Comparison of Henry V as Directed by Kenneth Branagh and as Directed by Laurence Olivier
Kenneth Branagh and Laurence Olivier are often considered to be quitesimilar. This is based on obvious similarities such as the fact that theyare both actors and directors and that they have both acted in and producedadaptations of Shakespeare's plays. One effective way to compare the twois to consider how both have approached the same film. This will now becompleted by analyzing and comparing the film "Henry V." This will showthat Branagh and Olivier are very different, with many of their differencesrelated to the time in which they directed. The first difference that is seen in the two films is that Olivier'sversion seems more like a movie of a play, than a movie. This has severalimpacts on the way the film is viewed. The first is that is makes you moreaware that you are watching a Shakespeare play. As a viewer, this changesexpectations of what will be seen. In movies, you generally expect to seea realistic chain of events, where you follow those events. While you arebeing shown various scenes, there is a tendency to be drawn into the scenesand to experience them almost as if you were part of them. In this way, agood movie actually allows the viewer to forget that they are vie
For a conflict to be engaging, there really needs to be a personal element. This involvement and the state of need created is what keepsa viewer watching. The review then goeson to describe the film saying, "Almost continually, it invests the art of Shakespeare--and the art of cinema as well--with a new spaciousness, a new mobility, a new radiance. This is a common aspectof modern film, where a major part of the interest is based on identifyingwith the main character and journeying with them as they develop andprogress. In another way, Olivier's version iseffective because it allows you to watch the scenes as an outsider andquestion them. Branagh has the opposite approach and presents war ina realistic way. This does not occur in Branagh's, sincethe format suggests that the story is realistic. Therefore, rather than focus on the dialogue, hefocused on expressing emotion since at least that would be clear to theviewer. The final major difference is that the way that war is treated ineach version. In working with the new filmmedium, Olivier was trying to determine how the possibilities offered byfilm could be used to enhance the play. Instead, the film revolvesaround the love story of Jack and Rose and the conflicts they both dealwith. This resultsin viewers judging films based on what they expect a film to be, oftenwithout a real awareness that they even have expectations. In short, a play is meant to be listened to, while a film ismeant to be watched. In Olivier's time, film was in its infancy andnew techniques were only just being employed. In one way, Branagh'sversion is more effective because it is easier to get drawn into the scenesand journey with the characters.
Common topics in this essay:
Magazine Olivier's,
Instead Olivier,
Cold Mountain,
Essentially Olivier,
Shakespeare's Olivier,
Henry Olivier's,
Theater London,
Branagh Olivier,
Falstaff Jardine,
Overall Branagh,
olivier's version,
character development,
agee 1946,
branagh's version,
branagh aware,
major difference,
version effective,
play movie,
branagh's approach,
source describes,
review film describes,
common aspect modern,
olivier's version saying,
describes saying branagh,
battle scene saying,
|
Acceptance Essays
