HENRY V (1989) A Film Review Copyright Dragan Antulov 2001
Screen adaptations of William Shakespeare's plays used to be made since the moment of Lumiere brothers' invention, but many might get an impression that the number of such films reached its peak in 1990s, and that the trend continues to this day. Every now and then we hear about another of Shakespeare's plays being turned into prestigious Hollywood production. In many of such cases producers try to overcome the gap between Bard's 16th Century worldview and modern-day audience by using the new settings (ranging from 1880s Italy to 1930s fascist Britain in alternative historical timeline) or adding new content (gunfights and musical numbers). Kenneth Branagh, British actor and director who is the best known Shakespearean filmmaker of today, has also experimented with new techniques, but his first major Shakespearean adaptation, 1989 version of HENRY V, is one of the most faithful and conventional adaptations in the history of film. Interestingly enough, it was also one of the best Shakespeare adaptations, at least judging by the critics who heralded 28-year Branagh as "new Laurence Olivier" and instantly called his work as "the masterpiece of British cinema".
The plot is based on the historical play Shakespeare had written in the earlier phase of his career and begins in 1415, during the lulls in Hundred Years War between England and France. Young Henry (played by Kenneth Branagh) has recently ascended English throne and many consider him inexperienced and still unfit to be the king, mostly due to his youthful rowdiness and friendship with notorious John Falstaff (played by Robbie Coltrane). Henry needs to establish his authority and the best way to do it is military campaign against France whose weak King (played by Paul Scofield) wants to deny him the right to succeed him at the French throne. When jingoistic French Dauphin (played by Michael Maloney) sends him tennis balls instead mandatory tribute, Henry would use this diplomatic insult as a pretext for war and rallying his nation. His army lands in France and takes the strategic port of Harfleur after prolonged and bloody siege; this victory is short-lived because Henry's army, exhausted by diseases, casualties and short on supplies must retreat towards their stronghold at Calais. When his route to safety gets blocked by huge French army Henry refuses French offer to surrender and instead prepares for the battle. The next day - October 25th 1415 - would enter military history as well as the name "Agincourt".
HENRY V is probably the most popular of all Shakespeare's historical plays, and this might be explained with its tone being somewhat different from the rest of Shakespeare's work in that period. Instead of complicated and often depressive tales of endless feudal backstabbing, Shakespeare provided us with story that provides clear definition between Good (English) and Bad Guys (French) as well the inspirational and uplifting story about triumph of human spirit against overwhelming odds. Strong patriotic and jingoistic overtones of that play explain why Laurence Olivier used it in order to make his 1944 film version while Britain was involved in war against Nazis. Almost half a century later, Kenneth Branagh didn't feel the need to incite patriotism in his fellow British, but jingoism of the play nevertheless had something to do with his choice of the project, although on more personal level. Branagh probably found many things in common between himself - young actor directing first major film - and Henry - young monarch being put to the first serious test of his reign. So, in many ways, this film has very personal dimension for its maker, which is usually one of the elements of true masterpiece.
Aware of the unavoidable comparisons between his and Olivier's version, Branagh was determined to be as different as possible. First of all, his version is more faithful to Shakespeare's text and it is more realistic. Despite the budget that seems ridiculously small compared with Hollywood standards, he decided not to turn HENRY V into stage play on film (like Olivier did in his version). Instead, HENRY V looks like full-blooded historical spectacle. Branagh also keeps some elements of Shakespeare's text that Olivier had felt uncomfortable with in 1944 war-torn Britain - like episode with English nobles betraying their king, English soldiers being hanged for stealing from church, and, finally, Henry himself capturing French town by publicly making threats that would look gross even to Rwandan war criminals. Furthermore, the lack of budget actually works to the film advantage - unburdened with the need to impress the audience with lavish costumes, thousands of extras or magnificent vistas, Branagh tries to suspend viewer's disbelief with naturalism which comes in many forms. For example, although Shakespeare's poetic language might sound artificial and out of place when it comes from the mouths of career soldiers and petty criminals, Branagh's adaptation, as well as very convincing acting performances, make those lines quite natural and believable in the context. Branagh, who lacked budget for extras or technology for CGI, had to forget about truly spectacular depictions of Agincourt, but his version compensates the lack of spectacle with intensity of action. Although their numbers could have hardly filled the ranks of two soccer teams, players and extras (Branagh had to use services of his composer Patrick Doyle) manage to create illusion of terrible slaughter that featured thousands of men by sheer intensity of bloodlust. Branagh uses slow- motion in almost the same manor Peckinpah did and the fighting scenes are very violent despite not being excessively gory. And after the battle, when victorious English begin to march out from the battlefield followed by Patrick Doyle's triumphant soundtrack, their blood-stained faces and muddy clothes speak volumes about the scope of the battle - more than thousands of extras would do.
However, the real strength of HENRY V lies in truly superb acting. Branagh was lucky to assemble great cast, the crŠme de la crŠme of the British actors, and, yet those giants, unlike in similar productions, work together in magnificent harmony. We have the opportunity to see great variety among them, sometimes in rather unusual roles, like Dame Judi Dench who had made a career with roles of tough and powerful women; here she plays rather common wife of mercenary soldier. Branagh's regular Michael Maloney gives another powerful performance as neurotic French Dauphin, while we also have the opportunity to see young Christian Bale as Falstaff's Boy. Branagh, being an actor himself, understood his colleagues very well and almost anyone made great performance. That includes Emma Thompson who was Branagh's wife at the time and with whom Branagh shares charming, although not very necessary seduction scene at the end of the film. Another Branagh regular, Derek Jacobi plays Chorus who is there not only to serve as an excuse for low production values (like in Olivier's version) but also to put events of the play into historical context.
Great acting, great respect for the source material, great experience and great talent - these are all ingredients that made Branagh's HENRY V into one of the best film adaptations of Shakespeare. Even those who aren't enthusiastic about the Bard or those who don't like historical dramas would probably enjoy this superb piece of filmmaking.
(Historical note: While most of period epics tend to sacrifice authenticity for the sake of drama and spectacle, HENRY V takes the different route. Battle of Agincourt is depicted in the way it probably happened, although Branagh decided to follow Shakespeare rather than historical record in some details. For example, unlike the film, English army had more men than French. However, Henry's army was exhausted by long marches and dysentery, and French had more of armoured knights in their ranks. Same as in the film, the battlefield was muddy and that prevented French from using the numerical advantage of their armoured cavalry; their knights were forced to fight on foot, making them an easy target for the favourite English weapon - Welsh longbows that decimated their ranks. Although a great English victory, Battle of Agincourt produced more English and less French casualties than in the figures presented by the film and Shakespeare's play.)
RATING: 9/10 (++++)
Review written on May 6th 2001
Dragan Antulov a.k.a. Drax Fido: 2:381/100 E-mail: dragan.antulov@st.tel.hr E-mail: drax@purger.com
Filmske recenzije na hrvatskom/Movie Reviews in Croatian http://film.purger.com Movie Reviews by Drax http://www.purger.com/users/drax/reviews.htm Movie Reviews on IMDb http://us.imdb.com/ReviewsBy?Dragan+Antulov
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