The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
One of my favourite Shakespeare plays, Othello was on tonight.
And I thought it was awful.
Simply because it was updated. In modern English.
Now, you can call me a snob or whatever, I don't care.
The whole point about Shakespeare, the main reason he is who he is?
The language he uses.
The poetry of almost every line. And to remove that and turn it into Eastenders is a sad, sad thing to me.
To remove the beauty of his writing and to use the story only is to miss the point of his stuff.
I didn't like the Baz Lurhman (sp?) "Romeo & Juliet", but at least he kept the language faithful.
I hated reading Shakespeare at college for A Level, it was laborious and it removed the beauty of his writing.
However, I went back on my own time and terms and love to read those plays now.
The acting was good tonight, and it was seriously treated.
But compare:
"Oh foulest Moor, of dark and cankerous will, thy knowst my love is twisted as the vine that grow upon the heart of love"
with
"I love her!"
"I do!"
"I love her more, you b*st*rd"
Just isn't the same.
But there you go, that's just me.
And I thought it was awful.
Simply because it was updated. In modern English.
Now, you can call me a snob or whatever, I don't care.
The whole point about Shakespeare, the main reason he is who he is?
The language he uses.
The poetry of almost every line. And to remove that and turn it into Eastenders is a sad, sad thing to me.
To remove the beauty of his writing and to use the story only is to miss the point of his stuff.
I didn't like the Baz Lurhman (sp?) "Romeo & Juliet", but at least he kept the language faithful.
I hated reading Shakespeare at college for A Level, it was laborious and it removed the beauty of his writing.
However, I went back on my own time and terms and love to read those plays now.
The acting was good tonight, and it was seriously treated.
But compare:
"Oh foulest Moor, of dark and cankerous will, thy knowst my love is twisted as the vine that grow upon the heart of love"
with
"I love her!"
"I do!"
"I love her more, you b*st*rd"
Just isn't the same.
But there you go, that's just me.
Very true.
Although I have to say, as a curmudgeonly old fool, that I think Brannagh's "Hamlet" is one of the best adaptations of Shakespeare going.
It's an immense film at just under 4hrs but it holds the attention like nothing else.
Hamlet is a play full of murder, insanity, revenge, Oedipal conflicts and Kate Winslett naked on the floor making love noises.
Excellent
Although I have to say, as a curmudgeonly old fool, that I think Brannagh's "Hamlet" is one of the best adaptations of Shakespeare going.
It's an immense film at just under 4hrs but it holds the attention like nothing else.
Hamlet is a play full of murder, insanity, revenge, Oedipal conflicts and Kate Winslett naked on the floor making love noises.
Excellent
I thought the Baz Luhrman one did quite well actually, but my outstanding hatred of Leo DiCaprio as an actor started there, and has continued thus far. I've never been a great fan of Shakespeare, but I did watch this, because I was bored. I didn't find it good, but it wasn't awful. It was still Shakespeare, though in a mutilated way..
Leave Shakespeare to Ken Branagh. He know's what he's doing i.e. Making us all fall asleep, then pretend we saw all of it when chatting to friends.
Leave Shakespeare to Ken Branagh. He know's what he's doing i.e. Making us all fall asleep, then pretend we saw all of it when chatting to friends.
The ITV trailer department came up trumps with the trailer for this one.. After watching a 20 second ad for the programme I knew I would rather shoot myself than watch it.. Pearl Harbour's had a similar effect until they removed all scenes of people "acting" from it, I would say acting but that would be detrimental to the entire acting profession. Anyway, I deviate from the subject.. How could ITV treat one of Shakespeare's best plays so sacreligiously, I mean Benjamin Jago, why? I have seen many modern versions of Shakespeare plays which have worked very well because they were well thought through. They didn't have such a contempt for the audience as to dumb-down Shakespeare's writing and simply transposed the setting into a different era. This gave space for the theatre director to show quite amply his original vision of the play and didn't compromise the play. However, any alteration of the script is essentially a compromise, as anyone who has studied shakespeare at school will know, every single line is meticulously written and includes the right words to trigger further meaning and to create a rythmn that can carry meaning too. If you try and change the script then you lose the things that make Shakespeare's plays so timeless. Admittedly not all transpositions of shakespeare plays work, for example Romeo and Juliet, but you stand a far far better chance of succeeding if you don't try to take the Shakespeare out of Shakespeare, to borrow a phrase used in a review of Othello.
My question is which Othello will be better remembered, ITV's or Shakespeare's? Hopefully teachers will have the sense not to try and "bring Shakespeare to life" by sticking on ITV's version. If they do then Shakespeare should endure well into the future.
My question is which Othello will be better remembered, ITV's or Shakespeare's? Hopefully teachers will have the sense not to try and "bring Shakespeare to life" by sticking on ITV's version. If they do then Shakespeare should endure well into the future.
One of my favourite Shakespeare plays, Othello was on tonight.
And I thought it was awful.
Simply because it was updated. In modern English.
Now, you can call me a snob or whatever, I don't care.
The whole point about Shakespeare, the main reason he is who he is?
The language he uses.
The poetry of almost every line. And to remove that and turn it into Eastenders is a sad, sad thing to me.
To remove the beauty of his writing and to use the story only is to miss the point of his stuff.
I didn't like the Baz Lurhman (sp?) "Romeo & Juliet", but at least he kept the language faithful.
I hated reading Shakespeare at college for A Level, it was laborious and it removed the beauty of his writing.
However, I went back on my own time and terms and love to read those plays now.
The acting was good tonight, and it was seriously treated.
But compare:
"Oh foulest Moor, of dark and cankerous will, thy knowst my love is twisted as the vine that grow upon the heart of love"
with
"I love her!"
"I do!"
"I love her more, you b*st*rd"
Just isn't the same.
But there you go, that's just me.
And I thought it was awful.
Simply because it was updated. In modern English.
Now, you can call me a snob or whatever, I don't care.
The whole point about Shakespeare, the main reason he is who he is?
The language he uses.
The poetry of almost every line. And to remove that and turn it into Eastenders is a sad, sad thing to me.
To remove the beauty of his writing and to use the story only is to miss the point of his stuff.
I didn't like the Baz Lurhman (sp?) "Romeo & Juliet", but at least he kept the language faithful.
I hated reading Shakespeare at college for A Level, it was laborious and it removed the beauty of his writing.
However, I went back on my own time and terms and love to read those plays now.
The acting was good tonight, and it was seriously treated.
But compare:
"Oh foulest Moor, of dark and cankerous will, thy knowst my love is twisted as the vine that grow upon the heart of love"
with
"I love her!"
"I do!"
"I love her more, you b*st*rd"
Just isn't the same.
But there you go, that's just me.