sign in sign up
<<
Home , Fire Over England, Harold Hobson, Kenneth Branagh, Marlon Brando, On Acting, Sean Connery

in the cinema: ’s charismatic version of history

Public attitudes to Henry V are very much influenced by ’s interpretation. Richard Inverne discusses how Shakespeare’s version has been translated into cinematic form by Laurence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh. Photo by: ITV/REX Shutterstock

24 The Historian – Autumn 2015 hakespeare indulges himself Pistol and Falstaff considerably with his own ‘Auntient’ (or Ancient…or Ensign… relatively recent history – or Lieutenant) Pistol, given almost RichardsS II and III, Henrys IV, V as much prominence as the king in and VI, for example. Subsequently the Quarto frontispiece, is one of the he even presents his own late Queen, hugely popular comic characters in , as a baby in the play he the play and would probably have co-wrote around 1613 with John been played by either Robert Armin Fletcher, Henry VIII. In (who replaced the famous Will Kemp (the play which is believed to come as company clown in 1599), or by straight after Henry V), Antony and another comedian, John Heminge Cleopatra and Coriolanus, there (who later went on to create the role appear his dramatic yet often fanciful of Sir Toby Belch in ). takes on dozens of real people from Treated in the Quarto frontage Plutarch’s records of Roman history. to publicity worthy of a soap star He also happily adapts mythological appearing in a Christmas panto, or semi-historical characters, for Pistol – played by one of the stars example: Theseus and Hippolyta of the company – would have been in A Midsummer Night’s Dream, a huge draw for the audience and, numerous gods and goddesses in subsequently, readers of the Quarto or Cymbeline, or some text. The character is described very human and uncharacteristically by Peter Quennell and Hamish fallible versions of Greek and Trojan Johnson, the authors of Who’s Who in heroes in Troilus and Cressida. Shakespeare, as ‘a dedicated coward’; Research into Shakespeare’s always a popular comic device and sources will prove interesting audience-pleaser’.1 (Compare Parolles and productive. Try, for example, in All’s Well that Ends Well.) An Holinshed (e.g. as well interesting premise is to consider as Henry V), More (Richard III), Saxo therefore still using the Curtain during Pistol himself to be an extension of Sir (), Plutarch (Julius Caesar), the transition. . Plautus (The Comedy of Errors), Virgil However, tradition – if not Falstaff, based on another historical (The Tempest) or Boccaccio (Cymbeline); incontrovertible fact – has it that figure, Sir John Oldcastle, is the tragi- listed are only a few of the sources and Henry V was indeed the very first play comic knight who constantly leads plays influenced by these writers. Brief to be performed at the Globe, during Prince Henry astray in the Henry IV exploration will provide much more the spring of 1599. It was thus a very plays, and is finally disgraced and information about his characters – real neat trick for the reconstructed Globe banished when Henry ascends the or mythological – enriching knowledge , known as Shakespeare’s Globe, throne at the end of the second play. and enjoyment of the text. If Shakespeare to present this play as its opening In the rarely-performed epilogue to could make such fascinating production in 1997. Since 1949, the Henry IV part 2, thought to have been out of past historical or mythological reconstruction had been the brainchild performed in 1598, the year before characters, what might he do with the of charismatic American film star and Henry V, Shakespeare had originally life of a ruler, about whom plenty had director . Although able suggested to his audience that Falstaff been written and verbally passed down to oversee the first stages of rebuilding, might appear in the next play: ‘Our since his death in 1422? Henry V had Wanamaker died in 1993, but his humble author will continue the story, died only about 175 years before the daughter, the equally well-known actor with Sir John in it’. play was written and was –according to Zoe Wanamaker, actually spoke the first To the modern eye, the epilogue contemporary sources but not precisely words as Chorus in that first production. to Henry IV part 2, actually reads in these words – ‘quite a legend’! The play itself seems to attract something like a film trailer, with Falstaff Hollywood-style stars and star quality all as one of the A-list stars! In fact, further Shakespeare’s Henry V around it; more of that to come. references in the epilogue suggest that Unlike many of Shakespeare’s plays Shakespeare’s own sources include Shakespeare was very enthusiastic about Henry V can be accurately and almost Raphael Holinshed’s Chronicles of continuing the adventures of his great certainly dated to between March and England, Scotland and Ireland of 1577 comic creation into the sequel; it almost September of 1599, because of obvious and 1587, Edward Hall’s The Union of has the feel of a film franchise with references to the earl of Essex and the Two Noble and Illustrious Families proven popular characters signed up for Elizabeth I in one of the richly poetic of Lancaster and York of 1548, and the ‘the next instalment’. Thus it becomes speeches of Chorus. The play was first anonymous 1594 play The Famous somewhat relevant to the 1944 Laurence performed by the Lord Chamberlain’s Victories of Henry the Fifth. Henry V is Olivier film version that the great variety Men, the company of which Shakespeare the last in a tetralogy of Shakespeare’s star George Robey appears (silently) as was a member, at either the Curtain historical , following Richard the dying Falstaff. In the play’s text his playhouse, or their new home the II, and Henry IV parts 1 & 2. It is death is reported; the character is not Globe Theatre. Research carried out by popularly entitled Henry V – or, to be seen. scholars such as T.W. Craik and A.R. more accurate and taking a look at the In fact by the time Shakespeare gets Humphries suggests that although the first Quarto copy from 1600, which round to actually writing what might Lord Chamberlain’s Men occupied could then be bought for sixpence, The well be – in filmic franchise terms – the Globe early in 1599, it may have Cronicle History of Henry the Fift with the third part of a blockbuster taken some time to become ready as a his battell fought at Agin Court in . entitled ‘Henry IV Part 3 – the son rises’, performing space, and the company was Together with Auntient Pistoll. he has changed his mind about another

The Historian – Autumn 2015 25 appearance by Falstaff. According to That did affright the air at T.W. Craik, in his introduction to the Agincourt? (Prologue Act I) Arden edition of Henry V, this happened because ‘A reformed Falstaff, if that And later… were thinkable, would be worse than no Falstaff; an unreformed Falstaff And so our scene must to the could not be allowed near Harfleur battle fly, or Agincourt; and, with the action Where – O for pity! – we shall transferred from England to France, much disgrace Falstaff could not have independent With four or five most vile adventures at home.’2 and ragged foils Thus, Falstaff had to die, which he Right ill-disposed in brawl does offstage, beautifully and (well) ridiculous cinematically reported by Mistress The name of Agincourt. Quickly. Falstaff’s comic potential (Chorus Act IV) is replaced by that of Pistol, a much more shallow and less interesting In Anne Curry’s comic character, but one who does not authoritative The Battle unbalance the play as Falstaff would of Agincourt: sources and undoubtedly have done. Shakespeare interpretations, she informs presumably realised that the king in us that ‘Agincourt was not a Henry V needed to be ‘the star’, a very decisive battle’. She also says, classical Hollywood filmic quality. And however, that ‘much historical so, 300-odd years later, did Laurence interpretation of Agincourt has Olivier, of whom more shortly. been influenced by sentiments of national identity and pride’.3 earlier plays, the battles of Shrewsbury, Shakespeare’s cinematic If this was so as much in 1599 as Tewksbury, Bosworth, not to mention quality in 1944 when Laurence Olivier made about half-an-hour’s-worth of ‘alarms The almost-filmic references in this the first film version (released five and excursions’ in the first part of Henry play are quite extraordinary. It is as if months after the D-Day landings), VI was apparently no problem. The Shakespeare, realising the inadequacies then Shakespeare might well have been embarkation for France, the siege of of the Elizabethan stage, is searching worried about successfully portraying Harfleur, the gathering of the heavily- for something more epic, something such a huge piece of propaganda-victory armoured French knights, and then the ‘cinematic’. For example: on . How could he let down , the greatest English his audience, a public which had been victory to date, posed quite another …can this cockpit hold steadily fed information – ‘sentiments of difficulty. The vasty fields of France? or may we national identity and pride’ – about just Shakespeare thus uses the character cram how important the battle of Agincourt of Chorus as a kind of spin-doctor, a Within this wooden O the very casques had been? Portraying on stage, in the propaganda machine to inspire and manipulate the imagination of the audience. And it works. Shakespeare’s as Chorus in the Olivier film. wonderful poetry takes the audience on beautifully descriptive tours of the theatre, preparations for war and the reactions in the French court, the setting-up of the invasion fleet and its journey across the channel, the siege of Harfleur, night-time preparations at Agincourt, ‘soundbites’ of the battle and mention of Henry’s triumphant return to . And it is very cinematic. Shakespeare avoids the necessity for large-scale pageantry by means of descriptive poetry. The siege of Harfleur and the battle of Agincourt actually barely happen on stage. Like so many of Shakespeare’s plays Henry V actually – and rather cleverly – contains very little on-stage fighting, mainly that identified by Andrew Gurr as occurring when the direction ‘Excursions’ occurs in the text. Anne Curry mentions the oft-discussed argument of practicalities, or the possibility that Shakespeare wished to ‘play on the imagination of the audience, to have them think about war, and to conjure up its image by words rather than actions’.4

26 The Historian – Autumn 2015 If Shakespeare could portray epic, ‘film-worthy’ events on stage mainly by means of his words, this in itself paradoxically seems to render the play absolutely ready for the cinema, which can take those words and support them – at last – with pictures hopefully worthy to complement the original. It is worth noting that in 1936 Allardyce Nicoll commented that ‘the expressive potential of cinema “may merely be supplying something that will bring us nearer to the conditions of the original spectators for whom Shakespeare w r o t e”.’ 5 This is an interesting opinion in view of the general feeling, then as now, that cinema extends the theatrical experience as well as being an entirely different medium. The making of Olivier’s Henry V In 1939, Great Britain declared war on Nazi Germany and, as in Cromwell’s time, the were (albeit temporarily) closed. The British film fascist Italy in 1933 and was now living Maria Callas, , Nicole industry, however, went into overdrive, and working in Britain. Del Giudice Kidman, , Diana Rigg, producing an annual average of no less persuaded the government and the Fleet , and than 40 feature films during the 1940s, Air Arm that the man later referred to Chris Rock. Readers can fill in their own including many made as propaganda for by critic and author Kenneth Tynan favourites. the war effort. And although America as ‘the greatest stage actor of his time’, Why Olivier? Appearance is one did not enter the war until late 1940, by journalist Harold Hobson as ‘the reason: American critic Foster Hirsch the large ex-pat British theatre and film towering Olivier’, and by director refers to ‘his chiselled profile, his thin, community living in Hollywood made as one of the two ‘legends of sensual mouth and glowering eyes, his many films for the war effort, often my lifetime’ (the other being Charlie mellow voice, and his tall, trim build’.7 thinly-disguised slices of anti-Nazi Chaplin), simply must make the film Add to that Olivier’s proven acting skills propaganda. H. Mark Glancy refers to which would rouse the minds and hearts and charisma in an already wide variety them as ‘The Hollywood “British” films’.6 of a demoralised British people. of stage and screen roles – the actor had Laurence Olivier had been one of Prime Minister Churchill’s also previously played Henry V at the the ex-pats who had gone to Hollywood government, with invasion plans in place Old Vic in 1937, as well as performing in the late 1930s, finding international – although of course that information some of the great speeches on BBC fame in Wuthering Heights (1939), was classified – saw the wisdom of Rebecca (1940) and Pride and Prejudice what del Giudice was saying. A really (1940). Among his films which can large-scale, patriotic British film, with be classed as propaganda for the war an excellent scriptwriter called William effort, both in England and America, are Shakespeare, directed by and starring Fire Over England (1937), Clouds Over the greatest and most flamboyantly- Europe (1939), , charismatic English actor of his day, was and 49th Parallel (both 1941). bound to inspire a country now poised, At this point Olivier takes centre- as part of the Allied movement, to defeat stage…or screen; an actor whose film the Nazis and emerge victorious. The version in 1944 renders him hugely film was quickly completed and released important in any discussion of Henry V, in British cinemas in November 1944, whether of the historical king or of a just five months after the Normandy dramatised version. invasion. The actor had returned to England It is surely not enough to say that late in 1941 to serve his country and Olivier was chosen simply because at enlisted in the Fleet Air Arm. Actually, the time he was regarded as the greatest he wasn’t a very good pilot, crashing a British stage and screen actor. What test-plane at one point, and was usually Olivier had, and what marks him out on relegated to bureaucratic assignments. screen from his excellent contemporaries He did however perform excerpts from like and , Shakespeare on the radio – very popular was star persona. This is something at the time – and from this came the indefinable, something which lifts invitation, in 1943, to direct and star in a a performer to the greatest heights. film version of Henry V. Arbitrarily-chosen ‘candidates’ in the Enter flamboyant producer Filippo performing arts might include Marilyn del Giudice, an Italian who had fled Monroe, , ,

The Historian – Autumn 2015 27 Radio in 1942 as part of a patriotic £80,000 out of the total budget of there was, in fact, minimal French cavalry programme entitled ‘Into Battle’.8 £300,000, and the finished version at Agincourt, and that the famous charge Perceive most definitely, therefore, the lasts for ten minutes – a large was not as effective or substantial since the star persona required and absolutely portion of screen time! French found it difficult to find volunteers ready to present Shakespeare on the In his book Laurence Olivier willing to ride into the arrow storm. screen to a battered nation needing on Screen, Foster Hirsch informs Olivier’s brief from his producer Filippo heroes and charismatic figures. us that Olivier studied the famous del Giudice (and the film’s creation was battle scene in Sergei Eisenstein’s carefully observed by the government) was Olivier as Henry V 1938 film Alexander Nevsky, and to present a great, faultless English hero, a At this point it is worth examining that ‘his symmetrical arrangement shining role-model to the British people. It exactly how Olivier presents himself of the archers, his long shots as star in Henry V, for which he won of soldiers silhouetted against ‘a Special Oscar for his “outstanding the horizon, and his dynamic achievement as an actor, producer and cutting, acknowledge his debt director in bringing Henry V to the to Eisenstein’s epic’.10 screen”.’9 As the film’s director as well as Yet there’s a caveat to star, the first indication is the ingenious Olivier’s Agincourt which Photo by: ITV/REX Shutterstock device of setting the first act of the play should here be considered. In in the confines of the Globe Theatre accord with the sensibilities in 1599, cleverly linking the theatrical of audiences alive to the origins within cinematic devices as the horrors of two world wars, film runs its course. British stage productions At his first entrance, Olivier plays the during the 1920s to 1940s, star actor (who was probably Richard including Tyrone Guthrie’s Burbage) playing the role of King Henry 1937 Old Vic production with and receiving a round of applause on Olivier and the 1944 film his entrance, as did Olivier on many directed by and starring the occasions in the theatre. Looking at the actor – showed little of the realism is interesting that, apart from the expanded scene, one wonders if Olivier is indeed of the battle of Agincourt. The pain, battle scene, the film differs from the textual playing Burbage. Or is he brilliantly blood and suffering were all glossed version mainly in its omissions, which were announcing Olivier’s presence as star over. Roger Lewis infers that to take necessary if Olivier, aided by his literary to the cinema audience? Furthermore, such an antiseptic attitude to war, collaborator Alan Dent, was to keep the it is interesting that at the very end to avoid reality, especially at that government happy: of the film, Olivier brings the setting time, was wrong. He informs us that Excised are the traitors and Henry’s back to the Globe Theatre. Perhaps this the film ‘quite ignore[s] the lessons ruthless treatment of them; the idea of an neat device was really so that Olivier of modern combat: no cold, no English traitor was untenable in such a the director could remind the cinema trenches, no deaths of multitudes. propaganda film. Cut are Henry’s extremely audience that he, Olivier the actor, is the Olivier’s vision of England is nasty threats of the atrocities to come if star of the film, and that they should be untouched by what the Great War the city of Harfleur is not surrendered; the applauding him alongside the audience did to it, or what the Second World king (for whom, conceivably read WWII of the mock-Globe! War was doing to it’.11 The D-Day Allied military leaders) must be presented as In 1944, stars were exactly what this landings took place on 6 June, and faultless and beyond criticism. Perhaps for country needed. It had them in Winston Allied victory was in sight after five that reason the king’s callous condemnation Churchill and General Montgomery, gruelling years. Perhaps the cinema- to death of his old friends Bardolph and so why not in Laurence Olivier and going public did not need to be Nym is omitted, as is Henry’s ruthless the character he was portraying, reminded of ‘the lessons of modern order to slaughter all the French prisoners, Henry V? One simply needs to watch combat’? followed sometime later by the command to the siege of Harfleur scene containing Despite Lewis’s comments the the ‘Once more unto the breach, dear battle scene, including the firing of …cut the throats of those we have, friends’ speech, to observe the brilliant a huge salvo by the English archers And not a man of them that we shall take combination of actor and character into the air and down on the French Shall taste our mercy (IV: 7) achieved by Laurence Olivier. Later, the knights, has become iconic in movie St Crispin speech – not dissimilar to a history and a template for many It is interesting to consider just how tenor’s rousing ‘call to arms’ in a Verdi subsequent epic films. important these textual alterations are; in opera such as Ernani or Il Trovatore – is Not everyone was impressed, many ways they completely alter the focus another of many examples throughout however. In James Agee’s 1946 of the film. It is also quite intriguing to note the film. Time review of the US premiere in that most of these more complex sides to the , he amusingly recounts to his king’s character are restored when, in 1989, Olivier’s Agincourt readers how, at the English premiere Kenneth Branagh made his ultra-realistic, The famous battle sequence – itself a at the Carlton Theatre in London, anti-war version – a sign of within very exciting, stylised, Hollywood-epic- one woman was disappointed in the each film. type set-piece – does not appear in the battle scene, because she insisted that original play apart from the occasional, all the horses at Agincourt would Branagh’s Henry V mild ‘Alarms and Excursions’, so beloved have been stallions and that the Film critic Mark Dujsik is of the thoughtful of Shakespeare in his Histories. Wisely film – using whatever horses were opinion that ‘Olivier’s Harry comes across a considered to be central to a film of available in Ireland at the time – was hero while Branagh’s comes across a human the scope of Henry V, it was filmed in therefore completely inaccurate! being’ and that the latter ‘is the result of Ireland, took 39 entire days to do so, cost Subsequent research shows that post-Vietnam cynicism and mistrust with

28 The Historian – Autumn 2015 government and allows Harry’s less L. Olivier, Confessions of an Actor admirable qualities to show through’.12 (London: Simon and Schuster, 1982) Branagh’s king is uncertain, almost T. Olivier, My Father, Laurence Olivier boyish, growing into a purposeful leader, (London: Headline, 1993) perhaps by circumstance and experience. J. Shapiro, 1599: A Year in the Life of Olivier is older, always the leader, ever William Shakespeare (London: Faber, in charge; manipulating, even when 2005) consulting his courtiers at the beginning of the film. J. Vermilye, The Complete Films of The character as played by Branagh Laurence Olivier (New York, Citadel is fleshed out by the restoration of some Press, 1992) of the subjects cut by Olivier. The traitors P. Ziegler, Olivier (London: MacLehose are back in (and – contrary to text – they Press, 2013) are a ruthless, unrepentant bunch); so is the condemnation of the king’s REFERENCES 1 Quennell, P. and Johnson, H. (1973) Who’s Who friends, so are the threats to the people in Shakespeare, London: Chancellor Press, p. of Harfleur. Yet, Branagh also cuts 219. Photo by: ITV/REX Shutterstock the slaughter of the French prisoners; 2 William Shakespeare, King Henry V. Arden edition (2002), ed. T.W. Craik, London: Thomson dramatically a wise decision, according Learning, p. 36. to Dujsik, as the scene in the text occurs 3 Curry, A. (2000, 2009) The Battle of Agincourt: ‘during the height of the point when the sources and interpretations, Woodbridge: The Boydell Press, pp. 2-3. audience’s sympathies must lie entirely 4 Gurr, A. (2011) The Shakespeare Company 1594- with Harry and the English’.13 1642, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, Branagh himself, in an interview p. 47; Curry, op.cit., p. 3. 5 Davies, A. and Wells, S. (1994) Shakespeare with Michael Billington for the New York and the Moving Image, Cambridge: Cambridge Times, has criticised Olivier’s version, University Press, p. 2. including the cuts: ‘I feel it has been 6 Glancy, H.M. (1999) When Hollywood Loved Britain, Manchester: Manchester University Press, p. x. 7 unjustly treated as a jingoistic hymn Photo by: ITV/REX Shutterstock Hirsch, F. (1984) Laurence Olivier on Screen, to England. Olivier’s film, because it Cambridge, Mass.: , p. 49. was made in 1943, inevitably became whether of the 1940s, 1980s or today. 8 Coleman, T. (2005) Olivier: The Authorised Olivier’s Henry V has indeed stood the Biography, London: Bloomsbury, p.153. a propaganda vehicle and cut out 9 Levy, E. (2003) All about Oscar: the history the less amiable aspects of Henry’s test of time and emerges triumphant. and politics of the , London: character’.14 Yet it is notable that Olivier Continuum, p.171. 10 Hirsch, op.cit., p. 69. himself, in his book On Acting, refers to Suggestions for 11 Lewis, R. (1996) The Real Life of Laurence Olivier, ‘Shakespeare’s brilliant jingoism’.15 Thus London: Century, p. 115. 12 it would seem that Olivier was not just further reading Dujsik, M. (2003) ‘The Presentation of King Henry V in the Film Versions of Henry V ’: swayed by the propaganda needs of a The Olivier Archive in the British www.markreviewsmovies.com/features/other/ country at war, but influenced by what Library includes much fascinating henryv.htm (accessed 15 August 2015). material on the making of the film 13 ibid. he himself read in the text. 14 Michael Billington, in : ‘A Both directors cut and amend of Henry V, especially the script and “New Olivier” Is Taking On Henry V on the the text considerably, and their synopsis in Additional Manuscript Screen’ [8/1/89]: www.nytimes.com/1989/01/08/ 80463 and the educational materials movies/a-new-olivier-is-taking-on-henry-v-on-the- performances are very, very different. screen.html (accessed 7 July 2014). It is interesting to consider which one produced for its circulation in 15 olivier, L. (1986) On Acting, New York: Simon & – Olivier or Branagh – comes closest Additional Manuscript 80475 B. Schuster, p. 274. 16 Brown, J.M. (1946) ‘Seeing Things: The Old Vic to Shakespeare’s vision of the king as K. Branagh, Beginning (London: Chatto and Henry V’ in Saturday Review of Literature evidenced in the text. and Windus, 1989) (25 May), cited in Davies, A. (1990) Filming Shakespeare’s Plays: the adaptations of Laurence Olivier’s film was a huge success, T. Coleman, The Old Vic: The Story of after the war being nominated for four Olivier, , Peter Brook and Akira a Great Theatre from Kean to Olivier to Kurosawa, Cambridge: Cambridge University Oscars, and winning the honorary Spacey (London: Faber & Faber, 2014) Press, p. 24. ‘Outstanding Achievement’ award for 17 Levi, op.cit., p. 171. Olivier, as well as several other awards A. Davies, Filming Shakespeare’s Plays: The Adaptations of Laurence Olivier, Orson in America and Europe. Writing Richard Inverne is Senior Lecturer in Welles, Peter Brook and in 1946, John Mason Brown in the Performance at Southampton Solent (Cambridge University Press, 1990) Saturday Review of Literature thought University, specialising in theory, that Olivier’s filmed Henry ‘was a K. Ewert, Henry V: A Guide to the Text history and analysis of many branches performance of superlative merit. He and its Theatrical Life (London, Palgrave of the performing arts. He ran his shone with spiritual splendour, a quality Macmillan, 2006) own theatre company and headed a as rare in actors as it is in other human S. Gillespie, Shakespeare’s Books: A children’s theatre for many years, as 16 beings’. Dictionary of Shakespeare Sources well as owning and running a video Whether one prefers the theatrical, (London: Continuum, 2004) production company. For several jingoistic, often-fantastical composition A. Holden, Laurence Olivier (New York: years he was southern area music and of Olivier’s version – described by Levy Atheneum, 1988) theatre critic for Plays and Players as ‘experimental and stylised’17 – or magazine. He is currently researching the more modern take on the story by J. J. Jorgens, Shakespeare on Film (Indiana the dynamic between Shakespeare in Kenneth Branagh, Shakespeare’s drama University Press, 1977) live performance versus its ‘Live in and poetry when transferred to the J. N. Loehlin, Shakespeare in HD’ (direct from theatre to cinemas screen must speak loudly and directly to Performance: Henry V (Manchester worldwide) counterpart. cinema audiences of any particular time, University Press, 2000)

The Historian – Autumn 2015 29