Henry V - Criterion Collection

Rating:
Summary: Interesting but Propagandistic
Review: This is described often as the first successful screen version of a Shakespeare play. I'd have to disagree, there is a Max Reinhardt version of A Midsummer Night's Dream antedating Henry V and at least as good. This version of Henry V was produced during WWII and was intended as a morale booster. The screenplay is an edited version of Henry V with portions that show Henry's ruthlessness excised. These include his orders to execute English traitors, the famous speech before Harfleur in which he threatens to kill all the inhabitants of the town, and this orders to kill French prisoners after the battle of Agincourt. While one-sided, this is a successful production. Henry is portrayed by the young and glamorous Olivier in a tremendously attractive performance. The play is staged theatrically and in full Technicolor glory. The other actors are very good. This version is definitely worth seeing though the more recent Kenneth Branagh version is much closer to the original play. If you're going to see or own one version, use the Branagh version. If you enjoy differing versions of Shakespeare, then seeing this version is a reasonable use of time.

Rating:
Summary: Anti-War Play done in Pro-war style
Review: This is significantly Olivier's first play, and it was made unfortunately in Pro-War times. An examination of the script shows that Shakepeare was trying to show Henry to be a hero, but war to be wrong. The script was sorely cut for Olivier, into an all pro-war/England is invincible rendition. this version suffers from the cutting more than the acting, and does not convey accurately what Shakespeare's points.

Rating:
Summary: Anti-War Play done in Pro-war style
Review: This is significantly Olivier's first play, and it was made unfortunately in Pro-War times. An examination of the script shows that Shakepeare was trying to show Henry to be a hero, but war to be wrong. The script was sorely cut for Olivier, into an all pro-war/England is invincible rendition. this version suffers from the cutting more than the acting, and does not convey accurately what Shakespeare's points.

Rating:
Summary: Improves with age
Review: When I first saw this film, in about 1948, I only really enjoyed the battle scenes, and then mainly the first flight of arrows streaking into the French cavalry. Since then I have revisited it countless times, most recently just now, and my admiration for it steadily grows. I sympathise with those reviewers who couldn't understand the circumstances of the film's production, were disappointed, or thought the actors foppish. It is true the English stage of the day was somewhat overloaded with old queans, some of whom appear here. But these things are basically irrelevant. Olivier's delivery, his perception of the significance of every word that Shakespeare wrote, is impeccable. Appreciation of it sinks in deeper every time his performance is re-savoured, and the bits I was bored with 50 years ago --- eg the opening, the death of Falstaff, the discussion of "nationhood", and the courtship scenes --- grow more and more enjoyable and interesting. By comparison, Branagh is almost totally insensitive to the rhythms and latent meanings of the text. Both versions are heavily edited: Branagh wallows more in the brutality, but Olivier is infinitely more subtle and perceptive. Branagh tries to be different, but several of Olivier's speeches and scenic exchanges are just so fine and powerful that all Branagh can do is produce pale copies of them. Not everyone will agree. Time will tell. I know the arrows were just scratched into the celluloid.