MovieChat Forums > Looking for Richard (1996) Discussion > Looking for an objective opinion...

Looking for an objective opinion...

posted 19 years ago by mail-1149
9 replies | jump to latest

This film tells us a number of things, of which these are but a few:

Hollywood is fake, all fake, and will use whatever licence to make something "dramatic" - for example, we see Pacino in Shakespeare's house, well he doesn't mention that most people who know, believe that Shakespeare was born next door and the house long since demolished. Also, the house he was in is in a pedestrian street (I've been there) - how was there an ambulance whizzing past? It is just not possible. In any case, the ambulance had a siren that was last used in 1960 something - ah, I see - perhaps it was added for "dramatic" effect? After all, that's what this "docudrama" is all about...

Then, more stuff, someone telling Pacino that actors own the play or something and that Pacino was great and didn't need any validation from academics. Luckily, there was a camera crew there to stop that guy dissapearing up Pacinos ar*e - either that or he had big feet.

Cut to shots of Pacino earnestly listening to some academic validating him...

Then Pacino discussing stuff in cars with people and lots of discussion about how they are making it "accessible for people on the street". Look, Shakespeare made his money from writing plays, okay? He wrote stuff that was to be performed in front of smelly, uneducated Englishmen who had walked in drunk on small beer, off the street... so that was the point of it, to be accessible. What they actually meant was that they felt that they had to make it accessible to *American* people... how feckin' patronising is that?

So, from a man that cannot wear a hat the right way round, poncing about the streets of somewhere or other... from the rent-a-quote talking heads that pitch up every few minutes to prove how feckin' magnanimous Pacino is to give his time to make this pastiche of tormented lovies trying to prove that Dick 3 is an "actor's play", from the trendy bad focus pulling camera guy, we get half a documentary about Richard III and half a film of Ricard III.

Better to be one thing or the other, or even better, to not have been made at all.

Or maybe I'm just a bit discontent now, it bein' winter an all, ya know? Yo.

[–] pry_to 19 years ago

Well, to begin with, the average person in 2004 does have difficulty understanding Shakespeare, probably even more so if it's on film, and especially if they're American, considering the average fare for American cinema.

The rest of your post is complete nit picking. Ambulance sounds? His hat? I don't think the people he spoke to in the street were reading lines, but there's no substantial argument for that, so I probably shouldn't have touched on it.

What can I say, what did you expect this movie to be? It's listed as what it is. If you want a Documentary, watch or read one.

Thank you for at least posting your thoughts and reasoning as to why you didn't enjoy it, it's a nice change from the mindless "This Sux0r5!!!!11!!" on these boards.

[–] penguinborntofrag 19 years ago

Well, I'm American and I am taking a Literature class. Our teacher showed us this before we read it. In my opinion he meant accesible as help people understand it, mainly as you said the American people. Many Americans dont understand the language differentiation (even though it isn't that different) that there was. Also another hard-understanding part is the family tree within the story. Unless you have some sort of preface, or a visual, it gets quite confusing. Most of us americans aren't taught British history, so naturally many of us don't know that Shakespeare was talking about the War of the Roses in the beginning. I think he was trying to get and understanding of this because he is American and he didn't understand parts. So in essence he was educating himself as well as others. I don't really understand why so many people shy away from Shakespeare still, may it be the language or when it was written. I like his writing and I've seen performances which are quite good in my opinion. By the way I'm not some 20 year old college student, I'm a 17 year old high school student...I guess that may be quite odd for someone like me to like Shakespeare...but who cares.

[–] vicky_lc2001-1 9 years ago

Not only Americans, people around the world have a hard time relating or understanding Shakespeare. I'm from the Philippines. Even people who are fluent in English have a hard time understanding Shakespeare in my country, even if it is on film like the ones Branagh made.

I love this film, it gave me an understanding of Shakespeare's context and who it was meant for. I loved the discussions they had on this, why shouldn't they have discussions? And why can't they perform Shakespeare in their own native accent, in this case American? Why does it have to be English?

Global Warming, it's a personal decision innit? - Nigel Tufnel

[–] emurphy824 19 years ago

"Then, more stuff, someone telling Pacino that actors own the play or something and that Pacino was great and didn't need any validation from academics. Luckily, there was a camera crew there to stop that guy dissapearing up Pacinos ar*e - either that or he had big feet."

Well, Pacino IS an expert on Richard III. His involvement with this play is more extensive than just this documentary, and the fellow questioning the need to consult an academic had a valid point.

"Cut to shots of Pacino earnestly listening to some academic validating him..."
You missed the joke. All the academic said was "I don't know" which means the OTHER guy, not Pacino, was validated. I interpreted what you saw as an earnest expression (which appeared on both listeners' faces, not just Pacino's) to be "I can't believe we argued about getting this guy's opinion and THIS is all we get?!"

[–] al_baby 19 years ago

Well, i guess you are entitled to your opinion, but i think you are somewhat missing the point of the spirit behind the film.

It seems to be a light hearted, playful look into the background and meaning of Richard III, and thus the playful joking with the academics and interviewees, which make the film easier to watch.

I think your opinion on the way Al should wear his hat etc are unnecessary, not to mention the fact that i and a lot of other women find the hat incredibly sexy...lol.

Anyway, i think what Al tried to do was break down the barrier between himself and the audience, and it showed him as a very intelligent, talented actor and caring person,
which just makes me fall even more in love with him!

Love you Al.
xx

"Shop smart. Shop S-Mart."

[–] 19 years ago

[deleted]

[–] stephen-donnelly11 18 years ago

'Looking for Richard' is a wonderful piece of film-making. It's well directed and manages to achieve it's aim to try and present itself to the viewer in a digestible manor and make Shakespeare not as daunting to either an actor or the general public. The documentary brilliantly manages to position humour and drama together and overall, it's educating as-well-as entertaining. Finally, I think you missed the objective of the documentary and stated reasons that weren't even relative, such as the way Pacino wears his hat around the streets, what's that really got to do with the documentary?

[–] cinemaisart 18 years ago

I agree it is wonderful.

To be objective? Pacino wears hat that way. If you did not understand: when he has the hat or is dressing in contemporary clothes: it is the actor Al Pacino, an american, in the late XX century wearing the clothes of his time and preparing to play a Shakespeare piece which story is supposed to have happend in the XV century, based in history facts, in Shakespeare view. What do you have to do with the way he dresses? by the way, isn't him charming? :)

But lets get back to the business: being objective. Exactly, do you like the Yang and Yin version, or the blues version idea? This is art, it is not objective! Although I like the interpretation of Pacino of why Richard wants the marriage scheme, I also like the answer of the scholar: "I don't know!" It is open to interpretations and of course Pacino is a very qualified interpreter.

Well looking for Richard is open to interpretations. One thing i can tell you: they got an interpretation of Shakeaspeare, very open and educational.

Go see it again!

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]