Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

An ongoing survey of the Criterion Forum membership to create lists of the best films of each decade and genre.
Message
Author
User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#51 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:42 pm

Strange Brew: A very loose adaptation of Hamlet, but in removing any stake of loyalty and having our characters become involved throughout the narrative by foolish happenstance (trying to get free beer is a funny concept but taking the floppy disc thinking it’s a “new wave EP” is great), the thematic reference to the play is nullified. That has no effect on the film being funny, which it is in parts, but mileage will vary depending on how much you enjoy films about dumb unaware characters unintentionally battling aware intelligent villains. I find the film to be light-hearted fun even when the jokes don’t land, but as an adaptation it works only as a humorous concept on the inverse of the play, an anti-Hamlet, and not much else.

I haven’t revisited it in ages, but The Lion King is something of a childhood favorite. Scar was always a captivating, effective villain and the scene where Simba discovers his father’s corpse is among the most unforced tearjerking moments I’ve seen with personal significance. It’s interesting to analyze it removed from nostalgia and more in the context of the play, as the basic structures are obvious but viewing Timon and Pumba as a shift on Rosencrantz and Guildenstern isn’t something I’ve done before, but only adds to the creative appreciation.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead: A hilarious and wise presentation of two silly people trying to apply rational thought and tangible processes to that which is anything but- the attempts to grasp life’s complexity. Oldman and Roth play well off of one another and I wish both had given more straight comic performances in other works. Unfortunately this last watch reminded me that there are plenty of moments of dead air in this film, which stand out more than they typically would since the rest of the film is so captivating in its intelligence and humor. As it stands, this is perhaps the funniest film to tackle Shakespeare’s themes that I’ve seen, and will surely place high on my list for its entertainment, wit, and application of the common thread of tropes woven through not just Hamlet but most of the work from the Bard.

Forbidden Planet: I enjoy the campy B-space film, even those based on other source material (I have a special fondness for Robinson Crusoe on Mars), but this one does next to nothing for me. As an adaptation of The Tempest I suppose it’s decent in its application of some aspects of the story, but aside from an interesting experiment at taking a Shakespearean comedy and transforming it into a B-sci-fi movie, it’s not worth much.

Julius Caesar (Mankiewicz) is a revelation, which shouldn’t be a surprise considering who was in front of and behind the camera. Still, I was impressed and glued to the screen throughout both hours of this masterfully constructed and accessible adaptation. Brando perfectly executes the famous speech that sways the people, capturing the essence of the blended manipulation with emotional authenticity that is so difficult to pull off in a balanced fashion in other adaptations on film and stage. Mank’s camera, placement and direction of his actors is of course beautiful, and I can’t think of a better filmmaker to take the helm.

10 Things I Hate About You: I actually agree with knives on this one, and while Clueless is the “best” of this subgenre of movie, this one cleverly manipulates the plot of its source to suit the politics of its era. Taking a play that’s sometimes accused of misogyny and transforming it into a politically correct space with heavy doses of feminism, brief recognitions of racism, and touches of socioeconomic concerns populating the social dynamics of the high school milieu actually works just as well here in the differences as it does in the similarities. Probably best of all is the emphasis on promoting self-actualization vs. conformist change, and the view that the changing that does occur in the process to achieve this peripheral evolution is authentic and not forced when one breaks out of self-focused isolation to choose to compromise themselves in congruence with the one they love. This film works as an adaptation in the way it plays to the inverse of the original, which shows pretty strong insight on the writers’ part. It’s also just a fun movie that works just as well on a revisit, with Larry Miller and Daryl Mitchell stealing scenes in parts that may not work with another actor in place who couldn’t deliver the martial with the gusto they do. Oh and yes that dress is hideous (my girlfriend entered the room solely to comment on its ugliness earlier today).
Michael Kerpan wrote:
Fri Aug 09, 2019 4:04 pm
therewillbeblus -- Hope you can also track down Kozintsev's Lear (probably my very favorite Shakespeare adaptation).
Michael, I have it reserved at the library, so it should come in sometime this week- I’m interested to hear your thoughts on why it’s your favorite though!

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#52 Post by Michael Kerpan » Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:00 pm

Short answer on Kozintsev's Lear -- the visuals, the music (by my favorite modern composer) and the performances. I love Kozintsev's Hamlet almost as much, however. My other top faves are Chimes at Midnight and Spiderweb Castle (oops -- Throne of Blood).;-) Favorite TV play -- BBC's Richard II, with Derek Jacobi as the ill-fated king (last seen decades ago, alas).

BTW -- I also like Kozintsev's 2 Shakespeare books -- Time and Conscience and Space of Tragedy.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#53 Post by domino harvey » Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:23 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:42 pm

Forbidden Planet: I enjoy the campy B-space film, even those based on other source material (I have a special fondness for Robinson Crusoe on Mars), but this one does next to nothing for me. As an adaptation of The Tempest I suppose it’s decent in its application of some aspects of the story, but aside from an interesting experiment at taking a Shakespearean comedy and transforming it into a B-sci-fi movie, it’s not worth much.

Daryl Mitchell stealing scenes in parts that may not work with another actor in place who couldn’t deliver the martial with the gusto they do. Oh and yes that dress is hideous (my girlfriend entered the room solely to comment on its ugliness earlier today).
I recently watched Forbidden Planet after finishing a reread of the Tempest and thought it was an adaptation equivalent of those duck liver homeopathic pills that are diluted to basically nothing but water. It has a weird energy to it and I kinda ended up liking it as its own thing, but man alive are Sci-Fi flicks from this era absolutely not my scene. Much better was the recent Globe Theatre perf of the Tempest, with Jessie Buckley as an enthusiastic Miranda-- I think it, like all productions of any Shakespeare play, makes some choices that don't work (Gonzalo, the funniest character when reading, gets completely overlooked as a comic figure here from the start with the choice to play the opening scene as dramatic action instead of droll comedy) but much more that do (committing to Caliban as a comic figure free of the post-colonial baggage that has dragged down modern interpretations of the play; the inspired comic perfs of the actors playing Trinculo and Stephano, which brought me great new appreciation for these scenes, which aren't nearly as funny or effective on the page; the general blocking and simplicity of the Globe Theatre-style unadorned style), but overall it by a longshot was the best adaptation I'd seen of this material (and as someone with only 70-something years to live on this Earth, there is zero chance I'm ever watching another Peter Greenaway film after the Falls, so it will likely be my last as well) and it did heighten my appreciation of the source text. Buckley and the goofy Joshua James' Ferdinand bring great romantic comedy energy to their scenes, which I've always found to be the most overlooked in the play. Honestly the biggest problem with this adaptation is the same one I always have with the Tempest: Prospero is just not a very interesting character. It's been eye-opening to read through the exhaustive Bloom's Shakespeare collection of essays and critical responses to the Tempest, as for the first few centuries, Caliban and Miranda received the most critical praise and focus, only for the shift to occur around the time people started viewing this as "Shakespeare's Last Play" and thus Prospero starts carrying weight of being an author surrogate that I'm not convinced he merits.

And of course Daryl "Chill" Mitchell would unfortunately become paralyzed not long after 10 Things in a motorcycle accident, but he was great in the third season of Ed as Mike Starr's replacement and had wonderful interplay with Michael Ian Black throughout the rest of the series-- the show never shied away from acknowledging his wheelchair or handicap and did so in a way that brought great humanism and honesty to his character (like everything else on the show)

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#54 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:37 pm

As if there weren’t already enough reasons to propel me to watch Ed immediately...

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#55 Post by domino harvey » Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:39 pm

Based on what I know about our shared tastes, I would be truly stunned if you didn't love it. Also there's an A+ twenty second adaptation of the Merchant of Venice in one of the first episodes, so it counts as viewing for this (not actually eligible)

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#56 Post by therewillbeblus » Sun Aug 11, 2019 11:18 pm

Haha, and very true, I’m on it. Speaking of shared tastes, are you going to share any thoughts on Godard’s Lear?

There’s a part of me that wants to default every project toward Godard, but I’m interested in hearing others’ analyses of this one in particular, as this last watch was striking in its deep application of Shakespeare’s themes beyond using strands solely as a jumping off point for Godard’s own ideas. I have no doubt that was the initial intention but it wound up serving as a more intricate evaluation than I had remembered, stretching the definition of an adaptation toward foreign dimensions of assessment that wind up revealing it as the most ‘pure’ specifically filmic adaptation the imagination could likely ever conceive of in this medium (and may even wrestle its way into my top spot for these reasons).

User avatar
Rayon Vert
Green is the Rayest Color
Joined: Wed Jan 08, 2014 10:52 pm
Location: Canada
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#57 Post by Rayon Vert » Mon Aug 12, 2019 12:17 am

Twbb, here was my last reaction to Godard's film since no one's yet taken you up. (My reading of Shakespeare is too far back in the past to analyze the film more deeply in respect to the play.)

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#58 Post by therewillbeblus » Mon Aug 12, 2019 10:45 am

Thanks Rayon! This thought in particular:
Rayon Vert wrote:
Sun Jul 08, 2018 12:51 am
Godard’s philosophy of the image – arriving at a means to create true images, that will somehow uncover and “resurrect” the real -, a cornerstone of his later period, is truly front and center here in this film which is almost pure allegory, barely a sketch of a narrative film.
seems to poke at how the goals of Shakespeare's characters and Godard's intentions when creating a film overlap. Shakespeare's characters essentially look for truth in people, systems, god, or other (seemingly) tangible forms, and meet their ends as a result of placing faith in these false truths. Godard, similarly, uses images and film to attempt to find 'truth' and repeatedly comes up empty, or perhaps not empty but with more questions than with which he started (which the Fool, Shakespeare, and even Godard may argue is the 'point' of it all, and the meaning if life itself).

The difference is that Godard, like Shakespeare, also fills the role of a creator who seems to be aware that this process is somewhat futile, but continues to explore it, as a) perhaps the exploration itself is what uncovers the 'truth' through discovering what truth is 'not' (as is the path the Fool takes in the play), b) by creating these art forms and striking an emotional response from the consumer, that seems to be what is 'real' - all these cognitive processes are relative to perspective (objective truths do not exist in cognitive-emotional processes) but the subject's perspective becomes truth, just subjective truth, but none less real, and c) what else is he going to do? People have an inherent drive to question and search for meaning, so by exploring in his own way just like Shakespeare did, the process itself is truth in humanity's attempts to locate the invisible by exposing its invisibility and finding brief moments of catharsis in subjective experience.

There are probably endless areas to investigate here but I feel better about my initial thoughts than these as they were more connected to specific elements of both works, having watched the film and read the play back to back. I'll be giving it another watch at the end of the project to see if I feel the same, but in the meantime hopefully others chime in -going down the metaphysical Godard rabbit hole alone doesn't leave many holds of validation by way of reality testing to latch onto!

User avatar
Shrew
The Untamed One
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:22 am

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#59 Post by Shrew » Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:35 pm

therewillbeblus wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 9:42 pm
10 Things I Hate About You: I actually agree with knives on this one, and while Clueless is the “best” of this subgenre of movie, this one cleverly manipulates the plot of its source to suit the politics of its era. Taking a play that’s sometimes accused of misogyny and transforming it into a politically correct space with heavy doses of feminism, brief recognitions of racism, and touches of socioeconomic concerns populating the social dynamics of the high school milieu actually works just as well here in the differences as it does in the similarities. Probably best of all is the emphasis on promoting self-actualization vs. conformist change, and the view that the changing that does occur in the process to achieve this peripheral evolution is authentic and not forced when one breaks out of self-focused isolation to choose to compromise themselves in congruence with the one they love. This film works as an adaptation in the way it plays to the inverse of the original, which shows pretty strong insight on the writers’ part. It’s also just a fun movie that works just as well on a revisit, with Larry Miller and Daryl Mitchell stealing scenes in parts that may not work with another actor in place who couldn’t deliver the martial with the gusto they do. Oh and yes that dress is hideous (my girlfriend entered the room solely to comment on its ugliness earlier today).
Well said. This is a far from perfect movie and is often a bit slapdash, but it’s charming enough to get by. In particular, I like how sweet the film is, in the same vein as Clueless as a last gasp of the 90s, in contrast to the raunch of teen comedies that would define the 00s; instead, the raunchy character is Alison Janney’s counselor, not the teens. The final act is a bit rushed (we don’t have enough of Kate’s interior between the big dance and her poem reading and instead wrap up other plots instead). As an adaptation, I appreciate how it successfully “fixes” the problem of the play’s sexual politics in a modern setting, while still making Kate abrasive but not unreasonable. For comparison, I like Whedon’s more faithful Much Ado and think the modernization works well there until Leonato starts to wish his daughter dead, which mars the film’s lightness. Anyway, I can’t imagine totally dismissing this film as a Shakespearean comedy when you’ve got things like…

Twelfth Night (Nunn, 1996)
…this dead fish of a film. Why did anyone think what Twelfth Night needed was a war setting and military uniforms? (Answer: someone who liked the leather pants and officer’s jackets of Branagh’s Much Ado.) That includes an opening where Viola runs through the woods hiding from hussars, I guess to set up an excuse for her disguise?, then cuts off her hair and dons men’s clothes with a strange mix of tears and excited gasping. Is she sad to lose her femininity, excited in the transgressing, uncomfortable in the binding? I don’t know and I don’t think the film does either. This all sets up a dourness that effectively dampens one of Shakespeare’s best comedies. This is particularly felt in the secondary plot of Olivia’s hangers-on, anchored by equally unlikeable versions of Toby Belch and Malvolio; Richard Grant as Aguecheek should be great, but aside from a bit of capering, he is tragically underused. I don’t blame the actors here, as they seem to be in the same mode of self-seriousness, which paired with the flat direction’s inability to highlight anything remotely comedic, makes for 2+ sour hours. Only Helena Bonham Carter seems to realize this was a comedy, though Ben Kingsley’s Feste, while not funny, at least fits the melancholy mood better than the rest.

Cymbeline (Almereyda, 2014)
I agree with the other comments in this thread. This is a lot of fun, and it’s a particularly effective culling and reordering of a rather slack source. Perhaps the best choice is moving the introduction of Posthumus’s background to half way through and putting it in the context of a police investigation/witness needling, which makes it a hell of lot less dull. As a play, Cymbeline is a weird beast, with lots of redundant exposition and asides whose purpose seems to be eliminate any sense of tension or tragedy. For example,
SpoilerShow
The scene where the doctor shares his distrust of the queen is in the play as an aside, but unlike in the film, he goes on to explain that he’s giving her fake drugs that only create the illusion of death. So, when Imogen takes them, there’s no “threat” of death. But the doctor still explains this again in the last act. Almereyda’s adaptation actually makes me wonder if the redundancies were always meant so that some could be cut, depending on whether the audience wanted more comedy or more tragedy.
I recently got to see a production of Cymbeline that played the thing as a farce, with the cascade of reveals in the final scene coming off like the end of a Neil Simon play. Almereyda chose to cut most of the obviously comic lines (as well as the literal deus ex machina) in favor of mining dry comedy from the audacity of his adaptation choices (like having the missing boys be off-the-grid hippies, their apparent far-left beliefs providing Imogen's alias), which is probably the movie’s gain. That said, while I appreciate the tweaky menace of Anton Yelchin’s Cloten, I do miss the bumbling idiot suitor from the page, particularly
SpoilerShow
CLOTEN: I would this music would come. I am advised
to give her music a-mornings; they say it will
penetrate. Come on, tune. If you can penetrate her with your
fingering, so. We’ll try with tongue, too.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#60 Post by Michael Kerpan » Mon Aug 12, 2019 5:42 pm

Shaw liked Cymbeline overall -- but found the last act (as then usually performed) dreadful. So he wrote his own (streamlined) version of the fifth act: http://www.gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0301031h.html

User avatar
Shrew
The Untamed One
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 2:22 am

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#61 Post by Shrew » Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:38 pm

Although, as Shaw mentions in the preface in your link, his distaste was partially inspired by a legendarily terrible production of Cymbeline from 1896, in which the lead actor of the company reshaped the play so it centered more on his part, Iachimo. The, uh, villain. And while I don't know enough about Shakespearean production history to say for sure, that may have been one of, if not the only, major productions of Cymbeline until the revival for which Shaw rewrote the ending. And it had supposedly not been performed for 60 years prior to that 1896 production too, though it was popular throughout the 18th century. In addition to changing tastes in Romances vs Tragedies, I imagine the lack of a really meaty role in Cymbeline combined with the large number of characters has kept it down. Though ironically, the more evenly stacked cast makes it ideal for school or amateur rep productions.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#62 Post by therewillbeblus » Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:46 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:39 pm
Also there's an A+ twenty second adaptation of the Merchant of Venice in one of the first episodes, so it counts as viewing for this (not actually eligible)
Sure enough this is great, but it’s even more effective in its hilarity due to the surprising energy shift in Justin Long, from monotonous and subdued to animated and hysterical prompted only by the act of performing Shakespeare.

This makes me wonder: Do any of the videos that condense Shakespeare’s works into brief periods of time count for this project? I haven’t seen any personally but I know a few people who are pretty serious Shakespeare academics and also recommend these videos hand in hand with the more straightforward adaptations when I’ve asked, which only peaks my interest to their merit.

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#63 Post by ando » Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:22 pm

I'll have to check out Almereyda's turn (3.8 imdb rating isn't promising) but I've long favored the 1982 BBC version of Cymbeline for years (nifty streamer). It features two of my favorite actors; Helen Mirren and Claire Bloom as Imogen and Queen, respectively.
Image
Course, this production couldn't have come off without the almost vile creepiness of Robert Lindsay's Iachimo. Having court gossipers deliver the chorus's lines is another nice touch. Everyone else gives serviceable performances. The indoor period sets are also adequate but the outdoor scenes suffer from the obvious studio renderings. The boon here, as in most in this BBC series, is the acting. And in my book that comes before all aspects of any Shakespeare production, which is naturally why I value the series so highly. If you're not going to feature the verse in a Shakespeare adaptation (that word is really inadequate), have at it. But if the verse is to be considered hire vocal coaches who know what they're doing. My huge qualm with contemporary (particularly American) productions are the actors who speak the lines as if they're reading the back of cereal boxes. Shakespeare's use of the English language is an actor's dream, not something to suffer with between sword fights!

At any rate, there's a discussion of this BBC film in Colin's thread dedicated to the Shakespeare series.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#64 Post by domino harvey » Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:07 pm

ando wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 9:22 pm
I'll have to check out Almereyda's turn (3.8 imdb rating isn't promising)
As everyone has already said, that's a selling point, not a detractor! This movie was sold as a Sons of Anarchy-style biker movie, and it is that except with Shakespeare's dialogue and a completely perverse yet intelligent co-option of the source text. Thus the movie alienates both Bard purists and those who hate/fear Shakespeare and would never have watched in the first place had they known, hence lots of negative reactions from "tricked" filmgoers
therewillbeblus wrote:
Mon Aug 12, 2019 8:46 pm
domino harvey wrote:
Sun Aug 11, 2019 10:39 pm
Also there's an A+ twenty second adaptation of the Merchant of Venice in one of the first episodes, so it counts as viewing for this (not actually eligible)
Sure enough this is great, but it’s even more effective in its hilarity due to the surprising energy shift in Justin Long, from monotonous and subdued to animated and hysterical prompted only by the act of performing Shakespeare.
Warren Cheswick is one of the richest veins of gold in them thar hills, you ain't seen nothing yet!

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#65 Post by ando » Tue Aug 13, 2019 2:51 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 1:07 pm
As everyone has already said, that's a selling point, not a detractor! This movie was sold as a Sons of Anarchy-style biker movie, and it is that except with Shakespeare's dialogue and a completely perverse yet intelligent co-option of the source text. Thus the movie alienates both Bard purists and those who hate/fear Shakespeare and would never have watched in the first place had they known, hence lots of negative reactions from "tricked" filmgoers.
Anyone who saw Almereyda's Hamlet will hardly be tricked if, indeed, his aim is to pimp Shakespeare to sukkaz. His Cymbeline has to have more to offer than that. Doesn't it?

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#66 Post by domino harvey » Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:09 pm

I’m not sure what more reassurance is possible given that me and everyone else who’s seen it has weighed in as enjoying it. It has absolutely zero aims at “converting” any Shakespeare skeptics, though— blame the distro for trying to make their money back by concealing what the film is and misleading a meathead audience hostile to this kind of thing

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#67 Post by domino harvey » Tue Aug 13, 2019 5:14 pm

All First Folio plays, as represented by quotes from the Office. This... is actually pretty good for most of these

User avatar
ando
Bringing Out El Duende
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
Location: New York City

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#68 Post by ando » Tue Aug 13, 2019 6:58 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Tue Aug 13, 2019 4:09 pm
I’m not sure what more reassurance is possible given that me and everyone else who’s seen it has weighed in as enjoying it. It has absolutely zero aims at “converting” any Shakespeare skeptics, though— blame the distro for trying to make their money back by concealing what the film is and misleading a meathead audience hostile to this kind of thing
Calling it Cymbeline might have something to do with it.

User avatar
therewillbeblus
Joined: Tue Dec 22, 2015 3:40 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#69 Post by therewillbeblus » Tue Aug 13, 2019 7:57 pm

I caught up with Kozintsev’s Hamlet and King Lear and was floored by both. Hamlet is an incredibly lavish adaptation, with a puncturing score and realistic sets in mostly indoor spaces. Its visual style serves the surrealistic mood Kozintsev is striving for, in a manner that’s imposing but not abrasive, often involving consistent camera movement that explore the areas like a curious animal. There are dark outdoor shots but the primary color is a perfect grey, setting a bleak vibe but also symbolic for the conflicted middling emotions of Hamlet as his world becomes undone. The intended mood prioritizes the dissolution of meaning for the characters in the systems we look to for truth, a key aspect of both plays often touched on but rarely embodying the focus. This is the most existential adaptation of Hamlet and gets my vote for the best version I’ve seen, for many reasons, including technical achievements, acting, and the inclusion of the politics, but primarily due to its execution of the themes I value most in the play. Oh and the sand/ash/crushed bone, or whatever debris spills out of the already dead and old skull that Hamlet holds, is a nice touch that defines the interpretation.

King Lear continues the approach of exuding coldness in the same stylistic choices, creating desolate landscapes and playing with extremities in lighting to its disorienting limits. Weather and dirt are louder details here, emphasizing the psychological disillusionment of the characters, and the darkness and desperate performances determine the deterioration of systems and the self. Symbolism is not overwhelming, but the entirety of the mise en scène embodies the spirit of the play and so this too becomes the best (faithful) Lear adaptation I’ve seen, even better than Brooks’.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#70 Post by Michael Kerpan » Tue Aug 13, 2019 8:05 pm

I am so delighted that you liked the Kozintsev adaptations -- and that you had the energy to write so nicely about them (something I find it hard to do these days).

Part of what makes these 2 films look so spectacular is Kozintsev's (and Gritsius's) mastery of black and white widescreen imagery. Kozintsev's very good (but maybe not quite as great) Don Quixote used Soviet color film -- which aged and degraded rapidly (and never satisfied Kozintsev), thus (happily for us) sending him back to black and white. Do check out K's Shakespeare books (especially the second which discusses adapting Lear and Hamlet).

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#71 Post by domino harvey » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:05 pm

Anyone besides me and therewillbeblus doing a read-along with this project? Currently suffering through Shakespeare’s edgelord play, Titus Andronicus, which is worse (!) than I remembered: next to no interesting uses of language, thematically thin with characters to match, and absurd and gratuitous violence being the only thing going for it. I’ve never seen it on the stage, but I imagine things like Lavinia writhing around on the ground in a puddle of blood like Sofie Fatale with her hands cut off could be weirdly entertaining when performed live, in theory. A Grand Guignol approach is the only way to do this, since the violence is all that’s here. On paper it’s all just too 4Chan-ish. There’s a reason most people use this play as one of the default “Even Shakespeare wasn’t always Shakespeare” examples...

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#72 Post by knives » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:10 pm

I was considering, but couldn't find my complete set though I should probably take out my Yale Twelfth Night.

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#73 Post by domino harvey » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:13 pm

For such a great play, unfortunately there are no Twelfth Night adaptations I’m all that eager to watch (I saw the Ben Kingsley one in college, not apt to revisit it), so I’ve got the recent reimagined National Theatre Live stage version with a female Malvolio (“Malvolia” 🙄) lined up for after I reread the source text... not real optimistic on that front

User avatar
knives
Joined: Sat Sep 06, 2008 6:49 pm

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#74 Post by knives » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:18 pm

I'm probably going to go after the Helen Mirren BBC version if I have time.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: Shakespeare Adaptations Mini-List Discussion + Suggestions

#75 Post by Michael Kerpan » Wed Aug 14, 2019 12:45 pm

I've liked several live performances of Twelfth Night I've been to far better than any filmed version I've seen. There is apparently a Russian version -- has anyone ever managed to see it?

I also find Titus Andronicus utterly awful. ;-)

Post Reply