TITUS
A film review by Mark R. Leeper
Capsule: TITUS is a production of TITUS
ANDRONICUS, widely considered to be Shakespeare's
worst play but here given a first class visual
treatment nonetheless. This is an over-the-top
melodrama of horrible revenge. HAMLET may be a
better play, but its virtues are worn out from
over-familiarity. TITUS on the other hand is a lot
of fun. Rating: 8 (0 to 10), +3 (-4 to +4) SPOILER
WARNING: I will reveal some plot points. And how
odd it is to have a Shakespeare play so little
familiar that it needs spoiler warnings.
Personally I think I need to see another production of HAMLET about as much as I need to see another production of A CHRISTMAS CAROL. Which is to say, not very much at all. The same few number of Shakespeare's plays seem to be done over and over. The value of seeing Shakespeare's good plays is somewhat compromised by their over- familiarity. There may be a lot more of interest in seeing one of his minor plays that never get seen. Of Shakespeare's 39 plays (the current count) it seems only a handful regularly produced. Most of the rest are rarely seen.
TITUS ANDRONICUS is nearly universally considered to be Shakespeare's worst play. It is a horror tale of revenge as a Roman noble and a captured Goth Queen wreck terrible revenge on each other in Imperial Rome. Academician Harold Bloom suggest that the play was never meant to be taken seriously and was Shakespeare's attempt to lampoon the pre-Grand-Guignol blood and thunder plays popular in his day. Humble film reviewer Mark Leeper suggests that Bloom may have it backwards. It may well be an effort to demonstrate that even violent horror plays of the time might be written with poetry, grace, and magic. Is it so different from Stanley Kubrick attempting a Stephen King horror story complete with elevators flooded in torrents of blood? TITUS is reminiscent of Peter Greenway doing what could be a TALES FROM THE CRYPT episode in operatic style in THE COOK, THE THIEF, HIS WIFE, AND HER LOVER. In any case TITUS ANDRONICUS is a play rarely performed and though it will not be for all tastes it is one that for many of us should be seen because it is a hoot.
In ancient Rome soldier and noble Titus Andronicus (Anthony Hopkins) returns from the wars with the Goths bringing with him the Goth queen Tamora (Jessica Lange) and her three remaining sons. Titus has lost twenty-one sons and has only four left. He orders the ritual execution of one of Tamora's sons as a final act of vengeance. Chance makes Tamora the wife of the new emperor Saturninus and she will have a gruesome revenge against Titus only to have him exact an even sterner vengeance against him.
Julie Taymor, who adapted THE LION KING for the live stage, adapted the play and directed with a strange visual sense that cuts across the centuries. This is a world that combines the legions of ancient Rome and vehicles and clothing of 1930s Fascist Italy. Taymor's visual sense lies somewhere between Fellini's SATYRICON and the Planet Mongo in a sort of filthy corruption of former splendor. As Tamora's vengeance seems to involve body part--heads, hands, tongues-- so too there are body parts sculpted in stone as a recurring theme in many of the visuals.
Taymor opens the film with the image of a child playing with toy Roman soldiers. The boy is dragged from a modern kitchen to a pavilion in Rome where human-sized toy soldiers march in mechanized lock step. This maybe suggesting that the play's violent plot is the product of a child's imagination. However she does fill the film with a generous dose of surreal dream sequences and obscure symbolism that would leave Shakespeare terminally confused. I suppose she could claim that she is not making the film for HIM.
Jessica Lange, who started her career unable to fulfill even the most demands of the damsel in distress in the 1976 KING KONG is now one of the most talented American actresses and is now more than equal to Shakespearean roles. Her Tamora physically evokes the visage of a Gorgon. In spite of a few role choices of late that I believe even she regrets, she is now back on track taking difficult roles and doing them well. Hopkins has the reputation, but he plays Titus entirely too blandly, falling back on some Hannibal Lector mannerisms in the hope they evoke chills. For my money Lange stole the film from under him. Alan Cumming is hardly memorable as Saturninus. He may be remembered as the pen-clicking Russian computer hacker from GOLDENEYE. Aaron, played here by Harry Lennix, is not very believable, due more to Shakespeare's writing than his acting. Like the Jew of Malta in Marlowe's play he lives just to be evil. Few people see themselves as just living to cause trouble.
TITUS is probably not going to be remembered as one of the great Shakespeare films. It is more a novelty, a Shakespearean horror tale. How often do we get a TITUS CHAINSAW MASSACRE or a TWELFTH NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD? I give it an 8 on the 0 to 10 scale and a +3 on the -4 to +4 scale.
Mark R. Leeper
mleeper@lucent.com
Copyright 2000 Mark R. Leeper
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews