Watch Kongens nei

Kongens nei

Kongens nei is a movie starring Jesper Christensen, Anders Baasmo Christiansen, and Karl Markovics. April 1940. Norway has been invaded by Germany and the royal family and government have fled into the interior. The German envoy to...

Other Titles
La decisión del rey, Wybór króla, A király választása, Das Nein des Königs, ヒトラーに屈しなかった国王, La scelta del Re, The King's Choice, Alegerea regelui, Ultimatum, Kungens val, Tre døgn i april, A Escolha do Rei, Kongens valg, Kraljev izbor, Kuninkaan päätös, The King's Choice - Angriff auf Norwegen
Running Time
2 hours 13 minutes
480p, 720p, 1080p, 2K, 4K
War, Biography, Drama, History
Erik Poppe
Harald Rosenløw-Eeg, Jan Trygve Røyneland, Alf R. Jacobsen
Anders Baasmo Christiansen, Jesper Christensen, Tuva Novotny, Karl Markovics
Norway, Denmark, Ireland, Sweden
Audio Languages
English, Deutsch, Français, Italiano, Español, Svenska, Gaeilge, Nederlands
日本語, Čeština, Tiếng Việt, Português, 한국어, Australia, Filipino, हिन्दी

April 1940. Norway has been invaded by Germany and the royal family and government have fled into the interior. The German envoy to Norway tries to negotiate a peace. Ultimately, the decision on Norway's future will rest with the King.

Comments about war «Kongens nei» (26)

Benjamin W. photo
Benjamin W.

In "A Christmas Carol," the movie-making of Hans Christian Andersen has been generally recognized as well as respected. It is his world-weary, yet noble, attempt to deal with the love and tragedy of Christmas in the name of Christ that has been lost in so much of the other adaptations of his works. Christopher Reeve's gruff man of action is the best-known adaptation, but if the world had not been ready to be made ready for the coming of the Christ, there would not have been an "A Christmas Carol" to begin with. Hans Christian Andersen was a poet, and therefore I would say the scene, as he described it to a friend in a meeting, that the masked angels had rescued Christmas from the dead body of Christ, would be as true to the real story as we would have to believe that Adam and Eve did not see the Garden of Eden before they died. This is the heart of the adaptation, and as the movie progresses, one of the scenes that tends to remain in the public consciousness (as it is described as often as it is described in the movie) is the one in which the Baron Von Hohenlohe's family is transformed. We get to see the Baron and his wife become the wives of the Christmas Carol. There is nothing more or less than what we see in the book, though it is more an adaptation that makes this movie of an existing book, that of the film version, but it is in fact a film adaptation as well, even if it is also a theatrical version, and not as good as the film of the book. The main actors are done well enough, though Ben Kingsley is the best, although an incident with the actress playing his mother was also unnecessary and uninteresting. Charles Martin Smith, however, does a fine job as the scene-stealing and (in my mind) overly intelligent prince, although I think the main thing that made the movie successful was the supporting cast, which includes Alan Rickman, Judy Davis, Amy Irving, and Robert Wagner. John Lithgow does a good job playing the horrible Jekyll. The only problem is with the film itself. The adaptation is rather poor, and the film suffers from the cheapness of the acting. The cast of the film, too, has some shortcomings: Martin Donovan as the Baron is a little wooden and it shows in the way he thinks, and Tom Waits is wasted as the governor, although he does an excellent job in the scenes that he appears in. If you have seen the film, and are thinking about seeing the film, then

Maria C. photo
Maria C.

History of the Vietnamese and American war effort has been a subject covered by both a film and a book, "The Vietnamese Interrupted: America and Vietnam, 1945-1960" (Omnibus, 1980), the latter of which was made into an excellent motion picture in 1987. Although this film is not to be confused with the last-named story, it does feature some of the same actors and was filmed on location in the French Saigon during the Tet Offensive of 1968. The film opens in 1965 with General Leonard Wood's own personal military service on the march to China to end the war. This is only one of many such engagements, which served to bolster General Wood's authority as head of the Special Forces, as well as solidify his popularity in the military and political circles. General Wood would later serve as the head of the U.S. Special Forces until the 1968 Tet Offensive. He is interviewed as a witness to the Tet Offensive, talking about the ill-fated invasion of Vietnam in which he lost a platoon-sized squadron in the first few minutes of the attack. His soldiers were routed by enemy forces, and after the battle, they all came back to Vietnam as POWs. He is then taken prisoner during a political takeover in the South Vietnamese capital Saigon. General Wood eventually becomes President of South Vietnam and gives orders to Washington to end the war. The story continues with the prisoner's capture, and his escape to West Germany and finally to San Francisco where he would meet John Cage, a local carpenter, and start a friendship which would be with the very young Cage in the middle of the Vietnam War. While I'm not saying this film is a masterpiece, I do think that it is one of the more entertaining movies to be made about the war, and the POW issue. It's certainly far from the first to discuss the topic, but it is one of the most notable, due to the attention to detail and the most colorful cast. This is especially true of the portrayal of the Vietnamese. The sheer passion of seeing people of all sorts of nationalities live and live under one regime is quite impressive. This aspect is more accessible than many other war films. Much of the dialogue is spoken through the interpreter, often carrying strong accents, making one feel that they are being just as truthful as the actors. The acting is a little on the plain side, with the fewest number of recognizable faces, but this is compensated by excellent locales and locations. The city of Saigon is shown in vivid detail in one scene, while the city of Hanoi is shown in a

Jeremy photo

As an Austrian, I was rather surprised by the quality of this movie. The actors were not great, but not bad either. I was expecting a Hollywood version of the film "The Assassination of Julius Caesar" but I was wrong. The movie is more a documentary on the real events and the real personalities of the characters. The movie is very good, but I think the best part is the documentary. The way they are presented is so much more convincing than a Hollywood movie. The way they show the real events is much more interesting than the actual events themselves. I hope to see a sequel of this movie, because I think that it is a must see movie.

Kyle photo

First of all, the name of this film does not ring a bell. Is it one of those films that the typical Westerner would watch and then come back and wonder what he has been missing? I had no idea what it was about. I don't recall any particular interest. I looked it up, and lo and behold it is an actual historical film. A film that does a great job of telling the story of what happened during WWII. No special effects or overly complicated plots. The story is quite simple. It follows the story of a German leader. The story is not about him, but about what goes on inside his head. It follows the history of a family that has been divided in two. A mother and son separated at birth. The father is a Nazi. They are torn apart by their upbringing. This film is not to be taken as a political statement. It is simply a film about the horrible reality that we all face and that the world as a whole is all too aware of. And it does not preach or take sides. It gives a clear portrayal of a person's distorted reality. The acting was excellent. I liked the acting. I don't remember being moved or horrified, but it was not as depressing as it could have been. I thought the script was better than some other films I have seen. The direction was not outstanding. And there was some editing that seemed to be over done. It seemed like they didn't know what to cut or to leave out. And the lighting was poorly lit, and could have used a little more realism. I liked the film. It kept me interested, but I can't say I was moved or disturbed by it.

Hannah Silva photo
Hannah Silva

Since I have been so impressed by the efforts by the screenwriter/director, and by Mr. Huang himself, I will just be writing about the film. Unfortunately, I must confess I have not really been impressed with Mr. Huang's previous movies. I would have said that the screenwriter/director, is the same for every single one of his movies. He is a very good screenwriter, with great talent for cinema, but he also has an unfortunate tendency to pull in the last drop of talent, which is the cause for his past (too) bad movies. That's why I always kept my expectation to the very bottom. When I was expecting a movie with a big name, it always seemed to me that it could not have been made, especially since I didn't have a big name in mind. And I have to say that I am one of the few people who was disappointed with this movie. I felt that it was really a huge disappointment. This is not a movie to get into the soul of. And this is a very bad movie to get into. I must admit that the movies in the previous 10-15 years had a really bad reputation, but it's actually not the same with this one. There are a lot of similarities with a lot of films, and it's almost enough to say that you should be able to enjoy this movie for what it is. Mr. Huang is a very good writer, but I just feel that there is something missing here, to make a good movie out of it. I think that he should have made it as an homage to the past films he enjoyed. So the movies are still just okay, but this is more of an exception.

Jordan photo

I was a bit surprised when I heard of this film because I was expecting a movie about the events of WWII. The first thing I noticed about this film was that it has an extremely harsh, violent tone that only served to emphasize the harsh reality of war and the violence that goes along with it. It was a little disturbing for me, because I'm not usually interested in films that push the envelope of human cruelty. That said, the violence did not seem to me to be overly over the top, and seemed realistic and realistic at the same time. The characters in the film were generally decent, and their actions felt completely believable. The actors in the film all seemed to be genuine, not as puppets used to bring out the worst in their characters. The music was also very powerful, and at times, the music had a very eerie and ominous feel to it, that added to the bleak tone of the film. Overall, the movie was an impressive movie, not only for the intense tone, but also for the characters and the story. It certainly had a bleak and depressing look to it, but the characters and the plot kept my interest. The performances were also very strong, and the acting was well done. Overall, this was a great movie to watch if you are a serious war movie lover. It also seems that it was done very well, and I give it a thumbs-up for doing what it was set out to do. I can only imagine how great the real-life events of World War II were.

Martha K. photo
Martha K.

This is the story of the assassination of a powerful Communist leader and his head of state, during the Korean War. It is a well done account of what the actors went through. Some of the details were a bit rushed and some of the details were quite unrealistic. But the film was able to capture the atmosphere of the war and its impact on the civilians. This is what most war movies are lacking. All in all, it is a well done film. The acting was also very good.

Danielle Fox photo
Danielle Fox

A film based on a book by a Hungarian writer, it tells the story of a large-scale commemoration of the victory over Nazi Germany at the end of World War II. The story centers on one particular town in Hungary, Ksiazk, and the historian Ustasha Gyorgy, who then goes into hiding for the rest of his life. He is trying to reestablish contact with his family and to keep his memory alive. The film is about the cold war and what happened during it. The film has a good production. The sound quality is good, the cinematography is good and the overall look of the film is beautiful. The acting is not great. In fact, the cast does not have a lot to work with. The film is very slow and has a very slow pace. The story is long and it is not as captivating as it could have been. This is because the director does not have a lot of time to work with. He does not want to go into too much detail with his cast because the script is not that good. This is probably the main problem with this film. There is nothing to recommend it except the production and the slow pace.

Gary photo

As a film student in an art school I found this movie to be very interesting. I was amazed at how realistic it was and how it portrayed the events of the war in a way that was very realistic. It was interesting to see how the different nations viewed the events and the war. I also found the movie to be very funny. It is a very unique movie and I recommend it to anyone who is interested in the history of the world.

Eric Brown photo
Eric Brown

This film is not a summary of the events of 9/11/01. It is more about the personal feelings of a few people who survived the tragedy. I am going to say right up front that I am not a Bush voter. I voted for John Kerry in 2000, and I voted against Al Gore in 2000, so I have no political leanings at all. I can say, however, that this film is a good representation of the feelings of a few people. The acting is superb. I will start with the highlight of this film. I was riveted. I was totally invested in the movie. The performances are exceptional. I can't really say much more. I have seen this film at least a dozen times. It's a difficult film to view. It is one of the hardest films to watch, because it is so moving and intense. The second highlight of this film was the story. The director uses a few gripping moments to create tension and drama. One such scene involves the writer's girlfriend and her daughter. This scene is very powerful and powerful enough to make you cry. The second highlight is a big fight between two journalists that builds up the suspense of what will happen next. I can't go into the details of the fight. I will just say that it is the kind of fight that you don't want to see on the screen. The third highlight is the writer's brother. He is in a difficult situation. This film portrays how he handles the situation. I know that is not the only scene where he handles the situation, but I have seen this film a dozen times. The final highlight is the mother. The mother of one of the two journalists in the story and the man who writes the story. I think the acting is exceptional. I could not find a flaw in the acting, except for the mother's mother. The mother is a typical German mother. I know that these people have had to deal with the same emotional problems as the other mother, but this mother showed us how the mother handles the situation. I also found the mother's acting impressive. I think this mother was not perfect, but it is still very convincing. I also found that she showed how she would handle a crisis and how she would handle any situation. The final highlight was the son. I found that this son was not a particularly likable character. However, he did have an almost sympathetic demeanor, which was much different from the son of the journalist. The son had a certain outlook on life that was very much unlike that of the journalist's son. The son's son was more

Eugene F. photo
Eugene F.

Like many of the reviewers, I'm a bit torn. Some people love this movie. It's a solid, well-made movie about an important part of the Cambodian history, but I'd go as far to say it's historically inaccurate. As I stated, this movie is accurate in some respects. The plot and conflict is accurate. It tells you how the war actually played out and how the Vietnamese people reacted. The acting is solid. A good movie in many respects, but not historically accurate. It's not trying to be, it's trying to be an accurate historical documentary. In that sense, it succeeds.

Jerry Fox photo
Jerry Fox

With 'Passion of The Christ', Pope Francis has reunited the world with the story of Jesus. Many have attacked the use of imagery and imagery in the film as un-Christian. However, I felt it was a great artistic decision. When Jesus is surrounded by flocks of birds, flying in the wind, surrounded by the Virgin Mary and surrounded by disciples carrying His body. This is a scene from the book of Proverbs, written by a pagan prophet. The Virgin Mary is a princess and God is a king. I also felt it was a great choice for the title of the movie. In the book of Proverbs, the first three words of the title are followed by four words which are said before any story begins. The 'life of the world' refers to the year of the end of the world. 'the life of the spirit' refers to the year of the beginning of the world. The movie takes place after the end of the world. The stars that were in the sky as they were depicted in the book were replaced with a more modern, smaller, fewer and more realistic star. I felt it was done well. Overall, 'Passion of The Christ' is a very powerful story about the life of Christ. I give it a '7' because it did leave me with a heavy heart for the death of the 12 disciples. I will not be watching it again.

Julia photo

I don't know much about the history of WWII, so I can't really compare this movie to other films, but I liked this movie. It told the story of the storming of the British embassy in Berlin. And I liked that. It was interesting, the same as the movie "Stalingrad" in that it is a very fast paced film, and it does show the "blood and guts" part of the war. But, it is the story of a young Brit who gets involved with German's that got involved with the Nazi's during WWII, because they were not up to the task of fighting the Americans and British forces. Well, the movie was fast paced. I was entertained and the actors were very good. It was fun to see the main character, but I don't know how much of the story is real, but I think it was very true. It was also very funny. I give it a 7 out of 10.

Julia Cunningham photo
Julia Cunningham

A powerful period piece, well-acted, great production values, with the solid acting of Erik Olin, Gillian Anderson, and all the supporting cast, while still a little too long in parts. It's interesting to see how a "known" Norwegian actor with English as a second language could be better than a great Norwegian actor with a Norwegian accent (as well as the fact that this is the only film about the Titanic that didn't have any mention of the first shipwreck of the Titanic!). For me, a must see, with some good history and good acting.

Rachel Berry photo
Rachel Berry

What a shock, when the Nazi ghosts from the World War II time period pop up at the end of the film in some strangely surreal way, the perfect way to make the audience think "this is something totally different from what we were used to." - Could this be Kubrick's way to warn us of the dark side of the Dark Ages? "Kongens nei" is a political propaganda film made in the 70s, and probably the last of the German propaganda films produced by this country. So, all in all, "Kongens nei" is a very enjoyable and important film, in particular the last of the Nazi propaganda films from the Nazi era. It's very good, not to be missed. But, the last thing, is that the story is very confusing, and there are no answers in it. I think that it could have been a better film. Seven out of 10. K. W. Toono

Victoria B. photo
Victoria B.

In 1946, World War II has become an epidemic of horror, the worst mass slaughter in human history. The Netherlands is the only country to suffer a German-style concentration camp: the so-called "Netherlands", and since 1946 the war has been a code for the atrocities, political intrigue, racism and prejudice that reign in the world. The hardest blow of the war was inflicted by the Allies on Germany, the war on the home front was, for the Germans, a nightmare, and the final result was a concentration camp in the Netherlands, reputedly a torture chamber. What does the Dutch think of the war? We watch a group of ordinary Dutch people who were also not war victims but made political deals with the Germans. Many people try to justify the Nazi regime, and many more try to excuse the atrocities, but most people do not have time to do that, but, in addition to that, many politicians and judges were involved in a conspiracy to hide the German crimes, hiding or denying the truth was the worst part of the war. The Dutch government declares war on Germany, leading to the harshest punishment. But the war is won, and the victorious side is Dutch, led by Peter Saarschild. The Dutch, in a special declaration, recognizes the Nazi-collaborators, the Germans who collaborated with the Nazis in the war, and the Dutch who supported the Nazis. That allows the Dutch government to take control of the Netherlands, its financial, political, and military institutions, and it gives them the right to the Dutch nationality. It also allows the Dutch state to give each Dutch citizen a Dutch passport, to provide a Dutch identity card. One of the things that is not recognized is the war crimes of the German regime, and that means that the Dutch government is entitled to be held responsible, even to bring the German-collaborators to trial. The Government of the Netherlands (known as the Netherlands, since 1946), until the present day, has refused to admit the German-collaborators as collaborators, but finally the courts are taking a decision, and the Dutch government is not ready to give up its desire to take back control of the Netherlands. But at the same time, the war is over, and the Dutch people have forgotten about the war, except the bad things about the war. So, that's why the movie is based on a true story, but is not based on the facts. The filmmakers managed to bring the Netherlands, the country, into a very human and meaningful scene, where everything that the Dutch believe and they do is something that is not

Nancy photo

This was an interesting film. It was about history, but it was also about the despair of war, the desperation of humanity. It was about how human beings are, and how people can turn in to beasts of war, how to fight for what you believe in, or fight against what you do not. I like that it does not give you a long or a fast storyline, it gives you enough details to be able to decide on your own. It is a great film.

Marie photo

Overall, "Forced to fight" is a good film. It is a biopic of the civil war and the way that both sides were pushed to use any means to achieve their goals, both in terms of violence, but also with regard to how they and their opponents behaved towards each other. This is evident from the point of view of both sides, especially in terms of social behaviour. I would recommend watching this film, as it may help you understand the issues of the war and how it was fought. The film is quite dark in some parts, especially the final scene. However, in spite of this, it is a very well made film with excellent performances from the entire cast. I am very much looking forward to seeing the director's future projects.

Ashley photo

This film brings together the heroic story of the "Kuwait march" of 1915, which was a campaign by the Japanese invading a poorly ruled Muslim minority in Asia. The only reason it was allowed to succeed was because the Japanese had sent Japanese soldiers to supervise it. In Japan, the film is usually given the title of "Gitan senso" (Battle in the Light), and to some degree it would have been if the Japanese had not interfered. The film focuses on one man's rise and fall in the mid 1920's to Japanese power in Japan. The film shows the lessons of the war, like never forget, never surrender, and never surrender again. It also depicts some of the struggle and the friendships formed between the men of the march. Many of the Japanese soldiers had fought before the war and knew the march was a bad idea. The film had some technical faults, like the sound, but it was not a total loss, it was an enjoyable film. In any case, if you like historical films or movies, this is a good one.

Lawrence E. photo
Lawrence E.

I've been a fan of the book for years, and I am also a huge fan of the old film. I thought that I'd never see such a faithful adaptation, and I'm glad that I finally have. First, this movie is a masterpiece. It feels like the film is simply shot in the style of a short novel, and in that sense, it's more enjoyable than some movies I've seen recently. The performances were very well done, and the cast seemed to be reliving scenes from the book without any real changes. It was a bit like reading a book while seeing a short film, except that I felt like I was sitting in a theater, watching a film I read several years ago. I think the most important thing is that the film is a work of art. I think that it captures the essence of the book very well, and that's just a beautiful thing. If you're one of those people who still don't know what to say about this movie, go see it anyway. It's well worth it.

Joan Russell photo
Joan Russell

The film itself is rather hard to get, but it is worth watching. It is very disturbing, and even shows just how bad the Nazi's were. That was so the real facts. The film shows just how desperate the Nazis were. The main character is played by Julie Swetman, a very good actress who really shows how much the film is trying to show. The script is very good. They try to show just how sad the war was. The film is also very beautiful. Even though it is a German movie, it is very hard to find, and I am just glad that I found it, but I suggest you don't let anyone know you found it. This is a very good film, it is not like your usual Hollywood block buster. I give it a 9 out of 10. The film is really very sad, and extremely well made. I don't think you will be dissappointed with this film.

Dorothy Turner photo
Dorothy Turner

When I first saw the trailer for "Mannen" I was amazed, it looked so good. The plot of the movie is quite interesting, but what I didn't expect was the fact that it was shot in the style of a documentary. It is a documentary style documentary that tells the story of a man who was born into a family that was persecuted for their beliefs. He was raised by a Christian family and then his father is murdered by the Nazi's. He then becomes a prisoner of war and is forced to fight against the SS. The story is told in a way that makes it interesting and even moving. There are many details that I would have liked to see explained, like why the SS didn't just use the SS troops to fight the enemy. Another thing that I didn't like was that the story was told in a very slow pace. I would have liked to see the action in a much faster pace, and even the ending could have been better. But I am not going to go into details because I don't want to spoil the movie for anyone. I would recommend this movie to anyone who is interested in historical movies. It is a good movie that will make you think.

William G. photo
William G.

It was a time when we all felt like a slave, to be a slave, to not be free, and remember that we were just humans. What a time that was. This film has the ability to bring that sort of feeling to you. The performances are very good, especially from the leading role, that's being played by its first American actor, George Clooney. A warm hearted man who gets the victims of war to understand that the pain of war is not going to go away because it's a painful and important experience, as everyone can attest to. It's also a man who knows a thing or two about the personal impact that war has on people. His voice is just as powerful and affecting as those of his fellow veterans, as he sits in the chair next to the TV and looks at the news of the war and understands the effect it had on their families and the little things that it destroyed in the families of the war casualties. The film also manages to give you the feeling that you're watching a documentary, and not just another movie. The way the director and writer show the victims of war is very real and extremely moving. It's a great story, the story of a man who truly understands what war is, and how important it is to remember that it's just a terrible experience. And although it does not take the form of a conventional film, it does provide a strong and accurate depiction of war, and does so with an intelligence and humour. The contrast between the brave man who tries to bring the message of war to the public, and the disappointed and unhelpful man who just tries to forget about it, is very effective. The acting, the camera work, the editing, the screenplay, the director, the cinematography, the story, the message, all are all excellent. Highly recommended.

Jeremy W. photo
Jeremy W.

I think you have to be a big fan of the movie to appreciate this film. A really fantastic and moving film that is very well made and deserves the place in my collection. This is not just another war movie, this is a story about the Holocaust and the end of that dark chapter of our history. If you like this movie, check out the other books and make sure you get the book version.

Alexander M. photo
Alexander M.

The movie is based on a true story about the friendship of two men in the Dutch colonial army during WWI. The film was made by a very good director who knows how to make a movie about the history. The story of the friendship between two soldiers is told through a number of flashbacks and a few interviews. This is the main problem of the movie. There is a lot of time spent talking about what happened in the past, but there is not enough time to tell the story. I really liked the story of the friendship of these two men, but I could not get into it. The only thing that I can say is that the movie is good, but I think it could have been much better.

Justin Daniels photo
Justin Daniels

The first half of the film is one of the best I've seen in a while, and the second half is just as good. It's a film that is very much in the vein of "Casablanca" and "Casablanca" - a story about people who are trying to do good, but in the end can't seem to make up their mind whether they should do good or evil. That's the theme of the film, and it's a great one. The acting is great, the cinematography is amazing, and the film is just all around great. I recommend this movie to anyone, but if you're looking for something completely different, I would suggest "Casablanca" or "Casablanca" (both of which are also great).