web counter
 

Is This A Glock I See Before Me? Shakespearian Modernizations: The Good, The Bad and The Coriolanus

By Joanna Robinson | Posted Under Miscellaneous | Comments (44)

Coriolanus-Ralph-Fiennes-directing-Gerard-Butler-1-6-10-kc.jpeg

One of the great virtues of Shakespeare’s material is its remarkable adaptability. His themes and characters are obviously universal and have resonated with audiences for centuries. One of the favorite tricks of a Shakespearian director is to modernize the setting of the play in order to capture something fresh in the verse. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t think it’s necessary. The best live production I ever saw was a fully ruffed, doubleted and hosed “Hamlet.” It is interesting, however, to see how a director manages to fit Elizabethan verse in an updated setting. To see how far you can bend the Bard before you break him.

Ralph Fiennes’ directorial debut, Coriolanus, premiered at the Berlin Film Festival yesterday to rave reviews. While maintaining the original verse, Fiennes has updated the setting from pre-imperial Rome to an anonymously modern civil war-torn state. Coriolanus is a story of blood, violence, military scheming, and torture that rings true in any era. As well as directing, Fiennes plays the titular Coriolanus and has cast Shakespearian veterans Vanessa Redgrave (stately!) and Brian Cox (stentorian!). Also starring is Gerard Butler and before you roll your eyes the man is a damn fine actor (Dear Frankie) who has made an avalanche of bad choices (The Ugly Truth, Bounty Hunter, P.S. I Love You, etc. ad nauseum). More exciting than the cast, for me, however, is the fact that Fiennes enlisted Hurt Locker cinematographer Barry Ackroyd. I’ll expect some gripping combat scenes and am prepared to not eat before the viewing lest I lose my lunch due to unrelenting shaky-cam.

Here are some recent examples of modernizations… only one of which is truly broken.

Hamlet (2000): This production grew on me with multiple viewings. I objected, at the time of its release, to the ubiquitous Julia Stiles who was great in Ten Things I Hate About You but rather dull when it came to speaking Shakespeare’s actual verse. But Bill Murray kills as Polonious and Sam Shepard is truly the face of every haunting father figure you want to impress. The director did some nice modernization work by having Hawke’s Hamlet be a filmmaker. Many of his soliloquies are films Hawke replays. As is “The Mousetrap.” It rather works.
MV5BMjYzMzY0OTk2M15BMl5BanBnXkFtZTYwOTc3MDY3._V1._SX580_SY374_.jpeg

Richard III (1995): This fantastic production with a killer cast (Ian McKellen, Annette Bening, Jim Broadbent, Robert Downey Jr. and Kristen Scott Thomas) reimagines Post War of the Roses Richard as a 1930’s fascist dictator. The man cries, “a horse, a horse, my kingdom for a horse” because his jeep is stuck in the mud. Brilliant.
R_1.jpeg

Romeo + Juliet (1996): Perhaps the most well-known of the modernizations, Luhrmann’s film caught some flack for the pop soundtrack and MTV cross-promotion. DiCaprio’s performance is gripping, however, and it’s a cute touch to name the weapons DAGGER 9mm and RAPIER 9mm. Luhrmann also cut more text than most directors, relying on visuals to convey meaning.
Romeo_Juliet.jpeg

Love’s Labour’s Lost (2000): This is where Kenneth Brannaugh, after a wonderful streak of Henry V, Much Ado About Nothing and Hamlet took his first, huge misstep. Love’s Labour’s Lost is not Shakespeare’s strongest plot at the best of times, and it crumples in this mess of a modernization that is set in the 1940’s. Oh and it’s a musical. Berlin and Gershwin are dragged into the fray. The Good? Adrian Lester, accomplished stage actor and singer. He makes both the verse and the dancing seem effortless. The Bad? Matthew Lillard who, like Keanu before him, is woefully miscast. The Ugly? Poor, poor Alicia Silverstone who can neither dance, nor sing, nor speak the verse. She’s a triple non-threat and it’s painful to watch.
lllbranagh2630.jpeg

Joanna Robinson is relieved to have side-stepped talking about the non-verse modernizations because she would have had to reveal her love for Get Over It starring Ben Foster, Kirsten Dunst, Mila Kunis and Sisqo (of Thong Song fame). Hermiaaaaaaaaaaa, I’ll make you love me.









Each Time You Like, Share, Tweet or Stumble a Pajiba Post, An Angel Does the Paul Rudd Dance

← Sorry, You're too Dumb to Have Sex | Justin Bieber: Never Say Never Review | The Origin Story of a Dips**t →









Comments

(I also love Get Over It.)

Posted by: Kim at February 15, 2011 4:38 PM

Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet is sort of modernized in that it is set in the Napoleonic Era. It is also an amazing film with a capital A.

Posted by: Zeff at February 15, 2011 4:39 PM

Branagh knows how to bring the Shakespeare, but he left it at home for Love's Labour Lost. His Hamlet, tho, is impeccable.

Honestly, tho, if the production is going to be other than as written, I wish they'd change the dialogue to suit the time/circumstances, than have a fool in a hawaiian shirt and allstars waving handguns and yapping about plagues on houses and whatnot. It's distracting. Which is a nicer way of saying I hate that version of Romeo + Juliet.

Posted by: Chickaboom at February 15, 2011 4:40 PM

Oh! But I am looking forward to Coriolanus, which I didn't even know existed until today.

(I also loved Get Over It!)

Posted by: Chickaboom at February 15, 2011 4:41 PM

Coriolanus, huh?

Ought to be interesting. Not the play I would have assumed would get a new treatment, but pretty awesome. Coriolanus was an interesting character, and I could totally see the issues that led to him getting screwed happening just as easily in the modern age.

There's a BBC set of productions on Shakespeare you can get off of Netflix Instant, including Macbeth with the guy who was the romantic interest in Penelope and Taming of the Shrew with the guy with the eyes from Dark City (among other things where he plays 'the guy with the eyes')

Good stuff. The Macbeth was particularly fan-fucking-tastic.

Posted by: twig at February 15, 2011 4:43 PM

I freaking LOVE that Richard III. Why don't I have that on DVD?!

Posted by: Todd at February 15, 2011 4:44 PM

This is an excellent opportunity to recommend that Shakespeare/theatre lovers watch Slings and Arrows on Netflix Instant.

Here's the review on Pajiba that got me to watch it:

http://www.pajiba.com/tv_reviews/slings-and-arrows-review-that-willful-suspension-of-disbelief-which-constitutes-poetic-faith.php

Posted by: Mrs. Julien at February 15, 2011 4:45 PM

Taymor missed with The Tempest, but still... Titus!

Posted by: The Other Agent Johnson at February 15, 2011 4:47 PM

Hey twig: Yesyesyes!yes!yes! It's called Shakespeare ReTold and the Taming of the Shrew w Rufus Sewell is addictive and charming and sexy as hell...in a twisted way.

And McBeth w James McScottishGuy is KILLER.

Looking forward to seeing Gerard Butler in something worthy of him (Dear Frankie is so good it hurts). Check out Youtube for an interview w Butler and Craig Ferguson to promote Dear Frankie. THe CUTEST boys ever!!!!!!

Posted by: klingonfree at February 15, 2011 4:51 PM

That picture of Ralph Fiennes is the spitting image of Forbiddendonut right after he gets his hair cut.

It's kind of eerie almost.

Posted by: Forbiddendonut at February 15, 2011 4:52 PM

i love shakespeare and think the film versions that use modern settings can be interesting but i do not like versions that modernize the language. it's all about the language (to me). this reminds me of a production of coriolanus that i saw in halifax some years ago. good times.

Posted by: splinter at February 15, 2011 4:52 PM

What, no Scotland, Pa. love?
While I understand the history and backstory about the Yorks/Lancastrians/Tudors et al during the Wars of the Roses, I never really got Richard III until I saw McKellan's interpretation.

Posted by: dorquemada at February 15, 2011 4:56 PM

I love Ralph Fiennes. When he banged that Qantas air hostess I was like, as if you wouldn't if he asked. I would. A lot.

Posted by: Kateo at February 15, 2011 5:03 PM

I am unapologetic of my love for Love's Labour's Lost. Between Natascha McElhone and Kenneth Branaugh, I'm willing.

Have any of you seen the most recent RSC performance of Hamlet, starring a one Mr David Fuck-Me-In-The-TARDIS Tennant as the titular role? I thoroughly enjoyed it. I may, in fact, have allowed the language to seep into my lusty half-sleeping mind like an airborne narcotic, resulting in a sonnet. For some reason I feel compelled to entrust you wankers with it:

Oh how my heart grows thick with ivy round,
All lush and verdant, oft with lust’s desires
To lay my hands upon thy fussed crown,
To twine my fingers through the twisted spires.

And by your voice may I inspired be
To close mine eyes and visualize your words
Yet though, while closed, without the need to see
My vision will be full to brim of yours.

Thy lean and slender carriage oft bewitch
My thoughts, and yet my virtue disallows.
To think on such desired limbs betwixt
Mine own shall soon besmirch my wedding vows.

Though baser urges draw my thoughts to thee,
Sweet Tennant, may this lust be seized from me.

That. Just. Happened.

Posted by: Patty O'Green at February 15, 2011 5:07 PM

@Splinter, I feel exactly the opposite -- If one is going to do a wildly modernized Shakespeare adaptation, leave the language out of it. I LOATHED Luhrmann's Romeo + Juliet for so many reasons, including the whole stupid "dagger" and "rapier" business. 10 Things I Hate About You is I think a better modernization, holding the plot and the spirit without trying to shoehorn in words that simply feel forced. On the other hand, all but the aforementioned one of Branaugh's Shakespeare films are top-notch. I think the language can be gotten away with in a historical setting sometimes (i.e. Branaugh's Hamlet or McKellan's Richard III) but trying to use it in familiar modern settings just frigging kills me. My feeling is, if you are going to do Shakespeare, do it. If you want to do some creative wiggling, you can use the plots and characters, but write your own damned dialogue.

Posted by: Siege at February 15, 2011 5:07 PM

Mrs Julien, thanks for the reminder of Slings and Arrows. Paul Gross is fantastic and I'm amazed I missed this show back in the day.

Definitely picking up the DVD's post haste though.

And Coriolanus looks like it could be great fun.

Posted by: Wintermute at February 15, 2011 5:08 PM

Verily! *Adjusts monocle*

Posted by: Murderbot at February 15, 2011 5:12 PM

Romeo + Juliet is, much like the passion between its star crossed lovers, a secret and forbidden love of mine. The twitchy mania, the pop everything, the extreme 90s of it all. I get tingly thinking about it.

Posted by: elgarcon at February 15, 2011 5:14 PM

I just didn't like R+J. I think it was both how young Leo looked (and I know Romeo's supposed to be young, but he looked 8 years old), and the way that everyone just SHOUTED every line without any respect for the material.

I did like Mercutio, though.

Posted by: Figgy at February 15, 2011 5:18 PM

Is this some sort of trick, wherein you get me to admit that I like Get Over It and then I end up on some list (with tags like loves Sisqo, Vitamin C, and Shane West's fake British accent) to be used against me at a later date? You won't get me that easily!

Damn, my love for Ben Foster and Swoosie Kurtz.

Posted by: jM at February 15, 2011 5:18 PM

I don't think you can watch Get Over It and not love it - I recently bought it for a couple of pounds on Amazon to replace my worn out video.

Posted by: sevenstories at February 15, 2011 5:23 PM

I love Get Over It. I love it so much. I love Ben Foster. I love Collin Hanks. I love Love S.C.U.D. I love Shane West's horrendous accent. I love the Vitamin C book-ends. I love all the Martin Short ridiculousness and all of the musical numbers. I even love the plant humping dog. There is absolutely nothing I don't love about that movie and I will not be ashamed!

I have "Hermia, Please Love Me" in my head right now.

Posted by: KRB at February 15, 2011 5:34 PM

I think the difference between movies like 10 Things I Hate About You and Scotland, P.A. and the ones listed here (and most of Branagh's run) is that the former are modernized adapted translations while the others are modernized adaptations. One type seeks to lure in audiences who might be averse to Shakespeare generally, the other seeks to give fans of Shakespeare something new. I like both, so long as they're done well or keep my interest. With the exception of Julie Taymor's Titus, I've liked almost every take on Shakespeare I've seen. (I know I'm a minority in that opinion.)

And since my normal recommendation (Slings and Arrows) has been stolen (gasp!), let me instead recommend Al Pacino's Looking For Richard which is part documentarty, part adaptation of Richard III, and totally radass.

Posted by: RobP at February 15, 2011 6:08 PM

@siege: i understand what you're saying but i just don't agree. or, i don't think i agree. i love shakespeare's language! have you ever read any of those modernized versions? hamlet just isn't hamlet--it doesn't resonate in the same way--if you rewrite it. i think that is a valuable strategy for students to get a handle on early modern english but not for performances. just my two cents.

i will say that i do like, even love, films like 10 things i hate about you which use shakespeare's plots as their framework.

here's a third vote for slings and arrows. that series was really good. way to go, canada!

Posted by: splinter at February 15, 2011 6:31 PM

There's also a 2006 version of Macbeth for any one who's curious though it's kinda of shitty boring film because it has Sam Worthington in it...

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0434541/

Posted by: franamadeus at February 15, 2011 7:03 PM

hehehehehheheheheh, Coriol-anus.
hehehhehh heh heeh heh heh.


Sorry, it was getting altogether too cultured for these parts.


hehhehehhehhe, parts.

Posted by: frank_247 at February 15, 2011 7:19 PM

Patrick Stewart's 2010 Macbeth rocked the house, despite its weird obsession with sinks. Best Banquo-at-the-dinner-table scene I've ever seen, and spookiest witches. Kinda derailed towards the end.

Macbeth (TV 2010)

Posted by: Salieri2 at February 15, 2011 7:24 PM

Splinter, I think you misunderstand--I am a Shakespeare purist, I guess. I LOVE Shakespeare's language, and I think having Leo say "dagger" and point a glock is abuse. With the exception of Love's Labor, Branaugh's adaptations are faithful--a sword fight is a sword fight, a lord is a lord, a handkerchief is a handkerchief, and a nun is a nun. Whereas the modernized ones, I feel, are someone who wants to do something entirely different, but is too lazy to come up with their own dialogue, so they bend and twist and molest the language to fit their own ideas. To me, it's not an adaptation, it's a bad reboot. If you want to make the story your own, by all means, go ahead...but have the decency to make up your own words, at least. There are ways to use modern language in a Shakespearean way without raping the original context. For example, Deadwood is Shakespearean without being a bad version of Shakespeare in cowboy hats.

(Sorry--this is a debate I've had several times lately, and I can be a little militant about it.)

Posted by: Siege at February 15, 2011 7:49 PM

So much serious love for a lot of these adaptations. That's one of the great things about Shakespeare, even half a millenium later he's still relevant.

Though I have to speak up and give a great big UGH to Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet. It's all "Look at me! Look at me! I'm Kenneth Branagh and I'm better than everyone!" I much preferred the latest RSC production that was on PBS, and not just because of my eternal love for Patrick Stewart.

I really wish Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellan would make that Merchant of Venice set in Las Vegas that they talked about back during their X-Men days. I would watch the hell out of that movie.

Posted by: Lipton at February 15, 2011 7:56 PM

@siege: gotcha and no worries. anyone who loves shakespeare is an instant friend. surprised no one has mentioned that 2004 (?) version of a midsummer night's dream. remember? i liked that one bicycles and all.

Posted by: splinter at February 15, 2011 7:58 PM

@Lipton: Wait, what was that about Merchant of Venice set in Vegas?

They really talked about that? And it hasn't happened yet?

*falls to knees* Khaaaaaaaaaan!

*ahem* Beg your pardon, I meant to say "... awww nertz."

Posted by: Wintermute at February 15, 2011 8:03 PM

@lipton: really?! i LOVE that version of hamlet and all other versions pale by comparison. i've seen it staged several times and have been disappointed. it must have something to do with the fact that it's nearly always truncated in some way and more than usual something like half the play is cut out. i hate that!

also, i once read that the hamlet we create in our minds as we read the play is always greater (this isn't the right word) than the one we see before our eyes. it was bloom, i think. there may be something to that.

Posted by: splinter at February 15, 2011 8:06 PM

@Lipton -- I see what you're saying about that Hamlet, though it is by far my favorite. I love that he's gone ahead and staged the ENTIRE play, without chopping and cutting. However, Branaugh is entirely too old to be playing Hamlet--the character is meant to be late teens/early twenties, not pushing 40. Makes the indecisiveness and mommy issues seem a lot more pathetic.

Posted by: Siege at February 15, 2011 9:05 PM

Also: I want to climb all over Gerard Butler's beard. Sure, the guy makes some terrible movies, but damn.

Posted by: Figgy at February 15, 2011 9:08 PM

... and it's not a modern adaptation, but holy shit thank you Finnes-kissing-Irons Merchant of Venice.

Al Pacino kicked the balls off of that play. What an actor.

Posted by: twig at February 15, 2011 9:34 PM

Since Looking for Richard and Slings and Arrows have been mentioned, I should include Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead. That was the funniest and most sideways perspective on Hamlet ever. Both Gary Oldman and Tim Roth just rocked it.

For more on the topic discussion, Christopher Ecclestons and Eamonn Walkers version of Othello was top notch. Chris does such a mean bastard well.

Posted by: mc-rox at February 15, 2011 9:40 PM

No love for Julie Taymor's weird, silly and rather wonderful Titus, starring Anthony Hopkins and Jessica Lange? Otherwise, top notch.

Posted by: Caspar at February 16, 2011 4:50 AM

@mc-rox: Bless, bless bless! Rosencrantz and Guildenstern is one of the top 5 go-to DVDs in my collection.
Also, I didn't adore Luhrmann's R&J, but when I saw it in a NY theatre this group of 10yr old boys sat in front of me and towards the end they started yelling "Don't do it! He ain't dead, don't drink the poison bitch!" and I realized they had no idea of the ending. When they walked out they were raving about the film. So hey, I'll put up with MTV glam if it gets the next generation bardy.

Posted by: cinekat at February 16, 2011 5:50 AM

There's also O, the adaptation of Othello that has a high school football setting. It was a clever little plan, but high school kid characters just don't have the gravitas to pull off the themes.

I saw a local production of Romeo and Juliet by an amateur group that I just adored. It was a modern setting, but the minute Romeo walked on stage wearing a Joy Division t-shirt, I knew he would nail the part, and he did.

Posted by: Wednesday at February 16, 2011 8:22 AM

Patty wins the EE this week!

Posted by: The Wanderer at February 16, 2011 9:32 AM

My favorite (recent) Shakespeare films:

Henry V with Kenneth Branagh (the mud, blood and chaotic Agincourt scene were splendid)

Hamlet also by Branagh. KB presented the entire play, not just the highlights that many others cover. Beautifully lush - it felt like a royal court.

Richard III with Ian McKellen. I was digging on Poor Rich the first time I saw the version starring Olivier (seriously, what inspired Larry to make himself look like Nixon?), and McKellen's version was top-notch.

Titus, with Anthony Hopkins. Yikes, blood, rape, cannibalism ... I was never much on the original play, but the film retelling was fantastic. A fever dream.

Posted by: The Wanderer at February 16, 2011 9:38 AM

I have GREAT memories of watching Love's Labour Lost with a friend. We thought we'd be watching a great adaptation, and instead we got "I'd rather charleston." Hilarious.

Posted by: dsbs at February 16, 2011 7:33 PM

I love Get Over It in a completely earnest, non-ironic kind of way. If only my school had allowed us to perform that kind of musical.

Posted by: Lentil at February 16, 2011 7:36 PM

I would like to use the chance of saying thanks to you for the professional assistance I have often enjoyed visiting your site. We are looking forward to the actual commencement of my school research and the whole preparation would never have been complete without coming to your web site. If I might be of any assistance to others, I might be thankful to help by what I have learned from here.

Posted by: Beretta92FS at February 23, 2011 6:49 PM