Lear.

[thehefner]

So Al Pacino will be doing a film of KING LEAR. This could either go really well or really, really badly. It's by the guy who did the MERCHANT OF VENICE film, was that any good?

Me, I still desperately need Peter Brook's 1971 KING LEAR on DVD. It's available in the UK, which is a single-handed argument for me getting a region-free player. It's one of the greatest Shakespeare movies ever made, and Paul Scofield is the greatest Lear I've ever seen. He underplays it more than any other Lear (who's usually played all fire and brimstone and trilling "r"s*), and the result is...

... well, here, Shakespeare fans, you owe this to yourselves. Just look at him. Look at this motherfuckin' King Lear.

I seriously don't think there's been a more powerful version of this curse:

Nor a more horrifying version of the eye-gouging (did the cameo by Patrick Magee, actor of A CLOCKWORK ORANGE, TALES FROM THE CRYPT, and MARAT/SADE!):

Nor a more badass (and insanely short!) duel between Edgar and Edmund. With fucking axes.

You may have noticed that this is a pretty truncated version of LEAR. Purists might be appalled to find beautiful soliloquies and speeches reduced to one or two lines, but somehow, it absolutely works in the sparse, stark, and bleak (Bergmanesque?) context of Brook's vision.

I originally was going to write a whole LJ post about why I love KING LEAR above all other Shakespeare plays, why I feel it's sorely underappreciated, and all the "troublesome" (i.e.: "often if not outright shitty") versions I've seen of it since, even with greats like Olivier, Ian Holm, and Stacy Keach. But I figured most of y'all would just gloss over that, and would have just preferred to show you guys these clips.

There are more on YouTube, including the awesome ten-minute long scene where Lear realizes his daughters' betrayal, all well worth watching until they finally put it out on DVD.

Okay, seriously, off to NYCC now.



*God, Larry Olivier, I love and defend you, but your Lear hurt my soul. "Oh RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRREASON NOT THE NEEEEEEEED!!!

Comments

[fragmentedsky.livejournal.com]

What? NO! But they had Anthony fucking Hopkins for Lear!

[tommx.livejournal.com]

Hopkins dropped out.

I didn't see Merchant of Venice, but I know it was directed by Michael Radford who also did 1984 and Il Postino, both of which I liked very much. However, that's no indication of whether Lear will work or not or of whether or not Merchant was any good.

But, because it's Lear, I will watch it.

[tompurdue.livejournal.com]

The Pacino MERCHANT was much better than you might think. The real star was Jeremy Irons as Antonio, but Pacino's performance was everything you want a Shylock to be, rich and complex. (As opposed to the Richard III we caught glimpses of in LOOKING FOR RICHARD, which was dreadful.)

I don't know if Pacino can bring off Lear. In theory, it hits a lot of the same notes Shylock does, twisted and tortured and uncertain. But that so easily turns into melodrama.

My inner Hulkamaniac is showing

[the-mithril-man.livejournal.com]

Always wanted to see Mick Foley do Lear, that would rock a whole lot of socks methinks.

[irish-caffeine.livejournal.com]

I like the Pacino version of Merchant. They were walking on thin ice by handling a text that contains so much blatant anti-Semitism, and I think they made a wise choice by playing it up instead of trying to side-step it. In my opinion, the racism that Shylock endures ultimately makes him a more sympathetic villain. My only beef with that version is that they seemed to lose sight of the fact that it was supposed to be a comedy. The worst example of this is how seriously they did the "where is the ring?" scene at the end. Still, good Shakespeare film.