Shakespeare Adaptations

[VCRTracking]

I'm not a big Shakespeare scholar or expert but I have seen a whole lot of movies based on his plays, from Romeo and Juliet(Zafarelli and Lurhman) to various versions of Richard III, MacBeth, Hamlet, Henry V, The Taming of the Shrew, etc. The latest movie I've seen is Much Ado About Nothing directed by Joss Whedon.  Recently I listened to an audiobook of Henry VI with David Tennant in the title role. I'm familiar with most of Shakespeare's historical plays except for this one because there aren't any movies made from it. I think it would be interesting though Joan of Arc(being the enemy French army) is portrayed as a villain whose visions came from demons instead of God! The only thing I would find annoying is the character of Talbot, who is a total Mary Sue. Okay we get it Shakespeare, this guy is the most awesome example of English manliness ever(eyeroll), too bad nobody today has ever heard of him while everybody remembers Joan as a saint. That's one attempt at character assassination that didn't stick.

Edited June 14, 2014 by VCRTracking

[Athena]

I've seen a lot of Hamlets. I also have a fondness for Twelfth Night. Basically, Olivier and Brannagh ones are particularly good. While I had mixed feelings when I saw it, I think Luhramann's Romeo+Juliet is a good adaptation. They captured that flakey, angsty teenage romance from the play and it was ridiculous and fun to watch too.

[Rick Kitchen]

10 Things I Hate About You was a really good modern-day interpretation of "The Taming of the Shrew".  Julia Stiles also starred in O, a modern retelling of "Othello", although it wasn't as good.

 

My Own Private Idaho is a very strange reinterpretation of "Henry IV, Parts 1 and 2" and "Henry V".  But an excellent movie, all the same.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Josh Harnett was the best thing about "O" , Stiles was okay but Mekhi Pheiffer truly disappointed me in the titular role.

 

The 1995 version was great. Being an AA female I was so pleased to see Fishburne as

The Moor on the big screen.  The first black actor to play the role in a major studio film

adaptation.

 

Branaugh was amazing as Honest Iago, one of his best acting performances to date IMHO.

Plus you got solid supporting work for Irene Jacob and Nathaniel Parker.

 

As Desdemona and Cassio.

Edited June 15, 2014 by MrsRafaelBarba

[VCRTracking]

Laurence Fishburne talked about the movie when he was on Inside the Actor's Studio. He said he was intimidated by Shakespeare and not sure if he could pull it off until he talked to a couple of people like Roscoe Lee Browne who encouraged him. 

[OakGoblinFly]

The Hollow Crown is fantastic version of four Shakespearean works: Richard II, Henry IV Part 1, Henry IV Part 2, and Henry V.  It is filmed like a big Hollywood movie and not a stage production and that (for me) gives the films a more earthy feel (granted Richard II does go for some unusual visuals, but that worked for me because of who Richard II was as a person) - the language is presented very naturally and you believe that's how every one really spoke.  The Henry plays have the added benefit of using many of the same actors so you get this wonderful continuity across the three plays.  

 

As an aside, Ben Whishaw  was brilliant as Richard and Rinnear was riveting as Bolingbroke in Richard II.  Jeremy Iron gives a fantastic performance as Henry IV and you can see why Tom Hiddleston was made for Shakespeare.

 

There's also Shakespeare Re-Told which re-images four of Shakespeare's plays: Much Ado About Nothing, Macbeth, The Taming of the Shrew, and A Midnight's Summer Dream.  They're all well done, though I personally prefer Much Ado About Nothing (set in a local news station where Beatrice and Benedick are the arguing news anchors) and Macbeth (about the brutality of the restaurant business and starring James McAvoy) because I like those plays better.

Josh Harnett was the best thing about "O" , Stiles was okay but Mekhi Pheiffer truly disappointed me in the titular role.

 

The 1995 version was great. Being an AA female I was so pleased to see Fishburne as

The Moor on the big screen.  The first black actor to play the role in a major studio film

adaptation.

 

Branaugh was amazing as Honest Iago, one of his best acting performances to date IMHO.

Plus you got solid supporting work for Irene Jacob and Nathaniel Parker.

 

As Desdemona and Cassio.

 

 

The Kenneth Branagh films are the thing that made me learn to appreciate Shakespeare on a totally new level.  I wish I had time to go home to NY to see his Macbeth.

 

Speaking of Macbeth, Michael Fassbender and Marion Cotillard are starring in a new remake; I hope it's good.

Edited June 15, 2014 by OakGoblinFly

[MrsRafaelBarba]

In 2001, PBS aired a modern retelling of Othello starring Oz's Eammon Walker as The Moor.

 

Christopher Eccleston and Keeley Hawkes, were Iago and Desdemona in this version.

 

Set in the UK, with them being in law enforcement.

 

Everytime I see Idris Elba, keep hoping another adaptation is done with him as the titular

character.  This and Hamlet are my favorite works from Shakespeare.

 

Also liked Julie Taymor's 1999 adaptation of Titus Andronicus. 

 

All this talk, makes want to watch some now. 

 

Maybe BBC's Hamlet with Ten and Sir Patrick, own it on blu and heard it was great.

[Crs97]

Kenneth Branagh is the King of Shakespeare as far as I am concerned.  I remember Jack Lemmon saying in an interview that he was lost when filming Hamlet and then Kenneth came over and discussed the scene.  He said when Kenneth says the lines, they all become clear but then he leaves and you try to say them the way he did, and you can't do it.  As a member of the audience, I agree.  I sometimes struggle with other actors and need to pull the play to read the lines and analysis to understand what they meant, but when Kenneth speaks Shakespeare, it's as clear as if he is saying hello.  He has a gift!

 

I love KB's Hamlet and actually got to meet him at a cocktail party before the movie premiered in Houston.  He was very nice and funny.

[LuciaMia]

 

 

The 1995 version was great. Being an AA female I was so pleased to see Fishburne as

The Moor on the big screen.  The first black actor to play the role in a major studio film

adaptation.

The late 1970's, PBS showed the BBC's tv adaptions of the entire Shakespeare plays.  And as much as I love Anthony Hopkins, when it was time for 'Othello,' having him play the lead in brown face make-up.  No, sorry, it just did not work.  

[VCRTracking]

 

 

As a member of the audience, I agree.  I sometimes struggle with other actors and need to pull the play to read the lines and analysis to understand what they meant, but when Kenneth speaks Shakespeare, it's as clear as if he is saying hello.  He has a gift!

I love KB's Hamlet and actually got to meet him at a cocktail party before the movie premiered in Houston.  He was very nice and funny.

 

His Benedick in Much Ado is my favorite performance ever of his. "NO! The world must be peopled!"

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Branaugh's 1996 version of Hamlet, was a major undertaking.

 

But he pulled it off, acting was overall top notch and amazing visuals with lush colors.

 

Poor Jack Lemmon, you could tell  he was struggling with The Bard's way of speaking.

 

Back then I recall some criticism about Kevin casting himself as the Totrured Prince.

 

Main issue, him being too old.  I had no issue with that.

[Rick Kitchen]

Also liked Julie Taymor's 1999 adaptation of Titus Andronicus. 

 

 

I'll second this.  Outstanding cast and the set design, set in the modern world but in a sort of punk underground, is superb.

[Sir RaiderDuck OMS]

One of the big problems with most adaptations of Hamlet: The actors playing Hamlet are usually in their 30s. This makes no sense at all, because a man that age would just take over the throne if his father died suddenly, no matter who his mother married. The 2000 modern-setting Ethan Hawke version, for all its flaws, got this right. Hawke's Hamlet is in his late teens and would not be trusted to head the Denmark Corporation.

 

I saw Roman Polanski's Macbeth in high school and loved it, but I won't buy it (or any Polanski film) while he's alive.

 

NOTE: I realize that denying 50 cents or so of DVD royalties to a multi-millionaire is ridiculous, but it's one of the few legal means I have for punishing that baby-raping scumbag.

[Rinaldo]

It's wonderful that we now have so many Shakespeare movies, and I love comparing different versions, each of which may catch different aspects. I agree that Kenneth Branagh* has done some wonderful work in the ones he directed: Much Ado and Henry V and Hamlet are really impressive achievements (even if I could pick the occasional nit), although As You Like It is a very mixed bag as well as a weird premise, and Love's Labour's Lost is pretty bad (everybody thinks he can make a musical, without knowing how they work).

 

(*I promise I'll do this only this once, I hate being That Guy, and it's not addressed to anyone here as I see this everywhere -- but is it really so hard to spell Branagh? One N, no U. OK, I apologize again and that's all on that topic.)

 

I don't really like the Olivier Hamlet. It's more a "meditation on certain favorite scenes and theories" than it is a rendition of the play -- we lose Rosenkrantz and Guildenstern and a lot more, and I really don't think it's "a story about a man who could not make up his mind." I do find his Henry V stirring and wonderfully entertaining (very different from Branagh and just as good), and Richard III good melodramatic campy fun. I can live without the Othello altogether, and wish that instead he had made a film (which was once planned) of his highly praised Macbeth with Vivien Leigh.

 

The Much Ado that Joss Whedon made is unexpectedly satisfying, with an elegant look, some good casting, and good thought about certain aspects. The whole Dogberry business (which Branagh kind of threw up his hands at and just let Michael Keaton mess around) comes wonderfully to life with Nathan Fillion, in a way I would never have expected.

 

I'm also a big fan of the Trevor Nunn Twelfth Night, which really does justice to a lot that I love about the play, including the suggestion that the happy ending for some means that some others don't fare so happily, and are left out in the rain that raineth every day.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Any thoughts of the 1990 version of Hamlet, with Mel Gibson as the Prince?

 

Back then my expectations were low, he was better than I expected.

[Spartan Girl]

I watched the Mel Gibson Hamlet in high school and it was pretty good.  IIt gets points for actually *going there* with Hamlet's Oedipus complex.  Yeesh.

[Rinaldo]

I'll say some good things about that one. The adaptation is at least more to my taste than Olivier's (it keeps R&G and most of the plot elements). Paul Scofield is superb as the Ghost. Gibson himself, though my nose will grow if I list him among the great Hamlets, definitely has his moments, largely due to his mastery of acting for the camera. His "Alas, poor Yorick," for instance, really works. But then there are the other moments; he (or more likely Zeffirelli) went whole-hog for the Freudian mother-son interaction (as Olivier did too, and in both cases with a Gertrude who was in fact about the same age as the actor playing her son), to the detriment of the story in my view. (That's one thing I was very happy that Branagh didn't go near.) Actually, I haven't watched this Hamlet in a long time; I need to look at it again with my current mindset.

 

Julia Stiles really was queen of the modern-day adaptations of Shakespeare for a while, wasn't she? 10 Things I Hate, "O", and Ophelia to Ethan Hawke's Hamlet. One weird derivation that I confess amused me: Scotland, PA with James LeGros and Maura Tierney as Joe and Pat McBeth, who get rid of Norm Duncan. And then of course there's the SCTV McKenzie Brothers spinoff Strange Brew as a derivation of Hamlet.

[MrsRafaelBarba]

Campbell Scott produced/starred in a tv adaptation of Hamlet back in the early 2000's.

Far from perfect,, but interesting.

[Rinaldo]

Very interesting indeed. (It's on DVD.) I like the unabashed American accents, the convincing relationships, several of the supporting cast (Blair Brown, Jamie Sheridan, Roscoe Lee Browne), and Scott's own best moments (which are, I think, in the offhand light moments, which include his advice to the players).

 

There was also a Hallmark version on TV in the 1970s, which used an early 19th century setting and which I found very effective. (It's not officially available on DVD.) Richard Chamberlain does very well as Hamlet, and the supporting cast is high quality: Richard Johnson (Claudius), Margaret Leighton (Gertrude), Michael Redgrave (Polonius), John Gielgud (Ghost), Alan Bennett (Osric).

[Sharpie66]

Ian McKellen's Richard III is one of my favorite Shakespeare films. I love the setting (an AU 1930s England where Edward VIII embraced his fascist side and went all homicidal), and the performances are just fantastic. I love the way they staged the "My horse" line, too.

McKellen did a version of Macbeth back in the early 1980s costarring Judi Dench as Lady Macbeth that I really want to see.

[vibeology]

Main issue, him being too old.  I had no issue with that.

 

He was too old. Its one of those things where you can get away with it on stage but it doesn't work on film. He's an amazing actor and I was able to move past it most of the time, but the stuff with Kate Winslet/Ophelia was painful because of the ages. No matter how good an actor, you can't close that age gap. 

 

Hamlet is really tough that way to adapt for film because you need an actor with range, power, presence and the ability to handle such a huge role all in Shakespeare's language who is young enough for the plot to make sense. I can't think of any recent actor who could have handled Hamlet when they were in that 16-20 year old range. It's just a tough role to cast and I'd rather someone too old than someone age appropriate floundering in the role but that doesn't mean I can just ignore the age thing completely. 

 

The Much Ado that Joss Whedon made is unexpectedly satisfying, with an elegant look, some good casting, and good thought about certain aspects. The whole Dogberry business (which Branagh kind of threw up his hands at and just let Michael Keaton mess around) comes wonderfully to life with Nathan Fillion, in a way I would never have expected.

 

I love Much Ado so I was predisposed to love this and I really did. The Branagh version is what sealed my love for Shakespeare but I think this had some improvements. Dogberry, like you mentioned, was so much better here. Obviously Don John was stronger out of Keanu's hands but I also thought Reed Diamond made for a better Don Pedro than Denzel. No one can touch Emma and Kenneth, but Acker and Denisof were very strong. Everything was shot so quickly and I think that added to the energy of the film. Rather than weeks of filming, having only days and doing many of the scenes only once made it more like a play for the actors and brought life to each scene. I think its a great adaptation.

[Rinaldo]

The actors playing Hamlet are usually in their 30s. This makes no sense at all, because a man that age would just take over the throne if his father died suddenly, no matter who his mother married. 

Not necessarily. Shakespeare seems to have imagined Denmark as an electoral monarchy, with the next ruler to be decided by some kind of vote. Hamlet himself says that his uncle "popped in between th' election and my hopes." I imagine the prince being away at the time of the murder (perhaps at Wittenberg?), and by the time the news reached him and he'd rushed home for the funeral, Claudius (shrewd operator that he is) had persuaded the voters (perhaps they're a privy council or something of the sort) that he himself was the best choice to lead the country, cementing his place by marrying Gertrude.

[Haleth]

Way back in time, probably the early 70s, PBS broadcast every Shakespeare play, one a week for however long.  I stumbled on to a performance of Much Ado with Sam Waterston and Kathleen Widdoes and fell in love.  Nothing can top the Branagh version for me (it's one of those movies I always watch when I see it's on) but it cemented my love for Shakespeare.  (I didn't care for the Joss Whedon version.  Or maybe I should say I don't care for Amy Acker.)

 

One of the premium cable stations has been showing A Midsummer Night's Dream constantly.  This version has some strange casting (Stanley Tucci as Puck?) but I could listen to David Strathairn read the phone book.

 

The Hollow Crown.  I was on a waiting list at the library for a full year before the librarian confessed it's been lost.  Sigh.

[Rick Kitchen]

Stanley Tucci is the best Puck I have ever seen, but then, Stanley Tucci is wonderful in everything.  :)  One of my favorite actors.

[Sandman]

I really have to see the Waterston/Widdoes Much Ado. I've seen clips, but never the whole thing yet. I've never heard a bad word about it. I lovelovelove the Branagh version, and I was prepared not to like Amy Acker, but she won me over. I hated the Betelgeused Dogberry that Michael Keaton turned in. I agree with Rinaldo that Branagh appears to have simply given up on getting anything more coherent out of Keaton; even the Keanu-ity of Don John wasn't as off-putting to me. [ducks]

 

Whedon's version of Much Ado has a wonderful sparkle, and I think the screwball comedy overlay works really well. (Is it just me, or does the plot actually make a lot more sense if we allow as how most of the characters are just really, really drunk the whole time?)

 

Aren't there indications in the text that Hamlet is actually in his late twenties (or even early thirties?), rather than being a teenager? (Branagh's still too old, but not by as much as all that, I think.) It's a very long time since I read the play, so I might be misremembermagining (or making stuff up, who can tell?)

Edited August 9, 2014 by Sandman

[Rinaldo]

There are inconsistencies as to Hamlet's age, of the "if we're honest, Shakespeare didn't worry much about it and figured we'd never notice" variety. At the start he's set up as a university student. Near the end, the gravedigger talks about how long Yorick's been dead, and since Hamlet knew him that makes him considerably older than we'd thought. (I incline to thinking that WS treated it as a throwaway and never thought through the implication of what it said about the prince's age.)

 

@Haleth , with respect, I think memory may be rose-coloring things a bit. There was never a time when PBS showed a Shakespeare play every week. Even when the BBC taped the 37 plays in the years just before and after 1980, they aired them 4 to 6 in a year (and that was the first and in some cases still only video version of some of the less popular plays). And the Waterston/Widdoes Much Ado was about a decade before those; it was a one-off based on a NY Public Theater summer presentation, but taped in a studio. It was done as turn-of-the-century Americana, with ragtime and all. I like it (have it on VHS) but am not all that crazy about it, I guess.

 

The Michael Hoffman film of Midsummer is a mixed bag for me, but there are definitely good things in it. Stanley Tucci as Puck, as noted, and the luxury of David Strathairn as Theseus. Kevin Kline is a new and valid idea of Bottom, and the casting of the other 5 mechanicals is kind of a hoot -- Bill Irwin, Max Wright, Sam Rockwell, Greg Jbara, Roger Rees. And from this vantage point it's amusing to see that the two boys Demetrius and Lysander, who seemed rather forgettable at the time, were Christian Bale and Dominic West.

[Haleth]

Rinaldo, I had to look it up because I know I'm not crazy (usually), so PBS did indeed show the BBC productions, albeit later than I remember.

From the PBS website:

The British Broadcasting Company (BBC) Shakespeare series, "The Shakespeare Plays," began taping in 1978 with "Romeo and Juliet" and completed its 37-play cycle in 1985 with "Titus Andronicus." The productions tended to closely follow the text and were broadcast first in the UK and the following year in the US on PBS. Though only occasionally inspired, they did feature some significant performances.

 

I think the article said they did 6 per year.  Maybe at one time PBS reran a number of them in consecutive weeks so I'm misremembering that as a presentation of the complete works.  Thanks for making me check my facts.

[Rinaldo]

Right, PBS was the US conduit for the BBC series. They didn't always do well by them, alas -- they weren't prepared to give Hamlet (Derek Jacobi, Patrick Stewart, Claire Bloom) the 3.5-hour timeslot it needed, so they cut it down by slicing out whole scenes, some of them famous ones (the DVD is complete as taped). And toward the end they decided people weren't watching and burned off the last seasons on Sunday afternoons rather than primetime. I believe the 3 Henry VI plays (among the ones filmed last... not surprising they'd get shunted off to the end) may even have aired on consecutive Sundays, so maybe that's what you're remembering. 

 

Myself, I remember An Age of Kings from around 1960, which the precursors to PBS stations aired once a a week. The history cycle divided into 1-hour episodes in B&W, done with the best UK rep-company actors of the time. A few now-famous faces pop up in non-king roles: Eileen Atkins as Joan of Arc, Judi Dench (very young) as the French princess, and memorably Sean Connery as Hotspur. The series is on DVD, and I recommend it.