Saint Crispin's Day Speech - The Film Adaptations
For those of you that haven't talked with me for more than five minutes, allow me to share with you a fun fact about myself you may not know: I love movies. If you hang around me for even a short period of time, you're almost guaranteed to hear a reference to a film, a director, or an actor come from my rarely-closed mouth. That being said, I was jazzed to find out we would be watching and discussing some film adaptations of Shakespeare's work in this course, particularly Kenneth Branagh's Henry V. At the time of writing, we have not yet watched the film in its entirety, nor have I seen it or any other adaptations of the play on my own time, but I was around for the clips we've watched as a class. Since we never got around to talking about the three different versions of the big Saint Crispin's Day speech from Act 4, Scene 3 in class, I thought I'd share my thoughts on each version (Laurence Olivier's 1944 film, Branagh's film released in 1989, and the adaptation featuring Tom Hiddleston from The Hollow Crown series, which, according to IMdb, originally aired in 2012 in the UK), particularly how each presents the character of King Henry V and how they handle the transition from stage to screen.
Olivier's film, as we have discussed, was released during World War II to boost England's morale, so it makes sense that the Henry V featured in this version is portrayed as a great, inspirational leader. He speaks with a commanding voice, loud enough so that all of his men can hear him reply to Westmorland's fear. This Henry wants to be seen as a fearless warrior, one who is certain that he will win. Olivier portrays Henry as upbeat during this scene, as if the King is confident that victory is near. This version also emits lines 24 through 33, in which, in the original text, Henry explains how he would be considered "the most offending soul alive" if it was a sin to covet honor (4.3.29). Also in this section, Shakespeare's Henry reiterates that he doesn't want to share the honor of defeating the French among more soldiers. Perhaps this change was made to avoid giving Olivier's King Henry potential flaws or weaknesses like being covetous of honor. The film also clearly wants us to focus on Henry; the camera does not cut once he appears in frame, and it follows him as he weaves through the crowd of soldiers listening to him. He even ends up above them as he ends his speech, allowing the audience to clearly see him among the large crowd as the camera pans out. At the conclusion of his speech, Henry raises his voice and the crowd cheers, clearly communicating to the audience that they were inspired by their leader's words. As I said, Olivier's volume at the end of speech is met with a wide shot; similarly, his volume is lower when the camera is closer to him, giving the scene some depth of range. Additionally, the clip posted to D2L featured loud, bombastically optimistic music that seemed to overpower the dialogue at points. My guess is that the music was either re-recorded and re-edited into to scene for a recent release of the film, or the author of the video mixed the score of another film onto this one. Branagh's version of the same play features nearly identical music.
Speaking of Sir Kenneth Branagh (yeah, he's knighted), his version of the Saint Crispin's Day speech is much like Olivier's version: Branagh says his lines loudly so the surrounding crowd can hear his character's speech, lines 24 through 33 are omitted (again, most likely to avoid portraying Henry in a bad light), the score is big and inspiring, and the soldiers cheer for their king at the end. The camera (and characters) follow Branagh when he beckons, similar to how Olivier commanded the camera movement in his version. Unlike it's predecessor, however, Branagh's film contains reverse shots of various groups of soldiers, showing the audience their positive reactions. The camera also closes in on Branagh's face, showcasing the actor/director's dynamic facial expressions. In general, I found Branagh's performance much more engaging, genuine, and emotional compared to Olivier's. When he recommends that those "which hath no stomach for this fight" (4.3.35) leave France, Branagh's Henry seems visibly proud and happy of his joke. From what we've seen of the film, it seems to me that this King Henry is a courageous and confident leader, so it makes sense that he'd be making jokes when their odds of victory seem low. Later in the scene, Branagh's Henry seems sincere as he refers to his "happy few" (4.3.60), solidifying, for me, his performance as more captivating than Olivier's. Additionally, the shots of Henry's men and their reactions to his speech made this version feel much more human, and the varied editing and cinematography made this version feel more like a movie scene than a stage performance.
Finally, let's talk about the speech from The Hollow Crown featuring Tom Hiddleston. (Interesting yet useless movie trivia: Hiddleston first appeared in his iconic comic-book role of Loki in the first Thor film, directed by none other than Kenneth Branagh!) From the scene we saw in class and this scene of the Saint Crispin's day speech, it seems that this version of Henry V is much more gritty and realistic than the other two we've seen. The camera appears to be handheld, giving the scene an extremely personal and human feel. Hiddleston is intense and serious, making me think that this King Henry is more of a realist; he recognizes that the battle he's facing won't be easily won, and he's not pretending to believe anything else. This version of the scene also includes lines 24 through 33, perhaps hinting towards a more flawed, rounded portrayal of Henry. As he delivers the speech, Hiddleston moves close to individual men, looking them in the eye. He moves his hands as he speaks, deepening his performance. When he moves his attention to another soldier, the camera follows him. We see reverse shots of each nobleman he speaks to, giving us a more involved position as the audience. When he lists the names of the noblemen, Hiddleston points to each. The names, however, are different than those featured in the original text, the most notable change being the addition of York. In this version, York is portrayed by an African-American actor, and Hiddleston's Henry pauses before he says his name, suggesting that the character plays a significant role. There is also no music during the beginning of his speech, making the scene more intense and forcing viewers to focus solely on the dialogue and performances. Yet as Hiddleston nears the climax of the speech with "We few, we happy few" (4.3.60), a light tone from brass and strings enters, playing the drama of Henry's emotion. Hiddleston appears to tear up during this part, making his a much more emotional performance than Olivier's or Branagh's. When he finishes his speech, Hiddleston slightly raises his voice, but his men do not cheer, fitting the seemingly reserved nature of this adaptation. The noblemen breathe deeply after the speech, convincingly inspired by their King's words.
In summary, I enjoyed Branagh's version of the Saint Crispin's Day speech more than Oliver's, and I feel comfortable making that comparison due to the similarity between the two. Branagh's version simply felt slightly more emotional, dynamic, and personal. On the other hand, Hiddleston's King Henry V took emotion and intensity to another level, and he is certainly no less inspiring. It's difficult for me to compare the two more recent portrayals of Henry V, given their drastic differences in cinematography and performances. It's also weird for me to critique scenes and, more so, performances out of context, since I don't have a good sense of the tones of each film as a whole. And please don't think I'm discounting Olivier's version just because it's older. I have a great respect for classic cinema, it's just that in this case, I prefer the more recent adaptations.
Shakespeare, William, et al. The Norton Shakespeare: Histories. Third ed., W.W. Norton & Company, 2016.
Speaking of Sir Kenneth Branagh (yeah, he's knighted), his version of the Saint Crispin's Day speech is much like Olivier's version: Branagh says his lines loudly so the surrounding crowd can hear his character's speech, lines 24 through 33 are omitted (again, most likely to avoid portraying Henry in a bad light), the score is big and inspiring, and the soldiers cheer for their king at the end. The camera (and characters) follow Branagh when he beckons, similar to how Olivier commanded the camera movement in his version. Unlike it's predecessor, however, Branagh's film contains reverse shots of various groups of soldiers, showing the audience their positive reactions. The camera also closes in on Branagh's face, showcasing the actor/director's dynamic facial expressions. In general, I found Branagh's performance much more engaging, genuine, and emotional compared to Olivier's. When he recommends that those "which hath no stomach for this fight" (4.3.35) leave France, Branagh's Henry seems visibly proud and happy of his joke. From what we've seen of the film, it seems to me that this King Henry is a courageous and confident leader, so it makes sense that he'd be making jokes when their odds of victory seem low. Later in the scene, Branagh's Henry seems sincere as he refers to his "happy few" (4.3.60), solidifying, for me, his performance as more captivating than Olivier's. Additionally, the shots of Henry's men and their reactions to his speech made this version feel much more human, and the varied editing and cinematography made this version feel more like a movie scene than a stage performance.
Finally, let's talk about the speech from The Hollow Crown featuring Tom Hiddleston. (Interesting yet useless movie trivia: Hiddleston first appeared in his iconic comic-book role of Loki in the first Thor film, directed by none other than Kenneth Branagh!) From the scene we saw in class and this scene of the Saint Crispin's day speech, it seems that this version of Henry V is much more gritty and realistic than the other two we've seen. The camera appears to be handheld, giving the scene an extremely personal and human feel. Hiddleston is intense and serious, making me think that this King Henry is more of a realist; he recognizes that the battle he's facing won't be easily won, and he's not pretending to believe anything else. This version of the scene also includes lines 24 through 33, perhaps hinting towards a more flawed, rounded portrayal of Henry. As he delivers the speech, Hiddleston moves close to individual men, looking them in the eye. He moves his hands as he speaks, deepening his performance. When he moves his attention to another soldier, the camera follows him. We see reverse shots of each nobleman he speaks to, giving us a more involved position as the audience. When he lists the names of the noblemen, Hiddleston points to each. The names, however, are different than those featured in the original text, the most notable change being the addition of York. In this version, York is portrayed by an African-American actor, and Hiddleston's Henry pauses before he says his name, suggesting that the character plays a significant role. There is also no music during the beginning of his speech, making the scene more intense and forcing viewers to focus solely on the dialogue and performances. Yet as Hiddleston nears the climax of the speech with "We few, we happy few" (4.3.60), a light tone from brass and strings enters, playing the drama of Henry's emotion. Hiddleston appears to tear up during this part, making his a much more emotional performance than Olivier's or Branagh's. When he finishes his speech, Hiddleston slightly raises his voice, but his men do not cheer, fitting the seemingly reserved nature of this adaptation. The noblemen breathe deeply after the speech, convincingly inspired by their King's words.
In summary, I enjoyed Branagh's version of the Saint Crispin's Day speech more than Oliver's, and I feel comfortable making that comparison due to the similarity between the two. Branagh's version simply felt slightly more emotional, dynamic, and personal. On the other hand, Hiddleston's King Henry V took emotion and intensity to another level, and he is certainly no less inspiring. It's difficult for me to compare the two more recent portrayals of Henry V, given their drastic differences in cinematography and performances. It's also weird for me to critique scenes and, more so, performances out of context, since I don't have a good sense of the tones of each film as a whole. And please don't think I'm discounting Olivier's version just because it's older. I have a great respect for classic cinema, it's just that in this case, I prefer the more recent adaptations.
“The Hollow Crown - Henry V.” IMDb, IMDb.com, www.imdb.com/title/tt2150275/?ref_=ttep_ep4.
Shakespeare, William, et al. The Norton Shakespeare: Histories. Third ed., W.W. Norton & Company, 2016.
Comments
Post a Comment