Film Review of Richard Loncraine's Adaptation of William Shakespeare's Richard III "Civil war divides the nation" the first caption we see at the onset of this adaptation of Shakespeare's Richard III sets the tone for scenes to come later in the movie. It starts by focusing on Shakespeare's underlying tone regarding Richard as somewhat an outlandish character to be mocked and amused by. Enter Richard to "stab" Edward in his war room at Tewkesbury in his tank. He then fills Edward full of holes with a gun rather than a sword to start the play on words that Richard is known for throughout the play. Set in the midst of a Nazi-like Britain during the 1930's, it provides more art deco and imagery than is actually in the text. It uses this as the opening focus to show Richards' ascent to power and his eventual downfall more as the leader of a fascist regime, than someone cunning for the role of King. Here big band jives lay the groundwork to the victory ball of King Edward where we are introduced to many of the characters not seen until much later in the text, Rivers, King Edward, Queen Elizabeth, Duchess of York, young York, etc. Richard then begins his soliloquy, "Now is the winter of our discontent..." He partially addresses the crowd to show support for his newly indoctrinated King and brother and the first half of his speech is received by warm applause at his play on words. The second half is completed at the urinal of the palaces' bathroom partly mumbled to the wall. His focus on his villainous ways addressed to the camera. Then he meets Clarence on his way to the Tower to await his execution. The Richard speaks of the forthcoming death of Clarence and his need to marry the Lady Anne, addressed to the camera. ... ... middle of paper ... ... rather than being killed by Richmond. The director's interpretation of this film focuses more on the use of metaphors in a comic state of humor amongst the villainy in a Hitleresque setting with Richard at the helm of this tyranny. Loncraine uses Shakespeare's play on words to make scenes more memorable, (i.e., trains, spiders, food,). He shows the abuse of power, greed and corruption of Richard with flare. The actual dialogue heard is true to the original text, as nothing was added, it is only severely out of order. Loncraine took an ordinary, simple play and made it into something enjoyable to watch. Although the scenes tend to be out of order and cut, this is still a successful adaptation of Richard III as the overriding theme is developed and enjoyable to watch. Richard is humorous in life as he lies, cheats and steals the throne from anyone in his way.
"Image is everything", says the commercial, and with movies being almost entirely dependent on the visual element, the phrase rings truer than ever. Olivier's version, along with being a "period piece", is done very much in the classic style; the stage is static, almost as if it were a play and not a movie. The sets are colorful and spacious, but they also have a simplistic feel, as though most of the budget went into the costumes (again, very much in the classic style). The movie brings us almost immediately to the throne room of King Edward IV, recently victorious in England's brutal civil war between the House of York and the House of Lancaster; the "Wars of the Roses". After all but Richard have exited, we hear Richard's opening soliloquy in its' entirety. The setting is very much what we call a "period piece"; the costumes, s...
Shakespeare constructs King Richard III to perform his contextual agenda, or to perpetrate political propaganda in the light of a historical power struggle, mirroring the political concerns of his era through his adaptation and selection of source material. Shakespeare’s influences include Thomas More’s The History of King Richard the Third, both constructing a certain historical perspective of the play. The negative perspective of Richard III’s character is a perpetuation of established Tudor history, where Vergil constructed a history intermixed with Tudor history, and More’s connection to John Morton affected the villainous image of the tyrannous king. This negative image is accentuated through the antithesis of Richards treachery in juxtaposition of Richmond’s devotion, exemplified in the parallelism of ‘God and Saint George! Richmond and victory.’ The need to legitimize Elizabeth’s reign influenced Shakespeare’s portra...
Anne is quite like a modern woman in the way that if a man tells her
In this play of challenge and debate, could it be possibly suggested that King Richard had a part to play in the murder of his uncle the Duke of Gloucester? Could the reader possibly pick up this assumption having known nothing about the play? These are all factors that one must find by reading in between the lines, noticing and understanding the silence that is exchanged. For the silence is just as important as the speech.Why is it assumed that King Richard II has anything to do with the murder? Let us review a scene from the play were Gaunt accuses Richard of being accountable for Gloucester's death.
Instead of a powerful physical image, like Queen Elizabeth I, Richard implements elegant soliloquies, engages in witty banter, and attunes the audience to his motives with frequent asides. This flexibility demonstrates Richard's thespian superiority and power over the rest of the play's cast, making him a unique character in the play, but why does he do it? This constant battle between characters to claim mastery over a scene leaves the audience with a seemingly overlooked source of power for an actor [clarify/expand].
Rhe citizens were also seduced by Richard. However, in Act III.vii. his wits alone did not work the persuasion. He had help from the Bishops, props and Buchingham. The Mayor exclaims to the citizens,"See where his Grace stands, 'tween two clergymen!" (III.vii.95). This is all part of Richard's goodly act. He wants to win the people by being a noble and good man. He wants them to believe that he is not only a moral man, but a modest one. Buchingham proceeds in supporting Richard in this attempt. Buchingham observes Richard and states to the people:
Richard had weakened since he had become king and was no longer ruthless as he had no reason to be ruthless. He had got what he wanted and was pleased with himself. He thought he was invincible, and he was too confident, which cost him his life. If he had been more careful, he would have been aware of the danger that lied before him. But, he did use some similar techniques in both the scenes.
The déjà vu of Nazi dystopia becomes interesting when comparing the general background of the movie to the original play. Richard III (1995) came out during the last decade of twentieth century, which, for many individuals, was ten years of compounded fear; the collapse of Soviet Union in 1991 ruins the socialism faith in millions, whereas global economy tsunami in 1998 foils capitalism as troublesome too. For the worst part, rumors about the doomsday of 2000 remain haunted. This typical collective fear also deeply roots in England when Shakespeare creates Richard III: Elisabeth I was rapidly aging without any heir. In both cases, fear of social stability comes with no promised solution. Therefore, under similar circumstance, it is necessary to recall the living demons like Richard and Hitler to remind people the horror of war.
In Act 3, Scene 4 of The Tragedy of King Richard the Second by Shakespeare, the Queen finds that she is unhappy due to an unexplained intuition. While in the Duke of York’s palace, the Queen’s waiting-women try to comfort her until the gardeners interrupt the failed attempts to reach a happiness. As the Queen secretly listens into the gardener’s conversation, she hears that they are speaking about binding the apricots and plucking the weeds. However, the gardening essentially is a metaphor for the rule and management of the kingdom under King Richard II. This scene is important because it displays how Shakespeare desires to reveal the perspective of the common man and the type of rule King Richard II has over the people of England. In the metaphors of the garden, blame is placed on Richard and his advisors for England’s state and the King’s overrule by Bolingbroke.
Shakespeare is of course establishing Henry's ability to gather support from the masses, the very key to his victory over Richard later in the play. The speech also clarifies Richard's position on the subject to underline this contrast between the two men. To fine tune Richard's character, Gaunt gives a revealing and unbridled description of Richard to his face just before dying. After Richard exiles the soul heir to his estate, Gaunt is bitter and fed up with his weak and pompous qualities:
and it is your job to make it simpler for them as well as keeping it
Shakespeare’s portrayal of power reflects the conflicting influences of Medieval Morality plays and Renaissance literature during the Tudor period, demonstrating that the text is a reflection of contextual beliefs. The Third Citizen’s submission to a monotheistic deity in the pathetic fallacy of “The water swell before a boisterous storm – but leave it all to God” qualifies the theological determinism of power due to the rise of Calvinism. Pacino embodies Richard’s desire for royalty in LFR through the emphasis on celebrity culture, as he is determined to film himself in close-up, which although emphasizes the importance of Pacino, leaves out the broader scene. Soliloquies are substituted with breaches in the fourth wall, and his metatheatrical aside to the audience “I love the silence… whatever I’m saying, I know Shakespeare said it”, subverts the cultural boundaries which, deter contemporary American actors in performing Shakespeare. Shakespeare’s breach of the iambic pentameter in “Chop off his head…And when I’m king” strengthens the Renaissance influence, as Richa...
The undeniable pursuit for power is Richard’s flaw as a Vice character. This aspect is demonstrated in Shakespeare’s play King Richard III through the actions Richard portrays in an attempt to take the throne, allowing the audience to perceive this as an abhorrent transgression against the divine order. The deformity of Richards arm and back also symbolically imply a sense of villainy through Shakespeare’s context. In one of Richard’s soliloquies, he states how ‘thus like the formal Vice Iniquity/ I moralize two meanings in one word’. Through the use of immoral jargons, Shakespeare emphasises Richard’s tenacity to attain a sense of power. However, Richard’s personal struggle with power causes him to become paranoid and demanding, as demonstrated through the use of modality ‘I wish’ in ‘I wish the bastards dead’. This act thus becomes heavily discordant to the accepted great chain of being and conveys Richard’s consumption by power.
In the Shakespeare play Richard III was depicted as a malformed mean, ill looking, tyrant. But this was not the case. Richard
In King Richard III Shakespeare presents the timeless notion of the inevitable connection between the moral rectitude of the political power and the condition of the State by illustrating the tragic consequences of Richard’s fraudulent pursuits for power. Set in the Elizabethan era following the Yorks’ victory in the War of the Roses, the 16thC doctrine of royal absolutism is epitomized by Buckingham’s hyperbolic extolment “the supreme seat, the throne majestical”. Through this, Shakespeare illustrates a hierarchical society that strictly upholds canons of the Divine Right of Kings and the Great Chain of Being. However, through the diabolic imaging of Richard as “a tyrannous villain”, the play reflects the politically correct endorsements of the Tudor ...