In Reply to: What are your favourit WS films? posted by patrickU on June 3, 2005 at 08:32:07:
patrick,Movie versions of Shakespeare I like:
"Henry V"- 1945 Olivier- the shift between stage to location. Olivier's depth is wonderful. The scene where Henry wanders among the troops in the night before the battle is esp. memorable.
"A Midsummer Night's Dream" -1936 version with Merle Oberon and Mickey Rooney as Puck! Magic in black and white. I even love the opening credits of this movie: "Play by William Shakespeare/ Additional dialog by Sam Taylor". Now that's a credit!
"Othello": I do like the Orson Welles version- the way he presents the gradual deterioration into chaos of Othello through jealousy. Amazing photography of the low budget sets is wonderful.
"Romeo and Juliet": I do like the 1967 or so version by Zefferelli- amazingly delicate
"The Taming of the Shrew": There is nothing at all wrong with the Tayor/Burton/York version. This is really funny, physical, and you can understand every word. It's so difficult to get the meter running proerly and this is one of the most natural sounding versions of Shakespeare and of course Taylor and Burton are believable as a embattled but passionate couple.
"Richard III": I really, really liked the recent version with Ian McKellan as a proto-fascist usurper in the late 1930s. Every detail is just wondeerful. when McKellan's Jeep gets hung up, he calls in a ironic agony "My Kingdom for a horse" and it's chilling! Like so many English mvies, the casting for every part no matter how slight is fantastic. Even Downey did well as Rivers.
"The Tempest": This was one of the last three plays and is a really difficult one because of the complexity of the symbolism, alchemical content, and the proto-phycology. I think Geenaway's version, "Prospero's Books" is almost genius in presenting the magic island conjured by Prospero. The interruptions to show the magic books might have been better integrated, but the whole atmosphere of magic and the constant reminders of the play's symbolic elements: air, earth, fire and especially water is brilliant ans subtle. Gielgud is perfect as the intellectual going through an alchemical mid-life crisis. The nudity too was so naturally done as to make the body almost abstract and neutral. Fantastic.
Almost Shakespeare:
"Ran": The Kurosawa version of King Lear- marvelous n wevery way
"Throne of Blood": The Kurosawa version of "Macbeth" Beautiful, and the sinister Lady Macbeth was never more insidious.
Rubbish Shakespeare:
I just hate the Branaugh versions. Branaugh has no absolutely no feel for the meter or language and is wooden and confused throughout with two styles- quiet declamation and "angry" declamation. Disasters. I think his "Much Ado about nothing" is the worst Shakespeare ever filmed. His "Hamlet" is so dull, Branaugh is so stiff and remote and confused as to be unwatchable. I think of Branaugh as the English Kevin Costner.
Mel Gibson's vanity project of Hamlet. If Gibson had been the Prince of Denmark, it's was a good thing his Uncle took over the country. instead of deep existential angst and paralyzing ambivalence, Gibson shows us a confused idiot that spends his life reading lines badly from a book.
Cheers,
Bambi B
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Shakespeare -now in glorious 2-D ! - Bambi B 08:27:30 06/05/05 (3)
- Re: Shakespeare -now in glorious 2-D ! - patrickU 06:41:25 06/06/05 (2)
- "Oh, dat dis twoo twoo solwid fwesh vould bee melting." - Bambi B 08:47:37 06/06/05 (1)
- Re: "Oh, dat dis twoo twoo solwid fwesh vould bee melting." - patrickU 09:09:49 06/06/05 (0)