Shakespeare in Dead Poets Society

Dead Poets Society. Dir. Peter Weir. Perf. Robin Williams, Robert Sean Leonard, and Ethan Hawke. 1989. DVD. Touchstone Home Entertainment, 1998.

---

And now let's get back to wonderful uses of Shakespeare in good films.

I know I surprised most of you when I revealed that I had never seen Good Will Hunting (for which, q.v.) until this summer.

I'm afraid I will shock you when I tell you that I had never seen Dead Poets Society until a few weeks ago.

"Were you not in training to be an English teacher in 1989?" you ask.

Well, yes, I was.

"Did you not know of the film's existence then?" you inquire.

No, I was well aware of the film and the basic elements of its plot.

"Why, then, did you not see the film?" you ask in stunned disbelief.

I'm not entirely sure, but I do remember wanting to wait until I had figured out my own teaching techniques before seeing the film. I didn't want to model my teaching on Robin Williams' interpretation of John Keating's teaching methods. This year, I started to feel relatively secure that I wouldn't be tempted to stand on desks during every lecture or have students recite Whitman while kicking soccer balls, so I broke down and watched the film.

I shouldn't have waited. You all already know this, but it's a great film with a tour de force performance by nearly everyone in it.

And the Shakespeare! Perhaps I would have seen it sooner if I had known about the Shakespeare! Here's a great scene where Williams convinces his students that Shakespeare doesn't have to be stodgy and staid, imitating what appears to be Sir John Gielgud (or the like), Marlon Brando, and John Wayne doing Shakespeare:

The culmination of the film (I'll still try to avoid spoilers for anyone who, like me, has yet to see it) involves a production of Midsummer Night's Dream. One of the boys at the school has discovered a passion for acting, has disobeyed his father's instructions, and has taken on the role of Puck. The clip below conflates the production, providing its beginning and end—with Puck's closing speech delivered to the father, who stands disapprovingly in the back of the auditorium:

The multi-layered delivery of the lines is fascinating. It caps the play, of course, and is delivered as a piece of false modesty to the audience—but it's also delivered as a request for absolution from the disobeyed father. 

That sort of careful integration of Shakespeare into a different plot is tricky—but absolutely awe-inspiring when it pays off, as it absolutely does here. 

---

Links: The Film at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the film from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

"O Horrible! Most Horrible!": Another Awful Shakespeare Derivative

Let the Devil Wear Black. Dir. Stacy Title. Perf. Jonathan Penner, Randall Batinkoff, Norman Reeds, and Mary-Louise Parker. 1999. DVD. Unapix, 2000.

---

Some time ago, I chanced upon a VHS tape of this film. I watched part of it, fast-forwarded though a fair bit of it, and abandoned it. But I remembered it when thinking about how bad badly-done Shakespeare derivatives can be.

This film is a derivative version of Hamlet set in modern Los Angeles. The cover says, "Something is rotten rotten rotten in the city of angles," and I suppose that doesn't count as false advertising—except it seems to apply to what happens in the plot when it more neatly fits the quality of the film.

I'm usually thrilled by derivative versions, finding that they point us back to the text in interesting ways. This film, even though it follows the plot of Hamlet more than most, doesn't work. It ends up being crude and amateurish, and it doesn't seem to have anything thoughtful to say about Shakespeare's play.

It took some time to find a clip that would capture the film well without being vulgar or indecent, but I managed to extract this one. For lack of a clearer analogy, this scene may be something of a version of the play-within-the-play. Jack (the Hamlet analogue) reveals to Carl (our Claudius figure) that he knows about the adrenaline pills (analogous to hebenon in the ear):

Steer clear of this film—there's just not much here. 

---

Links: The Film at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the film from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

A Terrible Attempt at Something Shakespearean in Strange Magic

Strange Magic. Dir. Gary Rydstrom. Perf. Evan Rachel Wood, Elijah Kelley, and Kristin Chenoweth. 2015. DVD. Industrial Light & Magic, 2015.

---

I should have listened to Shakespeare Geek.  "Always listen to Shakespeare Geek " I tell myself—and then I get excited about something that interests me and fail to listen to Shakespeare Geek.

I recently watched Strange Magic, which I had been assured was a film with some connection to Midsummer Night's Dream.  Fascinated, I plopped myself down and watched . . . one of the lamest and laziest excuses for an animated film ever. And I would have endured it happily (or at least in a less-irritated fashion)—I really would—had there been any genuine connection, however tenuous, to Shakespeare.

I also would have endured it with a much better grace if the musical covers had been even in the slightest degree worth listening to.

This disastrous and horrific film is set among the fairies and goblins of the forest—and there's a love potion involved. That almost is a connection to Midsummer Night's Dream, but this love potion doesn't really do anything like Shakespeare's, and these fairies aren't anything like his fairies.

Let me give you a quick demonstration. In the clip below, the daughter of the king is confronted with a newly-repentant former fiancé whom she caught in the arms of another women on her wedding day. He tries, in a corny, smarmy way, to convince her to give him a second chance (for utterly unexplained reasons, he thinks that marrying her will give him his own army, which he wants because . . . Industrial Light and Magic?), and she responds with a hearty get-out-of-my-life song:

The whole film is like that. It makes no sense. The animation hits that weird space between realism and animation that makes everyone's skin crawl. And the covers make us all want to run listen to the originals to get these dreadful versions out of our heads.

And it has no Shakespeare.

Shakespeare Geek said, "Skip this one. I can't really find anything worth recommending."  One of these days, I'll actually listen to his sound advice.  The film was not at all strange, and it was far, far from magical. And it was even further from Industrial Light and Magical.

---

Links: The Film at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the film from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Martha Speaketh Shakespeare!

"Thou Callest Me a Dog." By Peter K. Hirsch. Perf. J. T. Turner, Christina Crivici, and Tabitha St. Germain. Dir. Todd Demong.   Martha Speaks. Season 6, episode 7. PBS. 16 June 2014.

---

I've enjoyed the "Martha Speaks" books by Susan Meddaugh ever since LeVar Burton told me about the first one—Martha Speaks—on Reading Rainbow.

But it's relatively new news to me that PBS has a Martha Speaks show for children.

And for Shakespeare aficionados! In a recent show, Martha accidentally eats a copy of Hamlet (the actor had left a sandwich on it), and she starts speaking in Convenstional Shakespeare-Style Olde Englyssishe (CSSOE)—viz., a great prevalence of thee, thou, thy, doth, and -est endings of both nouns and verbs.

But she also quotes from the plays (notably Hamlet), and ends up being cast as Hamlet in a production. And the production is clever enough to use a title from Merchant of Venice and a few other interesting inside jokes (e.g., the solipsistic actor's name is "Armin Burbage").

I offer a few samples below, but you can watch the entire episode on-line.  Just click here, and then click on the "Thou Callest Me a Dog" episode.

In this first clip, Martha's language malady is diagnosed:

The second clip shows her being offered the lead role in Hamlet.

The most famous six words in Shakespeare make up the entirety of the third clip:

---

Links: The Show at IMDB. The Episode on-line.

Click below to purchase a Martha Speaks DVD 
(not the one from which this episode comes—I can't track that one down)
from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Shakespeare in Good Will Hunting

Good Will Hunting. Dir. Gus Van Sant. Perf. Robin Williams, Matt Damon, and Ben Affleck. 1997. DVD. Lionsgate, 2011.

---

We all know that there's lots of Shakespeare in Boston.

[Insert obligatory reference / link to Shakespeare Geek here.]

And one of the best movies featuring Boston accents in Good Will Hunting.

But did you notice the Shakespeare-with-a-Boston-accent in Good Will Hunting?

About a third of the way though the film, the Robin Williams character talks to the Matt Damon character and argues that all the book learning in the world won't make up for experience:

I ask you about war, you'd probably throw Shakespeare at me, right? "Once more into the breach, dear friends." But you've never been near one. You've never held your best friend's head in your lap, and watched him gasp his last breath looking to you for help. I ask you about love, you'd probably quote me a sonnet. But you've never looked at a woman and been totally vulnerable—known someone that could level you with her eyes.

It's a fabulous scene, and I include it below. N.B.: The language in the clip is, like the film, rated R.

There's something quite marvelous about that. And I think I'm ready to acknowledge that Shakespeare doesn't equate to experience. But I do think Shakespeare helps us to understand the experiences that we have had and imaginatively to experience those we haven't. Yes, the Chorus of Henry V asks us to piece out the play's imperfections with our thoughts and to "Think, when we talk of horses, that you see them / Printing their proud hoofs i' th' receiving earth" (Pro.26-27), but Shakespeare's genius lies it making it very easy for us to see the horses that aren't there—to know something of the experience of war—to find an articulation of the love we know we have.

Just like Good Will Hunting enables us to know something of the experience of losing a spouse to cancer or what it's like to be an orphan growing up in Boston.

Any Dickens fans out there ready to defend Oliver Twist on similar grounds? 

---

Links: The Film at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the film from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: The Stratford Zoo Midnight Revue Presents: Romeo and Juliet

Lendler, Ian. The Stratford Zoo Midnight Revue Presents: Romeo and Juliet. Illus. Zack Giallongo. Colors Alisa Harris. New York: First Second, 2015.

---

This is the second time we journey to the zoo in Stratford-on-Avon after closing time to see what the animals are up to (for the first visit, q.v.).

Previously, the animals put on Macbeth; this time, they turn their paws to Romeo and Juliet.

I enjoyed this book, but not as much as I enjoyed Macbeth. In the Macbeth, the violence was present but diffused by the notion the king (the lion) was eating his enemies, which is generally-accepted behavior for lions. The violence is also circumvented by another means, but I don't want to provide a spoiler on that score!

In the zoo's production of Romeo and Juliet, both the violence and the romance are diffused—and the means for doing so aren't quite as interesting or as effective. The petting zoo animals are the Montagues and the wild animals of the surrounding wood are the Capulets. The plot follows more-or-less accordingly, though Romeo and Juliet aren't romantically in love and [Small Spoiler Alert] they don't die at the end.

Still, the book is a good one, at which a gander is well worth taking. Here's a sample to whet your appetite:

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: Much Ado About Murder

Hawke, Simon. Much Ado About Murder. New York: Tom Doherty Associates, 2002.

---

I would not normally post a review of a book that I haven't finished, but classes start tomorrow, and I know that I won't have time to give this book the attention it deserves until Christmas break at the earliest.

And I wouldn't review it if I wasn't certain of the claims I'll be making about it. Having read the other three books in the "Shakespeare and Smythe" series and having read fifty pages or so of this book, I can confidently say that it's at least as enjoyable and worthwhile as the others were—and those others were very enjoyable and quite worthwhile.

Though all the books follow the same characters and have many of the same locations, they have considerable variety within those constraints. This is the only one that's felt a bit contrived in its set-up, but I can suspend that element of critique and just sit back and enjoy the narrative.

The novel, like the others, puts Shakespeare's words into others' mouths, leaving the words there for him to pick up and turn into solid dramatic gold later. I'm providing a good example of that in the images below (click on them to enlarge them). You'll see how the author plays with the opening exchange between Beatrice and Benedick in Much Ado About Nothing in this scene:

Hawke has done some good work in integrating Shakespeare's lines with his own sense of plot and character, even going so far as to give some of Beatrice's lines to the Benedick analogue.

All in all, it's a good summer read . . . even if I may have to wait until next summer to complete it!

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: Macdeath

Brown, Cindy. Macdeath. Dallas: Henery Press, 2015.

---

Speaking of Mysteries avec Shakespeare, we arrive at Macdeath. It's another in a mystery series—there are other Ivy Meadows Mysteries on the way (The Sound of Murder and Oliver Twisted, if you're keeping score).

I'm afraid I feel that I'm not the target audience for this book, and that will, of necessity, color my review. I enjoyed our heroine, Ivy "Olive" Meadows, most of the time, but she is too inclined to go on about the dreaminess of the male actors—and then is too quick about jumping into bed with them.

Other than that, the story is a reasonable murder mystery. Because it's the first of the series, I think there's more building of character and background than you might expect (or desire). And our heroine is just starting to think about the role of the investigator (she has an uncle who, as a private eye, is able to give her advice).

The general plot is that an actor is killed during a production of Macbeth—our heroine plays one of the witches, so she has a fair amount of time to nose around and find out which other actors / directors have motives and opportunity.

My main critique—as you might expect—is that there's not enough Shakespeare. I'd like to have more of the details of the theatre life and of this particular production of Macbeth. That's where a rote mystery takes on a greater depth and interest to me. I'm reminded of Ngaio Marsh's Light Thickens, for example (for which, q.v.), which does that brilliantly.

I'll leave you with a sample from early in the book—that will give you a flavor of the novel and let you know whether you're in its target audience or not.

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: The Cat Who Knew Shakespeare

Braun, Lilian Jackson. The Cat Who Knew Shakespeare. New York: Jove books, 1995.

---

Speaking of mysteries mit Shakespeare, I recently read The Cat Who Knew Shakespeare. After all, summer can't all be re-reading the plays and critical articles on the plays, can it?

This is a much lighter read than the Shakespeare and Smythe series (i.e., it's not as good and it lacks depth), but it was at least mildly interesting.

The Shakespeare comes in as a trope throughout the novel. The main character is a private detective in a very small town. He has two Siamese cats: Koko and Yum-Yum. In this novel, Koko becomes enamored of a set of Shakespeare plays. He pulls these down at opportune moments throughout the novel to illustrate or to foreshadow plot points. For example, he pulls The Tempest off the shelf and onto the floor right before a blizzard (which is a sort of a tempest, I suppose).

The novel occasionally exploits the ambiguities in the plays Koko decides to toss on the floor—and I wish it did so more or in more interesting ways. What could producing the Hamlet volume mean? A thousand possibilities open before us—but the novel often has our main character pinpoint the precise intended meaning. Perhaps that means Qwilleran would make a good Shakespeare scholar.

I'm providing two separate examples to give you a sense of how the book works—it's up to you to determine if this light read will lighten your days.

Koko is probably imagining himself as a tiger's heart wrapped in a cat's hide.

Here, there is some ambiguity over the reason this play was left on the floor.

Let me know if you try it and what you think of it if you do!

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: The Merchant of Vengeance

Hawke, Simon. The Merchant of Vengeance. New York: Tom Doherty Associates, 2003.

---

The fourth in the series of "Shakespeare and Smythe Mystery Series" (I somehow missed Much Ado About Murder, the third book, but I shall attempt to rectify that shortly), The Merchant of Vengeance, is very strong on characterization and language use but not quite as compelling in the details of the murder mystery.

Still, it's a good, fun read. As with A Mystery of Errors and The Slaying of the Shrew, I'm loathe to provide spoilers, but this one contains a lot of interaction with Shakespeare's contemporaries. We meet the largely-destestable Robert Greene in a pub, and Shakespeare thinks about ways to outdo Marlowe's Jew of Malta, finding a way to present a Jew on stage with the fullness of his humanity.

And there's a murder and betrayal and a league of thieves and exciting, insulting exchanges and romance (a bit). I recommend The Merchant of Vengeance as a light end-of-summer read that still has some gravitas.

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: The Slaying of the Shrew

Hawke, Simon. The Slaying of the Shrew. New York: Tom Doherty Associates, 2001.

---

I read Simon Hawke's Mystery of Errors (for which, q.v.) some time ago. I enjoyed it as a light read and wanted to try the two others in the series. This summer, I've managed to read the second: The Slaying of the Shrew.

Like the previous book, this one centers on the adventures of Symington Smythe and Will Shakespeare. Here, the former is a man who wants to act—but forgets his lines, however short and simply they may be, most of the time. The later is an actor, but he's pursuing the writing of plays more and more. Like the previous book, events in the lives of the characters mirror, foreshadow, and mimmic events in a Shakespeare play—but not only the one you're expecting from the title!

If I say too much more, the spoilers will detract from your own reading of the book. It's a mystery with Shakespeare as one of the characters—but not the main one—and his surroundings as the setting.

The category might be "Shakespeare Beach Novel"—a light, not-too-serious read that's entertaining and enjoyable . . . though it may not be terribly deep or remarkably memorable.

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: Shakespeare had a Daughter

Tiffany, Grace. Shakespeare had a Daughter. New York: Berkley, 2003.

---

I wanted to enjoy this novel; I thought I would enjoy this novel. I had liked Grace Tiffany's Will, after all (for which, q.v.), and she herself is very personable. But I'm afraid I didn't enjoy this novel.

The main reason is, I think, that it lacks fire and passion. The story is told in a route, emotionless way.

Spoilers follow.

The story centers on Judith Shakespeare, Shakespeare's younger daughter (Hamnet's twin). Responsible for Hamnet's death by drowning, Judith disguises herself as a boy and runs away to London, desiring above all to take a place on the stage.

She arrives in London (with the usual obligatory paragraphs about the terrible smells and the heads of traitors on London Bridge), finagles her way into the company, gets a small part, meets Nathan Field (who discovers she is a girl and asks to sleep with her as the price for keeping her secret—to this our heroine emotionlessly and without much commentary succumbs), deprives Nathan of his role as Viola in Twelfth Night, takes over the role herself, and is recognized by her father. Later and older, she returns to London, has an affair with Nathan Field, returns to Stratford, and marries Thomas Quiney.

The two main issues with which Judith Shakespeare deals—the loss of virginity and the guilt over the death of Hamnet—are the main themes—they're addressed periodically throughout the text—but they don't become compelling and Judith doesn't deal with them satisfactorily.

All in all, the book tends toward the dull. Lacking the interesting use of language Tiffany has in Will, it's a book to plod through rather than to enjoy.

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Book Note: Shakespeare Cats

Herbert, Susan. Shakespeare Cats. Boston: Bulfinch Press, 1995.

---

The Shakespeare-related material that crosses my path ranges from the ridiculous to the sublime.

Occasionally—just occasionally—something fits both categories.

Susan Herbert has illustrated a collection of Shakespeare cats, and I suppose it's not sillier than King Lear with Sheep.

And it's certainly less silly than the "kittens inspired by kittens"-inspired piece entitled "Shakespeare: Inspired by Shakespeare" (for which, q.v.).

The image above is Ophelia about to claw her way up a tree—a willow, I believe—from which she will plunge to a watery grave; and I imagine that the experience, for an animal that hates water already, is all the more horrific.

I'm providing a few more sample images. Herbert has arranged them with quotations from the plays on facing pages. Click on the images to enlarge them.

Hamlet. I appreciate the shape of this Yorick's skull.

King Lear. Later, he'll say "Yowl, yowl, yowl."

Macbeth. "Will all great Neptune's tongue lick this blood / Clean from my paw?"

Twelfth Night: Proving that everyone, even cats, looks ridiculous in yellow cross-gartered stockings.

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Tremendous Shakespeare at the Great River Shakespeare Festival

Much Ado About Nothing. Dir. James Edmondson. Perf. Michael Fitzpatrick, Leslie Brott, Stephanie Lambourn, Tarah Flanagan, Rosemary Brownlow, Caroline Amos, Andrew Carlson, Robert Ramirez, Brian White, Christopher Gerson, Jim Poulos, John Maltese, Silas Sellnow, JuCoby Johnson, Chris Mixon, Benjamin Boucvalt, Bailey Bestul, Justin Erbe, Emily Perkins, James Queen, and Addison Sim. Great River Shakespeare Festival. Winona, Minnesota. 2015.

---

Romeo and Juliet. Dir. Doug Scholz-Carlson. Perf. Christopher Gerson, Jim Poulos, Silas Sellnow, Michael Fitzpatrick, Brian White, JuCoby Johnson, Robert Ramirez, Rosemary Brownlow, Chris Mixon, Benjamin Boucvalt, Silas Sellnow, Tarah Flanagan, Caroline Amos, Jim Poulos, Jim Poulos, Mike Munson, Jim Poulos, Brian White, and Brian White; and Mike Munson (Guitar), Zac Barbieur (Durms), and Silas Sellnow (Violin). Great River Shakespeare Festival. Winona, Minnesota. 2015.

---

The title of this post is "Tremendous Shakespeare at the Great River Shakespeare Festival." Alert readers will immediately ask, "What else is new?" They did, among other remarkable productions, a perfect Twelfth Night, a masterpiece of A Comedy of Errors, a great Othello, a brilliant Taming of the Shrew, and marvelous versions of both Hamlet and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.

Yes, the question isn't whether they're putting on tremendous Shakespeare. The question is which Shakespeare they're doing tremendously. In fact, that's such a good question, let's set it up among a number of others, FAQ style.

Q: What Shakespeare plays are being done tremendously by GRSF this year?

A: Romeo and Juliet and Much Ado About Nothing. Didn't you look at the first part of this post?

Q: "Shakespeare Festival," eh? That means it's outdoors, right?

A: No, no. It's in a lovely, intimate, carefully-climate-controlled theatre on the campus of the University of Winona. You're thinking of various Shakespeare i' th' Park performances. Don't get me wrong—Shakespeare i' th' Park is great, but you do have to worry about rain and heat and mosquitos and seating and so on and so forth. At the GRSF, you can watch top-notch professional theatre in air conditioned splendor.

Q: Well, that sounds great. Can I just see the plays any day of the week all summer long?

A: Ah, there's something you should plan right now. The last show will be on August 2. Here's a handy calendar for your scheduling convenience.

Q: Man! That's only about two weeks left! I'll get my tickets right away! Now, they just just Shakespeare, right?

A: Actually, no.  They're also doing a production of The Glass Menagerie this year. For the past few years, they've done a third show, but you don't hear much about those shows here because of Bardfilm's keen interest in the Shakespeare side of things.

Q: All right. That sounds good. But all there is to do in Winona is watching plays by Shakespeare, right?

A: Although that might be reason enough, there is a constant stream of other Shakespeare-related material happening in conjunction with the GRSF. Indeed, I was astonished at how much activity there was! There was a symposium (see below for some details), narrated set changes, camps for young actors and designers, an apprentice program (they're doing King John this year), conversations with the actors and directors, film screenings (this year, they're doing Still Dreaming—for which, q.v.), et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Q: [Skeptically] Well, yeah. Shakespeare. And Shakespeare-related stuff. There's nothing else in Winona, then?

A: Egad, no! There's so much more! Again, Bardfilm's concerns focus on the Shakespearean, but there are concerts on the green between shows many afternoons, and there are really quite marvelous food trucks there. There are coffee shops and restaurants, and there's live music. And the scenery! Why, the two-hour drive from the Twin Cities is worth it just for the amazing scenic views of the Mississippi river along Highway 61 (the highway Bob Dylan revisited). And the river in Winona is beautiful—the bluffs with the occasional eagle flying over them are gorgeous and relaxing.

Q: Terrific! We can have great Shakespeare, but we can also get away from all the Shakespeare if we need to.

A: Yes. Well, technically. I mean, you can eat at a nice restaurant overlooking the river or listen to the concert on the green or hang out at a coffee shop—but I should warn you that you're very likely to overhear conversations about Shakespeare just about everywhere you go. That's a great draw for me: the whole town seems fascinated by Shakespeare and eager to discuss the shows the GRSF is putting on and Shakespeare in general. But if you really need some Shakespeare-free moments, a quiet stroll by the river will usually go uninterrupted. But I can't promise you won't start to think about Ophelia when you're down by the river.

Q: You've convinced me. I'm off to plan my visit right now. But perhaps you could give me some more details about the plays you saw and the symposium you mentioned?

A: I'm so glad! You won't regret it. And, yes, I'll provide a few loosely-organized comments in discreet categories below.

I always find that I have a huge amount I want to say about the GRSF productions—but I never seem to have enough time. That's partly because I'm busy doing all sorts of other reading and writing over the summer, but it's also because I want to post quickly so that more people can know about the shows and find time to see them. Let me give you just a few points of interest about the symposium and the plays as an entrée en matière to pique your interest and to get you to go to the GRSF.

The Symposium

I thought the symposium fascinating—and, no, not just my section. The GRSF had organized three presenters: Professor John Kerr from St. Mary's University, Christopher Gerson from the GRSF Company (who enlisted the help of fellow actor Benjamin Boucvalt for his presentation), and Yours Truly. Dr. Kerr gave an inspiring presentation centering on the different ways Paris has been presented in film versions of Romeo and Juliet.  My presentation was entitled "Shakespeare: Globe to Globe and Back Again," and it dealt primarily with Johnny Hamlet (for which, q.v.) and Makibefo (for which, q.v.) and what different approaches to Shakespeare in non-Anglophone languages offer us. Mr. Gerson filmed Mr. Boucvalt performing the speech about the apothecary in four different ways to show the differences between playing for the stage and acting for the screen. He then started to show us how he would edit those performances.

It was all completely enthralling—and then came the Q & A time. And that was enthralling, too. The audience (of about sixty people) asked really interesting questions, and we started a fascinating conversation that continued after we adjourned. It was tremendously exciting and entertaining. I certainly will be attending Symposia in the future (and, if I'm honest, I hope to present again as well).

Romeo and Juliet

First, it was a great show—well worth watching. The show I attended was sold out, and I gather there have been large audiences for this production.

Second, a few scattered thoughts:

• I never noticed how often these two young lovers threaten to commit suicide. I think they each suggested they would end their lives three times. This production heightened that element of being on the edge of devastation, and that kept the audience on the edge of its collective seat.


• Peter, one of the Capulet servants, is usually around for comic relief. He's illiterate, yet he's asked to deliver letters addressed to the important people of the town. You wouldn't expect there to be much depth in his character—yet this production gives him a sensitivity and purpose (in addition to the comic relief) that added to the scope and tragedy of the play.


• The set design and lighting were particularly impressive.


• The choreography of the fight scenes was intriguing—somewhere between West Side Story and a genuine switch-blade knife fight.


• The acting was very good—and the attention to Shakespeare's text was impressive.


• The portrayal by Romeo and Juliet started me thinking about patriarchy. Juliet's father is a demanding patriarch—but Juliet's speeches about Romeo (after their marriage) indicate not a break from patriarchy but a transfer of patriarchal power from Capulet to Romeo. 


• Throughout the play, an exceptional guitarist named Mike Munson added color and texture to the performance with blues and rock 'n' roll riffs. He mostly played between scenes, but the music also entered into the performance, enhancing it and carrying the action forward. It was an innovative and intriguing part of the show.

Much Ado About Nothing

This show, too, was well worth watching, and not just for the thrilling experience of watching Christopher Gerson and Tarah Flannagan play opposite each other. Other scattered thoughts follow:

• Tremendously villainous Don John, including one scene made complete with effects of lightening and thunder and (almost) a maniacal laugh.


• Great work by Dogberry and the Watch—especially when the Watch moved as one. Good concentration on the language Shakespeare gives us there, which isn't always the case (e.g., Michael Keaton's Dogberry).


• Supremely fascinating trickery scenes. In this production, they have Benedick hiding off to the side—but singing along (often as a mournful echo) to "Sigh no More, Ladies." The others notice this, and, during the final chorus, they sing heartily along (as does Benedick), but they break off singing suddenly, leaving Benedick to continue with an awkward solo "nonny" or two. Brilliant—and brilliantly funny. They also left in nearly the full text of each trickery scene, which enables audiences to see that they are really quite different—both in their methodology and in their results.


• Great connections to Romeo and Juliet. You've got your overbearing father, you've got your scheming friar, you've got your plot to pretend someone's dead, you've got your scene at the tomb. Seeing the plays in the order I saw them (RJ first and then MAAN) makes it seem like Much Ado is a restorative, redemptive version of Romeo and Juliet.

There's so much more that could be said about the GRSF—but why don't I get some other work done and you find a way to get there to see for yourself?

---

Links: The Great River Shakespeare Festival.

Shakespeare in Futurama

“The Thief of Baghead.” By Dan Vebber. Perf. Billy West, Katey Sagal, John diMaggio, Maurice LaMarche, and David Herman. Dir. Edmund Fong. Futurama. Season 7, episode 4. Comedy Central. 4 July 2012. DVD. Twentieth-Century Fox, 2012.

---

One episode of the television show Futurama attempt to answer an age-old question. "Who is the better actor?: A robot soap opera star named Calculon or a film actor named Langdon Cobb who has never been seen without a bag over his head.

I won't trouble you with the details of how they determine upon a competition (the details of Futurama episodes often cause dizziness), but I will mention that Calculon, in an effort to ensure that his death scene is believable, determines to take actual poison (or the robot equivalent) at the end of his chosen scene—Romeo's death scene.

Here's the speech as Calculon delivers it:

                                        Ah, dear Juliet,
Why art thou yet so fair? . . . . . . . . . . .
 . . . . . . . . . . . . I . . . will stay with thee;
And never from this palace of dim night
Depart again . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O, here
Will I set up my everlasting rest,
And shake the yoke of inauspicious stars
From this world-wearied flesh. Eyes, look your last!
Arms, take your last embrace! And, lips, O you
The doors of breath, seal with a righteous kiss.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Here's to my love! (V.iii.101-119)

And here's the clip of that scene:

Calculon, who is generally known for hamming it up, actually delivers the lines with a surprising sensitivity. The humor lies not in goofing up Shakespeare but in performing his lines well and in finding his lines to be so deeply moving.

For some reason, the segment reminds me of Orson Wells' delivery of the same speech during his appearance on I Love Lucy (for which, q.v.).

---

Links: The Episode at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the season from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Guest Post by Ceciley Pund: Spaghetti Shakespeare Number Two: Capriccio All’Italiana

Capriccio All'Italiana. Dir. Pier Paolo Pasolini. Perf. Totò, Ugo D'Alessio, and Regina Seiffert. 1968. DVD. Filmauro, 2005.

---

Note: As part of a Faculty / Student Collaborative Grant, I worked with one of my students on film versions of Shakespeare in Italian (for which, q.v.). This guest post by Ceciley Pund, the author of the blog What Consolation, is part of that project.

---

Paulo Pausini in his film Il Capriccio All’Italiana, or The Caprice Italian Style, examines Othello from a moral standpoint. The film was split up into multiple stories and episodes, and the part we examined was entitled “Che Cosa Sono le Nuvole?” or “What are the Clouds?” The episode presents questions of life and death and human existence, using a performance of Othello in order to bring up these questions.

This is the beginning of the film, and it starts with the creation of the marionette Othello who then goes to join Iago and the other characters who are also marionettes, apparently waiting to perform Othello. He tells them, “Sono cosí contento, perchè sono cosí contento?” “I’m so happy, why am I so happy?” And another marionette answers him, “Perchè sei nato!” “Because you are born!” He is innocent with no troubles or cares. Then their performance of Othello begins, and the marionette Iago tells Roderigo of his hate for Othello. As Iago schemes and plans the destruction of Othello, the marionette Othello watches from backstage.

Here Othello becomes much more than a performance as the marionette Othello begins to question the morality of the characters. He asked Iago why they had to be so bad, and “Perchè dobbiamo essere cosí diversi da come ci crediamo?” “Why do we have to be so different from who we thought we were?” And Iago answers, “We are in a dream within a dream.” Then it switches quickly back to the performance, but Othello grows more and more disturbed by the actions of the characters. When Iago tricks him into believing that Desdemona is going behind his back with Cassio, he decides to kill Desdemona, and this seems to be the final breaking point for the marionette offstage.

Iago tells Othello that he needs to strangle Desdemona, and offstage Othello begins to cry over his immorality. Then he asks, “What is truth? Is it what I think of myself? What people think of me or what he thinks of me (referring to the puppet master)?” And Iago asks, “What do you feel inside of yourself?” And Othello responds, “Yes, there is something!” And Iago tells him, “That is the Truth. But don’t name it. Because as soon as you name it, it will go away.”

The final blow is when Othello attempts to strangle Desdemona.

The audience ironically strangles and seems to kill the characters Othello and Iago in the way that they had planned to kill Desdemona, who ends safely with the women of the audience. Director Pausini made artistic choices to change Shakespeare’s original ending, but with what intent? Desdemona lives, but Othello and the scheming Iago die. However, even more unlike Shakespeare, the marionettes themselves must also die, not just the characters that they play.

The characters offstage are constantly examining truth and morality through the actions of the characters that they play onstage. Each time they leave the stage, they are able to step back and ask questions of the way that their characters choose to live. This film uses Shakespeare’s Othello to present the immorality of human beings; however, the audience, representing society, punishes immorality.

In the end, once the audience kills the immoral characters, the puppets who played these characters are dumped outside. This is when Othello asks the question, “Che sono le nuvole?” “What are the clouds?” And Iago has no answer for him. It seems that the two are free and happy, but only after their strings, tying them to the immorality of their characters, have been cut.

---

Links: The Film at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the film from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Shakespearean Pizza Advertisement

“Of Made We're Stuff the Love You'll.” Perf. Peter O'Toole. Pizza Hut. 1995. Advertisement.

---

As part of an occasional interest in the uses advertisers have put Shakespeare—see, for example, this trio of ads, this pair of powerful and weak ads, this use of the St. Crispin's Day speech, and this imaginary Pepsodent ad—I was delighted to be presented with this pizza commercial.

The ad campaign from which it comes is moderately clever. To promote its "stuffed crust" pizzas, the company was in the middle of encouraging its customers to eat their slices of pizza in a non-traditional manner—crust first. Hence, I gather, they reversed their slogan "You'll Love the Stuff We're Made Of" for the campaign.

But it's the use of Shakespeare and of Peter O'Toole that makes this quite brilliant. O'Toole had famously played Hamlet in a 1963 production of the play directed by Lawrence Olivier. In this commercial, he is instructed, during what looks like an audition, to "Try it backward." Utterly unflummoxed (and perhaps used to condescending to directors whose instructions don't make that much sense), he delivers the most convincing backward soliloquy I've ever heard:

It's O'Toole's performance that makes it. One might even say that his acting is "on made are dreams as stuff such."

---

The Great River Shakespeare Festival Opens Friday!

Romeo and Juliet. Much Ado About Nothing. The Great River Shakespeare Festival. 24 June to 2 August 2015.

---

I've said it before, and I'll doubtless say it again: Go to the Great River Shakespeare Festival. They produce utterly unsurpassable Shakespeare, well worth driving hundreds of miles to see.

Preview performances start tomorrow; opening night is Friday.

Here's a quick link to my reactions to last year's festival.

And here's a trailer for their Much Ado About Nothing—it looks fabulous, and I love the tagline:  "What Love Dares."  Good stuff.

---

Links: The Great River Shakespeare Festival.

Even More Shakespeare in Pears Before Swine

Pastis, Stephan. “Whuh you Reading?” When Pigs Fly: A Pearls Before Swine Collection. Kansas City: Andrews McMeel, 2010. 11.

---

Hey,
son.
Whuh
you
reading?

'Romeo and
Juliet' . . .
Its for my
English class.

Thus begins another nifty Shakespeare-related comic by Stephan Pastis.

And the spacing of that dialogue makes it easier for the comic to be inserted below!

Pastis has a fair number of Shakespeare-related comics. In the following, the dad Croc (like most of the Crocs in the comic, a fairly low wattage bulb) finds his son (unlike most of the Crocs in the comic, an over-achiever) reading a book. Observe the hilarity:

Update: Pastis puts together treasuries of his comics, providing "artist's commentary" on some of them. Let's see what he has to say about this one:

I'm not sure that's fair . . . but I'm not sure that comment is to be taken at face value.

---

Click below to purchase the book from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).

Two Macbeths from Orson Welles

Macbeth. Dir. Orson Welles. Perf. Orson Welles, Jeanette Nolan, Dan O’Herlihy, Roddy McDowall, Edgar Barner, and Alan Napier. 1948. DVD. Republic Pictures Home Video, 1992. 

---

Back in 2013 (yes, I'm running a bit behind), I was thrilled to see a new DVD release of Orson Welles' Macbeth. The only previous version I knew of was imported from Korea—and it was wonderful (except that I had to turn off the Korean subtitles every time I started it).  But I thought that, perhaps, the new release would have the audio cleaned up a bit and the video restored somewhat.

When the DVD arrived, I found that its run time was 1:47:34; the previous release had a run time of 1:42:38. The new release, I thought, contained a precious four minutes and fifty-eight seconds' worth of material not found on the earlier release! What scene that had been cut had been restored? Or was it a general lengthening—a few speeches here, a few speeches there, but each one adding to the overall texture of the film?

It turns out to be the same film, just run at a slightly-slower speed so that it takes an extra five minutes to watch. I love this film, but it doesn't need to be five minutes slower.

Thus, caveat emptor—especially if the emptor has been primed with this knowledge from Bardfilm.

---

Links: The Film at IMDB.

Click below to purchase the film (in either version) from amazon.com
(and to support Bardfilm as you do so).