The Shakespeare Conference: SHK 16.1378 Wednesday, 24 August 2005
From: Charles Weinstein <
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
>
Date: Tuesday, 23 Aug 2005 17:32:13 -0400
Subject: King John
Al Magary has some unkind words for the BBC's King John; but the
production has too many good performances to warrant such dismissal.
George Costigan's wayward but committed Bastard, a compound of offhand
charm, affable cynicism and absolute integrity, strikes me as a
beautiful piece of work; and Costigan's natural way with a line is an
object lesson in colloquial Shakespeare. Claire Bloom interestingly
transforms Constance's latent (and patent) melodrama into restrained
intelligence: she does not provoke tears but compels through force of
mind. Charles Kay's sanctimonious King Philip, Richard Wordsworth's
vulpine and chillingly unsanctimonious Cardinal, Mary Morris' flinty
Elinor and Phyllida Lloyd's rueful but reconcilable Lady Faulconbridge
are all first-rate. John Thaw's Hubert and John Castle's Salisbury
(surprisingly accomplished actors for such small roles) are also very
good; as are Jonathan Coy's Dauphin, Edward Hibbert's Faulconbridge and
others. The same cannot be said of Leonard Rossiter's John, but the
eponymous King does not dominate his play; and the youthful ineptitude
of Luc Owen's Arthur takes up sufficiently little screen time to be
forgivable (or almost). I count King John as one of the BBC's more
successful offerings; and ten years ago I shelled out the 80-odd dollars
to buy it.
_______________________________________________________________
S H A K S P E R: The Global Shakespeare Discussion List
Hardy M. Cook,
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
The S H A K S P E R Web Site <http://www.shaksper.net>
DISCLAIMER: Although SHAKSPER is a moderated discussion list, the
opinions expressed on it are the sole property of the poster, and the
editor assumes no responsibility for them.
|
