Make a Donation

Consider making a donation to support SHAKSPER.

Subscribe to Our Feeds

Current Postings RSS

Announcements RSS

Home :: Archive :: 1992 :: May ::
Rs: Shakespeare on Film, Productions of Apocrypha, Q: Oregon Festival
Shakespeare Electronic Conference, Vol. 3, No. 104. Monday, 25 May 1992.
 
 
(1)	From: 	Vinton Cerf <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Sunday, May 3, 1992, 16:05 GMT
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 3.0094  Shakespeare on Film
 
(2)	From: 	Steve Urkowitz <surcc%cunyvm.bitnet@utcs>
	Date: 	Friday, May 8, 1992, 08:01:00 -0400
	Subj: 	Re: SHK 3.0094  Shakespeare on Film
 
(3)	From: 	Daniel Traister <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Sunday, May 3, 1992, 19:35:01 -0400
	Subj: 	RE: SHK 3.0098  Productions of the Shakespeare Apocrypha?
 
(4)	From: 	Karen K. Marshall <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
	Date: 	Wednesday, May 13, 1992, 21:51:41 -0400
	Subj: 	Oregon Festival
 
 
(1)---------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: 		Vinton Cerf <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Sunday, May 3, 1992, 16:05 GMT
Subject: 3.0094  Shakespeare on Film
Comment: 	RE: SHK 3.0094  Shakespeare on Film
 
Regarding Tad Davis' comments on Branagh in *Henry V* and Nicol
Williamson's *Hamlet*, I have to agree. The battle scene in *Henry V*,
particularly the slow-motion treatment, lent an air of inescapable fate
to the scene. Swords descend with infinite, slow, and inevitable
consequence. The same method is used in the Merchant Ivory production
of *Howards End* after the court scenes and rendering of the verdict. Is
this technique now considered a cliche?
 
With regard to Williamson, despite the many other Hamlets I have scene, I
thought Williamson's rendering by far the most convincing (particularly in
the soliloquy). I also liked Mel Gibson's energy and range, but was left
less convinced in the introspective scenes.
 
Vint Cerf
 
(2)------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: 		Steve Urkowitz <surcc%cunyvm.bitnet@utcs>
Date: 		Friday, May 8, 1992, 08:01:00 -0400
Subject: 3.0094  Shakespeare on Film
Comment:      	Re: SHK 3.0094  Shakespeare on Film
 
About Tad Davis's appreciation of Branaugh's HENRY V: Yes, I agree it
does a lot of stirring things.  But despite der wunderkind's protestations
about the anti-war intentions he may have had, I'd like to pass on Michael
Warren's comment.  He said, "The Branaugh movie is about the glory of young
men being blooded.  "What Branaugh does, as I see it, is glorify Henry,
especially in the battle.  Those "slow-motion" death-on-the-rugby-pitch
scenes of anonymous combat between equal warriors is more like CHARIOTS
OF FIRE than it was like the absurd slaughter of 10000s, most of whom died
from the crush of their own comrades rather than from arm-to-arm combat.
The arithmetic of the story and the arithmetic of the movie are cock-eyed.
All those single or double combats make it seem like there were lots of
fair fights going on.  And then, at the last moment after showing the
discovery of the innocent dead lads, Branaugh leaves out Henry's "kill
the prisoners" episodes.  Hey, I've seen Robin Hood movies and simple cowboy
flicks that generated more ambivalence about the killing done by the "good
guys" than  Branaugh's movie managed.  Overlaying the Duke of Burgundy's
lament about the war's destruction with romantic-dramatic clips of glorious
battle esentially gutted any sense of the brief combat's futility.  Sorry
about that.  Don't mean to rain on your happy parade for what is in many
ways a fine film.  But it ain't ugly where Shakespeare calls in ugly, so
it's less than it ought to be, than it could have been.
 
                             Steve Urkowitz, SURCC@CUNYVM
 
(3)------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: 		Daniel Traister <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Sunday, May 3, 1992, 19:35:01 -0400
Subject: 3.0098  Productions of the Shakespeare Apocrypha?
Comment: 	RE: SHK 3.0098  Productions of the Shakespeare Apocrypha?
 
In either 1974 or 1977, I saw *Two Noble Kinsmen* produced in Regent's
Park, London, in a production that was acceptable if unexciting.  One left
with the feeling that the play might have worked better than it did--which
was good enough, but no better than that--in a production graced by better
actors than I fear I remember seeing on that occasion, and perhaps less
urban noise than I also remember.  At this date, I can recall little else
about the production--but it is *certainly* a viable work for the stage and
I find it difficult to imagine why one might suppose it *not* "viable."
 
Daniel Traister, Curator of Special Collections
Van Pelt-Dietrich Library Center
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA 19104-6206
215 898 7088 (phone); 215 898 0559 (fax)

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 @in (e-mail)
 
(4)------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
From: 		Karen K. Marshall <
 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 >
Date: 		Wednesday, May 13, 1992, 21:51:41 -0400
Subject: 	Oregon Festival
 
I'll be going to the Oregon Shakespearean Festival this summer.
Does anyone have any recommendations for the productions being offered
this year?  It will be my first time attending, so any tips will be welcome.
 
KareMarshall
University of Virginia

 This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
 
 

Other Messages In This Thread

©2011 Hardy Cook. All rights reserved.