Before watching Kenneth Branagh's version of Henry V, the only other Branagh film I had seen was Hamlet. I couldn't help but compare Henry V to Hamlet before I even started watching the film. I wondered if Branagh kept the lines the same in Henry V like he did in Hamlet. I feel that it takes a great director to be able to keep all the original lines the same. As I began watching, I realize that there were lines taken out in some places. In the end though, I do not think it really mattered. It was not like I got to the end of the film and felt like something was missing.
What did stick out the most to me was the very first chorus in the Prologue. When I was reading Henry V, I think I skimmed over the prologue thinking that it simply set up the events of the play or provided a little summary like in Romeo and Juliet. But by watching this part of the film, so much stuck out that I had not realized while reading. The lines "Can this cock-pit hold / The vasty fields of France? Or may we cram / Within this wooden O the very casques / That did affright the air at Agincourt"(11-14). I guess when I first read this I did not really think of the words "cock-pit" or "wooden O" as referring to the stage. But now, that I have seen the film, it really brings up the idea that could a stage successfully convey battle scenes and vast kingdoms. Does it have the same effect as if you were actually there or watching a film that is not set on a stage? Can you really experience what actually happened with actors and props instead of the actual people and places? The chorus even asks for forgiveness saying "But pardon, gentles all, / that flat unraised spirits that hat dared / On this unworthy scaffold to bring forth / So great an object."(8-11). The chorus is pretty much asking the audience to use their imagination. Imagine the stage as really being the kingdoms. Imagine the actors as really being the true people. Imagine that the few hours of the play or movie are really years and years in real time. The chorus goes on to say that he/she is there to help tell the story and move the play along. Be kind when judging the play...there is a lot that the set and characters must live up to. I think while watching the movie I realized that the chorus is an important part of the play. It is not something to be skipped over. The chorus also made me notice how much of a likable or diverse character King Henry was.
I did have one misconception as the film started...The man playing the chorus flips a light switch for a stage or backstage area. Honestly, in my mind at that moment I felt a little disappointed that it might be a modern remake of King Henry. I sure was glad it wasn't. I think that part just put more emphasis on the fact that we have to remember that it's a play on a stage (most of the time...but not in this film). It also helps bring us back from modern times into Shakespeare’s time.
New Paltz Students Blogging about Shakespeare
2 comments:
I had a similar experience while watching Henry V, particularly at the begining of the movie. I rarely paid attention to the chorus when reading the play, but when watching the movie it was impossible not to see the significance of the chorus. I felt the begining of the movie sets up the idea of life as a stage with people just playing out their role. I loved how the chorus guy kept popping up in the middle of the action, which kept reminding me I am watching a play here. The men and woman are simply acting out their lives.
These are nice reflections on the way the film represents the Chorus, Erica. I like the opening with the actor behind the scenes, so to speak, and I think it captures the same kind of metadramatic effect Shakespeare was able to achieve on stage in the theater. One comment of yours that interests me is your statement that the Chorus shows Henry in a favorable light. What if we didn't have the Chorus? Does he sway our perceptions of the King?
Post a Comment