| Product: |
Richard III [1996] (DVD) |
| Date: |
27.03.08 (91 review reads) |
| Rating: |
 |
Advantages: Great performances, very entertaining
Disadvantages: Doesn't quite marry Shakespeare's words with the visuals
A review of just the film.
This is a version of the Shakespeare play made in 1995, starring Ian McKellan back when he was still mainly known as a classical stage actor. It was an adaptation of a much acclaimed version he performed in for the National Theatre, and updates the action to a fictional 1930s England just recovering from a civil war.
Edward IV is on the throne, having won the civil war. He is ill, and his villainous brother, Richard of Gloucester, plans to claim the throne when Edward dies. He has to remove his older brother Clarence and the king's young sons to do it, but he's not prepared to let anything stand in his way...
This has always been one of Shakespeare's most popular plays, mainly because it gives leading actors a really juicy part to get their teeth into. It was one of Shakespeare's earlier plays, and while it contains probably his first great piece of character writing, it isn't a great play. It lurches too suddenly between the black comedy of the first half and the tragedy of the second, and it really is a one-man show. Once Richard has won the crown there's nothing much for him to do besides sit around waiting to lose it. The play really makes the most sense as the last play in the history cycle - when you see it in the context of the three parts of Henry VI, the awkward bits work a lot better. As a standalone it doesn't do nearly enough to establish the characters and their relationships, and relies on a lot of prior knowledge from the audience. The sudden arrest of Clarence at the beginning, for instance, really is incomprehensible unless you know what he'd done previously.
The film deals with this pretty well, though. It begins in fine OTT dramatic fashion, with a tank crashing through a wall and soldiers shooting people. Then we get about five minutes of dialogue-free celebration scenes which neatly tell us who everyone is and what they think of each other without voiceovers or clumsy captions. The film isn't shy about chopping and changing dialogue. Although most of the language is Shakespeare's, loads of lines are cut (just as well, it's a fearsomely long play), as is at least one major part (Queen Margaret - most of her lines are given to Richard's mother). Some juicy lines from Henry VI part 3 are included as they spell things out a bit better, and of course the semi-modern dress helps enormously. This is about as good an attempt at making Shakespeare exciting to a modern audience without dumbing down as you'll see (with the possible exception of the Baz Luhrmann Romeo + Juliet). It's certainly much more exciting and innovative than Olivier's pantomime-costume heritage version.
It works very well as a film. The violence is shown pretty explicitly (most of it takes place offstage in the play) and is enough to earn a 15 certificate. Richard is made an explicitly fascist figure in the Oswald Mosley mode, leading a rally and wearing an SS-style black uniform. The trappings of the 30s settings are beautifully detailed, from the costumes to the props (the film is very fond of those old-fashioned microphones, and everyone chain smokes). The locations are nicely appropriate, including such places as the Brighton Pavilion. London's old art deco power stations are well-used: what is now Tate Modern stands in for the Tower of London, while Battersea Power Station is the location for the final battle. It's a great final battle, too, albeit an obviously low-budget one.
McKellan is superb in the lead role, as you'd expect him to be. Unlike Olivier (or Branagh) he's just as compelling on screen as he is on stage (I'd imagine it was this film that got him the part of Magneto in X-Men). His craggy face, his lopsided smile, his wonderful voice are all deployed to maximum effect. He doesn't make much of Richard's disabilities - the limp and hump are a bit perfunctory, although there is a nice bit when he waves his deformed fist in people's faces. With his repulsive 30s hairstyle and moustache he really looks the part, too.
The rest of the cast are a collection of classy actors who excel at this kind of thing. Kristen Scott Thomas is the foolish Lady Anne, although not even she and McKellan can make the terrible wooing scene work. Maggie Smith, Nigel Hawthorne and John Wood provide the gravitas. Jim Broadbent is perfectly cast as the jolly but duplicitous Buckingham, the play's only other remotely interesting part. The Queen and her brother are played by Annette Bening and Robert Downey Jr, a blatant attempt to appeal to an American audience, but also a clever way of turning otherwise dull roles into a Wallis Simpson style usurper and her shiftless hanger-on brother (and both actors, as ever, are great).
So it's well acted, intelligent, and enjoyable in way you don't really expect Shakespeare to be. It's also shot very nicely, with some great little touches, and the music, a mix of portentous orchestrals and 30s dance music, works well. And there's a wild boar in it - nice! But I'm not sure it can be counted a complete success. The realism of the settings and décor doesn't really work with the inevitably mannered dialogue, most of which is in blank verse. Shakespeare can't be played as if it's regular drama because of the language, however much of the tricky stuff has been excised, and the film doesn't quite pull it off.
But it was worth a try. I greatly prefer to see Shakespeare on stage - I'll be seeing a Richard III again next month - but this is probably my favourite Shakespeare film, and one I'd recommend to people who think they don't like his work. It seems that this is unavailable on DVD in the UK at the moment - the edition I've got is being offered for an obviously-ludicrous £80 on amazon - but a region 1 disk can be imported for about £5.
Summary: A very good attempt to do Shakespeare on film
|
|