The Intersection of Shakespeare and Popular Culture; an Intertextual Examination of Some Millennial Shakespearean Film Adaptations
The intersection of Shakespeare and popular culture; an intertextual examination of some millennial Shakespearean film adaptations (1999-2001), with special reference to music.
Marina Gerzic
Bachelor of Arts (Hons): English – University of Western Australia
Thesis supervisor: Professor Bob White
This thesis is presented for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy of the University of Western Australia.
School of Social and Cultural Studies Discipline of English
Year of Submission: 2008
Abstract
This dissertation analyses millennial film adaptations of five of Shakespeare‟s plays with a specific focus on a selection of different kinds of film. These are William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (1999: Dir. Michael Hoffman), 10 Things I Hate About You (1999: Dir. Gil Junger), Hamlet (2000: Dir. Michael Almereyda), Titus (1999: Dir. Julie Taymor), and Scotland, PA (2001: Dir. Billy Morrissette). The films covered include both box office and independent, textually close to Shakespeare‟s words or not, all totally different from each other. This thesis contextualises these film adaptations within the realm of film studies, music theory, Shakespeare performance theory, critical theory and popular culture. Rather than analysing each Shakespearean film adaptation purely on an aesthetic level, my dissertation will identify and analyse each director‟s “reading” of the specific play that is the basis of the cinematic interpretation. The analysis of the filmic adaptation of a literary text always reveals something through what directors put into film as well as what they leave out. The focus of this dissertation is not on how faithful a film is to Shakespeare‟s text, but lies in how the differences between the film and text illuminate what a director perceives as “meaning” in Shakespeare‟s texts. My analysis looks at these Shakespearean film adaptations as representations of specific film genres and styles, products of a specific historical and cultural context, and in some cases with a specific target audience in mind. In my exploration of William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, 10 Things I Hate About You, Hamlet, Titus and Scotland, PA my dissertation examines the motivation and agenda involved in each of these adaptations. Each director has adapted into film one of Shakespeare‟s plays to convey both a certain interpretation of the play and its cultural relevance to their audiences. Traditionally the study of adaptation in film has focused on the question of fidelity between a film and its source text. More recently the focus of film adaptation has shifted towards the analysis and reception of intertextuality. The term intertextuality, as it is used in this dissertation, refers to the ways in which texts are built out of and draw upon prior texts, genres and discourses, a subject which has received comparatively little attention in studies of Shakespeare on film. In particular my thesis builds upon the analysis of popular culture in cinematic
3 adaptations of Shakespeare‟s work, and dissects and analyses each film‟s intertextual layers and use of music. Since the emergence of the medium of film, music has been associated with cinema. With the development of film technology, sound and music are now considered equally important components of films. However, few critics have explored music in Shakespeare on film. This dissertation examines the eclectic musical styles present in Shakespeare on film, which includes such diverse styles as high opera and popular contemporary music. My analysis looks at how music functions in a variety of ways in each film, from conveying emotions through tone, lyrics and placement, to its role in marketing strategies employed by filmmakers.
4
Table of contents
Title page 1
Abstract 3
Table of contents 5
Acknowledgements 7
Statement of candidate contribution 9
Introduction 11
Chapter One William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (Dir. Michael Hoffman, 1999) 25
Chapter Two 10 Things I Hate About You (Dir. Gil Junger, 1999) 53
Chapter Three Hamlet (Dir. Michael Almereyda, 2000) 87
Chapter Four Titus (Dir. Julie Taymor, 1999) 121
Chapter Five Scotland, PA (Dir. Billy Morrissette, 2001) 163
Conclusion 185
References
1. Primary Sources 191
2. Secondary Sources 193
3. Filmography 213
5
Acknowledgments
There are many people I would like to thank who have helped me, both directly and indirectly during the time it took me to write this thesis. These are just a few of them.
I would firstly like to thank Professor R.S. White, whose hard work and brilliant supervision has been the keystone to my candidature.
Thanks also to Dr. Steve Chinna, whose impromptu chats over the last four years have been comforting, and kept me sane and grounded.
I would also like to thank Dr. Gail Jones, whose career continues to inspire me.
Finally very special thanks to my good friends for their support, encouragement and feedback over the last four years.
This dissertation is dedicated to my family, Mum, Dad and my brother Erik, without whose support both financially and emotionally I could not have completed such an immense challenge. Volim te puno.
7
Statement of candidate contribution
This thesis does not contain work that I have published, nor work under review for publication.
9
Introduction
I totally respect Shakespeare's language. That's where I began but the films that are made based on his work, and I know they're not „Shakespeare‟ -- who on earth ever said it was -- but the films based on his language are not properly understood if all you do is criticise them on the grounds that they do not reflect the Quarto or Folio texts. It's irrelevant. In a film you have to make a scenario. You have to establish new ways of framing it, new methods of continuity. You can't just rely on the Shakespearean text. If you want to read the text you can do it in the library.
- Russell Jackson, “An Interview with Russell Jackson,” Early Modern Literary Studies 6.1 (2000).
Shakespeare films are not simply adaptations of a Shakespeare play but are allusions to and commentaries on the play they adapt.
- Michael Anderegg, Cinematic Shakespeare (2004).
This dissertation analyses millennial film adaptations of five of Shakespeare‟s plays - A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, The Taming of The Shrew, Hamlet, Titus Andronicus, and Macbeth, with a specific focus on a selection of different kinds of film. The films covered include both box office and independent, textually close to Shakespeare‟s words or not, all totally different from each other. This thesis contextualises these film adaptations within the realm of film studies, music theory, Shakespeare performance theory, critical theory and popular culture. My analysis looks at these Shakespearean film adaptations as representations of specific film genres and styles, products of a specific historical and cultural context, and in some cases with a specific target audience in mind. In my exploration of William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (1999), 10 Things I Hate About You (1999), Hamlet (2000), Titus (1999) and Scotland, PA (2001), my dissertation examines the motivation and agenda involved in each of these adaptations. Each director has adapted into film one of Shakespeare‟s plays to convey both a certain interpretation of the play and its cultural relevance to their audiences. My thesis dissects and analyses each film‟s intertextual layers, and explores the use of music in these films,1 which like references to popular culture, conveys subtextual meaning.
1 This dissertation is not an analysis of the history of music in cinematic Shakespeare, but an examination of how music is used in several filmed Shakespearean adaptations released during the period 1999-2001.
11
Ever since the silent era of film, William Shakespeare's works have been a popular source for cinematic adaptations. The earliest surviving example of Shakespeare on film is a segment from Herbert Beerbohm Tree‟s version of King John from 1899. The eighty-four foot segment of film comes from Act 5 Scene 7 of the play where the poisoned king lies dying. Kenneth Rothwell explains that the film was released as a visual report on the opening of Tree‟s production, staged at Her Majesty‟s Theatre in September of 1899.2 At the time no one would have considered filmed Shakespeare as a rival to performing his work on stage. Familiar stories and characters such as those from Shakespeare became a popular source for film narratives. Film makers at the time chose to use Shakespeare because his work was in the public domain, and therefore avoided copyright issues. Robert Hamilton Ball notes that an additional drive toward Shakespeare stemmed from the need for respectability in cinema.3 When the silent film industry began to develop in America and Europe, film was originally considered a novelty because it moved, and few people „cared what it said or implied.‟4 By 1908 film had become wide-spread, with over four thousand “Nickelodeons” or small cinema in the United States alone. Within the next decade, the technical resources and popularity of narrative cinema had grown substantially. Narratives involve people, conduct and morality, and favourite film subjects at the time were crude realistic portrayals of crime and risqué subject matter.5 Following the revocation of “moving-picture” licences by New York City mayor George B. McClellan, in 1909 movie theatre owners and film distributors joined together to form the National Board of Censorship of Motion Pictures.6 The mayor believed that the new medium of film degraded the morals of the community. The National Board of Censorship was established in order to endorse films of merit. Producers had to submit their films to the Board before making release prints, and cut out any footage that the Board found objectionable. Shakespearean narratives became a popular source for film as Shakespeare brought a sense of cultural respectability to a medium that was becoming immersed in the rise of what some considered as vulgar subject matter. In „The Moral Development of the Silent Drama‟ (Edison Kinematogram, 15 April 1910) Frank L. Dyer, President of the Motion Pictures
2 Kenneth S Rothwell, Early Shakespeare Movies: How the Spurned Spawned Art (Chipping Campden: International Shakespeare Association, 2000): 2. 3 Robert Hamilton Ball, Shakespeare on Silent Film: A Strange Eventful History (London: 1968): 39. 4 Ball, 39. 5 Ball, 39. 6 The National Board of Censorship of Motion Pictures would later become the National Board of Review of Motion Pictures.
12 Patents Company, confirmed producers‟ assumptions that no one would object to Shakespeare on film:
When the works of Dickens and Victor Hugo, the poems of Browning, the plays of Shakespeare and stories from the Bible are used as a basis for moving pictures, no fair-minded man can deny that the art is being developed along the right lines.7
Dyer encouraged the classic adaptation as a way of uplifting both the cultural and moral status of cinema.
The growth and evolution of film technology and culture encouraged the continuing popularity and reworking of Shakespeare on film. Directors adapting Shakespeare for the screen moved away from more theatrical and “faithful” adaptations of the Bard‟s work8 and began replacing words with images and sounds such as music. Shakespearean narratives were adapted into other genres, for example musicals: Kiss Me Kate (1953) (based on The Taming of the Shrew), West Side Story (1953) (based on Romeo and Juliet), and science fiction: Forbidden Planet (1956) (based on The Tempest). The development of the Shakespeare film auteur also emerged during this time.9 In the last decade there has been a particular explosion of Shakespeare on film. The study of Shakespeare on film is a relatively new area which has attracted serious academic attention only since the 1990s. Of particular note is Stanley Wells‟ seminal volume of Shakespeare Survey (Vol. 39 1987) devoted entirely to Shakespeare on film and television, later republished as Shakespeare and the Moving Image: The Plays on Film and Television (1994).10 Kenneth Branagh‟s film adaptation of Henry V (1989) sparked a renewed interest in Shakespeare on film, which culminated in the Shakespeare film “boom” of the 1990s. The popularity of Shakespeare on film is typified by the popularity and box office success of Baz Luhrmann‟s daring approach to Romeo + Juliet (1996). Branagh astutely summarises the popularity of Shakespeare on
7 Frank L. Dyer cited in William Uricchio and Roberta E. Pearson, Reframing Culture: The Case of the Vitagraph Quality Films (Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1993): 48. 8 Shakespeare himself was an adaptor of others‟ works. 9 Examples include, and are not limited to such directors as Laurence Olivier: Henry V (1944), Hamlet (1948), Richard III (1955), Orson Welles: Macbeth (1949), Othello (1953), Chimes at Midnight (1965), Akira Kurosawa: Throne of Blood (1957), Ran (1985), Franco Zeffirelli: The Taming of the Shrew (1966), Romeo and Juliet (1967), Hamlet (1990), and more recently Kenneth Branagh: Henry V (1989), Much Ado About Nothing (1993), Hamlet (1996), Love‟s Labour‟s Lost (2000), As You Like It (2006). 10 Shakespeare and the Moving Image: The Plays on Film and Television, Anthony Davies and Stanley Wells, eds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994).
13 film in the 1990s; Shakespeare was suddenly making Hollywood executives a lot of money.11 Following the immense success of Luhrmann‟s film, the millenary period of 1999-2001 was a particularly fruitful time for Shakespeare on screen, with over forty filmed Shakespeare adaptations released to varying degrees of box office achievement and popularity. These “new generation” Shakespearean films, termed „Post- Shakespeares‟12 by Michael Anderegg, are modernised renditions of Shakespeare‟s plays which have reconfigured Shakespeare for a modern audience and re-popularised Shakespearean works into popular culture. Shakespeare in film is now a genre with recognised sub-genres of its own; for example the “teen” Shakespeare film, the “Branagh” Shakespeare film, the “straight full-length” Shakespeare film, the “non Shakespeare-speak” Shakespeare film. With this increased interest by audiences for all things “Bard,” came an increase in critical studies not only of Shakespeare‟s plays but also of Shakespeare on film, for example Tom Stoppard‟s successful film Shakespeare in Love (1998). Yet despite this increased interest in Shakespeare and filmed adaptations of his work, to date there has not been a study devoted entirely to the exploration of intertextual reference and music in Shakespeare on film. Other critics have incidentally examined some intertextual references in these adaptations; however, the focal point of their analysis is predominantly other areas, for example Kenneth S Rothwell‟s focus on plot in his filmography of twentieth century adaptations, Shakespeare on Screen (1990). Any mention of intertextuality is usually only brief. Even fewer critics have explored music in Shakespeare on film, and therefore my analysis of music, in particular, sets my dissertation apart from other work done in the field.
The term intertextuality as it is used in this dissertation refers to the ways in which texts are built out of and draw upon prior texts, genres and discourses. The term intertextuality was first introduced by French theorist Julia Kristeva. Kristeva‟s invention of the word intertextuality has its context in her work on semiotics and literature in the 1960s. Through this work she introduced the work of Mikhail Bakhtin, the Russian linguist and literary critic, which was little-known of at the time. In particular she focused on Bakhtin‟s account of the “dialogic” in language. For Bakhtin, all language (and all thought) appears dialogic. By this, Bakhtin posits that everything
11 In her interview with Kenneth Branagh, Ilene Raymond questions him on why Hollywood is currently so enamoured with Shakespeare, to which Branagh quips: „They're only interested in things that make money.‟ Ilene Raymond, “Adapting the Bard: An Interview with Kenneth Branagh,” Creative Screenwriting 5.2 (1998): 23. 12 Michael Anderegg, Cinematic Shakespeare (Rowman & Littlefield, 2004): 177-202.
14 anybody ever says exists in response to things that have been said before. So a person‟s utterance „refutes, affirms, supplements, and relies on the others, presupposes them to be known, and somehow takes them into account.‟13 Therefore a dialogic work carries on a continual dialogue with other works of literature and other authors; it both informs and is continually informed by previous work. The dialogic understanding of language is a major starting point for the concept of intertextuality. Building on the work of Bakhtin, Kristeva refers to a text in terms of two axes. A “horizontal axis” connects the author and reader of a text and a “vertical axis” connects the text to other texts.14 Every text is therefore double, both „an absorption and a transformation of another.‟ 15 Uniting these two axes are shared interpretive frameworks which are used by both producers and interpreters of texts. Every text and every reading of these texts depends on these codes. Kristeva argues that every text is „from the outset under the jurisdiction of other discourses which impose a universe on it.‟16 Rather than confining our attention to the structure of a text, Kristeva suggests that we should study how the structure came into being. This involves situating the text „within the totality of previous or synchronic texts‟17 of which it was a transformation. Kristeva argues that signifying systems are created by the manner in which they transform earlier signifying systems. A text is not simply the product of a single author, but of its relationship to other texts, and to the structures of language itself. What Kristeva suggests is that a text should be analysed with regard to its multiple influences.
Inspired by Kristeva‟s work on Bakhtin, Roland Barthes provides some important ideas on intertextuality. In his essay „Death of the Author‟ (1967) Barthes criticises the tendency of readers to consider aspects of the author‟s identity in order to extract meaning from their work. Barthes argues that a text does not consist of a line of words releasing a single meaning, „the “message” of the Author-God.‟18 Abolishing both the notion of an author and of origins, Barthes defines a text as a „tissue of quotations
13 M.M Bakhtin cited in: The Bakhtin reader: selected writings of Bakhtin, Medvedev and Voloshinov, Pam Morris, ed (London: E. Arnold, 1994): 85. 14 Julia Kristeva, Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art, Leon S. Roudiez, ed Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine, and Leon S. Roudiez, trans (New York: Columbia University Press, 1980): 69. 15 Kristeva, Desire in Language, 66. 16 Kristeva cited in Jonathan Culler, The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981): 105. 17 Kristeva cited in Rosalind Coward, Language and materialism: developments in semiology and the theory of the subject, Rosalind Coward and John Ellis, eds (London; Boston: Routledge and Paul, 1977): 52. 18 Roland Barthes, Image, Music, Text, Stephen Heath, trans (London: Fontana, 1977): 146.
15 drawn from the innumerable centres of culture.‟19 Barthes argues that a text is a „multidimensional space in which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash.‟20 For Barthes, the author is not as important to the meaning of a work as are cultural context and intertextuality, each of which allows the text to come into being:
Any text is a new tissue of past citations. Bits of code, formulae, rhythmic models, fragments of social languages, etc., pass into the text and are redistributed within it, for there is always language before and around the text. 21
Both Kristeva and Barthes replace the concept of an author who “creates” a text, with that of intertextuality, a mosaic, blending or intersecting of various texts. What an author intends does not matter since only other texts, and not an author, can supply “meaning” which is multiple. Power shifts from the author, who becomes a scriptor who combines pre-existing texts in new ways, to the reader, whose scope of interpretation is opened up.22 The notion of subject as author can be applied when talking about cinema, as film is a collaborative medium. The director plays a leading role, but others are also influential, for example the film‟s composer, production designer, and actors starring in the film. Auteur theory offers a possible resolution to the reading of film as collaborative medium. In auteur theory the role of the director is the equivalent to the role of the author. Robert Stam addresses auteur theory in his ideas on intertextuality.
Later refinements to the term intertextuality by theorist John Fiske make a distinction between different levels of intertextuality.23 In his work Television Culture (1987) Fiske was one of the first scholars to discuss intertextuality within media studies. Fiske draws upon concepts introduced by Kristeva and distinguishes intertextuality into two types, vertical and horizontal:
19 Barthes, Image, Music, Text, 146. 20 Barthes, Image, Music, Text, 146. 21 Roland Barthes, “Theory of the Text,” Untying the Text: a post-structuralist reader, Robert Young, ed (London: Routledge, 1981): 39. 22 Barthes, Image, Music, Text, 145-147. 23 French theorist Michael Riffaterre had made a distinction between two types of intertextuality, weak or “aleatory” and strong or “obligatory,” prior to John Fiske‟s work in 1987. Riffaterre‟s ideas on intertextuality have their context in the study of poetry, and so I have chosen to highlight Fiske‟s work on media culture as it relates closer with the medium of film. For more detailed description of Riffaterre‟s ideas on intertextuality see Michael Riffaterre, The Semiotics of Poetry (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978).
16 Horizontal relations are those between the primary texts that are more or less explicitly linked, usually along the axes of genre, character, or content. Vertical intertextuality is that between a primary text…and other texts of a different type that refer explicitly to it.24
While Fiske‟s work is predominantly focused on the sphere of television, his analysis of different forms of horizontal intertextuality, such as genre and character, can be applied to film studies. Furthermore, in Fiske‟s discussions on vertical intertextuality he distinguishes between secondary texts that refer to the primary text (such as studio publicity and film criticism - both academic and journalistic) and tertiary texts that refer to the primary text (Fiske refers to a viewer's conversations about a film, including gossip and letters to the press25). The distinction between the two is commonly used in the study of media culture, and is particularly useful in analysis of film.
This dissertation focuses on film adaptations of Shakespeare‟s plays; therefore the work of Robert Stam is of particular relevance. Stam has published numerous works on film theory and history, and is a recent example of someone who discusses intertextuality as it relates to film, in particular film adaptations. Traditionally the study of adaptation in film has focused on the question of fidelity between a film and its source text. More recently, the focus of film adaptation has shifted towards the analysis and reception of intertextuality. The focus of critical studies of Shakespeare on film has equally shifted away from the issue of fidelity between Shakespeare‟s text and cinematic interpretations of his work. However, the analysis of intertextuality has received comparatively little attention in studies of Shakespeare on film. Stephen M. Buhler highlights the lack of study of intertextuality in cinematic adaptation of Shakespeare‟s work in his statement that „too often, Shakespeare films have been considered in isolation from other cinematic works and from each other.‟26 This dissertation attempts to address the lack of significant analysis of intertextual references in cinematic adaptations of Shakespeare‟s works. In his studies on intertextuality, Robert Stam argues that film is constructed out of a web of intertextual relations, in which features such as genre, historical references, actors‟ “stardom,” and auteurs‟ penchants and choices compete with the source text in
24 John Fiske, Television Culture (London and New York: Routledge, 1987): 108. 25 Online reviews and discussion by users at websites such as the Internet Movie Database
17 determining meaning. For Stam, film is conceived as part of an ongoing dialogical process and bears the traces of multiple intertexts:
Filmic adaptations get caught up in the ongoing whirl of intertextual reference and transformation, of texts generating other texts in an endless process of recycling, transformation, and transmutation, with no clear point of origin.27
Through combination with other texts in the intertextual exchange, previous text material loses its special status. All intertexts therefore become of equal importance in the intertextual process. Stam borrows Bakhtin‟s concept of dialogicism and proposes the idea of dialogic intertextuality, which he characterizes as:
the infinite and open-ended possibilities generated by all the discursive practices of a culture, the entire matrix of communicative utterances within which the artistic text is situated, and which reach the text not only through recognizable influences, but also through a subtle process of dissemination.28
For Stam, intertextuality is not reduced to matters of influence or source of a text, but „allows for dialogical relations with other arts and media, both popular and erudite.‟29 Intertextuality is therefore a valuable theoretical concept precisely because it does not limit itself to one medium.30 Intertextuality relates a text to other systems of representation, and as such, Stam sees it as a possible answer to the limitations of textual analysis and genre theory in the study of film.31
More recent analysis of intertextuality has come from Linda Hutcheon, who discusses the term as it relates to postmodern theory. Hutcheon‟s preferred term is parody, which she sees as synonymous with „ironic quotation, pastiche, appropriation, or intertextuality.‟32 Graham Allen notes that in the index to Hutcheon‟s work The Politics of Postmodernism (2002) the entry for „Intertextuality‟ simply directs the reader to the entry for „Parody.‟33 Allen argues that this substitution leads to unhelpful
27 Robert Stam, Literature Through Film: Realism, Magic and the Art of Adaptation (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005): 5. 28 Robert Stam, Film Theory: An Introduction (Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell, 2000): 202. 29 Stam, Film Theory: An Introduction, 203. 30 Stam, Film Theory: An Introduction, 203. 31 Stam, Film Theory: An Introduction, 202. 32 Linda Hutcheon, The Politics of Postmodernism, 2nd ed (London; New York: Routledge, 2002): 89. 33 Graham Allen, Intertextuality (London: Routledge, 2000): 189.
18 complications.34 Hutcheon‟s oversimplification of the term parody does not fully take into account both its ridiculing or humorous potential. Hutcheon further defines parody as a text which „paradoxically both incorporates and challenges that which it parodies.‟35 A parodic text imitates convention with critical difference. For Hutcheon parody is „not nostalgic; it is always critical,‟36 and as such does not fit in with how certain references are used by directors in their cinematic interpretations of Shakespeare. I have chosen not to refer to Hutcheon‟s idea of parody in this dissertation, as not all the intertextual references I highlight are cited in order to be made fun of. That is not to say the use of parody is completely absent in these films, and therefore any instance where a director does use intertextuality in a critical or ironic way shall be noted.
The first major sources for this dissertation are the five film adaptations of Shakespeare‟s plays. These are William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (1999: Dir. Michael Hoffman), 10 Things I Hate About You (1999: Dir. Gil Junger), Hamlet (2000: Dir. Michael Almereyda), Titus (1999: Dir. Julie Taymor), and Scotland, PA (2001: Dir. Billy Morrissette). All are recently released films from the period 1999- 2001 and are available as a Digital Video Recording (I shall refer to the abbreviated term of “DVD”). Within the realm of film studies a close reading of a film is a detailed examination of the film itself. Rather than analysing each Shakespearean film adaptation purely on an aesthetic level, my dissertation will identify and analyse each director‟s “reading” of the specific play that is the basis of the cinematic interpretation. The analysis of the filmic adaptation of a literary text always reveals something through what directors put into film as well as what they leave out. The focus of this dissertation is not on how faithful a film is to Shakespeare‟s text, but lies in how the differences between the film and text illuminate what a director perceives as “meaning” in Shakespeare‟s texts. My thesis will take a detailed look at both Shakespeare‟s texts and film, and how each director looks at both text and film. I have chosen to use current editions (all from New Cambridge Shakespeare editions) of each play-text I refer to, as these editions reflect ideas that would have been familiar to the directors at the time of
34 Allen suggests that at times Hutcheon would „fare better if she used the term intertextuality rather than…reshape and redirect notions of parody.‟ Allen, 190. 35 Linda Hutcheon, A Poetics of Postmodernism: History, theory, fiction (New York : Routledge, 1988): 11. 36 Hutcheon, The Politics of Postmodernism, 89.
19 filming.37 The majority of critical material in this dissertation will come from journal articles and books, especially those on Shakespeare on film. I am indebted to the work of Kenneth Rothwell, whose filmography of twentieth century adaptations of Shakespeare on film has been a useful source of information, particularly those films which are currently out of print. A more updated filmography is found in Shakespeare into Film (2002), by James M Welsh, Richard Vela, and John C Tibbets.38 Expanding the work of Rothwell, Shakespeare into Film provides both valuable commentary on each play and its filmic interpretations. Of particular interest is the information on films released since the publication of Rothwell‟s Shakespeare on Screen, which was published at the beginning of the explosion of Shakespeare on film in the 1990s. All but one film addressed in this thesis is mentioned in Shakespeare into Film.39
My dissertation is chiefly influenced by recent critics such as Kathy Howlett in Framing Shakespeare on Film (2000), who have moved away from issues of fidelity between Shakespeare and cinematic interpretations of his work. Taking on the premise of “is it Shakespeare?,” Howlett demonstrates the flexibility of Shakespeare on film, and how an audience‟s understanding can be manipulated by a director‟s cinematic technique. This dissertation shall highlight the way in which music and intertextual references fit into this “manipulation of understanding” in Shakespeare on film. The connection between intertextuality and a director‟s technique in Shakespeare on film is something which Samuel Crowl highlights in his book Shakespeare Observed: Studies in Performance on Stage and Screen (1992). Crowl‟s work focuses on the intertextual dialogue between contemporary film and stage versions of Shakespeare‟s plays. His discussion of the Dieterle/Reinhardt version of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (1935) is useful to my analysis of Michael Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, which is heavily influenced by the Dieterle/Reinhardt film.40 Samuel Crowl has written many articles on performance aspects of Shakespeare, and Shakespeare Observed predominantly focuses on how intertextuality relates to performance in Shakespearean
37 I have made note where a director has been influenced by another (possibly older) edition of Shakespeare‟s play-text. 38 Shakespeare into Film, James M. Welsh, Richard Vela and John C. Tibbetts, eds (New York: Checkmark Books, 2002). 39 The exception Scotland, PA, ran in limited theatre release in 2001 and was not released onto DVD until late 2002, well after the publication of Shakespeare into Film that same year. 40 Samuel Crowl has also written on Hoffman‟s adaptation (“Michael Hoffman‟s film of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream” Shakespeare Bulletin 17.3 Summer (1999): 41-42) as well as Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet (“Michael Almereyda‟s film of Hamlet” Shakespeare Bulletin 18.4 Fall (2000): 39-40) and Julie Taymor‟s Titus (“Julie Taymor‟s Film of Titus” Shakespeare Bulletin 18.1 Winter (2000): 46-47), all of which I analyse in this dissertation.
20 adaptations on stage and screen. My dissertation differs from Crowl‟s work, as performance is only one aspect of my analysis of cinematic Shakespeare; others include, but are not limited to a film‟s score and soundtrack and production design. This dissertation takes a similar approach to the work of Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray in Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle (2000) which reads Shakespeare films of the 1990s as a device with which directors confront the millenary anxieties associated with the transition from one century to another. My analysis of Shakespeare on cinema centres on recent criticism of millenary film adaptations, such as that from Burnett, Wray, Courtney Lehmann, Elsie Walker, Michael Anderegg in Post Shakespeare and both volumes of Shakespeare the Movie (1997 and 2003) edited by Richard Burt and Lynda E Boose.41 This recent criticism is valuable to my dissertation as it engages with and analyses the sociology of popular culture in Shakespeare on film. My thesis builds upon this analysis of popular culture in cinematic adaptations of Shakespeare‟s work, and highlights the impact of music and its importance along with that of intertextuality in understanding these films. Along with academic journals and books, this dissertation refers to film reviews, interviews with directors and cast and other online media. The „digitalization and globalization‟42 of Shakespeare on film has led to an increase in the availability of such tertiary sources online. Film reviews are an invaluable source of information about the popular culture surrounding a film‟s release. Interviews with the cast and director of a film can also offer great insight into the production of a film. Often these online sources of information are the only source of critical material about a film. These reviews and interviews are intended to supplement critical material found in journals and books on Shakespeare and each film adaptation, and as such are not the focus of my analysis.
Since the emergence of the medium of film, music has been associated with cinema. During the days of silent film, music was the only source of sound in theatres.43 With the development of film technology, sound and music are now considered equally
41 Shakespeare the Movie: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video, Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 1997). Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD, Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 2003). The articles in Shakespeare the Movie II are particularly useful as several focus on films which I address in this dissertation, the exception being Julie Taymor‟s Titus. 42 Richard Burt and Lynda E. Boose, “Introduction: Editors‟ cut,” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, Video and DVD, Richard Burt and Lynda E. Boose, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 2003): 2. 43 For a detailed examination of the history of sound in silent film see Rick Altman, Silent Film Sound (New York: Columbia University Press, 2004).
21 important components of films. There are various kinds of music in films, defined according to their placement during the film‟s production and also their placement within the diegesis in the film. By diegesis I refer to what Michel Chion calls the „point of hearing,‟44 the effect of positioning the sound source in film in relation to the point of view of the camera.45 In this dissertation I will not focus on all types of music used in film, and therefore I will only give the definitions of the types of film music that are relevant to the particular films. Music in film falls under two main types, diegetic and nondiegetic. Diegetic music is sound that occurs on screen, such as when an actor sings or plays an instrument, whereas nondiegetic music is sound clearly not produced within the screen space, such as a film‟s score or soundtrack, which is added to the film in post-production. Each of these types of film music tends to be split into two further categories,46 redundant music and contrapuntal music. Robert Stam defines redundant music as film music which „simply reinforces the emotional tone of the sequence.‟47 Redundant music underlines the significance of emotional scenes in a film. Contrapuntal music is described as music which goes against the dominant emotion of a scene or sequence.48 Stam notes that the main role of music in film is directing our emotional responses and regulating our sympathies.49 This dissertation shall show that certain scenes in each of the five cinematic interpretations of Shakespeare‟s plays are reinforced through the presence of music. As well as the film adaptations of Shakespeare‟s plays, where relevant I shall refer to a film‟s soundtrack and score. The majority of the music from the cinematic adaptations analysed in this dissertation has been released on Compact Disc (I shall refer to the abbreviated term of “CD”). Often the booklet that accompanies the CD soundtrack to a film contains linear notes from the composer, musical artists, and occasionally the director of the film. These notes reveal how and why certain music was chosen to be used in the film; as such both the soundtrack and booklet are an invaluable source in my analysis of how music is used to
44 Stam, Film Theory, 218. 45 Robert Stam, New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics: Structuralism, Post-structuralism, and Beyond, Robert Stam, Robert Burgoyne and Sally Flitterman-Lewis, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 1992): 62. 46 Michel Chion distinguishes between three possible types of film music. Empathetic music „participates in and conveys the emotions of the character.‟ A-empathetic music is defined as „music that displays an apparent indifference toward dramatically intense incidents, simply pursuing its rather mechanical course, providing a distanced perspective on the individual dramas of the diegesis.‟ Finally, didactic contrapuntal music „deploys music in a distanciated manner in order to elicit a precise, usually ironic, idea in the spectators mind.‟ Stam, New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics, 63. In this dissertation I shall only focus on the use of empathetic and didactic contrapuntal music in the five film adaptations of Shakespeare‟s plays. 47 Stam, New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics, 63. 48 Stam, New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics, 63. 49 Stam, Film Theory: An Introduction, 221.
22 convey subtextual meaning. In the case of Billy Morrissette‟s Scotland, PA (2001) there is no official soundtrack release for the film. I have made note throughout this dissertation where I reference songs that are not present on a film‟s soundtrack or score, but which are used during a scene. The reason behind a song‟s omission in a film can be just an important as another song‟s inclusion in establishing “meaning.”
23
Michael Hoffman’s William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night’s Dream (1999)
Michael Hoffman sets his film William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night's Dream (1999) is in late nineteenth century Tuscany. The various musical selections present in Hoffman‟s film include a classically inspired score by Simon Boswell as well as a choice of operatic arias from the Bel Canto tradition and incidental music from A Midsummer Night‟s Dream by Felix Mendelssohn (1842). These references and echoes not only serve to complement the fin-de-siècle Tuscan world in which the film is set, but are used as a signifier, a means to guide the audience through Hoffman‟s reading of the play. Following on from my discussion here of the use of music in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, I intend to demonstrate that intertextual references are used in a similar fashion in Hoffman‟s film in order to navigate the audience through his interpretation of the play. William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream is constructed from various references including allusions to other films, both as direct references and associations that come from the actors cast in the film, as well as styles of art and specific artists that were the inspiration for the visual design of the film. These associations are, in some cases, mediated through other films of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, such as those directed by William Dieterle/Max Reinhardt (1935), and to a lesser extent Celestino Coronada (Sueño de noche de verano, 1985), both of which also use music functionally in conveying meaning.
Through the use of the operatic arias Verdi‟s „Brindisi,‟ Donizetti‟s „Una furtiva lagrima,‟ Bellini‟s „Casta Diva,‟ and Mascagni‟s „Intermezzo‟ in Hoffman‟s film, the comedy of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream transforms into what can be considered a tragic-comedy, emphasising the tragic story of Nick Bottom, who is now a principal character. Even for those spectators with no opera knowledge the mere presence of opera music during the film suggests a connection to a sense of both “high” culture and “theatricality” associated with opera. Douglas Lanier suggests that from its opening scene, Hoffman‟s film „situates itself firmly within the conventions of heritage
25 cinema.‟50 This is a somewhat limited argument, since through this Lanier underestimates Bottom‟s role in Hoffman‟s film. Lanier goes on to argue that Bottom acts (within the conventions of heritage cinema) as a way to qualify Theseus‟ position in the film as governor of all he surveys. Bottom becomes a figure that is representative of what Lanier sees as the desires that heritage cinema are calculated to prompt, that is an aristocratic life of leisure and “high” culture.51 Bottom also becomes representative of the recognition that these desires, what Lanier terms „the governing fantasy‟52 of the film (represented in the figure of Theseus), are simply that, a fantasy. By relegating him to the status of „aristocratic wannabe‟53 and figure of „masculinist nostalgia,‟54 Lanier does not take into account Bottom‟s specific realignment to central character and focus of Hoffman‟s film, something which I will argue is tied in with the use of music within William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.
Lanier defines a major characteristic of heritage cinema as „nostalgia for an upper-class lifestyle and its material accoutrements,‟55 and so in Hoffman‟s film the presence of opera both on the soundtrack and as a physical object (the vinyl records) suggests opera as an example of “high” aristocratic culture. Sarah Mayo elaborates on this argument, noting that the operatic arias used in Hoffman‟s film are fairly recognisable and are divorced from their original context, and furthermore are performed by relatively “big named” operatic stars such as Luciano Pavarotti and Cecilia Bartoli. As a result, the presence of the arias in the film act not only as exemplars of “high” culture and accompany the time and place in which Hoffman has chosen to set his film, but also act as an opera‟s „greatest hits.‟56 This marketing strategy is reinforced by the soundtrack‟s packaging where on the back of the soundtrack CD case attention is drawn to the presence of what are referred to as “operatic superstars” within the soundtrack, their names printed in bold on the track-listing.57 The inner sleeve of the booklet that
50 Douglas M. Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality: the fate of the Shakespearean stage in the Midsummer Night‟s Dreams of Hoffman, Noble, and Edzard,” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD, Lynda Boose and Richard Burt, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 2003) 155. 51 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 156. 52 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 156. 53 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 156. 54 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 158. 55 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 155. 56 Sarah Mayo, “„A Shakespeare for the People?‟ Negotiating the Popular in Shakespeare in Love and Michael Hoffman's A Midsummer Night's Dream,” Textual Practice 17.2 Summer (2003): 305. 57 William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night's Dream: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack, Simon Boswell, Twentieth Century Film Corporation/ Monarchy Enterprises B.V/Regency Entertainment (USA) Inc/The Decca Record Company, AUDIO CD, US/UK, 1999.
26 accompanies the soundtrack also informs the listener as to the original Decca58 recording from where the tracks present can be originally found. Included with this is an advertisement for other releases by Decca artists who are on the film‟s soundtrack, such as Renee Flemming. Mayo‟s suggestion that the soundtrack is an opera list of “greatest hits” also works with what Linda Charnes terms „the cultural commodity of casting.‟59 The focus of the advertising and merchandise of Hoffman‟s film adaptation William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream are “bankable”; well-known (read: mostly American) cast members of the film, with Kevin Kline, Michelle Pfeiffer, Stanley Tucci, Callista Flockhart, and Rupert Everett gracing promotional material for the film. The casting of “stars” in this film acts as a way of bringing allusions to other roles these “stars” have played, and thus this example of intertextual referencing in Hoffman‟s film acts, like music, as a signifier. Mayo suggests that the original context of the operatic arias used in Hoffman‟s film may be divorced to some extent from their original context. However, the original context of the arias, the operas the individual arias come from and the place and meaning of each aria in that opera, bears some relation to the new context in which the song is used. This idea is especially true to those viewers who may have more than a rudimentary knowledge of opera.
Michael Hoffman explains his decision to make use of operatic arias in his film adaptation William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream on the inner sleeve of the booklet that accompanies the soundtrack. Hoffman states that his decision to use these arias came from a search to discover the “popular music” of late nineteenth century Italy, the choice of setting for his film. This popular music, Hoffman reveals, was opera.60 Hoffman‟s choice of operatic arias therefore comes from operas by various Italian composers from the Bel Canto tradition. Bel Canto, literally meaning „beautiful singing,‟61 is specifically an Italian style of opera singing that has a light, bright quality, and its use melds with the nineteenth century Italian setting of the film. Hoffman‟s reasoning for his choice of music combined with his reading of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream as a story „about love and the obstacles people face‟62 and his subsequent visual
58 Decca is the recording company who published the soundtrack to Hoffman‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. 59 Linda Charnes, “Dismember me: Shakespeare, paranoia, and the logic of mass culture,” Shakespeare Quarterly 48.1 Spring (1997): 7. 60 Michael Hoffman quoted on the inner sleeve of the booklet accompanying the soundtrack. Boswell, 1999. 61 “The Art of Bel Canto and the Romantic Generation,” Opera World, 27 Jul 2004
27 rewriting of Bottom‟s history, transforming him into a „hopeless dreamer‟63 and tragic figure central to the story of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, alters what was once considered a comedy into the tragic story of Nick Bottom the weaver. In Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream the character of Bottom is privileged over all other characters. This change in focus comes from Hoffman‟s anxiety over there being no central figure in previous film versions of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.64 Hoffman himself saw the absence of a central figure in A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, considered as more of an ensemble affair, as contributing to a lack of cinematic focus in previous films versions of the play, compared to film versions of plays such as Hamlet and Macbeth. Interestingly Hoffman refers to plays that are tragedies, and this can be considered as indicative of his choice to use operatic arias in order to present his film adaptation of as the tragic story of Bottom the weaver rather then simply as straight comedy. A similar realignment, this time of Puck as central character, is seen in the 1985 filmed version of the production of the play by Celestino Coronada, and in many stage productions of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.
Hoffman‟s reading of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream as a “proto-tragedy” has its basis in the similarities that exists with another of Shakespeare‟s plays the tragedy Romeo and Juliet. These similarities include themes of order and disorder, two “star-crossed lovers” whose parents disapprove of them being together.65 The story of Pyramus and Thisbe can also be taken as a parody of Romeo and Juliet. A Midsummer Night‟s Dream is a comedy in the sense that it is a play in which the major characters undergo various misfortunes, which are put right near the end of the play, and the play has more or less a happy ending. In A Midsummer Night‟s Dream the problems of the young lovers are “put right” relatively early in the play. At the end of act three Puck promises that „all shall be well‟ (III, iii, 47-48)66 and remedies his earlier mistake of enchanting Lysander. The beginning of Act IV sees Titania also remedied of her infatuation with Bottom (IV, i, 70-74), who is restored to his proper self. The remainder of Act IV and all of Act V acts as a celebration of true love (and of true selves) restored and a celebration of the marriages that follows this restoration. Romeo and Juliet is similar to A Midsummer
63 Mayo, 298. 64 Michael LoMonico, “„Is All Our Company Here?‟ An Interview with Michael Hoffman,” Shakespeare: A magazine for Shakespeare teachers and enthusiasts 3.2 Summer (1999): 9-13. 65 In A Midsummer Night‟s Dream only Hermia‟s father is present. 66 Line citations from A Midsummer Night‟s Dream refer to the 1984 edition, edited by R.A Foakes. William Shakespeare, A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, R.A Foakes, ed (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984).
28 Night‟s Dream in that it is a play in which the major characters undergo various misfortunes, and these are also more or less resolved. Though there has also been a marriage in Romeo and Juliet, this comes much earlier in the play (II, v) and instead of being a celebration is the cause of further problems and conflict. Romeo and Juliet differs from A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, because there is no happy ending here, rather the death of the major characters. The similarities between the two plays show how easily a comedy can become a tragedy by a few changes in circumstance. The story of Romeo and Juliet, and, for that matter, Pyramus and Thisbe,67 demonstrate how the story of Hermia and Lysander could have potentially ended.68
The connection between the tragedy of Romeo and Juliet and A Midsummer Night‟s Dream is reflected in Michael Hoffman‟s film by the transformation of the character of Bottom. Taking Romeo and Juliet as an example, a marriage earlier on in Shakespeare‟s play foreshadows a tragedy of some sort will occur later in the play. Hoffman‟s film opens with Bottom as the only character, besides Titania and Oberon, who is married. Past performances of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream both on stage and film, such as Adrian Noble‟s production of the play for the Royal Shakespeare Company (1996),69 have used a “doubling up” of actors portraying Theseus and Hippolyta and Oberon and Titania in order to establish a connection between the two “worlds” presented in the play. However, in Hoffman‟s film a connection is instead established between the two married couples, Titania and Oberon and Bottom and his wife. The marital strife in the fairy world is mirrored in the unhappy marriage of Bottom and his wife. While Titania and Oberon reconcile, Hoffman implies in the ending of his film that Bottom‟s marriage will now come to an end, signalled by Bottom‟s removal of his wedding ring. No death has occurred as in Romeo and Juliet; however, Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream ends on the tragic break-up of a marriage, rather than on its usual “happy ending” or comic resolution of the various marriages. By making William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream more like a tragedy and casting Kevin
67 Hoffman associates Pyramus and Thisbe with other tragedies further through a visual gag in the film. As the other performers are rehearsing while the Mechanicals are waiting for word from the Duke the audience sees one group of players is rehearsing the Greek tragedy Oedipus Rex and another pair of players is rehearsing a scene from Shakespeare's play Othello. 68 In his filmed adaptation Sueño de noche de verano (1985) director Celestino Coranada explicitly connects A Midsummer Night‟s Dream and Romeo and Juliet. During their rehearsals in the woods, a play script copy of Romeo and Juliet is clearly visible. The Mechanical‟s production of Pyramus and Thisbe becomes a performance of Romeo and Juliet on stilts; Pyramus is referred to as Romeo and Thisbe is called Juliet. 69 Adrian Noble‟s Royal Shakespeare Company production of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream was originally staged in 1995, and later filmed and released on video and DVD in 1996. A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Dir. Adrian Noble, Buena Vista Home Video, VHS, 1996.
29 Kline, a well known actor (who plays Bottom as the central figure of the film) the lack of “cinematic focus” is overcome. Hoffman invites the audience to read his film as “Bottom‟s Midsummer Night‟s Dream.”
Russell Lack notes that music „is capable of, and indeed usually does succeed in, stimulating emotional responses that lie beyond language itself.‟70 In Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream operatic arias are used primarily to lead the audience towards conclusions about the emotional state of the character who is presented as the central character of the film, Nick Bottom. For much of the film we are encouraged to sympathise with the character of Bottom. The focus on, and sympathy for the character of Bottom is firstly achieved through director Hoffman‟s addition of a shrewish wife figure for Bottom. There is no corresponding play-text to justify her inclusion in the film, and therefore her presence is purely an invention by Hoffman. The decision to include a wife character to explain Bottom‟s motivation is not limited to Hoffman‟s film adaptation. Dieterle/Reinhardt used a similar device in their film adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream but later cut this from the final film. This “shrewish” disapproving wife figure, unlike Titania, does not appreciate what Bottom has to offer, and Bottom‟s marriage is presented as the source of his disillusionment and the cause of Bottom‟s delusions of grandeur and his dreams of being an aristocratic „lady killer,‟71 a dream that is realised through his encounter with Titania. Director Hoffman alters the “relationship” that Bottom has with Titania from what Megan Matchinske suggests is „clearly coded as monstrous,‟72 into a relationship that is a viable alternative to his unhappy marriage.73 The audience of Hoffman‟s film empathises with Bottom as he represents „the hopeful romantic in all of us,‟74 and his disillusionment with life and love is presented as the site of the film‟s tragedy. This disillusionment is aurally illustrated through the use of four specific operatic arias during the film, Verdi‟s „Brindisi,‟ Donizetti‟s „Una furtiva lagrima,‟ Bellini‟s „Casta Diva,‟ and Mascagni‟s
70 Russell Lack, Twenty four frames under: a buried history of film music (London: Quartet Books, 1997) 287. 71 Megan M. Matchinske, “Putting Bottom on Top: Gender and the Married Man in Michael Hoffman's Dream,” Shakespeare Bulletin 21.4 Winter (2003): footnote 21, 55. 72 Matchinske, 45. 73 Putting aside Titania‟s bewitchment, her relationship with Bottom could also be considered an alternative relationship to a marriage between Titania and Oberon that is in strife. Titania is displeased with Oberon as he only wants one thing from her, the changeling boy, whereas Bottom wants nothing from her, except her love. 74 Courtney Lehmann, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Agenda: How Shakespeare and the Renaissance are Taking the Rage out of Feminism,” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.2 (2002): 269.
30 „Intermezzo,‟ and this use of various operatic arias „infuses nearly everything Bottom does with a certain pathos.‟75
The first of the arias used in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream is a relatively upbeat and spritely aria, „Brindisi‟ from Giuseppe Verdi‟s opera La Traviata. La Traviata76 tells the tragic love story between Violetta, a reformed prostitute and Alfredo. Violetta throws a party to celebrate her release from hospital, where she had been treated for consumption.77 When Alfredo appears, he performs a drinking song for the assembled partygoers. Alfredo sings the aria, „Brindisi,‟ a drinking song. „Brindisi‟ is initially heard during the opening sequence of Hoffman‟s film set in the piazza of Mount Athena. Here the audience is introduced to the various Mechanicals before finally being given its first glimpse of Bottom. Kenneth Rothwell suggests that this use of „Brindisi‟ echoes „the lighteheartedness of the citizens as they stroll the exhibitionistic hour of the promenade.‟78 More specifically this aria serves to bring the focus of this opening scene on the character of Nick Bottom, and it becomes an audio cue to Bottom‟s overblown and ostentatious character. In the original context Alfredo sings the aria „Brindisi‟ after he is convinced by Gastone (a party guest) and Violetta to show off his voice. Hoffman‟s use of the aria accompanies Bottom‟s “showing off” to the villagers. Visually and aurally Bottom is presented as the centre of attention as he sits at a café in the piazza. He is the last to arrive at the Mechanicals‟ meeting where they distribute parts for the “competition” of performances that has been organised as part of Theseus‟ wedding celebration. Bottom stands out from the other Mechanicals, various artisans and traders, in his crisp white suit, more appropriate attire for a “man- about-town” than a weaver. Hoffman has moved this scene to the public space of the piazza, and the preparations and dividing up of parts for the performance becomes a public spectacle where Bottom (and Kevin Kline) can “perform” and impress the locals (especially the ladies) with his acting abilities. As with the original aria in La Traviata that points to a tragedy to be, the use here of „Brindisi‟ is also tinged with a sense of underlying pathos. Scenes of Bottom preening in front of a store window and flirting with local women, are inter-cut with images of a braying donkey, foreshadowing
75 Josh Cabat, “Michael Hoffman‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream,” Shakespeare: A magazine for Shakespeare teachers and enthusiasts, Last updated May 31 2004, 7 Feb 2005
31 Bottom‟s later “translation,” and also the attitude of Bottom‟s angry wife, the source of his disillusionment, as she searches for her „worthless dreamer of a husband.‟79
„Brindisi‟ is again heard as the Mechanicals enter the forest to rehearse for the competition,80 shifting from its earlier nondiegetic presence to one that is diegetic as the various players sing the aria. Diegetic sound is sound that occurs naturally on screen, such as when an actor speaks, sings or plays an instrument, whereas nondiegetic sound clearly not produced within the screen space, such as voice-over or added music.81 The transition between diegetic and nondiegetic sound naturalises the use of opera within the screen space and thus illustrates Hoffman‟s assertion that his use of opera in the film was influenced by the “fact” that it was the popular music of the time, therefore the Mechanicals would be singing along to opera as modern people sing along to Pop songs. Another example of naturalising the use of opera within the film is when „Brindisi‟ is also played by the band during the celebrations at Theseus‟ wedding feast. The band‟s performance leads onto Theseus‟ toast to the wedding party „Joy, gentle friends - joy and fresh days of love/Accompany your hearts‟ (V, i, 28-29) an appropriate usage of the aria since „Brindisi‟ is a celebratory drinking song. The last instance in Hoffman‟s film where „Brindisi‟ is heard is when the Mechanical‟s performance of Pyramus and Thisbe ends to applause from the audience of assembled married couples and wedding guests. The use of „Brindisi‟ bookmarks the story of the Mechanicals, first heard when they meet in the Piazza, is used again in a celebratory context (like the wedding), that of the Mechanicals‟ triumphant performance. Its celebratory and jovial tone illustrates their triumph at being „very notably discharged.‟
Following on from the use of the aria „Brindisi,‟ is the use of the aria „Una Furtiva Lagrima‟ from Gaetano Donizetti‟s L‟elisir d‟amor. L‟elisir d‟amor82 translated means “the elixir of love,” and is a comedic opera that tells of the misadventures of a young villager named Nemorino, in his attempts to win over Adina, a wealthy owner of a local
79 The only additional “non-Shakespearean” text in Hoffman‟s film comes from Bottom‟s wife who speaks in Italian. Quotations of the dialogue are my own transcriptions based on the DVD release of the film. William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night's Dream, Dir. Michael Hoffman, Fox Searchlight Pictures/ Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment, DVD, US, 1999. 80 Brindisi also plays over the inter-cut scenes of the Mechanicals preparing for their production of Pyramus and Thisbe and as they enter onto Theseus‟ estate. Heard during the preparations, just before and after their production, the aria is therefore representative of the Mechanicals performance. 81 Susan Hayward, Cinema Studies: The Key Concepts 1st edt (New York: Routledge, 1996): 67-68. 82 Summary of Donizetti‟s L‟eliser d‟amor from “Stories of the Operas: L‟eliser d‟amor,” The Metropolitan Opera, 2 Aug 2004
32 farm, with whom he has fallen in love. The aria „Una Furtiva Lagrima‟ (meaning a sudden furtive tear) is from the second act of the opera. Nemorino, who has just taken a dose of what he believes, is a love potion,83 which is in fact nothing more than wine, is unaware that he has just inherited a fortune from his uncle, who has passed away. Flocked by women, Nemorino thinks that this is due to the “love potion” he has just consumed and ignores both the women and Adina, who is hurt by this and leaves. Nemorino notices Adina‟s unhappiness and realises that she truly cares for him and sings of his joy in finding out that she loves him. In William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream the aria „Una Furtiva Lagrima‟ is heard as Bottom wanders off dejectedly from the Mechanicals‟ meeting in the piazza. Having had his pristine white suit ruined by some boys‟ prank involving a bottle of Chianti, Bottom is publicly humiliated mid-performance in front of local assembled villagers, including some women with whom he had been earlier flirting. The audience „feel(s) more deeply for Bottom‟s inability to gain respect as a ladies‟ man than we do about his failure as a labourer performing badly before his social betters.‟84 Through the melancholy tone of the music (though the lyrics are anything but melancholy), the audience is positioned to express sympathy about Bottom‟s ridicule at the hands of the boys and villagers, more so than during the latter scene where the wedding party mock his and the Mechanicals‟ performance of Pyramus and Thisbe. „Una Furtiva Lagriama‟ continues to play over the next wordless scene where Bottom returns home to his disapproving wife. Not a word passes between them as Bottom shrugs sheepishly at his wife when she notices his ruined suit, after which she leaves the room in anger and annoyance and he sighs unhappily as it appears his wife does not love him. There is a juxtaposition between the lyrics of the aria, „M'ama; sì, m'ama; lo vedo, lo vedo‟/ She loves me; yes, she loves me; I see it! I see it!‟ and what action is seen on the screen, which is the unhappy home and love life of Bottom.
The musical centrepiece to Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream is the aria „Casta Diva‟ from Vincenzo Bellini‟s opera Norma. Set in Roman occupied Ancient Gaul, Norma85 tells the story of Pollione, a Roman Proconsul, and Norma, the Gallic high priestess and daughter to Orovonse the high priest of the Druids. Pollione has been the secret lover of Norma, and she, having broken her sacred vow of
83 The use of this particular aria is Michael Hoffman‟s way of foreshadowing what happens in the forest where several people will be under the spell of the juice from a magical flower. 84 Matchinske, 47. 85 Summary of Bellini‟s Norma from “Stories of the Operas: Norma,” The Metropolitan Opera, 2 Aug 2004
33 chastity, has borne him two children. Pollione, however, has become infatuated with the temple virgin Adalgisa, and he confesses this to his confidant but their conversation is interrupted by the commencement of druidic rites. Norma performs the rite of cutting the sacred mistletoe with her golden sickle and then advises the Gauls the time is not favourable for an attack on the Romans, and adds that the Romans‟ days of dominance are numbered anyway. In the aria „Casta Diva,‟ Norma calls upon the “casta diva,” the chaste goddess of the moon, for peace. Hoping to save Pollione‟s life through this message she prays to the chaste goddess of the moon to end all the warfare between the Romans and the Gauls. In Hoffman‟s film this aria is specifically heard during scenes involving Bottom and Titania and her entourage of fairies in Titania‟s bower. „Casta Diva‟ is first heard in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream when Bottom and Titania are being attended by her entourage of fairies. Bottom “enlightens” the clueless fairies on the “proper” use of records that had been pilfered from the early wedding preparations on Theseus‟ estate and brought to the fairies as gifts. Douglas Lanier refers to this as a „postmodern moment,‟86 where the objects from Theseus‟ palace (including the records) have only aesthetic value, since to the fairies their use is foreign. This moment also draws attention to the power of the music,87 and Lanier goes on to suggest that in this moment „the phonograph exerts a romantic power capable of enthralling women.‟88 While Lanier argues that within the film this “power” is „not securely in the control of men,‟89 I disagree. This “power” is literally very much in the hands of one man in particular; Bottom, since he is the only one who knows how to operate the gramophone. During this scene Hoffman‟s realignment of Bottom as central figure in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream comes to fruition and he is now the romantic lead, though it is in a parodic context as Titania is enchanted. The music Bottom plays is not only crucial in winning over Titania, but also in both her and her fairies‟ declaration of „Hail Mortal‟ we see that Bottom has garnered the admiration and adoration of all (the females) who are present, something that was earlier denied
86 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 156. 87 In opera the type of singer and their voice is instrumental in conveying a sense of feeling for the listener. A soprano is the highest voice in opera and considered by many to be the most powerful voice in opera as well. As such a soprano has always had a place of prominence in the vocal hierarchy in opera. The heroine or protagonist in opera is almost always portrayed by a soprano, because the high, bright sound of the soprano voice is indicative of innocence, youth and virtue. The role of Norma is played by a soprano, and calls for a tremendous vocal control of range, flexibility, and dynamics, as is demonstrated in the song „Casta Diva,‟ which ranges from F4 to C6, and calls for a tessitura (the most musically acceptable and comfortable timbre for a given voice) of between G4 to B6. One of the most famous soprano‟s to have played Norma is opera singer Maria Callas. Details about „Casta Diva‟ taken from “Casta Diva,” The Aria Database, 1 May 2008
34 during his performance in the piazza. The choice of music here, an aria about a chaste goddess is ironic considering that Titania soon acts as anything but chaste.90 However, the bel canto voice „fits the moment in its ravishing and romantic intensity,‟91 and „Casta Diva‟ is not the song that plays as Bottom and Titania consummate their relationship, but rather a version of composer Simon Boswell‟s „Love Theme.‟ Thus the act itself is presented with more romantic sentiment, rather than simply a physical encounter.
The final instance where „Casta Diva‟ is heard in Hoffman‟s film is during the final few inter-cut scenes in the forest. The aria plays as Oberon watches Titania and Bottom sleep, before remedying Titania of her bewitchment. Inter-cut with this is Puck curing Lysander of his enchantment. When Puck reassures that „and now all shall be well‟ (III, iii, 47-8), his words are reinforced not only by the images of fairies fixing the bicycles of the now sleeping lovers and washing their muddy clothes, but also by Oberon and Titania having sexual union. While this may be considered another ironic use of an aria about a “chaste” goddess, the aria is also a call to peace, and this scene demonstrates a restoring of balance and peace. Given that Hoffman has coded the relationship between Bottom and Titania as an alternative not only to Bottom‟s marriage, but potentially to a marriage in strife between Titania and Oberon, this sexual act can be read as a physical restoration of their relationship. Titania and Oberon have overcome their differences92 and leave together as a couple from the bower. „Casta Diva‟ continues to play as the sleeping lovers are discovered in the morning by Theseus‟ hunting party. Once again the music choice here, a prayer for peace by Norma to the “chaste” goddess is ironic given that the couples are found naked in what Celia Daileader terms „post-coital exhaustion,‟93 though such action is neither specified in the play-text nor the film. However, while ironic in that sense, the use of this aria is appropriate in another, given that peace has been achieved through the happenings in the forest.
90 Lehmann, „Crouching Tiger, Hidden Agenda‟, 268. 91 Crowl, “A Midsummer Night's Dream,” 42. 92 The film leaves the matter of the changeling boy unresolved. The last time Oberon mentions the changeling boy is „I‟ll to my queen and beg her Indian boy;‟ (III, iii, 37) which we do not see. In the play- text, although the audience is never witness to the resolution of this matter, they are informed of it when Oberon tells Puck: „I then did ask of her her changeling child/Which straight she gave me‟ (IV, i, 58-59). 93 Celia R. Daileader, “Nude Shakespeare in Film and Nineties Popular Feminism,” Shakespeare and Sexuality, Catherine M.S Alexander and Stanley Wells, eds (Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2001) 194.
35 As well as a number of operatic arias, in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream Michael Hoffman makes use of the „Intermezzo‟ a purely orchestral piece from Pietro Mascagni‟s opera Cavalleria Rusticana. Mascagni‟s opera Cavalleria Rusticana94 tells the story of Lola and Turiddu, who were once sweethearts, but when Turiddu goes to do his military service Lola marries Alfio. When Turiddu finds out on his return, he wanted to make Lola jealous by starting a casual affair with Santuzza, a more homely girl than Lola, but genuinely in love with him. Turiddu attempts to woo Lola, and spends the night with her while Alfio is away on business. Santuzza finds out and attacks Turiddu. After being rejected by Turiddu, she tells Alfio, in a fit of jealousy, of Lola's illicit affair with Turiddu. Alfio swears revenge for both himself and Santuzza, and Santuzza cries out in remorse for she realises what is about to happen. They both leave the stage while the orchestra plays the „Intermezzo.‟ All the tension that has accumulated up to this point is channelled into the „Intermezzo,‟ which is played with the curtain up, but the stage remains empty. In Hoffman‟s film the „Intermezzo‟ plays predominantly in the last few scenes involving Bottom, as he awakens from his “dream” and returns to his former life. Rather than functioning as it does in Cavalleria Rusticana as an intermission between scenes and a representation of tensions that have built up, in Hoffman‟s film the „Intermezzo‟ becomes a subdued melancholic ending to Bottom‟s story. The „Intermezzo‟ is heard as Bottom awakens from his night in the forest all alone, unsure if what has happened is a dream. He has been abandoned by the woman he had fallen in love with, and the melancholic tone of the music intends to compel the audience to feel for him. The same song is again heard as Bottom and the Mechanicals enter the grounds of Theseus‟ estate and Bottom sees a statue that reminds him of Titania. The music changes from the upbeat „Brindisi‟ to the more subdued „Intermezzo,‟ signalling Bottom‟s recognition of the statue‟s appearance and the sorrow that he feels at having lost that which he had for a moment, Titania, a woman, who unlike his wife, loved him passionately and appreciated him, although under the influence of a drug.
Simon Boswell‟s song „A Most Rare Vision‟ from his score for Hoffman‟s film is based on Mascagni‟s „Intermezzo,‟ and is an example of the point at which the opera and score meld. „A Most Rare Vision‟ borrows heavily from Mascagni‟s piece, so much so that Mascagni is given co-writer credits on the soundtrack‟s sleeve. The two songs are
94 Summary of Mascagni‟s Cavalleria Rusticana from “Stories of the Operas: Cavalleria Rusticana/Pagliacci,” The Metropolitan Opera, 2 Aug 2004
36 very similar, so that whenever the song from Boswell‟s score is heard one cannot help but immediately think of the original Mascagni piece. „A Most Rare Vision‟ starts off with Mascagni‟s „Intermezzo‟ from Cavalleria Rusticana and this is followed by a reprise of Boswell‟s own „Love Theme‟ for Bottom and Titania, initially heard during the song „The Course Of True Love‟ from Boswell‟s score. „A Most Rare Vision‟ is heard in the film as Titania and Oberon go through the room of the lovers to bless them, and continues on over the following scene, as the Mechanicals leave the palace triumphant and Bottom goes home alone to be visited briefly by Titania in fairy form. There is no supporting play-text that indicates a return visit by Titania, it is purely Hoffman‟s invention, and combined with the melancholic combination of the „Intermezzo‟ and the „Love Theme,‟ this moment strengthens the pathos the audience is compelled to feel for Bottom, and reinforce the tragedy of the love that he has lost.
As well as operatic arias from the Bel Canto tradition, some of Felix Mendelssohn‟s incidental music from an 1843 production of the play A Midsummer Night‟s Dream is also used throughout Hoffman‟s film. This incidental music has been „virtually imbedded‟95 in productions of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream since it was first used in 1843, and thus cements Hoffman‟s film in a long line of performances of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Its connection to the history of the performance, staging, and “theatricality” of the play on stage, melds with the use of opera and also becomes another exemplar of “high” culture within the film. The presence of Mendelssohn‟s incidental music is in addition an allusion to the William Dieterle/Max Reinhardt adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream,96 which also used Mendelssohn‟s music extensively. This feature places Hoffman‟s film within a history not only of adaptations of Shakespeare on film, and adaptations of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream on film, but specifically a certain type of Hollywood film, that of the epic studio film. The connection is further reinforced through other similarities to the Dieterle/Reinhardt film that I will highlight in my analysis of intertextuality in Hoffman‟s film. Felix Mendelssohn‟s incidental music from A Midsummer Night‟s Dream further functions in Hoffman‟s film as a framing device as well as a leitmotif, a recurring musical theme, for the characters of the aristocratic world, heard throughout the film at significant points that involve these aristocratic characters. The incidental music frames the action of the
95 Kenneth S. Rothwell, “The “[Trans] Textuality” of Kevin Kline‟s Bottom: A Modest Proposal,” The Poor Yorick Shakespeare Catalogue - Featured Articles Feb 3 2004, 7 Dec 2004
37 aristocratic characters and opens and closes the celebrations to Theseus‟ wedding. Opening the film is Mendelssohn‟s „Overture,‟ playing as the film‟s title appears, and as the preparations for the upcoming nuptials of Theseus and Hippolyta are seen on screen. This moment is interesting as the use of Mendelssohn‟s incidental music shifts from a nondiegetic presence to a diegetic one. The source of the music that had been playing over the credits is revealed to be a gramophone, with Hippolyta listening to a Mendelssohn record, as preparations for her wedding to Theseus are going on in the background. Hippolyta is more interested in listening to the music than to her „husband- to-be‟s erotic overtures.‟97 This shift from nondiegetic sound to a diegetic sound draws attention not only to the power of the music, but also, like the operatic aria „Brindisi,‟ the classical music of Mendelssohn is here historicized, acting as an example of the type of music that would potentially have been listened to at the time period in which the film is set.
The song next used in Hoffman‟s film from Mendelssohn‟s incidental music is „Fair Lovers You Are Fortunately Met;‟ a short piece heard when Theseus and his hunting party discover the young lovers at the edge of the forest. Theseus overrules Egeus‟ decision regarding his daughter‟s marriage to Lysander, and tells the lovers they are „fortunately met‟ (IV, i, 176), and invites the young couples to be married alongside himself and Hippolyta. The line spoken by Theseus signals the music and establishes a connection between the action on screen and the music. The strong orchestration and regal sounding horns of this song punctuate Theseus‟ mandate regarding Helena and Lysander‟s relationship, and announce the resolution of the issues involving the aristocratic characters.
Closing the major action of the aristocratic characters in Hoffman‟s film, Mendelssohn‟s „Wedding March‟ is heard as the four lovers, Hermia, Lysander, Helena and Demetrius, as well as Theseus and Hippolyta, enter the theatre as married couples and sit down to watch the Mechanicals‟ performance of Pyramus and Thisbe. Through this piece, a universally recognized piece of music used in weddings throughout the Western World in the past century, the music has become a „signifier…devoid from its context and…composer.‟98 Given that the „Wedding March‟ for the most part is now associated with wedding celebrations, its use is fitting in this scene within Hoffman‟s
97 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 156. 98 Mayo, 305.
38 film. Regardless of original context, the use of the „Wedding March‟ is a thematic conclusion to the world of the aristocratic characters, and to A Midsummer Night‟s Dream as a comedy, since comedies usually end on a happy note (and usually a marriage) and the resolution of the various misfortunes which the major (aristocratic) characters have undergone through the duration of the play and film.
Commissioned by director Michael Hoffman to create a score for his adaptation William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Simon Boswell has created music that is an amalgam of varied styles and influences. Hoffman himself describes the score as a cross between “traditional” music from countries such as India, Bulgaria and Syria and classical music in the tradition of Mozart, Stravinsky and Ravel.99 This classical element of the music complements both the use of operatic arias and Felix Mendelssohn‟s incidental music for A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Boswell‟s score works in a number of ways. Firstly it includes an ever present „Love Theme.‟100 This love leitmotif is first introduced in the song „The Course of True Love‟101 and is a constant presence throughout the music, being also heard in the songs „Forgeries of Jealousy,‟ „Between the Cold Moon and the Earth,‟ „What Fools These Mortals Be‟ and „A Most Rare Vision.‟ The music is therefore infused with a sense of love and is mostly heard during the film in conjunction with the action that occurs in the fairy world, understandable since this is a big part of the action in Hoffman‟s film. The forest is where the lovers flee, where they are united, and where Bottom finds love with Titania. Boswell‟s score comes to be representative not only of love but also of the different elements and styles that make up this fairy world. The music manages to become aurally symbolic of the fairies‟ duality, reinforcing the difference between Titania and Oberon and their entourages. This duality is something that is also visually illustrated through allusions to Pre-Raphaelite and Symbolist paintings, and also through different types of lighting used in each fairy space, both of which I shall refer to when addressing intertextuality. While the score reinforces the duality of the fairy world through melding its influences the music also becomes representative of the fairy kingdom as a whole. The fairy world
99 Michael Hoffman quoted on the inner sleeve of the booklet accompanying the soundtrack. Boswell, 1999. 100 The term „Love Theme‟ is used by Martin Provost in his review of the William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream soundtrack. Martin Provost, “A Midsummer Night's Dream by Simon Boswell (Cinemusic Online Soundtrack Review),” Cinemusic: Film Music and Soundtracks, Feb 22 2005, 27 Feb 2005
39 is introduced in the song „Between the Cold Moon and the Earth.‟102 This piece, with its subtle strings, woodwind instruments and “tinkling” percussion,103 is both ominous and brooding, like Rupert Everett‟s characterisation of Oberon, and at the same time mystical and magical, like Michelle Pfeiffer‟s interpretation of Titania, and perfectly exemplifies the mysterious enchanted forest where most of the action of the film takes place. Boswell‟s score then segues into a more “world music” feel of „Hot Ice‟ and „Strange Snow.‟104 Both songs, which are heard back-to-back in the film (though they are separated on the soundtrack), have a distinctive middle-eastern feel and complement the earthy, mystical, and Etruscan inspired design of the “fairy bar” as seen when Puck is introduced. Boswell has gathered together a vast array of unusual sounding “ethnic” instruments and combines them with various other percussive and woodwind instruments, which are played in unison and accompany the lively antics of the mischievous woodland spirits seen on screen. The score continues in the song „The Forgeries Of Jealousy,‟105 which starts with an Indian sounding orchestra, corresponding with Titania‟s arrival on screen with her “changeling boy”, who is now a blue Indian child resembling Krishna, and continuing the middle-eastern sound of „Hot Ice‟ and „Strange Snow.‟ The second part of this song is a rendition of the „Love Theme,‟ heard earlier in „The Course Of True Love,‟ which then weaves back to the Indian style to close the song, as Titania once again disappears with her “changeling boy.”
Following on from „The Forgeries Of Jealousy‟ is the song „I Know A Place Where The Wild Thyme Blows.‟106 It contains both a version of the „Love Theme‟ and a reprise of the earlier song from Boswell‟s score, „Between the Cold Moon and the Earth.‟ In Hoffman‟s film the song „I Know a Place Where the Wild Thyme Blows‟ initially appears in a diegetic form. When Titania instructs her fairies to „Sing me now asleep‟ (II, ii, 7) the song the fairy attendants play is the beginning of Boswell‟s „I Know a Place Where The Wild Thyme Blows.‟ Classical sounding stringed and woodwind instruments and flutes as well as some tinkling percussion play a version of the „Love Theme‟ as Titania falls asleep. Shifting to a nondiegetic presence the song then
102 Taken from the line spoken by Oberon: „Flying between the cold Moon and the earth‟ (II, i, 156). 103 This “tinkling” sound is coincidentally the sound Puck makes when he leaves and returns from Oberon‟s errands. 104 The song titles come from Theseus‟ line: „That is, hot ice and wondrous strange black snow‟ (V, i, 59). 105 Taken from the line spoken by Titania: „These are the forgeries of jealousy‟ (I, ii, 81). 106 Taken from Oberon‟s line, when describing the place that Titania sometime sleeps when in the forest: „I know a bank where the wild thyme blows‟ (II, i, 249).
40 continues to play over the scene that follows this. A reprise of „Between the Cold Moon and the Earth‟ with its mysterious sounding woodwinds, strings and accompanies Oberon‟s equally mischievous and devious action as he enchants Titania whilst she sleeps. The end of „I Know a Place Where the Wild Thyme Blows‟ is heard in a later scene in Titania‟s bower, where Bottom first encounters Titania. Once again, mischievous tinkling percussion, flutes and strings are used, with the song abruptly ending as vines spring out from Titania‟s bower and capture Bottom as he attempts to flee.
„What fools these mortals be‟ (III, ii, 115), a statement by Puck about the four lovers, initiates the similarly named song from Boswell‟s music and establishes a connection between the action on screen and the music. The sprightly and whimsical sounding woodwind and stringed instruments accompany the actions of the four lovers as everyone chases and fights each other in the confusion of love that has occurred because of Puck‟s error in enchanting Lysander. „What Fools These Mortals Be‟ then moves onto a version of Boswell‟s subdued „Love Theme,‟ signalling that all shall soon be well as the lovers fall asleep side-by-side and Puck remedies the situation, before ending the song with the same upbeat tone and music of the beginning of „What Fools These Mortals Be.‟ The last song from Boswell‟s score to be heard both on the soundtrack and in Hoffman‟s film is „A Most Rare Vision.‟107 As referred to earlier, „A Most Rare Vision‟ is a melding of Mascagni‟s „Intermezzo‟ and a version of Boswell‟s „Love Theme.‟ Heard over the final scenes of the film the song emphasises Bottom‟s tragedy of losing the woman that he loves, and being left stuck in a marriage to a “shrewish” woman who does not love nor appreciate him.
As well as the various musical selections, Michael Hoffman uses intertextual references as a system of signification through which he presents his “reading” of the A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. These intertextual references take various forms including allusions to other films, both direct references and those that come through associations with the actors cast in the film, and also to styles of and specific pieces of art that form the basis for the design of the film. Simply by being a film adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Hoffman‟s film has an automatic allusion to other filmed adaptations of the play, such as those by William Dieterle/Max Reinhardt, Celestino Coronada, and
107 Taken from Bottom‟s line as he awakens to find himself alone: „I have had a more rare vision‟ (IV, i, 202).
41 Adrian Noble. Through creative appropriation Hoffman integrates fragments of these films, as well as other filmed adaptations of Shakespeare‟s plays (such as those by Kenneth Branagh) within his film, and engages in a „filmic conversation with earlier film versions of the play.‟108 One of the most prominent “shadows” in Hoffman‟s film adaptation is the William Dieterle/Max Reinhardt film A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. The connection to the Dieterle/Reinhardt film is a stylistic device used by Hoffman that places his film within a history of both adaptations of Shakespeare on film and of adaptations of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream on film. As I have noted earlier, the connection between the two is implied through Hoffman‟s use of Mendelssohn‟s incidental music from an 1843 production of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Both the Hoffman and Dieterle/Reinhardt films make use of this incidental music, though the latter‟s use of this music is more liberal. The similarity between the films continues in the addition in both films of a character not found in the “original” play-text, that of Bottom‟s wife. In his discovery of the shooting script for the Dieterle/Reinhardt film, Russell Jackson brings light to a similar device of giving the character of Nick Bottom the weaver a wife, which was intended to be used in Dieterle/Reinhardt film but was later cut.109 This wife character in Dieterle/Reinhardt film‟s shooting script functions in a similar fashion to the wife that is present in Hoffman‟s film. As the shooting script for Dieterle/Reinhardt film indicates, Bottom‟s wife „is a virago of a woman, with a face like fury. She stands glaring at Bottom‟110 after he has been caught playing with a mask. We can infer from this description she is presented as a similar “shrewish” disapproving figure to Bottom‟s Italian wife in Hoffman‟s film. Hoffman almost mirrors this shot in his film when Kevin Kline‟s Bottom returns to his house, his white suit ruined with red wine, to his wife‟s wrath and disapproving looks. An earlier scene in Hoffman‟s film, in which Bottom‟s wife searches for him in the piazza, is also similar to a later shot in Dieterle/Reinhardt film where Bottom‟s wife drags Bottom away from the craftsmen and subsequently he escapes from his room which is noticed by his wife and she „shakes her fist as she calls after him.‟111
108 John R. Ford, “Translating Audiences and Their Bottoms: Filming A Midsummer Night's Dream,” Publications of the Mississippi Philological Association (2000): 2. 109 Russell Jackson, “A Shooting Script for the Reinhardt-Dieterle Dream,” Shakespeare Bulletin 16.4 (1998): 40. 110 Jackson, “A Shooting Script for the Reinhardt-Dieterle Dream,” 40 111 Jackson, “A Shooting Script for the Reinhardt-Dieterle Dream,” 40.
42 Hoffman also alludes to the Dieterle/Reinhardt film adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream in filming his “fairy world” on a soundstage.112 Reminiscent of Reinhart‟s film, which was predominantly filmed like a “backstage musical” on a soundstage at Warner Brothers Studios, complete with fake painted trees and sophisticated ballet sequences choreographed by Bronislawa Nijinska, Hoffman‟s film was partly filmed on a soundstage at Cinecittà film studios in Rome. Oliver Stapleton the cinematographer of Hoffman‟s film reveals in an interview that he was influenced by the effects employed by Hal Mohr, cinematographer for the Dieterle/Reinhardt113 film adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.114 Stylistically the fairy world in Hoffman‟s film looks “fake.” Though real trees and plants were used on stage to give the illusions of a magic forest, the real trees and their real leaves absorbed the light from the studio and looked dull on screen. Pieces of glass, tinsel and other reflective objects were therefore hung on the plants so the “magical forest” would catch the lights from the studio and sparkle,115 giving the forest an unrealistic look. Hal Mohr used a similar technique on Dieterle/Reinhardt film, spraying the trees with aluminium paint116 and covering them with tiny metal particles to reflect the light,117 especially important considering the Dieterle/Reinhardt film was shot using black and white film. The use of these lighting effect can especially seen in the entrance of Oberon, played by Victor Jory, where sparkles on screen and a slight unfocussed look give an unrealistic and magical feel to the picture. Although the films are in some respect stylistically similar, Stapleton remarks that the decision to film the forest scenes of William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream in a studio was a move that was predominantly influenced by the impracticality associated with filming in real woods, predominantly the problems faced with lighting the film outdoors and spending forty nights filming in freezing conditions.118 The usage of a soundstage as stylistic element in Hoffman‟s film could
112 Celestino Coronada‟s adaptation of A Midsummer Night's Dream is in some ways a parody of Reinhardt‟s film and the “backstage musical” production style. As with both Reinhardt‟s and Hoffman‟s films, Coronada‟s adaptation is filmed on a soundstage, and combines ballet, pantomime and opera in a choreographed “high camp” musical style performance. 113 Reinhardt, a refuge from Nazi occupied Germany, in turn came from the German surrealist movement and a background and theatre and was also probably influenced by director and musical choreographer Busby Berkeley. 114 Chris Pizzello, “Enchanted Forest,” American Cinematographer Online May 1999, 20 April 2005
43 also be considered an homage to Federico Fellini, since the soundstage that was used in the filming of Hoffman‟s film was Stage-Five the “Fellini stage” at Cinecittà.119
If Hoffman‟s allusion to the Dieterle/Reinhardt film adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream situates his film in the history of Shakespearean adaptations on film, then the allusions to Kenneth Branagh‟s film adaptation of Much Ado About Nothing (1993) cements Hoffman‟s film‟s position in the history of the Shakespeare on film “boom” of the 1990s. This “boom” was initiated by the release and commercial success of Branagh‟s Henry V (1989) and includes such diverse films as Branagh‟s Much Ado About Nothing and Hamlet (1996), Franco Zefferelli‟s Hamlet (1990), Richard Loncraine‟s Richard III (1995), Baz Lurhmann‟s Romeo + Juliet (the most successful Shakespearean adaptation on film during this period), and Gil Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You (1999). Of these, Branagh‟s Much Ado About Nothing is the most prominent film “shadow” that haunts Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. A connection between the two films was widely noted in reviews at the time of the release of Hoffman‟s film. Both Douglas Lanier and Samuel Crowl suggest that the opening of Hoffman‟s film is reminiscent of the opening of Branagh‟s Much Ado About Nothing,120 with both films sharing a „lush Tuscan setting.‟121 By setting his film in the Tuscan countryside Branagh was himself playing on the popularity of Tuscany as a holiday destination for English tourists. A similar motivation can be inferred from Hoffman‟s setting his film in fin-de-siècle Mount Athena, a fictional town in the Tuscan countryside. Josh Cabat notes that after a screening of Hoffman‟s film he attended:
everyone stayed through the very end of the credits, not to see who was involved in the production but to jot down the names of the towns used in the filming for immediate vacation planning.122
119 Calhoun, 38. The allusion to Fellini continues in the figure of Bottom. Played by Kevin Kline as a sort of “man about town” and “wannabe ” ladies‟ man and actor, Kline‟s performance is reminiscent of Marcello Mastroianni‟s style of acting, most notably in Fellini‟s La Dolce Vita (1960) where he portrays an Italian playboy. Samuel Crowl also makes this connection, noting: „There‟s not a trace of the weaver in Kline‟s Bottom but often a sweet suggestion of Marcello Mastroianni a bit lost in one of Fellini‟s cinematic dreams.‟ (Crowl, “A Midsummer Night‟s Dream,” 41). Parodying this type of playboy character, Kline‟s Bottom struts about the Piazza in his crisp white suit only to be humiliated by some local boys‟ prank. 120 Lanier, “Nostalgia and theatricality,” 155. 121 Crowl, “A Midsummer Night‟s Dream,” 42. 122 Cabat, “Michael Hoffman‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.”
44 Hoffman himself explains the choice of setting was also in part influenced by the time spent in „his early twenties living and working in Tuscany,‟ and his observation of the daily lifestyles and relationships of the small villages inhabitants.123
The similarity between Hoffman and Branagh‟s films is further highlighted through both films‟ Anglo-America cast, which mixes stage “pros” with film and television stars.124 Both films cast well known “bankable” actors next to virtual unknowns, something which also occurred in “odd” casting choices in the Dieterle/Reinhardt adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Hoffman‟s film makes especial use of the celebrity of the cast as a marketing tool in order to draw audiences in, a point which I will elaborate on in my analysis of the film‟s casting. From a marketing standpoint by associating one film with another a film maker can attract a similar type of audience with the proviso “if you liked that film then you‟ll like this film.” Through the association with Branagh‟s film by means of both a similar setting and type of casting, Hoffman‟s film works to attract a similar audience. This has been recently argued by Stephen M Buhler, who states that Hoffman‟s film is „Shakespeare according to Kenneth Branagh.‟125 Both Hoffman and Branagh present “safe” uncontroversial films that work to prevent offending potential audience members, especially women. A clever marketing strategy, Hoffman does not wish to give audiences any reason to stay away from his film and is therefore „dully inoffensive‟126 and avoids alienating women in the potential audience. He achieves this through „eliminating the play‟s male attitudes and behaviours that could produce justifiable outrage,‟127 and by also giving female audiences an familiar identifiable “pop-feminist” figure to relate to,128 through casting Callista Flockhart as Helena, who now becomes a more central figure in Hoffman‟s film.
Keith A. Reader refers to the concept of a film star as an intertextual one.129 Reader‟s assertion is especially true of how casting is used in the film adaptations of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream by both Hoffman and Dieterle/Reinhardt. Each film makes
123 Pizzello, “Enchanted Forest,” 2. 124 Crowl, “A Midsummer Night's Dream,” 42. 125 Stephen Buhler, “Textual and Sexual Anxieties in Michael Hoffman‟s Film of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream,” Shakespeare Bulletin 22.3 Fall (2004): 49. 126 Buhler, “Textual and Sexual Anxieties,” 50. 127 Buhler, “Textual and Sexual Anxieties,” 50. 128 The character Ally McBeal was featured on the cover of Time Magazine 151.25, June 29 (1998) under the heading, „Is Feminism Dead?‟ 23 April 2005
45 use of a “star system” of casting, a tactic that is also employed by Kenneth Branagh in Much Ado About Nothing. Like Branagh‟s „stunt casting,‟130 Michael Hoffman‟s eclectic cast is also made up of both American and British actors from film and television. This casting decision is used by Hoffman in an attempt to overcome the stigma that is often attached to Shakespeare and adaptations of his works on film. Hoffman‟s film provides „recognisable stars‟131 of varying professional backgrounds and therefore attracts „an audience looking for Callista Flockhart, or Rupert Everett, or Michelle Pfeiffer, or Kevin Kline.‟132 The casting in Hoffman‟s film is an example of celebrity being used as character in order to draw audiences in; a marketing strategy used in order to overcome any hesitation an audience might have in seeing a “Shakespearean” film. In Hoffman‟s film the cast also brings allusions to other roles each actor has played, in this way Hoffman‟s casting strategy resembles that of William Dieterle and Max Reinhardt in the film adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.133 Dieterle/Reinhardt worked with relatively unknown actors at the time, such as Olivia de Havilland and Mickey Rooney, as well as Warner‟s stock company that included popular actors of the time such as Joe E. Brown and James Cagney. The cast in the Dieterle/Reinhardt film worked in such a way that the actors were allowed „to define their Shakespearean roles in ways that either reinforced or undercut each actor‟s popular image,‟134 such as the casting of James Cagney as Nick Bottom the weaver. Cagney at the time of filming A Midsummer Night‟s Dream was known for his “tough guy” persona which he had developed over several “gangster” type films such as The Public Enemy (1931). This persona was translated to the character of Bottom. Cagney‟s Bottom covers his vulnerability with a good humoured tough guy performance.135 Cagney later went on to star in several “good tough guy” roles, such as that of James "Brick" Davis in „G‟ Men (1935), before returning to “gangster” roles in films such as Angels With Dirty Faces (1938) and White Heat (1949).
In Hoffman‟s film the casting of Kevin Kline as Nick Bottom and Callista Flockhart as Helena works in a similar way to casting in the Dieterle/Reinhardt film. At the time of filming William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream both Kevin Kline and
130 Cabat, “Michael Hoffman‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.” 131 Buhler, “Textual and Sexual Anxieties,” 49. 132 Ford, 3. 133 Ford, 3. 134 Ford, 3. 135 Russell Jackson, “Shakespeare‟s Comedies on film,” Shakespeare and the Moving Image, Anthony Davies and Stanley Wells, eds (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994): 103-104.
46 Callista Flockhart were well known recognisable actors. Kline is known for his versatile filmic roles, such as those in the comedies Dave (1993) and A Fish Called Wanda (1988), for which he won an Academy Award, and critically acclaimed drama The Big Chill (1983). He was still in the media spotlight following his successful comedic role as closeted teacher Howard Brackett in director Frank Oz‟s film In and Out (1997) when cast in Hoffman‟s film. With the realignment of Bottom‟s character as leading man, Kevin Kline, who is known for his ability to be equally facile in comedic and dramatic roles, fits the role of a Bottom, who is now both a figure of pathos and of fun. Callista Flockhart‟s presence in Hoffman‟s film acts both as a marketing tactic and gives extra dimension to the character of Helena. Flockhart at the time of filming was known predominantly for her role as Ally in David Kelley created television “dramedy”136 Ally McBeal (1997). By associating a film with another established television show a filmmaker can attract a similar type of audience to that show. Through its association with the show Ally McBeal, Hoffman‟s film can be argued to be appealing to similar demographics as Ally McBeal. Premiering on America‟s Fox network in 1997, Ally McBeal was a mix of comedy and legal drama. The character of Ally McBeal was defined particularly by her status as single woman, passion for her job as a lawyer, overactive imagination, and yearning for her child-hood sweetheart Billy, who married someone else. As a result the show had a particular appeal to those who could relate to Ally‟s life, specifically the demographic of 25-39 year old women with a high disposable income. Hoffman‟s film adaptation William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream markets to a similar audience through the casting of Callista Flockhart in the role of Helena, and the audience is encouraged to relate the character of Ally to that of Helena.137 Courtney Lehmann refers to Callista Flockhart as having an „intertextual presence‟138 in Hoffman‟s film adaptation. Known at the time for her role of Ally McBeal, Flockhart acts as „pop-cultural icon of how love makes fools of women in particular.‟139 Flockhart‟s presence in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream informs her performance of Helena with a sense of desperation and independence as she pursues the uninterested Demetrius. Ally McBeal, who is single and none too happy about it, is painfully honest and emotionally vulnerable. Like Ally, Helena is also defined by her honesty as she lays everything on the line with her words to Demetrius (especially in II, i, 195-244), emotional character, unstable love life
136 A contraction of the terms drama and comedy, a dramedy is a genre of movies and television in which the lines between these very different and distinct genres are blurred. 137 Lehmann, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Agenda,” 267. 138 Lehmann, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Agenda,” 267. 139 Lehmann, “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Agenda,” 267.
47 (controlled by Puck in the forest who enchants both Lysander and Demetrius to fall in love with Helena) and her yearning and dogged pursuit of someone who is unavailable, Demetrius.140 The film‟s focus on marketing to a specific demographic, highlighted through allusions to Ally McBeal, is reinforced through advertising141 and product tie- ins. On the release of Hoffman‟s film make-up manufacturer Max Factor released a line of cosmetics in association, which were created by the make-up artist who worked on Michelle Pfeiffer's makeup in the film. The company Classico Pasta Sauce also released their own product tie-in, putting out a cookbook of recipes “inspired by the film” that use Classico sauces, offering rebates with the purchase of Classico products and a ticket stub from the film, and sponsored a sweepstakes, the prize of which was a trip to the Tuscan region of Italy shown in the film.142 Both Max Factor and Classico capitalised on the film‟s target audience‟s gender, predominantly women, and high disposable income, in order to best advertise their products.
As well as references to various films, the design of Michael Hoffman‟s film adaptation William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream alludes to a “bricollage” of various styles of art and architecture and specific paintings by artists such as Gustave Moreau and J.W. Waterhouse. The allusions to art work in Hoffman‟s film range from the classical sculpture found in Theseus‟ estate to the Pre-Raphaelite and Symbolist influenced set and costume designs of the fairy kingdom. Complementing the fin-de- siècle Tuscan setting, the art along with the film‟s use of opera and classical music are exemplars of “high” culture. The references to art in Hoffman‟s film are also used as a thematic way in which to differentiate between the two different worlds of the human and fairy kingdom, as well as within the fairy kingdom itself, visually setting apart Oberon and Titania‟s kingdoms. The opening of Hoffman‟s film reveals to the audience the preparations for the wedding of Theseus and Hippolyta as well as the expanse of Theseus‟ estate. The orderly maintained gardens and grounds of Theseus‟ estate, in reality the Palazzo Fornazzi in the town of Caprolla, are tended to by gardeners, some of whom are seen cleaning and repairing a fountain in preparations for the upcoming wedding festivities. Amidst these ordered and somewhat constrictive gardens, mirroring
140 As with Ally McBeal‟s ex-boyfriend Billy, Demetrius is betrothed to someone else (Hermia). Futhermore, Demetrius is also disinterested in Helena‟s advances. 141 Callista Flockhart, as well as the other well known stars of the film, Kevin Kline, Michelle Pfeiffer, Stanley Tucci and Rupert Everett are all the focus of the film‟s promotional material. For an example see the film‟s promotional poster. 142 T.L Stanley and Stephanie Thompson, “Classico, Food Net mangia with „Dream‟,” Brandweek 40.8 Feb 22 (1999): 53.
48 what Hoffman notes in the film‟s opening cue card as the attitudes of the time, are several classical sculptures. These sculptures are examples of both the decadence and wealth of the “upper-class” lifestyle of the “humans” in the film and also the mythic past and the inspiration behind the characters of Theseus and Hippolyta. Whereas in Hoffman‟s film the “mythical” couple are now more reserved and Victorian in appearance and attitude in order to fit in with the change in setting and time, the use of classical sculptures invites the audience to make the connection between the characters and their former mythic nature. These sculptures also remind the audience that although the setting is ostensibly Victorian, the Tuscan setting is in fact steeped in a vast history and mythology of its own, which influenced the design of Hoffman‟s film.
Hoffman‟s decision to set his film in the Tuscan countryside facilitated his desire to get away from the „Celtic notion of the forest‟143 in Shakespeare‟s play. He instead looked towards the history and mythology associated with his Tuscan setting, particularly Etruscan and classical mythological elements, for inspirations for his film‟s design, and more specifically for the design of his fairy world. This led Hoffman in the direction of symbolist painters at the turn of the century such as Gustave Moreau, and to Etruscan culture.‟144 Hoffman further reveals that the influence of the Etruscans on the design of the fairy world was particularly important in differentiating it from the world of the humans:
Their [the Etruscans] interest in beauty, music, magic, divination, sensuality, their unapologetic vanity, and their reverence for the feminine made them excellent models for the fairy world. This was especially true in contrast to the uptight, conventional world of the court.145
The inspiration for the fairy world was not limited to simply Etruscan culture and Symbolists painters such as Moreau, but as production designer Luciana Arrighi elaborates, the design of the fairy world in William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream was also inspired by „Renaissance painters Raphael, Brill, the Landscape Fresco painters, the sculptures of Bernini, [and] the drawings of Piranesi.‟146 The design, inspired by all these very different styles of art, is symbolic of the fairy
143 Calhoun, 38. 144 Calhoun, 38. 145 Michael Hoffman, William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream (London: Harper Collins, 1999): 21. 146 Hoffman, 25.
49 kingdom‟s duality, and Hoffman‟s forest becomes a wild, unordered and eclectic place of escape.
Hoffman‟s elaborate indoor fairy world set, filmed on Stage-five in Cinecittà, was split into two very different areas, each with its own particular design and lighting schemes.147 Hoffman explains in the screenplay for William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream that the inspiration for Oberon was drawn directly from Gustave Moreau‟s The Muses Leaving their Father Apollo to go and Enlighten the World (1868). The brooding Apollo from Moreau‟s painting is translated on screen into the figure of Rupert Everett as Oberon, sitting atop his throne, moody and contemplative, „more melancholy than mischievous.‟148 Complementing Oberon‟s change in demeanour, his kingdom is a „starker, cool and less accommodating‟149 place inhabited by satyrs, centaurs and Etruscan style temples, overgrown and menacing.150 Contrasting with Oberon‟s kingdom, Titania‟s world is a warmer and more densely wooded, complete with classical temple.151 Hoffman himself describes Titania‟s realm as „soft and gentle and green, and the light is warm.‟152 Specific lighting was also designed by Oliver Stapleton to “light” actress Michelle Pfeiffer in order to highlight her role in the film as „leader of the magical people.‟153 Given both a strong-edged backlight and noticeably diffused close-ups, the lighting gives Pfeiffer‟s Titania an „unreal, magical, over the-top‟154 look. In the screenplay to his film adaptation Hoffman reveals that the appearance of Titania and her section of the forest were directly influenced by the works of Burne-Jones, G.F Watts and the Pre-Raphaelites.155 Titania‟s section of the forest is inhabited by various „female archetypes both light and dark‟156 drawn from mythology, such as the gorgon Medusa and the nymphs swimming in a pond, an explicit allusion to the well known work of Pre-Raphaelite painter J.W Waterhouse‟s work Hylas and the Nymphs (1896). With the character of Bottom, who is part of Titania‟s world for much of the film, Michael Hoffman noted it was important
147 Pizzello, “Enchanted Forest,” 2. 148 Rob Blackwelder, “Dream Manipulation,” SPLICEDwire, 1999, 20 Jan 2005
50 that Bottom‟s costume design needed to suggest an ass, something which served the comedy of his situation but that also remained somewhat sensual. Given the importance of Bottom‟s relationship to Titania, Hoffman stressed it was integral to the film that Bottom the “man” couldn‟t be lost.157 A small figure of the mythological figure Pan found by Hoffman in Moreau‟s canvas of Jupiter and Semele (1895) was translated into a design by Gabriella Percussi that „emphasised his [Bottom‟s] humanity.158 In terms of a marketing strategy, a costume that did not totally consume Kevin Kline but suggested the “star” underneath was important. Being presented as the central character in Hoffman‟s adaptation Kline was one of the main draw cards for the film and if he disappeared behind an obtrusive mask or costume the power of such casting would be diminished. Humanising Bottom during his translation to beast also reinforces Hoffman‟s alteration of the relationship that Bottom has with Titania, one that is no longer monstrous but an alternative to his unhappy marriage.
Director Michael Hoffman remedies a perceived lack of central figure in previous productions of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, and re-imagines his adaptation as the tragic story of Bottom. Through casting well known actor Kevin Kline in the role, Hoffman realigns Bottom as central figure in his film. Hoffman reinterprets Bottom‟s traditionally comedic character into one that is now tragic. Operatic arias, music by Felix Mendelssohn as well as a classically inspired score by composer Simon Boswell are used as a way to convey a sense of melancholy and nostalgia in the character of Bottom, and situate the film within the conventions of heritage cinema. Hoffman‟s film also gives emphasis to the character of Helena. Helena is played by actor Callista Flockhart, who was known at the time for her starring role in the television show Ally McBeal. Flockhart‟s earlier role as single lawyer Ally informs her performance of Helena with a sense of anxiety and emotional vulnerability. Hoffman invites his audience to relate the character of Ally with Helena, as both are portrayed as “victims of love.” Together with cleverly marketed advertising campaign, Hoffman‟s film targets a similar demographic to those who can relate to Ally‟s life, namely middle-aged women with a high disposable income. Stylistically, Hoffman‟s film evokes the influence of references to art and architecture, Etruscan culture, and most significantly to film. Both the Dieterle/Reinhardt adaptation of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, as well as Kenneth Branagh‟s film version of Much Ado About Nothing are prominent influences for Hoffman‟s film. As with Branagh‟s film, Hoffman‟s adaptation contains a diverse “star”
157 Hoffman, 72. 158 Hoffman, 72.
51 cast of both Anglo and American actors, a marketing strategy employed to attract an audience that may be hesitant in seeing Shakespeare on film. Through the allusions to the Dieterle/Reinhardt film, director Hoffman situates his film in the history of adaptations of Shakespeare on screen, in particular film versions of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Of particular note is Hoffman‟s appropriation of a device found in the Dieterle/Reinhardt film, a wife-figure for Bottom; a character absent from Shakespeare‟s play-text. Through this wife figure, the character of Bottom is given a depth and understanding, and with the use of operatic arias, is a method by which the film conveys a sense of Bottom‟s tragedy and empathy to the audience.
52
Gil Junger’s 10 Things I Hate About You (1999)
Gil Junger‟s film 10 Things I Hate About You (1999) has what Richard Burt describes as a „post-hermeneutic relation to Shakespeare‟s plays.‟159 The work, be it a performance on film, television or stage, is so far removed from the “original” Shakespearean work that it isn‟t immediately recognised or interpreted as Shakespearean. Rather than being considered strictly a “remake” of William Shakespeare‟s The Taming of the Shrew, Junger‟s film 10 Things I Hate About You „borrows an approximation of The Taming of the Shrew‟s plot‟160 and uses Shakespeare‟s story in order to comment on issues relating to the teenage audience to which the film is predominantly marketed. Ariane M Balizet argues that we „look at the conventions of Shakespeare‟s comedy to view [Junger‟s] message on contemporary youth culture.‟161 The target audience influences the way in which 10 Things I Hate About You is constructed and marketed. Music and intertextual references are used both as marketing tools and as a way to convey Junger‟s comments on the youth culture he is representing in his film. In general, thematic approaches to the adaptation of The Taming of the Shrew have been „dominated, consciously or not, by a desire to „soften‟ it and make it more acceptable.‟162 Glossing over the gender and power dynamics of The Taming of the Shrew, Junger‟s film adaptation is „stripped of most of the play‟s male bravado and authority over women.‟163 The most obvious shift in the gender politics of 10 Things lies in the characterisation of Katerina Stratford, the play‟s Katherina Minola.
159 Richard Burt, “Shakespeare in Love and the End of the Shakespearean: Academic and Mass Culture Constructions of Literary Authorship,” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siecle, Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray, eds (Houndmills, Basingstroke: Palgrave, 2000): 226. 160 Melissa Jones, ““An Aweful Rule”: Safe Schools, Hard Canons and Shakespeare‟s Loose Heirs,” Almost Shakespeare: Reinventing His Works For Cinema and Television, James R Keller and Leslie Stratyner, eds (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company Inc, 2004): 138. 161 Ariane M Balizet, “Teen Scenes: Recognizing Shakespeare in Teen Film,” Almost Shakespeare: Reinventing His Works For Cinema and Television, James R Keller and Leslie Stratyner, eds (Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company Inc, 2004): 129. 162 William Shakespeare, The Taming of the Shrew, Ann Thompson, ed, (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995): 30. 163 Richard Burt, “Afterword: Te(e)n Things I Hate about Girlene Shakesploitation Flicks in the Late 1990s, or Not-So-Fast Times at Shakespeare High,” Spectacular Shakespeare: Critical Theory and Popular Cinema, Courtney Lehmann and Lisa S. Starks, eds (Madison, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press and London: Associated University Presses, 2002): 213.
53
In The Taming of the Shrew Katherina is characterised as a “shrew,” a bad-tempered or aggressively assertive woman. Her first appearance in the play (I, i, 57)164 offers no evidence to support this characterisation and does not anticipate her later outspoken nature and fiery conversations with male characters. Irene G Dash argues that Kate is defined by her actions and speeches,165 and suggests we only know what Katherina is like through what other characters know about her and reveal at the beginning of the play.166 However, in the beginning of Act II, stage actions reveal the extent of why Katherina is considered to be a shrew. She binds her sister Bianca‟s hands and refuses to release her, striking Bianca when she does not reveal which of her suitors she loves best. Hortensio, her musical tutor, also states that Katherine strikes him over the head with a lute during a lesson (II, i, 145-150). The abuse of her sister and Hortensio‟s “witness statement” suggest that earlier descriptions of Katherina as an unruly and untamed shrew may have some merit. Rather than simply being disruptive or destructive forces within the play, Kate‟s lack of restraint, temper, and assertiveness define her as an example of indiscipline within the play. Her outspoken and boisterous nature is motivated by her circumstance. In a play set in an age where aristocratic marriages were often arranged predominantly for economic reasons, Kate speaks out against the authority of her father Baptista, who sees his daughters as his possession, to do with as he pleases. Katherina explicitly states her lack of intent to marry (I, i, 61-62), and is outspoken in her rejection of her father‟s choice of husband for her, Petruchio (II, i, 274-278). However, her father, who marries her off to Petruchio anyway, ignores both these instances of indiscipline.
In 10 Things I Hate About You, Kat Stratford is transformed from the obnoxious, violent, shrew of Shakespeare‟s Katherina into a modern, outspoken, independent, feminist “outsider” seen as having an „attitude problem.‟167 In fact, as Richard Burt notes, the film makes her „literally a feminist critic,‟168 especially in the scene of her debate with Mr. Morgan on the syllabus of her high school English class. While Kat‟s
164 Line citations from The Taming of the Shrew refer to the 1995 New Cambridge edition, edited by Ann Thompson, first published in 1984. 165 Irene G. Dash, Wooing, Wedding and Power: Women in Shakespeare‟s Plays (New York: Columbia University Press, 1981): 34. 166 Katherina has no soliloquies, and when she first appears in the beginning of the play offers no reason, other than speaking her mind, for the description of her as like „hell‟ (I, i, 121) or title as „Katherine the curst‟ (I, ii, 122). 167 Mary Elizabeth Williams, “One Shrew Thing,” Salon April 1 1999, 18 July 2004
54 „feminist bitchiness most closely corresponds to the shrewishness of…Katherina in that both women converse freely with men,‟169 the difference in the characters lies in the political dimension. Not only does Kat use her bitchery, wit and intelligence to put down those who mindlessly follow the ethos of the popular clique, but also, as Michael Friedman notes, when Kat speaks out it is „not only against the authority of particular men, but on the inequities of patriarchal culture.‟170 This hard-line feminism makes her „a little tough to take.‟171 Kat‟s political rhetoric becomes predictable and is parodied by others, as seen when Bianca and her friend finish Kat‟s rant about their attending a schoolmate‟s party. Kat‟s best friend Mandella emphasises this with her sarcastic response to Kat‟s reasoning for opposition to the school prom. When Kat tells Mandella: „We‟re making a statement‟ by not attending the prom, Mandella replies with the sarcastic retort: „Oh goody, something different for us.‟172 Her reaction to Kat‟s statement „paints Kat‟s rejection of the prom as a typically stale and doctrinaire response.‟173 Kat‟s feminism „comes to look more like a personality disorder than a viable political position.‟174 Her feminism is simply quoted but not dealt with in any depth, and is used as a way to make Kat intolerable and hard to take. As I will argue later, the film‟s approach to Kat‟s feminism in 10 Things mirrors the tokenistic use of both Riot Grrl music and the culture and politics surrounding the Riot Grrl movement. Unlike Katherina, Kat‟s outspokenness and hostility, particularly towards boys, is not motivated by her circumstance, but by a bad sexual experience with Joey Donner, Kat‟s former boyfriend and a member of the popular clique at school. This event prompts her rejection of seeking popularity, and the film presents Kat as a girl with a grudge, whose indiscipline is limited to not being in the “in” crowd at her high school.
Along with the characterisation of Kat, 10 Things I Hate About You also differs from the gender politics of The Taming of the Shrew in the transformation of the character of Petruchio. Richard Burt argues that 10 Things I Hate About You inverts the account of gender relations in The Taming of the Shrew.175 An example in the film of this approach is the modernisation of the character of Petruchio. In the tradition of the performance of
169 Michael D. Friedman, “The Feminist as Shrew in 10 Things I Hate About You” Shakespeare Bulletin 22.2 Summer (2004): 51. 170 Friedman, 51-52. 171 Jay Carr, “„Teen „Taming‟ offers at least 10 things to like,” Boston Globe Mar 31 1999: F.4. 172 Quotations of the dialogue from 10 Things I Hate About You are my own transcriptions based on the DVD release of the film. 10 Things I Hate About You, Dir Gil Junger, Touchstone Pictures/Buena Vista Pictures, DVD, US, 1999. 173 Friedman, 59. 174 Jones, “An Aweful Rule,” 142. 175 Burt, “Afterword,” 214.
55 The Taming of the Shrew on stage and screen, actor Heath Ledger is much younger than the character Petruchio is normally played. At the time of the film‟s release, Ledger was twenty years old. This makes him one of the youngest actors to have played Petruchio on screen.176 In Franco Zeffirelli‟s The Taming of the Shrew (1967), Richard Burton (Petruchio) was forty-two at the time of filming. However, this production was predominantly considered a “star vehicle” for actors Burton and Elizabeth Taylor and thus did not focus on the characters‟ ages, but rather on the widely publicised relationship of the actors that played them.177 In 10 Things the casting of “teen” idol Heath Ledger is indicative of the concession to the marketing towards a teenage demographic. Through having a good-looking teenage Patrick/Petruchio (nowhere in the play is Petruchio described as handsome)178 the film offers someone for the audience to identify with, and teenage girls to idolise. The shift in the age of Petruchio and other main characters also fits in with moving the plot of the play to the locale of a suburban American high school. In 10 Things I Hate About You Petruchio‟s „outlandish behaviour,‟179 such as his antics at his wedding to Katherina (III, ii, 77-228) is removed. Petruchio‟s wild actions are both transformed into Patrick‟s bad reputation and „legendary character,‟180 and transferred to Kat,181 such as demonstrated when she flashes a teacher to get Patrick out of detention. Richard Burt argues that 10 Things „tells the story of the taming of teen boy desire.‟182 Teenage boys are tamed either through having their „private parts symbolically cut down to size‟183 as seen in the literal ball-kneeing of Joey Donner at the prom, or they are forced to change their “wicked ways.” Patrick is tamed in that he is forced to clean up his act in order to win Kat over. He both gives up smoking and has to do things he doesn‟t want to, such as go to Club Skunk. Patrick is the one required to change, not Kat. In 10 Things I Hate About You Patrick also differs from Petruchio in that he doesn‟t attempt to overpower or dominate
176 The gap between the ages of Patrick and Kat is also much smaller than in other adaptations of The Taming of the Shrew. Julia Stiles was eighteen at the time of the film‟s release, and therefore is one of the youngest actors who has portrayed Katherina. Elizabeth Taylor was thirty-two (a ten year age difference with Richard Burton) and Mary Pickford was thirty-seven (a nine year age difference with Douglas Fairbanks). 177 Director Sam Taylor‟s adaptation of The Taming of the Shrew (1929) was also focussed on the dynamics between husband and wife acting team Douglas Fairbanks (Petruchio) and Mary Pickford (Katherina). Fairbanks was forty-six at the time of the film‟s release. More recently played by actor Rufus Sewell in the BBC television adaptation ShakespeaRE-Told (2005). He was thirty-eight at the time. 178 This seems to be a trend with portraying Petruchio on screen. Both Burton and Fairbanks were also considered screen idols in their own time. 179 Monique L. Pittman, “Taming 10 Things I Hate About You: Shakespeare and the Teenage Film Audience,” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 147. 180 Pittman, “Taming 10 Things,” 147. 181 Burt, “Afterword,” 214. 182 Burt, “Afterword,” 214. 183 Burt, “Afterword,” 214.
56 Kat in any way but rather his behaviour arises out of his „gentle concern for Kat‟s well- being.‟184 Unlike Petruchio, who prevents Katherina from sleeping and eating in order to tame her, Patrick woos and serenades Kat in order to win her over. In 10 Things the physicality of Petruchio and Katherina is instead „transformed into a playful paintball match.‟185 Katherina‟s final declaration of her obedience and submission to Petruchio (V, ii, 146-54) is softened. Kat is not required to make a speech about wifely obedience. Her submission instead comes from her declaration of her feelings for Patrick in her poem read aloud during English Class. Her love for Patrick is that which Kat submits to. Love “tames” her, not Patrick.
As well as Petruchio‟s transformation into the milder Patrick, in 10 Things the representation of patriarchal authority over women that is prevalent in The Taming of the Shrew is also softened. This is accomplished through the change in the characterisation of Kat and Bianca‟s father. In The Taming of the Shrew mercantile Baptista Minola is a man who obviously favours his younger child, Bianca. As Katherina notes, Bianca is Baptista‟s „treasure‟186 (II, i, 32) and is therefore treated more favourably than she is. This feature is carried over to 10 Things, with Kat‟s assumption that her father wants her to be more like Bianca. However, in the end of the film Bianca punches Joey out, and behaves more like Kat than her previous amiable and docile self. Mr Stratford responds honestly that he didn‟t want Kat to be more like Bianca and is impressed that Kat has “rubbed off” on her younger sister:
You know, fathers don't like to admit it when their daughters are capable of running their own lives. It means we've become spectators. Bianca still lets me play a few innings. You've had me on the bench for years.
While he was happy Bianca allowed him to still have some sort of authority over her, therefore making it seem as if he was needed and involved in her life, Kat has taught Bianca how to be strong and independent; both characteristics that Mr Stratford values in Kat. In The Taming of the Shrew Baptista sees his daughters as his possessions to do with as he pleases; he is willing to “sell off” Bianca to the highest bidder (II, i, 331-333) and wants to rid himself of Katherina. To do so he marries her off to Petruchio, the first man who shows interest in her. Contrasting with Baptista‟s attitude towards marrying
184 Burt, “Afterword,” 214. 185 Pittman, “Taming 10 Things,” 147. 186 Bianca is likewise, Mr Stratford‟s „precious.‟
57 Bianca off to whichever suitor can offer the most for her, Baptista informs Petruchio that he will only be allowed to marry Katherina when her love is obtained. (II, i, 124-5) However, he „quickly forgets his pledge to honor her will and expressly acts against her will,‟187 ignoring both Katherina‟s initial statements against wanting to ever marry (I, i, 61-62), and her protestations against marrying Petruchio (II, i, 274-278). In 10 Things Mr Stratford also sees it as his right as a parent to control his daughters, a point which Kat rebels against. She criticises his wanting to control her life, through denying her the right to attend the school of her choice, and wants her father to instead trust her to make her own choices, right or wrong:
KAT Fine. Then stop making my decisions for me.
WALTER I‟m your father. That's my right.
KAT So what I want doesn't matter?
WALTER You're eighteen. You don't know what you want. And you won't know what you want until you're forty-five. And if you get it, you‟ll be too old to use it.
KAT I want to go to an East Coast school! I want you to trust me to make my own choices. And I want you to stop trying to control my life just because you can‟t control yours.
Unlike Baptista, Mr Stratford does not enforce his will nor go against the wishes of his daughters. Kat‟s father might be overprotective and somewhat controlling but he is given reasons for his overbearing behaviour - a genuine concern not only for the issue of teenage pregnancy, to which he is exposed every day, but more importantly the
187 “Kat and Bianca Avenged: Or, Things to Love about 10 Things I Hate About You,” Leslie Wilson, ed, Magazine Americana May 2001, 26 Oct 2005
58 wellbeing of his daughters. Unlike Kate, „Kat has a father who not only listens to her, but also learns from her,‟188 and therefore Mr Stratford relents on this issue of dating and allows his daughters to go to both their schoolmate Bogey‟s party and the high school prom. He also eventually rescinds his opposition of allowing Kat to attend college at Sarah Lawrence through the gesture of paying her tuition. Through the shift in gender politics, 10 Things I Hate About You instead becomes a comedy of „misunderstanding, false starts and eventually love,‟189 and thus brings both The Taming of the Shrew and Junger‟s film into line with conventions of “teen” comedy. 10 Things I Hate About You can be considered what Sarah Neely terms a „makeover‟190 “teen” film, a film targeted at a teenage audience where questions about the construction of identity arise. The focus of 10 Things I Hate About You is on both the status games of contemporary teenage culture and on marketing to the teenage audience of the film. Therefore the film is preoccupied with issues of identity, popularity and reputation all relevant themes to the film‟s teenage audience. Other films that share these characteristics include Clueless (1995) and Cruel Intentions (1999), both of which, like 10 Things, engage in „enmeshing the generic conventions of a teen movie with a “literary” classic.‟191
In referring to Baz Luhrmann‟s Romeo + Juliet Kay Dickinson suggests that „specific semantics…are exchanged between this film and the specific songs on its soundtrack.‟192 Capitalising on the success of the initial soundtrack to Romeo + Juliet and its second volume sequel,193 music in Gil Junger‟s film 10 Things I Hate About You functions in a similar fashion. Music in the film is moulded around various visual and narrative themes, specifically those involving issues of teenage identity such as popularity and reputation, and character traits of protagonist Kat Stratford. Nancy Goodwin observes that in many cases in Junger‟s film the lyrics of the songs used
188 “Kat and Bianca Avenged.” 189 Williams, “One Shrew Thing.” 190 Sarah Neely, “Cool Intentions: The Literary Classic, the Teenpic and the „Chick Flick‟,” Retrovisions: Reinventing the Past in Film and Fiction Deborah Cartmell, I.Q Hunter and Imelda Whelehan, eds (London and Sterling: Pluto, 2001): 76. 191 Diana E. Henderson, “A Shrew for the Times, Revisited,” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD, Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 2003): 137. 192 Kay Dickinson, “Pop, Speed and the 'MTV Aesthetic' in Recent Teen Films,” Scope: An Online Journal of Film Studies June (2001) June 1 2001, 12 Aug 2004
59 suggest the subtext of the film and give clues to the plot better than the script does.194 Working within its “teen” comedy genre frame, 10 Things I Hate About You becomes a collection of small video clips with scenes specifically illustrated by song. An example of this occurs at the beginning of the film. A car full of teenage girls singing along to „One Week‟ by male Pop/Rock band Barenaked Ladies is drowned out as Kat pulls up alongside in her own car, which is blasting the Joan Jett and the Blackhearts‟ song „Bad Reputation.‟ The “war” between songs illustrates, not only Kat‟s character and attitude towards others, but also the contrast between what is popular and unpopular, a theme that is resonant in Junger‟s film.195 Richard Burt argues that Kat is „differentiated from other girls from the start by her interest in (bad) girl rock and roll.‟196 This differentiation, which is marked in the types of songs that are playing - Rock & Roll197 versus relatively “new” Pop/Rock,198 is carried over visually in the type of cars each group is driving. Kat drives a red vintage sports car while the group of girls drives a blue convertible. Kat‟s subversive feminist Punk Rock drowns out what can be argued as the dominant male voice of popular music. The lyrics of the Joan Jett and the Blackhearts song, „I don‟t give a damn about my reputation‟ poignantly illustrate Kat‟s character and attitude throughout the film. Kat makes a point both in her musical taste and in talking with her sister Bianca that she doesn‟t care what other people think of
194 Nancy Goodwin, “10 Things, 2 Elements,” Shakespeare: A magazine for Shakespeare teachers and enthusiasts Last updated Feb 2005, 7 Feb 2005
60 her. This idea of reputation and identity constructed through others‟ perceptions is drawn from issues of identity within the source material for 10 Things, The Taming of the Shrew. The induction at the beginning of The Taming of the Shrew involving the deception of Christopher Sly introduces the problem of identity by „considering how the self takes form.‟199 This can also be applied to the issue of the construction of Katherina‟s identity and whether she is “tamed” at the end of the play. Monique L Pittman observes that Katherina „emerges in Act II only after her identity has been constructed through the description of others.‟200 In 10 Things I Hate About You Kat makes a point both in her musical taste and in talking with her sister Bianca that she doesn‟t care what other people think of her. The use of the Joan Jett song therefore acts as a thematic example of both her understanding but also rejection of the idea that her identity is constructed through the perceptions of others, and the power others have over her because of this. However, that is as strong as the “girl power” message becomes in the film. Michael D Friedman argues that „in addition to establishing Kat‟s hostile non- conformity, this scene begins a pattern of expressing Kat‟s feminist traits in musical terms.‟201 Friedman‟s argument is, however, slightly tenuous considering Kat‟s more extreme musical choices, especially Riot Grrl, are downplayed and parodied in the film.
10 Things I Hate About You is set in the suburbs of Washington,202 which was notably the hub of Riot Grrl movement of the early 1990s. Riot Grrl (sometimes written Riot Grrrl) is a term constructed by mainstream media to describe music, predominantly hardcore Punk Rock203 music known for its feminist stance, which emerged from the Punk and independent music scenes of Washington state, especially the capital city Olympia, and Washington D.C. The Riot Grrl movement came from a reaction to the male-dominated Punk scene and acted as a response to prevalent attitudes of Punk machismo. Riot Grrl music encouraged women and girls to:
199 Pittman, “Taming 10 Things,” 145. 200 Pittman, “Taming 10 Things,” 145. 201 Friedman, 56. 202 10 Things I Hate About You was filmed in both Seattle and Tacoma Washington. The opening shot of the film further establishes the location as somewhere in suburban Seattle as Seattle‟s “Space Needle” is visible. Later in the film Bianca also watches The Real World: Seattle (1998) on television. 203 “Punk Rock” is an “anti-establishment” music genre and movement that emerged in the mid-1970s, out of the perceived excesses of mainstream 1970‟s Rock & Roll. “Punk Rock” bands create fast, hard music, typically with short songs, stripped-down instrumentation and often political or nihilistic lyrics. Shuker, Popular Music, 213-216.
61 take control of the means of cultural production… through producing music and zines (short for “fanzines,” that is, fan magazines produced by fans themselves) that put their own personal experiences at the forefront.204
Riot Grrl musicians were fiercely independent. Most shunned the major record labels, sticking with independently run labels. Riot Grrls often addressed gender-related issues such as rape, domestic abuse, sexuality, animal rights and female empowerment in their lyrics.205 Throughout 10 Things I Hate About You Kat is defined by her musical preference. Sarah Neely argues that music „can be read as a marker of a teen‟s own taste and identity‟206 and Kat‟s taste in “girl Rock” presents her as feisty, tough and independent. Kat uses her bitchery, wit and intelligence to put down those, like her sister, who mindlessly follow the ethos of the popular clique. Riot Grrl music is identified as a big part of Kat‟s life, in so much that is important enough for Patrick to learn about in order to woo her, and it arguably explains a lot of her “attitude.” However, in the final film the presence of, and also Kat‟s contact with Riot Grrl is limited. In 10 Things none of the radical gender politics of the movement find a place, and instead the references to Riot Grrl can be read as an example of the rebellious female voice in the film being covered over and “tamed.” Melissa Jones observes that in 10 Things, women‟s resistance to patriarchal dominance is „reduced to a girl with a grudge.‟207 The radical feminist voice of the Riot Grrl movement is simply relegated to posters adorning the walls of Kat‟s room, including one of the band The Gits,208 and the act of name dropping, as seen when Patrick compares the female fronted band playing in the night club to precursors of the Riot Grrl movement, British band The Raincoats and well known Riot Grrl band Bikini Kill. Friedman argues that this comment is an attempt to link the band Letters to Cleo with the Riot Grrl movement,209 however, the comment is used mainly as a way for Patrick to engage Kat in conversation. Riot Grrl is only deemed important since it becomes one of the things that Patrick has to learn about in order to woo Kat. Any other significance Riot Grrl music may have is dismissed through Cameron later referring to it as: „angry, girl music of the indie-rock persuasion,‟
204 Kristen Schilt, ““Riot Grrrl Is…”: The Contestation over Meaning in a Music Scene,” Music Scenes: Local Translocal and Virtual, Andy Bennett and Richard A. Peterson, eds (Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2004): 115. 205 Shuker, Popular Music, 231-232. 206 Neely, 79. 207 Jones, “An Aweful Rule,” 142. 208 The Gits were a Seattle based band, during the late 1980s and early 1990s. The Gits lead singer Mia Zapata was raped and murdered in 1993 and has become an icon in her death. For more information on The Gits and Mia see their official website: The Gits
62 which to Patrick translates as: „chicks who can't play their instruments.‟ An earlier draft of the film‟s screenplay210 has a fictional band called Gigglepuss from Olympia (home of the Riot Grrl scene) performing at Club Skunk. Friedman suggests tenuously that this is another attempt to connect the film with the Riot Grrl movement.211 However, in the final film the more Pop/Rock friendly Letters to Cleo replaces Gigglepuss. The film therefore „makes a concession to marketing that weakens the force of the film‟s connection between music and feminism,‟212 with an established band, who have two songs on the soundtrack, appearing rather than an unknown, or “made for the movie,” band with connections to Riot Grrl. Due to this concession there are noticeably no songs by Riot Grrl bands within the film or on the soundtrack.
The only music that appears both in the film and on the soundtrack is the Pop/Rock radio friendly Letters to Cleo and even then, only two of their original tracks appear, albeit briefly, in the film,213 the rest are “cover songs.” These are „Cruel To Be Kind „originally by Nick Lowe and „I Want You To Want Me‟ originally by band Cheap Trick. A cover song, also known as a “cover version,” is a new rendition of a previously recorded song. Often used in film soundtracks, cover songs are often designed to fit into the structure of each film they appear in, and to suit the taste of the contemporary audience for which they were made. In 10 Things I Hate About You cover songs are also used as a marketing strategy, an idea which I will further explore later in this chapter. Through the use of cover songs, viewers of the film, who do not necessarily fit the teenage demographic that the film is predominantly marketed to, are also catered for. They are eased into and form a connection to the film through the presence of recognisable songs that were past hits. These new takes on older songs also introduces the audience to the possibly unfamiliar contemporary sound of Pop/Rock band Letters to Cleo.214 The cover songs are the centrepieces of the musical selections within the film, and they are the only songs sung by Letters to Cleo in the 10 Things I Hate About You that appear on the film‟s soundtrack.
210 Karen McCullah Lutz and Kirsten Smith, “10 Things I Hate About You - Revision November 12, 1997,” The Daily Script 18 Oct 2004
63 Critical of the use of female fronted bands covering songs by male artists, Richard Burt complains that the covers used in the film are „nearly identical to the originals except for the gender of the voices.‟215 He further suggests that this leads to a covering over of the “rebellious” female voice in the film by limiting it to simply being a copy of the male voice.216 Burt‟s observations are demonstrated by the replacement of the rebellious voice in the film, Kat‟s feminist rhetoric with its ties to Riot Grrl, by the more palatable sounding and less political, female-fronted Pop/Rock band Letters to Cleo. Rather than the music of a Riot Grrl band, throughout 10 Things Pop/Rock band Letters to Cleo is identified as representative of Kat‟s voice. A connection between the two is first established when Letters to Cleo are revealed to be Kat‟s favourite band that she goes to see live at Club Skunk. While Friedman argues that this „sequence sets up Kat‟s attraction to Riot Grrl music,‟217 Patrick and not Kat makes the connection between Letters to Cleo and Riot Grrl bands such as Bikini Kill. I would instead suggest that this scene sets up Kat‟s love of “chick Rock” and of music in general. This scene emphasises the connection between Letters to Cleo and Kat, and not necessarily a desire on Kat‟s part to become a “do-it yourself” Riot Grrl musician, but simply a desire to start a band. This connection is something that Kat freely admits to, when after hearing Letters to Cleo playing on the car radio on their way home from schoolmate Bogie Lowenstein‟s party Kat says to Patrick: „I should do this…start a band.‟ A further link between Kat and Letters to Cleo is established at the end of the film, where the band plays atop the roof of Padua High School. The camera zooms in on Kay Hanley, lead singer of the band, suggesting that she anticipates what Kat plans to become, a musician. 218
Letters to Cleo‟s presence at the end of the film playing atop the Padua High‟s roof further draws attention to how the rebellious female voice in 10 Things I Hate About You is covered over and “tamed.” Burt argues that this ending sets up the romantic economy as one of „loss recoverable with interest.‟219 Patrick is able to buy Kat off with a musical instrument every time he does something stupid. Kat‟s protests are silenced both by a kiss and by a cover of Cheap Trick‟s „I Want You To Want Me as sung by Letters to Cleo, echoing Petruchio‟s words in The Taming of the Shrew that silence Katherina, „Come and kiss me, Kate‟ (V, ii, 180). Burt‟s argument against the use of
215 Burt, “Afterword,” 218. 216 Burt, “Afterword,” 219. 217 Friedman, 57. 218 Burt, “Afterword,” 219. 219 Burt, “Afterword,” 219.
64 cover songs does not, however, take into account the impact of the lyrics of the songs, which work to convey feelings, emotions and themes in the film. Simon Frith suggests that a use of a particular song in a film can become:
a kind of commentary on the film: the singers represent us, the audience, and our response to the film, but also become our teachers, making sure we got the film‟s emotional message.220
Music acts as an audience‟s “reading” of the film. Cover songs also function as a marketing ploy, something which plays on the nostalgia of older audience members of the film and “teen” film in general. The lyrics of the songs performed by Letters to Cleo convey what Kat cannot, or is unwilling to say to Patrick and others, and highlight the underlying feelings and mood of the scenes they are in. Frith observes that one of the ways in which music functions in a film is as an example of emotional reality:
Music…can convey and clarify the emotional significance of a scene, the true, „real‟ feelings of the characters involved in it. Music, in short, signals what‟s „underneath‟ or „behind a film‟s observable gestures.221
As previously observed, in 10 Things I Hate About You there is a connection established between Letters to Cleo (and especially their lead singer Kay Hanley) and Kat Stratford. The two cover songs performed by the band Letters to Cleo act as example, of songs conveying the emotional significance and “real” feelings of the character of Kat Stratford. Letters to Cleo‟s cover of the Cheap Trick song „I Want You To Want Me‟ follows on from Kat‟s sonnet. Both the sonnet and the use of Letters to Cleo‟s cover of „I Want You To Want Me‟ serve as symbolic representations of the end of Kat‟s resistance to Patrick and as previously asserted, the “taming” of the rebellious female voice in the film. The model for Kat‟s sonnet (which is in fact not a sonnet at all) comes from Shakespeare‟s Sonnet 141, „In faith, I do not love thee with mine eyes.‟222 Read earlier by her English teacher in class the first four lines of Sonnet 141 are the basis for Kat‟s poem and for the title of the film:
220 Simon Frith, “Mood Music: An Inquiry into Narrative Film Music,” Screen 25 Nov 3 (1984): 79. 221 Frith, “Mood Music,” 83-4. 222 William Shakespeare, “Sonnet 141,” The Sonnets, G. Blakemore Evans, ed (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999): 103.
65 In faith I do not love thee with mine eyes, For they in thee a thousand errors note; But 'tis my heart that loves what they despise, Who, in despite of view, is pleased to dote.223
Kat‟s poem is at first a list of things she hates about Patrick: „I hate the way you talk to me and the way you cut your hair.‟ However, her poem ends with renouncement of her hostility towards him for hurting her: „But mostly I hate the way I don‟t hate you, Not even close, not even a little bit, Not even at all.‟ This echoes the sentiment of the beginning of Shakespeare‟s Sonnet, that is despite everything that Patrick has done, Kat still loves him and cannot resist him, she is her „proud heart‟s slave.‟224 The lyrics of „I Want You To Want Me‟ further reiterate the idea brought up in Kat‟s poem, of her being a slave to love. The line „I want you to want me/I need you to need me/I'd love you to love me‟ signals the end of Kat‟s resistance to Patrick. Unlike earlier in the film when Kat was uninterested in both the idea of dating and in Patrick‟s attraction to her, now Kat wants him to want her. The lyrics also convey Kat‟s sense of desperation; the lyrics suggest someone begging to be loved; and need for Patrick that „recaptures…Kate‟s posture of humiliation‟225 in The Taming of the Shrew. Kat feels equally humiliated and weak for the power her love for Patrick has over her. Katherine Minola‟s call for wives to acquiesce to their husband‟s will and „place your hands below your husband‟s foot‟ (V, ii, 177) and subsequent demonstration of this act of humiliation and submission finds a mirror in the lyrics „I'll shine up my old brown shoes/Put on a brand new shirt/Get home early from work/If you say that you love me.‟ These lyrics suggest giving in to love and the power one person has over another who is in love with them. Patrick is the one, who Kat admits in both her poem and through the lyrics of the song, now has power over her. She would do anything for Patrick, including forgiving him for hurting her, because she loves him. Through this admission Kat‟s rebellion and open hostility against conformity and the idea of dating is silenced.
Letters to Cleo‟s cover of Nick Lowe‟s „Cruel to Be Kind‟ is heard on two occasions in 10 Things I Hate About You. It functions as aurally symbolic of both the theme of reputation and of Kat and Patrick‟s revelation of their “true” selves to each other. The song firstly plays in the car as Patrick drives a drunken and possibly concussed Kat back
223 Shakespeare, “Sonnet 141,” Lines 1-4. 224 Shakespeare, “Sonnet 141,” Line 12. 225 Jones, “An Aweful Rule,” 139.
66 home after Bogie Lowenstein‟s party. As „Cruel to Be Kind‟ plays Kat reveals to Patrick what she wants to do, her desire to start a band. She also reveals her understanding and sarcastic rejection of how others perceive her, when she tells Patrick: „The only thing people know about me is that I‟m “scary”.‟ Kat is not what she seems. Through the use of the song the audience is positioned to read Kat‟s bitchiness, sarcastic comments and “shrewish” attitude as a cover. The line „cruel to be kind‟ implies a reason for her attitude, Kat‟s „ferocious exterior is a defence for a softer Kat beneath,‟226 and through her cruelty and attitude she shows her kindness and love. Patrick is also revealed to be nothing like his reputed self. He is both kind and a gentleman, whose concern for and care of a drunken Kat including driving her home leads to her dropping her hostility towards Patrick and admitting to him: „You‟re not as vile as I thought you were.‟ The audience is invited to read this as translating to “I like you” on Kat‟s part, when after this statement she leans over and tries to kiss Patrick. However, Patrick refuses to take advantage of the situation and Kat misreads his behaviour as a rejection of her advances and she again becomes hostile and storms out of the car. The second time „Cruel to Be Kind‟ is heard is at the Padua High Prom when Patrick, much to the delight of Kat, arranges for her favourite band (Letters to Cleo) to play at the prom as a surprise. Once again the song is tied in to themes of reputation and acts of revelation. As the band plays and Patrick and Kat dance together he reveals to her that he is nothing like the outlandish rebel he is rumoured to be. Instead of all the outrageous things Patrick had apparently been engaging in during his year of absence from school, he had actually been caring for a sick grandparent.
Music in 10 Things I Hate About You also illustrates the cross marketing formula of film, in particular how the film is targeted at a wider demographic than simply a teenage audience. Burt notes that with the „closer relation between MTV, film, and video, spin- off soundtracks are crucially important to gaining a market for teensploi film.‟227 The soundtrack to 10 Things I Hate About You is populated not with Riot Grrl or any of the angry “girl Rock” that Kat listens to but with a variety of less harsh and “in-your-face” artists, both new and old covering a number of genres. This marketing standpoint is what Sarah Neely terms as „necessary to avoid exclusion.‟228 The soundtrack includes songs not only from various genres but also from various generations, leaving room for
226 Carr, F.4. 227 Burt, “Afterword,” 217. 228 Neely, 75.
67 adult to relive their teenage days, as well as teenagers to explore their own.229 Friedman poignantly explains the marketing strategy behind the selection of older songs in “teen” film:
teen comedies tend to examine a teen‟s life from the perspective of current adults, and they often feature a “retro” soundtrack that recalls the high school of today‟s thirty – and forty something generation.230
All but one of the cover songs performed in the film are included on the soundtrack231 and these combined with several “retro”232 songs, both on the soundtrack and in the film, function as a marketing ploy that plays on the nostalgia of older audience members of the film.
The choice of music both used in the film and present on the film‟s soundtrack can be also read by what Kay Dickinson refers to as the commercial manipulation of the “MTV aesthetic.”233 Highlighting the increasingly, horizontally-integrated nature of major film, television and music corporations, Dickinson draws attention to the promotion of music via film and vice versa.234 This cross-media marketing is set up to sell products, be they tickets to films, DVDs or copies of the soundtrack, to the teenage audience. The interweaving of entertainment companies is influential to how music is marketed and works in 10 Things. When producing film soundtracks in many cases the „deals done are simply between different divisions of the same entertainment conglomerate.‟235 10 Things I Hate About You is produced by Touchstone Pictures and distributed by Buena Vista Pictures. Both these companies are subsidiaries of Disney. Disney in turn owns Hollywood Records, who produced and distributed the soundtrack to the film. Several artists who appear on the soundtrack were signed at the time to Hollywood Records. It is much more convenient and commercially viable for a company to stick with using songs by artists from either an affiliated company, rather than to have to deal with licensing difficulties over the use of several songs. That would require dealing with
229 Neely, 76. 230 Friedman, 62. 231 The two cover songs by Letters to Cleo, renditions of Cheap Trick‟s „I Want You To Want Me‟ and Nick Lowe‟s „Cruel To Be Kind.‟ The only cover song not included is Patrick‟s version of Frankie Vallie‟s „Can‟t Take My Eyes Off Of You.‟ 232 By the term “retro” I refer to aspects of modern culture, for example music, film, television, and fashion, that is imitative or derivative of past trends, modes or attitudes. 233 Dickinson, “Pop, Speed and the 'MTV Aesthetic.” 234 Dickinson, “Pop, Speed and the 'MTV Aesthetic.” 235 Lack, 220.
68 numerous artists, record labels, and publishers. The use of songs by artists on an affiliated record label also allows for exposure for up and coming artists, as well as testing the market for the viability of future releases by the artists. An example of this is Jessica Riddle, whose debut song „Even Angels Fall‟ appeared on the soundtrack. „Even Angels Fall‟ also appears on her debut album Key of A Minor that was released the following year (2000) on Hollywood Records. Musical artists from the soundtrack also appear within the film itself. Both Save Ferris236 and Letters to Cleo appear in 10 Things. The image of Letters to Cleo playing on the rooftop of Padua High closes the film, thus emphasising how important music is within the film, and acting as a reminder for the audience to go out and buy the soundtrack. Through this the film implies that the audience can be like the characters in 10 Things. Having their music used in a film also assures wider airplay for artists,237 and later on footage from the film can also serve as a substitute for a music video. This not only serves as a cheaper alternative to a normal music video, but encourages people to go out and buy other albums from the artists, as well as the soundtrack to the film and also to re-watch the film.
As with music, intertextual references are used in 10 Things I Hate About You as a way to convey director Gil Junger‟s comments on the youth culture he is representing within his film. These intertextual references take two forms, references to Shakespeare and his play The Taming of the Shrew, the basis for 10 Things, and references to popular culture of the 1980s and 1990s including the “teen” films of John Hughes. 10 Things I Hate About You „foregrounds Shakespeare‟s status as cultural icon‟238 and uses the figure of Shakespeare to “authorise” the message about teenage culture and identity within the film. At the same time the film plays against what Richard Burt terms the „cinematic vogue‟239 Shakespeare developed as a result of the popularity and success of Baz Luhrmann‟s Romeo + Juliet. Both are achieved through token references to the play The Taming of the Shrew, the source material for the plot of 10 Things, previous film versions of The Taming of the Shrew, as well as references to and the “presence” of Shakespeare himself as cultural and historical figure within the film. Ariane M. Balizet argues that 10 Things constructs a filmic world in which „Shakespeare as author is the
236 The band Save Ferris take their name from a catchphrase in 1980s “teen comedy” cult classic Ferris Bueller‟s Day Off (1986). Teen films from the 1980s, specifically those directed by John Hughes are especially influential to 10 Things I Hate About You. I shall explore the connection between 10 Things and the films of John Hughes later in the section on intertextual references. 237 Dickinson. “Pop, Speed and the 'MTV Aesthetic.” 238 Burt, “Afterword,” 215. 239 Burt, “Afterword,” 208.
69 touchstone of the high school English classroom and „“Shakespeare” bleeds into everyday life.‟240 An example is found in an early scene set in the English class of Padua High. Kat‟s teacher Mr. Morgan begins the class by asking the students what they thought of author Ernest Hemingway‟s novel The Sun Also Rises. This leads to a disagreement between Kat and Mr. Morgan over the canon of literature being taught in class. Kat critiques Hemingway‟s place on the syllabus with her cutting remark: „I guess in this society being male and an asshole makes you worthy of our time,‟ before asking Mr. Morgan to consider addressing what she sees as a distinct lack of “great” female writers such as Sylvia Plath241 or Charlotte Brontë on the class reading list. While validating Kat‟s objection to the reading list, Mr. Morgan‟s sarcastic retort also points out that Kat‟s “anti-canon” critique is somewhat bound by her limited perspective242 as a white middle upper-class female. Through his comment: „ask „em why they can‟t buy a book written by a black man,‟ Mr. Morgan notes that factors other than gender, such as race, also serve as reasons for an author to be excluded from the canon. The mise en scène reinforces both his argument and Kat‟s. Of all the posters of various authors that adorn the walls of the English classroom, only one is female, the rest are male. All are white.243 Mr. Morgan then recites Shakespeare‟s „Sonnet 141‟ - the basis for a class assignment - in a “Rap” style performance. Translating Shakespeare‟s words into language associated with African-American mass culture244 illustrates how culturally relevant Shakespeare‟s poetry is, and is used by Mr. Morgan to gain his students‟ interest in the subject matter. Through Mr. Morgan‟s comment: „Shakespeare knows his shit‟ he demonstrates his respect of Shakespeare, a respect that transgresses his earlier criticism of the exclusionary nature of the canon. Despite the fact that Shakespeare is white Mr. Morgan‟s statement reveals that he believes his work is both relevant and „worthy of our time.‟ Kat‟s acceptance of the assignment and eagerness,245 which Mr. Morgan mistakes for sarcasm, also demonstrates her own respect for Shakespeare and his work, despite his gender. Thus the disagreement of the reading list and canon is overcome through a mutual love and understanding of Shakespeare.
240 Balizet, 129. 241 Kat is later seen sitting down at home reading Sylvia Plath‟s The Bell Jar (1963), indicating that „she is not simply advocating women authors on principal, but reading them because she enjoys their work.‟ Jones, “An Aweful Rule,” 141. 242 Jones, “An Aweful Rule,” 142. 243 Burt, “Afterword,” 213. 244 Burt, “Afterword,” 216. 245 Kat asks her teacher Mr. Morgan whether the poem needs to be written in iambic pentameter, but fails to deliver on this in her final poem.
70 Melissa Jones notes, at Padua High school, „Shakespeare acts as a uniting sign of “our way of life”.‟246 This unity is not only limited to classroom disagreements but also filters through into the students‟ everyday lives. In 10 Things I Hate About You Shakespeare is presented as the „ultimate authority in romantic love,‟247 more specifically heterosexual romance. Any gay references are dismissed, as seen in the case of Bianca‟s assertion that her sister Kat is not harbouring any same-sex desires, or parodied, as seen in the gay references brought up between Michael and Cameron, which are joked about or „disavowed.‟248 In 10 Things, the figure of Shakespeare is used to unite various characters through love. The characters Michael and Mandella first connect through a mutual love and reciting of a line from Macbeth. Quoting Shakespeare legitimises Michael‟s wooing.249 The culmination of their relationship occurs at the prom. Mandella, who is not only a fan of Shakespeare but declares she is “involved” with him, dances with Michael, who has come dressed as Shakespeare. The physical manifestation of Shakespeare at the climax of the film brings the various couples together and gives them his “blessing.” Director Junger also uses the „authority of “Shakespeare” to legitimise a unique representation of adolescent life‟250 he presents in 10 Things. The film employs Shakespeare to authorise the message presented. This message is that the “project” of adolescence is „self-awareness,‟251 and that self- awareness comes from revelation. Shakespeare is present in proxy form at the prom via Michael‟s costume, and oversees the unfolding of events that reveals the major plot device of Patrick‟s acceptance of the bet to date Kat. Preceding this, the prom is also the scene of various characters revealing their real motivations and true identities to each other. Bianca learns from her friend Chastity that the real reason Joey wanted to date her was to deflower her. Kat also discloses the explanation as to why she kicked Bobby Ridgeway in the testicles, telling Patrick that he (Bobby): „deserved it. He tried to grope me in the lunch line.‟ Patrick and the audience learn that Kat‟s attack on Bobby, which is never seen on screen and therefore adds to her reputation as a „heinous bitch,‟ was justified. Kat was simply defending herself from a sexual assault rather than lashing out without reason. The reputation she has received as being militant, violent and scary is revealed to be for the most part unfounded. Patrick‟s reputation is also found to be
246 Jones, “An Aweful Rule,” 143. 247 Burt, “Afterword,” 216. 248 Burt, “Afterword,” 215. 249 Chris Anthony, “Shakespeare Goes to School: Intertextuality and Appropriation in 10 Things I Hate About You, O and Hamlet,” Chris Anthony: Music, Journalism and Media Relations, Last updated 2004, 26 Oct 2005
71 fallacious, when he informs Kat of his whereabouts for the past year, the subject of debate for his fellow-classmates and a running joke throughout the film:
That's where I was last year. I wasn't in jail, I don't know Marilyn Manson, and I didn‟t sleep with a Spice Girl, I don‟t think. You see, my grandpa, he was ill, so I spent most of the year on his couch watching Wheel of Fortune and making Spaghettios. End of story.
Patrick‟s comment about taking care of his grandfather discloses that he is far from the wild rebel he has been made out to be. He is simply a kind grandson looking after a sick relative. Shakespeare‟s connection to characters‟ self awareness is also present in the basis for Kat‟s poem, „Sonnet 141.‟ Kat‟s poem reveals both the depth of her feelings for Patrick but also the hurt he has caused her by lying to her.
At the same time as foregrounding Shakespeare as icon and employing his status to “authorise” the “message” about teenage culture presented, 10 Things I Hate About You also uses references to Shakespeare and his works in order to parody the cinematic craze for adaptations of Shakespeare on film during the 1990s. 10 Things plays against the popularity and success of adaptations of Shakespeare on film, more specifically the box office success of Baz Luhrmann‟s film Romeo + Juliet, through the film‟s advertising.252 On film posters advertising 10 Things the tag line at the bottom reads „Romeo, Oh Romeo, Get Out Of My Face.‟253 Through its parody of a well known line from Romeo and Juliet, Junger‟s film adaptation is presented as a backlash against both the idea of romantic love presented in Luhrmann‟s film, echoing Kat‟s own resistance to love, and to Luhrmann‟s film in terms of its form as Shakespearean adaptation. 10 Things therefore positions itself as an “anti-Shakespeare” Shakespearean film adaptation. This position is further reinforced through the minimal presence of any Shakespearean lines in the film. Rather than overtly referencing Shakespeare‟s play- text, 10 Things uses token references to the plot of The Taming of the Shrew, and even then, as many critics and film reviewers have observed, there are notable differences between Shakespeare‟s play-text and the film‟s screenplay. The only direct reference to
252 Burt, “Afterword,” 208. 253 The film‟s other tagline found on the promotional poster, „How Do I Loathe Thee, Let Me Count The Ways‟ is a parody of the line „How do I love thee? Let me count the ways.‟ This line comes from „Sonnet 43‟ from Sonnets from the Portuguese by Elizabeth Barrett Browning. The tag line thus pokes fun at the Sonnet form, the basis for the poem that Kat writes, which in turn is the basis for the film‟s title, a list of ten things she hates about Patrick.
72 lines from The Taming of the Shrew comes from Cameron in his declaration of feelings for Bianca: „I Burn! I pine, I perish‟ (I, i, 146). All other references to both Shrew and Shakespeare himself are presented as tongue-in-cheek. Phrases that may be considered „heightened prose,‟254 for example Michael‟s exclamation of: „The shit hath hitteth the fan-ith,‟ are actually parodies of what I term “Shakespeare-speak,” language that invokes Shakespearean prose. Other examples of token references to Shakespeare include Bianca and Kat‟s surname being Stratford (changed from the play‟s Minola) Patrick‟s surname being Verona (the hometown of the play‟s Petruchio) and the name of the High School the students attend being Padua High (The Taming of the Shrew is set in the Italian town of Padua). All these references serve to “poke fun” at the source material for the film and add to its humour.
Going hand-in-hand with “teen” film, what is popular at the time of making the films is influential to the demographic being targeted by the film. This allows for the audience to be able to better relate with the characters and the events within the film. As a “teen” film Gil Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You is filled with various references to popular culture of the 1980s and 1990s. References to popular brand names such as Prada and Skechers are examples of how the film is driven by and dominated by marketing towards teenage consumers. References in the film also critique the way in which teenage identity is formed through appearances and brand names and „has little to do with individuality or what is below the surface.‟255 The opening of the film, where veteran Padua High student Michael introduces new student Cameron to the various school cliques, aptly illustrates this. Sarah Neely observes that what Michael points out is the superficiality of the groups‟ named identity:
The coffee drinkers are shown with a cup of coffee, the white rastas are only so because they „smoke a lot of weed‟, the cowboys‟ closest connection to cattle is through McDonalds.256
Rather than being dictated by behaviour, the way these various social groups are represented is only tokenistic and is largely based on their outward appearance. Characters are defined by what they wear not who they are. Those who play into this formation of identity are portrayed as figures of fun, for example the “white rastas.”
254 Goodwin, “10 Things, 2 Elements.” 255 Neely, 77. 256 Neely, 77.
73 Their appearance is a visual gag. They are shown to be white boys with dreadlocks and Jamaican berets, and as Michael describes them: „they think they're black,‟ so they act accordingly. Their appearance dictates their behaviour as seen in their response of: „That‟s right mon!‟ (said in a Jamaican accent) to Mr. Morgan‟s voicing of the issue of the lack of black authors on the English class syllabus. This in turn is greeted with the critical: „Don‟t even get me started on you two‟ by Mr. Morgan. The audience is positioned to find their behaviour and appearance amusing because the “white rastas” are trying to be something they are not.
Films such as Cruel Intentions, 10 Things I Hate About You, She‟s All That and Clueless are all developed from within in the “teen pic” genre and share many of the characteristics that are unique to this genre.257 One of the most significant characteristics is the way in which the female characters are defined through what they wear.258 Ann Thompson notes the presence of this “appearance and reality” theme within The Taming of the Shrew. When Petruchio is criticised for his inappropriate wedding attire he responds with:
To me she‟s married, not unto my clothes. Could I repair what she will wear in me As I can change these poor accoutrements. „Twere well for Kate and better for myself. (III, ii, 107-10)
And later, he tells Katherina not to be concerned about going back to her father‟s house in her old clothes:
For „tis the mind that makes the body rich, And as the sun breaks through the darkest clouds, So honour peereth in the meanest habit. Why, is the jay more precious than the lark Because his feathers are more beautiful? (IV, iii, 166-70)
257 Neely, 79. All are also “teen films” from the 1990s and adaptations of literary works. 258 Neely, 79.
74 Both cases demonstrate Petruchio‟s „moralising on the lack of necessary congruity between the clothing and the person underneath it.‟259 In 10 Things I Hate About You the idea that what you wear defines who you are ties in with the themes of reputation and teenage identity with its links to popularity. Petruchio/Patrick continues his moralising on the themes of identity, popularity and reputation through his comment to Kat at Bogey‟s party of: „I say, do what you wanna do.‟ However, the idea that what you wear defines who you are is chiefly critiqued through the female figures of Kat and her sister Bianca. As previously noted Kat is defined by her musical choices. She is also visually defined through what she wears rather than who she is “inside.” Kat‟s comment about being seen as “scary” by fellow students goes hand in hand with her attire, as expressed in Joey‟s quip to her as she walks down a hallway at school dressed in a camouflage print shirt: „Your little Rambo look is out, Kat. Didn‟t you read last month‟s Cosmo?‟ Kat is defined as militant through what she wears and through her reputed character, a „heinous bitch.‟ Kat may be verbally vicious at times, as seen in her criticism of Hemingway in English class, but as she says to Ms Perky in defence of her outburst in class: „Expressing my opinion is not a terrorist action.‟ The only physical damage Kat causes that is presented on screen260 is that to Joey‟s car.261 Her attack on Bobby Ridgeway is relayed by Ms Perky, but is later presented as justified when Kat reveals to Patrick that Bobby sexually harassed her. As I have argued is the case with Katherina in The Taming of the Shrew,262 how others see Kat is coloured by her reputation, who others think she is. The idea that reputation defines identity and is linked with popularity is something Kat takes issue with, and she „balks at the compromise to her personal integrity that is required by this conformist attitude and refuses to play along.‟263 Kat rebels by refusing to care what others think of her, her attitude revealed in her comment to her sister Bianca of: „You don‟t always have to be who they want you to be, you know?‟ Kat views her sister Bianca as playing into how
259 Thompson, The Taming of the Shrew, 34. 260 Bianca proves more Shrewish than her sister as her physical aggression towards another person is seen on screen, whereas Kat‟s is not. She punches Joey Donner twice in the nose, once for making her date, Cameron, bleed and once for what he did to her sister, and then kicks him in the groin, saying: „and that's for me.‟ This action is not presented as abhorrent but is instead approved of. When Kat relays the story of what happened at the prom to her father, rather than being upset, he is impressed. 261 Even then, Kat‟s attack on Joey‟s pristine expensive red sports car can be viewed as an attack on the idea of appearances dictating identity. Joey, as male model, is the ultimate example of this idea that teenage identity is formed through appearances, and has little to do with individuality or what is below the surface. Joey is a shallow conceited “pretty boy” who can only talk about his looks and his modelling jobs. Bianca‟s punching of Joey at the prom also echoes her sister‟s aggression. She has finally learnt how to be strong and to be herself. 262 Katherina‟s identity as vicious shrew has been constructed by the description of others before she appears in the beginning of Act II. 263 Friedman, 49.
75 others see her simply for the sake of popularity. Michael Friedman characterises Bianca as someone who cares deeply about popularity, „which she attributes partly to pleasing other people and living up to their expectations.‟264 She seeks the approval of others and is presented as initially defined by how others see her, aptly demonstrated in her reply to Kat‟s advice, where she admits: „I am perfectly happy being adored.‟ 10 Things further sets up Bianca‟s physical desirability as the key to her popularity among the young men at her high school.265 Bianca is set apart from her sister Kat through her trendier popular brand name clothing and her acceptance of being defined through appearances. The acceptance of being defined by what you wear is parodied in the film through Bianca‟s shallow observations to her friend Chastity on the difference between what it is to like and love something:
BIANCA There's a difference between like and love. I mean I like my Skechers. But I love my Prada backpack.
CHASTITY But I love my Skechers.
BIANCA That's because you don't have a Prada backpack.
As with her own identity, Bianca defines what it is to like and love something by material surface appearances, in this case brand names, rather than by substance.266 Bianca‟s initial perfect happiness with being an object of desire and affection and also with being defined exclusively through what she wears and not who she is, is seen as a lack of substance on Bianca‟s part. The way Bianca dresses and acts simply draws attention to herself as “empty” object, a point which Patrick makes clear in his observation to Kat: „I know everyone digs your sister, but…she‟s without.‟ Michael informs Cameron during his education on the structure of the school‟s various cliques, Bianca belongs to the: „Don‟t even think about it group,‟ and further describes Bianca as a:
264 Friedman, 49. 265 Friedman, 60. 266 This explains her attraction to Joey, who as a male model is the epitome of appearance over substance.
76 snotty little Princess wearing a strategically planned sun dress to make guys like us realize we can never touch her, and guys like… Joey, realize they want to.
Michael‟s comments highlight the fact that Bianca‟s manipulative nature is expressed through the way she dresses. This characterisation is carried over from The Taming of the Shrew. Diane Dreher notes that Bianca, her father‟s favourite and pursued by many admirers, „manipulates men with her beauty.‟267 Michael‟s comment to Cameron notes that this modern Bianca is no different. She too uses the way she dresses to gain advantage over the men in her life. Bianca only abandons this practice when Chastity‟s disclosure of Joey‟s motives for dating Bianca reveals that she does not in fact have any of the control and power over men, which up this point she considered her appearance afforded to her. Only after Bianca sees her superficial behaviour reflected in Joey Donner‟s shallow preening and posing for party-goers at Bogey Lowenstein‟s party does she begin to change. Bianca realises that she is not happy with simply being adored for her looks. Cameron‟s confrontation with her selfish behaviour enlightens her to the possibility of being liked for who she is. Bianca realises that Cameron cares about her, not because she is simply a pretty face.268 He sees the substance beyond the surface, and Bianca encourages his affections because he „treats her the way she wants to be treated.‟269
In Gil Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You pop culture references present in the film include allusions to various “teen” films, and 10 Things is driven by the conventions of “teen” comedy, „specifically as they have been shaped by the films of John Hughes.‟270 John Hughes, a noted film director, producer and writer, was responsible for some of the most successful comedy films of the 1980s, including Sixteen Candles (1984), The Breakfast Club (1985), Weird Science (1985), Pretty in Pink (1986), and Ferris Bueller's Day Off (1986). These films dealt with the tragi-comedy of adolescence, including the complex social hierarchies of high school, issues of teenage angst and the social dynamics of the formation of teenage identity. Maura Kelly observes that Hughes'
267 Diane Elizabeth Dreher, Dominance and Defiance (Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky, 1986): 109. 268 While Cameron is initially attracted to Bianca because of her looks, as Friedman observes, Cameron is attracted by the „purity of Bianca‟s image‟ (Friedman, 60). Rather than simply wanting to sleep with her like Joey, Cameron‟s attempts to woo Bianca and his comment when he first sees her, „I mean, look at the way she smiles, and look at her eyes man. She‟s totally pure. You‟re missing what‟s there‟ reveals that he sees something beyond her superficiality and beauty. Eventually Cameron does get to know who Bianca really is. 269 Friedman, 61. 270 Friedman, 45.
77 movies made „the awkward angst of adolescence funny and bearable without romanticizing or glorifying it.‟271 By framing 10 Things through the genre of “teen” film, the focus of Junger‟s adaptation is significantly different to previous adaptations of The Taming of the Shrew on film. Unlike previous productions of The Taming of the Shrew which have focussed on themes such as „the mercantile aspects of courtship,‟272 and the issues of gender politics and marriage that dominate Zeffirelli‟s film adaptation, Junger uses the plot to present issues and themes relevant to the teenage audience the film is marketed to. These issues are tied up with the theme of formation of identity, more specifically issues of popularity. The films of John Hughes that are particularly influential to Gil Junger‟s film 10 Things I Hate About You are what Janet Maslin refers to as the „Molly Ringwald trilogy.‟273 So called because they all star actress Molly Ringwald, the films Sixteen Candles, The Breakfast Club and Pretty in Pink274 are particularly influential in terms of their representation of teenage feminine identity and their critique of social cliques in high school. The first of these aesthetic links to Hughes‟ films is the suburban setting. 10 Things I Hate About You takes place in a „super-affluent all-American never-never land where high schoolers drive fancy cars and have lavish wardrobes.‟275 The film shares a similar setting with Hughes‟ films, a predominantly white upper “middle-class” world where characters have no real money problems.276 In 10 Things Mr. Morgan makes a point of referencing this upper “middle- class” suburban world in his criticism of Kat during their discussion on canon of literature in English class. The parallel between 10 Things and the films of John Hughes is further cemented in characters‟ concern with popularity and high school status. Both films present a world where characters care about being liked and accepted and about the compromises that go into winning their friends‟ approval.277 John Lewis notes that in Hughes‟ Pretty in Pink we find a high school world „dominated by social-class drawn cliques.‟278 In another of Hughes‟ films, The Breakfast Club, each teenage character
271 Maura Kelly, “John Hughes,” Salon Jul 17 2001, 4 Oct 2005
78 initially plays into „prevailing one-dimensional stereotype(s),‟279 corresponding to quintessential school cliques, the popular rich snob, the rebel, the jock, the outcast, and the nerd. Similarly in 10 Things characters are „preoccupied with their social standing in relation to other members of their cliques and very sensitive to the boundaries between social groups.280 These social cliques are parodied in the scene at the beginning of the film where Michael gives Cameron a tour around campus.
As I have previously argued, popularity is a big concern with characters in 10 Things such as Bianca, who desperately wants to fit in and be liked. Bianca‟s primary concern at the beginning of the film is being adored, a point which she admits to her sister. In order to achieve this and to “fit in” she succumbs to the conformist attitude that is required to please people by playing into their expectations of her. Contrasting with this are the attitudes of both Kat and Patrick. In The Taming of the Shrew both Katherina and Petruchio rebel against the specific expectations of how a person should behave. Katherina does not play the traditional female role or being polite and subservient towards men. Kate is instead brash, does not follow orders and talks back not only to her father and Petruchio, and is therefore considered to be a “shrew.” Equally Petruchio does not act according to expectations, demonstrated in his ostentatious behaviour at his wedding to Katherina. When he shows up to the wedding dressed is mismatched clothes, Baptista points out that Petruchio is acting both shamefully and against popular convention:
Now sadder that you come so unprovided. Fie, doff this habit, shame to your estate. An eye-sore to our solemn festival. (III, ii, 89-91)
Petruchio defends his choice in clothing, declaring that Kate is marrying him and not his clothes, indicating that who he is beneath the attire he wears is not the same as the attire itself. As with Katherina and Petruchio, both Kat and Patrick aren‟t considered popular. Kat and Patrick both rebel against the high school code of popularity and both make statements against following peer pressure and compromising identity in order to fit in. Their ethos of “doing what you want to do, and being who you want to be,” is echoed in
279 Jen Chaney. “Anyone? Anyone? …” PopPolitics 3 „Identity,‟ Nov 19 2000, 10 Nov 2005
79 the banner found in Mr. Morgan‟s English classroom. Its slogan of: „What is popular is not always right; what is right is not always popular,‟ itself serves as a critique of what it is to be popular at Padua High, an example of which can be found in the contrasting characters of Joey Donner and Cameron James. Whilst Joey is popular, he is revealed to be a pompous shallow show off who is only after Bianca so he can sleep with her. Cameron, a new student, and lacking popularity,281 is the “nice guy” who offers Bianca what she‟s after and thus ends up with the girl. Paralleling the relationship between the characters of Andie and Blaine from Hughes‟ film Pretty in Pink, in 10 Things the romance between Cameron and Bianca displaces the social order of high school. Cameron, like Andie, is the outsider, and like Blaine, Bianca is the popular rich kid.282 Inverting the events of Pretty in Pink where Blaine asks Andie out, in 10 Things Cameron asks Bianca out.283 While the resistance to Blaine and Andie‟s relationship comes from their friends, who are openly hostile about their dating, 10 Things changes the “teen pic” formula when Bianca herself proves resistant to a possible relationship between Cameron and herself. However, as in Pretty in Pink, a resolution to this resistance is similarly achieved at the end of 10 Things. Bianca‟s own prejudices and initial lack of interest in Cameron are overcome when, like Blaine, she asserts her individuality in the face of resistance.284 Realising popularity isn‟t everything both Bianca and Blaine reconcile with their unpopular boyfriend/girlfriend, and a new social order is established and celebrated at the school prom, when love overcomes the social cliques.
The aesthetic links to John Hughes‟ films in Junger‟s film are not isolated to issues of popularity, but also continue in how feminine identity is formed and played out in the films‟ young female protagonists. Hughes‟ “teen” films that are specifically influential in this respect are the “Molly Ringwald trilogy,” more specifically Pretty in Pink. The focus in 10 Things is predominantly on the character of Kat.285 The audience
281 Cameron is an outsider as he is the “new kid” and does not belong to a social group. His association with Michael, the unpopular “Audio/Visual geek” (who is also without a social group since his ousting from the „Future MBAs‟) would also significantly lower his standing within the high school hierarchy. 282 In 10 Things I Hate About You the socio-economic aspects of the schoolyard are absent. Money is shown not to be as much of an issue as it appears in Pretty in Pink. 283 This is also the premise of John Hughes written and produced film, Some Kind Of Wonderful (1987) where unpopular student Keith (Eric Stoltz) asks popular student Amanda Jones (Lea Thompson) on a date. 284 For more on Pretty in Pink and the overcoming of social cliques see Lewis, 138-139. 285 The film‟s title suggests that Kat is the focus of the film as it is the ten things she hates about Patrick. These ten things form the basis for her poem she delivers towards the ends of the film.
80 immediately identifies with her as the sole character of substance in the film.286 As with the character of Andie in Pretty in Pink, Kat is a hero who is an outcast. Both characters are strong willed and self-assured, and they are also both taunted by the wealthy and popular students of their corresponding high schools. While economic status isn‟t an issue in the upper “middle-class” world of Padua High, in Pretty in Pink Andie is singled out and ridiculed because she is poor and from the „wrong side of the tracks.‟287 Her social status is also revealed to be the reason Blaine, her rich boyfriend, tries to get out of taking her to the prom. In her analysis of Pretty in Pink Jen Chaney observes that Andie refuses to meekly accept Blaine‟s succumbing to peer pressure,288 and confronts him:
You‟re ashamed to be seen with me. You‟re afraid to go out with me. You‟re scared that your goddamn rich friends won‟t approve. Just say it! Just tell me the truth!289
Regardless of her economic status, Andie refuses to compromise her identity in order to fit in with the “richies,” the wealthy and popular students who taunt her. As she asserts to Blaine, „If somebody doesn't believe in me, I can't believe in them.‟ Kat also similarly refuses to play along in order to fit in with the popular crowd at Padua High, represented in the figure of Joey Donner. Kat admits to her sister that she was once popular, and that she slept with Joey, in part „because everyone else was doing it.‟ It was this succumbing to peer pressure and Joey dumping her after she refused to continue sleeping with him that led to Kat‟s rejection of popularity. Both Kat and Andie prove to be resilient and independent, secure in their identities and demand to be accepted in their own terms, a point which Kat tries to get across to her sister in her „you don‟t have to be who they want you to be‟ speech. As a result both Andie and Kat are rewarded for their stance against compromising who they are for popularity. They both get the guy they are after, self-respect still intact, and the wealthy popular students who had previously taunted them, are now the ones who are being ridiculed. Joey is humiliated at the prom when Bianca punches him out, and Blaine‟s rich friends are abandoned.
286 Balizet, 129. 287 Chaney, “Anyone? Anyone? …” 288 Chaney, “Anyone? Anyone? …” 289 Quotations of the dialogue from Pretty in Pink are my own transcriptions based on the DVD release of the film. Pretty in Pink, Dir. Howard Deutch, Prod. John Hughes, Paramount Pictures/Paramount Home Video, DVD, US, 2002.
81
The similarity between Pretty in Pink and 10 Things is furthered demonstrated in both films‟ inclusion of an absent mother figure,290 who is instrumental to the formation of a young female protagonist‟s character. This lack of familial authoritative is a characteristic of recent “teen” film.291 Kat‟s mother‟s abandonment of her family is revealed in Kat‟s criticism of her father, „Aren‟t you punishing me because mom left?‟ Sarah Neely argues that in “teen” film an absent parent, more specifically an absent mother is particularly influential to the way in which a female character‟s identity is formed and played out:
This primarily allows for the female protagonist to assemble her identity by herself…but it additionally generates connotations of the latchkey kid, the parentless child, who must grow up quickly and assume adult roles.292
The lack of a maternal figure of authority is another characteristic carried over from The Taming of the Shrew, where only Katherina and Bianca‟s father Baptista Minola is present. The mother‟s absence is not accounted for but instead emphasises that the family dynamics, which are set up within the play, are inherently patriarchal. Fathers and husbands have power and control, while wives and daughters are supposed to be dutiful and submissive. The absence of Kate and Bianca‟s mother allows no counter to Baptista‟s domineering and controlling character. In 10 Things I Hate About You, the family dynamics that are presented differ. The absence of Kat‟s mother leads to her identity being formed by herself, rather than having someone to look up to and model her behaviour on. Essentially Kat becomes the adult female figure of authority absent from her life. In an earlier draft of the screenplay the figure of Kat‟s mother, a character named Sharon Stratford, is present.293 In the final film the character of guidance counsellor Ms Perky takes on many of the traits of Kat‟s mother including her hobby of writing romance novels. Ms Perky also takes the place of the maternal authority figure in Kat‟s life. Rather than being an intervening and guiding force in Kat‟s life, Ms Perky
290 Also true for Clueless (1995), She‟s All That (1999) and Cruel Intentions (1999) where both parental figures are missing. 291 Sarah Neely notes the difference between “teen” films of the past and current teen films is an inversion of the presence of authority in a teen protagonist‟s life. Earlier “teen” films were structured around a teen‟s rebellion against the familial authority, but in recent “teen” films what is demonstrated is the lack of authority and intervention of family in a teen‟s life. Neely, 78. 292 Neely, 78. 293 Lutz and Smith, “10 Things I Hate About You - Revision November 12, 1997.”
82 simply chastises Kat for her behaviour without taking any action against her. Telling Kat that she might want to work on her bad behaviour, Ms Perky dismisses Kat so she can get back to writing her novel. This receives the sarcastic response of: „As always, thank you for your excellent guidance,‟ from Kat, which indicates Ms Perky‟s lack of involvement in the lives of the students is a regular occurrence. Kat‟s absent mother not only provides fuel for Kat‟s angst and temperament, but is also presented as one of the reasons Kat engages in the adult act of sexual relations with Joey. She reveals to Bianca that she and Joey had slept together „Just once, right after their mother left.‟ As well as an absent mother, Neely argues that another significant characteristic that defines “teen” film is a moderately involved father.294 In John Hughes‟ films adults are all either „well- meaning but ineffectual… or a complete and hazardous waste of time.‟295 Adults in 10 Things fare no better. Kat and Bianca‟s father Walter Stratford is well intentioned in his concerns for his daughters. However, his neurotic lectures on the dangers of teenage pregnancy are seen as a point of humour in the film. Unlike Walter Stratford, in The Taming of the Shrew Baptista is very much involved in the lives of his daughters. He imposes his will upon both his daughters, and rather than being well-meaning, his concerns for Bianca have their foundation in mercantile roots, and he outright ignores Katherina‟s wishes not to marry Petruchio. While Walter Stratford is somewhat controlling over his daughters lives, illustrated most poignantly in his imposing of the “no dating rule,” he neither enforces his will on his daughters, nor goes against their wishes. The no dating rule and lectures to his daughters on teenage pregnancy are the limit to his involvement with them. We never see Walter Stratford, Kat and Bianca‟s father, attending to domestic chores. As an obstetrician he is constantly interrupted by his pager and in the middle of conversations with his daughters runs off to attend to patients. Sarah Neely argues that in “teen” film a „gap exists where the daughter must somehow replace the role of the absent mother.‟296 Bianca‟s involvement with Joey instigates this motherly instinct within Kat:
BIANCA
Okay. So why didn't you tell me?
294 Neely, 78. 295 Brad Laidman, “Sixteen Candles,” Film Threat Oct 17 2000, 10 Nov 2005
83 KAT
I wanted to let you make up your own mind about him.
BIANCA
Then why did you help Daddy hold me hostage?
It‟s not like I'm stupid enough to repeat your mistakes.
KAT
I guess I thought I was protecting you.
BIANCA
By not letting me experience anything for myself?
KAT
Not all experiences are good, Bianca.
You can't always trust the people you want to.
BIANCA
Well, I guess I'll never know, will I?
Wanting to protect Bianca and save her from a fate similar to her own negative sexual encounter with Joey Donner, Kat goes along with her father‟s plans to stop her sister dating. By refusing to go to the prom, she denies Bianca the opportunity to also attend. Kat only relents when realises she that Bianca is capable of making her own decisions. This action is mirrored by Kat‟s father when at film‟s end Mr Stratford decides to trust her judgement and supports her decision to attend Sarah Lawrence, relinquishing his desire for Kat to attend school close to home.
In translating The Taming of the Shrew to screen in his “teen” film 10 Things I Hate About You, director Gil Junger glosses over the contentious gender and power dynamics
84 of the play. The most evident shift in the gender politics of 10 Things is found in the characterisation of Kat Stratford. The boisterous and outspoken nature of Katherina from The Taming of the Shrew is reduced in Junger‟s film to a girl with a grudge. The rebellious female voice in 10 Things is covered over, and Kat‟s feminism is quoted but not delved into; used simply as a way to present her as intolerable. Analysis of the use of music in 10 Things helps us understand the way in which marketing plays a significant role in how Kat‟s indiscipline is diminished. The film tenuously connects Kat to the Riot Grrl music scene in order to characterise her as “hard to take,” and in a concession to marketing, the culture and politics surrounding the Riot Grrl movement do not find a place in the film. A more commercial and less political Pop/Rock band Letters to Cleo is instead presented as representative of Kat‟s voice. Through the “taming” of her rebellious voice, Kat‟s indiscipline within the film is limited to that of a girl who is not a member of the “in” crowd. The construction of 10 Things is driven and dominated by the marketing to the teenage target audience, and references to popular brand names and fad of the 1990s are prevalent in the film. These references function as a means for Junger to analyse what he sees as a teenage preoccupation with appearances over substance. Junger‟s film foregrounds Shakespeare as icon, employing his status to “authorise” the critique of teenage culture presented. Through the conventions of “teen” comedy 10 Things I Hate About You translates the thematic concern with appearance and reality from The Taming of the Shrew into a critique of the formation of teenage identity. In particular aesthetic links to the films of John Hughes are used by Junger to focus on the way in which young female protagonists‟ identity is formed and played out. Teenage identity is shown to be influenced by appearances and brand names and has little to do with individuality.
85
Michael Almereyda’s Hamlet (2000)
Michael Almereyda‟s approach to his filmed adaptation of Hamlet (2000) illustrates Jan Kott's theme in his work Shakespeare Our Contemporary (1967).297 In it Kott argues that a text is shaped by the times. Applying this to Shakespeare he points out that the themes in Shakespeare‟s plays will be continually perceived through differing experiences in life. These experiences are afforded both by differing circumstances and more significantly differing times. In his cinematic adaptation director Almereyda recontextualises Hamlet in terms of contemporary social problems.298 Almereyda notes that the motivation for his approach to filming Hamlet was to see „how Shakespeare can speak to the present moment, how they can speak to each other.‟299 Setting his adaptation of Hamlet in a late twentieth century Manhattan world of business, the kingdom of Denmark is now a media corporation and Elsinore is a lavish hotel. Almereyda‟s film, as with Michael Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream and Julie Taymor‟s Titus was filmed during a period of millenarian anxiety due to the closing of the twentieth century. The anxiety presented in Hamlet is one of a broken postmodern world of claustrophobia, conspiracy and global corporate power. There is a bombardment of visual information throughout the film. Shakespeare‟s “original” play-text has been significantly edited and visually displaced and rearranged. What is left is a film dominated by image over Shakespeare‟s “words”. There are two main types of imagery in the film, the corporate - the product placement (purchased by the director Almereyda) and artistic - Hamlet‟s Pixelvision300 video diaries, Ophelia‟s photographs, and Hamlet‟s short film The Mousetrap. Here words are dispensed with altogether. Contradictory images are also dominant within the film as
297 Jan Kott, Shakespeare Our Contemporary, Boleslaw Taborski, trans (London: Methuen, 1967). 298 Elsie Walker, “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare: Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet (2000),” EnterText: An Interactive Interdisciplinary E-Journal for Cultural and Historical Studies and Creative Work 1.2 Spring (2001): 322. 299 Michael Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet (London: Faber & Faber, 2000): ix. 300 The term Pixelvision refers to recordings made on a Fisher-Price PXL2000 toy black and white portable video camera produced in 1987. A characteristic of recordings produced by the camcorder is a reduced frame rate output and a picture that is both monochrome and low in resolution.
87 well as a juxtaposition of sound and image to differ the meaning of that which is spoken.
In Almereyda‟s Hamlet there are numerous intertextual references to other films within the film. These are predominantly visual references. Clips of numerous films are seen within Hamlet such as The Crow II: City of Angels (1996) with its references to revenge, and the James Dean films Rebel Without a Cause (1955) and East of Eden (1955) with their exposition of the dysfunctional conflict between parents and children. These references highlight themes discovered by Almereyda within Hamlet. The dark figure wreaking revenge is Hamlet and as Mark Thornton Burnett suggests, the “children” of Almereyda‟s film are Hamlet and Ophelia.301 There are also allusions to Baz Luhrmann‟s film Romeo + Juliet, examples including the use of water imagery, the similar newsreader ending, and the casting of Diana Venora as a mother figure in both films. Casting, as also seen in Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, itself proves to be a way of conveying extra information. Another similarity to Luhrmann‟s film is the focus given to the relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia. Almereyda‟s Hamlet can therefore be considered more of a romantic tragedy, like Romeo + Juliet, than strictly a “typical” revenge tragedy. The references to other films in Hamlet continue in the allusions to foreign versions of Hamlet such as Hamlet Goes Business (1987)302 and the Akira Kurosawa film The Bad Sleep Well (1960). As in Almereyda‟s film, both these films are set in business worlds, and all three films offer a critique of global corporate power. Finally through Almereyda‟s use of Pixelvision in Hamlet‟s video diaries, a link is created to Almereyda‟s other films - both of which are unconventional horror movies, such as the vampire film Nadja (1994), and which also contain the Pixelvision technology. Hamlet can be subsequently viewed as an unconventional ghost story, the haunting of Hamlet. As well as with the references to other films mentioned, the actors cast in Hamlet themselves bring allusions to other films and these allusions influence the way in which we read characters and themes highlighted within the film. The most notable of these would be the casting of Ethan Hawke as Hamlet. His portrayal of Hamlet is imbued with the “Generation X” apathy of his character Troy from Reality Bites (1994), and this in turn gives new meaning to Hamlet‟s inability to act in the film. Julia Stiles also brings to her role of Ophelia the
301 Mark Thornton Burnett, ““To Hear and See the Matter”: Communicating Technology in Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet (2000),” Cinema Journal 42.3 Spring (2003): 56. 302 The reference to Aki Kaurismäki is seen when Ophelia removes a rubber duck from her bag. In Kaurismäki's Hamle Goes Business (1987) following the death of Hamlet‟s father, his uncle controls the board of a company that decides to move into the rubber duck market.
88 fierceness, independence and rebellion of her previous role as Katherina Stratford in Gil Junger‟s “teen” film 10 Things I Hate About You, itself an adaptation of another of Shakespeare‟s works, The Taming of the Shrew.
In a film which constantly moves forward and does not allow time for ruminations or „uninterrupted contemplation‟303 the use of musical excerpts provide extra information that there is otherwise no time to convey. Almereyda‟s Hamlet is characterised by the numerous types of music present during the film. The score by noted film composer Carter Burwell304 is dark and brooding, much like Hamlet himself, and employs only strings and woodwinds. Classical music pieces by composers Franz Liszt (Symphonic Poem No. 10 “Hamlet, 1858), Niels Wilhelm Gade (Echoes of Ossian Op. in A Minor, 1840), and Pytor Illyich Tchaikovsky (Hamlet, fantasy overture Op. 67 in F Minor, 1888) are also used in the film. Tchaikovsky‟s music for “The Mousetrap” accompanies Hamlet‟s film within a film, adding to the classical nature of the film score. Contrasting with this is the eclectic soundtrack featuring such diverse artists as The Birthday Party (Gothic Rock305), Primal Scream (Alternative Rock306), Morcheeba, and The Supreme Beings of Leisure (Trip-Hop307). Meaning in film can be presented through the tone and lyrics of each song and what scene each is used in. A prominent example is heard during the gravedigger scene in the film, where an excerpt of Bob Dylan‟s „All Along the Watchtower‟ (1967) (later covered by The Jimi Hendrix Experience in 1968) is briefly sung by the gravedigger as Hamlet and Horatio pass by him on their way to Ophelia‟s funeral. Elsie Walker suggests the musical choices in Hamlet “smooth out” the construction of the film. Rather than binding scenes or Shakespeare‟s speeches together, music in Almereyda‟s Hamlet „emphasises temporal and ideological
303 Walker, “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare,” 328. 304 Hamlet: Original Score from the Miramax Motion Picture, Carter Burwell, Varese Sarabande Records, AUDIO CD, US, 2000. 305 “Gothic Rock” is a sub genre of “Alternative Rock” and originated during the late 1970s. Originally bands from the style had strong ties to the “Punk” genre. As “Gothic Rock” became more popular during the 1980s, the genre was defined as a separate movement. “Gothic Rock” artists deal with dark themes and intellectual movements such as gothic horror, Romanticism, existential philosophy, and nihilism. Shuker, Popular Music, 154-156. 306 “Alternative Rock” is a genre of “Rock & Roll” music that has been used since the 1960s, and became widely popular in the 1980s and 1990s. The term “alternative” was coined to describe popular music that did not fit into mainstream genres. “Alternative music” emphasises music as an act of expression rather than as a product of commercial appeal, and is often considered more authentic and uncompromising compared to other popular genres of music. Shuker, Popular Music, 6-7. 307 “Trip-Hop” is a music genre description that was applied to the musical trend in the mid 1990s of down tempo electronic music characterised by a moody and dark yet lyrical sound. “Trip-Hop” relies on the use of samples, usually taken from old vinyl records, particularly from genres such as Jazz and Hip- Hop. Shuker, Popular Music, 277.
89 differences, cultural eclecticism and collaboration.‟308 Music in Hamlet is marked by the presence of diverse musical styles side-by-side, which both highlight the clash between “high” and “low” culture within the film, and also binds the disparate elements of the film together.
Michael Almereyda‟s film uses musical excerpts to provide subtextual “meaning.” The most significant example of this technique is heard during the graveyard scene (V, i) where Hamlet has returned from England to find that Ophelia has died. Initially Michael Almereyda had filmed this as an extended scene in the Cypress Hills Cemetery in Brooklyn. All that remains of this scene in the final cut of the film are the lyrics that the gravedigger, played by Jeffrey Wright, sings as Hamlet and Horatio pass him on the way to Ophelia‟s funeral. Almereyda‟s comments in the screenplay for the film elaborate on his decision to cut back on the gravedigger scene. He explains that, the „tone and timing were off, and the whole episode seemed to sidetrack Hamlet‟s response to Ophelia‟s death.‟309 Ethan Hawke goes on further to critique the logistics of filming the scene in a modern setting: „How do you find a skull in a modern day cemetery?‟310 There is, however, a nod to the classical performance of the graveyard scene, in one of the clips Hawke‟s Hamlet watches while working on his short film The Mousetrap. While not included in Hamlet‟s final short film, during the film‟s creation a performance of Hamlet starring John Gielguld, where Gielguld‟s Hamlet grasps the skull of Yorick, plays as Hawke‟s Hamlet works. As the scene plays upon the television, Hawke‟s Hamlet (in voiceover) talks about how he is unsure whether the Ghost that has appeared to him is real:
I know my course. The spirit I have seen May be a devil, and the devil hath power T‟assume a pleasing shape, yea, and perhaps Out of my weakness and my melancholy, As he is very potent with such spirits, Abuses me to damn me. I‟ll have grounds More relative than this. The play‟s the thing
308 Walker, “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare,” 334. 309 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 140. 310 Jeffrey M. Anderson, “Brushing Up Shakespeare: Interview with Ethan Hawke & Michael Almereyda,” Combustible Celluloid May 4 (2000), 5 Aug 2004,
90 Wherein I‟ll catch the conscience of the king.311
Hamlet decides that he requires proof of Claudius‟ guilt of the murder of his father, which he will obtain this proof from observing his uncle‟s reaction to the film. The combination of Hamlet‟s voiceover and Gielguld‟s performance on screen connects the death of Hamlet‟s father (and Hamlet‟s thoughts on the matter) with the graveyard scene and the ideas that are brought up in the conversation between the gravedigger and Hamlet. His short film is not only a way to prove Claudius‟ guilt, but also to confirm the worth of his father‟s life.
The significance of the graveyard scene in Almereyda‟s film is astutely summarised by Samuel Crowl in his remark that the scene signals a „return to a more natural and honest landscape - earth and death.‟312 The break from the harshly reflective, sterile hold of Manhattan‟s urban landscape and a return to natural space is achieved both visually and aurally. The bright warm autumn313 colours of the trees and the lush green of the grass in the graveyard are a contrast with the dark tones and blue tinge that are used in the rest of the film. If we take into account Burnett‟s suggestion that Hamlet and Ophelia are representative of children corrupted by the impurity and immorality of the urban corporate world which surround them,314 then the graveyard, and therefore nature, is the one place that is honest and free from the corruption and dysfunction of both Manhattan and those who have power and influence in that space. Both Hamlet and Ophelia are presented as having a desire for a connection with this pure natural world. Burnett suggests that Hamlet and Ophelia strive for:
a return both to a location (a landscape unaffected by consumerism) and to a mode of being (an integrated sense of self) that postmodernism has tragically eclipsed.315
However, the connection each is able to have with nature is only through representation of it. In Almereyda‟s film Hamlet constantly replaces human interactions with virtual
311 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 59. 312 Samuel Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex: The Kenneth Branagh Era (Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2003): 190. 313 The season is inferred not only form the colour of the leaves on the trees but also by the Halloween costumes the children who run past Hamlet and Horatio wear. 314 Burnett, „To Hear and See the Matter,‟ 56. 315 Burnett, „To Hear and See the Matter,‟ 55.
91 ones. He obsessively replays, reconfigures and manipulates images in an unsuccessful attempt to make the virtual “real.” An example is seen when Hamlet is working on his short film. He obsessively replays an image of a flower. The filmed flower on his screen opens and closes, lives and dies, and is an apt symbol of Hamlet‟s concern over the nature of life and death. This is something which in Shakespeare‟s play Hamlet goes into detail during his conversation with the gravedigger. The dying flower is a prominent image in his short film, and further symbolises what Hamlet‟s sees as the corruption of his family unit. For Ophelia nature is a place of escape. During the scene where Polonius lectures her about how Hamlet‟s promises to her can‟t be trusted, she clutches a diorama, „a glass-fronted box featuring a view of a gravel road disappearing into a dim forest glade,‟316 staring into it longingly. The distraction of the diorama is an escape from Polonius‟ accusatory words against Hamlet. Noticing her distraction, Polonius eventually snatches the diorama from Ophelia‟s hands and puts it aside. With this action Polonius draws Ophelia back into the harsh real world. Having broken Ophelia‟s connection with the natural world of escape, Polonius is rewarded with a stern look from his daughter. However, Polonius does not allow her a break in the conversation to object, and instead emphasises his words to her:
Do not believe his vows; I would not, in plain terms, from this time forth, Have you so slander any moment leisure, As to give words or talk with the Lord Hamlet. Look to't, I charge you.317
Using the word slander, he warns Ophelia that her actions reflect negatively on him. Almereyda‟s editing of Polonius and Ophelia‟s conversation gives what Polonius tells her an austere, almost threatening tone. In Hamlet nature is also connected with death. In her mad scene, filmed at the grand Guggenheim art museum in upper Manhattan, Ophelia, in lieu of actual flowers, distributes Polaroid photographs of them. The only connection Ophelia is allowed with nature while she is living is with representations of it. She only manages to achieve a real connection with the natural world by becoming part of it in her death. But even the scene of her death, the fountain, is merely a simulation and not external nature. Only when she is buried in the cemetery is Ophelia
316 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 36. 317 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 36-7.
92 allowed a connection with nature - albeit a landscaped park. Death becomes the ultimate escape from her life and the claustrophobia and surveillance that accompanies it. This connection with nature and death is continued with the gravedigger and the song he sings as he goes about his work. The graveyard scene instead of being an extended repartee between the gravedigger and Hamlet plays out as follows. As Hamlet and Horatio pass the gravedigger, he is briefly heard to be singing the opening lines of „All Along the Watchtower.‟ Written by Bob Dylan, „All Along the Watchtower‟ is from his album John Wesley Harding (1967). It would later be recorded and made more famous by Jimi Hendrix. The song is basically about what is valuable, human life, and what is not, the more material things associated with a consumer society. The song opens with a conversation between a Joker and a Thief:
“There must be some way out of here," said the Joker to the Thief, "There's too much confusion, I can't get no relief. Businessmen, they drink my wine, ploughmen dig my earth, None of them along the line know what any of it is worth.”318
The Joker tells the Thief why he wants to escape, that there is too much confusion in his life. This confusion arises from others (business men and ploughmen) benefiting from his labour, yet not understanding the worth (of his life) behind it. Thus, the opening verse of „All Along the Watchtower‟ is about value; what is seen as being valuable to some people, which are simply material possessions compared to what is seen as valuable by the Joker, the worth of a human life, his own.
This short sound byte during the graveyard scene in Hamlet illustrates certain ideas about mortality and the worth of someone‟s life themes found in the play by director Almereyda, which he considers important and relevant to modern life. In short, the „Gravedigger‟s song offers a musical substitute for the material embodiment of Yorick‟s skull.‟319 Douglas Lanier suggests that the throwaway allusion to the Dylan song „epitomizes Almereyda‟s desire to find “some way out” of the wraparound media system‟320 that Hamlet is subjected to. Throughout the film Hamlet is constantly surrounded by signs of money. Many trademarks and logos, mistaken by viewers for
318 Bob Dylan, “All Along the Watchtower,” John Wesley Harding Copyright © 1968; renewed 1996 Dwarf Music, 10 Jan 2005
93 product placements,321 bombard the screen space, leading to a sense of claustrophobia. Hamlet declares to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern that „Denmark is a prison‟ (II, ii, 242), and this prison is „defined by the advertising, by all the hectic distractions, brand names, announcements and ads that crowd our waking hours.‟322 In Hamlet the human is displaced with signs of money,323 a sentiment that is shared by the Joker in the lyrics of „All Along the Watchtower.‟ The Joker tells the Thief, money is valued over human lives. In Hamlet money is not only valued over human life but is also considered by some as worth killing for. Hamlet‟s father is killed by his uncle Claudius in order to gain possession of the “kingdom” of Denmark Corp. Material possession and wealth are more important to Claudius than the life of his brother. Conversely for Hamlet, the lives of the people he loves are more important than material things. At the loss of his father Hamlet does not talk about his father on a material level, but highlights the personal effect his father‟s death has on himself, his mother, the kingdom and the nature of things (III, iv, 40-87). Having lost his father, Hamlet has now also lost the love of his life, Ophelia, and this discussion on human life can also be seen to be applicable to her. She is little more than a commodity to be used by the male figures around her, such as her father Polonius, who tells her what to do, and uses her to spy on Hamlet, in order for him to get in Claudius‟ favour. Her life, on the other hand was valuable to Hamlet on a personal level. He loved her and now she is gone.
Mark Thornton Burnett suggests an association specifically with the figure of Bob Dylan and his involvement with the civil rights movement, making reference to a rumoured assassination attempt on Dylan‟s life by the C.I.A.324 He connects this with Hamlet‟s return from London. Burnett suggests that Hamlet, having thwarted murderous designs on his own life, is presented as a similar folk celebrity like Bob Dylan. However, the words are sung by the gravedigger (who is played by Jeffery Wright - an African American actor) and not by Hamlet himself. Therefore, the connections to Dylan‟s celebrity are tenuous at best, and ignore the “meaning” behind the song‟s lyrics. The allusions to a period of social change, especially with regards to the civil rights movement, are much more applicable. These connections to ideas of race are further punctuated by the fact that the song „All Along The Watchtower‟ was later recorded and made famous by Jimi Hendrix (an African American musician). The song, which is
321 Almereyda paid for the privilege of using all the brand names. At the end of the film there is a long list of credits and thanks for all the companies who allowed their products and trademarks to be used. 322 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, xi. 323 Walker, “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare,” 331. 324 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 61.
94 synonymous with the 1960s, serves as an anthem of that period and of social change and lost ideals. It also acts as a momentary example of nostalgia for a period that is a complete juxtaposition of the world in which this film adaptation of Hamlet is set, a more earthly “hippy” free-loving culture, as opposed to the orderly urban material capitalistic cold modern world where Hamlet lives. As Michael Almereyda explains, the scene in the graveyard is the „only respite from the city‟s hard surfaced, mirrors, screens and signs.‟325
The use of „All Along The Watchtower‟ is an interesting translation of ideas brought up in the conversation between Hamlet and the gravedigger, an exchange which is cut out of Almereyda‟s film. The scene between Hamlet and the gravedigger (the First Clown) is important, as it is the only time within the play where a character is able to match wits with Hamlet, and also leads to Hamlet‟s acceptance of death. As the gravedigger goes about his work singing merrily as he does so, Hamlet mediates on the meaning of human life and the value of the life of people who have died. Wondering how the gravedigger can sing during his work he asks Horatio: „Has this fellow no feeling of his business, that he sings at grave-making?‟ (V, i, 65-66). Horatio responds that the man, having been a gravedigger for some time, is so at ease with his work that it does not bother him (V, i, 67-68). The song that the gravedigger is singing is in fact about time passing in his life and his eventual death and relegation to a „pit of clay‟ covered by a „shrouding sheet‟ (V, i, 94-5). As the gravedigger roughly upturns two skulls while digging a new grave, Hamlet is horrified at the disrespect that he sees the gravedigger showing to the remains of people who have died (V, i, 91-92). Mortified by the gravedigger‟s nonchalant attitude while grave-making, Hamlet confronts the nature of life and death and goes to speak with the gravedigger. Hamlet asks him whose grave he digs, to which the gravedigger responds with equivocation:
Hamlet What man dost thou dig it for?
First Clown For no man, sir.
325 Michael Almereyda, “A Live Wire to the Brain: Hooking Up Hamlet” New York Times May 7. 2000, 2.19.
95 Hamlet What woman, then?
First Clown For none, neither.
Hamlet Who is to be buried in't?
First Clown One that was a woman, sir; but, rest her soul, she's dead. (V, i, 130-136)
The grave he digs is for neither a man nor woman, but a corpse. For the gravedigger the people that have died are simply items that need to be buried. However, for Hamlet they are people that he‟s known, Yorick and Ophelia, whose death he is yet to learn of, and he is reminded of memories of his past and how the lives of people in his past had value and meaning. Questioning the possibility of what each of the skulls the gravedigger uncovers might have been in life, had the person they belonged to not died, Hamlet draws to the conclusion that no rank or money can change the equality of death. In asking the gravedigger how long it takes a corpse to decompose once buried in the ground (V, i,164-165), Hamlet realises that death transforms even great kings such as Alexander, Caesar and subsequently his own father, into nothing more than trivial dirt.
In Almereyda‟s Hamlet music is crucial in „creating a balance of tones.‟326 This is not to discount the influence of marketing considerations in the decision as to what music was used in the film. The soundtrack to Almereyda‟s Hamlet was released on Palm Pictures/Rykodisc327 and as such there are artists from both companies on the soundtrack, for example Josh Rouse and The Supreme Beings of Leisure. The album sleeve points out to listeners which album each song is taken from, thus encouraging
326 Cynthia Fuchs, “„Looking around corners‟: Interview with Michael Almereyda, writer-director of Hamlet” Pop Matters, 3 Aug 2004
96 them to go out and buy other records from these artists. It does not do this for songs licensed from other record companies. However, unlike Gil Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You, where the choice of music is heavily influenced by the teenage audience to whom the film is marketed, one of the major functions of the soundtrack to Hamlet is to underscore the fragmentation of the text. Almereyda combines popular elements with “high” culture allusions through eclectic musical choices. These musical choices in Hamlet emphasise the differences and eclecticism within the film. As well as music choices by contemporary artists (both Rykodisc artists and artists from other record labels) music that is inspired by Hamlet as a play features prominently within the film. Tchaikovsky‟s Hamlet, fantasy overture Op. 67 in F Minor (1888), Liszt‟s Symphonic Poem No.10 “Hamlet” (1858) and The Birthday Party‟s song, „Hamlet (Pow, Pow, Pow)‟ (1982) are all heard during Hamlet. Almereyda‟s film also uses classical music that has a long standing tradition of association with theatrical performances of Hamlet, such as the piece by Tchaikovsky. The use of both classical and popular contemporary musical cues is an example of the combination of “high” and “low” cultures within the film. Another example of how the film contrasts “high” and “low” culture is the presence of both references to films and advertising as well as clips of „canonised performances of the canonised Hamlet,‟328 specifically, that of John Gielgud during the scene where Hawke‟s Hamlet is creating his short film. Michael Almereyda explains that the eclectic choice in music used in Hamlet was not chosen purely to accentuate the contrast between “high” and “low” culture prevalent within the film, nor was it simply music that he liked and wanted to include. Music in Hamlet was also deliberately chosen in order to emphasise the schizophrenic and fragmented mood in the film:
The idea was to layer in music that could highlight the play‟s up-to-the moment tensions, textures and contradictions. Music as jagged and out of joint, restless and rich as the thoughts buzzing in Hamlet‟s brain.329
Music in Hamlet sets the rhythm and the mood of scenes. The “chop-and-change” nature of the genre of musical choices in the film matches the fragmentation of language and image within the film. This fragmentation is seen in the collision of disparate references that are rife throughout the film, as well as the breaking up of scenes. A prime example is how conversations started by Hamlet (with both Gertrude and
328 Walker, “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare,” 321. 329 See the booklet that accompanies the soundtrack to the film. Music From The Motion Picture Hamlet Rykodisc, AUDIO CD, US, 2000.
97 Ophelia) are finished over the phone. Hamlet‟s „Get thee to a nunnery‟ speech transforms from a direct address to a series of angry phone messages left on Ophelia‟s answering machine.330
The nuance and mood of various scenes in Almereyda‟s Hamlet is also set by Carter Burwell‟s score for the film. The score is both stark and minimalist, only employing strings and woodwinds, and dark and moody, epitomizing the tempo and environment of the film. The repetitive and cyclical nature of the score is especially significant as it ties in with Hamlet‟s introspective character in the film. On the booklet that accompanies the score for the film, Almereyda describes how the music transports the listener and viewer of the film into the maddening dilemma of the film‟s central character:
repeating melodies that circle and superb a heroic ideal. Lucid chords describing a descent into madness, man‟s mind resisting, and then riding, the sweep of fate, the coiling movements of love and loss.331
Burnett argues that the looping rhythms of Carter Burwell‟s electronic score emphasise the repressive spaces within the film.332 Burnett further suggests a connection between Almereyda‟s presentation of a world where characters are constantly monitored and controlled, with Michel Foucault‟s metaphor of the Panopticon, a mechanism for social control based on omnipresent surveillance.333 The Panopticon is a type of prison building designed by English philosopher Jeremy Bentham. In his work Discipline and Punish (1977) Foucault argues that Bentham‟s Panopticon exemplifies the ultimate modern disciplinary institution, because it allowed for an ever-present observation and recording of prisoners within the prison structure. In a society in which discipline is based on observation and examination, a prisoner‟s knowledge of the constant possibility of observation allows them to be controlled without the use of extensive force.334 Control and discipline become internalised within the imprisoned individual, and a state of conscious and permanent visibility in an inmate „assures the automatic
330 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 64-5. 331 See booklet that accompanies the score. Burwell, Hamlet: Original Score. 332 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 53. 333 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 52. 334 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish, 1st American ed, Alan Sheridan, trans (New York: Pantheon Books, 1977): 201.
98 functioning of power.‟335 Foucault notes the most important element of the Panopticon‟s design is that the prisoners could never be sure whether they are being observed.336 Prisoners are therefore less likely to commit a crime or break the rules if they believe they are being watched, even if they are not. Like the Panopticon, Almereyda‟s Manhattan is a place where each person is constantly visible, constantly watched, and contained. Certain spaces occupied by both Hamlet and Ophelia are therefore seen as a prison. In these spaces both Hamlet and Ophelia‟s actions are severely restricted, an example being Ophelia being forced to wear a hidden microphone to her meeting with Hamlet, therefore betraying him. The looping nature of Burwell‟s score combines with visual representation of repetition, the spirals that are constantly present throughout the film, in signalling these places of repression. Spirals are dominant in both the Laundromat, where Hamlet retreats to wash Polonius‟ blood from his clothes, and is also confronted and physically abused by Claudius, and the Guggenheim museum where Ophelia dissolves into madness.337 Unlike the Panopticon, constant surveillance in Hamlet is an insufficient means of controlling Hamlet and Ophelia. In both these spaces of repression, the powers in control resort to containing Hamlet and Ophelia with force in order to stem their rebellion. Hamlet is manhandled and shipped off to England (to his potential death) by Claudius in a move that is intended to rid him of Hamlet for good. Gertrude and Claudius also try to contain Ophelia‟s outburst, a piercing scream that echoes through the Guggenheim, by having a bodyguard physically drag her away from prying eyes.
Joana Owens argues that „interpretations of earlier texts are colored, whether we intend them to be or not, by our experiences with later texts.‟338 The tendency to reread original texts through „the lenses of their adaptations‟339 is particularly evident in Almereyda‟s Hamlet, where the “later texts” of various filmic references influence the way in which we read Almereyda‟s interpretation of the play-text. Almereyda‟s intent, he reveals, was an attempt at making his adaptation Hamlet „not such much as a sketch but as a collage, a patchwork of intuitions, images and ideas.‟340 The various references to the films in Hamlet are eclectic, each coming from a variety of genres and types, and
335 Foucault, 200-201. 336 Foucault, 201-202. 337 Spirals also adorn in the box in which she keeps the remembrances of Hamlet. This box is with her when she drowns. 338 Joana Owens, ““Images, Images, Images”: The Contemporary Landscape of Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet” Interdisciplinary Humanities 20.2 Fall (2003): 21. 339 Owens, 21. 340 Almereyda, “A Live Wire to the Brain,” 22.
99 each touching on different themes that Almereyda has discovered within the play that he sees as reflecting modern concerns. Almereyda‟s Hamlet explores issues about alienation, paranoia, spying, self-absorption, communication, and generational conflict, all of which, as Samuel Crowl fittingly argues, are alive in Shakespeare‟s play.341 These themes are mediated through references to different films. Almereyda notes that it was always his intention in making Hamlet a modern adaptation. Not coming from a high- cultured British, background it was Almereyda‟s desire to address Hamlet in terms he understood that were „specifically American.‟342 This approach is particularly evident in his focus on the dysfunctional family relationships that exist within Hamlet. This dysfunction is mediated through references to “teen pics” of the 1950s, specifically those involving James Dean, East of Eden and Rebel Without a Cause, and their portrayal of domestic life in America. In Almereyda‟s film James Dean is cast (by proxy) as Hamlet‟s Player King. As a result, Dean‟s famous „haunted and alienated melancholy becomes a rich cultural icon for Hawke‟s Hamlet.‟343 Samuel Crowl suggests that there is a morose and often self-absorption to Ethan Hawke‟s conception of Hamlet, and argues that he „seems only to be able to find himself on the screen.‟344 Richard Burt summarises Hawke‟s portrayal in his observation that „Hamlet sees himself everywhere.‟345 He is a sum of all the references around him especially those he watches on his television screen. As Hamlet watches images of Dean on screen in clips from both East Of Eden and Rebel Without A Cause, a connection is established between Dean‟s conflict in both films with „repressive parental institutions,‟346 and his own disconnection from his own feelings and inability to deal with repressive and dysfunctional parental figures. As images of Dean appear on screen they are also captured by Hamlet and amalgamated into his video diary. One of the primary functions of Hamlet‟s video diary is to reflect the „fractured and tormented state of Hamlet‟s soul and imagination.‟347 Ethan Hawke reveals that making the video diary was a great way for him to get inside the character.348 The video diary is also useful device to record and reflect the bits and pieces of Hamlet‟s soliloquies that are retained by Almereyda in the
341 Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex, 192. 342 Ross Anthony, “Interviews with actor Ethan Hawke and director Michael Almereyda of Hamlet” Ross Anthony‟s Hollywood Report Card, 3 Aug 2004
100 screenplay to his film adaptation of Hamlet. Dean‟s appearance on screen coincides with Hamlet‟s „O what a rogue and peasant slave‟ soliloquy. 349 In it Hamlet questions the passion of the Player King (James Dean) in his performance. He wonders how Dean is able to be so convincing and poignant in his acting when he himself is so apathetic about his own problematic real life situation. Dean‟s presence as Player King functions as a projection of Hamlet‟s wish fulfilment and a figure of inspiration for Hamlet.350 Hamlet wants to be able to deal with things as James Dean does in these movies, and during this soliloquy Hamlet is finally moved to action. In order to try and prove Claudius‟ guilt Hamlet decides to put on The Mousetrap. The short film The Mousetrap is Almereyda‟s filmic equivalent of the player‟s performance of The Murder of Gonzago in Shakespeare‟s play-text; the “play-within-a- play” becomes a “film-within- a-film.”
Just as the production design of Hamlet is a collage of sources, the way Hamlet the character is conceived and performed is also very much an amalgamation of various citations. Ethan Hawke notes that he envisioned Hamlet as part Kurt Cobain and part Holden Caulfield,351 and these references, as well as those of James Dean, inform Hawke‟s performance of Hamlet. Crowl describes Hawke‟s performance as very 1950- ish, and further characterises Hawke‟s Hamlet as a „sensitive, brooding, inarticulate soul caught in a world whose values he despises,‟352 the same type of performance that James Dean was known for. Hawke‟s performance as Hamlet teeters between self- absorbed petulant child and „troubled soul whose rolling confusion…can be enough to tear your heart in two.‟353 Mumbling and moping through his performance, the delivery of Hawke‟s lines straight to camera seem „uncomfortable.‟354 However, this uneasy delivery serves a purpose, and along with his slumped posture and aversion of his eyes, Hawke‟s performance is an apt portrayal of the Hamlet‟s sadness and his uncomfortableness in both his position as “Prince” of Denmark and his role as avenger of his father‟s murder. Almereyda notes in the screenplay an idea that actor Ethan Hawke has suggested to him in pre-production for the film. Hawke suggested that Hamlet‟s hesitation to kill Claudius is justified, and that he doesn‟t need to kill Claudius
349 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet. 58. 350 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 59. 351 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, xiv. 352 Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex, 195. 353 Stephanie Zacharek “Hamlet” Salon May 12 (2000), 6 July 2004
101 once he‟s made the man face his own guilt.355 The focus of Hawke‟s interpretation of Hamlet is that he is unable to „shake free of his debilitating existential angst to concentrate on his quest to uncover the corruption at the play‟s centre.‟356 Self-doubt, which subsequently leads to Hamlet‟s inaction is brought forward and sets the mood for the film.
Ethan Hawke, twenty seven at the time of filming, is the youngest actor to portray Hamlet on film. The casting of both Hawke and that of Julia Stiles as Ophelia, are among the factors that give Almereyda‟s film more appeal to a younger demographic. The casting of Hawke and Stiles also defines their roles in Hamlet in ways that both undercut and reinforce each actor‟s popular image. Kim Fedderson and J Michael Richardson argue that Almereyda‟s Hamlet is „attended by a cast of previous characters.‟357 They further suggest that Hawke himself was cast as Hamlet because his characters in previous films „represent the “Generation X” version of the brooding alienated young man.‟358 Hawke was known at the time predominantly for his role as an alienated and disaffected young man in cult favourites Reality Bites, a portrait of the lives of four “Generation X”359 people in their twenties in America, and Before Sunrise
355 Almereyda. William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, ix. 356 Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex, 198. 357 Kim Fedderson and J. Michael Richardson, “Hamlet 9/11: Sound, Noise, and Fury in Almereyda‟s Hamlet,” College Literature 31.4 Fall (2004): 157. 358 Fedderson and Richardson, 157-8. 359 Generation X is a term coined to describe people born from 1965 to around 1982, and is used in such diverse fields as demography, social sciences, marketing, and popular culture. The date range for which Generation X applies is a current issue of contention, however, it is widely accepted is that Generation X follows on from the “Baby Boomer” generation. Generation X is seen as a reaction to and rejection of habits and values and ideas prominent during the Baby Boomer era, and is marked particularly by a sense of disaffectation with society. The term originated in a 1960s‟ collection of interviews with teenagers, titled Generation X (London: Gibbs, 1964) compiled by Jane Deverson and Charles Hamblett. The interviews revealed a group of teenagers who were drastically different to the more traditional British public. They took drugs, had sex before marriage, weren‟t religious, disliked the Queen, and disrespected their parents. Generation X, a punk rock group that Billy Idol formed in 1976, was named after the book. More recently, Generation X is the title of a novel by Canadian author, Douglas Coupland: Generation X: Tales for an accelerated culture (New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991). The book‟s main characters are over educated, under fulfilled, and uninspired. Limited to jobs in the service industry (the book is famous for coining the term “McJob” to describe the phenomena of working in the low-paying, service industry), the book‟s main characters decide to distance themselves from society (they travel to the Mohave desert to live a simple life) in order to get a better sense of who they are. Coupland took the title Generation X from Paul Fussell's book Class (New York: Summit Books, 1983). Fussell uses the term “class X” to designate a part of America's social hierarchy, who did not want to engage in the cycle of status, money, and social climbing that so often frames modern existence. Like “class X,” the characters in Generation X are characterised by a sense of apathy, irresponsibility, disconnection and desire to escape overcommercialised society. This depiction has become by and large the popular definition of Generation X, and exists in many other cultures around the world. The French term for Generation X, “Génération Bof,” poignantly translates what Generation X has come to mean in popular culture, “Generation Whatever.” For more on the term “Generation X” see Tara Brabazon, From Revolution To Revelation: Generation X, Popular Memory and Cultural Studies (London; New York: Ashgate, 2005) especially 9- 31, Rebecca Huntley, The World According to Y: Inside the New Adult Generation (Sydney: Allen &
102 (1995) about a young man‟s journey around Vienna with a young French woman he has just met. He plays up these allusions as well of those to other figures of Generation X existential angst, such as Kurt Cobain, in his performance and so both of these roles colour his performance of Hamlet. One reviewer summarises the appeal of Hawke‟s performance as: „Twentysomething alienation reverberates through Hawke‟s Hamlet, who is encumbered…by treacherous parents and denied love.‟360 The characterisation of Hamlet as disaffected “twenty something” is best illustrated in his poignant „To be or not to be‟ soliloquy.
In Almereyda‟s Hamlet the soliloquy is split over three different scenes. The first instance of the appearance of Hamlet‟s famous soliloquy is delivered not by Hawke himself, but by Thich Nhat Hanh, Vietnamese Buddhist monk, peace activist, and author. In a play on Hamlet‟s quandary over whether or not to be, Nhat Hanh is seen on a television that is playing in Hamlet‟s bedroom delivering a speech about his philosophy on the nature of being. Nhat Hanh explains that:
We have the word „to be,‟ but what I propose is the word „to inter-be‟. Because it‟s not possible to be alone, to be by yourself. You need other people in order to inter-be.361
Nhat Hanh also lists off „mother, father, but also uncle‟362 as people a person needs in their life in order to be. However, for Hamlet these figures are either dead or corrupt. As Hamlet listens to Nhat Hanh speak he reviews footage of Ophelia. The screenplay describes the footage as: „Ophelia in bed, a book covering her face. She lifts the book, looks into the camera.‟363 This same footage appears earlier in the film when Hamlet delivers his „frailty, thy name is woman‟ soliloquy. 364 These images of Ophelia suggest an earlier relationship between Hamlet and Ophelia, though they are less explicit than scenes of Hamlet and Ophelia having sex in Branagh‟s film adaptation.365 Through the juxtaposition of the images playing on Hamlet‟s handheld video recorder with Thich
Unwin, 2006), particularly 1-24, and Anushka Asthana and Vanessa Thorpe, “Whatever happened to the original Generation X?” The Observer 23 Jan 2005, June 5 2008
103 Nhat Hanh‟s words, Almereyda‟s invites his audience to infer that the person whom Hamlet needs in order “to be” is Ophelia. This falls into line with the focus of the film, the love story of Hamlet and Ophelia. The feelings Hamlet has for Ophelia progress into the next scene where he sits at a diner and writes love poems to her. These poems will eventually be their relationship‟s undoing as they become the catalyst for Claudius and Polonius‟ deceptive operation involving a “wired-up” Ophelia unwillingly betraying Hamlet.
The second part of Hamlet‟s soliloquy, a truncated repetition of the opening „To be or no to be‟ line, is seen in footage from Hamlet‟s video diary. Hamlet reviews, rewinds and re-watches footage of himself. The footage contains images that eerily echo Kurt Cobain (both he and Hawke‟s Hamlet share a similar “scruffy” unkempt appearance) and is made up of Hamlet going through the motions of a potential suicide. In the footage Hamlet stuffs the muzzle of the gun into his mouth then presses the gun‟s barrel under his chin before finally holding it against his temple. As he does this he recites the line „To be or not to be.‟ When reaching the „not to be‟ part of the line Hamlet gives a gleeful grin to the camera, relishing in his potential death, and suggesting that through killing himself he is rewarded. This morose celebration of death is continued in the „Fishmonger‟ scene between Polonius and Hamlet. When Polonius takes his leave of Hamlet, Hamlet responds with „You cannot take from me anything that I will more willingly part withal; except my life.‟366 The last part is repeated in voiceover as he goes to find and presumably attempt to kill Claudius since he is carrying a handgun. This endeavour proves to be fruitless, as on entering Claudius‟ office with his gun drawn, Hamlet finds it empty and appears „crestfallen‟367 but also slightly relieved. His mission to kill Claudius and then kill himself is a failure. Almereyda invites the audience to consider that in this moment Hamlet realises that his death is not the answer; the reason for his realisation is alluded to in his video diary. While the video diary contains explicit suicidal imagery, when Hamlet allows the footage to finally end, his repetitive video rant ends on „To be.‟ What is revealed in this moment is that Hamlet has chosen to live because he has something to live for, Ophelia. The breakdown of Hamlet‟s relationship with Ophelia is the turning point in both their lives and the catalyst for their tragic end.
366 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 44. 367 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 45.
104 The screenplay for Hamlet reveals that Hamlet‟s „To be or not to be‟ soliloquy was originally set in several locations including The Whitney Museum,368 Blockbuster video store, and Hamlet‟s apartment. In the final film the full uncut soliloquy is delivered by Hamlet as he struts and sneers his way through the “Action” aisles of a Blockbuster. The original screenplay describes the scene playing out as juxtaposition between indecisiveness and action. Hamlet‟s meditation on the nature of existence is contrasted with images of the creation of his short film The Mousetrap, as he picks out source material in Blockbuster and reviews it in his apartment.369 The film‟s isolation of the location of the „To be or not to be‟ soliloquy, now only delivered in full in the Blockbuster store, emphasises the ideas of inaction that are brought forth in Hamlet‟s words. In the Blockbuster store Hamlet is surrounded by images of action, both on the aisles‟ labelling, and in the film that is playing on the television within the store. Hamlet‟s soliloquy, first heard in voiceover then eventually delivered in store by Hawke, is presented as a debate on existence and how man is driven to inaction through the indecisiveness brought about by a fear of the results of actions. Hawke‟s delivery of the soliloquy begins in voiceover with a tone of sullenness. The voiceover ends and Hawke‟s low key delivery of the lines switches the tone of the soliloquy to one of contempt and resentment. The audience are invited to interpret Hamlet‟s words as an outburst of both his existential angst and Generation X apathy. Hamlet‟s soliloquy seems to suggest the question, “why bother living and fighting and suffering when everything is diseased and corrupt?” This scene also foreshadows the breakdown of Hamlet‟s relationship with Ophelia, which is fated to become as diseased and corrupt as his familial one. Joana Owens notes that this scene, when viewed in context with a later scene (also set in Blockbuster), is not one of complete passivity on Hamlet‟s part.370 While the action of creating The Mousetrap is not immediately linked to the „To be or not to be‟ soliloquy as it is in the screenplay, the creation of his short film is not completely absent from the final film. The creation of The Mousetrap is instead broken up into two different scenes. During the scene that contains „O what a rogue and peasant slave‟ soliloquy, Hamlet lies on his bed and watches James Dean films, recording video from the screen on his Pixelvision camera. The scene then shifts to Hamlet sitting in
368 Almereyda notes that Hamlet‟s „To be or not be‟ soliloquy was to feature part set in Bill Viola‟s video installation “Slowly Turning Narrative” while Viola‟s retrospective was on view in the Whitney Museum. However, actor Ethan Hawke‟s impromptu marriage to actress Uma Thurman threw the shooting of the film off schedule and Almereyda was unable to film the scene before the exhibition had moved on to Amsterdam. Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 137. 369 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 49-52. 370 Owens, 24.
105 front of his computer, editing together video clips. The creation of his short film is also subtly referred to during a short scene without dialogue where Hamlet is back at the Blockbuster store and checks out a stack of videos. Hamlet is able to actively manipulate the images from the videos he picked out in Blockbuster in „meaningful ways,371 and uses them in his plans for revenge.
Both Rebel Without a Cause and East Of Eden deal with a teenage boy‟s dysfunctional relationship with his family, particularly with his father. The presence of clips from both of these films in Hamlet highlights the problems between parents, particularly fathers and their children within the film. Almereyda‟s Hamlet acts as a commentary on flawed inter-generational relationships in modern society. In Almereyda‟s film there is a constant presence of father figures. Samuel Crowl observes that Hamlet is trapped by several fathers, „one who challenges (Claudius); one who chatters (Polonius); and one who commands (the ghost).‟372 Sam Shepard‟s Ghost is a constant menacing presence throughout the film, and is a „powerful father who will not die or be denied.‟373 Hamlet‟s relationship with his father is hinted at being far from the idyllic one that is reflected in both Hamlet‟s video diary and short film. At one point during the construction of his video diary Hamlet reviews Pixelvision footage of a home movie of his father and mother ice skating. The screenplay summarises the action as: „They embrace, stumble, regain their footing, hug and laugh.‟374 Hamlet obsessively rewinds and repeatedly watches this footage. Contrasting with this idyllic image of his parents embracing is the dysfunction and corruption of Hamlet‟s new family unit. While watching the footage of his parents, Hamlet notes the difference between the two family dynamics in a voiceover soliloquy:
So excellent a king, that was to this Hyperion to a satyr, so loving to my mother That he might not beteem the winds of heaven Visit her face too roughly.
Heaven and earth
371 Owens, 24. 372 Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex, 199. 373 Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex, 199. 374 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 18.
106 Must I remember? Why, she would hang on him As if increase of appetite had grown By what it fed on; and yet, within a month - Let me not think on't; frailty, thy name is woman - A little month, or ere those shoes were old With which she followed my poor father's body, Like Niobe, all tears, why she, even she -
O god, a beast, that wants discourse of reason, Would have mourned longer - married with my uncle, My father's brother, but no more like my father Than I to Hercules, within a month, Ere yet the salt of most unrighteous tears Had left the flushing in her galled eyes, She married. Oh most wicked speed, to post With such dexterity to incestuous sheets! It is not, nor it cannot come to good. But break, my heart, for I must hold my tongue - 375
Hamlet talks with reverence about his father. He is a man Hamlet admired and loved, and to Hamlet he also personified the perfect husband. Expressing his disgust, Hamlet is unable to fathom his mother remarrying Claudius only two months after his father had died. Hamlet‟s words describe what he sees as the corruption of his family unit by his mother‟s perverse actions in marrying his uncle. The last two lines of Hamlet‟s soliloquy highlight his current predicament. Hamlet knows that his mother‟s marriage to his uncle is wrong and it will come to no good but he cannot say anything about it.376 These lines also foreshadow what is to occur between Hamlet and Ophelia, and the eventual tragedy that will unfold. As Hamlet recites the last two lines the footage of Hamlet‟s parents in his video diary blends into footage of Ophelia reading. When she notices the camera is filming her she hides behind her book as the camera intrudes on her private moment. The use of the voiceover over this image in particular suggests to the audience Hamlet‟s inner thoughts are a knowledge that his relationship with Ophelia will fail. The scene then shifts to the second part of a scene where Ophelia waiting by a
375 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 19. 376 It would both endanger Hamlet‟s position for him to say anything, as well as a strategic mistake. In order to find out more about Claudius‟ guilt, he must stay silent.
107 fountain, the first part of which precedes Hamlet‟s soliloquy.377 The screenplay indicates she is waiting to meet up with Hamlet,378 but unlike what is performed in the screenplay, in the final film Hamlet does not appear. The corruption of his family has infiltrated his own relationship with Ophelia, and Hamlet now views women with distrust.
Hamlet‟s short film The Mousetrap paints a 1950s‟ “ideal” family and its eventual corruption. The screenplay describes the film‟s opening as: „rose blooming; an idyllic happy family: man, wife and a little boy. The earth spins calmly on its axis. All is well in the world.‟379 These pleasant almost “schmaltzy” images of “perfect” family life are then juxtaposed with grotesque and pornographic images of decay, death and sex. Hamlet‟s short film goads Claudius into reacting to what he sees in the film (and by Hamlet‟s assertion therefore admit his guilt) and is also a critique on the state of Hamlet‟s new family dynamics. Mark Thornton Burnett argues that the film implies that there is „no equivalent example of a functional familial unit in the Elsinore of the millennium.‟380 The short film highlights the dysfunction in his current family situation and the unrealistic expectations and projections he has for his former one. Hamlet‟s short film is also a commentary on his situation and how he views the difference between his parents‟ relationship and the one his mother and uncle Claudius now engage in. Like the references to James Dean, the childhood family depicted in Hamlet‟s short film is also a figure of his wish fulfilment and nostalgia. Hamlet positions himself as the innocent boy whose world is unwittingly destroyed as he sleeps. Sleeping becomes an analogy for Hamlet‟s absence. He is away at school in Wittenberg when his father is murdered. The perfect family that appears on screen is symbolic of Hamlet‟s view of his own family before his father‟s death. This picture perfect 1950s‟ family symbolises the perfect familial relationship he believes was destroyed by sinister and perverse figures, represented on screen by images of sex and death, and one whose impossible return he longs for. However, his strained encounter with his father‟s ghost suggests the relationship between them to have been less than ideal when he was still alive.
377 The scene of Ophelia waiting by the fountain bookmarks Hamlet‟s soliloquy. She is waiting for him while he is absorbed in his visual diary. That explains why he never shows up to meet her, he is busy working. His absence illustrates Hamlet‟s preference for and addiction to interacting with images on a screen. They are images he can manipulate and control rather than dealing with real people. 378 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 16. 379 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 68. 380 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 59.
108
Stephanie Zacharek argues that Ethan Hawke plays Hamlet as „a spoiled brat just on the cusp of being a serious young man.‟381 This characterisation is particularly evident during the scenes between Hawke and actor Sam Shepard who plays his father, the Ghost King Hamlet. When the Ghost first appears he authoritatively instructs Hamlet to be quiet and to listen to what he has to say: „Pity me not; but lend thy serious hearing To what I shall unfold.‟382 The tone of this command is almost patronising and sets the emphasis of the rest of the scene as a father sternly ordering a son, with whom he hasn‟t had many dealings with in the past, to action. Through their awkward interaction there is a sense that Hamlet‟s father „never spoke to him so directly when alive‟383 and that this is the first time that Hamlet and his father have had any sort of meaningful interaction whatsoever. The authoritative but awkward connection between the two in this scene is continued the next time the Ghost appears. During Hamlet‟s „emotional chaos‟384 of an encounter with his mother (just after he has killed Polonius) Shepard‟s Ghost sits scrutinising his son. The Ghost‟s menacing expression suggests that he is annoyed that Hamlet has strayed from the mission he had been given by his father the last time the two met. His father‟s irritation (and Hamlet‟s guilt) is verbally realised by Hamlet in his line: „Do you not come your tardy son to chide.‟385 Hamlet reaction to his father during this scene is one of fear. Hamlet tells Gertrude: „Look you, how pale he glares‟386 before shrinking back in fear like a son who has been caught disobeying his father‟s orders. Hamlet fears his father‟s wrath for vacillating in his decision to bring Claudius to justice and for the mess he has just created in his encounter with his mother and murder of Polonius.387 The screenplay describes the look the Ghost gives Hamlet as: „The ghost, indeed looks more than a little disgusted. His expression says: „Calm down, don‟t mess this up.‟388 Sam Shepard‟s stern delivery of „Do not forget, this visitation is but to whet thy almost blunted purpose‟389 builds on this and reinforces that this Ghost is a domineering and controlling father bringing his son into line. Almereyda‟s casting of Sam Shepard as Hamlet‟s father sets up some interesting contrasts within his film. Shepard had previously played Ethan Hawke‟s father in
381 Zacharek, „Hamlet.‟ 382 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 29. 383 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 31. 384 Crowl, Shakespeare at the Cineplex, 199. 385 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 82. 386 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 83. 387 Hamlet was explicitly told by his father to leave Gertrude alone in his „Leave her to heaven‟ speech (I, v, 69-72). 388 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 83. 389 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 82.
109 director Scott Hick‟s adaptation Snow Falling on Cedars (1999).390 Their dynamic in the film is translated to Almereyda‟s Hamlet. As well as being an actor, Sam Shepard is a well-known and successful playwright. His casting as Hamlet‟s father sets up their relationship in terms of contrasts, both of generations (“Baby Boom” versus “Generation X”) as well as medium for performance (play versus film). One of the most striking images in Hamlet is of Shepard‟s Ghost dissolving into a Pepsi vending machine. Kim Fedderson and J Michael Richardson remark that the machine „evokes Pepsi's then current marketing slogan - “The Next Generation” - and thus invites consideration of the play's themes of impeded biological and political succession.‟391 The casting of Sam Shepard and Ethan Hawke as father and son works in a similar fashion, and is symbolic the clash of cultures. Shepard‟s presence in the film is symbolic of an older generation (Shepard was born in 1943 and grew up during the volatile 1960s) and he interprets the Ghost as a man of words rather than of images. Unlike in Branagh‟s film adaptation of Hamlet (where a scene illustrating King Hamlet‟s murder is included) Almereyda does not show what happened to the King on screen. Almereyda instead has the Ghost tell Hamlet what has happened; Sam Shepard painting the imagery simply with his powerful words and performance. As I have earlier argued, actor Ethan Hawke is entrenched in allusion to “Generation X.” His Hamlet is very visual and obsessed with images. In order to understand and convey what his father has told him regarding his murder Hamlet has to translate words to images, which he does to great effect in his short film. His way of conveying information is the “new generation” way of expression, digital video recording. In a stark contrast to his father‟s (over)use of words, Hamlet‟s short film is made up only of moving images; the only sound comes from a musical score. The contrast between the modes of expression of Hamlet and his father illustrates how Shakespeare on stage has evolved into Shakespeare on film, and how recent films translate Shakespeare‟s text into images and sounds such as music.
As with the casting of Ethan Hawke, in Hamlet the presence of actress Julia Stiles in the role of Ophelia brings its own intertextual weight. Mary Christel refers to Stiles as „the
390 Hamlet‟s father and Arthur Chambers from Snow Falling on Cedars (played by Sam Shepard) are men of great stature and reputation. Both Hamlet and Ishmael Chambers (played by Ethan Hawke) have an awkward relationship with each of their fathers that arises out of a fear that they cannot live up to their legacy. 391 Fedderson and Richardson, 160.
110 queen of the 1990s teen pic adaptation.‟392 In the space of two years Stiles starred in no less than three different adaptations of Shakespeare‟s works on screen: 10 Things I Hate About You (an adaptation of The Taming Of The Shrew), Hamlet and O (2001)393 (an adaptation of Othello). Fresh from her role as Katherina Stratford in Gil Junger‟s “teen” film 10 Things I Hate About You, Julia Stiles brings to her role of Ophelia the fierceness and attitude of shrewish Kat. Parallels can be drawn between Stiles‟ portrayal of Kat Stratford and Ophelia. Ophelia shares some of Kate‟s independence and stubbornness.394 Both Ophelia and Kat have domineering controlling fathers and absent mother figures. Each also has flawed substitutes in their place, in Kat‟s case Ms Perky and in Ophelia‟s case Gertrude.395 Much like Hamlet‟s own flawed familial relationships, Ophelia‟s relationship with her family is equally corrupt and dysfunctional. Just as with Hamlet, Ophelia is also trapped between father figures, father Polonius and proxy father figure, elder brother Laertes.396 Herbert Coursen characterises Ophelia as a „subversive force undermining the smooth operation of Claudius & Co.‟397 Subsequently she is seen by her father and brother as someone who needs to be kept in line and controlled. Stiles‟ Ophelia resists her brother and father, however, the „price of her resistance is repression.‟398 Her repression is first suggested in the set design for the Polonius‟ family apartment. Surrounded by transparent materials such as the glass floor that announces Polonius‟ arrival home, the setting gives a sense of constant surveillance. “Big brother” Laertes and her father watch over Ophelia at every possible moment. Their repression and assertion of control are noticeable throughout the film. At the press conference that opens Almereyda‟s film, Laertes and Polonius both prevent Ophelia from spending any time with Hamlet. Laertes intercepts a note from Ophelia to Hamlet, and he and his father both steer her away from Hamlet as she attempts to “sneak off” to talk with him. Their interloping in
392 Mary T. Christel, ““Get Three to a Cineplex!”: Stunt Casting Hamlet for Good or Ill,” The Poor Yorick Shakespeare Catalogue - Featured Articles, April 15 2004, 7 Dec 2004
111 Ophelia and Hamlet‟s relationship continues in Laertes‟ „Perhaps he loves you now‟399 speech to his sister. Laertes warns Ophelia about getting involved with Hamlet. As she listens to her brother‟s words, Ophelia rolls her eyes, indicating that she doesn‟t completely take what Laertes is saying seriously. While Ophelia takes his words under advisement the impact of his advice is tempered by her: „I shall the effect of this good lesson keep‟ 400 speech, where she warns Laertes against not following his own counsel.
While Ophelia may be able to rebuke her brother‟s concerned admonishments, she is unable to ignore her father Polonius‟ commands not to see Hamlet again. At one point during Polonius‟ chastisements she does look up at him, the screenplay describes Ophelia‟s gaze as stern, „as if to challenge‟401 him. However, at no time during her father‟s lecture is she given the opportunity to do so. The whole tone of the scene between Polonius and Ophelia in the family apartment is of a father talking down to a disobedient young child. Bill Murray‟s emphasis on words like „baby‟ and „slander‟ indicate that Polonius sees Ophelia‟s immature actions in her involvement with Hamlet as a mark against his own character. Murray‟s body language also conveys a commanding presence. When questioning her about her relationship with Hamlet, he stands over her, literally talking down to her. He also curtly snatches from her hands the diorama she is looking at so she pays attention to what he is telling her. Lastly, when he orders Ophelia not to spend any more time with Hamlet „he grabs Ophelia‟s foot and ties her unlaced sneaker.‟402 Polonius‟ actions, rather than conveying what Elsie Walker refers to as an „emotional intimacy,‟403 are an assertion of fatherly control, power and order, and reinforce the commanding tone he uses with her in this scene and throughout the film. The final time this fatherly power is asserted is after Polonius arrives unannounced at Ophelia‟s apartment, interrupting a tryst between her and Hamlet. He snatches the letter that Hamlet had delivered to Ophelia. This gives Polonius‟ line when showing the letter to Claudius and Gertrude: „This in obedience hath my daughter shown me‟404 a more sinister tone. Humiliating Ophelia by reading out the content of Hamlet‟s letter, Polonius‟ repression and control of Ophelia then comes into full effect when he forces her to unwillingly wear a hidden microphone to spy on Hamlet. Wesley Morris characterises the moment as, „Ophelia seems more the pawn here than she‟s ever
399 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 24. 400 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 25. 401 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 36. 402 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 36. 403 Walker, “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare,” 332. 404 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 46.
112 been before.‟405 While Polonius tapes the wire to her waist, Ophelia is visibly upset. Stiles‟ body language in this scene poignantly illustrating exactly how powerless Ophelia is. The screenplay describes Ophelia as: „She‟s trying not to cry, but can‟t help herself.‟406 Ophelia does not resist and Polonius takes no note of his daughter‟s emotions.
The problematic relationship between Ophelia and Polonius highlights Almereyda‟s interpretation of the reason behind Ophelia‟s madness. While other readings of the play have suggested that Polonius‟ murder is the catalyst for her madness and eventual death, in Hamlet Almereyda implies that the breakdown of Ophelia‟s relationship with Hamlet is the reason for her distress and suicide. This characterisation falls in line in with the focus of Almereyda‟s adaptation, the tragic love story between Hamlet and Ophelia. Ophelia‟s true mind-set regarding her utter devastation at the breakdown of her relationship with Hamlet is more pronounced in the film‟s screenplay. In a scene in the latter half of the screenplay, Ophelia burns Polaroid photos of Hamlet‟s face.407 She then gulps down a handful of pills she has taken from a medicine cabinet. The screenplay indicates that the scene ends with the camera focussing on the burning photo of Hamlet. As the flame dies all that remains is a „blistered black square.‟408 This wordless scene direction gives new interpretations to Ophelia‟s declaration of:
And will he not come again And will he not come again? No, no, he is dead. Go to thy death-bed. He will never come again.409
The screenplay encourages us to consider her words to be about Hamlet rather than her father. Ophelia is lamenting on the loss of her lover, whom she assumes she will never see again. This new interpretation is reinforced by the placement of the photo burning scene in the screenplay. In the scene immediately following it, Gertrude announces
405 Wesley Morris, “Nothing Rotten at Denmark Inc,” SFGate May 19 (2000), 9 Aug 2004
113 Ophelia‟s suicide to her brother Laertes. Ophelia believes she has lost the love of her life, and therefore takes her own.
Almereyda‟s focus on the dysfunctional family relationships in Hamlet is also touched upon in the allusions Baz Luhrmann‟s successful adaptation Romeo + Juliet. Both films share some similar characteristics, although, the impact and intention of each of these differs somewhat in Almereyda‟s film. The connection between these two films highlights the shift in focus in Hamlet, where Hamlet and Ophelia‟s relationship is centralised. Almereyda invites the audience to read Hamlet as a romantic tragedy. As in Luhrmann‟s film adaptation Romeo + Juliet, in Hamlet there is an emphasis on water imagery. The symbolic nature of water in Luhrmann‟s film has been read in numerous ways. For Charles Ross water in Romeo + Juliet acts as a way of illustrating Juliet‟s release from oppression as well as „establishing symmetry between Romeo and Juliet since both are trapped by social forces and both seek a clearer, better world.‟410 James N Loehlin further argues that the use of water in Luhrmann‟s film acts as, what he terms an „aquatic insulation,‟ and that water helps remove Romeo and Juliet from the „noisy and frenetic world of Verona Beach.‟411 The idea that water is a place of escape from a world of corruption and repression is also a dominant feature of Almereyda‟s film. Water in Hamlet is specifically associated with the character of Ophelia. Water imagery in Hamlet signals a place where Ophelia can meet Hamlet in private. The episode where she sketches a picture of a fountain suggests that they have met at the fountain before. The fountain becomes particularly significant as it becomes the scene of her death, further linking her emotional breakdown to the disintegration of her relationship with Hamlet. Water serves as a place of privacy where she can escape, whether for a moment or eternity, from her troubles. These troubles are namely the overwhelming controlling nature of her father and the corruption that dominates the “real world.” The scene poolside at Gertrude and Claudius‟ penthouse aptly illustrates this. Invoking Hamlet‟s suicidal and self-destructive nature as he watches himself rehearsing „To be or not to be‟ with a gun to his temple, the scene by the pool centres on Ophelia and her equally self- destructive thoughts. As Polonius reveals the content of Hamlet‟s letter, Ophelia, feeling
410 Charles Ross draws particular attention to the scene in the bath, where Juliet lays underwater smiling as she hides from the world and the bidding of her mother. Charles Ross, “Underwater Women in Shakespeare‟s Films,” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture: A WWWeb Journal 6.1 Mar (2004), 21 Oct 2004
114 violated, ashamed and humiliated by Polonius‟ betrayal, moves to the side of the swimming pool and gazes at herself in the reflection in the water. Polonius‟ relation of the details of his daughter‟s relationship with Hamlet, specifically his comment of: „Lord Hamlet is a prince out of thy star. This must not be,‟412 reveals the extent to which he interferes and dominates his daughter‟s life and his status-conscious nature. The suggestion that Ophelia must abandon her relationship with Hamlet (an action earlier ordered by Polonius - he reveals as much in his comments in this scene) triggers Ophelia into an action that foreshadows her later death by drowning. The screenplay describes the action of the scene as: „Ophelia jumps into the pool, crashing into the water, fully dressed.‟413 In order to escape Polonius‟ hurtful and pompous talk and interference in her life she retreats underwater. A jump cut reveals that her diving into the pool only occurred in her mind, and as Polonius continues talking, Ophelia manages to take some solace in snatching back Hamlet‟s letter, though not without escaping the wary watchful eyes of Gertrude.
Gertrude is portrayed by actress Diana Venora, and this casting choice further connects Hamlet to Romeo + Juliet, with Venora also starring as Gloria Capulet (Juliet‟s mother) in Luhrmann‟s film. Both Gertrude and Gloria Capulet are flawed maternal figures. James Loehlin describes parental figures in Romeo + Juliet as „wealthy, status- conscious and stereotypically out of touch with their children.‟414 He further characterises Gloria Capulet as „a chain-smoking pill popping trophy wife with no time for her daughter‟s problems.‟415 In Hamlet Venora‟s Gertrude appears very much the “trophy wife” during the press conference scene, staring adoringly at her new husband as he speaks to the collected media. Her concern for her son Hamlet vacillates throughout the film and she is generally out of touch with his problems. Gertrude‟s concern for Hamlet is briefly noted when she asks him to not go back to school but remain at Elsinore. However, she is more interested in seducing her husband than in what Rosencrantz and Guildenstern have to report about Hamlet‟s problematic behaviour and moody demeanour. Her concern for Hamlet only seems to become truly concrete and passionate when the truth about Claudius‟ guilt of her previous husband‟s murder is revealed to her. At this point she sacrifices herself for her son, drinking the poison wine intended for him. As noted earlier Gertrude is also placed within the film to
412 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 48. 413 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 48. 414 Lohelin, “These Violent Delights,” 122. 415 Lohelin, “These Violent Delights,” 122.
115 be a surrogate mother figure for Ophelia. Rather than treating Ophelia with love and concern and kindness, like Polonius Gertrude treats her as a child that must be disciplined and controlled. Instead of protecting Ophelia from embarrassment by indulging Ophelia‟s wish to regain some privacy and respect (Ophelia attempts to snatch back the letter from prying eyes) and returning Hamlet‟s letter addressed to her, Gertrude won‟t let her have it back. Though Ophelia does manage to eventually get the letter back after it is left unattended on a chair „Gertrude warily watches her,‟416 like a parent keeping watch over an unruly child. In the later scene of Ophelia‟s arrival at the Guggenheim museum we further see that Gertrude does not treat her with motherly concern but with embarrassment and discipline. Ophelia is seen by Gertrude as someone who needs to be hidden away from view and dealt with in private. Ever status-conscious Gertrude says „I will not speak with her‟417 when Ophelia arrives ranting and raving, and backs away when approached by her. With the help of a bodyguard Gertrude drags Ophelia away after she screams and attracts the attention of other people in the museum. Once again Gertrude‟s concern is mislaid until it‟s too late. Her statement of her hope that Ophelia „shouldst have been my Hamlet‟s wife‟ (V, i, 246) occurs when Ophelia is already dead and buried in the ground.
The dysfunctional relationship that both Ophelia and Hamlet endure with their family is one of the characteristics that lead the audience to consider Ophelia as Hamlet‟s equal within the film. Almereyda had originally intended Fortinbras to act as Hamlet‟s doppelgänger, describing him in the screenplay for the film as:
a proud fatherless prince like Hamlet, but deprived of Hamlet‟s melancholy, his self-loathing, his talent for introspection. Fortinbras is decisive and active; a warrior, a winner418
The screenplay also indicates that Fortinbras initially had much more of a physical presence within the film. In particular Fortinbras closes the film. When Fortinbras arrives by helicopter to Elsinore‟s rooftop he takes out his digital video camera and films the scene before him. Documenting the final carnage that he has come upon, the screenplay notes that „Fortinbras steps past Claudius, tracking bloody prints as he stands
416 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 48. 417 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 96. 418 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 141-2.
116 on the King‟s chair for a better view.‟419 For Almereyda, Fortinbras is the embodiment of history:
History‟s bloody bootprint, stamping remorselessly among the corpses of all overcomplicated young men, the ones who hesitate, who stun themselves looking into mirrors, the poets the losers.420
Unlike Hamlet‟s videoing, which is a mean of artistic introspection and observation, Fortinbras‟ filming of the dead bodies seems a cold, macabre way of documenting that which he has conquered, an act fitting a man who is now the face of a global media empire. Unlike what is presented in the screenplay, in the final film Fortinbras‟ presence is diminished, with certain characters appropriating his characteristics. Described in the screenplay as a „scruffy young man wearing a sharp suit, a hat with earflaps, a bag slung on one shoulder,‟421 these physical features and costuming are transferred in the film to Hawke‟s Hamlet and define Hamlet throughout the film. In the final film Fortinbras is reduced to being present simply in images, in the paper that Claudius rips up at the press conference, on the cover of “Wired” that Guildenstern reads, and on screen on the news program Hamlet watches on the plane. Almereyda states, Fortinbras‟ presence in the film became „so fragmentary, nearly anonymous, as befits a prince in the age of faceless corporate power.‟422 The reduction of Fortinbras to image is a comment on the power of image. In the end image, the reproduction of reality, symbolised by Fortinbras, is what completely takes control of Denmark.
The similarity between Hamlet and Ophelia is not simply contained in their parallel family relationships, but extends to the common ground they find in their art, Hamlet‟s use of video and Ophelia‟s photography. These visual means of recording are not used by them as forms of surveillance, as the corrupt others in their lives do, but as a form of introspective art in which they can express themselves. Burnett characterises Hamlet and Ophelia‟s connection with their art as reminiscing in a gloomy „self-conscious and narcissistic manner.‟423 Through their connection to artistic modes of visual reproduction, compared with the commercial imagery associated with the corrupt world around them, Burnett further argues that Hamlet and Ophelia‟s relationship comes to be
419 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 129. 420 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 142. 421 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 128. 422 Almereyda, William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet, 142. 423 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 56.
117 „read through a nostalgic register.‟424 The romantic tone of their relationship is the focus of Almereyda‟s film, and he re-imagines Hamlet as their love story.425 As in Luhrmann‟s Romeo + Juliet, Almereyda‟s Hamlet emphasises the tragic quality of the love story between Hamlet and Ophelia. The similarity between the two films is highlighted in Alessandro Abbate‟s characterisation of Hamlet and Ophelia‟s relationship in the film as a love story „capable of liberation and mutual understanding, against the background of a world of corruption, egoism and disconnection.426 Along with their visual art, Hamlet and Ophelia are linked to writing. Ophelia, in a clip from Hamlet‟s video diary, is seen reading William Burroughs and both Ophelia and Hamlet write notes to each other. Hamlet also writes poetry on paper, saving emails and electronic correspondence from his dealings with the corrupt others in his life such as Claudius and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. He sends the latter to their deaths with a quick change to a computer file. In Hamlet correspondences via machines are distinguished from personalised forms of writing. Richard Burt sees this as a sentimental take on the play:
Hamlet‟s romantic love for Ophelia, her love for him, and their knowledge via art/media are opposed to parental and self-surveillance.427
Almereyda presents a dichotomy between “original” handwritten word, and reproductions by technology. The split between the two further cements the juxtaposition in the film between the cold urban city and the natural world longed for by Hamlet and Ophelia. Both Hamlet and Ophelia are placed at odds with the world around them. The older generation in Hamlet are „all hyper-mediatized,‟428 while the younger generation are connected to nature and expression through art. Generational conflict and confrontation with a corrupt world dominated by the media images from consumer culture is particularly reminiscent of Luhrmann‟s Romeo + Juliet. As with Luhrmann‟s protagonists, Hamlet and Ophelia‟s conflict and confrontation with this media dominated corrupt and controlling world leads not only to the breakdown of their relationship but also to their deaths.
424 Burnett, “To Hear and See the Matter,” 56. 425 This approach is similar to Michael Hoffman‟s film adaptation William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, which Hoffman re-imagines as the tragic love story of Bottom and Titania. 426 Alessandro Abbate, ““To Be or Inter-Be”: Almereyda‟s end-of-millennium Hamlet,” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 84. 427 Burt, “Shakespeare and Asia in postdiasporic cinemas,” 294. 428 Burt, “Shakespeare and Asia in postdiasporic cinemas,” 294.
118
In translating Hamlet from the play to screen, Michael Almereyda reconfigures the play for a modern audience. Transplanting Shakespeare‟s story into modern New York City, Almereyda places Hamlet and Ophelia at odds with the urban world of claustrophobia, conspiracy and global corporate power that surrounds them. Analysis of the diverse selection of music found in the film is a threshold into understanding Almereyda‟s cinematic interpretation of Hamlet. Through musical tone, lyrics and placement within a scene, musical excerpts convey ideas about mortality and the worth of human life, and also emphasise the schizophrenic and fragmented mood of the film. Almereyda‟s Manhattan is a place where Hamlet and Ophelia are constantly watched and contained. Carter Burwell‟s minimalist and at times repetitive score signals ideas of repression and surveillance that form the basis for Hamlet. As with music, intertexual references are used to convey themes in Hamlet. Contemporary social problems such as generational conflict and dysfunctional family relationships are conveyed in the film through citations to popular culture which deal with similar themes, for example the films Rebel Without a Cause and Romeo + Juliet. Allusions to previous roles cast members have portrayed are also influential in expressing issues within the film such as family dysfunction and the clash of generations. The most notable example is actor Ethan Hawke, who imbues his portrayal of Hamlet with a “Generation X” apathy that is a stark contrast with the ambitiousness of the various “father figures” who surround him. Hamlet invites further comparison with Romeo + Juliet through the way in which director Almereyda centralises Hamlet and Ophelia‟s relationship and re-interprets Shakespeare‟s story as their romantic tragedy. Hamlet and Ophelia are set apart from others through their symbolic alignment with art, nature and the handwritten word. Almereyda suggests that their confrontation with a corrupt urban world dominated by images, technology and repression leads to the breakdown of their relationship, and subsequently their untimely death.
119
Julie Taymor’s Titus (1999)
Julie Taymor sets her film Titus (1999), an adaptation of one of Shakespeare‟s earliest plays Titus Andronicus, in an undetermined time and setting. Originally staged off- Broadway in 1994, Taymor adapted her stage production of Titus for the screen. Through a stylised mise-en-scène and amalgamation of genres, times and setting, the world created in Julie Taymor‟s film is both ancient and modern. Taymor‟s film adaptation of Titus is highly political, and takes a similar approach to Michael Almereyda‟s adaptation of Hamlet in the way in which Taymor recontextualises one of Shakespeare‟s plays in terms of contemporary social problems. Julie Taymor notes that her decision to adapt Titus, firstly in her off-Broadway production, and then in her film adaptation, was due to the play‟s relevance to modern times. She remarks of Titus Andronicus: „if there‟s any Shakespeare play that really speaks to what‟s going on today, with race and violence, this is it.‟429 Titus was filmed at a time when media is saturated with images of violence occurring in war430 and close to home, a time when the “who bleeds leads” mentality dominates news coverage, and also when big violent blockbusters make millions of dollars at the box office. Both prolific and detailed in her discussion of her film adaptation of Titus Andronicus, Taymor notes that her approach to filming was influenced by a desire to present a critique of violence as entertainment in our culture. Taymor‟s Titus makes reference to Antonin Artaud‟s theory of the “Theatre of Cruelty.”431 The audience is not permitted to suspend their sense of disbelief or willingly become silently uninvolved observers. Taymor argues that „complacency as a result of familiarity is an enemy,‟432 and her film Titus attempts to reinstall a sense of shock to an audience that she believes has become desensitised to violence. She achieves this through two very different techniques. The juxtaposition of violence and
429 Julie Taymor quoted in Miranda Johnson-Haddad, “A Time for Titus: An Interview with Julie Taymor,” Shakespeare Bulletin 18.4 Fall (2000): 34. 430 The conflict in Kosovo would start just months after filming on Titus, filmed in neighbouring Croatia, itself the scene of war and genocide years earlier, was completed. 431 Antonin Artaud, “The Theatre of Cruelty,” Antonin Artaud: Selected Writings, Susan Sontag, ed Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988). 432 Julie Taymor quoted in Eileen Blumenthal, Julie Taymor: Playing With Fire: Theatre, Opera and Film, updated expanded ed (New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999): 184.
121 humour in Titus is intended to unsettle the audience and cause them to see things differently. Julie Taymor also seeks to draw the audience into her film. Rather than simply stimulating her audience with acts of horrific violence, director Taymor inspires empathy as a means to greater audience involvement with her film.433 References to musical styles, objects, time periods and events, as well as popular cultural references from film and television are used to engage the audience with the film, and draw parallels with their own lives and culture.
Julie Taymor further inspires empathy with the audience through the focus she draws on the figure of Young Lucius, Titus‟ grandson, a minor figure in Shakespeare‟s play. Taymor‟s use of the point of view of a child, who frames the film, draws parallels with the popular Academy award winning Italian film Life Is Beautiful (1997). Both films critique the impact of violence of children through the use of a child character who acts as a liminal observer and witnesses the brutal violence that occurs around them, including the loss of a father figure. A further connection between the two films is seen in their juxtaposition between humour and horrific violence. This integral feature of both films is also shared with another text referenced in Titus, Fellini‟s La Strada (1954). I shall explore the significance of La Strada to the post World War Two Italian cinema inspired mise-en-scène of Taymor‟s film later in this chapter. While there are certain correlations between Titus and Life is Beautiful, Taymor‟s idea to use Young Lucius as liminal observer and framing device in her film adaptation of Titus Andronicus was drawn directly from her stage production in 1994. The use of Young Lucius is one of several major thematic and production design elements that Taymor has transferred from stage production to her 1999 film. Given that Taymor‟s stage production occurred in 1994 and Life is Beautiful was released in 1997, in my opinion allusions to Jane Howell‟s BBC adaptation of Titus Andronicus (1985) as well as Adrian Nobel‟s Royal Shakespeare Company production of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream have a more significant impact on Taymor‟s Titus and the themes she addresses, such as the impact of violence on children. In all three productions a young boy acts as a liminal observer and witnesses events unfold. Providing a further link between films, the young boy in Noble‟s Dream was played by Osheen Jones, who also portrays Young Lucius in Taymor‟s film. In Titus Taymor presents a critique of both violence as
433 Courtney Lehmann, Bryan Reynolds, Lisa S. Starks, “„For Such a Sight Will Blind a Father's Eye‟: The Spectacle of Suffering in Taymor's Titus,” Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical Future, Bryan Reynolds, ed; Janelle Reinelt, foreword; Jonathan Gil Harris, afterword (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003): 220.
122 a learned behaviour and the ritualistic and cyclical nature of violence through the changing role of Young Lucius, as he shifts from observer to active participant.
The design of Taymor‟s Titus is particularly influenced by the post-World War Two Italian tradition of film making, and contains many references to the films of Italian directors such as Federico Fellini and Luchino Visconti. The Italian “feel” of the film is further reinforced by Taymor filming part of Titus at the famed Cinecittà studios in Rome, and through the use of director of photography Luciano Tovoli and production designer Dante Ferretti, who have worked with directors such as Michelangelo Antonioni, Dario Argento, Piere Paulo Pasolini and Fellini. Of particular influence to Taymor‟s film are Fellini‟s Roma (1972), Satyricon (1969) and La Strada, and Visconti‟s The Damned (1969). Like Fellini in Roma, Taymor addresses the difficulties of contemporary society through the mixture of incongruent time periods and styles and culture that exists in Ferretti‟s production design. The influence of Fellini‟s films on Titus is also demonstrated in the decadence and sexuality of Saturninus‟ Rome, as well as the juxtaposition between moments of comedy and ones of seriousness and horrific brutality. Through the citation of films by directors from the Cinecittà era of post war Italian filmmaking, Taymor‟s Titus also alludes to the history of Fascism in Italy, and the role of Cinecittà Studios in producing propaganda during wartime. The allusion to Fascism is further punctuated through the use of the Palazzo della Civilta Italiana, Benito Mussolini‟s government centre, as Saturninus‟ palace.
As I have shown is the case with Michael Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Gil Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You, and Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet, casting carries a significant intertextual resonance, with actors bringing allusions from previous films they have starred in and roles they‟ve portrayed in the past. Alan Cumming brings to his role of Saturninus allusions to his Tony Award winning role of the Master of Ceremonies in the 1998 revival of the Ebb and Kander musical Cabaret.434 The reference to Cabaret, which is set in Fascist Germany of the 1930s, as well as the way in which Cumming interprets his role, suggests a connection between Fascism and non-conformist sexuality and decadence. This association characterises Saturninus as both sinister and corrupt. Casting is also important in how the audience reads Anthony Hopkins‟ portrayal of Titus. Invoking his previous Oscar
434 Directed by Sam Mendes and co-directed and choreographed by Rob Marshal. Originally staged at the Donmar Warehouse in 1993, this production transferred to Broadway in 1998.
123 winning role of Hannibal Lecter in Silence of the Lambs (1991), Hopkins‟ presence in the film helps to juxtapose humour and horror, and also highlights the shift in Titus‟ character from returning hero to monster. Contrasting with the way in which he is vilified through intertextual allusion, the audience is also encouraged to empathise with Titus. This empathy is achieved through both the use of dramatic close-ups as well as the characterisation of Titus‟ enemies, such as Tamora, as vile and villainous and thus worthy of what befalls them. Tamora is vilified through being contrasted with Lavinia. Director Taymor draws upon recognisable symbols of females from film, such as Grace Kelly, Marilyn Monroe and the Baroness from Visconti‟s The Damned in her characterisation of Tamora and Lavinia. Whether intentional or not, through this cinematic technique she quite conservatively aligns sexuality with villainy and violence. The connection between violence, sexuality and decadent imagery is repeated in the imagery throughout Titus. Undermining Taymor‟s intent to criticise the entertainment value of violence in our culture, the empathy created between the audience and Titus allows them to relish his brutal and calculated retribution and to consider his violent revenge against his enemies as both cathartic and cleansing. Also problematical to Taymor‟s intended criticism of the impact of violence is the characterisation of Lucius as “hero.” Taymor ignores Lucius‟ role as initiator of violence and retributive violence in Titus, and instead suggests certain types of violence are understandable and acceptable.
As with references to other films, the use of Elliot Goldenthal‟s musical score is equally important in illustrating themes Julie Taymor has “found” in Titus Andronicus. Composer Goldenthal, a frequent collaborator of Taymor‟s, constructs a musical score that emphasises the heterogeneous nature of Taymor‟s adaptation of Titus. Eclectic and diverse, Goldenthal‟s score ranges from imposing orchestral numbers to wild swinging “big band” Jazz and “heavy” Rock & Roll. Just as in Simon Boswell‟s score for William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Goldenthal‟s score for Titus also reflects character and larger themes through musical motifs. The only piece of music used in the film not composed by Goldenthal,435 is „Vivere‟ sung by Italian singer Carlo Buti, who was a popular singer from the 1930s until his retirement in 1956. „Vivere‟ is a pleasant pop song heard in the final banquet scene of Taymor‟s film. The upbeat sounding „Vivere‟ enhances the juxtaposition between the horrific images of the Chiron and
435 „Vivere‟ is also the only song on the film‟s soundtrack not composed by composer Goldenthal. Titus: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack, Elliot Goldenthal, Sony Classical, AUDIO CD, US, 2000.
124 Demetrius‟ murder, and the disturbing and outrageous black humour the “homely” image of the pies made of human flesh. The contrast between images and tones is intended to emphasise Titus‟ cold and calculated violence, as well as the carnage during the banquet. However, Hopkins‟ performance as well as the comical imagery used in the scene diminishes the impact Taymor had intended to achieve.
Both Elliot Goldenthal‟s and Buti‟s music complement the heterogeneous Roman world in which the film is set. A long time creative partner of Julie Taymor, Goldenthal also scored Taymor‟s theatre production of Titus and Taymor‟s biopic of artist Frida Kahlo, Frida (2002). Composer Goldenthal also scored dramatic films full of action, such as Interview with a Vampire (1994), Heat (1995), A Time to Kill (1996) and Batman and Robin (1997). His score for Titus reuses a track called „Pressing Judgement‟ from the score from A Time to Kill. Goldenthal is known for his brutal action music as well as his ability to blend various musical styles and techniques. This ability to blend various musical styles is demonstrated most clearly in his score for Titus, where he follows the same stylistic concept as the designers of the film.436 Lisa Starks notes that the collision of past and present in Taymor‟s film is developed on an auditory level by Goldenthal, who combines „ancient-sounding compositions with modern jazz to achieve an effect that, as with the costumes and production design by Dante Ferretti, juxtaposes past and present.‟437 Goldenthal‟s musical score in Titus highlights the fragmentation of time periods and styles that exist not only within the film but also within the city of Rome. His comments on the linear notes for the soundtrack to Titus, which have been reproduced on a fan run website, suggest that his score for the film was particularly influenced by a trip he made to Rome during the pre-production stage of filming:
On day one, glancing at the Palatine Hills from a 1998 Fiat, we saw the great Circus Maximus with the ruins of privileged patricians' villas perched overhead, and I heard in my mind's ear an archetypal ancient percussion ensemble. In that same moment another car pulled up alongside ours, equipped with a sub woofer - with the pentameters and heameteres [sic] of hip-hop blasting through every window. The music cross-faded as I watched a group of Andean pan flute players in native Bolivian garb hawking their tapes and playing their music
436 Julie Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay: Adapted from William Shakespeare‟s Titus Andronicus (New York: Newmarket, 2000) 182. 437 Lisa S. Starks, “Cinema of Cruelty: Powers of Horror in Julie Taymor‟s Titus,” The Reel Shakespeare: Alternative Cinema and Theory, Lisa S. Starks and Courtney Lehmann, eds and intro (Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, London, England: Associated UP, 2002): 133.
125 which was almost drown out [sic] by an Elvis impersonator with a cheap Karaoke setup - replete with cheesy reverb - singing "Jail House Rock" in Neapolitan dialect...well, you get the idea.438
Goldenthal notes in his commentary on the DVD release of Titus that his decision to create a score so stylistically diverse was to match the stratification of Rome, his intentions mirroring Julie Taymor‟s stylistic approach. In her screenplay for Titus, Taymor reveals the aim of the film‟s production design was to „blend and collide time, to create a singular period that juxtaposed elements of ancient barbaric ritual with familiar, contemporary attitude and style.‟439
The influence of the carnivalesque music from the circus that Goldenthal encountered while in Rome is heard in the music created for the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequences in Taymor‟s film. The Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequences are a concept that originally appeared in Taymor‟s earlier stage production of Titus Andronicus. The Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequences (referred to by Taymor in the abbreviated form “P.A.N.S.”) were devised as stylised breaks meant to portray the inner landscapes of the minds of characters as affected by their external actions.440 They were signalled in the stage production through a framing device of floating gold frames revealed by the drawing of tattered red velvet curtains,441 an element still visible in some places during Taymor‟s film.442 In the film the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequences take the form of short surreal visual moments of remembered violence. Taymor describes these sequences as presenting objects and moments in her film that couldn‟t literally be stated or seen. They are “nightmare-scapes” that illustrate the inner conscious of the characters.443 There are five Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequences in total,444 one appearing in each of
438 Ryan Keaveney, “Elliot Goldenthal Discography: Titus,” The Website For Composer Elliot Goldenthal 2003, 15 Sept 2004
126 the five acts of Titus.445 Each of these sequences is a stylised moment of respite from the brutal actions in the film.
In Titus the juxtaposition between humour and horror is a tool used by both Goldenthal in his musical score and Taymor in the film‟s imagery in order to unsettle the audience and to highlight brutal violence. Goldenthal notes that he used “jazzy” carnival type music made up of tuba, accordion, saxophone and clarinet to add humour to the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence where the heads of Titus‟ sons are returned. The whole scene plays out what Taymor terms a moment of „strange levity‟446 where what is real and what is imagined collide. The scene is played as a comic and absurdist theatrical moment. The carnival-like music combines with the surreal imagery of the character of the strongman (he abducts Young Lucius at the beginning of the film), who arrives at the Andronicus family home in a small amusing looking circus van. A red-headed girl (the angel of mercy seen during the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence at the crossroads) dances around and sets up a mock theatre, seating the Andronicus family in folding chairs facing the circus van. The strongman then lifts the side panel of the van, which becomes the pseudo curtain of a macabre theatre of horrors when the shocking and disturbing image of the severed heads of Titus‟ sons and the hand that was meant to secure their release are revealed. The imagery here is again another example of Taymor‟s continued juxtaposition between tragedy and grotesque horror. The scene is filmed from behind the principle actors and shows their reaction to the horror that is presented. The differing reactions to the brutal violence are particularly important in this scene. Marcus the controlled statesman fervently calls the family to action in his speech culminating with the powerful words: „Now is a time to storm!‟447 Contrasted with Marcus‟ angry and horrified reaction, Titus simply laughs at the horror that has been revealed. Marcus is shocked and asks Titus: „Why dost thou laugh?‟ as he is unable to understand what he sees as Titus‟ improper reaction to the brutal execution of his sons. Titus replies with: „I have not another tear to shed.‟ Titus is so overcome with grief and rage he has become subject to an emotional numbing. Just as Marcus becomes over talkative in reaction to his discovery of Lavinia‟s rape and mutilation, Titus becomes
445 In this way Taymor preserves the separation of Titus into acts, a point that is also demonstrated by the scene selection menu for the two disc special edition DVD release of Titus. The scenes are divided into five acts. In order to select a separate scene for viewing the user must first select the act in which that scene appears. 446 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 447 Unless otherwise stated, quotations of the dialogue from Titus are my own transcriptions based on the two disc special edition DVD release of the film.
127 emotionally frozen and cannot shed any more tears over the brutal violence that has been cast upon his family. Titus‟ laughter also signals the turning point for him and the rest of his family. Tamora‟s revenge against Titus and his family has reached its climax. Now Titus‟ revenge against those who have wronged both him and his family will begin. While Titus cannot undo what has happened to Lavinia or bring back those who have been killed, enacting revenge against his enemies will satisfy and heal his damaged honour. The seriousness of what Titus says and Marcus‟ call to action is contrasted with the black humour of his command to Lavinia to: „Bear thou my hand, sweet wench, between thy teeth.‟ Alan Hughes notes that modern audiences tend to laugh at this sort of stage action, a reason which led to director Peter Brook cutting the line from his “serious” Stratford-upon-Avon theatrical production of Titus Andronicus in 1955.448 The carnivalesque music again appears later in the film during the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence where the figures of Rape, Revenge and Murder appear to Titus as he takes a bath. Julie Taymor has rearranged and edited the scene so that the opening lines (V, ii, 1-8)449 where Tamora reveals that she is actually playing the Revenge figure are cut. Taymor notes that she wanted the audience to think the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence was a figment of Titus‟ imagination,450 and refers to this sequence as a carnival in Titus‟ mind.451 The possibility that Titus has gone mad at this point in the film is emphasised in this sequence through the imagery of the spiralling Ferris wheel lights that spin behind the figures of Rape, Revenge, and Murder, as well as the eerie and sinister sounding music. Only after the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence ends are the real identities of Rape, Revenge and Murder, namely Tamora, Chiron and Demetrius, are revealed. The bizarre masquerade is in fact real and Titus has not gone mad, but knows who they are and is playing along as a part of his grand plan for revenge.
As well as illustrating the thematic concerns of Julie Taymor‟s production design, Elliot Goldenthal‟s score for Titus reflects and defines character. Just as the costuming in Titus is designed to define characters visually, music defines characters aurally. Goldenthal provides certain characters in Titus with their own theme or musical motif. Elsie Walker notes that Goldenthal does not use a homogenous score to connect the disparate nature
448 William Shakespeare, Titus Andronicus, Alan Hughes, ed (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994): notes 278-81, 101. 449 Line citations from Titus Andronicus refer to the 1994 New Cambridge edition, edited by Alan Hughes. 450 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 185. 451 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.”
128 of Taymor‟s film, but „wrote diverse music to play into the psychology of individual characters.‟452 Juxtaposition and contrast in Goldenthal‟s score for Titus unsettle the audience and also demonstrate character and relationships between people. An example of this juxtaposition is demonstrated in two consecutive scenes in the film, the first between Titus and Lavinia in the Andronicus family tomb and the next between the warring brothers Saturninus and Bassianus. A gentle theme being played by a French horn highlights the warmth and humanity Titus feels towards Lavinia,453 and also gives a solemn sense of both the history of the generations of Andronici who are buried in these tombs, and their duty to the Roman state. At the scene change the music transforms with a saxophone now playing the exact notes the French horn was playing. Goldenthal notes that the music, inspired by Jazz from the 1930s to 1950s and chosen as it reflects the architecture and art design of the scene, gives a sense of optimism and that something new, “cool” and modern is happening. When the camera pans once again the music changes and the lively Jazz gives way to dark, serious orchestral music. Goldenthal‟s music has a tone of foreboding which underscores the turmoil in the scene that is mirrored in Marcus‟ worried expression a result of the discordant groups of populous in the streets.454 The streets are filled with supporters of both Saturninus and Bassianus, the sons of the late Emperor, each vying for control of Rome.
In Titus the character of Saturninus is associated with the Jazz music used in the score, heard in particular during the scene where Saturninus becomes Emperor of Rome. The official sounding orchestral coronation music twists into raucous Jazz complete with „blaring trumpets playing high shakes.‟455 This gives a sense (along with his “Nazi-like” appearance) that Saturninus‟ has a sinister edge and that his rule brings with it trouble. Jazz is also heard during Saturninus‟ and Tamora‟s wedding celebrations and becomes associated with a feeling of decadence and corruption under Saturninus‟ rule. Goldenthal continues the use of contemporary musical cues with the characters of Chiron and Demetrius, who are associated with the sound of „“chaotic” Rock and Heavy Metal.‟456 The music is heard specifically during the scene in the boys‟ dungeon “games room” area of the palace. As Demetrius rushes around and plays violent arcade games,
452 Elsie Walker, “„Now Is a Time To Storm‟: Julie Taymor‟s Titus (2000),” Literature/Film Quarterly 30.3 (2002): 195. 453 Quotations from the film‟s composer Elliot Goldenthal‟s commentary are my own transcription based on the two disc special edition DVD release of the film. 454 Goldenthal, “Commentary.” 455 Goldenthal, “Commentary.” 456 Walker, “Now Is A Time To Storm,” 195.
129 Chiron dances hectically in what appears a drug induced state. The chaotic nature of this scene with the boys is further punctuated by the sharp contrast in music used during both this scene and that which precedes it. As the Andronici sit down for dinner slow- classical music plays softly; the softness dramatically gives way to contemporary “industrial” type Rock & Roll heard during the scene with the boys. The music is made up of computerised beats, numerous electric guitars, and also contains distorted dialogue. Goldenthal reveals during his DVD commentary the words spoken are: „Write down your mind.‟ These are the same words which Chiron taunts Lavinia with after she has been raped and mutilated by him and Demetrius: „Write down thy mind, bewray thy meaning so.‟ The mood during the scene is one that is menacing, dark, detached and dangerous, and as Goldenthal suggests, also proposes that the boys are trying to get their violent actions out of their mind.457
Contrasted with the contemporary music that is associated with Saturninus, Chiron and Demetrius, is the classical music that marks the character of Titus. In her film adaptation of Titus Taymor has rearranged the beginning of Shakespeare‟s play-text. Rather than opening with the scene of both Saturninus and Bassianus drumming up support in their mission to be elected Emperor (as is the case in Shakespeare‟s play- text), Taymor‟s film begins with Titus and his troops entering the Coliseum returning victorious after a lengthy war with the Goths. The Captain‟s speech (I, i, 64-69) introducing Titus has been converted into Latin and is sung by eighty male singers, tenors, baritones and basses. Along with the intense percussion and orchestral music, the grand opening musical cue gives a sense of military precision and rigidity, both characteristics of Anthony Hopkins‟ portrayal of Titus. Taymor also notes the music has a feel of an oratorio, a religious themed musical composition,458 foreshadowing the sacrificial rites that will immediately follow this magnificent entrance. This grand orchestral sound is later heard in the scene where Titus comically parades in the streets of Rome accompanied by his paramilitary force, who shoot messages to the gods on arrows (IV, iii). Just as Hopkins‟ marching gestures are “over-the-top” and exaggerated, so too is Goldenthal‟s music that accompanies the scene, which has a bombastic orchestral sound dominated by brass and drums. The militaristic sound of brass, particularly trumpets, becomes Titus‟ signature sound, best illustrated as Titus slowly walks through the back alleys of Rome, having killed his son Mutius. A solo trumpet
457 Goldenthal, “Commentary.” 458 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.”
130 accompanies Titus‟ solitary movements, as he makes his way to the Andronici tomb where Mutius‟ body has been taken to be buried. As well as being defined by orchestral classical music, Titus is also one of the characters who are associated with composer Goldenthal‟s „pity theme.‟
Working in a similar fashion to Simon Boswell‟s score for Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Elliot Goldenthal‟s musical score is used to underline the larger themes director Julie Taymor presents in her film. Goldenthal conveys these themes aurally through the repetition of musical motifs, as in the “pleading theme” that occurs „every time a character falls to his or her knees to beg for the life of their child.‟459 In Titus the pleading theme, which Elliot Goldenthal terms, the „pity theme,‟ is associated with the principal characters of Tamora, Lavinia, Titus and Aaron. Goldenthal notes in his commentary on the Titus DVD, the „pity theme‟ is composed of a two note counterpoint that is created with two sets of pitches that move along almost Bach-like and suggests „a sense of grand mercy, caritas, pity.‟460 The „pity theme „appears in the film during the scenes where one character gets down on knees and begs for pity from another for their own life or that of their child. Each of the two notes that make up the theme represents both the character asking for, and the character who is being asked for pity. Each time a character seems impervious to this pleading for pity they later get reduced to the exact same spot.461 The repetition of this theme every time a character pleads with another illustrates the cyclical nature of violence in Titus, with one violent act becoming the catalyst for another later in the film. When Tamora pleads with Titus for the life of her son Alarbus, he denies her, only to plead himself for mercy for the life of his own two sons from the Tribunes of Rome, which is again denied. The cycle is continued with Lavinia, who pleads to Tamora for mercy when she is captured in the forest, but is also denied. The process finally ends with Aaron, who falls to his knees in front of Lucius and pleads for the life of his infant son. Lucius shows Aaron‟s son mercy and allows him to live. However, he continues the use of retributive violence when he orders Aaron‟s execution.
Elliot Goldenthal notes in his commentary on the Titus DVD that what he refers to as the „mercy theme‟ in his score for Titus, was intended to represent a „burgeoning slightly pre-Christian world of Rome where the sense of mercy was starting to take
459 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 183. 460 Goldenthal, “Commentary.” 461 Goldenthal, “Commentary.”
131 hold.‟462 The theme is defined by the idea that part of being human is being in a position not only to ask for mercy, but also to show mercy to others. Goldenthal sets apart the ideas of pity and mercy in his „mercy theme,‟ noting that the theme is intended to show this Christian idea of mercy as opposed to characters begging for pity, which is represented by the „pity theme.‟ However, through the actions seen on screen when the „mercy theme‟ is heard it becomes apparent how intertwined the idea of mercy and pity are. The difference between the two themes is that the „pity theme‟ illustrates whenever a character begs for pity and mercy from a character caught within the cycle of violence in the play, they are denied. Their pleas are instead met with violent revenge. The „mercy theme‟ appears where characters outside this cycle of violence, unclouded by the desire for retribution, perform “natural” and voluntary acts of compassion. The „mercy theme,‟ becomes essential in defining the characters of Marcus and especially Young Lucius, and foreshadows the latter‟s actions at the end of the film. These two characters are presented as outside the cycle of hate, violence and revenge that dominates others‟ actions. As a result they show pity, compassion, and kindness towards Lavinia (and later Aaron‟s infant son). The connection between the two characters of Marcus and Young Lucius is further cemented by Taymor‟s reassigning of Marcus‟ action, and subsequent justification of killing a fly (III, ii, 53-85) to Young Lucius. I will further address the connection between the two in my analysis of Young Lucius‟ changing role within Taymor‟s film.
The „mercy theme‟ is heard first in Titus during Marcus‟ discovery of his niece Lavinia after she has been brutalised by Chiron and Demetrius (II, iv, 11-57). This scene can be considered in many ways the centre of Taymor‟s film. Not only does it falls around half-way through the film‟s running time, but both the imagery of the scene and its stylistic presentation is intended to create a significant impact on the audience through the heightened emotion that it generates. Marcus‟ bizarre reaction to the appalling reality of his niece Lavinia‟s condition can be considered a moment of incongruity in Shakespeare‟s text. Deborah Willis offers an explanation of Marcus‟ absurd reaction by highlighting the possible impact witnessing this trauma has on him:
462 Goldenthal, “Commentary.”
132 [He] retreat(s) from her into a world of words, in a moving if also sometimes absurd attempt to gain control over their own potentially overwhelming emotions.463
By putting his grief into words and sharing it with Lavinia Marcus hopes that this action will somehow help ease it. At the same time we can also read Marcus‟ reaction as a form of emotional “numbing.” Just as Titus will later in the play not be able to shed another tear over the horrors inflicted upon his family, Marcus is unable to comprehended or categorise what has happened. Richard J. Brucher notes that Marcus‟ reaction contains „no talk of seeking justice or taking revenge, only of railing.‟464 Marcus uses metaphor and euphemism as coping mechanisms in order to not have to confront what he is witnessing. For Taymor, Marcus‟ speech is intended to be poetic rather than dramatic, functioning in a way that she terms „an inner aria, like opera, an aria,‟465 an expression of a character‟s inner emotions. Taymor achieves this through her significant edits to Marcus‟ dialogue in this scene. Marcus‟ speech originally goes for forty seven lines, while in Taymor‟s film the speech comprises the beginning and end of what Marcus says in the Shakespeare‟s play-text and subsequently runs a mere fifteen lines. Taymor relies less on words and makes more use of stylised imagery, facial expression and especially music in order to convey the “information” and emotion of the scene. Taymor‟s setting of this scene is a particularly significant example of her stylised approach in conveying such heightened emotion. The visual imagery of burnt branches protruding from a desolate swamp is symbolic of Lavinia‟s broken and ravaged body, and a translation of the imagery contained in lines such as: „lopped and hewed and made thy body bare/Of her two branches‟ (II, iv, 17-18). The music heard during this scene is composed to work with this imagery. Goldenthal‟s „mercy theme‟ is defined by its low register and is made up of instruments such as a viola da gamba (bass viol) and bass and bamboo flutes, which Goldenthal used to create a hollow sound. The hollowness of the theme was intended to match the image that confronts Marcus, that of Lavinia opening her mouth and blood pouring out.466 As the theme takes hold the camera pans from Lavinia crying out to her uncle, to a close-up on Marcus‟ reaction on seeing his mutilated niece. The reaction to violence is repeated throughout Taymor‟s
463 Deborah Willis, ““The gnawing vulture”: Revenge, Trauma Theory, and Titus Andronicus,” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.1 Spring (2002): 43. 464 Richard J. Brucher ““Tragedy, Laugh On”: Comic Violence in Titus Andronicus,” Renaissance Drama 10 (1979): 83. 465 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 466 Goldenthal, “Commentary.”
133 film. Marcus then shows Lavinia kindness and compassion as he tenderly takes her down from her tree stump pedestal and carries her home in his arms. The image of mercy is repeated both during a wordless scene added by director Julie Taymor, as well as the end of the film, when Young Lucius similarly gathers Aaron‟s infant son in his arms and carries him out of the Coliseum. In the wordless scene Young Lucius, trying to find a solution for his aunt‟s lost hands, goes to a wood carver‟s shop where various puppets and wooden body parts are strewn across tables and shelves. The sound of the „mercy theme‟ is slightly changed in this scene, with the addition of a boy soprano, representative of Young Lucius, combining with the viola da gamba. The use of the „mercy theme‟ as well as the imagery of saints and various wooden body parts that appear on screen highlights the burgeoning Christian idea of mercy. For Taymor this scene demonstrates „the birth of compassion and what that means, and mercy.‟467 Once Young Lucius reveals the gift of wooden prosthetic hands to his aunt, Lavinia smiles at his thoughtfulness and compassion for her situation, the first time she has done so since Chiron and Demetrius ravaged her in the swamp. Goldenthal notes in his commentary that what he wanted to convey was that Young Lucius is a figure of hope and caritas, and that particularly in this scene you get a sense of compassion in direct contrast to the brutality of the drama of the film468 and the violence that has been inflicted upon Lavinia.
The song „Vivere‟ is the only other musical cue used in Taymor‟s Titus. „Vivere‟ is sung by Carlo Buti, famous for his “Pop” music songs which were sung in a style known as il stornello - a folk song technique typical of the Tuscan area of Italy. Pascale Aebischer incorrectly attributes Carlo Buti‟s style to the Bel Canto technique.469 Buti in fact, shied away from operatic songs, and instead preferred to record popular songs of the time (Buti‟s singing career spanned from the 1930s to the mid-1950s). The song „Vivere‟ is an optimistic sounding song about life and wanting to live. „Vivere‟ is heard only once during the banquet scene at the Andronicus household at the end of the film. The whole banquet scene is set up as a series of juxtapositions. The first is the juxtaposition in image, from the horror of Titus murdering Chiron and Demetrius, to the comical image of two steaming pies made from human flesh cooling by the window, and finally to the confronting scene of Titus‟ murder of his daughter Lavinia and
467 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 468 Goldenthal, “Commentary.” 469 Pascale Aebischer, “Titus,” Scope: An Online Journal of Film Studies Feb 1, 2001, 8 Nov 2006
134 Tamora and the reactionary killings that follow. The second type of juxtaposition is that of the music. Taymor notes in her DVD commentary that she and composer Goldenthal decided against using a lot of music in the scene where Tamora‟s sons are slaughtered. Not only did they believe it would detract from the shock of the violence that appears on screen, but they argued that the silence both emphasises Chiron and Demetrius‟ fear and keeps the audience on edge. 470 When the scene shifts to the next and „Vivere‟ begins it provides a sense of (comical) relief. „Vivere‟ begins and plays through most of the dinner scene until Lavinia enters the room, where it is replaced by slow eerie sounding music. The final juxtaposition of the banquet scene is that between the subject matter and jovial sound of „Vivere‟ and the actions that occur both before and after it appears. „Vivere,‟ a song that repeats the lyrics „to live‟ is heard after the cold and calculated butchering of Chiron and Demetrius by Titus. The actions following „Vivere‟ are a series of murders, starting with Titus‟ “mercy killing” of his daughter Lavinia and ending with Lucius‟ execution of Saturninus. The contrast between the imagery and the music is used to highlight Titus‟ brutality and the dramatic sequence of violence that happens during the banquet. By emphasising the violence, Taymor hopes that the audience will be alerted to and cast a critical eye on the way violence functions as entertainment in our culture. However, Anthony Hopkins‟ comical appearance and performance during this scene, as well as the disturbingly rustic imagery of the giant human flesh pies cooling on the window sill have the opposite effect, they become entertaining. The audience laughs at Titus‟ daring actions against enemies, and this weakens the intended impact of the juxtaposition between horror and comedy.
Julie Taymor notes in an interview with Miranda Johnson-Haddad that her approach when filming her adaptation of Titus Andronicus was not simply to rely on the language of the play. As with most adaptations of Shakespeare‟s works, Taymor has significantly cut and rearranged Shakespeare‟s “original” play-text. Taymor notes her approach to the relationship between the play-text and filming Shakespeare:
I would never rewrite Shakespeare, but I fill it out visually. You have to because you also have to cleanse your palate of the language. You can‟t have a battery of dialogue, dialogue, dialogue in a movie.471
470 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 471 Johnson-Haddad, 35
135 This visual “filling out” of Shakespeare is achieved through the numerous references to time periods, films, culture, and as noted earlier, musical styles. The collision of these different references in Taymor‟s Titus produces a visual extravaganza of epic proportions. Inspired by the stratification of modern Rome, Taymor has set Titus in a version of Rome where ancient and modern images and cultures intermingle. Lisa Hopkins notes of Taymor‟s film that the audience are repeatedly reminded of parallels between events in the film and those in their recent past.472 Taymor suggests Shakespeare himself blended periods in his own work,473 and her film is a sampling or collage of time and style. While Titus hints at certain time periods and historical references the production on a whole is not set in a specific time. H.R Coursen crucially points out in his work Shakespeare in Space that Julie Taymor‟s production of Titus does not intend to imitate any moment that existed in history.474 Rather Titus is intended to be representative of all time, just as the audience at the end of the film sitting in the coliseum are intended to be representative of all of us.475 The various references in Taymor‟s film are not deliberate attempts to situate the audience in a specific time and place, but work thematically in order that the audience draws parallels with their own lives. Taymor combines various symbols from both history and popular culture that „remind us of the long and dishonourable tradition of human violence and cruelty.‟476 Taymor‟s intentions in using all these references and associations the audience makes are to convey ideas about violence as both entertainment and learned behaviour and the ritualistic and cyclical nature of violence that she has discovered in Titus Andronicus.
Julie Taymor‟s Titus alludes to previous productions, both on stage and on film and television of Titus Andronicus. A prominent example in the film is the stylized way in which Taymor portrays blood gushing from Lavinia‟s mouth as she attempts to speak to her uncle Marcus, who discovers her bruised and bloody in the swamps of Rome. Taymor has the moment choreographed with Elliot Goldenthal‟s score and Lavinia appears like a ravished ballerina swaying in the wind. A stream of blood escapes her mouth. The image is reminiscent of the long crimson scarves that hung from Lavinia‟s sleeves and mouth, which symbolised blood and „transfigured her suffering‟477 in Peter
472 Lisa Hopkins, “A Tiger‟s Heart Wrapped in a Player‟s Hide: Julie Taymor‟s War Dances,” Shakespeare Bulletin 21.3 Fall (2003): 62. 473 Johnson-Haddad, 35 474 Coursen, Shakespeare in Space, 140. 475 „This time, the bleachers are filled with spectators. Watching. They are silent. They are we.‟ Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 185. 476 Hopkins, “A Tiger‟s Heart,” 63. 477 Hughes, 43.
136 Brooks‟ 1955 Stratford-upon-Avon production of Titus Andronicus. Alan Hughes suggests that Brook‟s rejection of realism kept the audience from distancing the violence by „ridiculing an inadequate illusion. They could not escape from imagination.‟478 Brook‟s approach of not allowing the audience to distance themselves from the brutality of the drama in Titus Andronicus is reproduced by Taymor in her presentation of the character of Young Lucius. Taymor situates Young Lucius as a liminal observer, and he mediates and frames everything the audience sees.479 The audience watching Titus is „aligned with the Young Lucius in viewing events beyond our imagination.‟480 The foregrounding of the character of Young Lucius, Titus‟ grandson, who in Shakespeare‟s text is a minor character, is a feature Taymor has borrowed from Jane Howell‟s BBC production of Titus Andronicus.481 Howell‟s production „emphasised the appalling experience of Young Lucius as he lives his family‟s tragedy.‟482 Many times during her production, Howell directed the camera‟s focus towards Young Lucius. Pascale Aesbischer notes the similarity in Howell and Taymor‟s approach, with both directors „foregrounding the boy‟s role as liminal observer of violence whose compassion represents the only ray of hope at the end of the tragedy.483 However, Howell and Taymor‟s use of Young Lucius differs in the ending of each of their productions. The final sequence in Howell‟s production has Young Lucius weeping over the black coffin containing Aaron‟s infant son. The production ends by superimposing the image of a skull on Young Lucius‟ darkened face.484 Julie Taymor originally intended to use a similar “dark” ending to her stage production of Titus Andronicus.485 In this alternative ending Aaron‟s infant son is represented by a tiny black coffin, which is carried into the Coliseum. When it is opened the sound of babies crying are heard.486 However, Taymor altered the ending in order that her film concluded with a sense of hope. This falls in line with the thematic concern in Titus that,
478 Hughes, 63. 479 Mary Lindroth, ““Some Device of Further Misery”: Taymor‟s Titus brings Shakespeare to film audiences with a twist,” Literature/Film Quarterly 29.2 (2001): 111 480 Walker, “Now Is A Time To Storm,” 202. 481 Titus Andronicus, Dir. Jane Howell, BBC/Time-Life Television Productions Inc, UK, VHS, 1985. For more on the comparison between Taymor and Howell‟s productions of Titus Andronicus, see Lucian Ghita, “Reality and Metaphor in Jane Howell‟s and Julie Taymor‟s Productions of Shakespeare‟s Titus Andronicus,” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture: A WWWeb Journal 6.1 Mar (2004). 482 Hughes, 45. 483 Aebischer, “Titus.” 484 Ghita,12. The transition between a skull and Young Lucius‟ face is used to frame Howell‟s production. Howell‟s adaptation commences with the same image. Ghita, 8. 485 For a further comparison between Taymor‟s stage and film version of Titus Andronicus, see David McCandles, “A Tale of Two Tituses: Julie Taymor‟s Vision on Stage and Screen,” Shakespeare Quarterly. 53.4 Winter (2002): 487-511. 486 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.”
137 while violence is a learned behaviour, so is compassion.487 Taymor has noted that her intention in directing Titus Andronicus both on stage and on screen was in particular to criticise the impact violence has on people, especially children. She remarks in an interview with Miranda Johnson-Haddad that „the development of the child from innocence through knowledge to compassion is [for her] the essentially most important theme.‟488 In Titus this theme is highlighted through Young Lucius‟ changing role. Lucian Ghita makes note of this change in her assertion that Young Lucius‟ viewpoint „represents the arch of the narrative sequence, in which he gradually evolves from spectator to participant and finally actor.‟489
Titus opens with a wordless scene absent from Shakespeare‟s “original” play-text that establishes the point of view within the film. A young boy later identified as Young Lucius, Titus‟ grandson, engages in mock-fighting play with toy soldiers in a 1950s inspired kitchen. The play-fighting becomes more vicious and hectic. As the boy mimics the acts of violence, various comic cartoon sounds of violence give way to real sounds of violence, screams, explosions, sirens and gunfire. The incredibly loud chaotic sound becomes unbearable for the boy and so he hides under the table in fear. When an explosion rocks the kitchen, a Shakespearean clown figure490 appears, grabs the boy and carries him down a staircase into what Taymor terms the „original theatre of cruelty,‟491 the Coliseum. Young Lucius is dragged into the “space of violence” and is subsequently initiated into the ritual and cyclical nature of this violence. Only by leaving this “space” at the end of the film is he able to escape the violence. Young Lucius is initially positioned in the film as a passive observer. He silently watches the procession of Titus and the victorious returning Roman soldiers as they march into the Coliseum. He is also privy to the sacrificial rights that follow. Throughout most of the film the camera concentrates on individual reactions and responses to acts of violence rather than the acts themselves. This reminds the audience of their position as „responders to violence,‟492 most poignantly illustrated in the scene where Titus‟ sacrifices his hand in order to buy the lives of his two sons. Up until this point Young Lucius had not beheld an actual act of violence being performed, simply the after effects of violent brutality.
487 This idea is also conveyed by Goldenthal‟s score, both in the „pity‟ and „mercy‟ themes that appear in moments where compassion is asked for and either denied or granted. 488 Taymor quoted in Johnson-Haddad, 35. 489 Ghita, 7. 490 The same clown is later seen in the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence where the heads of Titus‟ sons are returned. 491 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 492 Lindroth, “Some Device of Further Misery,” 111.
138 Peering through a space between the kitchen doors he is a silent spectator to Aaron chopping off Titus‟ hand. The camera cuts from Titus‟ grimacing in pain to Young Lucius‟ horrified reaction at what he has just seen. After witnessing Titus‟ hand cut off, Young Lucius‟ role changes from observer to participant. In another wordless scene added to the film by Taymor, Young Lucius shows pity and mercy when he purchases wooden hands for his aunt Lavinia. This act of compassion marks the difference between the impact violence has on Young Lucius and Chiron and Demetrius. His immediate thoughts and actions following the brutal violence that he witnessed are not a call for revenge, but are to ease the suffering of another. This act of compassion marks Young Lucius‟ „first act of repair‟493 within the film, and also illustrates the difference the impact of violence has on him compared to Chiron and Demetrius.
The characters of Chiron and Demetrius highlight the way in which Taymor‟s film emphasises that extreme violence can generate extreme responses and corrupts visually and morally.‟494 After witnessing their brother‟s murder, Tamora‟s sons are inspired to words of revenge and actions of violence. Demetrius placates his distraught mother with the idea of an „opportunity of sharp revenge‟ (I, i, 137). Young Lucius, Chiron and Demetrius are all set up in Titus as examples of how violence is a learned behaviour, and of the impact violence has on them. Unlike Young Lucius they are figures who are not redeemed, but become consumed by revenge, violence and butchery, and this subsequently leads to their deaths. In an interview, director Taymor explains her interpretation of Chiron and Demetrius:
In the beginning, they‟re like puppy love, and they‟re fun, showing a certain innocence. Aaron harnesses their hatred based upon seeing their brother die and the fact that they are prisoners. You take sexual infatuation and you twist it, pervert it. These boys aren‟t killers or rapists; they didn‟t come up with the idea on their own.495
Taymor‟s shift of blame for Chiron and Demetrius‟ rape and mutilation is problematic. Her attitude towards violence and acquitting blame is congruent with her defence of Lucius‟ acts of violence at the end of the film. However, I do not intend to discount the
493 Clara Agusti Escoda, “Julie Taymor‟s Titus (1999): Framing Violence and Activating Responsibility,” Atlantis 28.1 June (2006): 66. 494 Ghita,15. 495 Taymor quoted in Johnson-Haddad, 36.
139 influence of the adult figures on initiating the young into a cycle of violence in Taymor‟s film. Aaron does bear some influence over the boys. He plays upon their infatuation and desire for Lavinia and plants ideas of violence in their head as a way to calm the boys, who fight with each other over the right to court her (II, i). Through this action he keeps the peace and assures his own position via Tamora at Saturninus‟ court. Chiron and Demetrius are further manipulated into violent actions by their mother Tamora. When she is discovered in the forest having a tryst with Aaron by Bassianus and Lavinia, they threaten to reveal what they have seen to her husband Saturninus. In order to prevent Saturninus learning of her indiscretions with Aaron and therefore protect her position as Empress, Tamora misleads Chiron and Demetrius into the belief that Bassianus and Lavinia had planned to kill her and dump her body in a nearby pit (II, iii, 90-115). In defence of their mother they stab and kill Bassianus. Realising that Chiron and Demetrius are going to exact revenge on her, Lavinia begs for mercy:
When did the tiger‟s young ones teach the dam? Oh do not learn her wrath. She taught it thee? The milk thou suck‟st from her did turn to marble; Yet every mother breeds not sons alike. Do thou entreat her show a woman‟s pity.
She recognises that familial influence is guiding their brutal revenge and pleads with them not to act like their mother. The death of Alarbus spurs on Tamora‟s cruelty, and she implies that her refusal to listen to and show mercy upon Lavinia is a direct result of Titus‟ earlier refusal to do the same.496 An act of violent revenge is presented as a horrifying moment of familial bonding. Tamora not only justifies, but also supports and incites Chiron and Demetrius‟ brutal deeds. Tamora tells her sons: „Revenge it as you love your mother‟s life, or be ye not henceforth called my children.‟ She frames their violent actions as both an act of revenge, and one that will make her proud and also becomes a symbol for their love for her. This scene stresses a significant theme in Taymor‟s film of what is justice and what is revenge, and how these two ideas collide in the violent actions that take place. Tamora is implicitly connected to revenge by Shakespeare, who has her later appear to Titus disguised as Revenge (V, ii). Taymor sets this scene in a Penny Arcade Nightmare which turns to reality. Brecken Rose
496 For a detailed analysis on the connection between the two “sacrificial” events in Shakespeare‟s play see Anthony Brian Taylor. “Lucius, The Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus,” Connotations 6.2 (1996-97): 142-143.
140 Hancock underscores the appropriateness of Tamora‟s role as the figure of Revenge in this scene in his comment that „she is the first revenger to be introduced, and the mother who sets the entire revenge tragedy moving.‟497 Contrary to Hancock‟s argument, I shall argue later in this chapter that Lucius is the figure who gets revenge “moving.” His characterisation as “hero” by Taymor in Titus is particularly problematic given he is the instigator of violence in the play.
Tamora is fixated with destroying Titus and his family, and she plays with ideas of justice and revenge in order to achieve retribution for the murder of Alarbus. Tamora imparts this attitude to her sons, who readily and easily slaughter Bassianus and rape and mutilate Lavinia. While these acts of violence and killing were easily undertaken, the aftermath proves to be difficult for Chiron and Demetrius to deal with, as is revealed when Aaron murders the nurse in front of them. Chiron and Demetrius, who until this point have taken violence they perform lightly, are horrified at what they consider a cold-blooded murder that happened so suddenly and easily without significant provocation. For Aaron murdering is an easy act, quickly forgotten, whereas for Chiron and Demetrius murder and violence were not easy, and their actions haunt their minds. Lavinia‟s continuing presence serves as a reminder of Chiron and Demetrius‟ brutality, and eventually leads to their downfall. Whatever justification Tamora and her sons may convey about their retributive actions, these are undercut by the way in which Taymor presents their deeds as shocking, horrific and gruesome. Through filming technique and imagery Taymor vilifies Chiron and Demetrius, presenting their behaviour as equivalent to animals hunting and killing their prey. The description by Titus that „Rome is but a wilderness of tigers‟ is literally translated by Taymor and costume designer Milena Canonero into Demetrius‟ costuming with the tiger stripes that adorn his jacket. This tiger imagery again appears in Lavinia‟s rape flashback Penny Arcade Nightmare. When filming the forest killing scene Taymor uses a constant moving steadicam498 as Chiron and Demetrius encircle Lavinia and Bassianus. Each actor was filmed twice freely with steadicam, and the footage was then edited together by Françoise Bonnot.499 The numerous filmic cuts in the scene as well as the constant movement by the actors
497 Brecken Rose Hancock, “Roman or Revenger?: The Definition and Distortion of Masculine Identity in Titus Andronicus,” Early Modern Literary Studies 10.1 (May, 2004): paragraph 12. 498 A steadicam is a hand-held camera. Rather than stabilising the camera on a mounting system firmly attached to the ground, such as a tripod, a steadicam is held in the camera operator‟s hands. This has the advantage of speed and flexibility of use, and is therefore perfect for filming fast moving, chaotic scenes such as this hunting scene in Titus. 499 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.”
141 convey a sense of dizziness, confusion, frenzy and predatory play. Through using a cinematic style that is reminiscent of a horror film, Taymor constructs Chiron and Demetrius as gruesome monstrous murderers. This characterisation becomes instrumental in how Taymor vindicates Titus‟ equally gruesome and violent actions of revenge against the boys.
While Young Lucius‟ act of mercy may set him apart from Chiron and Demetrius, he follows it with an act of violence that draws parallels to Tamora‟s sons‟ brutality and how they learn to hate and to seek revenge on others. Young Lucius‟ witnessing of violent acts being inflicted upon a family member similarly marks him; he becomes the perpetrator of a violent act himself. As in Peter Brook‟s 1955 stage production of Titus Andronicus, Julie Taymor has also taken the fly scene (III, ii, 50-80), which is attributed in Shakespeare‟s play-text to Marcus, and reassigns it to Young Lucius. Sitting down to dinner with his family Young Lucius sees a fly and stabs at it impulsively with a knife. Titus angrily reprimands him, telling his grandson that what he has done is unjust (III, ii, 60-65). Young Lucius uses culturally learned ideas of racism and revenge and playfully defends his actions in an attempt to regain his grandfather‟s favour: „Pardon me, sir; it was a black ill-favoured fly, like to the Empress‟ Moor. Therefore I killed him.‟ This event is significant as it demonstrates that Young Lucius starts to learn the lessons of violence and uses them to manipulate his grandfather. Laughing at Young Lucius‟ cheek Titus excuses his reproach of his grandson and joins in at stabbing the black fly. In Titus acts of revenge are contextualized for the audience so that „the lesson of violence is transmitted to, and thus perpetuated by, the younger generation.‟500 This moment in particular highlights the way children are initiated into a circle of violence by adults. Elsie Walker argues that „the moment is horrible because the child suddenly puts on the antic and monstrous disposition of the revenger.‟501 This scene is a shocking moment of macabre familial bonding; by excusing his grandson and sharing in the violent activity Titus legitimises the violence.
Following the stabbing of the black fly Young Lucius gets even more involved in the revenge and violence his family has become a part of. After the discovery of Chiron and Demetrius‟ guilt in Lavinia‟s rape and mutilation, Titus orders his grandson to deliver gifts of weapons along with a message to Chiron and Demetrius. In the “original” play-
500 Lindroth, “Some Device of Further Misery,” 111. 501 Walker, “Now Is A Time To Storm,” 202.
142 text Young Lucius‟ eagerness to wreak revenge and inflict violent retribution against Chiron and Demetrius is made clearer when he answers Titus‟ request with: „Ay, with my dagger in their bosoms, grandsire‟ (IV, i, 90). Taymor has removed this line and instead the scene shifts immediately to the image of Young Lucius entering Chiron and Demetrius‟ “dungeon” recreation area. Young Lucius looks uneasy and struggles to recall and deliver the message word perfect, suggesting that he is following orders rather than eagerly participating in a plan of revenge.502 The speech he delivers with its veiled message of revenge and violence is not of his own making but something that has been learnt and memorised. Young Lucius‟ eagerness to inflict retribution against Chiron and Demetrius is cut from the play and is reduced to a brief aside, addressing the camera with: „And so I leave you both like bloody villains.‟ Young Lucius‟ direct to camera delivery of lines sets him apart and notes his change in role within the film. He is no longer a silent observer but is now engaging the audience. From this moment Young Lucius becomes a willing accomplice in his grandfather‟s plans for revenge. Cementing a relationship that is constructed through a bonding over “justifiable” violence and achieving “justice” through violent means Young Lucius accompanies Titus as he marches in the streets with his kinsmen. Young Lucius carries weapons in a red Radio Flyer toy wagon that he drags along behind him. As with the opening toy soldier battle, this image combines violence with child‟s play making it all the more horrific.503 By the film‟s end Young Lucius has become a full participant in the actions of the film. During the film‟s finale Aaron‟s son is brought into the Coliseum enclosed in a cage. Young Lucius takes the baby from the cage and cradles the infant gently in his arms before slowly walking out of the Coliseum. Just as he himself was brought into the space of violence in the beginning of the film, he now exits with Aaron‟s son and moves „possibly to redemption.‟504 The end of Taymor‟s film is deliberately left without a clear and defined resolution of the fate of Aaron‟s infant son. Its openness does not provide the audience with a specific ending or a sense of closure, but instead ends of a sense of hope and potential change. This open ending forces the audience to question what they have seen and to work at an understanding of Taymor‟s reading of the film and her critique of the violence that it contains.
502 Taymor reveals in her DVD commentary that in reality actor Osheen Jones, who played Young Lucius, had trouble remembering his lines, so the uneasiness he shows is genuine. 503 Young Lucius also serves as waiter during the final banquet scene. He helps his grandfather serve up the pies made from the flesh of Chiron and Demetrius to the unsuspecting diners, including the boys‟ mother Tamora. 504 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.”
143 In Titus the audience „must create a context out of its own history and experience.‟505 Director Taymor „drops various clues‟506 in order to guide the audience‟s interpretation of her film. These “clues” take the form of the various intertextual references that are prevalent within Taymor‟s film. The design of Titus is beset with references to popular cultural elements, particularly filmic references. These references draw not only upon the previous work of the actors cast in Titus, but also the post-World War Two Italian tradition of film making. Taymor‟s stylised mise-en-scène contains numerous references to the films of Italian directors such as Federico Fellini and Luchino Visconti, particularly their films La Strada, Satyricon, Roma, and La Caduta degli dei (also known as The Damned). The intertextual texture of Titus is reinforced through being partially filmed at Rome‟s Cinecittà studios where these filmmakers also made their films, and through the use of director of photography Luciano Tovoli and production designer Dante Ferretti.507 Tovoli and Ferretti worked extensively in the past with famed Italian directors such as Fellini, Pier Paulo Pasolini, Michelangelo Antonioni and Dario Argento. Taymor acknowledges her intertextual “nod” to directors such as Fellini, noting proudly in an interview: „I had all of Fellini‟s, you know, the older men who used to build these incredible sets that no one asks them to build anymore.‟508 The influence of Fellini and Visconti is most strongly felt in the epic and decadent visual design of Taymor‟s film. Lisa Hopkins notes that in watching Taymor‟s Titus we are reminded of films, and that „Taymor has a much observed debt to Fellini, particularly La Strada…and she herself also points out the influence of Visconti.‟509Alan A. Stone points out further correlations between Titus and Fellini‟s films in his description of the film‟s design:
Taymor emptied the Cinecittà storerooms, and added motorcycles, a Popemobile, and many of the vehicles we last saw in Fellini movies. Her anachronisms are meant to add layers of meaning.510
505 Anderegg, Cinematic Shakespeare, 183. 506 Anderegg, Cinematic Shakespeare, 183. 507 The other major filming location was the coliseum in Pula, Croatia, itself a source of intertext and allusion to the civil war in Croatia and Bosnia that was occurring at the time. 508 Taymor quoted in Paul Russell, “Titus: A Class Reborn,” DVD Angle Aug 16 2000, 3 Aug 2004
144 Stone suggests not only that Titus remind us of the film style of Fellini but also that the references add “meaning” by highlighting Taymor‟s “reading” of the play, a reading that influenced the production design of the film. The design of Titus is a deliberate collision of time periods and styles. Taymor notes that the Roman world created on screen was inspired by the stratification of culture and time that exists in the city of Rome today: „Modern Rome, built on the ruins of ancient Rome, offered the perfect stratification for the setting of the film.‟511 Taymor goes on to describe the Rome of Titus as „really ancient, even Etruscan, and then 30s, 40s, 50s and present.‟512 Jim Welsh and John Tibbet argue that while Taymor does not specifically mention Fellini or other directors who have used the stratification of a civilisation in a symbolic way, her production of Titus lifts part of its concept from Fellini, not only from Satyricon, but also Roma.513 Roma is characterised by Fellini‟s examination both of the difficulties of contemporary society and the tracing of a personal history with the city of Rome. Fellini achieved this through referencing the past and present that co-exist within Rome. Taymor similarly addresses the difficulties of contemporary society through the mixture of time, objects, historical periods, and popular culture that exists in her production of Titus. Rob Blackwelder describes Dante Ferretti‟s production design for Titus as a mixture of „luxuriant, post-modern industrial style with the ruins of ancient Rome.‟514 The diverse visual design of Taymor‟s film together with the eclectic musical score by Elliot Goldenthal is indebted to Fellini‟s Roma. The difficulties of modern society which Taymor addresses in her film include violence as entertainment in our culture. However, Taymor‟s critique of society‟s cultural preoccupation with violence as entertainment is undercut through her rather “conservative” alignment of the brutal horror, violence and sinister Fascist totalitarianism with decadence and sexual non- conformity. In Titus Taymor suggests that Saturninus becomes corrupted by power once he has been elevated to the position of Emperor, and therefore Rome itself plummets into a state of amorality. Taymor presents the world of Rome after Saturninus has become Emperor as corrupt in its debauchery and political totalitarianism. The visual design of the film is used to signal the immorality, licentiousness and corruption that is now rife in Rome. Dante Ferretti‟s design for the film, particularly scenes in Saturninus‟
511 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 178. 512 Taymor quoted in Douglas Eby, “Julie Taymor on making Titus,” Talent Development Resources 2003, 16 Nov 2006
145 Roman court have a „worked-up decadence‟515 that is recognisable from the films of Fellini. Lucian Ghita highlights the allusive impact of Ferretti‟s production design:
the architectural space created by Taymor‟s set designer Dante Ferretti (a nightmarish, baroque composition intermixing elements from different cultural an historical époques) triggers stylistic associations with Fellini‟s visually stunning representation of Roman decadence, hedonism, and sexual licentiousness in Satyricon (1969).516
As Ghita notes, Dante Ferretti draws inspiration from the perverse decadence and sexuality of Fellini‟s Satyricon in his design of Saturninus‟ wedding party and orgy scene. Using similar rich colours and sexually suggestive imagery as in Satyricon, Ferretti‟s design suggests a wild feeling of decadence and corruption in Saturninus‟ Rome, which is punctuated through the Goldenthal‟s raucous score of Jazz and Rock & Roll. These scenes are presented as a direct contrast to the quiet family dinners at Titus‟ family home. Goldenthal‟s soft classical music together with the demure production design during these scenes suggests a space imbued with a sense of honour, tradition and conservativeness. The mood set here drastically changes at the end of the film, where Titus‟ home becomes the scene not only of a horrific meal made from human flesh but also the brutal massacre that follows.
Taymor‟s film not only references Fellini‟s Satyricon but also draws upon his film La Strada. Several critics and reviewers have noted the visual similarity of the Clown messenger in Titus with the character of Zampano (played by Anthony Quinn) the strong man from Fellini‟s La Strada. 517 The imagery in La Strada is dominated by scenery that is broken, poor and desolate, symbolic of the impact of World War Two on Italy. Taymor‟s allusion to the cruel and brutish Zampano and to La Strada itself further suggests a feeling that the Rome under Saturninus‟ rule is similarly “broken” and is now dominated by corrupt grotesqueness. The Clown first appears at the very beginning of Titus when he snatches Young Lucius out of the kitchen and drags him down some stairs into the Coliseum. The Clown again appears at the Andronicus family home. Richard Burt describes him as „driving a truck much like the murderous strongman
515 Charles Taylor, “Titus,” Salon Jan 7 2000, 18 July 2004
146 Zampano.‟518 The Clown climbs out of the van carrying a loudspeaker and moves about disjointedly to the jovial circus type music. As he calls out to the Andronici inside, his assistant dances about setting up chairs. Carol Chillington Rutter describes her appearance with reference to La Strada, she is a „redheaded girl, like Giulietta Masina‟s strangely old and infantile Gelsomina.‟519 The girl shares a smile with Young Lucius, who has come out to find the source of the commotion, and eventually the other members of the Andronicus family emerge from the house to watch the “show.” The scene is set up as both comic and absurd. Stone refers to this scene as a surreal “Fellini moment” that illustrates the absurdity of horror and exhausts the conventional possibilities of human emotion.520 As with Fellini, Taymor „alternates between gaiety and sadness‟ in Titus.521 In his analysis of Fellini‟s La Strada Edward Murray notes that the film‟s complex structure moves from seriocomic to the serious.522 Murray gives the example of a scene between the characters of Gelsomina and Zampano. Gelsomina has been purchased by Zampano to act as his assistant; her job is to announce his act. In a scene at the beginning of the film Gelsomina tries unsuccessfully to learn her routine:
The audience laughs at the attempts of Zampano to make the girl understand the simple requirements of her role; but when the lout proceeds to strike Gelsomina on the leg with a switch in order to make her concentrate, the laughter dies. What starts like a kind of Abbot and Costello vaudeville turn, then, ends far from comedy.523
The movement between comedy and uncomfortable seriousness is a prominent feature of the scene where the heads of Titus‟ sons are returned by the Clown. Once the family are seated the Clown suddenly throws open the shutter on his van and reveals the severed heads displayed in bell jars along with Titus‟ severed hand that was supposed to ransom their lives. The moment is set up like a bizarre freak show. The Clown delivers his message from Saturninus tonelessly over the loudspeaker: „Worthy Andronicus, ill art thou repaid for that good hand thou sent‟st the emperor.‟ Titus is literally left without
518 Richard Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust: Julie Taymor‟s Titus is Beautiful, or Shakesploi Meets (the) Camp,” Shakespeare After Mass Media, Richard Burt, ed (New York: Palgrave, 2002): 312. 519 Carol Chillington Rutter, “Looking Like A Child - Or - Titus: The Comedy,” Shakespeare Survey 56 (2003): 18. 520 Stone, “Shakespeare‟s Tarantino Play.” 521 Edward Murray, “La Strada,” in Federico Fellini: Essays in Criticism, Peter Bondanella, ed (London; New York: Oxford University Press, 1978): 40. 522 Murray, 40 523 Murray, 39-40.
147 words. After he witnesses the grotesque horror of his sons‟ severed heads, laughter is his only response, illustrating the continuing juxtaposition of humour and violence in Taymor‟s film. The scene shifts from jovial gaiety of a street performance being set up, complete with the upbeat circus type music, to the grotesque and horrific imagery of severed heads and hand. While Taymor does not acknowledge the reference to Fellini in the scene she does note in her DVD commentary that this moment is one where horrific grotesque nightmare and reality collide, a „Penny Arcade Nightmare for real.‟524
References in Titus to directors from the Cinecittà era of post war Italian filmmaking such as Fellini and Visconti also carry with them allusions of the legacy of Benito Mussolini and Fascism. During wartime Cinecittà produced mass amounts of propaganda for Mussolini‟s Fascist government. Taymor‟s film was partially filmed at Cinecittà Studios and as a result Michael Anderegg argues it is subsequently implicated in the „Fascist impulse she wants to comment on.‟525 Anderegg‟s contention is supported by the fact that the centrepiece of Taymor‟s film is the Palazzo della Civilta Italiana, which serves as Saturninus‟ Roman court. The Palazzo is part of the Esposizione Universale Roma (also known as the E.U.R) an enormous complex built by Mussolini as a celebration of Fascism in Italy. Its presence in Taymor‟s film alludes to Fascism and of Mussolini‟s brutal regime. The Palazzo della Civilta Italiana was Mussolini‟s government centre and was built by Mussolini „to re-create the glory of the Ancient Roman Empire.‟526 The Palazzo is often referred to as the square Coliseum because of the rows of arches that make up the Neo Classical architecture of the building‟s façade. Therefore, along with the Coliseum in Pula, also used as a location in Titus, the Palazzo functions in a symbolic way as an „archetypal theatre of cruelty, where violence as entertainment reached its apex.‟527
Casting is used as an important form of intertext in Taymor‟s Titus. Elsie Walker notes that the casting choices in Titus contribute to „the inter-textual story-telling.‟528 Both Anthony Hopkins and Alan Cumming bring to the characters they play in Titus an intertextual resonance to roles they have previously played on both stage and screen. Drawing attention to the “specialised knowledge” of intertextual references that
524 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 525 Anderegg, Cinematic Shakespeare, 185. 526 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 178. 527 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 178. 528 Walker, “Now Is A Time,” 195
148 audience members bring to films, Phillip Auslander explains the way in which an audience “reads” acting:
We arrive at our perception of a performance by implicitly comparing it with other representations of the same role (or the way we feel the role should be played), or with our recollection of the same actor in other roles, or with our knowledge of the stylistic school to which the actor belongs, the actor‟s private life…our perception of the actor‟s work derives from this play of difference.529
Through recognising intertext, whether consciously or not, an audience‟s interpretation or “reading” of both the actor‟s performance is coloured by these cultural references. In Titus a chief example of how intertext is influential to an audience‟s interpretation of an actor‟s performance is the casting of Alan Cumming. The way in which Cumming interprets the role of Saturninus reinforces allusions to Fascism and Mussolini already present in Taymor‟s references to Italian cinema. These citations are used by Taymor to characterise Saturninus as both sinister and corrupt. In order to appear in Titus, Alan Cumming took time off from his Tony award winning performance as the Master of Ceremonies in Sam Mendes‟ revival of Cabaret, a musical set in Nazi controlled Germany. This intertext as well as Cumming‟s interpretation of his role of Saturninus leads the audience to draw parallels between Saturninus and the sexually ambiguous Master of Ceremonies (“Emcee”) of Cabaret.530 Cynthia Fuchs highlights the visual similarity of both characters in her review of Titus. She describes Alan Cumming‟s Saturninus as like Cumming‟s portrayal of the Emcee, „done up with Fuhrer-bangs and
529 Philip Auslander quoted in D.J Hopkins, Catherine Ingram and Bryan Reynolds, “Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink, Know What I Mean, Know What I Mean? A Theoretical Approach to Performance for a Post-Shakespeare,” Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical Future, Bryan Reynolds, ed; Janelle Reinelt, foreword; Jonathan Gil Harris, afterword (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003): 160. 530 Bob Fosse‟s 1972 film Cabaret starring Liza Minnelli and Michael York is considered the most well known version of the musical. However, I refer to Sam Mendes Broadway revival of Cabaret, originally staged at the Donmar Warehouse in 1993, and transferred to Broadway in 1998. There are many differences between Fosse‟s film and Mendes stage revival. The most significant is the characterisation of the Emcee. The role of the Emcee was initially played by Joel Grey in Fosse‟s film, as well as the original West End and Broadway staged productions. Dressed in a tuxedo and with rouged cheeks, Grey portrays the Emcee in an androgynous and minor sexually suggestive manner. Alan Cumming‟s portrayal of the Emcee is more overtly sexual in both appearance and performance. His costume consisted of white suspenders that weave their way around his body and crotch, and red paint on his nipples. The cabaret number “Two Ladies” in Mendes‟ revival is an example of Cumming‟s highly sexualized performance. The number is staged with the Emcee, a cabaret girl, and a cabaret boy in drag (Fosse‟s film version had two cabaret girls), and included a shadow play simulating various sexual positions.
149 psycho eye shadow.‟531 Costumes in Titus were conceived to express the nature of a character.532 Much like Cumming‟s Emcee, Saturninus is also „played with [a] camp flamboyance‟533 that combines sexual ambivalence with Fascist symbolism. Saturninus initially appears dressed in a Gestapo type uniform of long leather trench and combat boots. Once he becomes Emperor his appearance is reminiscent of Fascist leader Benito Mussolini, who almost always wore a military uniform. Combining with his fantastical appearance, Cumming delivers an over-the-top performance that is both comical and sinister.534 Cumming‟s portrayal is frightening in its fluidity, one moment he is almost childlike in his insecurity,535 the next megalomaniacal mad and power hungry.536 Cumming‟s Saturninus is also incredibly charismatic, both during the conflict with his brother Bassianus as well as the coronation scene that follows it. Saturninus‟ bearing and delivery of lines as he provokes his supporters and demands to be the next Emperor are reminiscent of the fiery speeches delivered by both Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. This reading of Saturninus is acknowledged by various critics and reviewers such as Rob Blackwelder, who characterises Cumming‟s interpretation of his role as „Hitler- esque.‟537 Together with the Fascist aesthetic of the E.U.R and Saturninus‟ costuming, the imagery in Titus therefore works to suggest his eventual “dictator” status in running Rome. While Saturninus is set up as sinister and amoral through both Cumming‟s characterisation and Milena Canonero‟s costume design, through most of Titus Andronicus he doesn‟t necessarily do anything that justifies being presented in such a villainous way. Alan Hughes characterises Saturninus‟ actions, such as the execution of Titus‟ two sons, as justified under Roman law: „And while Saturninus orders the execution of Quintus and Martius, he acts in the belief that they are guilty of Bassianus‟s murder.‟538 Taymor herself further exonerates Saturninus of guilt, by eliminating his order that the Clown, who delivers a letter from Titus, be hanged (IV, iv, 44). The only murder Saturninus does commit is when he attacks Titus in retaliation for
531 Cynthia Fuchs, “Meltdown,” Pop Matters, 3 Aug 2004
150 the murder of his wife Tamora, and is immediately punished for this when he is killed by Lucius.
The representation of violence in Titus works against Julie Taymor‟s intentions. In Taymor‟s film violence is to some extent entertaining. Titus‟ retributive frenzy is both cathartic and potentially crowd-pleasing, and succeeds in „manifesting a „comparable urge to cleanse the world of a vividly displayed corruption.‟539 The catharsis and cleansing value of violence in Titus is further exemplified in the characterisation of Lucius as “hero.” Taymor attempts a counterpoint to the audience‟s relishing in Titus‟ retributive violence primarily through framing the murder of his son Mutius as an execution, and the disturbing and eerie mood that is set during his shocking “honour killing” of his daughter Lavinia. However, both these attempts are undercut through the film‟s use of black humour and the construction and celebration of Titus as “anti-hero.” Anthony Hopkins‟ presence in Titus also carries with it a significant intertextual weight. Hopkins is known predominantly for his Oscar winning performance as psychotic cannibal serial killer Hannibal Lecter in Jonathan Demme‟s film The Silence of the Lambs. The way in which Hopkins interprets the role of Titus alludes to the role of Lecter, an observation that is echoed by several reviewers and academics. Playing upon these allusions to Hannibal Lecter, Taymor presents the characters of Titus and Aaron as mirrors of each other in the play. She describes the transition of both Titus and Aaron through her film in terms of role reversal; as one becomes a monster the other becomes a father:
Nihilistic, atheistic, cold and calculating, this dark figure emerges as the mirror image of Titus. Titus begins as the good man, acting upon honour and a sense of morality. Aaron is the artful and self-aware devil who revels in horrific acts of atrocity without conscience. But by the end, Titus‟ turn as cook closely resembles an Aaron act in its cruelty and creativity, while Aaron, the loner, evolves into a loving father, ready to sacrifice himself for the life of his child.540
Titus begins the film and play on the threshold of change. Julie Taymor has rearranged the order of several scenes from Titus Andronicus, particularly those from the beginning of the play. Titus opens with a prologue that introduces both Young Lucius and shows
539 McCandless, 492. 540 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 178.
151 Titus‟ victorious return from battle. Taymor shifts the battle between Saturninus and Bassianus for control of Rome (I, i, 1-63) to later in the film. The pomp and ceremony of the choreographed opening scene immediately demonstrates the way in which Taymor‟s production stylistically blends time periods. More importantly the opening of the film clearly suggests Titus as the “hero” and focus of the film.
Through Taymor‟s film Titus‟ role shifts from rigid authoritarianism to wild vengefulness. His position as a character in transition is signalled through both performance and costuming. Titus begins the film dressed in an austere uniform. His uniform visually symbolises not only his position as military leader and the pride with which he serves Rome, but also the armoured and rigid nature of his character. He is „invulnerable to real emotion‟541 and is steadfast in his commitment to policy, ritual and piety. Titus values duty to Rome above loyalty to his family, a point which is demonstrated in his reluctant acceptance of Lavinia‟s betrothal to Saturninus, and his killing of Mutius in defence of it. As the film progresses Titus completely transposes his attitude about privileging duty above loyalty to his family, and as Titus‟ character changes so do his clothes. Titus‟ costumes gradually change and become more subdued and lighter in colour. The dark colours of his military uniform are eventually replaced by his pristine white chef‟s outfit. Director Taymor notes that Titus‟ costume changes reflect him becoming more vulnerable as the play progresses.542 Titus‟ vulnerability is linked to his change in attitude regarding his relationship with his family. As Titus becomes more vulnerable terrible things begin to happen to both him and his family. The result is that rather than „defining himself as a Roman first and a father second, he places the wrongs his family has endured above his duty to protect the state.‟543 Following the series of horrific and violent events that occur to Lavinia, his sons and himself, Titus‟ costume changes from military uniform to a grey cardigan. Sitting down to dinner with his family Titus is no longer the great military ruler preoccupied with ideas of piety and duty, but a weary old grandfather, who has been broken by all the wrongs that have been committed on his family. The shift of Titus‟ attitude from the “official” to the “personal” is punctuated by the setting, the domestic surrounds of the Andronicus‟ dining room. Titus‟ appearance and demeanour is fatherly as he tries to comfort his family and understand his daughter. At the same time Titus has also begun to plot his revenge. In the previous scene, Titus gathers his family around him swears to
541 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 542 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 543 Hancock, 7.
152 right their wrongs (III, i, 277). Revenge is personally rather than politically motivated. Titus‟ obsession with carrying out vengeance for his family illustrates how his actions are now motivated by family loyalty rather than the duty he used to feel as a statesman.
Titus‟ next significant costume change occurs in the bath scene (V, ii, 1-165) that is a part of the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence where Rape, Revenge, and Murder appear. Titus sits naked in a bath writing on parchment in his own blood. This image itself is a quotation of Jacques Louis David‟s painting The Death of Marat (1793). The citation suggests Titus as a kind of revolutionary, whose act of taking revenge into his own hands after his family is attacked and his entreaties are ignored, is seen as an act of treason against the Empire.544 Stripped of all his armour and clothing in the bath scene, Titus‟ nakedness is the ultimate expression of his vulnerability, both in mind and body. Through her rearrangement of the revelation of the identities of Rape, Revenge, and Murder (as Chiron, Tamora and Demetrius) Taymor frames the scene to suggest that Titus has possibly been sent mad by all the horrific things that have happened. The revelation of identities instead appears after the Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence has finished. The intended result of delaying the reveal is that the audience does not know whether that which is seen on screen is real or a figment of Titus‟ imagination. If the removal of clothes indicates Titus‟ vulnerability, then once Titus starts putting clothes back on his vulnerability begins to disappear, and so does his apparent madness. Titus becomes not only as monstrous and cunning as his enemies, but also as determined on exacting revenge as they are. Disturbed from his bath by Tamora and her sons, Titus emerges from his house wearing a simple white bathrobe to talk to them. Taymor has cut Titus‟s aside where he reveals he recognises Tamora and her sons (V, ii, 142-144). However, Hopkins‟ performance, especially his tone of voice during this scene, suggests what Titus reveals in the aside, that he is not fooled for a moment and is playing along with Tamora‟s attempt to trick him. Titus takes the first steps to revenge when he orders the capture of Chiron and Demetrius and slaughters them with his own hands. The sacrifice of Alarbus that Titus orders at the beginning of the film is performed according to „Roman Rites‟ (I, i, 146). His murder of Chiron and Demetrius, and later that of Tamora is motivated by the violence inflicted upon his family. Titus admits this when he entreats Tamora (who is disguised as Revenge) with the words: „I pray thee, do on them some violent death. They have been violent to me and mine.‟
544 Saturninus reveals as much in his tirade against Titus (IV, iv, 1-26) where he refers to Titus‟ action as „libelling against the Senate‟ (IV, iv, 17).
153
Richard Burt observes that audiences viewing Shakespeare in film have a tendency to „read backward from film to Shakespeare.‟545 Hopkins‟ performance during the scene where Titus slaughters Chiron and Demetrius is cold and calculating, and recalls his earlier role of Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. Taymor herself notes how influential Hopkins‟ previous role is in shaping audience‟s perceptions of his portrayal of Titus. Responding to comment by an interviewer about Hopkins‟ history in appearing in films containing grotesque horror (the interviewer light-heartedly notes a connection between Silence of the Lambs and Titus, as both films contain Hopkins and severed heads) Taymor replies with „Exactly! You‟d have to use Hannibal Lecter.‟ 546 Further establishing a connection between Titus and Lecter, Anthony Hopkins cites his well known previous role when Titus delivers Lecter‟s signature “slurp” as he relishes in the prospect of butchering Chiron and Demetrius and serving them up to their mother.547 The allusion to Lecter is significant as it shows how Titus‟ role has shifted from respected statesman to murderous monster. The slaughter scene in Titus and Taymor‟s citation of a recognisable character from popular culture exemplifies how the film diverts from her intentions, and violence in the film is cathartic and entertaining. Through the use of close-up and recurrent focus the slaughter scene centres on Titus‟ pained reaction to his recounting of the crimes committed against him and his family. David McCandles describes the effect of this technique as:
The fixation of Taymor‟s camera on the wounded eruptive Titus, combined with Hopkins‟s intrinsic gravitas and eloquent pathos, create precisely the sort of “star turn” conductive to heroizing a potentially repellent lunatic.548
While Taymor‟s stage production of Titus Andronicus focussed on the bodies of the boys and the terrible way they are murdered, her film adaptation centres on Titus and his emotions, creating empathy for Titus and the justification for his revenge.549 Both the focus on Titus and the citations to Hannibal Lecter work to undermine Taymor‟s intended criticism of violence as entertainment. In a series of filmic cuts Titus‟ horrific
545 Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust,” 308. 546 Taymor quoted in Russell, “Titus: A Class Reborn.” 547 Several academics and critics have noted the connection between Hopkins‟ Titus and Hannibal Lecter. Both Virginia Mason Vaughn and Richard Burt make particular note of Titus‟ use of Lecter‟s signature mannerism. See Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust,” 308, and Virginia Mason Vaughn, “Looking at the „Other‟ in Julie Taymor's Titus,” Shakespeare Bulletin 21.3 Fall (2003): 73. 548 McCandles, 493. 549 McCandles, 493.
154 slaughter of the boys is juxtaposed firstly with the image of two pies cooling on a window sill and then with Titus‟ comical appearance in chef‟s attire as he serves the pies made from human flesh to his guests. Titus is no longer vulnerable and is now in complete control as his plan for revenge climaxes. The juxtaposition between the disturbing and the comical domestic imagery is intended to make the audience aware of the nature of violence in entertainment and to unsettle them, undercutting their delight.550 However, undermining this intent is the way in which the retributive violence that occurs in Titus is crowd-pleasing. Taymor remarks on her DVD commentary that this banquet scene gets the most reaction in her film. Anderegg summarises the appeal of Titus‟ behaviour to the audience by asserting that „everything Titus does is so „“right” and at the same time horribly “wrong.”‟551 The use of the song „Vivere‟ also adds extra levity in the scene. The musical choice together with the image of Titus smiling sinisterly and brandishing cutlery and his delight in serving up the pies made from Chiron and Demetrius‟ remains to their mother is both unsettling and humorous. Once again it recalls what Walker refers to as the „ghoulish excess‟552 of Hannibal Lecter. The audience is positioned to laugh at Titus‟ repellent and daring act, and along with the empathy created with Titus in the previous scene this tempers the vilification of Titus in Taymor‟s film.
Taymor also vindicates Titus by explicitly „demonizing his enemies.‟553 Whether intentional or not, Taymor presents Titus‟ revenge against Tamora as acceptable by her characterisation as vile and loathsome. Tamora‟s appearance is reminiscent of Italian film aesthetic from the 1930s and 1940s. Taymor herself implies that her presentation of Tamora was inspired in part by the baroness from The Damned:
And the 30s and 40s gives you a feeling about Jessica Lange and her character. She‟s very androgynous and decadent. It‟s metal, a feeling like you got watching Visconti‟s The Damned.554
Much like the Baroness, Jessica Lange‟s Tamora is a ruthless figure who will do anything to achieve her desires for power and revenge, employing seduction as a tool to manipulate those around her. Further parallels between the two characters are seen in
550 Lindroth, 113. 551 Anderegg, Cinematic Shakespeare, 188. 552 Walker, “Now Is A Time,” 196. 553 McCandles, 493. 554 Taymor quoted in Eby, “Julie Taymor on making Titus.”
155 Lange‟s interpretation of Tamora, in particular her relationship with her sons. Taymor characterises their close relationship as „almost incestuous,‟555 and their interaction certainly recalls the sexualised nature of the relationship between the Baroness and her son. As with Cabaret, Visconti‟s The Damned is set in Germany during the Nazi rise to power. The citations to both films further highlights the way in which Taymor aligns Fascist imagery with decadence and sexual non-conformity. Costuming is important in Titus and influences the way in which audiences read the characters of Tamora and also Lavinia:
Costume is character not period. I thought of Lavinia more as Grace Kelly, with the little white gloves, 1950s character. But Tamora is more like Visconti‟s 1930s film, The Damned. She‟s androgynous.556
Tamora is further demonised through being contrasted with Lavinia. Both Tamora and Lavinia are constructed in terms of recognisable symbols of femininity - female figures from the world of cinema. Tamora is presented in an overtly sexualised way, wearing bright and bold suggestive clothing that alludes to buxom “bombshells” from Italian cinema of the 1930s and 1940s. Burt reads Tamora‟s sexualisation as „a sign of her moral corruption by her desire of revenge.‟557 He goes on to suggest that in contrast with Tamora, Lavinia‟s „moral purity is represented by her lack of sexuality.‟558 Lavinia‟s purity is stressed through the allusions to an idea of “conservative” femininity prevalent during America in the 1950s; she is dressed in a black full bell skirt reminiscent of Grace Kelly, personifying the virginal “girl-next-door” aesthetic. Taymor emphasises Lavinia‟s purity further by literally placing Lavinia on a tree stump pedestal, her costuming, a torn and bloodied petticoat, suggesting a ravaged Degas ballerina.559 Once raped by Chiron and Demetrius Lavinia‟s costuming changes from “conservative” black to bright sexual red. Resembling Tamora‟s hunting outfit, Lavinia‟s new costume symbolises her defilement. The image of Lavinia on a pedestal
555 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 556 Taymor quoted in Richard Schechner, “Julie Taymor: From Jacques Lecoq to The Lion King,” TDR: The Drama Review 43.3 (T 163) Fall (1999): 47-48. 557 Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust,” 315. 558 Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust,” 315. 559 The difference between the two women is further illustrated in the contrast between their mates, Saturninus and Bassianus. The dichotomy between 1950‟s conservative and 1930‟s and 1940‟s decadent sexualised imagery can be seen in the opening scene where the brothers vie to be Emperor of Rome. As Taymor notes, „cars and costumes are a reflection of character so Saturninus, who‟s this kind of mad emperor, drives in Mussolini‟s car, I mean it really is of that period. Then his brother, who‟s more of a 1950s straight sort of guy, very conservative, he drives a 50s convertible.‟ Taymor quoted in Eby, “Julie Taymor on making Titus.”
156 appears again during Lavinia‟s rape flashback Penny Arcade Nightmare Sequence. Taymor once again draws on recognisable symbols of femininity from cinema in order to convey Lavinia‟s change in character from virginal to sexualised object. In this stylised flashback sequence Lavinia, part human, part doe is attacked by Chiron and Demetrius, who appear as part hum, part tiger. In a deliberate quotation of Marilyn Monroe‟s skirt flying up as she crosses a subway grate in Billy Wilder‟s film The Seven Year Itch (1955), Lavinia, a look of anguish and fear on her face, helplessly beats down her billowing skirt. Director Taymor asserts that this image is an apt modern iconic parallel to this scene of humiliation and rape.560 Burt astutely argues that sexuality in Taymor‟s Titus is made the equivalent of the violent act of rape, and is „something that happens to (good) women rather than something that is part of them.‟ 561 Unlike Tamora,562 Lavinia is not in charge of her sexual pleasure, and her transition to sexualised object is forced unwillingly upon her. This once again illustrates what I see as Taymor‟s continued “conservative” approach in Titus in aligning violence and sexuality.
Contrasting with the construction of both Tamora as villainous sexualised revenger and Saturninus as morally corrupt Emperor of Rome, Taymor‟s characterisation of Lucius as “hero” in Titus is also problematic. Lucius begins the cycle of violent revenge and also brings bloodshed and death into the play.563 Both the opening and the closing of the film are dominated by Lucius‟ call for revenge, firstly in the guise of institutionalised justice and by the end, simply bloodthirsty retribution. Lucius‟ first words in the film are an insistence on a ritualistic sacrifice as a tribute to his dead brothers:
Give us the proudest prisoner of the Goths, That we may hew his limbs, and on a pile Ad manes fratrum, sacrifice his flesh That so the shadows not be unappeased, Nor we disturbed with prodigies on earth.
560 Taymor, Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay, 184. 561 Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust,” 315. 562 Burt further argues that only “bad” women like Tamora are in charge of their sexual pleasure in Titus. (Burt, “Shakespeare and the Holocaust,” 315). Tamora‟s sexuality is aligned with the corruptness of Rome, because she uses it in order to manipulate those around her and rise to power. 563 Taylor, “Lucius, the Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus,” 141.
157 Lucius demands and relishes in the sacrifice of Alarbus. His report of the event is disturbing in the language he uses to describe the violent event and the pride with which he says it:
See, lord, father, how we have performed Our Roman rites: Alarbus‟ limbs lopped, And entrails feed the sacrificing fire, Whose smoke like incense doth perfume the sky.
The savagery of pride with which he describes the sacrifice underscores Lucius‟ position as the initiator of the cycle of violence and brutality in Titus. In her DVD commentary Taymor implies that it was her intention to present the idea that witnessing the brutal way in which Alarbus is killed sets the chain of vengeance in motion and instigates Tamora and her sons‟ hatred and desire for violent revenge.564 Anthony Brian Taylor points out correspondences in Shakespeare‟s text between the events of the sacrifice and those of Lavinia‟s rape and mutilation.565 Taylor notes that Lucius‟ immediate response to Tamora‟s pleas for her son‟s life is „Away with him, and make a fire straight.‟ (I, i, 127. Italics are Taylor‟s). Similarly, Lavinia‟s plea for her own life is met with: „Therefore away with her, and use her as you will.‟ (II, iii,166. Italics are Taylor‟s).566 Taymor punctuates the brutal and disturbing way in which Lucius relishes in the sacrifice of Alarbus with the reaction of Young Lucius. Taymor does not show the actual sacrifice and instead focuses on Young Lucius‟ shocked expression as he witnesses the gruesome image, and the sizzling sound of entrails being thrown into the fire by his blood splattered father.
While Julie Taymor is critical of the cruel and pointless ritualistic violence of this scene, in contrast she characterises Lucius as justified in his violent actions against Aaron later in the film. When Aaron is captured at the Goth army base, Lucius stands over him and cruelly gloats with a menacing grin, and also threatens to murder Aaron‟s son. Only after Aaron revels in his description of the rape of Lavinia does Lucius explode into action and senselessly beat him. Taymor excuses the depiction of violence with the explanation that „everybody would understand his violent response because he is so
564 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 565 Taylor notes that this verbal patterning is influenced by Ovid and is also seen in the play‟s major Ovidian source, the story of Philomel. Taylor, “Lucius, the Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus,” note 16, 154. 566 Taylor, “Lucius, the Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus,” 143.
158 greatly provoked.‟567 Her defence of Lucius is at odds with how the violent act is presented on screen. Lucius‟ attack on Aaron is brutal. The sound of Lucius‟ fists and boot making contact with Aaron is harsh and loud, all the more noticeable by the absence of the score during the scene. Taymor further defends Lucius in her revelation that actor Angus MacFayden, who plays Lucius, insisted his character not kill Aaron‟s infant son because his character would not break his word.568 This differs from her stage production of Titus Andronicus, where Aaron‟s son is represented on stage in the final moments of the play by a tiny black coffin, suggesting to the audience that Lucius has indeed murdered the infant. Both her explanation of MacFayden‟s interpretation of his character, and statement regarding the provocation of Lucius illustrate how Taymor wants to acquit Lucius of blame for the violence he engages in. Virginia Mason Vaughn summarises the intent of Taymor‟s characterisation of Lucius:
In choices that seem inconsistent with the rest of the film, MacFayden and Taymor clearly want their Lucius to be a “good guy” in a play where there are no good guys.569
Taymor‟s acquittal of Lucius is a contradiction of her examination and criticism of violence in entertainment. Just as with their perception of Titus‟ actions, the audience of Taymor‟s film is encouraged to relish in Lucius‟ payback. Violence becomes acceptable when justifiably provoked against a character who is a figure of empathy and is presented as a “hero.” Vaughn characterises MacFayden‟s Lucius as a „manly man, a warrior garbed in dark and austere uniforms, or leather garnished with metal.‟570 Costuming in Titus serves to express the nature of a character, therefore the audience is encouraged to read Lucius as a “heroic” gladiator, who emerges from the battle victorious and is “rightly” awarded the rule of Rome. Lisa Hopkins draws on this “heroic” intertext in her examination of MacFayden‟s portrayal of Lucius, and notes a similarity with MacFayden‟s role of Robert the Bruce in Mel Gibson‟s film Braveheart (1995). Hopkins argues that both characters are survivors,571 who emerge as rulers in the end because of the death of the other contenders.572 Further attempts to present
567 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 568 Taymor, “Director‟s Commentary.” 569 Vaughn, 78. 570 Vaughn, 78. 571 Lisa Hopkins‟ use of the word “survivors” (Hopkins, “A Tiger's Heart,” 63) suggests that the audience overlook each man‟s flaws and instead focus on their great will and determination to overcome the obstacles in their lives. 572 Hopkins, “A Tiger's Heart,” 63.
159 Lucius in a positive light are made by both Taymor and Elliot Goldenthal. In their respective commentaries on the Titus DVD, they both explicitly make a connection between Lucius and the figure who they believe Shakespeare alludes to, his namesake, the legendary King Lucius, who introduced Christianity into Britain. Taylor is critical of such a connection, and argues that Lucius is severely flawed and unworthy of a comparison with his apparent namesake.573 In response to Taylor‟s argument, Maurice Hunt notes several “positive” features of Lucius‟ character.574 Lucius defends his sister (I, i, 282) and offers his own hand to be cut off to save his father pain and anguish (III, ii, 162-166).575 He is driven by revenge and swears to right his family‟s wrongs no matter what. It is precisely this drive for revenge and the brutal way Lucius achieves it at the end of Titus that complicates the alignment of Shakespeare‟s Lucius with the historical Christian figure of piety. Hunt further defends Lucius through the observation that Lucius‟ sensitivity and finer “human” feelings manifest themselves in his concluding words to his son (V, iii, 159-165).576 These words of caring and tenderness are cut by Taymor in her film. The only interaction between father and son at the end of Titus is in Young Lucius‟ silent observation as his father murders Saturninus and mercilessly sentences Aaron to death by starvation. After the massacre of Act V, Lucius emerges as a figure of authority and responsibility to restore order to Rome. While the play and film end with the word pity, Lucius is guilty of that which he accuses Tamora of, being „devoid of pity‟ (V, iii, 198). He does not attempt to disguise his words behind notions of institutionalised forms of justice or religious piety. Rather than merely dispensing justice he is „once again inflicting pain and agony with calculated relish.‟ 577 In sentencing Aaron and Tamora, Hancock notes that „vengeance remains the governing motivation for violence.‟578 These words of vengeance are what Lucius leaves with his son Young Lucius. Therefore, in his decision in Taymor‟s film to show mercy on Aaron‟s infant son and carry him out of the Coliseum, Young Lucius proves more deserving than his father as worthy of a comparison with his pious namesake.
Analysis of both the diverse musical score and intertextual references in Titus helps us to understand the way in which Julie Taymor attempts to critique both violence as
573 Taylor, “Lucius, the Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus,” 138-141. 574 Maurice Hunt, “Exonerating Lucius in Titus Andronicus: A Response to Anthony Brian Taylor,”‟ Connotations 7.1 (1997-98): 87-93. 575 Both these actions are also present in Taymor‟s film. 576 Hunt, 88. 577 Taylor, “Lucius, the Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus,” 144. 578 Hancock, 19.
160 entertainment and the impact of violence on children. Composer Elliot Goldenthal uses music to unsettle the audience and highlight brutal violence within the film. Character and larger themes are also conveyed in Titus through musical motifs. The repetition of Goldenthal‟s „pity theme,‟ illustrates the cyclical nature of violence performed by those within the film who are clouded by revenge. The other major musical motif within the film, the „mercy theme‟ represents the compassion and kindness performed by characters, such as Young Lucius, who are outside the cycle of violence and are not driven by a desire for retribution. Director Taymor foregrounds the character of Young Lucius, a feature borrowed from Jane Howell‟s BBC production of Titus Andronicus. Taymor uses the shift in Young Lucius‟ role from passive observer to active participant as a means to highlight how children are indoctrinated into a culture of violence. Only through knowledge and embracing compassion can they escape the space of violence. While Taymor‟s critique of the impact of violence on children is supported through the use of intertextual references, these same references highlight how she also becomes implicit in the system that she is attempting to criticise. Undermining Taymor‟s intent to criticise the entertainment value of violence in contemporary culture is the empathy created between the audience and Anthony Hopkins‟ Titus. Taymor‟s film presents certain violence as justified, cathartic and entertaining, allowing the audience to relish in Titus‟ brutal and calculated retribution. Also problematical to Taymor‟s intended criticism of the impact of violence is the characterisation of Lucius, the initiator of the cycle of retributive violence that occurs in Titus, as “hero.” Through this Taymor seems to suggest that certain types of violence are understandable and ultimately acceptable.
161
Billy Morrissette’s Scotland, PA (2001)
In adapting Macbeth in his Scotland, PA (2001) director Billy Morrissette comments on the issues of ambition, greed and the desire to escape the limitations of class in “small town” America. Scotland, PA can also be read as an observation on the struggles involved in adapting Shakespeare for film, in particular the split reception that occurs when the works of Shakespeare are translated to the medium of film. Morrissette sets his adaptation of Macbeth in suburban America of the 1970s. In Scotland, PA, themes of passion, love, ambition and greed transcend the original tale of murderous royalty and now become the foundation for suburban squabbles, intrigue, and murder. This translation is further reinforced by the deletion of various characters and plots and the slight alteration to the ending of Macbeth. The motivation for murder in Morrissette‟s film, in this case kidnapping that turns into accidental death, is no longer the crown of Scotland, but control of a local fast food restaurant called “Duncan‟s.” Scotland, PA draws upon the comedic moments of its source material Macbeth and is transformed by director Morrissette into a black comedy. The sinister dark humour of Scotland, PA is similar to that of Fargo (1996), a murder mystery set in “small town” Minnesota, and a film which Morrissette claims as a point of reference in his audiocommentary on the Scotland, PA DVD.579 The humour in Morrissette‟s film comes from the collision of references and cultural allusions, and the disparity between the “high art” of Shakespeare and the “low art” of the various popular culture references from 1970s‟ America, which dominate the film‟s production design. Understanding the references and allusions in Morrissette‟s film is therefore instrumental in understanding the comedy of the film. Along with the numerous references to popular culture of the 1970s, which also incorporates clothing and set design, music is also an important tool used to situate the viewer in the suburban America world of the film. Although no official soundtrack for the film has been released, the music used in Scotland, PA is made up of a score by composer Anton Sanko, and more significantly a selection of
579 Quotations from the Billy Morrissette‟s commentary are my own transcriptions based on the DVD release of the film. Scotland, PA, Dir. Billy Morrissette, Abandon Pictures/Lot 47 Films/Showtime Entertainment/Sundance Channel Home Entertainment, DVD, US, 2002.
163 various songs from the 1970s. In particular Scotland, PA contains several songs performed by the band Bad Company, who were a favourite of director Billy Morrissette in his youth. As I have shown is the case in other films based on Shakespeare‟s plays, music is also used in a thematic way in order to define character in Scotland, PA. Sanko‟s score is composed of themes for each character, while the various other musical selections, along with visual elements of the production design, define characters‟ class and morality in the film.
In Billy Morrissette‟s film Scotland, PA music firstly functions as a way in which to situate the viewer in the time period the film is set. Apart from the modern score composed for the film, the musical choices in Morrissette‟s film are otherwise dominated by songs from the 1970s. In particular Morrissette chose to use a number of songs by Rock band Bad Company, as they were a favourite band of his when he was growing up in Connecticut. For Morrissette the music of Bad Company perfectly summed up the life and struggles of those living in suburban America during the 1970s.580 Other musical selections used in Scotland, PA include songs by popular musical artists from the 1970s including Janis Ian, First Class, Three Dog Night, and The Marshall Tucker Band. Together with a mise-en-scène dominated by pop culture references from the 1970s, and David Robinson‟s costuming inspired by fashion from the 1960s and 1970s, Morrissette presents a world on the verge of the fast food revolution, which now dominates American culture. Music in Scotland Pa not only situates the audience in a specific time and place but is also used as a way to define character and narrative themes. In particular, the representation of the connection between taste and class and Morrissette‟s film is developed on an auditory level through the variety of musical choices.
Composer Anton Sanko‟s score for Scotland, PA is highlighted by its light-hearted, brassy and rhythmic tango sound. Sanko‟s score reflects and defines characters through providing them with their own theme or musical motif. For example, during the opening scene where Mac first meets the three witches, the score sounds both jaunty and carnivalesque. The music complements Morrissette‟s characterisation of the witches as “kooky” and crazy hippies living at a local carnival, and adds to the light-heartedness of the scene. Another more significant example of how Sanko‟s score functions in the film can be heard during a scene in what is now “McBeth‟s” restaurant. As Lieutenant
580 Morrissette, “Director‟s Commentary.”
164 McDuff questions various staff about Norm Duncan and his son Malcolm‟s turbulent relationship, Sanko‟s score aurally differentiates each character. Morrissette notes in the DVD commentary for the film that Sanko took the same song, the opening title theme, but changed it slightly so it became a theme for each character in the scene. For Mrs Lennox (a waitress at “Duncan‟s” and also “McBeth‟s”) the theme is a little lighter, and for Anthony “Banko” Banconi (Mac‟s best friend) the theme is composed of whistles. Finally for Mac, the theme returns to its original sound of accordions and tango beat. By using the same song but differing the sound slightly, Sanko‟s score helps the scene flow, and at the same time allows for each character to be individually highlighted.
As well as a score by Anton Sanko, Scotland, PA contains numerous musical selections by assorted bands from the 1970s. The use of music from a specific period in history, along with popular culture references, costuming and set design helps situate viewers in the time period the film is set, 1970s‟ America. Using music in order to establish a time and place is a common technique used in many modern films and television shows. Recent examples of this practice include the film The Wedding Singer (1998) and television drama serials Cold Case (2003) and Life on Mars (2006). Just as costuming defines a character in film visually, musical cues and the associations the audience makes because of the musical choices can be used to define characters aurally. In Scotland, PA the musical cues associated with the character of Donald Duncan are an example of how music defines a character. Song choices from the musical Cabaret play upon stereotypical associations between musical theatre and homosexuality, and are used by director Morrissette to hint at Donald‟s alternative sexuality. The characterisation is further reinforced in the juxtaposition between Donald and his brother Malcolm. In a scene that highlights the difference between the two brothers, the camera pans from an image of Donald sitting listening to the very quiet, feminine sounds of gay icon singer Janis Ian, to the loud, gritty and heavy macho sounds of Rock band Bad Company that blare from Malcolm‟s stereo. Popular culture references are also used to further imply the difference between the boys. Malcolm‟s messy bedroom is plastered with posters of Al Pacino and Jimi Hendrix and graffiti, and suggests macho heterosexuality. Contrasting with this Donald‟s bedroom is extremely neat and contains a poster of the film Cabaret featuring gay icon Liza Minnelli, as well as a sexually
165 suggestive poster of bare-chested footballer Joe Namath.581 The presence of the latter in particular serves as a visual punch line to the exchange between Norm Duncan and son Malcolm over whether Donald likes playing football. The photo of Namath suggests to the audience not Donald‟s love of the game, but instead his feelings of desire towards men.
Music in Scotland, PA is more significantly used by director Morrissette as a way to illustrate characters‟ taste and its connection to their class and moral standing. Scotland, PA examines America‟s class divide through translating the central question in Macbeth concerning the way in which a person determines their own fate, into a question about the roles which people play in establishing their place in America‟s social order.582 The desire for Scotland‟s throne is translated by Morrissette into Pat and Mac‟s desire to escape the “white-trash” “working-class” place in 1970s‟ American society. However, the film shows that it becomes impossible for Pat and Mac to escape their class because, although they become wealthy, they cannot escape their “bad taste.” Anthony D Hoefer Jr. notes the way in which taste and class identity are linked in Morrissette‟s film:
Consumption provides identity in late capitalist economy, and the film certainly plays with mass-consumer products to establish its characters. But even when Pat and Mac find success, their tastes remain comically tacky…True class mobility, it seems, is impossible, as patterns of accumulation and consumption inevitably reveal true class identity.583
Elaborating on the McBeths‟ inability to escape class, Elizabeth Deitchman notes that although their status as employees at a fast food restaurant (and therefore their minimum wage income) might account for the meagreness of their possessions, „their transformation from workers to owners highlights the scope and significance of their white-trash aesthetic.‟584 Although they become wealthy their tastes do not change; the McBeths‟ failure to truly move up in Scotland‟s society is signalled by the persistence of their “working-class” taste. Hoefer Jr. further suggests that McDuff‟s movement
581 The presence of the photo of Joe Namath is an example of the many references to the 1970s time period which saturate the film‟s production design, and are used to situate the viewer in the 1970s. Namath‟s sporting career spanned the years 1965-1977. 582 Elizabeth A. Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare: Taste, Morality, and the Dark Side of the American Dream in Billy Morrissette‟s Scotland, PA,” Literature/Film Quarterly 34.2 (2006): 140. 583 Anthony D. Hoefer Jr., „The McDonaldization of Macbeth: Shakespeare and Pop Culture in Scotland, PA‟ Literature/Film Quarterly 34.2 (2006): 158. 584 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 143.
166 from police detective to small business owner is more acceptable because in terms of hierarchy the move is a lateral one.585 However, this assumption is problematic given Christopher Walken‟s portrayal of McDuff is characterised by an underlying sinisterness, primarily due to Walken‟s own intertext. Charles Taylor describes the types of roles Walken has become synonymous with in his acting career as „by-now patented Walken schtick - vaguely menacing weirdness.‟586 Taylor refers to Christopher Walken‟s characteristic traits in performance, in particular his peculiar speech rhythm and “deadpan” delivery of lines. Walken initially agreed to take on the role of Lieutenant Ernie McDuff because he would be playing a nice guy.587 However, during the course of filming, Walken‟s motivations for the character changed, as revealed by director Billy Morrissette:
He [Walken] would say things like, „What if I don‟t really have a wife and kids, and I was just saying that?‟ Well, they don‟t show up. He couldn‟t get over that at the end of the movie he ended up with the restaurant, and he would talk about that. He‟d say, „So I must have some ulterior motive.‟588
Walken‟s change in the way in which he approached portraying McDuff invites the audience to question the character‟s motivations for investigating the McBeths. Walken‟s McDuff is no longer a nice guy, but is characterised as „after the restaurant the whole time.‟589 The ending of Morrissette‟s film shows McDuff in control of the fast food restaurant, which now offers healthy vegetarian meals such as a “Garden Burger.” Though his reason for wanting to take over the restaurant may be less motivated by fiscal and class ambitions and more of an ideological one, this ending suggests that McDuff is no less ambitious than Pat and Mac. I refer to McDuff‟s vegetarianism, which is contrasted with meat dominated menu at “McBeth‟s.” McDuff equates the greasy fast food offered at “McBeth‟s” with poison in his line: „Get them hooked, like kids on drugs.‟590 Once he kills Mac, McDuff turns “McBeth‟s” into his own fast food vision, offering a “healthy” vegetarian menu. The ending also draws parallels to Roman
585 Hoefer Jr., 158. 586 Charles Taylor, “Scotland, PA,” Salon, Feb 8 2002, 18 July 2004
167 Polanski‟s own film adaptation of Macbeth (1971), which itself ends with Donalbain‟s visit to the three witches, suggesting his sinister ambitions for his brother‟s crown, and the power, influence and wealth that comes with it. Both films translate the ongoing cycle of ambition and bloodshed from the play through visually implying the hidden motives of Lieutenant McDuff and Donalbain respectively. Another significant feature in Scotland, PA that influences the reading of Walken‟s depiction of McDuff is the removal of his family. The brutal murder of Macduff‟s family and his grief at their loss in Macbeth is an important factor in establishing both the audience‟s sympathy for him and their revulsion of Macbeth for ruthlessly ordering it:
Macduff
He has no children. All my pretty ones? Did you say all? O hell-kite! All? What, all my pretty chickens and their dam At one fell swoop?
Malcolm
Dispute it like a man.
Macduff
I shall do so; But I must also feel it as a man; I cannot but remember such things were That were most precious to me. Did heaven look on, And would not take their part? Sinful Macduff, They were all struck for thee! naught that I am, Not for their own demerits, but for mine, Fell slaughter on their souls. Heaven rest them now.
168 (IV, iii, 218-230)591
The scene marks Macduff as a loving father and a figure of pathos. Macduff‟s grief in the realisation of the murder of his innocent family stirs sympathy within the audience, and is an example of how the play sets up Macduff as hero, albeit a problematic one. Macduff abandons his wife and child and flees to England, leaving his family in harm‟s way. Malcolm questions Macduff‟s reasoning behind this action (IV, iii, 25-31). R.S White astutely notes that „Macduff is offended by this accusation, but neither penitent nor explanatory.‟592 Shakespeare offers us no reasoning behind Macduff‟s failure to show love and duty towards his family. Macduff‟s guilt is somewhat tempered with his heartfelt reaction to the news of the death of his family, and his passionate declaration to seeking revenge on their behalf (IV, iii, 213-238). His family‟s brutal murder becomes the driving force behind his deadly pursuit of Macbeth, and is set up, along with his loyalty to Scotland (which has cost him his family), as justification for the killing of villain Macbeth. The scene is also set up by Shakespeare as a contrast to the next act, where the death of Lady Macbeth is revealed (V, v, 8-18). Both Macduff and Macbeth lose their closest relation and confidants, and with the loss of their family comes the end of their respective family lines. The removal of Macduff‟s family in Scotland, PA affects the characterisation of Lieutenant McDuff. He is no longer presented as the respected Thane of Fife, grieving father, and a figure of pathos with which the audience can sympathise, but as a man with “Macbeth-like” motivations of power. The parallel between Lieutenant McDuff and Mac does not come about through the loss of their families, but instead more troublingly through their ruthless ambitions to control “Duncan‟s.” Morrissette invites his audience to view Lieutenant McDuff‟s murder of Mac as less justified because of the revelation of his sinister ambitions for control of the restaurant. The alteration is one of the ways in which Morrissette attempts to steer the audience‟s sympathies towards the McBeths, a dominant feature of his film, which I shall later discuss further in relation to the characterisation of Pat McBeth.
In Scotland, PA the film‟s soundtrack plays a critical role in establishing a character‟s taste and therefore their associations with work.593 The contrast between the lower-class
591 Line citations from Macbeth refer to the New Cambridge edition, edited by A.R. Braunmuller. William Shakespeare, Macbeth, A.R. Braunmuller, ed (Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997). 592 R.S. White, Shakespeare‟s Macbeth (Melbourne: Sydney University Press in association with Oxford University Press, 2005): 23. 593 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 142.
169 and middle-classes in Scotland, PA is signalled by a character‟s taste in music, with both Rock & Roll music and classical music used as markers of class. Rock music from the 1970s, in particular songs by band Bad Company, is used in Scotland, PA to signal both “low-class” and bad behaviour. This connection between Rock music and “low- class” and taste is best articulated by Norm Duncan, the film‟s example of “middle- class” hard work, as he lectures his son Malcolm on the value of hard work. Malcolm would rather play in his band than help out at his father‟s restaurant. Norm‟s disgust that his son would rather play in a Rock band than working in the family business is met with Duncan telling Malcolm: „you sound like Scotland trash,‟ thus connecting Rock music with the worst aspects of “low-class” life and culture. Rock music in the film is „blue-collar fare played after work on jukeboxes and in dive bars‟594 and as such is associated with characters such as the McBeths, signalling them as “low-class.” Morrissette‟s film links social class to morality, with characters‟ bad deeds becoming inseparable from “bad taste.”595 In particular, the choice of music by Bad Company can be literally taken to suggest that Pat and Mac are bad company,596 and are morally corrupt because of their love of Rock music.
Contrasting with the popular music selections are the presence of two recognizable pieces of classical music by Ludwig Van Beethoven, his „Seventh Symphony‟ and „Moonlight Sonata.‟ Classical music in Scotland, PA is associated with “good taste” and moral character, and as such is heard in scenes involving Norm Duncan, and during Mac‟s one “good” deed in the film. In Morrissette‟s film, Norm Duncan „bears an acute sense of his social position, and is figured, both by others and himself, as somehow “above” the rest of Scotland.‟597 An example of this can be seen early in the film where Norm is attending his son Donald‟s football game. As he converses with a local woman, who is working a concession stand, she greets him with: „Come down to visit the little people?‟ Her comment suggests that Norm‟s place as a rank above the rest of Scotland‟s “working-class” residents. The choice to associate Norm with classical music is therefore intended as a way to set Norm apart from others in Scotland, who prefer to listen to Rock music. Connecting Norm with classical music is also used to characterise him as both hard working and moral. Beethoven‟s „Moonlight Sonata,‟ is heard playing softly during Norm‟s wake. As the Sonata plays, the camera focuses on a photo of
594 Eric C. Brown, “Shakespeare, Class, and Scotland, PA,” Literature/Film Quarterly 34.2 (2006): 149. 595 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 145. 596 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 142. 597 Brown, “Shakespeare, Class, and Scotland, PA,” 150.
170 Norm dressed in his “Duncan‟s” restaurant uniform. This scene is a filmic moment where a relationship is established between the “fine art” of classical music and ideas of morality and the value of hard work. The other piece of classical music in the film, the „Seventh Symphony‟ is heard during a close-up shot of Norm‟s reserved parking space, a reward for Norm‟s hard work, and also a symbol of how Norm is set apart from those who work for him.
Other filmed adaptations of Macbeth have also set Duncan apart from others by symbolically representing his moral character. A prominent feature of Trevor Nunn‟s “stripped down” production of Macbeth (1976/1977)598 is the way in which a character‟s moral character is signalled through their costume.599 In Nunn‟s stark and bare staged production Duncan‟s superiority is symbolically represented by his appearance. Actor Griffith Jones‟ soft-spoken delivery of Duncan‟s lines as well as his long white hair and beard, and white robes reminiscent of a priest‟s clothing (complete with crucifix hanging from his neck) convey “saintliness.” This characterisation is highlighted by several critics such as Michael Rosenberg, who refers to Griffith Jones‟ appearance as „saintly Duncan.‟600 Michael Mullin further describes Jones‟ performance of Duncan as the „saintly, fragile Duncan seemed every inch a Christian King.‟601 Duncan‟s ethereal and holy appearance is juxtaposed with actor Ian McKellen‟s menacing Macbeth, whose slicked back hair and a long leather trench coat evokes images of German Gestapo agents during World War Two.602 Duncan‟s appearance is used by Nunn to express the “divine right” of Duncan‟s rule, and Macbeth‟s murder of Duncan is therefore presented as an unholy act. Orson Welles handles the realisation of Duncan‟s character in a similar fashion. The focus of Welles‟ film adaptation of Macbeth (1948) is predominantly on the figure of Macbeth, played by Welles himself. In his analysis of Welles‟ Macbeth, J. Lawrence Guntner highlights the film‟s preoccupation with centralising the figure of Macbeth. Guntner notes that the film
598 Originally performed on stage by The Royal Shakespeare Company in 1976/1977 and then filmed for television in 1979. A Performance of Macbeth, Dir. Phillip Carson, Royal Shakespeare Company/Umbrella Entertainment, DVD, UK, 2005. 599 I shall again refer to the symbolic use of costumes in Nunn‟s production of Macbeth, in particular that of Ian McKellen, in my analysis of the costume design in Scotland, PA. 600 Marvin Rosenberg, “Trevor Nunn‟s Macbeth,” Shakespeare Quarterly 28.2 Spring (1977): 195. 601 Michael Mullin, “Stage and Screen: The Trevor Nunn Macbeth,” Shakespeare Quarterly 38.3 Autumn (1987): 355. 602 The symbolic nature of clothing in Nunn‟s production is seen in the costumes of other characters. The colour of a character‟s costume signals a character‟s moral status, for example the colour white signals a character‟s moral purity. Malcolm‟s innocence in his father‟s murder and his rightful role as King of Scotland is symbolised by the white woollen cable-knit sweater he wears throughout. Lady Macduff also wears white. Lady Macbeth‟s dark dress is obviously intended to contrast with Lady McDuff‟s white dress.
171 „contains some five hundred shots, and the majority focus directly on Welles as Macbeth or include him in the mise-en-scène.‟603 In order to focus his film on Macbeth several other characters are either sidelined, including Duncan, or are completely absent, such as Ross. Duncan‟s appearance is extremely brief but is importantly pre- empted by a scene of juxtaposition, where the Holy Father (a character of Welles invention) gives mass following the execution of Macdonald. Michael Anderegg argues that “goodness” in Welles‟ film is „almost completely externalized in codes and rule of behaviour embodied in such figures as the Holy Father.‟604 Duncan‟s appearance directly after the prayer hints at his “goodness” and the divine nature of his rule. As in Billy Morrissette‟s initial characterisation of Duncan in Scotland, PA as morally superior through music, Trevor Nunn and Orson Welles‟ adaptations realise Duncan as equally superior, “saintly” and “good” through costume and imagery. However, there is no supporting evidence for him to be considered so in Shakespeare‟s text. Such characterisations are therefore merely each director‟s interpretation of the play. Not all directors‟ approach the character of Duncan in the same way. For example, Roman Polanski‟s adaptation of Macbeth handles the issue of Duncan‟s rule and Macbeth‟s usurping power quite differently. Polanski‟s film privileges the character of Ross, who is both „the „maker‟ and unmaker‟ of kings,‟605 and as such the film presents kings as made rather than being divinely appointed. In Geoffrey Wright‟s recent adaptation of Macbeth (2006), Gary Sweet‟s Duncan is characterised as both an un-likeable and morally corrupt gangster. His betrayal by Macbeth (portrayed by actor Sam Worthington) is presented as just another step in the cycle of violence in the “gangland wars,” the modern day setting of the film. In Scotland, PA Morrissette also questions Duncan‟s superiority to a degree in order to strengthen his audiences‟ sympathies with Pat and Mac.
In Scotland, PA the „Seventh Symphony‟ also accompanies Mac‟s only virtuous deed in the film. Director Morrissette translates the Captain‟s reports of Macbeth‟s valour and victory in battle against Macdonald (I, ii, 7-42) into Mac‟s one good deed in the film. Scotland, PA is one of the few major film adaptations of Macbeth to visually represent Macbeth‟s success against Macdonald. Trevor Nunn‟s production remains faithful to Shakespeare‟s play-text and has a messenger describe Macbeth‟s actions in the battle.
603 J. Lawrence Guntner, “Hamlet, Macbeth and King Lear on film,” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film, Russell Jackson, ed (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000): 124. 604 Michael Anderegg, Orson Welles, Shakespeare, and popular culture (New York: Columbia University Press, 1999): 89. 605 Guntner, 128.
172 Surprisingly Orson Welles‟ adaptation does not visually translate Macbeth‟s valiant actions in battle. While the focus of Welles‟ film is on Macbeth, his valour and bravery in battle does not appear on screen. Only Roman Polanski‟s film shows to some extent a scene depicting the fight between Macbeth and Macdonald. The sounds of battle heard in the opening title sequence cuts to images of bodies laying on the battlefield and the execution of Macdonald‟s soldiers who have been captured. Like his men, Macdonald has been captured and chained up and is later executed on screen.606 In Scotland, PA Mac‟s good deed occurs when he leaps over the front counter at “Duncan‟s” and deals with the obnoxious customers who have started a food fight, implicitly connecting classical music to a moment of honourable and moral action.607 The moment is set apart not only by the presence of classical music, but also through the use of slow-motion technique, which forces the audience to focus on Mac‟s “good” actions. The relationship between classical music, morality and the value of hard work, represented in the film through the character of Norm, is also problematic given Norm‟s less than virtuous character on occasions during the film. While Norm Duncan is seen by some characters as moral beacon for the community of Scotland and a class above the rest of the town, he is also characterised as an ambitiously greedy workaholic. Norm hardly spends any time with his family, and instead works such long hours at his restaurant that he falls asleep in his office. The little time he does spend with his family usually involves coercing them into helping him out with his business, such as after Donald‟s football game. Rather than a moment of family bonding, the scene instead highlights the Duncan family‟s estrangement and disconnection. Malcolm heckles his brother‟s team with the taunt: „Scotland, sucks!,‟ and his interaction with his father is strained and their conversation leads to an argument. Instead of respecting his sons, Norm orders them about. Following the football game, Donald is made to service tables still wearing his football uniform, while Malcolm helps out in the back of the restaurant cooking food. Family is only important to Norm in terms of making sure his business runs profitably and smoothly, and also stays in Duncan family hands. The latter is most poignantly illustrated when Norm nepotistically promotes his uninterested son Malcolm to head manager of “Duncan‟s.” Despite informing on corrupt manager Douglas (who is revealed to be embezzling money from the business), Mac is passed over by Norm for a
606 Roman Polanski translates Malcolm‟s speech about his men‟s report of Macdonald‟s execution (I, iv, 2-11) into a scene where Malcolm and Duncan actually witness the event. 607 Mac also informs Norm of Douglas‟ embezzling money from the business. The film does not present this as a good deed on Mac‟s part, but as Mac taking advantage of a drunken Banko (who actually saw Douglas and told Mac about it) in order to further his position.
173 decent promotion, and is simply appointed assistant manager. Norm‟s attitude and actions towards Mac lead the audience‟s sympathies to identify with Mac.608
Elizabeth Deitchman suggests that the connection between social class and morality in Scotland, PA is an example of how the film vilifies the characters Pat and Mac.609 However, as I have argued, director Morrissette also maligns both McDuff and Norm, the film‟s examples of “high-class” and moral behaviour. Rather than demonising the McBeths in his film, Morrissette characterises Pat and Mac as “underdogs” attempting to escape their “low-class” position in life. Pat explains to Mac their need to take extreme measures to improve their life situation as: „We‟re not bad people, Mac. We‟re just underachievers that have to make up for lost time.‟ Through the construction of the McBeths as “not bad people” Morrissette attempts to stir sympathy in the audience for the hapless couple, a factor which is considerably helped through his edits to Shakespeare‟s play-text. The McBeths are relieved of most of their responsibility for Norm Duncan‟s death. Although they plan the murder of Norm, when it comes down to the event Mac tells his wife that he is unable to go through with it. Norm‟s eventual death is instead presented as accidental, achieved when Mac unintentionally knocks Norm into the fryer. The horrific murder of Macduff‟s family is also noticeably absent from Scotland, PA. 610 Rather than vilifying the McBeths, Morrissette instead chooses to characterise them as a „good time and a partying couple who we kind of root for a little bit.‟611 Along with edits to Shakespeare‟s play-text, the audience‟s sympathies are significantly provoked in Scotland, PA through the shift of the film‟s focus upon Pat McBeth. This realignment may be in part due to the fact that Morrissette was married to actress Maura Tierney, who portrays Pat McBeth in Scotland, PA, at the time of filming.612 Pat is presented as a somewhat sympathetic character, and the film privileges her tragedy over her husband‟s. Maura Tierney‟s performance as Pat is signalled out by
608 Courtney Lehmann, “Out Damned Scot: dislocating Macbeth in transnational film and media culture,” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD, Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt, eds (London; New York: Routledge, 2003): 245. 609 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 140. 610 Their presence only remains in an anecdote by Morrissette on the DVD commentary, in which he reveals he originally intended for McDuff‟s children to be kidnapped by Mac, but not harmed. 611 Morrissette quoted in “Behind the Lens: Scotland, PA,” New York Screenwriter. 612 Morrissette reveals in his DVD commentary that he initially envisioned Pat being played by someone else. However, as he wrote the screenplay Tierney‟s influence on the character of Pat became apparent. Several phrases which Maura Tierney said in real life were appropriated by Morrissette and became Pat‟s dialogue in the film.
174 several critics and reviewers as the focus of Scotland, PA.613 Morrissette elaborates on Pat‟s appeal to the audience, and describes the difference between Pat and Mac as:
she‟s the star, the one who‟s fun and who has so many awful things to say, and he‟s kind of the schlub, a nice enough guy, even a good guy, but who‟s easily led.614
Pat‟s driving ambition and superior attitude to her surroundings set her apart from the other residents of Scotland, and more significantly her husband. At the beginning of the film Pat is presented as the controlling force in her marriage, an aspect that is translated from Shakespeare‟s Macbeth. Derek Cohen notes that in Macbeth Lady Macbeth‟s treatment of her husband parallels the way Duncan also treats him: „To her, as to Duncan, Macbeth is an instrument of conquest of power.‟615 Lady Macbeth uses her husband as a proxy for her desire for control and power. From the moment she receives Macbeth‟s letter to his murder of Duncan, Lady Macbeth influences and guides him, and their relationship is strengthened through this exchange. George Lyman Kittredge describes their relationship as the „perfect union of complementary natures, each supplying those qualities the other lacks.‟616 Lady Macbeth‟s strong will and charm coaxes Macbeth from his gentle and kindly temperament and honourable yet unfulfilled ambition into action. However, when Macbeth starts acting on his own without her knowledge, unable and unwilling to share his power and trust with others, the couple become increasingly estranged. The result is her increasing marginalisation both as a wife and as a member of a couple with power and influence. In Scotland, PA Pat and Mac‟s relationship is defined by the way in which Pat manipulates her husband, using Mac as a means to fulfil her desire to escape her miserable “low-class” life. Pat is smarter, more ambitious and conniving than Mac, who, as Marguerite Rippy quips, is far too “syrupy sweet” and “slouchy” for the audience to transfer allegiance from Pat.617 Pat persuades Mac to move beyond his lacklustre, underachiever position as assistant manager of “Duncan‟s,” and her intellect, charisma, and determination to succeed draw the audience‟s appeal. Pat‟s focus and driving ambition to escape her dull “small town” life and her success at moving up from “low-class” position is celebrated in what
613 Malanowski, “Macbeth, Droll and Deep Fried,” and also Marguerite Rippy, “A Fast-Food Shakespeare,” Chronicle of Higher Education 48.32 19 April (2002): B16. 614 Malanowski, “„Macbeth,‟ Droll and Deep Fried.” 615 Derek Cohen, Shakespeare‟s Culture of Violence (New York: St Martin‟s Press, 1993): 132. 616 William Shakespeare, Macbeth, George Lyman Kittredge, ed (Boston: Ginn and Co., 1939): xv. 617 Rippy, “A Fast-Food Shakespeare.”
175 Courtney Lehmann terms as „her one moment of glory,‟618 a montage accompanied by the First Class song „Beach Baby.‟619 The most striking of the images seen in the montage is of Pat floating in a pool, totally content in her surroundings, having arrived in modest “middle-class” prosperity. However, the song is also an ironic marker of the McBeth‟s upward mobility. Pat‟s subsequent fall from her new found place in “middle- class” society stirs empathy within the audience and her demise becomes far more tragic than her husband‟s.620 Courtney Lehmann connects Pat‟s tragedy to the burgeoning idea of feminism in the 1960s and 1970s that is hinted at in the film:
She is quite clearly the brains in the operation but, like other women in the 1970s who were contemplating their autonomy for the first time, she still requires a man to execute - and consequently, profit from - her plans.621
While Pat may be in control, telling Mac what to do and nurturing his ambition, she still requires his help to carry out her plan. She indirectly profits from their new found success, as illustrated in the „Beach Baby‟ montage; however, the sign on the restaurant says “McBeth‟s” and not “Pat‟s.” Pat‟s hampered ambitions are poignantly illustrated in a scene late in the film where Pat applies salve to her burn as she stares into a mirror. Earlier in the film when Norm accidentally falls into the fryer, a drop of oil splashes up onto Pat‟s hand, burning her. This burn becomes a signal of her increasing marginalisation and loss of control and influence over Mac. As the camera pans up in the late scene it reveals a photo of Jacqueline Kennedy, which Pat has affixed to the mirror. Deitchman defines Jacqueline Kennedy as „the epitome of taste and class for Pat‟s generation of women.‟622 Like Jacqueline Kennedy, Pat is also presented as a woman of influence behind a man with power. This scene also marks the contrast between the two women; Pat‟s dishevelled and immature appearance is juxtaposed with Jacqueline Kennedy‟s elegance and class. Unlike Mrs Kennedy, Pat‟s influence and control over her husband gives way to her increased liminal status in their relationship. Pat‟s relegation of her social role to “spectator” in Mac‟s life comes to a head with Mac‟s reassurance to his wife: „Don‟t worry; I‟m going to take care of everything. I‟m
618 Lehmann, “Out Damned Scot,” 246. 619 Eric C. Brown astutely argues that „the band name provides an interpretative model for reading the film as a whole.‟ Brown, “Shakespeare, Class, and Scotland, PA,” 149. At its core, Morrissette‟s Scotland, PA translates the tragic ambitions of Macbeth into the anxieties over class and social mobility in suburban America. 620 Rippy, “A Fast-Food Shakespeare.” 621 Lehmann, “Out Damned Scot,” 246. 622 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 145.
176 going to take care of you.‟ Billy Morrissette describes the impact of the scene as Pat‟s worst nightmare, because she had always taken care of everything, and was the one in charge.623 Pat‟s tragedy is thus firmly connected to the loss of control in her life. When she takes her own life, she leaves the film with an action that reasserts the control over her own life. Her look of happiness and relief signals that she has finally escaped the limitations her “low-class” life has imposed on her, but it comes at the high cost of her life.
In Scotland, PA director Billy Morrissette both engages an audience that already has an understanding of Macbeth and also distances those who have detailed prior knowledge of the play. Scotland, PA is therefore a meditation on the split reception of Shakespeare on film. Morrissette approaches the production with some reverence for the source material. Promotional posters for the film contain both images of the film‟s main characters, such as Pat McBeth and Lieutenant McDuff, and also specific quotations from Shakespeare‟s text, which correspond with each character‟s equivalent in Macbeth.624 However, Morrissette also distances himself from the source material and notes that he didn‟t want to write a film only for people who knew the play.625 He suggests instead that his approach in adapting Macbeth for the screen was based on a „midground that [doesn‟t] shove Shakespeare in people‟s faces.‟626 Hoefer Jr. astutely argues that Morrissette‟s approach suggests the notion that Macbeth is „no less common a cultural experience than popular music, regrettable hair styles, and bad jobs in food service.‟627 Shakespeare is presented as just another reference, along with music, and popular culture, which the audience is presented with and must have a little understanding of in order to fully appreciate Morrissette‟s film. Hoefer Jr. further suggests that to understand the film the audience must have some understanding of the cultural contexts of the film, and notes that „the act of cultural retrospection is crucial: the transformation of the elements of the play…depend on specific textual knowledge as well as pop culture awareness.‟628 Scotland, PA is full of Shakespearean references and
623 Morrissette, “Director‟s Commentary.” 624 The promotional posters also contain the catch line: „Shakespeare, the way it outta be.‟ The presence of this statement alongside quotations from the play illustrates Morrissette‟s split reception in engaging with Shakespeare. He both treats the source material with reverence, but also asserts that his approach in adapting Shakespeare is just as valid (if not more) than other interpretations. 625 “Behind the Lens: Scotland, PA,” New York Screenwriter. 626 Malanowski, “Macbeth, Droll and Deep Fried.” 627 Hoefer Jr., 154. 628 Hoefer Jr., 157.
177 clever allusions to contemporary culture that make light of the cross cultural mélange.629 Understanding the references in the film is therefore critical to understanding the comedy of the film. The opening scene is a poignant example of how the humour in Scotland, PA comes from the juxtaposition between “high-class” Shakespeare and “low- class” popular culture. The three hippies (the witches from Macbeth) sit on a Ferris wheel eating fast food chicken, when one drops the bucket containing their meal:
Hippie No. 3 The fowl was foul
Hippie No. 1 And the fair was fair
Hippie No. 3 Fowl‟s fair
Hippie No. 2 The fair‟s fowl
Hippie No. 3 My ass hurts
Hippie No. 2 I don‟t think that one works Shh! She‟s having a spell
Hippie No. 3 Oh god, so dramatic.
Their exchange is a parody of the witches‟ lines in the opening scene of Macbeth: „Fair is foul, and foul is fair‟ (I, i, 10). The humour of the scene comes from the audience‟s understanding this allusion, as well as the wordplay that makes light of the references to the source material for the film, such as the witches of Macbeth („spell‟) and to
629 J.J. Hermes, “Waxing Shakespearean with Billy Morrissette: An interview with the director of Scotland, PA,” The Leader, April 24 2002, 10 Aug, 2004
178 Shakespeare‟s plays („dramatic‟). A later example of how the film plays with references to Macbeth in order to poke fun at the source material can be seen in the motivational tape McDuff plays while driving in the car. A voice drones on that „Tomorrow is not today‟ a parody of Macbeth‟s notable „Tomorrow, and tomorrow, and tomorrow‟ (V, v, 19-27) speech. The humour of this line is found both in recognising the reference to the play-text but also in the irony that such a numbing speech about the pointlessness of life is used by Lieutenant McDuff to motivate himself into action.
As well as allusions to Shakespeare, the mise-en-scène of Scotland, PA is laden with consumer fads and popular culture such as muscle cars, shag carpeting, macramé, fondue and Yahtzee from America of the 1970s. These references are used to help situate the viewer in the time period in which the film is set. In Scotland, PA cars are not only used in the production design to exemplify American culture of the 1970s, but are also presented as status symbols. Almost everyone except Norm drives a Camero, and so cars become symbols of economic differences, as well as differences in taste. Billy Morrissette notes on the film‟s DVD commentary that Lieutenant McDuff drives a Japanese model of car.630 This detail was intended as a way to further illustrate McDuff‟s difference from Pat and Mac and his superior class and taste, but was removed from the film during editing. As well as references to vehicles of the period, the production design in Scotland, PA contains allusions and clips from various „70s Americana classic‟631 television shows. Director Morrissette originally envisioned a film packed full of references to detective shows of the 1970s.632 The final film references just Columbo (1971) and McCloud (1970). Several reviewers have noted the similarity between Christopher Walken‟s performance as McDuff and Peter Falk‟s role as Columbo.633 The film‟s opening sequence also uses a scene from McCloud. The clip‟s inclusion is another way in which the world of Scotland, PA is situated in the 1970s, and also assumes the audience‟s familiarity with both the show, and the „recurrences of the prefixes “Mc” and “Mac” in the surnames of the play‟s character‟s.‟634 At the end of each episode of Columbo and McCloud, the detectives “always get their man,” and therefore assuming an audience‟s knowledge of the shows
630Morrissette, “Director‟s Commentary.” 631 Rippy, “A Fast-Food Shakespeare.” 632 Morrissette, “Director‟s Commentary.” 633 Charles Taylor calls Walken‟s performance „Columbo-like‟ (Taylor, “Scotland, PA”) while Sean Axemaker observes that „Walken plays the garrulous detective like an eccentric small-town Columbo.‟ Sean Axmaker, “Scotland, PA, has more than a wee bit of intelligence,” Seattle Post-Intelligencer Feb 22 2002, 6 Aug 2004
179 allows Morrissette to foreshadow Lieutenant McDuff‟s “victory” over Mac at the end of the film.
As with Julie Taymor‟s film Titus, costumes in Scotland, PA are significant as they define characters visually, and along with popular culture references are as a marker of the time period the film is set. Costume designer David Robinson based various characters‟ costumes on actual fashion designs from the 1960s and 1970s. Thus the costumes are another example of the production design which helps the audience situate themselves in the American world of the 1970s. Costuming in Scotland, PA also „proves iconic throughout.‟635 An example in the film is the images of nature on both McDuff and Pat McBeth‟s clothing. These images are visual translation of imagery present in Shakespeare‟s play-text. In particular, the dress Pat wears to the press conference has a branch design which foreshadows the return of Birnam wood to Dunsinane, one of the markers of Macbeth‟s imminent demise. As well as visually translating the text, costuming is used to define characters, and also as a visual marker of the change of status of various characters. The way in which clothing is used as a means to define character and status in Scotland, PA is an aspect that is translated from Macbeth. In the long tradition of symbolic interpretation and exposition of Shakespeare‟s work, a great deal has been written on the significance of imagery in Macbeth. Of particular importance is the work of Caroline Spurgeon, and Wolfgang Clemen.636 Spurgeon, in particular, has shown that the repeated image of “ill-fitting garments” is integral in our understanding of Macbeth.637 Images of clothing are constantly recurring symbols used to signal Macbeth‟s unnatural and undeserved appropriation of honours and titles. The idea that Macbeth‟s new honours „sit ill upon him, like a loose and badly fitting garment, belonging to someone else,‟638 is first expressed by Macbeth himself, in his response to noblemen Ross and Angus‟s addressing him as Thane of Cawdor:
The Thane of Cawdor lives. Why do you dress me In borrowed robes? (I, iii,106-7)
635 Brown, “Shakespeare, Class, and Scotland, PA,” 151. 636 Wolfgang Clemen, The Development of Shakespeare's Imagery, 2nd edition (London: Metheun, 1977). 637 Caroline Spurgeon, Shakespeare‟s Imagery and What It Tells Us (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1935): especially 324-327. 638 Spurgeon, Shakespeare‟s Imagery, 325.
180 The use of the word „borrowed‟ suggests that although Macdonwald, previous Thane of Cawdor, committed treason (an offence punishable by death at the time of James I), Macbeth is uncomfortable with being addressed by someone else‟s title, especially since the three witches predicted these very honours would be bestowed upon him. The image that Macbeth‟s new status as king is unnatural and undeserved is later drawn upon when the Scottish Lords advance upon Dunsinane in order to capture the merciless and treacherous Macbeth. One nobleman, Caithness, remarks of Macbeth that:
He cannot buckle his distempered cause Within the belt of rule. (V, ii, 15-16)
Macbeth is thus characterised as an undeserved ruler, through the image of a man who is vainly trying to fasten a large garment upon him with a belt that is much too small. Several productions of Macbeth have used costume as a way to signal the imagery used to symbolise Macbeth acting in a role that is “too big” for him. Of particular note is the now legendary Royal Shakespeare Company stage adaptation of Macbeth directed by Trevor Nunn and starring Ian McKellen and Judi Dench. During the production McKellen is clearly wearing a coat that is much too big. Images of Ian McKellen‟s costume for the production can be found at McKellen‟s official website.639 Another example of how analogy comprising of imagery of clothing is used to contrast between Macbeth‟s deserved rights and his present position as King, is brought forward by Angus:
Now does he feel his title Hang loose about him, like a giant‟s robe Upon a dwarfish thief. (V, ii, 20-22)
The image invoked by the word „thief‟ helps to demonise Macbeth and highlight his unrightful rule of Scotland, the title which was “stolen” from Duncan. Macbeth has ruthlessly captured power through treacherous means. Because of this his nature is
639 “Macbeth,” Sir Ian McKellen Official Home Page Mar 2008, 6 Mar 2008
181 viewed not as noble or honourable, but as a vile, cruelly ambitious and unworthy of his title.
In Scotland, PA Billy Morrissette realigns the focus of Shakespeare‟s Macbeth from Mac towards the character Pat McBeth. Pat is the film‟s most clear example of how a character is both defined and their status is visually signified through their costumes. Charles Taylor notes the connection between the change in Pat‟s success and class and the appearance of her costumes:
This being the early „70s, Pat goes around in tailored peasant blouses and flared jeans…And after she puts her scheme to work…and she and Mac wind up in the chips, she switches to Pucci prints and matching headbands.640
Once they have taken over “Duncan‟s” restaurant, both Pat and Mac‟s wardrobe changes from the “working-class” “uniform” of blue jeans and t-shirts emblazoned with the names of Rock bands, to the high end fashion of designer dresses, shirts and suits. The change in certain aspects of the McBeths‟ taste is further highlighted in the change of their name plaque on their house. Before Norm‟s death the sign that adorned their trailer park home simply reads „Pat and Mac.‟ The shortening of their names, as well as the type of housing indicates their “low-class” position. This is contrasted with those who are a class above them, such as McDuff, Malcolm, and Donald, who are always referred to throughout the film by their full names. Once the McBeths take ownership of “Duncan‟s” restaurant, the sign on their new house changes to read „The McBeth‟s.‟ The more formal signage suggests that a change in class as well as a change in personal taste comes with the alteration in their success. The new house plaque parallels the change in name of “Duncan‟s” restaurant to “McBeths‟” and as Deitchman notes, the change becomes „a more formal statement of ownership.‟641 The McBeths‟ clothing is a stark contrast with their other “unrefined” tastes, which remain essentially the same despite their change in status. Pat‟s use of vulgar language and numerous expletives remains unchanged throughout the film. Furthermore, despite their new found wealth and status they do not move to a bigger and better house (such as that belonging to Norm Duncan); they are content to simply purchase an above-ground swimming pool,
640 Taylor, “Scotland, PA.” 641 Deitchman, “White Trash Shakespeare,” 144.
182 complete with “tacky” plastic lawn furniture. The static nature of these coarse tastes signals the McBeths‟ inability to escape the confines of their “low-class” station in life.
In his film Scotland, PA director Billy Morrissette borrows an approximation of the plot from Macbeth and reworks the tragedy into a black comedy set in suburban America of the 1970s. In Morrissette‟s film, Shakespeare is presented as just another intertextual reference and along with popular culture and music conveys ideas about of ambition, greed and the limitations of class in suburban America. Much of the humour in Scotland, PA is derived from the collision of these numerous and disparate references. References to popular culture from the 1970s, along with a soundtrack primarily composed of musical choices from the era situate the audience in the “small town” American world of Scotland, PA. More importantly these citations define a character‟s taste, and subsequently both their moral nature and status in the community of Scotland. Pat and Mac McBeth are defined as much by what they listen to as what they wear. Through edits to the plot and characters from Macbeth, as well as costume and musical choices, Morrissette‟s film stirs the audience‟s sympathies for Pat and Mac. The audience is in particular encouraged to support Pat McBeth‟s ambitious desire to escape the confines of her “low-class” status in suburban Scotland. While championed because of their “underdog” status, Morrissette‟s film also suggests that Pat and Mac‟s rise to modest prosperity is fundamentally flawed as they are unable to escape their own “bad taste.” Scotland, PA quite conservatively demonstrates that class change is impossible without a change in personal taste. Only those of a certain existing high status in society, such as Lieutenant McDuff, are allowed to profit from their ruthless ambition.
183
Conclusion
There will never be too many versions of any of the Shakespeare plays because each artist brings his or her own vision to the script. The more you see these plays in all their varied forms, the deeper and richer they become. It‟s often not about the story at all, but all about how you tell it.‟
- Julie Taymor, 100 Shakespeare Films: BFI Screen Guides (2007).
In the introduction to his recently released filmography of Shakespeare on film 100 Shakespeare Films (2007),642 Daniel Rosenthal traces the history of Shakespeare on screen. What is of particular interest in Rosenthal‟s book is the focus on recent film adaptation of Shakespeare‟s work. This aptly signifies the increased interest in and critical study of these films. Each of the five films, which form the basis for my critical analysis in this dissertation, fall into what Rosenthal terms as the seventh age of cinematic Shakespeare, „the genre decade.‟643 Rosenthal is particularly critical of this age and emphasises the lack of Shakespeare‟s “language” in the majority of these films. He sees this as symptomatic of both poor box-office figures and a “dumbed down” 21st century culture. However, as I have shown in this dissertation there are many other ways a director can convey the power and poetry of Shakespeare‟s language. Some recent publications which have focused predominantly on the “seventh age” of Shakespeare on film include Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-first Century (2006), New Wave Shakespeare on Film (2007), and Shakespeare on Film: Such Things as Dreams are Made of (2007).644 These critical studies embrace both the variety of approaches recent directors‟ have taken when staging Shakespeare on screen, and how „citationally rich‟645 their films are. Sarah Mayo notes of mainstream Shakespeare film that it occupies both a complex and precarious space at the intersection of high and
642 Daniel Rosenthal, 100 Shakespeare Films: BFI Screen Guides (London: British Film Institute, 2007). 643 Rosenthal, xxi-xxii. 644 Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-First Century, Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray, eds (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006), New Wave Shakespeare on Film (2007), and Caroline Jess-Cooke, Shakespeare on Film: Such Things as Dreams are Made of (London; New York: Wallflower Press, 2007). 645 Thomas Cartelli and Katherine Rowe, New Wave Shakespeare on Film (Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007): 2.
185 popular culture.646 What this thesis has demonstrated is precisely how important the analysis of popular culture surrounding each film‟s production is in understanding a director‟s cinematic interpretation of Shakespeare‟s plays.
What I have proposed in this dissertation is the analysis of recent Shakespeare on film in light of cultural and temporal contexts. Just as Shakespeare‟s plays reflect early modern culture and history, I have shown the importance of examining millennial film adaptations of Shakespeare in relation to a twenty-first century historical and cultural context. The originality of my approach to the chosen texts has been to focus primarily on the importance of popular culture and especially music in the analysis of millennial Shakespeare on screen. Shakespearean films are built out of and draw upon prior texts, genres and discourses. I have shown how filmic Shakespeare is influenced by a variety of elements involved in film production and marketing. An audience‟s understanding in these films is manipulated by a range of factors including a director‟s cinematic technique, an actor‟s performance, a film‟s production design and costuming, as well as the musical score and soundtrack. Each of the five film adaptations I have analysed uses these elements in a variety of ways and to differing degrees in order to reflect modern concerns and anxieties. In some cases these references are instrumental in understanding a director‟s cinematic interpretation of Shakespeare. In the chapter on Scotland, PA I have shown that the humour of the film is linked to the audience‟s recognition of the various references to popular culture and Shakespeare, as well as their negotiation of the space between “low” and “high” culture. Similarly in Gil Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You references to Shakespeare are “played for laughs.” Both films treat Shakespeare as „available but not privileged forms, part of a field of received cultural matter free for appropriation or recycling.‟647 An audience‟s understanding of the popular culture associated with a film‟s production design is connected to their enjoyment of the film. Furthermore, this understanding is significant to their comprehension of the themes a director chooses to convey in each cinematic interpretation of Shakespeare‟s plays. In the chapter on 10 Things, I have shown how the film is driven by the conventions of “teen” comedy. Aesthetic links to John Hughes‟ “teen” films of the 1980s both convey ideas about how teenage identity is formed, and critique the role of ineffectual parental figures in this process. Likewise in his adaptation of Hamlet, the formation of identity and dysfunctional family relationships are themes
646 Mayo, 295-296. 647 Cartelli and Rowe, 3.
186 director Michael Almereyda approaches through citations to popular culture which deal with similar ideas, such as the films East of Eden and Romeo + Juliet.
Along with references to popular culture, music is also an effective channel by which a director conveys a cinematic interpretation of Shakespeare‟s plays. A common trait observable in the films analysed in this dissertation is how music is used effectively to evoke certain moods, reflect the state of mind of characters, and to set time and place. Billy Morrissette‟s musical choices in Scotland, PA both situate the audience in the suburban 1970‟s American world and also define a character‟s taste and therefore class. What a character listens to in Scotland, PA is an important tool which influences how an audience interprets their nature and moral status. Pat and Mac‟s love of Rock music is used by Morrissette to signal the couple‟s simple tastes and “low-class” status in Scotland society. Composer Elliot Goldenthal takes a similar approach in his musical score for Julie Taymor‟s Titus. Goldenthal uses different musical styles to signal character to the audience, and plays with associations the audience makes because of what they hear. Each character in Titus is given a specific “sound” when appearing on screen. For example Chiron and Demetrius are associated with hectic loud Rock music. This music becomes symbolic of their aggressive violent brutality. Along with character, larger themes a director has chosen to highlight in each film adaptation of Shakespeare‟s plays are also conveyed through musical score and soundtrack. Throughout this dissertation I have provided several examples of how music functions in a symbolic manner. In the chapter on Michael Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream music is the main method by which he conveys his reinterpretation of Shakespeare‟s text as a tragic love story between Bottom and Titania. Both opera and a classically inspired music score express Bottom‟s tragedy and empathy to the audience. In Almereyda‟s Hamlet, Carter Burwell‟s repetitive and minimalist musical score also functions in a thematic manner, and signals the repression and surveillance of the corrupt urban world that surround Hamlet and Ophelia. Furthermore, the use of an excerpt of the song „All Along the Watchtower‟ aptly conveys themes of mortality and the worth of human life, issues with which Hamlet struggles with throughout the film. Ideas of humanity and human nature are also conveyed in Goldenthal‟s score for Titus. Goldenthal‟s music both emphasises the heterogeneous nature of the film, and is used to convey ideas of pity and mercy. These themes are instrumental in an audience‟s interpretation of the violent world which Taymor presents, and the redemption her film offers in its open-ended conclusion.
187
Sound and music have always been considered equally important components of films paradoxically ever since the „silent‟ era,648 yet soundtracks to cinematic Shakespearean adaptations have received comparatively little attention. There are a few recent analyses that focus predominantly on music in Shakespeare film. A notable exception is Julie Sanders book, Shakespeare and Music: Afterlives and Borrowings (2007). Sander‟s book is a study of the diverse range of musical responses to Shakespeare that have taken place from the seventeenth century onwards.649 Sander‟s research is of particular interest as her book devotes considerable attention to contemporary music and popular culture in Shakespeare on film. Her analysis of music in Shakespeare films mentions several films that are the focus of this dissertation: Michael Hoffman‟s William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream, Gil Junger‟s 10 Things, and Julie Taymor‟s Titus. My hope is that along with Sander‟s book, this dissertation will encourage the further exploration and analysis of music in cinematic Shakespeare.
While devices such as music and citations to popular culture can in some cases be important tools in understanding a director‟s cinematic approach to Shakespeare, they do not always successfully convey a director‟s intentions. This thesis has noted several examples where such references deviate from a director‟s intended “reading” of the play the film adapts. In Junger‟s 10 Things I Hate About You the culture and politics surrounding the Riot Grrl movement do not find a place in the film, and notably the film‟s soundtrack contains no Riot Grrl artists. The tenuous citations to Riot Grrl reveal much more about the concessions to marketing that dominate the film‟s production design, than they do anything about the character or “rebellion” of Kat Stratford. Another noteworthy case is found in Taymor‟s Titus. One of the most prominent examples of the citation of popular culture put forward in this dissertation is the influence actors‟ previous roles (and in cases celebrity) can have on their performances. Thomas Cartelli and Katherine Rowe refer to this as „Extra-textual referentiality.‟650 These previous roles are influential in how an audience interprets the characters these actors portray in each of these Shakespearean adaptations. In the chapter on Almereyda‟s Hamlet I have shown how Ethan Hawke‟s “Generation X” persona imbues his portrayal of Hamlet with apathy and angst. Hawke‟s interpretation of Hamlet is one
648 For more on the importance of music in the silent era of cinema see Altman. 649 Sander‟s work explores the many ways in which Shakespeare‟s plays and poems have been reworked by musical composers. Her book features work on such diverse musical styles as opera, ballet, classical symphony, Broadway musicals, Jazz, film scores and contemporary soundtracks. 650 Cartelli and Rowe, 2.
188 of the main examples of how Almereyda‟s adaptation of Hamlet focuses on generational conflicts. Allusions to an actor‟s intertext can also hinder a director‟s intentions. In Taymor‟s Titus Anthony Hopkins‟ intertext bears strong influence over his portrayal of Titus and his performance is shadowed by his previous role as Hannibal Lecter. As such, the audience is aware of Titus‟ brutal and bloodthirsty revenge against his enemies, the very reaction to violence in entertainment which director Taymor seeks to criticise in her film.
The millenary period of 1999-2001 was a particularly prolific time for Shakespeare on screen. As we approach the end of another decade, Shakespeare is once again proving a popular source for cinematic adaptations of all styles and calibres. We are now heading into an exciting period which Caroline Jess-Cooke terms as „Post-Millennial Shakespeare cinema.‟651 Several straight full-length film adaptations of Shakespeare‟s plays are scheduled for release in the next few years, such as King Lear,652 The Winter‟s Tale,653 and The Tempest.654 Other notable forthcoming adaptations of Shakespeare‟s works include Gnomeo and Juliet, a 3D animated film version of Shakespeare's play, set in the world of warring indoor and outdoor gnomes, and an as yet untitled Eddie Murphy/Romeo and Juliet project, a re-imagining as told from the point-of-view of the young lovers‟ parents. The fact that such a variety of films based on Shakespeare‟s works are in pre-production reveals his continuing influence on popular culture, and gives hope of the enduring popularity, evolving changes, and future success of cinematic Shakespeare.
651 Caroline Jess-Cooke, “Screening the McShakespeare in Post-Millennial Shakespeare Cinema,” Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-First Century, Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray, eds (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006): 163-184. 652 Starring Anthony Hopkins, Keira Knightley, Gwyneth Paltrow and Naomi Watts. This film was due to be shot in 2009 and released in 2010. Due to the global economic crisis, production of this film has since been cancelled. 653 Starring Derek Jacobi and Dougray Scott. 654 Directed by Julie Taymor and currently in pre-production. Taymor has previously directed The Tempest on stage at the Theatre for a New Audience in 1986. This production was filmed for WNET-TV and broadcast on PBS. For her film version, Taymor had changed the gender of main character Prospero, with Helen Mirren set to play the role. Jeremy Irons, Djimon Hounsou, comedian Russell Brand, Alfred Molina, Ben Wishaw and Felicity Jones have also taken parts in the film and Geoffrey Rush is in negotiations to join the cast. The film version will centre on Prospera, her daughter Miranda (Jones) and a shipwrecked crew full of Prospera's enemies. This film will once again bring together Taymor and long time collaborator composer Elliot Goldenthal.
189
References
1. Primary Sources
1.1 Shakespeare’s plays
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Ed. Phillip Edwards. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1985.
Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Ed. A.R Braunmuller. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997.
Shakespeare, William. A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. Ed. R.A Foakes. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1984.
Shakespeare, William. The Taming Of The Shrew. Ed. Ann Thompson. 1984. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
Shakespeare, William. Titus Andronicus. Ed. Alan Hughes. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
1.2 Films, Soundtracks and Screenplays
Michael Hoffman’s William Shakespeare’s A Midsummer Night's Dream (1999)
William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night's Dream. Dir. Michael Hoffman. Fox Searchlight Pictures/ Twentieth Century Fox Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 1999.
William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night's Dream: Original Motion Picture Soundtrack. Simon Boswell. Twentieth Century Film Corporation/ Monarchy Enterprises B.V/Regency Entertainment (USA) Inc/The Decca Record Company. AUDIO CD, US/UK, 1999.
Hoffman, Michael. William Shakespeare‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream. London: Harper Collins, 1999.
191 Gil Junger’s 10 Things I Hate About You (1999)
10 Things I Hate About You. Dir. Gil Junger. Touchstone Pictures/Buena Vista Pictures. DVD, US, 1999.
10 Things I Hate About You: Music From The Motion Picture. Hollywood Records. AUDIO CD, US, 1999.
Michael Almereyda’s Hamlet (2000)
Hamlet. Dir. Michael Almereyda. Double A Films/Miramax Films/Buena Vista Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 2000.
Music From The Motion Picture Hamlet. Rykodisc. AUDIO CD, US, 2000.
Hamlet: Original Score from the Miramax Motion Picture. Carter Burwell. Varese Sarabande Records. AUDIO CD, US, 2000.
Dylan, Bob. “All Along the Watch Tower,” John Wesley Harding. Copyright © 1968; renewed 1996 Dwarf Music. 10 Jan 2005
Almereyda, Michael. William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet. London: Faber & Faber, 2000.
Julie Taymor’s Titus (1999)
Titus (two disc special edition). Dir. Julie Taymor. Clear Blue Sky Productions/Fox Searchlight Pictures/Twentieth Century Fox Film Corporation. DVD, Italy/US, 1999.
Titus Original Motion Picture Soundtrack. Elliot Goldenthal. Sony Classical. AUDIO CD, US, 2000.
Taymor, Julie. Titus: The Illustrated Screenplay: Adapted from William Shakespeare‟s Titus Andronicus. New York: Newmarket, 2000.
Billy Morrissette’s Scotland, PA (2001)
Scotland, PA. Dir. Billy Morrissette. Abandon Pictures/Lot 47 Films/Showtime Entertainment/Sundance Channel Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 2002.
192
2. Secondary Sources
“Casta Diva.” The Aria Database. 1 May 2008
“Shakespeare in the cinema: A film directors' symposium.” Cineaste 24.1 (1998) 48-55.
“Stories Of The Operas: La Traviata.” The Metropolitan Opera. 2 Aug 2004
“Stories Of The Operas: L‟eliser d‟amor.” The Metropolitan Opera. 2 Aug 2004
“Stories of the Operas: Norma.” The Metropolitan Opera. 2 Aug 2004
“Stories of the Operas: Cavalleria Rusticana/Pagliacci.” The Metropolitan Opera. 2 Aug 2004
“Behind The Lens: Scotland, PA. writer/director Billy Morrissette.” New York Screenwriter. 10.6 Feb/Mar 2002. Celebrating Christopher Walken. June 19 2007. 20 June 2007
“The Art of Bel Canto and the Romantic Generation.” Opera World. 27 Jul 2004
“Macbeth.” Sir Ian McKellen Official Home Page. Mar 2008. 6 Mar 2008
Abbate, Alessandro. ““To Be or Inter-Be”: Almereyda's end-of-millennium Hamlet.” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 82-90.
Abele, Elizabeth. “Hamlet.” Images: A Journal of Film And Popular Culture. 11 April 2006
Aebischer, Pascale. “Titus.” Scope: An Online Journal of Film Studies. Feb 1 2001. 8 Nov 2006
Allen, Graham. Intertextuality. London: Routledge, 2000.
Almereyda, Michael. “„A Live Wire to the Brain: Hooking Up Hamlet.” New York Times May 7. 2000: 19-22.
Altman, Rick. Silent Film Sound. New York: Columbia University Press, 2004.
Anderegg, Michael. Orson Welles, Shakespeare and Popular Culture. New York: Columbia University Press, 1999.
193 Anderegg, Michael. Cinematic Shakespeare. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers Inc, 2004.
Anderson, Jeffrey M. “Brushing Up Shakespeare: Interview with Ethan Hawke & Michael Almereyda.” Combustible Celluloid. May 4 2000. 5 Aug 2004
Andrews, Christopher. “Richard III on Film: The Subversion of the Viewer.” Shakespeare into Film. Eds. James M. Welsh, Richard Vela and John C. Tibbetts. New York: Checkmark Books, 2002. 147-158.
Anthony, Chris. “Shakespeare Goes to School: Intertextuality and Appropriation in 10 Things I Hate About You, O and Hamlet.” Chris Anthony: Music, Journalism and Media Relations. 2004. 26 Oct 2005
Anthony, Ross. “Interviews with actor Ethan Hawke and director Michael Almereyda of Hamlet.” Ross Anthony‟s Hollywood Report Card. 3 Aug 2004
Artaud, Antonin. “The Theatre of Cruelty.” Antonin Artaud: Selected Writings. Ed. Susan Sontag. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1988.
Asthana, Anushka and Vanessa Thorpe. “Whatever happened to the original Generation X?” The Observer. 23 Jan 2005. June 5 2008
Axmaker, Sean. “Scotland, PA, has more than a wee bit of intelligence.” Seattle Post- Intelligencer. Feb 22 2002. 6 Aug 2004
Bakhtin, M. M. The dialogic imagination: four essays. Ed. Michael Holquist. Trans. Caryl Emerson and Michael Holquist. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1981.
Bakhtin, M. M. Speech genres and other late essays. 1st ed. Eds. Michael Holquist and Caryl Emerson. Trans. Vern W McGee. Austin: University of Texas Press, 1986: 91.
Balizet, Ariane M. “Teen Scenes: Recognizing Shakespeare in Teen Film.” Almost Shakespeare: Reinventing His Works For Cinema and Television. Eds. James R. Keller and Leslie Stratyner. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company Inc, 2004. 122-136.
Ball, Robert Hamilton. Shakespeare on Silent Film: A Strange Eventful History. London: Allen & Unwin, 1968.
Barry, James. “Titus review.” SoundtrackNet. May 10 2003. 15 Sept 2004
Barthes, Roland. Image, Music, Text. Trans. Stephen Heath. London: Fontana, 1977.
194 Barthes, Roland. “Theory of the Text.” Untying the Text: a post-structuralist reader. Ed. Robert Young. London: Routledge, 1981. 32-47.
Barthes, Roland. Barthes: selected writings. Ed and intro. Susan Sontag. London: Fontana, 1983.
Blackwelder, Rob. “A Graphic Feast of Brilliance.” SPLICEDwire. 1999. 28 Aug 2004
Blackwelder, Rob. “Dream Manipulation.” SPLICEDwire. 1999. 20 Jan 2005
Blackwelder, Rob. “Hawke-ing About Hamlet.” SPLICEDwire. May 5 2000. 28 Aug 2004
Blackwelder, Rob. “Monkeying with Macbeth.” SPLICEDwire. Feb 1 2002. 28 Aug 2004
Blackwelder, Rob. “Burger, Fries & a Shakespeare.” SPLICEDwire. 2002. 28 Aug 2004
Blumenthal, Eileen. Julie Taymor: Playing with Fire: Theater, Opera, Film. Updated, expanded ed. New York: Harry N. Abrams, 1999.
Shakespeare the Movie: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 1997.
Boose, Lynda E and Richard Burt. “Introduction: Shakespeare, the Movie.” Shakespeare the Movie: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video. Eds. Lynda E. Boose, and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 1997. 1-7.
Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003.
Brabazon, Tara. From Revolution To Revelation: Generation X, Popular Memory and Cultural Studies. London; New York: Ashgate, 2005.
Bristol, Michael D. Big Time Shakespeare. New York: Routledge, 1996.
Brode, Douglas. Shakespeare in the Movies: From the Silent Era to Shakespeare in Love. New York; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Brown, Eric C. “Cinema in the Round: Self-Reflexivity in Tim Blake Nelson‟s O.” Eds. James R. Keller and Leslie Stratyner. Almost Shakespeare: Reinventing His Works For Cinema and Television. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company Inc, 2004. 73-85.
Brown, Eric C. “Shakespeare, Class, and Scotland, PA.” Literature/Film Quarterly 34.2 (2006): 147-153.
Brucher, Richard J. ““Tragedy, Laugh On”: Comic Violence in Titus Andronicus.” Renaissance Drama 10 (1979): 71-91.
195
Buhler, Stephen M. “Camp Richard III and the Burdens of (Stage/Film) History.” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Houndmills, Basingstroke: Palgrave, 2000. 40-57.
Buhler, Stephen M. Shakespeare in the Cinema: Ocular Proof. Albany: State University of New York Press, 2002.
Buhler, Stephen M. “Textual and Sexual Anxieties in Michael Hoffman's Film of A Midsummer Night's Dream.” Shakespeare Bulletin 22.3 Fall (2004): 49-64.
Burnett, Mark Thornton. “The “Very Cunning of the Scene”: Kenneth Branagh‟s Hamlet.” Shakespeare into Film. Eds. James M. Welsh, Richard Vela and John C. Tibbetts. New York: Checkmark Books, 2002. 113-116.
Burnett, Mark Thornton. ““To Hear and See the Matter”: Communicating Technology in Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet (2000).” Cinema Journal 42.3 Spring (2003): 48-69.
Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-first Century. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006.
Burt, Richard. “Shakespeare in Love and the End of the Shakespearian: Academic and Mass Culture Constructions of Literary Authorship.” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Houndmills, Basingstroke: Palgrave, 2000. 203-231.
Burt, Richard. “Afterword: Te(e)n Things I Hate about Girlene Shakesploitation Flicks in the Late 1990s, or Not-So-Fast Times at Shakespeare High.” Spectacular Shakespeare: Critical Theory and Popular Cinema. Eds. Courtney Lehmann and Lisa S. Starks. Madison, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press and London: Associated University Presses, 2002. 205-232.
Burt, Richard. “Shakespeare and the Holocaust: Julie Taymor's Titus is Beautiful, or Shakesploi Meets (the) Camp.” Shakespeare after Mass Media. Ed. Richard Burt. New York: Palgrave, 2002. 295-330.
Burt, Richard. “Slammin‟ Shakespeare in acc(id)ents yet unknown: Liveness, cinem(edi)a, and racial dis-integration.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.2 Summer (2002): 201-226.
Burt, Richard. “Shakespeare, “Glo-cali-zation,” race, and the small screens of post- popular culture.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 14-36.
Burt, Richard. “Shakespeare and Asia in postdiasporic cinemas: spin-offs and citations of the plays from Bollywood to Hollywood.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 265-303.
196 Burt, Richard and Lynda E. Boose. “Introduction: Editors‟ cut.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, Video and DVD. Eds. Richard Burt and Lynda E. Boose. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 1-13.
Cabat, Josh. “Michael Hoffman‟s A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.” Shakespeare: A magazine for Shakespeare teachers and enthusiasts. Feb 2005. 7 Feb 2005
Calhoun, John. “A Midsummer set in Fellini‟s backyard.” Entertainment Design 33.5 May (1999): 38-39
Carr, Jay. “„Teen „Taming‟ offers at least 10 things to like.” Boston Globe Mar 31. 1999: F.4.
Cartelli, Thomas. “Shakespeare and the street: Pacino‟s Looking for Richard, Bedford‟s Street King, and the common understanding.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 186-199.
Cartelli, Thomas and Katherine Rowe. New Wave Shakespeare on Film. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007.
Cartmell, Deborah. “The Shakespeare on Screen Industry.” Adaptations: From Text to Screen/Screen to Text. Eds. Deborah Cartmell and Imelda Whelehan. New York: Routledge, 1999. 29-37.
Cartmell, Deborah. Interpreting Shakespeare on Film. Basingstroke: Macmillan, 2000.
Talking Shakespeare: Shakespeare into the Millennium. Eds. Deborah Cartmell and Michael Scott. Houndmills and New York: Palgrave, 2001.
Cella, Catherine. “Sundance expands Indie film brand.” Billboard 20 Sept. 2003: 55.
Chaney, Jen. “Anyone? Anyone? …” PopPolitics. 3 „Identity‟ Nov 19 2000. 10 Nov 2005
Charnes, Linda. “Dismember me: Shakespeare, paranoia, and the logic of mass culture.” Shakespeare Quarterly 48.1 Spring (1997): 1-16.
Christel, Mary T. ““Get Three to a Cineplex!”: Stunt Casting Hamlet for Good or Ill.” The Poor Yorick Shakespeare Catalogue - Featured Articles. April 15 2004. 7 Dec 2004
Cohen, Derek. Shakespeare‟s Culture of Violence. New York: St Martin‟s Press. 1993.
Coupland, Douglas. Generation X: Tales for an accelerated culture. New York: St. Martin's Press, 1991.
Coursen, Herbert R. Shakespearean Performance as Interpretation. Newark: University of Delaware Press, 1992.
197 Coursen, Herbert R. “Filming Shakespeare's History: Three Films of Richard III.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 97-115.
Coursen, Herbert R. Shakespeare in Space: Recent Shakespeare Productions on Screen. New York: Peter Lang, 2002.
Coursen, Herbert R. Shakespeare Translated: Derivatives on Film and TV. New York: Peter Lang, 2005.
Coward, Rosalind. Language and materialism: developments in semiology and the theory of the subject. Eds. Rosalind Coward and John Ellis. London; Boston: Routledge and Paul, 1977.
Crowdus, Gary. “Shakespeare Is Up To Date: An Interview with Sir Ian McKellen.” Cineaste 24.1 (1998): 46-7.
Crowl, Samuel. “Michael Hoffman‟s film of A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.” Shakespeare Bulletin 17.3 Summer (1999): 41-42.
Crowl, Samuel. “Julie Taymor‟s Film of Titus.” Shakespeare Bulletin 18.1 Winter (2000): 46-47.
Crowl, Samuel. “Michael Almereyda‟s film of Hamlet.” Shakespeare Bulletin 18.4 Fall (2000): 39-40.
Crowl, Samuel. Shakespeare at the Cineplex: The Kenneth Branagh Era. Ohio: Ohio University Press, 2003.
Culler, Jonathan. The Pursuit of Signs: Semiotics, Literature, Deconstruction. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1981.
Daileader, Celia R. “Nude Shakespeare in Film and Nineties Popular Feminism.” Shakespeare and Sexuality. Eds. Catherine M.S Alexander and Stanley Wells. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press, 2001. 183-200.
Dash, Irene G. Wooing, Wedding and Power: Women in Shakespeare‟s Plays. New York: Columbia University Press, 1981.
Dash, Irene G. Women‟s Worlds in Shakespeare‟s Plays. Newark, Del: University of Delaware Press; Cranbury, NJ: Associated University Presses, 1997.
Davies, Anthony. Filming Shakespeare‟s Plays: The Adaptations of Laurence Olivier, Orson Wells, Peter Brook, and Akira Kurosawa. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1988.
Shakespeare and the Moving Image: the Plays on Film and Television. Eds. Anthony Davies and Stanley Wells. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Davis, Hugh H. “I Was a Teenage Classic: Literary Adaptation in Turn-of-the- Millennium Teenage Films.” The Journal of American Culture 29.1 (2006): 52- 60.
198
Deitchman, Elizabeth A. “From the Cinema to the Classroom: Hollywood Teaches Hamlet.” Spectacular Shakespeare: Critical Theory and Popular Cinema. Eds. Courtney Lehmann and Lisa S. Starks. Madison, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press and London: Associated University Presses, 2002. 172-86.
Deitchman, Elizabeth A. “Shakespeare Stiles style: Shakespeare, Julia Stiles, and American girl culture.” A Companion to Shakespeare and Performance. Eds. Barbara Hodgdon and W.B Worthen. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005. 478-493.
Deitchman, Elizabeth A. “White Trash Shakespeare: Taste, Morality, and the Dark Side of the American Dream in Billy Morrissette‟s Scotland, PA.” Literature/Film Quarterly 34.2 (2006): 140-146.
De Luca, Maria and Mary Lindroth. “Mayhem, Madness, Method: An Interview with Julie Taymor.” Cineaste 25.3 (2000): 28-31.
Deverson, Jane and Charles Hamblett. Generation X. London: Gibbs, 1964.
Dickinson, Kay. “Pop, Speed and the 'MTV Aesthetic' in Recent Teen Films.” Scope: An Online Journal of Film Studies. June 2001. 12 Aug 2004
Donaldson, Peter S. “Cinema and the Kingdom of Death: Loncraine's Richard III.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.2 Summer (2002): 241-59.
Donaldson, Peter S. “Game Space/Tragic Space: Julie Taymor's Titus.” A Companion to Shakespeare and Performance. Eds. Barbara Hodgdon and W.B Worthen. Oxford: Blackwell, 2005. 457-477.
Donaldson, Peter S. “Hamlet among the Pixelvisionaries: Video Art, Authenticity and Wisdom in Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet.” A Concise Companion to Shakespeare on Screen. Ed. Diana Henderson. Oxford: Blackwell's, 2006. 216- 37.
Film Music: Critical Approaches. Ed and intro. K.J. Donnelly. New York: Continuum, 2001.
Dreher, Diane Elizabeth. Dominance and Defiance. Kentucky: The University Press of Kentucky, 1986.
Eby, Douglas. “Julie Taymor on making Titus.” Talent Development Resources. 2003. 16 Nov 2006
Egan, Gabriel. Introduction. “Hamlet on Screen.” EnterText: An Interactive Interdisciplinary E-Journal for Cultural and Historical Studies and Creative Work. 1.2 Spring (2001): 171-341. 29 Aug 2006
Escoda, Clara Augusti. “Julie Taymor‟s Titus (1999): Framing Violence and Activating Responsibility.” Atlantis 28.1 June (2006): 57-70.
199 Featherstone, Mike. Consumer Culture and Postmodernism. London: Sage Publications, 1991.
Fedderson, Kim and J. Michael Richardson. “Hamlet 9/11: Sound, Noise, and Fury in Almereyda‟s Hamlet.” College Literature 31.4 Fall (2004): 150-170.
Fellini, Federico. Fellini on Fellini. Ed. Costanzo Costantini. Trans. Sohrab Sorooshian. London; Boston: Faber & Faber, 1995.
Fierman, Daniel. “The Dane Event.” Entertainment Weekly 543 June 2. 2000: 40-42.
Finkelstein, Richard, “Disney Cites Shakespeare: The Limits of Appropriation.” Shakespeare and Appropriation. Ed and intro. Christy Desmet. Ed. Richard Sawyer. London: Routledge, 1999. 179-96.
Fiske, John. Television Culture. London; New York: Methuen, 1987.
Foakes, R.A. Shakespeare & Violence. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 2003.
Ford, John R. “Translating Audiences and Their Bottoms: Filming A Midsummer Night‟s Dream.” Publications of the Mississippi Philological Association (2000): 1-9.
Foucault, Michel. Discipline and punish: the birth of the prison. 1st American ed. Trans Alan Sheridan. New York: Pantheon Books, 1977.
Francassini, Camillo. “White trash on the menu as Macbeth goes burger king.” Scotland on Sunday. Jan 13 2002. 29 Jun 2007
Freedman, Barbara. “Critical Junctures in Shakespeare Film History; The Case of Richard III.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. pp. 65-66.
Friedman, Michael D. “The Feminist as Shrew in 10 Things I Hate About You.” Shakespeare Bulletin 22.2 Summer (2004): 45-65.
Frith, Simon. “Mood Music: An Inquiry into Narrative Film Music.” Screen 25 Nov 3 (1984): 78-87.
Frith, Simon. Performing Rites: Evaluating Popular Music. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998.
Fuchs, Cynthia. “„Looking around corners‟: Interview with Michael Almereyda, writer- director of Hamlet.” Pop Matters. 3 Aug 2004
Fuchs, Cynthia. “Meltdown.” Pop Matters. 3 Aug 2004
Fuery, Patrick. New Developments in Film Theory. Basingstoke: Macmillan; New York: St. Martin's Press, 2000.
200
Fussell, Paul. Class: A Guide Through the American Status System. New York: Summit Books, 1983
Ghita, Lucian. “Reality and Metaphor in Jane Howell‟s and Julie Taymor‟s Productions of Shakespeare‟s Titus Andronicus.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture: A WWWeb Journal 6.1 Mar (2004).
Gleiberman, Owen. “Despise the Limit.” Entertainment Weekly 480 9 April. 1999: 48.
Goldwasser, David. “Hamlet (score) review.” SoundtrackNet. June 16 2002. 15 Sept 2004
Goodwin, Nancy. “10 Things, 2 Elements.” Shakespeare: A magazine for Shakespeare teachers and enthusiasts. Feb 2005. 7 Feb 2005
Guntner, J Lawrence. “Hamlet, Macbeth and King Lear on film.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed. Russell Jackson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000: 117-134.
Hancock, Brecken Rose. “Roman or Revenger?: The Definition and Distortion of Masculine Identity in Titus Andronicus.” Early Modern Literary Studies 10.1 (May, 2004): 7.1-15.
Hattaway, Michael. “The Comedies on Film.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 85-98.
Hayward, Susan. Cinema Studies: The Key Concepts. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge, 2000.
Henderson, Diana E. “A Shrew for the Times.” Shakespeare the Movie: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 1997. 148-168.
Henderson, Diana E. “A Shrew for the Times, Revisited.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 120-139.
Hermes, JJ. “Waxing Shakespearean With Billy Morrissette: An interview with the director of Scotland, PA.” The Leader. April 24 2002. 10 Aug, 2004
Film Studies: Critical Approaches. Eds. John Hill and Pamela Church Gibson. Consultant Eds. Richard Dyer, Ann E. Kaplan, and Paul Willemen. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.
Hodgdon, Barbara. “Replicating Richard: Body Doubles, Body Politics.” Theatre Journal 50.2 (1998): 207-25.
201 Hoefer Jr., Anthony D. “The McDonaldization of Macbeth: Shakespeare and Pop Culture in Scotland, PA.” Literature/Film Quarterly 34.2 (2006): 154-160.
Holden, Stephen. “It‟s Like, You Know, Sonnets and Stuff.” New York Times Mar 31. 1999, late ed.: E.11.
Holste, Gayle. “Branagh‟s Labour's Lost: Too Much, Too Little, Too Late.” Literature/Film Quarterly 30.3 (2002): 228-30.
Hopkins, Lisa. ““How very like the home life of our own dear queen”: Ian McKellen‟s Richard III.” Spectacular Shakespeare: Critical Theory and Popular Cinema. Eds. Courtney Lehmann and Lisa S. Starks. Madison, N.J.: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press and London: Associated University Presses, 2002. 47-61.
Hopkins, Lisa. “„A Tiger‟s Heart Wrapped in a Player's Hide‟: Julie Taymor's War Dances.” Shakespeare Bulletin 21.3 Fall (2003): 61-69.
Hopkins, D.J, Catherine Ingram and Bryan Reynolds. “Nudge, Nudge, Wink, Wink, Know What I Mean, Know What I Mean? A Theoretical Approach to Performance for a Post-Cinema Shakespeare.” Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical Future. Ed. Bryan Reynolds. Foreword. Janelle Reinelt. Afterword. Jonathan Gil Harris. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. 137-170.
Howard, Tony. “Shakespeare‟s Cinematic Offshoots.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 295-313.
Howlett, Kathy M. Framing Shakespeare on Film. Athens: Ohio University Press, 2000.
Howlet, Kathy M. “Antipodal Anxieties in Julie Taymor‟s Titus.” A Boundless Sea: Shakespeare‟s Mediterranean on Film: Seventh World Shakespeare Congress, Seminar. Valencia, Spain, April 18-23, 2001. Unpublished.
Hunt, Maurice. “Exonerating Lucius in Titus Andronicus: A Response to Anthony Brian Taylor.” Connotations 7.1 (1997-98): 87-93.
Huntley, Rebecca. The World According to Y: Inside the New Adult Generation. Sydney: Allen & Unwin, 2006.
Hutcheon, Linda. Theory of Parody: The Teachings of Twentieth-Century Art Forms. New York: Methuen, 1985.
Hutcheon, Linda. The Poetics of Postmodernism: History, theory, fiction. New York: Routledge, 1988.
Hutcheon, Linda. The Politics of Postmodernism. 2nd ed. London; New York: Routledge, 2002.
Iampolski, Mikhail. The Memory of Tiresias: Intertextuality and Film. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1998.
202 Jackson, Russell. “Shakespeare‟s Comedies on film.” Shakespeare and the Moving Image. Eds. Anthony Davies and Stanley Wells. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994. 99-120.
Jackson, Russell. “A Shooting Script for the Reinhardt-Dieterle Dream.” Shakespeare Bulletin 16.4 (1998): 39-41.
Jackson, Russell. “From Play-script to screenplay.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 15-34.
Jackson, Russell. “Shakespeare and the Cinema.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare. Eds. Margreta De Grazia and Stanley Wells. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. 217-233.
Jameson, Anna. Shakespeare‟s heroines, with twenty-six portraits of famous players in character. London: George Bell, 1897.
Jess, Carolyn. “The Promethean Apparatus: Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet as Cinematic Allegory.” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 90-97.
Jess-Cooke, Caroline. “Screening the McShakespeare in Post-Millennial Shakespeare Cinema.” Screening Shakespeare in the Twenty-First Century. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2006. 163-184.
Jess-Cooke, Caroline. Shakespeare on Film: Such Things as Dreams are Made of. London; New York: Wallflower Press, 2007.
Johnson-Haddad, Miranda. “A Time for Titus: An Interview with Julie Taymor.” Shakespeare Bulletin 18.4 Fall (2000): 34-36.
Jones, Melissa. ““An Aweful Rule”: Safe Schools, Hard Canons and Shakespeare‟s Loose Heirs.” Almost Shakespeare: Reinventing His Works For Cinema and Television. Eds. James R. Keller and Leslie Stratyner. Jefferson, North Carolina: McFarland & Company Inc, 2004. 137-154.
Jones, Nicholas. “Bottom's Wife: Gender and Voice in Hoffman's Dream.” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 82-90.
Music and Emotion: Theory and Research. Eds. Patrik N. Juslin and John A. Sloboda. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001.
Kakutani, Michiko. “Why Shakespeare Resonates With the Modern Age.” New York Times March 18. 1999, late ed.: E.1.
Kaplan, Ann E. “The Politics of Feminism, Postmodernism, and Rock: Revisited, with Reference to Parmar‟s Righteous Babes.” Postmodern Music/Postmodern Thought. Eds. Joseph Auner and Judy Lochhead. London, New York: Routledge, 2002. 323-334.
203 Keaveney, Ryan. “Elliot Goldenthal Discography: Titus.” The Website for Composer Elliot Goldenthal. 2003. Sept 15 2004
Kelly, Maura. “John Hughes.” Salon. Jul 17 2001. 4 Oct 2005
Kerr, Darren. “An Interview with Russell Jackson.” Early Modern Literary Studies 6.1 (May, 2000): 5. 7 December 2004 < http://www.chass.utoronto.ca/emls/06- 1/jackinte.htm>.
Keyishian, Harry. “Shakespeare and Movie Genre: The Case of Hamlet.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 72-81.
Kott, Jan. Shakespeare Our Contemporary. Trans. Boleslaw Taborski. 1965. London: Methuen, 1967.
Kristeva, Julia. Desire in Language: A Semiotic Approach to Literature and Art. Ed. Leon S. Roudiez. Trans. Thomas Gora, Alice Jardine and Leon S. Roudiez. Oxford: Blackwell, 1981.
Lack, Russell. Twenty four frames under: a buried history of film music. London: Quartet Books, 1997.
Laidman, Brad. “Sixteen Candles.” Film Threat. Oct 17 2000. 10 Nov 2005
Landwehr, Margarete. “Introduction: Literature and the visual arts; questions of influence and intertextuality.” College Literature 29.3 Summer (2002): 1-16.
Lanier, Douglas M. “Shakescorp Noir.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.2 Summer (2002): 157-180.
Lanier, Douglas. “Nostalgia and theatricality: the fate of the Shakespearean stage in the Midsummer Night‟s Dreams of Hoffman, Noble, and Edzard.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 154-172.
Lanier, Douglas M. “Popular Culture: Will of the People: Recent Shakespeare Film Parody and the Politics of Popularization.” A Concise Companion to Shakespeare on Screen. Ed. Diana Henderson. Oxford: Blackwell's, 2006. 176- 196.
Lehmann, Courtney. “Crouching Tiger, Hidden Agenda: How Shakespeare and the Renaissance are Taking the Rage out of Feminism.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.2 (2002): 260-79.
Lehman, Courtney. “Dead Again? Or, the Cultural Logic of Late Auteurism.” Shakespeare Remains: Theater to Film, Early Modern to Postmodern. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002. 161-189.
204 Lehmann, Courtney. “The Machine in the Ghost: Hamlet‟s Cinematographic Kingdom.” Shakespeare Remains: Theater to Film, Early Modern to Postmodern. Ed. Courtney Lehmann. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 2002. 89-129.
Lehmann, Courtney. “Out Damned Scot: dislocating Macbeth in transnational film and media culture.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 231-251.
Lehmann, Courtney, Bryan Reynolds and Lisa S. Starks. “„For Such a Sight Will Blind a Father's Eye‟: The Spectacle of Suffering in Taymor‟s Titus.” Performing Transversally: Reimagining Shakespeare and the Critical Future. Ed. Bryan Reynolds. Foreword. Janelle Reinelt. Afterword. Jonathan Gil Harris. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. 215-43.
Leitch, Thomas M. “The World According to Teenpix.” Literature/Film Quarterly 20.1 (1992): 43-47.
Leonard, M. “Rebel Girl, You are the Queen of My World: Feminism, “Subculture” and Grrl Power.” Sexing The Groove. Popular Music and Gender. Ed. S. Whitely. London and New York: Routledge, 1997. 230-56.
Levinson, Jerrold. “Film Music and Narrative Agency.” Post-theory: reconstructing film studies. Eds. David Bordwell and Noël Carroll. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996. 230-247.
Lewis, John. The Road to Romance and Ruin: Teen Films and Youth Culture. New York: Routledge, 1992.
Lindroth, Mary. ““Some device of further misery”: Taymor‟s Titus brings Shakespeare to film audiences with a twist.” Literature/Film Quarterly 29.2 (2001) 107-115.
Loehlin, James N. ““Top of the World Ma”: Richard III and Cinematic Convention.” Shakespeare the Movie: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 1997. 67-79.
Loehlin, James N. “„These Violent Delights Have Violent Ends‟: Baz Luhrmann‟s Millennial Shakespeare.” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Houndmills, Basingstroke: Palgrave, 2000. 121-136.
LoMonico, Michael. “„Is All Our Company Here?‟ An Interview with Michael Hoffman.” Shakespeare: A magazine for Shakespeare teachers and enthusiasts 3.2 Summer (1999): 9-13.
Lumenick, Lou. “A Tale Told By An Idiot, All For Laughs.” New York Post. Feb 8 2002. 3 Aug 2004
Lutz, Karen McCullah and Kirsten Smith. “10 Things I Hate About You - Revision November 12, 1997.” The Daily Script. 18 Oct 2004
205 Malanowski, Jamie. “Macbeth, Droll and Deep Fried.” New York Times Feb 3. 2002: 2.11
Marti, Cecile. “Julie Taymor‟s Titus: Deciding Not to Cut.” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 122-126.
Maslin, Janet. “Marching Toward Maturity.” New York Times 15 Mar 1987: 90.
Maslin, Janet. “A „Dream‟ of Foolish Mortals.” New York Times 14 May. 1999, late ed.: E.1:1.
Matchinske, Megan M. “Putting Bottom on Top: Gender and the Married Man in Michael Hoffman‟s Dream.” Shakespeare Bulletin 21.4 Winter (2003): 40-56.
Mayo, Sarah. “„A Shakespeare for the People?‟ Negotiating the Popular in Shakespeare in Love and Michael Hoffman‟s A Midsummer Night's Dream.” Textual Practice 17.2 Summer (2003): 295-315.
McCandless, David. “A Tale of Two Tituses: Julie Taymor's Vision on Stage and Screen.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.4 Winter (2002): 487-511.
McKellen, Ian, and Richard Loncraine. William Shakespeare's Richard III: A Screenplay Written by Ian McKellen & Richard Loncraine. London: Doubleday; Woodstock: Overlook, 1996.
Metz, G. Harold. Shakespeare‟s Earliest Tragedy. Studies in Titus Andronicus. London: Associated University Press. 1996.
Mitchell, Elvis. “Hamlet: A Simpler Melancholy in a Different Denmark.” New York Times. May 12 2000. 3 Aug 2004
Monelle, Raymond. The sense of music: semiotic essays. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2000.
The Bakhtin reader: selected writings of Bakhtin, Medvedev and Voloshinov. Ed. Pam Morris. London: E. Arnold, 1994.
Morris, Wesley. “Nothing Rotten at Denmark Inc.” SFGate. May 19 2000. 9 Aug 2004
Aspects of Macbeth: articles reprinted from Shakespeare Survey. Eds. Kenneth Muir and Phillip Edwards. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1977.
Mullin, Michael. “Stage and Screen: The Trevor Nunn Macbeth.” Shakespeare Quarterly 38.3 Autumn (1987): 350-359.
Mundy, John. Popular Music on Screen: From Hollywood Musical to Music Video. Manchester & New York: Manchester University Press, 1999.
206 Murphy, Andrew. “The Book On Screen: Shakespeare Films and the Textual Culture.” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Houndmills, Basingstroke: Palgrave, 2000. 10-25.
Murray, Edward. “La Strada.” Federico Fellini: Essays in Criticism. Ed. Peter Bondanella. London; New York: Oxford University Press, 1978. 39-59.
Neale, Stephen. Genre and Hollywood. London: Routledge, 2000.
Neely, Sarah. “Cool Intentions: The Literary Classic, the Teenpic and the „Chick Flick‟.” Retrovisions: Reinventing the Past in Film and Fiction.” Eds. Deborah Cartmell, I.Q. Hunter and Imelda Whelehan. London and Sterling: Pluto, 2001. 74-86.
Owens, Joana. ““Images, Images, Images”: The Contemporary Landscape of Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet.” Interdisciplinary Humanities 20.2 Fall (2003): 21-27.
Pendleton, Thomas A. “Shakespeare…with additional dialogue.” Cineaste 24.1 (1998): 62-67.
Phillips, William H. Film: An Introduction. Boston: Bedford/St Martin‟s, 1999.
Pittman, L. Monique. “Taming 10 Things I Hate About You: Shakespeare and the Teenage Film Audience.” Literature/Film Quarterly 32.2 (2004): 144-153.
Pittman, L Monique. “Dressing the Girl/Playing the Boy: Twelfth Night Learns Soccer on the Set of She‟s The Man.” Literature/Film Quarterly 36.2 (2008): 122-136.
Pizzello, Chris. “Enchanted Forest.” American Cinematographer Online. May 1999. 20 April 2005
Pizzello, Stephen. “From Stage to Screen.” American Cinematographer 81.2 (2000): 64-7.
Pizzello, Stephen. “Titus a Timeless Tale of Revenge.” American Cinematographer. Feb 2000. 11 Jan 2007
Prendergast, Roy M. Film Music: a Neglected Art: a Critical Study of Music in Films. 2nd ed. New York: W.W. Norton, 1992.
Pride, Ray. “King of Infinite Space.” Filmmaker Magazine. Winter 1999. 28 Aug 2004
Provost, Martin. “A Midsummer Night's Dream by Simon Boswell (Cinemusic Online Soundtrack Review).” Cinemusic: Film Music and Soundtracks. 27 Feb 2005
Raymond, Ilene. “Adapting the Bard: An Interview with Kenneth Branagh.” Creative Screenwriting 5.2 (1998): 20-23.
Riffaterre, Michael. The Semiotics of Poetry. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1978.
207
Rippy, Marguerite. “A Fast-Food Shakespeare.” Chronicle of Higher Education 48.32 19 April (2002): B16.
Roe, Katherine. ““Remember me”: technologies of memory in Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet.” Shakespeare the Movie II: Popularising the Plays on Film, TV, and Video and DVD. Eds. Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt. London; New York: Routledge, 2003. 37-55.
Rooney, David. “Scotland PA.” Variety Feb 12. 2001: 40-41.
Rosen, Steven. “Time ripe for „Midsummer‟ Shakespeare comedy rides on Kline‟s back.” Denver Post 14 May. 1999, Rockies ed.: E.01.
Rosenberg, Marvin. “Trevor Nunn‟s Macbeth.” Shakespeare Quarterly 28.2 Spring (1977): 195-196.
Rosenthal, Daniel. 100 Shakespeare Films: BFI Screen Guides. London: British Film Institute, 2007.
Ross, Charles. “Underwater Women in Shakespeare‟s Films.” CLCWeb: Comparative Literature and Culture: A WWWeb Journal. 6.1 Mar 2004. 21 Oct 2004
Rothwell, Kenneth S. Shakespeare on Screen: An International Filmography and Videography. Eds. Kenneth S. Rothwell and Annabelle Henkin Melzer. New York: Neal-Schuman, 1990.
Rothwell, Kenneth S. A History of Shakespeare on Screen: A Century of Film and Television. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.
Rothwell, Kenneth S. Early Shakespeare Movies: How the Spurned Spawned Art. Stratford-upon-Avon: International Shakespeare Association, 2000.
Rothwell, Kenneth S. “Shakespeare Goes Digital.” Cineaste 25.3 (2000): 50-52.
Rothwell, Kenneth S. “The “[Trans] Textuality” of Kevin Kline‟s Bottom: A Modest Proposal.” The Poor Yorick Shakespeare Catalogue - Featured Articles. Feb 3 2004. 7 Dec 2004
Russell, Paul. “Titus: A Class Reborn.” DVD Angle. Aug 16 2000. 3 Aug 2004
Rutter, Carol Chillington. “Looking at Shakespeare‟s women on film.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 241-260.
Rutter, Carol Chillington. „Looking Like a Child - or - Titus the Comedy.‟ Shakespeare Survey 56 (2003): 1-26.
Sanders, Julie. Shakespeare and Music: Afterlives and Borrowings. Cambridge,UK; Malden, MA: Polity Press, 2007.
208
Schechner, Richard. “Julie Taymor: From Jacques Lecoq to The Lion King.” TDR: The Drama Review 43.3 (T 163), Fall (1999): 36-55.
Schilt, Kristen. ““A Little Too Ironic”: The Appropriation and Packaging of Riot Grrrl Politics by Mainstream Female Musicians.” Popular Music and Society 26.1 (2003)
Schilt, Kristen. ““Riot Grrrl Is…”: The Contestation over Meaning in a Music Scene.” Music Scenes: Local Translocal and Virtual. Eds. Andy Bennett and Richard A. Peterson. Nashville: Vanderbilt University Press, 2004.115-130.
Schwarzbaum, Lisa. “What The Puck?” Entertainment Weekly 485 14 May. 1999: 48.
Sconce, Jeffrey. Haunted Media: Electronic Presence from Telegraphy to Television. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2000.
Shakespeare, William. Macbeth. Ed. George Lyman Kittredge. Boston: Ginn and Co., 1939.
Shakespeare, William. Titus Andronicus. Ed. Jonathan Bate. London: Routledge, 1995.
Shakespeare, William. “Sonnet 141.” The Sonnets. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge University Press, 1999. 103
Shepard, John and Peter Wicke. Music and Cultural Theory. Cambridge, Ma: Polity Press, 1997.
Shohet, Lauren. “The banquet of Scotland (PA).” Shakespeare Survey 57 (2004): 186- 195.
Shuker, Roy. Understanding Popular Music. 2nd ed. London, New York: Routledge, 2001.
Shuker, Roy. Popular Music: The Key Concepts. 2nd ed. London, New York: Routledge, 2005.
Sinyard, Neil. “Shakespeare Meets The Godfather: The Postmodern Populism of Al Pacino‟s Looking for Richard.” Shakespeare, Film, Fin de Siècle. Eds. Mark Thornton Burnett and Ramona Wray. Houndmills, Basingstroke: Palgrave, 2000. 58-72.
Smith, Jeff. “Unheard Melodies? A Critique of Psychoanalytic Theories of Film Music.” Post-theory: reconstructing film studies. Eds. David Bordwell and Noël Carroll. Madison: University of Wisconsin Press, 1996. 239-282.
Smith, Jeff. The Sounds of Commerce: Marketing Popular Film Music. New York: Columbia University Press, 1998.
Smith, Jeff. “Popular Songs and Comic Allusion in Contemporary Cinema.” Soundtrack Available: Essays on Film and Popular Music. Eds. Pamela Robertson Wojcik and Arthur Knight. Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 2001.
209
Solga, Kim “Rape's Metatheatrical Return: Rehearsing Sexual Violence Among the Early Moderns.” Theatre Journal 58.1 March (2006): 53-72.
Spurgeon, Caroline. Shakespeare‟s Imagery and What It Tells Us. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1935.
Stam, Robert. New Vocabularies in Film Semiotics: Structuralism, Post-structuralism, and Beyond. Eds. Robert Stam, Robert Burgoyne and Sandy Flitterman-Lewis. London; New York: Routledge, 1992.
Stam, Robert. Film theory: an Introduction. Malden, Mass.; Oxford: Blackwell, 2000.
Stam, Robert. “Introduction: The Theory and Practice of Adaptation.” Literature and Film: A Guide To The Theory and Practice of Film Adaptation. Eds. Robert Stam and Allesandra Raengo. Malden, MA: Blackwell, 2005. 1-52.
Stam, Robert. Literature Through Film: Realism, Magic and the Art of Adaptation. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005.
Stanley, T.L and Stephanie Thompson. “Classico, Food Net mangia with „Dream‟.” Brandweek 40.8 Feb 22 (1999): 53.
Starks, Lisa S. “Cinema of Cruelty: Powers of Horror in Julie Taymor‟s Titus.” The Reel Shakespeare: Alternative Cinema and Theory. Eds and intro. Lisa S. Starks and Courtney Lehmann. Madison, NJ: Fairleigh Dickinson University Press, London, England: Associated UP, 2002. 121-42.
Sterngold, James. “Competition for Cliff Notes.” New York Times Mar 5. 1999, late ed.: E.:12.
Stone, Alan A. “Shakespeare‟s Tarantino Play.” Boston Review. 25.2 April/May 2000. 8 Nov 2006
Storey, John. Cultural Theory and Popular Culture: An Introduction. 3rd ed. Essex England: Pearson Education Limited, 2001.
Taubin, Amy. “Prince of New York.” The Village Voice. May 17 2003. 11 April 2006
Taylor, Anthony Brian. “Lucius, the Severely Flawed Redeemer of Titus Andronicus.” Connotations 6.2 (1996-97): 138-157.
Taylor, Charles. „Titus.‟ Salon. Jan 7 2000. 18 July 2004
Taylor, Charles. “The Player.” Salon. June 9 2000. 18 July 2004
Taylor, Charles. “Scotland, PA.” Salon. Feb 8 2002. 18 July 2004
210
Uricchio, William and Roberta E. Pearson. Reframing Culture: The Case of the Vitagraph Quality Films. Princeton, N.J: Princeton University Press, 1993.
Vaughan, Virginia Mason. “Looking at the „Other‟ in Julie Taymor‟s Titus.” Shakespeare Bulletin 21.3 Fall (2003): 71-80.
Walker, Elsie. “A „Harsh World‟ of Soundbite Shakespeare: Michael Almereyda's Hamlet (2000).” EnterText: An Interactive Interdisciplinary E-Journal for Cultural and Historical Studies and Creative Work 1.2 Spring (2001): 317-41.
Walker, Elsie. “„Now Is a Time to Storm‟: Julie Taymor's Titus (2000).” Literature/Film Quarterly 30.3 (2002): 194-207.
Postmodernism a Reader. Ed. Patricia Waugh. London; New York: E. Arnold; New York, NY: Routledge, Chapman and Hall, 1992.
Welsh, James M. Shakespeare into Film. Eds. James M. Welsh, Richard Vela and John C. Tibbetts. New York: Checkmark Books, 2002.
Welsh, James M. “Seduced By Shakespeare, Transfixed by Spectacle.” Shakespeare into Film. Eds. James M. Welsh, Richard Vela and John C. Tibbetts. New York: Checkmark Books, 2002. xxiii-xxxi.
Welsh, James M. “Classic Demolition: Why Shakespeare Is Not Exactly “Our Contemporary,” or, “Dude Where‟s My Hankie?”” Literature/Film Quarterly 30.3 (2002): 223-227.
Welsh, Jim. ““Ill Met by Moonlight': Michael Hoffman‟s Dream.” Literature/Film Quarterly 27.2 (1999): 159-61.
Welsh, Jim and John Tibbet. “To Sup With Horrors. Julie Taymor's Senecan Feast.” Literature/Film Quarterly 28.2 (2000): 155-156.
White, R.S. Shakespeare‟s Macbeth. Melbourne: Sydney University Press in association with Oxford University Press, 2005.
Willem, Michèle. “Video and its Paradoxes.” The Cambridge Companion to Shakespeare on Film. Ed and intro. Russell Jackson. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press, 2000. 35-46.
Williams, Gary Jay. Our Moonlight Revels: A Midsummer Night's Dream in the Theatre. Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1997.
Williams, Mary Elizabeth. „One Shrew Thing.‟ Salon. April 1 1999. 18 July 2004
Willis, Deborah. ““The gnawing vulture”: Revenge, Trauma Theory, and Titus Andronicus.” Shakespeare Quarterly 53.1 Spring (2002): 21-52.
211 “Kat and Bianca Avenged: Or, Things to Love about 10 Things I Hate about You.” Ed. Leslie Wilson. Magazine Americana. May 2001. 26 Oct 2005
Wood. Mary P. Italian Cinema. New York: Berg, 2005.
Intertextuality: theories and practices. Eds. Michael Worton and Judith Still. Manchester; New York: Manchester University Press,1990.
Wrathall, John. “Titus: Bloody Arcades: John Wrathall Talks with Julie Taymor.” Sight and Sound 10.7 July (2000): 24-26.
Wray, Ramona. “Nostalgia for Navarre: The Melancholic Metacinema of Kenneth Branagh‟s Love‟s Labour‟s Lost.” Shakespeare into Film. Eds. James M. Welsh, Richard Vela and John C. Tibbetts. New York: Checkmark Books, 2002. 193- 199.
Zacharek, Stephanie. “Disenchanted Forest.” Salon. May 14 1999.18 July 2004
Zacharek, Stephanie. “Hamlet.” Salon. May 12 2000. 6 July 2004
212
3. Filmography
Films are listed alphabetically by title
The Breakfast Club (1985). Dir. John Hughes. Universal Pictures. DVD, US, 2003.
East of Eden (1955). Dir. Elia Kazan. Warner Brothers/Warner Home Video. DVD, US, 2005.
Cabaret (1972). Dir. Bob Fosse. ABC Pictures/Warner Home Video. DVD, US, 2003.
Fargo (1996). Dir. Joel Coen/Ethan Coen. Gramercy Pictures/Columbia TriStar Home Video. DVD, US, 1996.
Ferris Bueller‟s Day Off (1986). Dir. John Hughes. Paramount Pictures/Paramount Home Video. DVD, US, 1999.
Hamlet (1948). Dir. Laurence Olivier. The Criterion Collection/Carlton International Media Limited. DVD, UK, 2000.
Hamlet (1990). Dir. Franco Zeffirelli. Icon Entertainment International/Warner Brothers. VHS, US, 1995.
Hamlet liikemaailmassa (aka. Hamlet Goes Business) (1987). Dir. Aki Kaurismäki. Villealfa Filmproduction Oy. VHS, Finland, 1987.
Henry V (1944). Dir. Laurence Olivier. Two Cities Films Ltd/Criterion Collection. DVD, UK/US, 1999.
Henry V (1989). Dir. Kenneth Branagh. BBC/Renaissance Films/MGM. DVD, UK, 2000.
Kiss Me Kate (1953). Dir. George Sidney. MGM/Warner Home Video. US, DVD, 2006.
Kumonosu jô (aka. Throne of Blood) (1957). Dir. Akira Kurosawa. Toho Company Ltd/ Festival Video. VHS, Japan, 1989.
La Caduta Degli Dei (aka.The Damned) (1969). Dir. Luchino Visconti. Warner Home Video. DVD, US, 2004.
La Dolce Vita (1960). Dir Federico Fellini. Riama Film/Gray Film/Umbrella Entertainment. DVD, Australia, 2003.
La Strada (1954). Dir. Federico Fellini. Ponti-De Laurentiis Cinematografica/Madman Entertainment. DVD, Australia, 2005.
Life is Beautiful (1997). Dir. Roberto Benigni. Miramax Films. DVD, US/Italy, 1998.
Love‟s Labour‟s Lost (2000). Dir. Kenneth Branagh. Miramax Films. DVD, UK, 2000.
213
Macbeth (1948). Dir. Orson Welles. BBC/Second Sight Films. VHS, UK, 1996.
Macbeth (2006). Dir. Geoffrey Wright. Arclight Films. DVD, US, 2007.
Men of Respect (1991). Dir. William Reilly. Columbia Pictures. VHS, 1991.
A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (1935). Dir. William Dieterle/Max Reinhardt. Warner Brothers/Warner Home Video. DVD, US, 2007.
A Midsummer Night‟s Dream (1996). Dir. Adrian Noble. Buena Vista Home Video. VHS, 1996.
Much Ado About Nothing (1993). Dir. Kenneth Branagh. BBC/Renaissance Films/Columbia TriStar Home Video. VHS, UK/US, 1993.
Nadja (1994). Dir. Michael Almereyda. Kino Link Company/Siren Visual Entertainment. DVD, 2002.
O (2001). Dir. Tim Blake Nelson. Filmengine/Lions Gate Films Inc. DVD, US, 2001.
Othello (1995). Dir. Oliver Parker. Castle Rock Entertainment/Columbia Pictures. VHS, UK/US,1995.
A Performance of Macbeth (1979). Dir. Phillip Carson. Royal Shakespeare Company/Umbrella Entertainment. DVD, UK, 2005.
Pretty in Pink (1986). Dir. Howard Deutch. Prod. John Hughes. Paramount Pictures/Paramount Home Video. DVD, US, 2002.
Reality Bites (1994). Dir. Ben Stiller. Universal Pictures/United International Pictures. DVD, 1998.
Rebel Without A Cause (1955). Dir. Nicholas Ray. Warner Brothers/Warner Home Video. DVD, US, 2000.
Richard III (1995). Dir. Richard Loncraine. British Screen Productions/United Artists. VHS, UK/USA, 1995.
Roma (1972). Dir. Federico Fellini. MGM Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 2001.
Satyricon (1969). Dir. Federico Fellini. MGM Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 2001.
The Seven Year Itch (1955). Dir. Billy Wilder. Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation/ 20th Century Fox Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 2006.
ShakespeaRE-Told (2005). Dir. David Nicholls/Peter Moffat/Sally Wainwright/Peter Bowker. BBC/Acorn Media. DVD, UK, 2006.
Shakespeare in Love (1998). Dir. John Madden. Universal Pictures/Miramax Films, DVD, US/UK, 1998.
214 The Silence of the Lambs (1991). Dir. Jonathan Demme. MGM/UA Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 2001.
Sixteen Candles (1984). Dir. John Hughes. Universal Pictures/Universal Home Video Inc. DVD, US, 2003.
Snow Falling On Cedars (1999). Dir. Scott Hicks. MCA/Universal Pictures. DVD, US, 2000.
Some Kind of Wonderful (1987). Dir. Howard Deutch. Prod. John Hughes. Paramount Pictures. DVD, US, 2002.
The Street King (2002). Dir. James Gavin Bedford. TVA Films/Mistral Pictures. DVD, US, 2002.
Sueño de noche de verano (A Midsummer Night's Dream) (1985). Dir. Celestino Coronada. Cabochon/Televisión Española (TVE). VHS, UK/Spain, 1985.
The Taming Of The Shrew (1929). Dir. Sam Taylor. JEF Films/Aikman Archive. VHS, US, 2002.
The Taming of the Shrew (1967). Dir. Franco Zeffirelli. Sony Pictures. DVD Italy/US, 1999.
Titus Andronicus (1985). Dir. Jane Howell. BBC/Time-Life Television Productions Inc. UK, VHS, 1985.
The Tragedy of Macbeth (1971). Dir. Roman Polanski. Caliban Films/Playboy Productions/Columbia Pictures/Sony Home Entertainment. DVD, 2002.
Twelfth Night: Or What You Will (1996). Dir. Trevor Nunn. Renaissance Films. US/UK, 1996.
Warui yatsu hodo yoku nemuru (aka. The Bad Sleep Well) (1960). Dir. Akira Kurosawa. Kurosawa Production Co. Ltd/Home Vision Cinema. VHS, 2001.
West Side Story (1961). Dir. Robert Wise. Beta Productions/United Artists. DVD, US, 2004.
William Shakespeare‟s Hamlet (1996). (Four hour director‟s cut version). Dir. Kenneth Branagh. Castle Rock Entertainment. VHS, US/UK, 1998.
William Shakespeare‟s Romeo + Juliet (1996). Dir. Baz Luhrmann. 20th Century Fox/20th Century Fox Home Entertainment. DVD, US, 1996.
215