Change Your Image
amycomerford
Reviews
ShakespeaRe-Told: The Taming of the Shrew (2005)
Just as Galling as the Play.
'The Taming of the Shrew' comes to life on screen in David Richard's and Sally Wainwright's episode of BBC Shakespeare-Told. As a series which received glowing praise, I expected much more than I received. Perhaps it is the very nature of the play that makes it so hard to create an appealing adaption. I highly doubt any version of female suppression and misogyny would be very entertaining for me, no matter who took part in it or what the plot was. While the play is supposed to make us question our assumptions about 'proper' gender roles and our opinions regarding power struggles in relationships, I cannot quite move past the blatant element of sexism so intrinsic to the basic storyline of both Shakespeare's play and Richard's adaption. Overall the adaption lacked believability and made for some pretty uncomfortable viewing.
However, to each dark gloomy cloud, there is a silver lining. In the case of Richard and Wainwright's work, the casting does its best to make this adaption bearable for a modern audience. Shirley Henderson's portrayal of Katherine Minola is on the money in terms of faithfulness to the play. The Katherine of Shakespeare's play is quite the character. She berates her father publicly, ties up and beats her sister, breaks musical instruments over people's heads and is innately rude and bad tempered. Shirley Henderson manages to capture the essence of Shakespeare's Kate expertly. Our first encounter with Henderson's Katherine Minola is like something out of a cartoon. As she barrels through Westminster like a scalded cat with people turning on their heel to get out of her war path, she is every bit the villain she is made out to be in the play. Her interchange with poor David Mitchel, while bizarre to watch perfectly encapsulates everything that Katherine Minola is believed to be: a shrew.
However, while I do admire how well Henderson plays up the childish temper tantrum qualities of Katherine's personality, it is something that I cannot quite reconcile with her identity as a public figure. It simply does not mesh. A person in the public eye could not behave the way she does and still be seen as a credible leader. The damage to one's reputation if they broke a guitar over a stranger's head would be irreparable in real life. Her tempestuous behaviour does not translate to her job as a politician. It is not believable. On the other hand, Rufus Sewell gives a far more plausible performance as Petruchio. To his credit, he received a BAFTA Nomination for his role and it is easy to see why. He is a very charismatic in his role and is more than able to go toe to toe with the Shirley Henderson. He holds his own throughout and captures the immaturity that Shakespeare's Petruchio displays. Sewell shrewdly portrays the selfish nature of Petruchio while at the same time, for instance, he makes his decision to do a selfless thing like become a stay at home father so that Katherine can continue her political career a sincere act.
In terms of faithfulness to the original play, there are aspects that I both like and dislike. Shakespeare's original work was a comedy, and this adaption is no different. The witty banter between Katherine and Petruchio remains. The elevator scene after Bianca's party is hilarious as Petruchio meeting Katherine for the first time shouts 'kiss me Kate' to which she vehemently replies 'up yours weirdo'. The scene in the park is also full of humour with Petruchio being hit with a bike and a football while Katherine questions his motives asking 'Are you stalking me?' to which he says 'No, but I'd like to'. There are some great one liners throughout including Petruchio's declaration that 'I want you (Kate) to have all my babies' as well as Katherine's mother (Twiggy Lawson) admission 'you don't shop around the corner, do you?'.
More negatively, the subplot between Bianca and Lucentio was reduced to an afterthought. If they had been removed from the film it would not have made much difference as they were almost non-existent as it is. Similarly, so is my critique of it.
Regarding the infamous moment at the end of the play when Katherine makes her speech declaring her obedience to her new husband, I admired that the BBC retelling just as open to interpretation. Are we to believe Katherine? While Henderson gives off a cold, defeatist attitude, the speech is full of contradictions. She claims her husband is her 'Lord and Boss' yet she commands him to stay at home with their children so she can continue to work. It is just as ambiguous as the play's ending and we cannot be quite sure if Katherine has been tamed.
Overall, the adaption is just as galling as the play. While Henderson makes a good Katherine, there is an irreconcilable flaw to her behaviour with her role as a politician. Bianca and Lucentio do not serve the plot particularly well. Petruchio's abuse is given a humorous overtone as he slashes Kate's tires and throws her clothes in the pool, but at the end of the day is still incredulous. Alas, there is something fundamentally wrong with a woman being forced into marriage to further her aspirations, and it makes for painful viewing.
West Side Story (1961)
The drama is nothing compared to its dancing
William Shakespeare's infamous 'Romeo and Juliet,' is revitalised by director Robert Wise as he takes it from the stage to the silver screen in the, if not equally infamous, 'West Side Story'. As a film that has had much acclaim I was already familiar with its storyline and some musical numbers, although having never seen it. I had high hopes. I love a good musical. 'West Side Story' received an outstanding eleven Academy Award nominations. It would go on to receive ten of these including Best Picture, Best Supporting Actor and Actress for George Chakaris and Rita Moreno respectively, and Best Direction for the dynamic duo of Robert Wise and principle choreographer Jerome Robbins. I was expecting perfection. Perhaps it was for this reason that I was unfortunately left feeling deflated and ultimately disappointed.
That being said, I do not want to let my disillusionment cloud my objectivity. The film was not all bad – there were pleasant aspects. The choreography by Robbins is sheer genius. I do not envy the gruelling efforts the cast and crew made to create this excellence. The stories of Robbins need to create perfection in every take are well known. His inability to say 'Cut!' did ultimately lead to his removal from production due to financial impracticality but his assistants proved loyal to his vision and every step we see is his. Robbins displays innovativeness far out ranking any of his contemporaries. The notable scene whereby the gangs run toward a tall chain-link fence and manoeuvres themselves barehanded upwards and over onto the playground below in one fluid motion is not only incredible to behold in the moment, but you cannot help but wonder how many times the poor actors, not stuntmen, were forced to carry out this sequence to give it it's effortlessness.
I also found the retelling of 'Romeo and Juliet' itself to be utterly refreshing. I enjoyed the setting's transference from 16th Century Italy to the more familiar Upper West Side New York. The Montagues and Capulets become two rival street gangs - the second generation European immigrant Jets and the Puerto Rican Sharks struggling to find their place in the world. While I find fault with the actual names of the gangs and dub them corny, the perpetuation of the young adults as victims of racial barriers evokes empathy in the viewer and an understanding of the feud not present in Shakespeare's play due to purposeful ambiguity. The removal of the parents from the plot and the casting of a young Rita Moreno as Anita to mirror the role of the older Nurse serve to make the film more appealing for a younger audience. These simple plot devices come together to make William Shakespeare approachable and take away the impossibility of coming to terms with his extensive literary catalogue.
Be all that as it may, I cannot hide my belief that this film was anti-climactic. I found the dialogue uninspired and bland. It was corny, and not in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way. As a Disney lover, I am a big fan of cheesy fairy tale romance. That being said, I cannot hide my disdain for the interchanges between the two leads Maria (Natalie Wood) and Tony (Richard Beymer). Firstly, there is a sheer lack of chemistry between the two lovers. Beymer is cripplingly insincere due to his incapability to carry the role of leading man let alone portray the role of a reformed gang leader. I am unable to find them to be a credible couple. I do not root for them. In terms of casting, on the other hand Rita Moreno's portrayal of Anita saves the show. She is utterly deserving of her Oscar. She exudes a charisma, magnetism and passion in that role that puts on display the numerous flaws of Beymer and Wood for all to see.
While I can admire the bold move to rewrite Shakespeare's tragic ending of mutual suicide, I cannot help but wonder if perhaps to have had Maria shoot herself would have saved my view of the film. While this film does indulge on tragedy through violence, murder and an attempted rape, I cannot help but say I was unmoved. The film lacked the same powerful ending that 'Romeo and Juliet' has. The death of Juliet in the play is critical to the play's success. It embodies the play's message of love and intensifies its moral - intolerance creates only sorrow. I understand that it played into the character development of Maria in becoming a confident and independent woman, but I do think her death could have given the movie the strong conclusion it so desperately needs. The hint of reconciliation between the Jets and the Sharks is utterly contrived and does not do anything to add a satisfactory climax. If anything, it only serves to underline American cinema's need at the time to provide feel good cinema and a happy ending.
Overall, the film's drama is nothing compared to its dancing. The leads are overshadowed by Rita Moreno. The gangs are parodies. The ending is lacklustre. It is for these reasons I would give it only three-and-a-half out of five stars. For a film with such potential and such acclaim, I truly had expected more.