Henry V announces that the Shakespeare play cannot be done justice in the restrictive space of theatre. Yet, for all Shakespeare's literary brilliance and the fine acting, Henry V feels like a nomadic and underwhelming experience.
The story is linear and this is in stark contrast to the complex but deeply meaningful language of the play. Although the acting is of the highest quality the straightforwardness is rather cumbersome. The introduction of Chorus played by Derek Jacobi certainly serves a necessary purpose of providing immediacy to proceedings.
The introduction of the four characters Bardolph, Nym, Pistol and Flagstaff just didn't fit at all in the scheme of the film it felt rather strangely and obtrusive. I understood they knew Henry V but couldn't understand their relationship, it was vastly under-explored. Most of the characters are tipped very lightly in characterisation and their deaths do not nurture a single regret.
The cinematography is the films greatest strength providing the necessary atmosphere but I felt the direction, suffered a lack of emotional structure and set bearings. This is where Henry V suffered as a film, the battles are staged in rather closely shot environs, not wishing to expand the destruction and death of warfare. The fine speeches and acting is severely hampered by not providing the audience with sufficient stimuli that a film can only provide. Henry V goes on his journey to Agincourt, and indeed to his famous victory with a tiny consortium of people that is not grand or epic but rather non-sensical, how did they win the battle of Agincourt?
Henry V provides the necessary thespian talent but it is ravaged by its lack of coherency and piece-meal offerings of epicness. The film is too straightforward and suffers greatly from its almost nomadic sense of pushing to the end, leaving the cinematography to make up for the lack of extras, landscapes and grandeur. Henry V although admirable in some ways does not enrich the vistas of our imagination as it had so offered to do so at its beginnings.
The story is linear and this is in stark contrast to the complex but deeply meaningful language of the play. Although the acting is of the highest quality the straightforwardness is rather cumbersome. The introduction of Chorus played by Derek Jacobi certainly serves a necessary purpose of providing immediacy to proceedings.
The introduction of the four characters Bardolph, Nym, Pistol and Flagstaff just didn't fit at all in the scheme of the film it felt rather strangely and obtrusive. I understood they knew Henry V but couldn't understand their relationship, it was vastly under-explored. Most of the characters are tipped very lightly in characterisation and their deaths do not nurture a single regret.
The cinematography is the films greatest strength providing the necessary atmosphere but I felt the direction, suffered a lack of emotional structure and set bearings. This is where Henry V suffered as a film, the battles are staged in rather closely shot environs, not wishing to expand the destruction and death of warfare. The fine speeches and acting is severely hampered by not providing the audience with sufficient stimuli that a film can only provide. Henry V goes on his journey to Agincourt, and indeed to his famous victory with a tiny consortium of people that is not grand or epic but rather non-sensical, how did they win the battle of Agincourt?
Henry V provides the necessary thespian talent but it is ravaged by its lack of coherency and piece-meal offerings of epicness. The film is too straightforward and suffers greatly from its almost nomadic sense of pushing to the end, leaving the cinematography to make up for the lack of extras, landscapes and grandeur. Henry V although admirable in some ways does not enrich the vistas of our imagination as it had so offered to do so at its beginnings.