret Thatcher than Meryl Streep (and Meryl is one of my favorites)
Gillian Anderson was brilliant as Thatcher. Dr
That hairdo! It looks like Attila the Hen is wearing a crown of steel wool!
A person best suited for position of power and influence assumes that position reluctantly in my opinion. And also, people ussually play and experiment in the fields of their passions. Politics should be and sometimes are THE LAST RESORT for good leaders.
No proper leader would get in the trough of politics.
Her Late Majesty would have followed the "Lascelles Principles" in deciding a request from Her desperate Prime Minister to prorogue Parliament.
Specifically, the Lascelles Principles are a constitutional convention in the United Kingdom beginning in 1950, under which the sovereign can refuse a request from the prime minister to dissolve Parliament if three conditions are met:
if the existing Parliament is still "vital, viable, and capable of doing its job",
if a general election would be "detrimental to the national economy", and
if the sovereign could "rely on finding another prime minister who could govern for a reasonable period with a working majority in the House of Commons".
At the time John Major had held all the major Offices of State (Chancellor of the Exchequer & Foreign Secretary) and was the natural successor and the market in the House was still substantial to pass legislation.
Although we'll never know the exact form of the conversation we can guess the Queen would have acted entirely constitutionally but, I think, with some small satisfaction in finally putting Thatcher in her place: out of Downing Street, and on the lecture circuit preaching politics to Republicans.
So the Lascelles Principle was proposed but has never been enacted. If a monarch denied a sitting PM’s request to dissolve parliament and have an election, people would flip out. It would doom the monarchy. QEII knew this well.
Also, it doesn’t seem like you understand John Major wasn’t chosen by the Queen. Major was elected leader of the Conservative Party by the members of the parliamentary party. And because the conservatives had a majority in the commons, and because he was the leader of that party, he was able to command the confidence of the house. Ergo, he was appointed prime minister. This is how the process works.
And Major was far from the natural successor. He and Douglas Hurd both entered the leadership contest in the second ballot after Thatcher withdrew, the idea being they could deny Michael Hesseltine a majority, and then whichever of the two, Major or Hurd, did worse, they would withdraw to unify the Thatcher wing of the party and prevent Hesseltine’s rebels from winning.
@@jasonkoch3182 A good explanation of the Party Politics that went into Thatcher's downfall. I'd forgotten the machinations to keep Hesseltine out of Downing Street as PM; Douglas Hurd isn't exactly the most memorable of men and, at the time, Major was entirely untested as a candidate for Party Leader. So it was something of a surprise for everyone that he was elected despite being elevated from relative obscurity by Thatcher.
With regard to the constitutional implications: I was aware of Queen Elizabeth II surrendering the Monarch's choice of Prime Minister, after Macmillan retired and the debacle over Alec Douglas Hume appointment upon the departing PM's advice, and instead, now, relies upon the choice of elected Party Leader as a recommendation for whom to Make Prime Minister - only the Sovereign can "make" PM.
The "Lascelles Principles" are now established as part of the unwritten constitution but were never deemed necessary to be written into law as these extreme situations are rare and any future Government would want to retain some flexibility in deciding these matters?
@@Kian2002 the Lascelles Principle was proposed. It was never enacted. No sitting prime minister in the modern era has ever been denied the right to have an election. A PM might be willing to follow the principle on his or her own, but if it was ever revealed that a PM had sought an election and been denied by the monarch, that would literally end the monarchy. Once a PM decides to call an election, there is an election. Getting the monarch’s permission is a formality.
@jasonkoch3182 Firstly, things don't have to be enacted in order to be part of constitutional convention. Indeed, it was the enacting of the Fixed Term Parliaments Act in 2011 which definitively terminated the Lascelles Principles, as it completely abolished royal prerogative in the matter of Parliamentary dissolution. The repeal of that Act in 2022 is generally thought to have made them constitutional convention once more.
Secondly, it is possible to imagine a Prime Minister so desperate to cling to power in the face of all reason that to _grant_ the request to dissolve would be an outrage to popular opinion -and, accordingly, doing so would not result in the end of the monarchy. Any monarch contemplating that course of action would inevitably consult extremely widely and would in that eventuality be sure of having very wide support from the general constitutional establishment.
@@dizwell I’m aware. And the Lascelles Principal was never a constitutional principle. It was proposed by Alan Lascelles but never used.
The fix term parliament act took the power to call an election out of the hands of the prime minister. Since it was repealed, it is now solely the prime minister’s responsibility and right to call an election, just as it was prior to the FTPA.
Long story short, there is no evidence anywhere that QEII denied a prime minister the right to call an election, and certainly didn’t deny Thatcher.
Margret Tatcher forgot the cardinal rule of politics - that all political carrers end in failure.
Maggie was always moving GB forward. Despite the feelings hurdles.
I think some of the commenters here, but more importantly the makers of the Crown, should be aware that this didn't happen. Thatcher never requested or even hinted at a dissolution of Parliament to the Queen. It would've caused an enormous constitutional crisis. I do think if you're doing a historical drama with real people as characters then you shouldn't make rubbish up like this.
I think that outro needs to be louder. 🤔 I'm not totally deafened by it.
Reading the comments below, I think people need to realize "The Crown" wasn't a documentary. 😁I loved this show but I sincerely doubt there was any conversation like this between the Queen and Thatcher. And Thatcher never asked for Parliament to be dissolved.
Give her some water ffs
Uh, that was a NO !
Girl bye
LOL. If Gorvachov said that he was even more stupid than we thought.
There is no dignity in the wilderness
(cut to Burning Man)
Thatcher of course never made this trip to the Palace to persuade the Queen to dissolve parliament.
Thank you! Sometimes, I have to scroll at least ten more comments down before finding the 'THIS FICTIONAL DRAMA BASED ON REAL EVENTS IS SHOWING THINGS THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN" comment. If the show only showed what occurred in real life, it'd be a documentary or the news, Xero. Get a hold of yourself man/woman/other! And whatever you do, don't watch Jurrasic World.
@@WisdomWeaverBitcoinBruv you realise that this being a drama based on real life events, it does include things that actually happened as well?.
@@xeromoth9771 Well, yes, that's rather the point, hence "based on real events", which would include some things that *did* occur AND some things that did not. That's how telly works, Nigel!
@@WisdomWeaverBitcoinBruv I find it helpful for it to be pointed out that this never happened.
@@WisdomWeaverBitcoinBruv If you're doing a drama based on real life you shouldn't introduce lies. This isn't some fictional Prime Minister and fictional Queen. This is supposed to be Thatcher and Queen Elizabeth, in November 1990. The whole thing is supposed to be faithful to reality, not just bits. You can't just introduce "some things that did not [occur]".
The arrogance of that evil woman. Basically she is saying I am the state.
Poll Tax did for Mrs T.
Thatcher was such a wretched woman. But Anderson did a fantastic job portraying her.
She was one of best pms we have ever had
@@simosino6763 no, she wasn't. We are still suffering from the havoc she and Reagan gave us.
@@AndyBluebear-fi9om I agree, dreadful woman.
Ironically I'm watching this on election day.
@@AndyBluebear-fi9om what did she do though? I'm genuinely curious.
@@kyuubidemon95 Quite a bit, and not exactly a discussion for the YT comments section.
Now Rishi Sunak has asked the King to dissolve parliament. The conservatives are finished.
An Indian in power? Give me a break. Sunak is the bright example that power does no longer reside either in the ministry or even Parliament; now, I'm sure that corporations have taken over like . . . well . . .you know what country has shown what they do when a president does not comply with corporations' requests.
Yes they might be finished, who cares, but who replaces them, the same as before.....Labour? The problem with the UK is that they are cowards, they are leeches, they are a nation of very unhealthy cowardly people who vote for who will get them more on a plate for doing nothing. I think the PM suggested bringing back a national service, this would of course help bring responsibility back to the individual, a bit of discipline, control to their live, morals. People of the UK need to vote for real change (which they keep talking about ironically). They need to vote outside the two main parties that have controlled the mess for so long. UK GET SOME BALLS 🙄
as they should be….and Labour should be next
I sympathize with the Conservatives more than with Labour, who I consider to be wrong in almost every aspect. But the Conservatives have made a crock of the power they were given. They squandered it. They deserve to be out of government.
They will come back. It goes in cycles. Governments go stale after 10 years or so and they've been there for 14
Thatcher was so corrupted by the one Ring at this point that her policies werent even that Conservative anymore. This is why Im increasingly convinced that the will to establish a moral society depends on how Conservative you are, how much you wish to preserve tradition, independence, and even law. The more you abandon it, the more subserviance you want for the state, the more you start viewing institutions as weapons, and the more you decide that the best litnuss test for loyalty is by determining how radical someone is rather than by how sensible that someone is.
The one ring? I didn't know Thatcher was in Lord of the Rings.
@@WilliamSmith-mx6ze I say that because Thatcher’s political journey is very similar to Frodo’s in terms of gradual descension into madness and obsession with power.
I thought she was a Neo Libral not conservative
Thatcher: It burns us!!
@@shadowshots9393 Neo Liberalism is Conservatism.
grasping myopia, Margaret.
How accurate is this?
The Audience meetings between Queen and Prime minister are confidential and never recorded but Margaret Thatcher never asked anyone to save her political skin when she was facing being thrown out of her job as prime minister
Not at all. It is not a documentary. It is a television series. It is extremely private what the prime ministers and the queen discussed in their weekly meetings. So the autors had to make something up. For every single of those meetings. And the "We've come so far!" quote is actually from an interview Thatcher gave. She even started crying in fron of the cameras. So again: It is just a television series. Not a documentary. Never take anything as a fact in this series.
It was never intended to be 100% accurate. It is still a drama.
But it is based on real events. I think the show is a wonderful reflection of the country's history, in general.
No way to know. Nobody ever hears what is said in that room. Nobody.
If she was desperate enough, it could have happened. And If I were Sovereign I would tell her No, and to Kick Rocks.
Gotta love the tears of Conservatives
Thatcher did so much damage. England was horribly diminished by her and her government. It still hasn’t completely recovered. As bad as Trump and Australia’s Tony Abbott.
Riiight !!
Do you guys think Margaret Thatcher had girl power?
other shows glorify and whitewash Margaret Thatcher as a girl boss. This show dared to present the truth.
What 👁️👄👁️?
We must have her back.😁
LOL these comments are ridiculous.
Margaret was desperate to stay in power, and the Queen was right, everyone was against Thatcher.
Crocodile tears. Such a nasty woman. Congrats to Gillian: she has renewed my contempt for this poor excuse for a human being.
I do not believe Thatcher spoke like that in private, I do not think the Queen was that intelligent, and I do not think Thatcher would blubber before Her Majesty. This series is cheap ham.
two females fighting for power one entitled and one self made was never going to end well.
I don't like Gillian Anderson's exaggerated and over-the-top portrayal of Thatcher. It's an annoying grotesquery if anything.
lol army of one
@@taherlokhandwala Just because you and others like her performance, doesn't mean you're right.
I know I'm in the minority, and I usually love Gillian Anderson's work, but I just can't get behind her as Thatcher. She comes off as a caricature. Part of an SNL parody or something.
We must all atleast understand that the prime minister Margaret thatcher wished well and only wanted to do what will benefit the country and its people.
Famously not.
🤣
.. to do what SHE believed was best for the country, which was rather often at odds with actual benefits for the country, which rather often ushered in substantial misery for the country, unless one was wealthy.
lol best joke I've heard all week
@@arseface2k934 Is it really so unbelievable to you?
i love margaret thacher
I love her not being around anymore.
There's always one complete moron....
2:07 "Power without authority is nothing." Very true. All authority is a delusion. We can all rebel. The only being who has true power and authority is Almighty God, yet of all beings, he is the most reluctant to use it. Most of the time, He delegates it, hoping people respect such. Such is the course of history.
@Royalfamily @cúilraithin 🗽 @Madampresidentireland @Madamvicepresidentireland :🇮🇪