my_daroga | Shakespeare on Film

Due to the enabling power of the Seattle Film Festival Shakespeare series, I was recently afforded the opportunity to see Orson Welles' Macbeth and Othello on screen and restored. As a show of my lack of bias, I also saw Olivier's Hamlet again, and thoroughly enjoyed all three despite what I see as massive problems in each. Perhaps I'll delve into those further at a future time (though I know my Orson posts are not very exciting for all of you!) but I will say that they all offer exciting things to watch and think about even as they also raise questions about filmmaking, Shakespearean adaptation, and character interpretation. (I will say that despite some opinions I've seen to the contrary, and black face politics aside, I think Orson's one of the least ridiculous looking white guys I've ever seen play Othello. Even if his makeup seems to be all over the place over the course of the 3 year filming period, and he looked darker in parts of Jane Eyre and Macbeth.)

I'm struck, every time I see Hamlet in whatever form, at how brilliant it is. I don't know why it would be, considering how many times I've seen it and how much I've apparently memorized, that I should be surprised by it every time. I am not so much a fan of Macbeth, and I honestly don't know Othello well enough to have a firm opinion of it, but Hamlet kills me every time. And I do like Olivier, sometimes; his Hamlet is bizarre and theatrical even when no one's watching, which I suppose is valid enough, though Ophelia is rather awful and I wish he'd sucked it up and let Vivien play her. Certainly, 33 is far too old for an Ophelia playing opposite his 41-year-old Hamlet. Considering Gertrude's 28, this argument seems rather flimsy. Anyway, I suppose it is merely a matter of Hamlet's themes and writing striking a chord with me, though I feel rather unoriginal and redundant, expressing my love thus.

Welles' Macbeth and Othello are quite different from Olivier and from each other, though both are plagued by technical issues arising from lack of funds. One gets the impression that at this point Welles felt trod on and denied enough that he merely wished to get something done, and certain things fell by the wayside. Still, both movies are strong in certain areas, especially if one can get past the first few minutes of Othello which are appallingly edited and difficult to follow. This film, especially, has moments of sublime beauty and exhibits flashes of brilliance through the technical limitations Welles was forced to by paying for most of it himself.

But adapting Shakespeare is always an issue--both men were flogged by critics for taking liberties with the text, though as Branagh's Hamlet proved, presenting unexpurgated Shakespeare is not a foolproof method of translating it to the screen. But by necessity, it's going to be a different experience than watching it on the stage. So my question to you is: Do you think it's been done well? By whom? What's your favorite Shakespeare movie? (Any discussion of the three movies named above is also welcome!)

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

Your Orson posts are not boring!

Let's see...

Ten Things I Hate About You.

She's The Man and Titus were alright.

(Julie Taymor's doing Tempest and Helen Mirren plays Prospero. I am excited.)

Shakespeare in Love was also okay. There is a trend, here...

I love that 10 Things is at the top of your adapted Shakespeare list! This makes me happy. I think it was quite successful, much in the way Clueless was.

I had not heard about The Tempest--that does sound interesting, indeed.

And I knew I was supposed to like Shakespeare in Love when it came out, but I was profoundly "meh" about it. If such a thing is possible. It even had my favorite thing ever, which as you know is girls-as-boys, but it was Gwenyth, and she just didn't work for me.

Yeah, you've said. And like I said, I don't want to see it again because I might start to dislike it. I think my liking it was mostly due to profround Geoffrey Rush love and the fact my HS was doing R+J at the time. Yes, there was a plus.

Amanda Bynes was a cute boy.

Sorry to be repetitive. At this point, I don't know what I've said to you. Possibly everything ever.

Yeah, I was tempted to see that movie (I've said this too, I think) but didn't have a "valid" opportunity.

It's not good. 10 Things was way better. But I can't help it; I'm shallow. I would watch it with you whenever you felt like you had a valid opportunity...

I repeat myself all the time. I wasn't meaning to accuse you or anything.

I didn't feel accused. You know. Just repeaty.

Maybe someday I'll feel I have an excuse to watch cute girls play boys. Wait, why do I need one? I have no idea! Oh, time. Right.

I like your Orson posts too!

I also admit to an insane, rabid love for Macbeth. Like, I probably love it like you love Hamlet. Not that I don't love that one, too. I like Olivier's better than Branaugh's. Orson's Macbeth is probably the best one I have seen. There are several which are appallingly bad. For some reason, I think that one has not been done well on film. I did enjoy Scotland, PA, though.

Have you seen Ian McKellen's Richard III? I like that one. Also, Branaugh's Henry V, and I'm glad

tkp mentioned 10 Things I Hate About You, too.

I'd love to hear what it is you love about Macbeth. What grabs you every time? I was amused by how utterly hapless Orson's Macbeth seemed--while obviously this is in the text, his was so passive in the face of nearly everything it was nearly comical. He seemed to stand about, waiting for things to happen. I also loved the way his dissipation seemed due to both madness and drink, and how at any given moment it was difficult to tell which had the upper hand.

Scotland, PA was really entertaining and original, I recall. I did like Branagh's Henry V, but must admit that I started McKellen's Richard III and didn't get through it. That was probably a "not in the mood at this time" issue, however, and I will try again one day.

Part of my Macbeth love is that it was my first-ever exposure to Shakespeare, in 10th grade. Everybody else in class was going, "Oh god, I don't understand this, waah" and I went, "MOAR PLEASE." Basically. In some ways it hit all my buttons--it kind of plays like a horror film--there are ghosts and witches and murders and prophecies and heads getting chopped off, and people going mad and stuff (and the whole intrigue about it being performed--"The Scottish Play" superstition thing). I love that word you used--"hapless." Macbeth himself can come across as kind of an idiot. I've seen productions where he does come off as completely comical.

I adored Lady Macbeth completely. Our teacher took us to see a production of the play, and I was struck by the sexuality of the performance. This was a local production at a college, and they really emphasized the hold Lady Macbeth had over her husband. There was a raw attraction between the two of them, almost a wantonness to it, that made me uncomfortable at the time (being 15) but also was incredibly revealing about a lot of Macbeth's motivations, as well as some of my own, sort of-literary fetishes, regarding my preference for strong female characters. And when she went mad, they dressed her in an almost sack-cloth type outfit--taking "Unsex me" literally, removed the makeup from her face and just made her almost androgynous, as if her femininity and her use of it to tempt her husband had been the cause of her evil, ambitious nature and the guilt of it had been what had driven her mad. I've seen this in other productions, of course--Jeremy Brett's Macbeth is pretty darn lascivious, as well as totally histrionic and eye-rollingly over-the top, but Ian McKellen and Judi Dench had some good chemistry together, I thought.

Macbeth, like Hamlet, is so complex, and I think that's what I love about the character. He's got this ambition, and this greed to fulfill his goals no matter what, but he's wracked with guilt and goes against his nobility and his consciousness. I love all of his asides. There are so many different ways to interpret Shakespeare, and like you said, I get something different out of every one. I read reviews of David Tennant's Hamlet that said he brought out more comedic elements than some reviewers were expecting. I hope they put his performance on dvd; I'll certainly be interested in seeing that.

I have yet to see a movie version of Macbeth that I really love, other than Scotland, PA. I've seen several stage productions that get it really right, though.

Interesting. Thank you so much. I can see all of that in it, but it's never really hit me that way. Perhaps if I saw it "done right," or rather done in a way that appealed to me in a certain way, it would. Macbeth, as I have seen him, is not complex enough. That is to say, I have yet to see anyone draw out his complexities so that they appeal to me; Orson is fun, but it's hard to see his nobility with the production design so rugged and primitive.

I would love to see Tennant's Hamlet, as I've always found the play, and Hamlet, to be quite funny, and not just when he's playing mad. And I can't believe I haven't seen Brett's Macbeth in all my years of fangirling him, even though I'd likely be embarrassed for him.

Shakespeare on Film

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject