Richard III

Rating:
Summary: translates very well from the play
Review: The film version of Shakespeare's play Richard the III translates very well from the play. The film makes some changes from the original play. The most obvious is the time setting change. The setting of the 30's portrays the character of Richard the III very well. It keeps his evil. This video lives past the standards of past Shakespeare films. At the same time, it is true to the original plot of Richard the III, but still adds plenty of variety to keep almost anybody interested. The end of this movie especially shows the true nature of Richard the III, and his cruel heart. It brings back to life the remakes of Shakespeare's plays that have had their reputation brought down by past remakes of other plays.

Rating:
Summary: Poignant!
Review: Poignant! This comic book version of Richard III, staring Ian McKellan, is actually an extremely profound statement about our times. Jeeps replace horses, tommy guns replace spears, and hanging replaces beheading as the setting takes place in London, swinging away the 1930Õs in midst of a fascist coup. Richard III is beautifully portrayed by McKellan: deformed, merciless and treacherous. The movie is teaming with sex, drugs, and violence. The style is reminiscent of the modern version of Romeo and Juliet staring Leonardo Dicaprio, though Richard III is more cartoonish: bombs explode, women ware impeccable makeup with red nails, and love is shallow. The director successfully catches the mood and spirit of ShakespeareÕs Richard of Gloucester, all using the authentic dialogue with few cuts and making a poignant parallel between Richard and Hitler.

Rating:
Summary: a good shakespearian story
Review: In William Shakespeare's Richard III, Shakespeare worked to create a sense of excitement and drama by pitting characters against others; the prime example being Queen Elizabeth hating Richard, Duke of Gloucester because he had and would again murder people dear to her, although at the time she did not know that. In this modern recreation of Richard III, the producer loses none of the thrill or tragic emotion by placing it in the early 1900s instead of in medieval times.The only sceen in which the same feelings are lost is in the last scene when Richmond and Richard are hunting after one another. The entire reason the two were battling it out was because they were honorable men looking to see who was a better knight and who had the right to be the ruler of England. In the book they used swords; it seemed to give the battle more integrity because it took real skill to be an excellent fencer. In the movie, they used guns which takes a week or two to learn how to use efficiently. Other than that you can enjoy a good shakespearian story with its plot intact

Rating:
Summary: quite entertaining
Review: Recently I was given the opportunity to watch this film during my English class. After actually reading the play, I viewed the full-length picture and found it to be quite entertaining. Surprisingly it was rather accurate to Shakespeare's work. The only significant difference was the time setting. I believe this made the film rather interesting. The time setting takes place somewhere between the 1920's-1930's. This did not ruin the meaning of the play at all.

Rating:
Summary: innovative
Review: The updated film version of Shakespeare's Richard III, pays spectacular homage to the wonderful wit portrayed in the original. The light nature in which the movie is handled allows the audience to enjoy Richard's devious plans involving absolute cruelty, can be comical. And the twist of placing Richard in the 1930's, is an innovative way of bridging the gap between Shakespeare's audience and today's. The first two minutes of the movie are a slap in the face, whether you are familiar with the play, or if you've never heard of the cunning Duke of Gloucester. The way the movie uses Shakespeare's exact words to fit a twentieth-century struggle for the crown of England. Is handled very well. This movie was entertaining, but is taken to a new level if you are familiar with the famous works of Shakespeare.

Rating:
Summary: superbly cruel
Review: The devious nature of Richard III was truly captured in this motion picture. He was depicted as a vilanous, evil man who stopped for nothing to achieve the crown. He went so far as to kill his nephew, brother, and "beloved" friend. "Richard III" showed what a frightening man this was. What made him so frightening was that his enemies knew not of his nature, or of his evil intentions. He was able to turn the heart of a woman spitting curses at him. Despite his hideous appearance, he was able to charm even those who hated him the most. "Richard III" was able to capitalize on the superbly cruel nature of this man.

Rating:
Summary: a good interpretation
Review: The film Richard III is a modernized depiction of Shakespeare's classical play. The movie gives a good interpretation of the plot and allows viewers the opportunity to understand Shakespeare's intentions and motives. The movie is somewhat humorous and lively. The setting is set around the 1930's; thus, numerous props are replaced with modern technology. The film slightly defers from the original plot and somewhat lacks channeling the true character of Richard. However, I must commend the movie, because it does an excellent job in portraying the evil, conniving intentions of the future king. Not only does the movie succeed in depicting the deceitful life of Richard, but it also succeeds in portraying the harsh life of the royal family during.

Rating:
Summary: Same Play...Different Time and Different Place
Review: Same Play...Different Time and Different Place If your English teacher mentions that you will be watching a movie on Richard III, would it ever cross your mind that it was possible to reenact this Shakespearean play in a different setting? This Richard III movie, unlike the other movies, puts on the whole play in a different time and place. Instead of having the Elizabethan period, the movie takes place during the early 1900's. Now, would this detain the spirit of the whole play to be fully understood? It doesn't really ruin the whole plot; the movie just shows another way--new ideas and settings--can be substituted in a Shakespearean play. Moreover, since you are most likely aware of the early 1900's than the Elizabethan period, the setting is more familiar. If William Shakespeare were alive during the early 1900's, he would most likely have written his plays this way.

Rating:
Summary: story and characters remain the same
Review: In the film conversion of Shakespeare's Richard III the time has changed but the story and characters remain the same. The main purpose of this story is to make the film viewer love to hate Richard, which it accomplishes. The movie successfully portrays Richard as a ruthless murderer, liar, thief, and as a downright thug. The setting, in mid to early 1900's is unique, and makes the story more entertaining to the younger viewer. The film successfully uses the most famous and memorable parts of Shakespeare's original play with no awkward moments due to the extensive time change. Overall this film uses Shakespeare's Richard III in a unique and explosively upbeat way.

Rating:
Summary: very modernized
Review: Although it is very modernized, Ian Mckellen's adaptation of Richard III recaptures the spirit of Shakespeare's play. It also attracts people who don't exactly like Shakespeare by its 20th century setting. Everyone is attention is quickly grabbed within the first five minutes when a tank storms through a house and guns start going off everywhere. People stay interested with Robert Downey Jr's funny side lines. The story stays true to the original, amazingly enough. As always, some parts are taken out, but nothing signifigant. The main story is all there, and for those who refuse to read the play, the movie makes a good substitute around test time.