Don't get me wrong. I like Tom Hiddleston a lot - but the direction of this baffled me. Why waste the St. Crispin's Day speech on six guys? I also missed the playfulness of Emma Thompson's Catherine. Too bad it wasn't Kenneth directing Tom.
_____________________________
Unapologetic Moffat fangirl
Beans are evil. Bad, bad beans.
Haven't seen this version of Henry V yet, but I found Branagh's quite watchable. I really liked the grit in his presentation of the story.
"[Cinema] is a labyrinth with a treacherous resemblance to reality." - Andrew Sarris
Tbh, I liked the quiet way (talking only to six) of this speech more. It was the first time I was actually moved by it. I think it has a much stronger impact on the viewer this way.
shareAs I say below, the filming and rehearsing time for Henry V was dramatically cut short and rushed. So I don't know if Thea Sharrock filmed the speech scene with only six captains and not the whole brigade was a totally creative decision and would have been the same regardless, or if it was also motivated by time constraints. I think both.
An interesting note:
In an article Hiddleston said on his first day of filming, he was told they were going to shoot the St Crispin's day speech. He responded, "you're joking, right?". But they weren't, and they shot his big, climactic scene that day. That's show biz for you.
In an article Hiddleston said on his first day of filming, he was told they were going to shoot the St Crispin's day speech. He responded, "you're joking, right?". But they weren't, and they shot his big, climactic scene that day. That's show biz for you.
Each of the three Hollow Crown directors had very different visions and obstacles for their adaptations of the plays. One of the main objectives of the BBC was to make the Hollow Crown a large scale production of Shakespeare for TV with on location filming and authentic sets as in quality film/cinema. Another prime objective was for it to be accessible to mainstream audiences.
It seems Thea Sharrock didn't want to do the straight version of Henry V. She wanted a more intimate feel to Henry and put more attention on the romance between Henry and Kate, the French monarchy as well as the epic on location battlefield scenes.
Also, after filming for Richard II had completed, the BBC moved up the air dates for the whole series so it would be shown during the spring/summer right around (not necessarily during) the Olympics and 2012 Jubilee celebrations. Henry V was actually filmed before Henry IV making the filming even more rushed because Henry IV was two plays and had huge battlefield scenes too that had to be filmed in the snow. This shortened the rehearsal time of Henry V to barley two weeks and a very tight, rushed filming schedule which is one of the reasons I think it feels a little too truncated.
She wanted a more intimate feel to Henry and put more attention on the romance between Henry and Kate
In the RSC's recent production, which I saw at the Barbican here in London earlier in the year, Henry, as played by Alex Hassell, is not only desperately worried and frankly afraid before the battle, although showing a brave face to his troops, but when it comes to the wooing scene is awkward, shy and very nervous. It makes the whole thing totally real and believable. A refreshing change from the rather smug self-confidence of Olivier, Branagh and the like.
share"the director was aiming to achieve, and said the hoped to give a woman's take on it...There really was nothing new, and certainly no feminine, let alone feminist, angle."
Hiddleston's version was a relatively low budget tv film. Branagh's version was a relatively low budget film version which had a larger cast and more time to film.
It's that man again!!
Compare how Hiddleston does the famous St Crispin's Day Speech and how Branagh does it.
shareHiddleston's version was a relatively low budget tv film
Branagh brought more to the role of Henry, and yes, the structure of the film worked with him to bring it to the fore. Hiddleston's Henry was perfectly good. But the fact that the miniseries was front-loaded with epic actors like Suchet, Irons and Stewart made him look a little bit like a lightweight in comparison.
shareI think not all Hiddleston's scenes were filmed in a good way also.
shareI must say the old Laurence Olivier's version is better than Branagh in my opinion. Also i didn't like Emma Thompson in that role. I want to watch this version now.
shareOlivier was good. I agree. Emma Thompson sometimes seemed bored a bit, but she had good chemistry with Branagh.
shareThompson should had good chemistry with Branagh. They were married.
It's that man again!!
Thompson should had good chemistry with Branagh. They were married.
Being married not always guarantee good onscreen chemistry. I reckon.
share'I suppose she was casted for this reason only.'
Thompson went on to become an Oscar winning actress.
'Being married not always guarantee good onscreen chemistry. I reckon.'
They subsequently divorced!
It's that man again!!
They subsequently divorced!
I prefer Branagh as Henry V, too -- but I really love Tom Hiddleston's Prince Hal.
45 Years: 9
Son of Saul: 10
The Witch: 8.5
Bridge of Spies: 8.5