Churchill (2017) - Monty & Winston clash over D-Day
Вставка
- Опубліковано 14 лют 2018
- From the film Churchill (2017) staring Brian Cox.
Churchill out now on Blu Ray & DVD.
www.churchillfilm.com
Actors
Brian Cox, Miranda Richardson, John Slattery, Ella Purnell, James Purefoy
Director
Jonathan Teplitzky
Cohen Media Group
This guy can play both Goering and Churchill.. Give this man an Academy already
Brian Cox in Nuremberg 2000 and Churchill 2017
Can't credit true talent or the facade ends with the crap sadly people like Daniel day Lewis and this fine actor none
Didn't this also come out the same year as Gary Oldmans Darkest Hour?
Very gifted actor, He can master any roll. I like him in the movie about the sinking of the RMS Laconia where he was Captain of the doomed ship. @@daveslark
Brian Cox is an incredible actor that has enjoyed a fine career and doing currently some of his best work . Keep it up!
So inaccurate. Churchill was indeed worried over D Day because he organised in Gallipoli. No British General would ever speak to the PM like that.
@herr haller it's not real mate...
@Who am I Really
But an Asshole, fought knowing he COULDN'T rely on having replacement manpower (like Soviet and US generals did)but who still turned the tide in North africa, responsible for all land planning & operations on D-day until day 48(1 day ahead of schedule)when Ike took over to steal the Credit for another mans work, and Saved the US's ass at the Battle of the Bulge - when Ike ran away and hid.
I'll fight for an asshole like like that,
@@farmerned6 The men who fought and died at the Battle of the Bulge are the only ones responsible for defeat or victory, not some pencil pushing desk jockey.
@Paul Easy when you're a country that hides half way around the world and has insane man reserves, ofc Ike doesn't is "opportunistic"
@@farmerned6 General Eisenhower didn't run away at all. Get your facts straight idiot
This is a great work!...of fiction.
“That puffed up little shit!” Oh that is good! I’m going to use that!
I like and respect that puffed up little shit. And the troops loved respected and followed him.
FOR ALL TRUE HISTORY BUFFS.
Churchill was the first, after Eisenhower, to feel the confidence and enthusiasm that now radiated from Montgomery. Arriving at 6 o’clock on the evening of 31 December in Marrakesh, Monty found Churchill ‘in bed reading a copy of OVERLOARD’ flown out specially in its latest edition from Morgan in London. Churchill was ‘recovering from his recent illness and did not look very fit,’ Monty noted in his diary.
He (Churchill) said I (Monty) was to read OVERLORD and give him my (Monty) opinion about it. I (Monty) replied that I was not his military adviser. He (Churchill) then said he was very anxious to have my (Monty) first impressions of OVERLORD, which I (Monty) had never seen. So I (Monty) said I would read it through and would give him my ‘first impressions’ in the morning.
The next morning, sitting besides Churchill in his car on the two-hour drive that had been planned to the Atlas mountains, Monty went over the ‘Overlord’ plan with the Prime Minister, and declared it to be ‘impracticable’. Not only was the size of the invasion force too small, but it committed the assaulting army to the same error that had doomed the Allies at Salemo, and would so again, despite the approval of Eisenhower, Bedell Smith, Alexander, Clark, Wilson, Tedder and Admiral John Cunningham (who had succeeded Sir Andrew Cunningham as Navel C-in-C, Mediterranean) at Anzio: namely the confinement of the invasion to one easily contained beachhead. Worse still, in terms of subsequent build-up, was the attempt to land too many formations, both on D-Day and the succeeding days, acrross the same beaches - beaches that would become fatally congested.
By D+12 a total of 16 Divisions have been landed on the same beaches as were used in the initial landings. This would lead to the most appalling confusion on the beaches, and the smooth development of the land battle would be made extremely difficult -if not impossible.
He (Monty) told Churchill. The answer, by contrast, was simple to land on a broad enough front to ensure that each succeeding wave of reinforcing divisions was fed straight into their respective Corps which had landed on D-Day.
(a) The initial landings must be made on the widest possible front.
(b) Corps must be able to develop their operations from their own beaches, and other Corps must NOT land though these beaches.
(c) British and American areas of landing must be kept seperate.
(d) After the initial landings, the operations must be developed in such a way that a good port is secured quickly for the British and American forces. Each should have its own port or group of ports.
Monty’s idea was that ‘if such a thing was possible there would be many advantages in putting the armies on shore in such a way’ the British should secure the whole of Caen-Cherbourg coast, while the Americans took the west side of the Cherbourg peninsula, securing St Malo, St Nazaire and Brest. Above all, ‘air battle must be won before the operation is launched. We must then aim at succeess in the land battle by the speed and violence of our operations.
Once again, as in the Egyptian desert, Churchill was won over by the clarity and authority of the new commander he has only reluctantly appointed. ‘Evidently he was a firm believer in the operation,’ Churchill recorded almost incredulously,’ and I was pleased at this.’ When Churchill suggested they drive up to a favorite panoramic viewpoint in the mountains, Monty ‘got out and walked straight up the hill “to keep himself in training” as he put it. I (Churchill) warned him (Monty) not to waste his vigour, considering what was coming...that athletics was one thing and strategy another. These admonitions were in vain,’ Churchill recalled with amusement. ‘The General was in the highest spirits; he leaped about the rocks like an antelope, and I (Churchill) felt a strong reassurance that all would be well.’
Churchill’s ‘admonitions’ wre reciprocated by Montgomery. Aware that the Morgan plan was hopeless, Monty was consumed by vexation at the way - as in ‘Husky’ and as in Italy - major military operations were planned on paper and handed over to their commanders too late for them to make alterations that would ensure their success: ‘I impressed on him the need to get experienced fighting commanders “in” on any future operational plans early; if left too late it might not always be possible to change the layout of the operation; in every operation which I have been brought into in this war, changes in plan have been necessary and there has been all too little time, e.g. HUSKY in May, 1943, and now OVRLORD did not look good.’
That Monty would ‘grip the show’ was clear to Churchill, as it became, too, for the second time, to Eisenhower who stopped in Marrakesh briefly on his way back to Washington and had a secret meeting with Monty - a meeting he neglected to mention in his war memoirs. Monty, however, remembered the occasion very well, as he recalled when reading Eisenhower’s book in 1948: ‘Montgomery met Eisenhower in Marrakesh quite by accident, and took the opportunity to explain to him the tactical faults in the COSSAC plan. On having these faults pointed out, Eisenhower asked Montgomery to examine the whole plan in England, and gave him the necessary authority to do so.
Churchill and Eisenhower might respond positively to Monty’s ‘grip’. Not all were happy about this, though - particularly thos who, like Harold Nicolson, resent Monty’s growing fame in Britain. ‘Montgomery today is the second most popular figure in England,’ Nicolson noted with distaste in his diary on 5 January 1944.
Note: This extract is taken from Nigel Hamilton’s book, “Monty Master of The Battlefield 1942 - 1944.
Or ooo
That was truly epic my friend
Thank-you!
A great book about an under appreciated military genius and great man. He was for the British Army what Admiral Fisher had been for the Navy, THE modernizer and professional! More than that while insisting on victory he spared no effort to minimize deaths and illness!
Monty liked to make himself look good, the ego maniac. However actual history contradicts his memoirs. Montgomery did not convince Eisenhower to expand the invasion to a broad front. Eisenhower already favored it.
Eisenhower was designated Supreme Commander & Monty his deputy. They got the original plans for Overlord in December 43. The North Africa meetings in Casablanca with a stopover in Marrakech for US & UK political leaders to/from Casablanca was in January 43 so Monty couldn’t convince anyone of anything regarding Overlord planning. He hadn’t seen it & wouldn’t for about 11 months. Eisenhower didn’t mention it in his memoirs because it didn’t happen.
When they got the plans (AT THE SAME TIME) Eisenhower & Monty BOTH saw that the invasion was too small with too few troops. They JOINTLY expanded the invasion plans. The original plans given to Eisenhower & Monty had 3 divisions with 2 in support-100% seaborne troops. No airborne. They JOINTLY expanded it to 5 seaborne divisions and 3 airborne divisions. They wanted a broader front and it would make the capture of the Cherbourg port quicker.
Leave it to Monty & his ego to suggest he alone came up with the final plans & convinced everyone else to do it his way that he was right & everyone else was wrong. By reading his memoirs you’d think he singlehandedly won the war.
I don't get why so many people are pointing to Gallipoli as evidence for Churchill "not caring about casualties." It was that disastrous campaign that _made_ him so worried about casualties at D-day. The exact _opposite_ effect of what you people are saying.
Churchill was responsible for the mess in Gallipoli because being a staunch imperialist; he didn't believe Ottomans could possibly defeat British troops (i.e. Whites couldn't lose to browns).
He also withdrew troops from North Africa when they were on the verge of finishing off the Italians and sent them to Greece when the Greeks had already repelled the Greek invasion. The Germans sent the Afrika Korp to North Africa where the weakened British forces were driven back all the way Egypt and the Germans also worried about British forces in Greece being able to threaten the Romanian oilfields, so they reinforced the Italians in Greece and threw the British out. The author Roald Dahl found himself one of only seventeen fighters in the whole of Greece versus hundreds and hundreds of German aircraft.
Churchill also advocated invading mainland Italy, calling it the 'Soft underbelly of Europe' despite the terrain favouring the defenders. An American general would later call it 'One tough gut'.
Every military decision Churchill ever made resulted in disaster. He was an armchair general who got where he did because of his famous military ancestors; not because of any genuine skill.
@@DomWeasel Take the ANZAC's away from him and he would've looked even worse.
@@godofcodu13itch, Rommel credits the Ozzies defending Tubruk as long as they did for his defeat in North Africa. If they hadn't held there, the British wouldn't have had time to reinforce Egypt after Churchill stripped its forces for Greece.
If the ANZACs hadn't fought as fiercely as they did at Gallipoli, as you say it would have been even more of a disaster.
@@DomWeasel yeah its a pity so many great people had to die on all sides, but now Australia is 1/4 born overseas we lost the bravest generation's and when i look around i haven't the foggiest idea why.
Exactly so. Churchill pushed hard for a landing in Gallipoli but was not involved in the planning or execution of the operation, which as we all know was a disaster. It is still taught at Sandhurst as a textbook case of how not to carry out a seaborne landing.
This was one of the most well documented and interesting periods in history and yet we have scenes in films like this which are complete fantasy. There is also another scene with Churchill arguing with Eisenhower which did not happen. And, the sad thing is, for a lot of people, this is the only history they are exposed to is fiction.
It smacks of hit job. The demonization of Montgomery seems only exceeded by the demonization of MacArthur. The idea of Churchill giving advice about amphibious operations is stunning. I just would have replied to Churchill, " how did that Gallipoli thing work out for you? "
@@WALTERBROADDUS Yes, agreed. Montgomery, Patton, MacArthur all get a bad rap. However, as I remember, Montgomery was very well respected up to his death in 1976 and this demonization has come about by films such as this which simply invent the narrative for dramatic effect.
@@willyspinney1959 I think it comes down to Rommel and Patton getting a better movie.... 🤷🏽♂️
I'd of loved to seen these men arguing with each other
These two never talked like this to each other. Not sure what movie this is but glad I never saw it.
you mustve been there
What a terrible, and historically inaccurate, movie this must have been. I'm glad I didn't see it.
My thoughts too
where you there?
@@cirrus1964 Don't try to be a smartass. What do you think the odds are that a 2017 popcorn flick was more accurate in its portrayal of history then 70 years of reliably accredited documentation and personal accounts written by those who were there or those who directly interviewed those who were there.
Also, where and were aren't interchangeable, dumbass.
@Heuckepeucke Borserian That ridiculously unprofessional exchanges like this would have taken place between Churchill and Montgomery, especially over D-Day.
@Heuckepeucke Borserian
';Churchill and Monty used to argue with each other like that'
When?
1:30 Pushing a high ranking officer in this context would never happen.
I accept it for the sake of drama but you're very good for pointing it out.
Montgomery is a field marshal
@@phoenixwolff8103 as of 1 sept 1944. Well deserved and earned. Bradley was pissed that he did not get his 4th star until 2 weeks before ve day. He got it along most senior generals in the eto.
@@phoenixwolff8103 ETO.. eqivilent to our
5 star rank.
@@paratrooper629 Im gonna have to disagree, Harold Alexander was a far better general.
I don't recall any exchange like this in any of the histories that I have read of this period.
History is generally written with hearts and smiles
@@notaclerk1 mmmmk… Not really my point. I don't think Monty and Churchill had this kind of relationship.
@@TheLoyalOfficer Nothing in my reading would indicate they had that sort of relationship. In fact, I NEVER saw two English gentlemen display anger in that manner.
@@capnbobretired Exactly. Tension between Churchill and Monty was minimal. Monty generally deferred to Churchill, which is one of the reasons why Churchill liked and kept him.
I'm a history buff in general, deeply interested in WW2 as well, but even I don't care if, in reality, this confrontation never happened. It's one helluva damn fine scene!
A career soldier talking back to his commander. I don't believe this ever happened. Or that monty called winston by his name instead of "sir" or "mr prime minister".
Spoken to like that, Churchill would've eaten him alive!
Montgomery apparently did so to Eisenhower at least once during the war.
And Ike "gently" corrected him. And Monty apologized right away. "Easy, Monty, you can't talk to me like that."
You're right, Ike, I'm so sorry."
The Prime Minister isnt the Commander'n' Chief of the forces. The King (Queen) was (is)
the british were and still are very status and rank conscious.since Britain is/was ruled effectively by civilians,churchill was montgomerys superior by at least two ranks in british society and the military
.as a general/field marshal,,montgomery also had a military boss... the Chief of the general/imperial staff who reported directly to Churchill.therefore theres no way he couldn address the prime minister as in the movie.the PM can also move to have the general replaced /fired as he/she heads the defence council.
"Of all the warlords of Greece, I hate him the most!"
Imagine a king who fights his own battles. Wouldn't that be a sight?
This film is really painful to watch. Like the 2001 Pearl Harbor film, it looks like it was written by someone with a high school history education. British actors speaking like Brits in a Bugs Bunny cartoon. Subordinates cursing and swearing at their commanders. Fouling up the historical record for major historical events.The Churchill-Ike scene also was a painful joke to watch. After watching this film I had the same queasy feeling after Afflack's awful Pearl Harbor (except for John Voigt in that film -- he was very good as FDR).
Brian Cox is a great actor, constantly wasted in bad roles
Agree completely.
Gary Oldman was a better Churchill in ,"The Darkest Hour" and this film here is unreal. Tora Tora Tora was a much better film than poor junk Pearl Harbor as well.
To be fair, operation overlord could've just as easily been a slaughter and a crushing defeat.
@@pearly872 i did it
I see this movie has about as much historical accuracy as Braveheart.
No it has way more 😂🇬🇧🏴
to this day I still don't know get what was the point of making a movie dramatizing (and exaggerating) Churchill's fears and doubts about Operation Overlord.
Ignore this film. Read a book about it if you are truly interested.
I think it was because with the First World War centenary, Gallipoli was brought back into the public consciousness and they were trying to paint Churchill as more conscientious than he ever was.
I agree completely, i think doh some might be afraid to read that book, god forbid some might learn a truth.
The Russians defeated the Nazis. I still don't know why we didn't just let the Soviets take all of Germany. Would they have stopped there or gone all the way and taken France? Capitalism vs Communism. I guess the red tide would have spread all the way to the English Channel if we hadn't landed on Normandy. I guess it was necessary. There was more going on then just defeating the Nazis.
Here I thought Hollywood was bad.
I just love how they put a "german brigade" at Omaha...
If you want to see a more accurate account of this scene watch the awesome film - Ike: Countdown to D-Day (2004) starring Tom Selleck. It's a great film.
A film made to be sold to the American Market it has to be remembered
Brian Cox portrayed Goering, Churchill and Hannibal Lector. Golly.
Steady Monty. You can't speak to me like that. I'm your boss.
Dwight D. Eisenhower
Churchill knew very little about military operations, especially logistics. Monty, was an experienced General who planned the entire operation, and got the job done with a minimum of casualties.
Churchill was lord of the admiralty during WW1 and knew the dangers in a failed landing, having organized Gallipoli. Don’t say such dumb things when you don’t know what your talking about.
@@druzo5198 Well said.
Look at what churchill did for the men round him in the bore war
Churchill was terrified because of the memories of his service on western front and the gallipoli campaign. In the D-day plans he saw every possible negative. But its hard to fault him after considering his history. Its why he preferred the idea of landings in vichy/southern France where there were no such defences first.
Operations Market Garden was a failure. That he plannedand pushed on the ALLIES. They should have gone with Pattons plan. But Hindsight is 20/20.
Even if there was a back and forth, I doubt he’d have charged him. That’s just an outstanding offence.
But the men did follow Monty!
I don't know if this really happned between the 2 but the Normandy Invasion went very well as we had the best crucial edges of naval an air superiority.
@herr haller appart from omaha , the landings went pretty well. The SHAEF was expecting around 20-25 000 cassualties, they got around 12 000.
Exactly.
@John Cornell the liberation of Normandy was way behind schedule, but the liberation of france was a reverse Blitzkrieg
@John Cornell agreed on the liberation of Paris, but i was speaking more about the Normandy campaign. By D-Day +35, the allied should have reach the Loire river, liberated half of Britanny. In reallity, the americans were slowly advancing in the bocage, and the Anglo-canadians were blocked in front of Caen.
by the way, nice to see someone who knows is subject, even on yiutube comment section ^^
@John Cornell I got the same numbers and facts ^^ Where are you from by the way ?
We can debate who should have done what when , but when it comes down to it both our countries lost one too many brave American and British boys in that horrible war .
huh surprising amount of comments annoyed at this scene due to it being incredibly unlikely it happened (although I will say something very similar happened between Monty and Ike and may well be the inspiration for showing Monty like this)
movies tend to do this though, take frustrations and tense relationships between figures and concentrate it into one scene for a movie
Hard to believe Ike would act the way he did but Monty. Im gonna be honest I can see it. Commander in chief or no Churchill was a millitary dinosaur and Monty was a genius but also egotistical. I doubt he would have been too pleased to be sidelined by Winston
Well, no. You are swallowing the utter bullshit presented to you by this utter, sickening travesty of a movie. Read and (maybe) learn.
Total Rubbish.
The villa aston ( up the blues ) lol bcfc .
Is the third with the beard supposed to be Allenbrooke?
An if I was in Monty's shoes I wouldn't be taking advice from the man who planned Gallipoli either
Funny looking Southwick House
No British General would ever speak to the PM like that. precisely
I don't think this ever happened; also, while I understand Churchill's concerns about repeat of Gallipoli, Montgomery's idea materialized also during Market-Garden... and we all know how well that went.
@John Cornell Keep making excuses. The main objective of the plan was not done.
I don't believe a word of it. Montgomery wouldn't have spoken like that to Churchill. In any event, by the time the plans got to this stage, Eisenhower was in charge and he would have been explaining the plans to Churchill, not Montgomery. Also, why could they not find an actor who actually looked like Montgomery? This fellow looks like Monty with an extra thirty pounds.
There is no way a General would have spoken to Churchill like that. Smuts was a South African Field Marshal and a personal friend of Churchill. He would never have stood by if pushed or witnessed a LT Gen speaking to The PM in such a manner.
2017 Churchill : look at me acting 2018 Gary Oldman's Churchill : say acting one more time bitch...
My understanding is that the invasion plan was created at Eisenhower's HQ and the British were just coming along for the ride so to speak.
Nope it was created by Frederick Morgan & tweaked by Monty. Fact.
Montgomery could fight men, his weakness was his own personality. He tended to rub everyone the wrong way. He was at time overly cautious however as the British commander he new the loss his country had suffered in men and the need to conserve what he had.
He didn't favour a cautious strategy as Normandy was winding down. He argued for a strong powerful concentrated northern thrust to the Ruhr then beyond. It was Eisenhower who favoured the more cautious broad front, which tippy toed towards Germany and got nowhere for six months.
Montgomery wanted a battering ram. Eisenhower went for a door knocker.
@@lyndoncmp5751 You are forgetting the underlying political issues involving the Soviets, allowing them to get to Berlin. The battering ram would've had to stop at the Elbe anyway and would've cost more Allied lives.
@@solomongrundy4905
No this was in August 1944 when Montgomery proposed the strategy, long before it was established that the Soviets would be taking Berlin. In August 1944, Berlin was very much still an Anglo-American objective.
@@lyndoncmp5751 Except the London Protocol (signed Sept 12, 1944 by the EAC) already divided up Germany and it was clear that the Soviets would get much of central and eastern Germany, with Berlin being divided. Why would the Allies risk lives trying to get to Berlin first if they knew the Russians would get most of the territory west of the city anyway? Nevertheless, Monty wanted to drive into Germany! He was in idiot of class A level!
@@solomongrundy4905
1. Montgomery's proposal was laid down in August 1944.
2. Berlin was not really the issue. The issue was Montgomerys concentrated northern thrust vs Eisenhowers broad front. Berlin was at the end of both advance options so it wasn't really the main issue. The main issue was how to get into then across Germany. Montgomery favoured all allied armies being concentrated together in the north as one huge powerful unstoppable force. Eisenhower favoured dispersal of force across 500km of front. This ended up weakening the allied advance, blunting it's offensive power and getting sucked into pointless secondary campaigns for months on end such as the Hurtgen Forest, Lorraine and Alsace/Vosges. If Montgomery had his way there wouldnt have been any pointless campaigns in the Lorraine and Alsace.
3. Montgomery was the most savvy and most successful Western Allied ground commander of WW2 by some way. It was desk man Eisenhower, completely inexperienced as a battle strategist, who didn't know what he was doing. Eisenhower even ignored Montgomery's warning on November 28th 1944 that the American front line in front of the Ardennes was too thinly held and needed strengthening. Montgomery advised him to strengthen it. Eisenhower didn't listen, the Germans attacked there 3 weeks later and caused nearly 100,000 American casualties. Ironically, Eisenhower had to turn to Montgomery to bail him out.
Now maybe my standards are ridiculously high but I feel like I’m watching three
re-eanctors doing what they read in an article online somewhere.
Badly.
What nation is the officer in the background belonging to?
I believe thats a stand in for De Gaul, given his accent?! I'm not sure.
Jan Smuts. The South African Prime Minister
I think he's French because of the accent
Looks nothing like Monty!
But acts like him. Normandy was his best battle, and he, the master of the set peice frontal assault, was the perfect commander for it.
He looks tad bit plump to be playing Monty.
Nice hat though :)
I don't know that Monty ever had this exchange, but Ike and Alan Brook certainly would have. Churchill balked at the invasion to the very last. He wanted to dither around
the Greek Islands. And then what would he have done when the -1s and V2s started landing ?
Brian Cox is one of the very best actors. Gary Oldman could do no better in playing the British Bulldog.
People are going to rip on you, but, it need be remembered that at this point, the relationship between Churchill and his generals was very frayed..The Generals were wanting to open the front and were sick of Churchills machinations to continually delay, the generals were sick and tired of it
Absolutely correct. Thank god Alan brooke was CIGS and talked him out of his many hare brained schemes. Hell.... winnies ideas would have caused millions of deaths until germany got nukes many times in the summer and fall 1945. Plus.... using nukes on germany has implications on executeIng the invasion of japan.
Why is Monty arguing with Jabba the Hut about the D-Day Invasion?
The actor playing Monty doesn't even bother with that speech impediment the general had with the letter "r" ....What a cop out ....
well done monty
A guy playing Winston Churchill who also played Herman goering... ironic
Which movie?
@@ikhone9805 Nuremburg. Its the 2001 movie with Alec Baldwin
And hannibal lecter
What's ironic about it?
I seriously doubt Mountie would have confronted Churchill like and calling him by his last name. Very bad. Remember Mountie had to back down apologize to Ike and he was just a fellow officer, not a head of State.
Very inaccurate. It should have been Ike that Churchill would have argued the D Day plans not Montgomery.
In fact, in private, Churchill did voice his objections and Concerns to Ike.
Not getting involved in any fuckin arguments here. But if Churchill was THAT compassionate over human lives, he'd not have bombed the French navy.
The guy playing Montgomery sounds nothing like him ! the best portrayal was Michael Bates in "Patton ", Looks and voice !
Bates should have had his own film as Monty
I know this is a movie and doesn’t need to be 100% accurate, but I’d like to add that Montgomery never thought there was a serous squabble. In his memoirs he writes:
”It has been written that I had a row with the Prime Minister shortly before D-Day, and even threatened to resign. This is untrue. I would like to tell the true story. Here it is.
For some time before D-day the P.M. had not been satisfied that we had the right balance between fighting troops and vehicles for the initial landing on the Normandy beaches. He reckoned there were not enough men with rifles and bayonets, and too many lorries, radio vehicles, and so on. He gave out that he would come to my Head-quarters near Portsmouth and investigate the matter with my staff. On that, I invited him to dinner to meet my senior staff officers. He came on 19th May 1944. The photograph reproduced facing page 224 was taken on his arrival. I asked him to come to my study for a short talk before meeting the others. Having got him comfortable seated I said ’I understand, sir, that you want to discuss with my staff the proportion of soldiers to vehicles landing on the beaches in the first flights. I cannot allow you to do so. My staff advise me and I give the final decision; then they do what I tell them.
'That final devision has been given. In any case I could never allow you to harass my staff at this time and possible shake their confidence in me. They have had a terrific job preparing the invasion; that work is now completed, and all over England the troops are beginning to move towards the assembly areas, prior to embarkation. You can argue with me but not with my staff. In any case it is too late to change anything. I consider that what we have done is right; that will be proven on D-day. If you think it is wrong, that can only mean you have lost confidence in me’”
Then he explains how he quickly led Churchill to meet his staff after an awkward silence, and they chatted nicely and later had a friendly dinner.
So this means 2 things:
1. The film is wrong in what Churchill was worried about; it was actually ratio of men and vehicles, not distance between Utah and Sword or gas attacks.
2. Churchill and Montgomery were not in a heated argument, and it was resolved relatively quickly. I am, however, a bit confused by the lack of response from Churchill. It seems he did not push the subject further, or maybe Monty just didn’t care to talk too much about it in his memoirs. I can’t say for sure.
I might also add that this is one mans perspective, and is undoubtedly biased. I have no idea to what extent, though. Perhaps he is hiding the fact that he was rude to the Prime Minister, for is own agenda. Many people seem to dislike Montgomery. I personally see few reasons other than Market Garden, but to be fair I haven’t read into the man that much.
I have not read or heard Churchill's view on what happened that day, and it might be useful to conclude roughly how heated their argument was, and what really went down, but if anyone else knows what his perspective was, please reply to my comment.
British and American? What about the Canadians? We had a whole beach to ourselves to contend with.
6:00 President Debate 1944 (2020)
How historically accurate is this scene? The movie makes it look like he was mainly worried about not getting men killed than destroying the Nazis and liberate Europe.
Anyone?
The idea that Montgomery ever, EVER addressed Winston Churchill in this way is just an absolute travesty. Whoever made this movie hated Churchill - and the truth.
"Well this entire conversation doesn't matter because Eisenhower is in charge."
If the real-life Montgomery had ever shown that much energy on the battlefield as the fictional portrayal does in this scene, he probably would've won more victories without having to repeatedly rely upon Patton to pull his chestnuts out of the fire on more than one occasion... I mean, sure, he was the big hero at El-Alamein, but after that? Psh...not so much.
It was Monty that pulled Patton out of the fire at El Guettar when the Eighth army attacked the Germans from the rear at Wadi Akarit while patton was stalled.
@@saxonwarrior3736 Nope, sorry, you're wrong. Don't know where you got your revisionist "history" from but the facts don't support that rather fanciful & inventive (not to mention Anglocentric) "interpretation" of events at all.
@@MrPGC137 Is that so?
''On 6 April, the British 8th Army once again overran the Axis lines at the Battle of Wadi Akarit, and a full retreat started. On the morning of 7 April, Benson Force moved through the positions held by the 1st and 9th divisions, and raced down the abandoned El Guettar-Gabès road, where it met the lead elements of the 8th Army at 17:00. With the last Axis line of defense in the south of Tunisia broken, the remaining forces made a run to join the other Axis forces in the north. Tunis fell to the Allies in early May."
@@MrPGC137 Looks like you are wrong lol
@@MrPGC137 Wadi Akarit is behind El Guettar. Try again.
Surely Montgomery would have been court martialled if he'd spoken to the pm like that?
The worst part of this movie was the total lack of reference to the Dieppe Raid.
I doubt Monty ever behaved with such insolence to Winston.
Winston loved Monty
Me neither
The most you can say for this invention is at least there wasn't a regiment of zombie SS.
It’s Always arguing about plans and etc . but I don’t think that kinda talk really took place in reality . Let’s call it “artist fiction”
oops wrong monty and winston
amichi sevilla 😂😂💀
IM LAUGHING 👺👺👺
Montey was very short in height. He was not taller then Winston.
googling tells me they were the exact same, so i guess "about the same height" seems right
I always thought Montgomery was a tall man. That's a revelation.
Gerald Johnson Not nearly as tall as he thought.
@@MrCrchandler "Well said."
Gerald Johnson He was very short. Even for the time period. Check out photos of him back there.
This is inaccurate, if you want a great Churchill film, watch darkest hour (2017)
I don't understand this scene, even if it is total fantasy and these two never argued like this. It seemed at the start, that the argument was over the size of the beachhead, with the PM thinking it needed to be wider than 50km, but... neither talked about that, and what they did say, I don't get it, the scene made it seem like the PM did not want to invade France, and just wanted to keep the men safe, which, ummmm....huh?
Complete fiction. Winston would have sacked immediately for such outbursts!
Watch Darkest Hour instead.
He carried the world on his shoulders. He was brave & hot headed ! Ho Winston ,ho .........
He was not an idiot or a pussy ! A true hero.
The old joke
Monty says to churchy
I dont drink or smoke and I'm 100% fit
Churchy replies
I smoke and drink and I'm 150% fit
Churchill remembers what happened when he ordered the Gallipoli invasion
Montgomery was a bigger hindrance to the allied war effort than the German army.
No way Monty spoke to Churchill like that. Would have surely addressed him as Prime Minister for a start. Winston would have insisted on it, or threaten to fire him. Even Ike was on the brink of firing him for speaking out of line and Monty had to back pedal pretty fast on order to keep his job.
Eisenhower could not fire Montgomery.
@@johnburns4017 yep he wanted to after goodwood but couldn't because of the backlash that would cause with the british public
@@crumpetcommandos779
Below is from Nigel Hamilton in _Monty, Master of the Battlefield 1942-1944:_
Brooke, however, was worried that he had not completely stopped the rot, and the next morning penned a long letter to Monty warning him of Eisenhower’s ‘mischief-making’:
_My dear Monty The trouble between you and the P.M. has been satisfactorily settled for the present, but the other trouble I spoke to you about is looming large still and wants watching very carefully. Ike lunched with P.M. again this week and as a result I was sent for by P.M. and told that Ike was worried at the outlook taken by the American Press that the British were not taking their share of the fighting and of the casualties._
_There seems to be more in it than that and Ike himself seemed to consider that the British Army could and should be more offensive. The P.M. asked me to meet Ike at dinner with him which I did last night, Beddel was there also. It is quite clear that Ike considers that Dempsey should be doing more than he does; it is equally clear that_ *_Ike has the very vaguest conception of war!_*
_I drew attention to what your basic strategy had been, i.e. to hold with your left and draw the Germans onto the flank while you pushed with your right. I explained how in my mind this conception was being carried out, that the bulk of the Armour had continuously been kept against the British. He could not refute these arguments, and then asked whether I did not consider that we were in a position to launch major offensives on each Army front simultaneously. I told him that in view of the fact that the German density in Normandy is 2 ½ times that on the Russian front, whilst our superiority in strength was only in the nature of some 25% as compared to 300% on the Russian superiority on the Eastern front, I did not consider that we were in a position to launch an all out offensive along the whole front._
_Such a procedure would definitely not fit in with our strategy of opening up Brest by swinging forward Western Flank.’_
To Brooke, Monty’s strategy was so clear that he could not understand Eisenhower’s apparent obsession with side issues, such as accusations in the American press that the British were leaving all the fighting up to the Americans: ’The strategy of the Normandy landing is quite straight-forward. The British (on the left) must hold and draw Germans on to themselves off the western flank whilst Americans swing up to open Brest peninsular,’ Brooke noted in his diary.
Churchill? WINSTON?! Yeah, calling the prime minister by his first & last name?! Who the HELL wrote the script to this movie?! Monty WAS a coincided, ego maniac but I HIGHLY doubt he ever disrespected Churchill like that! At least not to his face!
What proof, besides Hollywood, have you to prove Monty was an _ego maniac?_
These movies never point out the grave mistake of the Hedgerows...They were perfect for defense and the Allies landed right in front of them. Apparently the Allies never sent black opps people into the area behind the beaches to inspect the interior terrain for an armoured advance. This cost the lives of ten, twenty, thousand?...and stopped the advance cold for a month. Proving piss poor planning leads to piss poor results.
So now Monty created overlord?😅😄😃🤣😂
Yes he did with Frederick Morgan.
The reason the Germans never used gas was simple: they depended on horses for supply and even to pull artillery. Ever try and fit a horse with a gas mask and then keep it on?
was that a soviet commander
French
That's total bull. Monty talking out of his ass and daring to speak like that to Churchill??? Not believable a sec. We know Monty had an ego larger than Everest and he'd never had dared such behaviour at the risk of being dismissed on the spot for unsubordination by a man like Churchill who'd never stand for that. It's all fiction.
Is that a fucking soviet general?
What I would give for 1 luck V2 strike then and there,
Forgets the Canadians and other allies
It seems as if Churchill feared another Gallipolli fiasco. Not sure why. He was chiefly responsible for Gallipolli by being the First Lord of the Admiralty and proposing the attack on the Dardanelles in 1915. This time however the responsibility of a failed invasion would be on Eisenhower.
That being said I have good reason to believe he was far more optimistic in reality. You see by the summer 1944 the Wehrmacht had been on the retreat from the Eastern Front for a year and the Soviets had driven them back close to the borders of Poland. While it may have not been known at the time a whopping 192 German divisions were tied down from Finland in the north to Romania in the south trying to hold a long eastern front. Only 66 German divisions were in France in June 1944. Compare that to the 210 German divisions in France 1940. *There would be a whole lot less Germans to fight this time* .
Most of the Germans in France were concentrated around Calais because everything pointed it to being the place of the allied invasion. Allied bombing intensified around Calais to convince the Germans that was indeed their target. Counterespionage fed double-agents false information Calais was to be the landing area. It made the most sense too since the distance was the shortest, the beaches were ideal for invasion and the harbor, railroads and roads highly useful for the allies. Since nobody in the German high command believed Normandie would be the landing area they had the beaches manned by secondary units, shanghaied foreigners (everything from Tatars to Koreans) and older men.
Anyways, Churchill couldn't be certain the Germans had fallen for the allied ruse. They had time and time again during the last years of the war though. Operation Mincemeat had been a brilliant deception the Germans swallowed line, hook and sinker.
Some facts they knew or were fairly certain of. The allied bombing had reduced the French railway network nigh on useless for the Germans. Without it the Germans would be unable to move troops and equipment sufficiently fast. The allies enjoyed an air superiority which became distinctly more clear every week in 1944. The superiority of the Luftwaffe in 1940 was one of the main reasons the French couldn't organize an effective defense - after all their forces were being strafed and bombed almost at will by the Luftwaffe. This time it would be allies that had all the air-cover and the Germans getting strafed almost at will.
The German fuel situation was getting dire in 1944. Needless to say the logistic chain to the Eastern Front and all the tank forces there ate up a lot of fuel. If not for the Romanian oil fields at Ploesti they'd throw in towel in a month.
This seems like a bad made-for-tv drama though. Monty would never have addressed his prime minister in such a manner.
Sorry Churchill, I'm afraid Monty is right on this one. They really had the element of surprise and by concentrating forces on those beaches at Normandy gave the Allies a small foothold. The beaches however wasn't the problem despite Omaha beach being a slaughterhouse.
It was the Hedgegrow country of Normandy that made it into a Vietnam style quagmire. Perfect for Defence against infantry and tanks. More would die taking Normandy inland Than on the beaches
I wouldnt worry guys. Even if DDay is a total failure, as 1. The Soviets have got the Germans on the run in the East and will be in Berlin within the year and 2. The atomic bomb will be available by August 1945 to drop on Germany which would have ended the war anyway. So D Day and the rest only shorted the war by 3 months, at the cost of how many allied lives? Saved western Europe falling into Soviet hands though, but at a terrible price.
British and America youth what about the Canadian!
and Poles, Indians, Australians and New Zealanders, Free French etc. He can't mention them all can he? PS The Canadian Tank Regiment did very well in Normandy, they took out Michael Wittmann, so cheer up.
Wish they at least try to be accurate to their personalities...
Churchill worried about casualties?? When did that happen?
after his shame at gallipoli, nonetheless this movie is bad
If anything Montgomery was overly cautious of the lives of his men. He was a deeply cautions commander or at least was so til Arnhem when I suspect he allowed the insinuations of others force him to recklessness. The idea that he was callously indifferent to loss is simply wrong. He was and is a vastly overrated general but he was no wastrel of lives.
Churchill certainly had reservations about across channel invasion he didn't see the need for it as we'd already invaded Italy but the Italian campaign it becomes stagnant and the Americans never saw the war being won from Italy they were always gonna go across the channel eventually Churchill put his reservations aside and completely supported the operation by then the Americans were dominating the war anyway in Britain had become a junior partner it is unlikely certainly the Montgomery and Churchill would ever have had such a confrontation and Monty would certainly never have called the prime minister a trader if we had he would certainly have lost his job
Churchill voted against D Day in June against Roosevelt and Stalin. This scene, however inaccurate it might be, shows his reaction to the sidelining of Britain in WW2 and his own irrelevance, onl to be full shown a year later when he lost the general elections to Labour.
No he didnt. He knew the plans by April as Morgan & Monty had planned the entire thing
@@TheBritishLegions I said he voted against it (in casablanca, i think), not that he didn't know of it.
I like how they left out Canadian troops even through Canadians made up the majority of the troops landing on D-Day!!!🇨🇦❤️🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦🇨🇦
in real life, Montgomery was cautious about risking troops, and Churchill, for a politician...wasnt
No. Monty was a plodding meat grinder. Cautious about risking troops? You have heard about Market-Garden, havent you? PFFFT.
Even if this happened exactly as portrayed, its one of Histories "so what" moments.
He's far too tall to be Montgomery.