the tempest!

So yesterday I noticed that Julie Taymor's The Tempest was playing at the Broadway in Salt Lake, so my husband took me to see it, and it was incredible. Again, incredible.
The movie followed the play to script, except for when Prospera (Helen Mirren) told Miranda how they came to be on the island, they had to add a story so that there was a justifiable reason behind Prospero being Prospera, a woman. But the screenwriters were able to make that bit of dialog sound Shakespearean, so it wasn't as distracting, but still...you knew it wasn't part of the original.
And the best part of the whole movie had to be the spectacle scenes with Ariel. There were many interesting things they did with that character, and I was blown away with the visual effects. At some points in the play, Ariel was shown with a woman's breasts, which was interesting considering how ambiguous a character Ariel has been throughout history.
My husband, who isn't normally a Shakespeare film fan, loved this film. So, if he loved it, maybe you could too.

in all the world.

After finishing the text of As You Like It on Friday, I took a break yesterday from all things Shakespeare. Now today I'm back on the wagon and I watched the HBO FILMS version of the play, and I must say it was quite incredible. This 2006 production really touched on the many conventions of Shakespeare's comedies that we went over in class. I took more notes while watching this film than I did with the 1936 version AND with the text, I confess. So I'll just do a list of what I noticed and what I learned from watching a very well done production of As You Like It.

• The film opens with a few quotes, the last of which is "All the world's a stage." This was really effective, especially since the setting of the film was in Japan. Just goes to show that Shakespeare wrote about human experiences that can happen to any one around the world. This also made me think of an article I read a year or two ago titled "Shakespeare in the Bush." An anthropologist goes to West Africa and tells the tale of Hamlet to a small tribe, and she recalls her experience and the feedback she received from telling this universally themed story. Really, check the article out.
• The film shows the actual, physical banishment of Duke Senior. It held much more emotion and made me realize that it wasn't likely to be a peaceful event, but rather highly charged and emotional. You just don't get that by reading the text. 
• I liked seeing that Orlando and Oliver were still separated in status by their styles of clothing. Orlando the poor peasant worker in ragged, unkempt clothes and his "evil" older brother dressed to the nine. 
• Also, still talking about Orlando and his brother, I didn't understand why Oliver hated his youngest brother so much, but when I watched the film it hit me. Oliver was envious of his brother's kind heart, and the fact that people still admired him even though he was restrained by his brother to have any gentlemanly qualities, he was still loved. This mirrors the brotherly relationship between Duke Senior and Duke Frederick; Duke Fredrick was incensed near the end of the play to find that even though his elder brother was banished to the forest, young men still flocked to Duke Senior because he was so admirable a leader. This made Duke Fredrick realize his efforts were futile, hence he went on his way to the forest to experience the life of a hermit. I'll get to this later, I'm sure. 
• As for Rosalind, she was still very sweet and lovely, but not in a silly, giddy, over-the-top way. 
• The scene where Duke Fredrick banishes Rosalind was done in a very interesting manner. He comes in, yells at Rosalind and tells her she is banished, then takes Celia aside and speaks to her so lovingly to try to convince her he was doing this for her good, all the while she pretending to be swayed by his words only to tell him he might as well banish her. Then, enraged, Duke Fredrick rushed back to Rosalind, and yells more. Very interesting, if you ask me. It was very effective in developing Duke Fredrick's character, as well as Celia's. 
• Adam, the servant of the De Boys household, had a short soliloquy when he and Orlando were leaving the estate. This was a particularly interesting take on the scene, especially after learning in class that soliloquies are more of a convention of Shakespearean tragedies, and that comedies are more back and forth between characters. And this soliloquy form shows up rather a lot in this movie. I think this helps give more depth to the characters, showing that they are more thoughtful and reflective of situations and experiences that they have. 
• When Jaques pleads with Amiens to continue singing, it has Jaques sitting in the middle of a circle in a zen garden. This has some interesting implications, such as showing that Jaques, although melancholy, is very philosophical. 
• Along the same lines, Touchstone is doing Tai Chi in the scene when he meets Jaques. This definitely could be showing the translation of the human experience between cultures. Maybe?
• Also, there seemed to be something about Jaques being vegetarian in the movie. I didn't catch ANYTHING like that while reading the text, but it certainly goes with his character. I'd be interesting in knowing more about that. 
• Jaques "All the world's a stage" speech is more of a philosophical inquiry than him preaching to the forest court. More like he was thinking to himself, pondering about the state of life than telling everyone how it really is. I liked this presentation of the speech a lot. 
• Something else I must have missed entirely in the text was about Corin's previous life as a priest. I have no idea how I missed that, but it certainly was clear in the film. 
• Another thing that I wondered about was when Orlando and Ganymede first met in the forest, Orlando says there is no clock in the forest. Then later on in their meetings they mention specific times, like two o'clock.
• Then there is a scene where it shows Duke Fredrick by himself, looking rather remorseful for the things that he did to his brother and his court, and shows that he gained nothing from it because he ended up being alone. Hence his being repentant and going into the "wild" of the forest to commit to a life of hermitage. Then Jaques followed the same path, staying in the green world to find peace.  So at the end of the movie it shows Duke Fredrick sitting under a tree in a meditative state while the wedding party runs and dances by, then Aliena sees her father, kisses his head, and carries on her way. Then after she runs by, he smiles. I thought this was very sweet and a nice touch to show repentance and forgiveness, and ultimate kindness.

This really was an absolutely wonderful film. As I was reading As You Like It I didn't think I would like it very much, mostly because I was comparing it to A Midsummer Night's Dream. Whereas I thought AMND was much more interesting because of its many layers, I felt AYLI lacked a lot of conflict. But as it turns out, AYLI deals with the more philosophical musings of life, and that's where the conflict lies. I really enjoyed this play and the issues it made me wonder about and think about. Especially my original ponderings on gender confusion, which was cleared up a lot by Dr. Burton's explanation of homosociality in Shakespeare's time. This answered the question I had about in what circumstance it would have been socially okay for Orlando to kiss Ganymede, as is mentioned by Rosalind when she talks about Orlando's lips, indicating that the two kissed while Rosalind was disguised as Ganymede. Makes sense now under the definition of homosociality.

coz rosalind.

Yesterday I tried a different approach to getting acquainted with As You Like It: instead of reading the play first then watching a film adaptation of it, I watched the film first, and now I'm working on reading the text. This helped introduce the story line, especially since I am totally unfamiliar with the play, other than the "All the world's a stage" speech.

I watched the 1936 version with Lawrence Olivier, and it was pretty decent. But first off, the actress playing Rosalind seemed too sweet. Like I said before, I have had no previous experience with As You Like It but I knew well enough that Rosalind was much too sweet and soft-spoken. Then once she got into the character of Ganymede, that's when she really came out of her shell and became that strong, confident woman that I had read about in the Bevington introduction. This made me wonder if this transformation from sweet to strong is a convention of the character of Rosalind, or if that's just how it happened to turn out in the film.
As I read the text, I'm going to pay careful attention to if there is any indicator of this transformation in Rosalind's speech. Also I will be watching the 2006 version of As You Like It directed by Kenneth Branagh and then compare Rosalind from all three angles.

henry iv finale.

Well, I finished reading Henry IV Part 1 on Saturday, and then I finished Chimes at Midnight on Sunday. Well, I didn't finish the entire film, but I watched as much of it as was relevant to only the first part of the play. Apparently Chimes at Midnight is a culmination of Henry IV, Part 1, Part 2 and the first bit of Henry V. As much as I would've like to watch how the story ended, I just got bored. And I'm not saying it was entirely the movie's fault, but had I read all three plays, I would have been more invested in finishing the movie.
So first, just some thoughts about the movie, then I'll move on to final thoughts on the play.

Chimes at Midnight.
As I watched the last half of the half of the movie that focuses on Part 1 of the play, I came to the realization that I pitied Hotspur more, mostly because he was so likeable and jovial. I didn't get this as much in the play, and so I mentioned this to my mom. She mentioned that the real-life Harry Percy was sort of like the "sweetheart" of England; he was the King's go-to man, and everyone adored him. So I looked up some history (wiki style) about the real-life Harry and found that he really did seem to be loved by many. Even King Henry IV was said to have cried at finding Hotspur to be dead. Which then leads to how he died, which, unlike the play, was not by the hand of Prince Hal, although it was during the same battle, as far as I can tell. Also, in the play Hotspur and Hal are supposed to be more of peers, when historically Hal was only sixteen when Hotspur rebelled against Henry IV, and when he died. Now all this real historical background led me to the sources at the back of our book. I know I should've checked it out earlier, but I didn't, so...
Anyway, wiki led me to a source that is not mentioned in our book, but it seems like sound evidence? But that source is said to have come from Hotspur's squire, a John Harding, who wrote about the Percy family and about the rebellion against King Henry IV. The authentication of this source led me to a genealogy site where Hotspur's descendants keep it updated. Here is the link, if you so desire. It's pretty cool. I would never have thought of checking on the ancestry of some of the historical figures of Shakespeare's plays!

Well, I sort of got of track with that, so let me continue on to my final words on the play version of Henry IV.

Okay, so I came across an article titled "Shakespeare's best history plays," and I actually found it to be pretty interesting. In brief, what I found to be most interesting was that the article says that Henry IV, Part 1 could have been the most widely produced play during Shakespeare's time. I wondered why it might have had such a wide following back then when now there are very few productions of it. Perhaps it is because the play is the epitome of a prodigal son returning. I can only assume that that was a popular theme at the time, so I have a few ideas on why that theme might not be so popular with our society now.
In literature, media, films, tv, the heroes and heroines are the anti-hero. Our society is bombarded with the idea that it's okay to do drugs, be immoral, and what have you, because even with those flaws you can still be the protagonist. It's as if our society doesn't want to see the protagonist to get out of a slump, because maybe it proves that no matter how imperfect you are, you can still do anything. But I think that it would be more impressive to see the protagonists of our modern literature to follow the path of the hero's journey, where they make mistakes and better themselves to reach the ultimate boon. But now, our society has made it so simple and we don't expect people to progress and become their better selves. So that's my very simple idea of why Henry IV isn't very known in our day. I'm sure there is more psychology on the matter, and I'm just blabbering on about my own ideas, but for now, that's what I have.

chimes at midnight.

 I began watching the film adaptation of Shakespeare's Henry IV "Chimes at Midnight." It was my intention to read along with the movie, as I had done with the Branagh version of Hamlet, but it proved to be much more difficult. The movie adaptation jumps from scene to scene, and even from act to act, but because I have read most of the play i was able to track down where the movie was in comparison. Also, speeches are cut very short, and I'm not sure how the screenwriter decided on what to leave out, because oftentimes it would just be a word or two, and it didn't seem to safe much more time by eliminating a brief phrase. But there are a few other observations that I'd like to point out.

The opening of the film has a narrator who gives a brief explanation of how Henry Bolingbroke became king. It places him to be more of a villain than I thought he would be. While reading the play, I pictured Bolingbroke to be a victim of mutiny, but after watching a good portion of the movie, I'm rather confused...

Also, in act 2 scene 3 when Hotspur is speaking with his wife, I had a totally different visualization of what was happening than what was portrayed in the movie. When I was reading the text, I pictured Hotspur as gruff and mean to his wife, but in the movie it was all in good fun.

So with just getting to the middle of the movie, I have realized how beneficial it truly is to sit down and watch a production of a play you are studying as oftentimes you can misinterpret characters' personalities and so forth.

 I can't wait to finish the film and the text this weekend, and to think of some better final analysis on the whole history play genre.