Rating: 
Summary: Chilling portrayal of Shakespeares Relevence Today
Review: Anyone who questions the relevance of learning Shakespeare should watch this brilliant classic Using the original Shakespeare language this masterpiece is set in the 1930's in a typical Fascist/Stalinist dictatorship with the scheming and cruel King Richard(played brilliantly by McLellen) portrayed as a Hitler/Stalin figure. The cynicism of modern day tyranny is clearly paralleled in the character of Richard. The directors have left nothing out and even King Richards emblem is portrayed as the Boar which was the real emblem of the Duke of Gloucester ,in a white circle with the red background just like the Swastika
The essence of the 1930's is beautifully captured-complete with music from Al Johlson ,with all the scenes adapted to this era In the beginning scene ,Henry VI is assassinated by elite troops with gas masks which climb out of a tank ,that has just burst into his bunker Of course the adaptation, ,just like the original is set in England ,with the chilling warning that tyranny can appear in any land if we are not vigilant and is not inherent in any one nation. This when even today one has to look around the world and see the tyrannies and dictatorships that still exist in the Third World and elsewhere
Rating:
Summary: A brilliant adaptation
Review: Ian McKellen is great in this Art Deco, crypto-Fascist rendering of the great Shakespeare "villain-play." The rest of the cast is very good, with only one of the female characters seeming not quite up to her role. But overall it's an excellently-conceived and well-executed adaptation. You'll enjoy it!
Rating:
Summary: "Now is the winter of our discontent ...
Review: made glorious summer by this sun of York."The first line of Shakespeare's "Richard III," spoken by Sir Ian McKellen approximately 10 minutes into the movie, sets the tone for this unusual telling of the tale. Shakespeare's drama is set in England ... but not an England that you might know. This is England as it might have appeared if the Fascist sympathizers had come into power. Interestingly enough, the politics are very similar to the Wars of the Roses, so this odd juxtaposition works incredibly well. The casting is, of course, superb. McKellen is delightfully wicked as Richard. Annette Benning makes a superbly sympathetic Elizabeth Woodville. I found all of the players to be quite credible in their roles. An interesting aside for Shakespearean scholars: the song being performed at the movie's opening by the chanteuse at the ball is "The Passionate Shephered to His Love," which was written by Christopher Marlowe. Marlowe is one of the frequently-named possibilities as the true author of the Shakespearean catalog. Overall, this is one of the best performances of "Richard III" that I have seen. For admirers of Shakespeare, Ricardians who want to investigate every possible performance or book concerning the last Plantagenet king, or for historians with an interest in either the present or the past era, this is a film not to be missed.
Rating:
Summary: Shakespeare lives on.
Review: I liked very much of this adaptation of Shakespeare classic play Richard III. Adapted to the 1930's England, Richard III becomes a kind of political fable about the man's undying power thrist and to what this end's up taking us. Ian Mckellen is explendid as the diabolicly seductor Duke of Gloucester that kills everyone in his way to take the throne. Great movie.
Rating: 
Summary: What was butchered worse: Richard's Army or the Bard's Play?
Review: Well, 2 stars might be more accurate, but given the large number of 5 star reviews this horrible adaptation has already garnered I think a 1 star review is warranted. Annette Bening, and most of the other actors, deliver their lines in this film so atrociously it is a wonder they were paid in dollars and not rotten tomatoes(no more needs to be said of the acting, it's just that awful). While I don't question the amount of Shakespeare they cut from the script, I do think they could've done much better in choosing which lines to cut). This adaptation also, like many better films, transcribes Shakespeare into a more modern setting. However, the Naziesque setting has the filmakers selected has no point. Zero. Why bother putting Richard in a tank? Take Branagh's Hamlet and compare it to Gibson's. The late 19th Century costumes and palace that Branagh's Elsinore has is a tremendous aesthetic improvement to the drab, yet historically accurate, Elsinore of Gibson's adaptation. This new Richard III on the other hand, is no improvement at all upon Olivier's. Another Shakespeare adaptation, Titus, gets away with a very crazy modernization because the director was actually competent.
Rating: 
Summary: An Exception to the Rule
Review: Generally speaking, I do not like it when people take the works of Marlowe, Shakespeare, and Dickens out of their times. But this is one time the content of the story did not really suffer too much. The script was for the most part left alone. Gloucester (later King Richard III) is captivating as the most demonic and evil character Shakespeare ever created. Just as when we read the play, we can easily be won to Richard III's side despite his evil. Maggie Smith demonstrates her mastery of Shakespeare as Richard's furious mother. As in the play, the action never stops. Despite the fact that much of the scenery is anachronistic, it is done well. My only real complaints are that they deleted the scene where Richard III is haunted by the 11 ghosts as well as King Henry VII's speech that ends the War of the Roses.
Rating: 
Summary: A play! A play! My kingdom for a play!
Review: Make a film of a Shakespeare play for the popular audeince, and you have to make deep cuts. Olivier's "Hamlet" loses two subplots and two great soliloquies, as well as nearly half of everything else - but it still works. Any production of "Richard III", for any audience at all, will usually make some pretty drastic excisions as well, as the original script has some serious klunkiness which can be thus mended. Again, Olivier's film is a case in point. The film on this DVD has gone at it not with a scalpel but with a cleaver, leaving us with a more or less clear picture of the gross outline of the story, but with little wealth of detail to let us know exactly why it's happening. It's as though we see a passing glossy trace of the play, rather than the play itself. McKellan is brilliant as usual, in the material allowed him. Other characters sink into the fog - Buckingham in particular. Ralph Richardson's Buckingham is one of the most memorable elements of the Olivier film. After watching this version, I would not be surprised to hear somebody say, "Buckingham? Which one was he?" A relentlessly good-looking film, of course, which seems to be more and more what moviemaking is only about. Interesting for McKellen fans, and for comparison with the Olivier, which, I'm afraid, remains the standard despite any technical limitations of its day and budget.
Rating:
Summary: Shakespeare meets the Third Reich
Review: Some material is so good that it's like one of those stereo speakers that is so well-made you can sink it in a fish tank for a year, pull it out, and after being a guppy condo it still works. Bach perfomed on weird electronic instruments or steel drums or with a bunch of guys on sticks is an example of this. Richard III done in an imaginary fascist England of the 1930's is another. The clothes (wonderful!), cosmetics, body language, furniture, everything dovetails flawlessly down to the smallest detail. Ian McKellen, as Richard, is one of the most convincing villians I have ever seen. The language is so wonderful, it would -- almost -- be worth having fascism it that was what it took to get leaders who spoke instead of grunted.
Rating:
Summary: Maggie Smith steals this movie
Review: In this version of Richard III the action has been movied to England in the 1930's. The move to this time period is flawless. While not as good as Titus (which is similar) this is a great film with fine performances. Maggie Smith as the Duchess of York steals this movie with her expert handling of Shakespeare. The scene she has with Ian McKellan (Richard III)by the stairs is amazing. Maggie Smith should have been a candidate for an Oscar for Best Supporting actress, a truly flawless performance. Annette Bening is very moving as Queen ELizabeth. Her best scene is in front of the building where her sons are being held prisoner by Richard. Krisitn Scott-THomas is riveting as Lady Anne. Ian McKellan is astouding as RIchard III. This is probably his best performance (even better than his performance as James Whale in "Gods and Monsters.") THe costumes and sets are also expertly done. Richard III is a near masterpeice.
Rating:
Summary: Imaginative, Unconventional and Utterly Riveting
Review: Although I'm a film devotee, and love Shakespeare on the stage, film versions of his plays usually bore me to tears -- but not this one! To begin with the centerpiece of the movie, Ian McKellan's performance is magnetic, magnificent, and thoroughly engaging. He doesn't overplay Richard's physical disability, and despite his unprepossessing appearance, he can be almost appealing when he wants to be. It's a portrayal you won't easily forget. The rest of the cast -- with a single exception -- is almost his equal. Jim Broadbent beautifully underplays the shallow, traitorous Buckingham. Maggie Smith's few scenes are powerful and heartbreaking. Annette Bening more than holds her own -- you get the feeling that this woman is intelligent and persuasive, despite her countless travails. Adrian Dunbar in the small role of Tyrrell is slimily personable. Only Robert Downey Jr. is sadly miscast; he manages to butcher the language every time he opens his mouth (and I'm generally a fan of his work). Too much has been made of the resetting of the play in an imaginary 1930's fascist England. With good actors and an imaginative director, Shakespeare works equally well in unconventional settings and traditional ones. I WILL say that Julie Taymor must have seen this film before embarking on her own "Titus". The similarities are remarkable, and I'm surprised that no one has commented on them (that film is also recommended, by the way).
|
