This is one of my favourite plays by William Shakespeare so
when I saw this film version listed in my television schedule I set it to
record so that I could enjoy watching it at a time when I knew I would not be
disturbed.
Directed by Julie Taymor from her own screenplay adaptation
it was presented as a ‘reimagining’ of Shakespeare’s classic. I hate that word ‘reimagining’!
In many instances I have found it to just mean plagiarism at the worst or a
distinct lack of originality by the writer at the least. To be fair this might
not be Julie Taymor’s fault as the only real alteration to the original is in
changing the lead character’s sex to female. Again, I am in ignorance as to why
this was felt necessary other than to presume that Julie Taymor wanted to work
with Hellen Mirren on the project and that this was the only way to accommodate
her?
I do not have any problem with changing the Duke Prospero
into the Duchess Prospera but I have to wonder why not go all the way? It would
be easier to suspend disbelief if Julie Taymor had set her tale in another time
perhaps but this is not the case. The characters all appear in reasonably
faithful late medieval dress, complete with doublets and ruffs, carrying
rapiers and such. I found this observance with accuracy on one point at
loggerheads with the notion of a female duke at a time when women rarely had
the opportunity to aspire to such a high and powerful status as a duke in their
own right. It somewhat renders Prospera’s complaints of being robbed of her
dukedom by her younger brother moot as according to the time in which the play
is set inheritance passed down the male line anyway to this would have become
the logical outcome of Prospera being female!
Personally I would have been a lot more accepting of
Prospera if Julie Taymor had abandoned medieval Europe altogether and presented
a much more fanciful set design in which to play out the story.
That said, Helen Mirren carried off her role with consummate
professionalism. Her presence on screen gives the film its gravitas and she is
commands attention in every scene. Unfortunately she is let down by the rest of
the cast with only two notable exceptions. The first of these is Ben Wishaw as
the sprite Ariel, He looks quite otherworldly but I was unconvinced that he had
to appear naked in every scene. It is not that he isn’t good looking, it is the
inevitable comic effect that arises from trying to cover up his genitals as a
result. Otherwise he was quite convincing as the spirit, I particularly liked
his appearance as a crow as this created a very striking image.
Djimon Hounsou also acquitted himself well as Caliban. I
found him very interesting to watch as he communicated the foul and yet
pitiable nature of the mooncalf through use of both his body and his voice. He
raised the character from out of the purely comic to one more approaching
tragedy.
These apart the rest of the cast failed to impress. I am not
a fan of Russell Brand but I was willing to allow him an opportunity to impress
me as the clown Trinculo but all I saw was Russell Brand being Russell Brand;
same hair, same beard, same annoying accent. Reeve Carney as Prince Ferdinand
simply lacked any conviction, even allowing for Miranda, played by Felicity
Jones, having grown up without ever having seen a man previously Carney’s
Ferdinand seemed too effeminate and understated as to defy belief that he could
win the girl’s heart so easily.
In conclusion this was not as enjoyable a film as I was
hoping for. It had its moments and I certainly would not think of it as a
failure but there was also something missing, something that I could not
ignore, the spark of magic and wonder that lives in Shakespeare’s text but was
not translated to the screen in this instance.
No comments:
Post a Comment