วีดีโอ

Thank you for the explanation of Season I. It ties everything together. I don’t have Netflix and have seen a lot of videos here on TH-cam. Looking forward to watching your following season recaps.

❤❤❤ I really admired Queen Elizabeth the second. But her. Attitude to Diana was cruel and I know she didn’t like all the attention. Diana got from the world. I will forgive her, but it’s awful what Diana had to go through

- Claire Foy portrays her as a vulnerable young girl with a shy introverted personally trying to do well and behaving in alignment with her 'good girl' education doing her best to internalize her hypersensitivity to criticism. - Olivia Coleman portrays her as a stiff upper lip middle aged woman with no tolerance for emotional fits, with a few moments of self-admitted 'weakness' seeping through. - Imelda Staunton conveys the portrayal of an emotionally detached and cold-hearted yet wise, pragmatic, caring and experienced, compassionate grandmother with a greater tolerance for change and greater room for contemplation.

Claire Foy!!!❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤

I am a Broadway actor and have been an actor since 1970. I think you’re great. I love hearing you. I love your interpretation and your sense of humor. Yes, you are fabulous.!❤❤❤❤❤❤

😂😂😂 once again you have nailed it with wit and charm❤❤❤❤

I’m tired of seeing these bitchy comments about your commentary. You are brilliant and you are also funny. Don’t change anythingyou make it a delight. Cheers.❤❤❤❤❤

This is brilliant and funny😂😂😂 oh my God I loved it❤❤❤

Love these breakdowns!

I find it very ironic and galling when I come across videos made by americans lecturing us about our royal family. Not to mention doing appalling impressions about British people and character assassination of Her Majesty.

This episode of "The Crown" was such an incissive analysis of the two women. Queen Elizabeth, who was perceived as boring and dowdy, and Jackie Kennedy, the "style icon" of the United States. Really a matter of breeding vs. nouveau riche (let's face it, when your ancestry, in almost every branch is traceable (and documented!) for over 1,000 years, wel,THT is breeding. Jackie O.? Her father was a colorful character, an alcoholic, adulterer, etc.; she did have style, for the time and place, but that's not saying much given the time and place. Much has been made of her stylr, but, it is just a case of popular opinion and,well, face it, the masses are not known for true good taste. There is a difference between popular taste and true good taste. As to the post- JFK years and the sturm und drang of the Onassis soap opera years, well, Jackie O. could have taught the Kardasians a thing or two about self promotion. ( the blood stained dress is a very telling indictment).

def my fave episode… my most watched ep actually

Proper protocol is NOT for foreign politicians or officials to bow to royalty from other countries. It is optional of course, but it can cause internal problems in those countries. The only time it is considered appropriate is between royal families themselves, where one will see lower members of foreign royalty bowing to senior members of the host royalty, and equivalent ranks kiss.

Clotted cream, not butter on scone.

Americans are not expected to bow or curtsey to royalty. They can but when President Obama appeared to bow to the Japanese Emperor, there was quite the hue and cry. However the President and Mrs. Kennedy were quite sophisticated and would never have botched the introduction as shown in The Crown. Great video; thanks.

The Scene with Meeting the Kennedys and the death of President Kennedy really was done so well and loved how the Queen broke Protocol for the President Kennedy. It was quite an enjoyable episode to watch and watched it numerous times because I admired the Queen much more than Jackie who had a few skeletons in her closet. Especially when I learned that she would have divorced Jack Kennedy if her father-in-law didn't provide her with more money to stay in this marriage due to the presidential election that was coming up.. To me she was mercenary.

Great video. Can't wait to see more.

thins content is very helpful. I didnt remeber nothing about this season, now I can see season 2 \o/

Nice job. Keep up the good work.

the people behind the czar cause the russian revolution..

No! No! No! No! No! It's NOT the British Commonwealth - It's THE Commonwealth. It's not owned by Britain or the United Kingdom. It's a free association of Nations with links to our old Empire days. Actually there are members who were not part of the Empire who are members. Tonga, Togo, Cameroon, Mozambique are some. So please GET IT RIGHT and don't insult 50+ nations with your inaccuracies. By the way, the stories in The Crown are Not Gospel! There may be a grain of truth in the stories but they are fictional, or fictionalis(z)ed as you Yanks might say!

Great review for a great scene

Siberia not Serbia!

Jackie = frog

King George was a coward … he left his cousin to be murdered. He could have put his cousin in protective custody … and say it was a family matter. The Czar was no longer the Czar… he had no power or claim to Russia.

Very sad execution of romanovs.Very sad fate of them.

Wow ! Thank you ☺️

The script is good

Good job. Would like to watch your S2 recap but cannot find it.

13:38, you mean Siberia?

Unlike most of the comments I found this clip to be fatuous in the extreme. It adds nothing to what is already known. I found the depiction of the Romanovs trip to Cowes in the The Crown to be inaccurate on most points. But who is this guy and what is his claim to expertise on “the last family”. More to the point why is camera locked on to his face so relentlessly. Why do we want to see him narrate. Sure, most clips show the presenter but focus more on the subject to hand. There are some photos but not many and quite often the commentary and the images are misaligned. Don’t talk about staying at Alexander Palace and then illustrate it with a photo from Tobolsk. And then he has the family going to Serbia (sic). Yes he probably/hopefully does mean Siberia but he hasn’t bothered to correct it. At the end he posits: there is a lot of information out there, go check it out. Well, right back at you fella. Please, please read some books, esp Radzinsky, check out some documentaries. Add to the information rather regurgitating same old...

Jackie was a gold digger. Marrying Aristotle Onasis was proof

I was pretty pissed about how the show The Crown portrayed Queen Mary as being responsible for the decission to deny assylum to the Romanovs. Making up things and falsely blaming someone like her for a very real and deadly historic event is beyond irresponsible. There are now millions who believe Queen Mary did this, and she didn't.

So so so sad . 💔💔💔

3:52 Don't put that rude sound in your videos.

'Father asks to have it passed on to all who have remained loyal to him and to those on whom they might have influence, that they not avenge him; he has forgiven and prays for everyone; and not to avenge themselves, but to remember that the evil which is now in the world will become yet more powerful, and that it is not evil which conquers evil, but love.' -Excerpt of a letter by Grand Duchess Olga (eldest daughter of Nicholas), written in 1918 during exile. - Здесь ва убил императора - Here was killed an Emperor

Glad to know ... I'm not the only one reliving these scenes over again ... especially the dance number. Philip alone drew many to him ... killing the negativity of viewers not fond of his rendition of the character role ... 😊

Great work - good review. I watched season 4 a long time ago but have just downloaded seasons 5 and 6 for an overseas trip - this was perfect and brought everything back very clearly. Thank you!

Mike said "He sounds much different than in person. More dramatic" lol

I recently started watching the crown and really enjoy your videos. I hope you’ll consider making more videos like this doing mini deep dives and recaps on certain episodes. I was especially very captivated by the episode before this, Mou Mou, and would love your long take on that one. I also think it would be great if you went back and did season long recaps for the seasons you didn’t do. As an American who really only knew Princess Diana, I had no interest in season 1-3 until Camilla got involved at the end of season 3 and I knew the Diana storyline was starting. So I’m sure I’m not the only one who skips seasons and the season recap you did of season 3 was what brought me to your channel initially! I was sad to not find a video like this for every single episode and hope you’ll continue making them! I’m very surprised your channel doesn’t have millions of subscribers - quite literally, this is one of the best TH-cam channels I’ve found. It’s a shame that the people who have money to spare have to hoard it and can’t fund brilliant independent content creators such as yourself. I’m a struggling artist too in a very similar predicament - so if you don’t make your videos anymore due to money/ lack of support, that much I understand, but please do know that the algorithm is recommending them to those of us searching for the crown stuff and maybe you’ll have a resurgence of popularity if you create some more content about it. I look forward to seeing your other content and commentary about other shows and movies as well.

You are excellent at recaps.

Thank you for this recap, I missed a lot because the Season 4 DVD set I received as a gift was missing disc 1 , which has most of the important Charles/ Diana scenes .

RIP Nicholas II of Russia (1868-1918) Alexandra Feodorovna (1872-1918) Olga Nikolaevna (1895-1918) Tatiana Nikolaevna (1897-1918) Maria Nikolaevna (1899-1918) Anastasia Nikolaevna (1901-1918) Alexei Nikolaevich (1904-1918) Eugene Botkin (1865-1918) Anna Demidova (1878-1918) Alexei Trupp (1856-1918) and Ivan Kharitonov (1872-1918)

My favorite seasons) 1 & 2 2nd Favorite) 3 & 4 Least Favorite) 5 & 6 I did not care for Imelda Staunton, just couldn’t understand her. I loved Claire Foy and Olivia Colman.

You did a Terrific job in Detail

Was Cate Blanchett really mad? I do not think so, she doe snt need another one

I like how calmly and respectful you are trying to explain the Romanovs rule. Unfortunately and unsurprisingly there are few contexts missing in this video. There are multiple new information that came to light from the Russian archives by professors and researchers that many people aren’t aware of. Of course i can understand that its not fault of your self but because of years being told a story that isn’t necessarily all true. But i’ll will only focus of what you missed with the stampede in 1896 and Bloody Sunday, otherwise it will very be a long comment. I can at least recommend these 4 researchers and historians: Nick Nickelson, Paul Gilbert, Helen Azar and George Hawkings, I also recommend book the Romanov royal martyrs TH-cam channel with the same name. Its a very interesting read. It is well documented by other guests the the couple were heavily burdened by the tragedy. The next day the imperial couple spend the whole day visiting hospitals. Nicholas allotted some 90 thousand rubles to the victims families out of his own personal funds, and not the states. He ordered that a thousand bottles of port and Madeira were to be sent to hospitals for the wounded, and the sovereign himself visited the wounded in the hospitals and attended the funeral service for the dead. Further, all orphans received a pension until they were of age. tsarnicholas.org/2020/08/23/the-myth-of-nicholas-iis-indifference-to-the-khodynka-tragedy/ Now for Bloody Sunday. Few days before the tragedy there was an attempt to take Nicholas life so he left for home for his own safety. It is established that the priest wasn’t a good man and he didn’t had good intentions and lived a double live: he was an agent of the Okhrana, namely, of the Secret Police, while at the same time cooperating with the Socialist Revolutionary Party. He was a spy! Perhaps you may think that Gapon did not believe that the authorities would disperse his “peaceful” march? He himself answered this question later when he admitted that he knew full well that the authorities would not permit the protest to take place under any circumstances, because-very simply-it would not have been peaceful. Unlike what we’ve been told, unfortunately, is that a lot of demonstrators weren’t peaceful at all. They were destructive on the way to the palace! Of course A certain portion of the workers did not realize what was about to happen. They believed Gapon’s fraudulent promises and did not know that the tsar was absent from the palace that day. These were the first to be surprised by the violent behavior of the other demonstrators. They indeed had peaceful intentions and believed that they would meet the tsar to hand over to him their humble petition. They also did not know that the content of the petition almost did not have anything to do with them at all. tsarnicholas.org/2020/10/21/bloody-sunday-1905-what-is-the-truth/ BONUS: interesting facts of Nicholas II and his achievements. tsarnicholas.org/2021/07/13/70-facts-about-emperor-nicholas-ii-and-his-reign/ Like i said i don’t blame you. The stories that we’ve been told for many years were seen as facts. I hope you find this interesting. If not, well you can ignore it. Have good day!

I really enjoyed Queen Charlotte on Netflix. It’s actually very well done.

Nicolas II was far from being the best ruler, but he and his family didn't deserved such fate. Even if it was cruely logical for the reds to get rid off what was a serious threat for their new regime