Thomas Crowl’s Shakespeare and Film’s second chapter, “Close up: Major Directors I” features three directors. These three directors are most responsible for the atmosphere of the Anglo-American Shakespeare film. Laurence Oliver (1907-1989,) Orson Welles (1915-1985,) and Kenneth Branagh (b. 1960) each fashioned different methodologies to transfer the text from Shakespeare’s plays to innovative and thought-provoking films.
Crowl writes this chapter to inform readers with an unbiased and fair review of directors who have successfully and profoundly constructed reproductions of Shakespeare’s plays. All three directors are considered artistic geniuses, because, as Crowl describes, each brings a new component on how to interpret Shakespeare’s work,
…show more content…
Olivier reigned in on his nation’s need for self expression during wartime and Shakespeare fit the bill perfectly. Olivier’s sagacity led him to rewriting and directing Henry V that fused his nation’s need for self expression during wartime and Shakespeare. It did not take much work to trim and style Henry V to relate it to England during World War II. He used this piece to rally and at the same time awareness to the great works of Shakespeare. Olivier also directed Hamlet and Richard III and acted in several Shakespeare films. His Hamlet was filmed in black and white and offered a dark and psychological approach in contrast to the cheerful and patriotic Henry V. Olivier decided to do the opposite of typical films by pulling away from characters as speeches developed, instead of zooming in. This technique offered fresh and visually appealing films and gained much laudatory remarks. Olivier was known for his “physical and vocal power as an actor.” His standing and accomplishments as an actor and director brought “Shakespeare to a wider audience,” and “contributed to making the Shakespeare film a vital …show more content…
Branagh did things much like Shakespeare when it came to borrowing from past work. He took the best ideas from other films, and combined them into his Shakespeare films. One aspect that Branagh brings from film to film is comedy. Branagh is known for taking fresh actors and mixing them with strong and well known British actors. What the chapter failed to mention was that both Olivier and Welles portrayed men of color by using blackface for all of the Shakespeare re-productions. Branagh was the only one to leave the roles to talented African American actors. Branagh’s Shakespeare films are known for their controversial casting, but he is just trying to make films with “different accents, different looks . . .” and a modern Anglo-American looking cast. Branagh also attempted to link his Shakespeare films to popular Hollywood models like screwball comedy, intellectual epic, war film, and musical comedy. All of these attempts to modernize Shakespeare brought his work to an even wider viewing
Warren, Roger. Shakespeare Survey 30. N.p.: n.p., 1977. Pp. 177-78. Rpt. in Shakespeare in the Theatre: An Anthology of Criticism. Stanley Wells, ed. England: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Vickers, Brian. 1993. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
Warren, Roger. Shakespeare Survey 30. N.p.: n.p., 1977. Pp. 177-78. Rpt. in Shakespeare in the Theatre: An Anthology of Criticism. Stanley Wells, ed. England: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Vickers, Brian. 1993. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels. New Haven and London: Yale University Press.
William Shakespeare has become landmark in English literature. One must be familiar with the early days of English literature in order to comprehend the foundation of much of more modern literature’s basis. Shakespeare’s modern influence is still seen clearly in many ways. The success of Shakespeare’s works helped to set the example for the development of modern dramas and plays. He is also acknowledged for being one of the first writers to use any modern prose in his writings.
William Shakespeare was a very famous English poet, playwright, and actor. One of the famous plays that he wrote was “Hamlet”. Hamlet is a very famous play and many play writers or directors interpret Shakespeare’s play differently. A Great scene to compares is Act5 scene 2. The two films that will be compared are “Hamlet” from 1996 directed by Kenneth Branagh and “Hamlet” from 2009 directed by Gregory Doran. The two different directors took the same play and made it reflect their own interpretation. The films are very different, but similar in many ways. “Hamlet” from 1996 directed by Kenneth Branagh and “Hamlet” from 2009 directed by Gregory Doran both use the theme guilt. The theme of guilt will be explain through the comparison of how Gertrude
Although William Shakespeare is considered to be one of the most revered and well-renowned authors of all time, controversy surrounds the belief that he actually produced his own literary works. Some rumors even go so far as to question the reality of such a one, William Shakespeare, brought on by paralleling the quality of his pieces with his personal background and education. With such farfetched allegations, it persuaded others to peek into the person we all are taught to learn as “Shakespeare”, but who is actually the person behind these genius works of literary promise and enlightenment? To some, Shakespeare is as much accredited to his works as frequently as you see his name placed. To others, Shakespeare is a complex enigma into which we the people are supposed to unravel; the true author behind a falsely-given pseudonym. The debate pertaining to the true authorship of William Shakespeare’s works are still questioned in today’s society.
Vickers, Brian. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1993.
Filmmaking and cinematography are art forms completely open to interpretation in a myriad ways: frame composition, lighting, casting, camera angles, shot length, etc. The truly talented filmmaker employs every tool available to make a film communicate to the viewer on different levels, including social and emotional. When a filmmaker chooses to undertake an adaptation of a literary classic, the choices become somewhat more limited. In order to be true to the integrity of the piece of literature, the artistic team making the adaptation must be careful to communicate what is believed was intended by the writer. When the literature being adapted is a play originally intended for the stage, the task is perhaps simplified. Playwrights, unlike novelists, include some stage direction and other instructions regarding the visual aspect of the story. In this sense, the filmmaker has a strong basis for adapting a play to the big screen.
The movie of Hamlet was an excellent, as far as book-movies go. I believe it was produced with focus, reason, and logic. The characters were also portrayed with a good interpretation. There were several changes to the play compared to the book, although the movie was done in such a way that they were not particularly missed, from the movie's point of view.
Vickers, Brian. Appropriating Shakespeare: Contemporary Critical Quarrels. New Haven and London: Yale University Press. 1993.
William Shakespeare, poet and playwright, utilized humor and irony as he developed specific language for his plays, thereby influencing literature forever. “Shakespeare became popular in the eighteenth century” (Epstein 8). He was the best all around. “Shakespeare was a classic” (8). William Shakespeare is a very known and popular man that has many works, techniques and ways. Shakespeare is the writer of many famous works of literature. His comedies include humor while his plays and poems include irony. Shakespeare sets himself apart by using his own language and word choice. Shakespeare uses certain types of allusions that people always remember, as in the phrase from Romeo and Juliet, “star-crossed lovers”.
Shakespeare's comedy Much Ado About Nothing is a witty play that is interpreted in many different ways for many different audiences. Branaugh's movie rendition, compared to the Shenandoah Shakespeare Company's play, have many separately emphasized points. If we look at elements such as use of space, costuming, and love relationships we find that Kenneth Branaugh emphasizes the separation of the military from the domestic which eventually heads down to the separation of men and women, while in the stage production, the director emphasizes the relationship and friendship between Claudio, Benedict, and Don Pedro.
Critique of the Film Shakespeare in Love Shakespeare in Love is a fictional movie about the great writer and poet, William Shakespeare. The story is of a young William Shakespeare barely making ends meet and trying to write a play for the local theatre. However, Shakespeare is suffering from writer's block, and is seeking inspiration by having a muse. A muse is a power, in this case a female, used to inspire a poet. Of course, a love story proceeds.
Being a director in a production such as Romeo and Juliet is no easy task, and I enter into this paper with that in mind. My goals are to be creative, and do things differently from the many versions of the play we have viewed in class. Each of those directors took the original text, written by William Shakespeare, and turned it into a unique version of their own; unique in the sense that they changed the tragedy by taking out lines, conversation or even entire scenes to better suit that particular director’s needs.