by G. Jack Urso
Those of you who can’t relate to men in tights
uttering archaic English will be in for a most pleasant surprise; there’s
enough war, intrigue, and betrayal to satisfy even those who normally eschew
the Immortal Bard. Moving beyond Shakespeare’s content, the film features
musical numbers evocative of the Golden Age of Hollywood. As bizarre as that
sounds, Ian McKellen masterfully integrates both to provide new insight into
the characters and their motivations in a way that straight drama cannot.
McKellen’s Richard III is set in the fascist era of
1930s Europe where the Machiavellian machinations of the early Renaissance seem
quite at home. Drawing heavily from Nazi pageantry, much of the action is set
in or near monumental architecture, creating a paranoid atmosphere where the
individual is overwhelmed by the power of the state. The good are slowly
eliminated, toadying sycophants get promoted, the mediocre are easily
manipulated, and the king is mad. By updating Richard III, McKellen gives a
glimpse of history as it was, as it is, and as it could be, retaining the
play’s cautionary tale of the abuse of power.
Richard III, as portrayed by McKellen, is an Everyman
of absolute rulers. Courageous, though morally and physically crippled,
McKellen’s Richard sets about the business of usurping the throne with a glee
of self-satisfaction that is infectious. This is particularly apparent in one
early scene set a crowed hospital emergency room. Here, Richard succeeds in
seducing Lady Anne Neville, in a morgue of all places, then segues into a
1930s-esque musical number with an ease that seems almost criminal. McKellen
uses our preconceptions about classic film to lure us into a familiar place. Rather
than being a distraction, the viewer is drawn deeper into the film and its
reality.
 |
| McKellen as Richard III confronts the audience, breaking the fourth wall. |
McKellen takes us into Richard’s conspiracy by
speaking directly to the camera, breaking down the invisible “fourth wall”
separating performer and audience. In this way, we become Richard’s confidants
and share his unbounded joy in his pursuit of power. McKellen invites us to
become characters in the play by seducing us as well. Along with other characters
in the play, we fall under Richard’s spell. Without disparaging Sir Lawrence
Olivier’s masterful performance in the 1955 film version, I felt more of a
connection to the play’s thematic content in McKellen’s version and came away
with deeper understanding of Richard’s motivations.
A generous performer, McKellen cast an ensemble of
noted British and American actors including Annette Bening, Jim Broadbent,
Robert Downey Jr., Sir Nigel Hawthorne, Kristin Scott Thomas, Dame Maggie
Smith, John Wood, and Dominic West. Some roles from the play are expanded or
combined to provide the actors with the room to develop their parts so that the
film does not hang on the performance of any one person alone. With apologies
to purists who frown upon any editing of the Immortal Bard’s words, the
adaptability of the play underscores the universality of the themes Shakespeare
explores and the characters he creates.
In a final, haunting moment the night before his
final battle, we find Richard tormented by his nightmares, reduced to tears by
the voices of his many victims. One almost feels sorry for Richard in this
state as we have been lulled into sympathy by McKellen’s creative delivery of
centuries-old dialogue. Indeed, it is McKellen’s unique interpretation of his
lines that is this film’s lasting contribution to the enduring legacy of this
play.
Compared to Olivier’s Richard III, McKellen daringly
takes a great risk in giving a new twist on a sacred thespian role, but his
gamble pays off. War, love, hate, lust, greed, cowardice, heroism, sacrifice,
honor, and revenge — the full tragedy of the human condition is explored in 104
minutes of film.
If nothing else, you’ll learn how a one-armed man can
pee without getting urine stains on his trousers while quoting Shakespeare.
Related Content
● ● ●
No comments:
Post a Comment