TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Richard III (2016)

The Hollow Crown: The Wars of the Roses: Richard III (2016) directed by Dominic Cooke based on Shakespeare's plays

For the previous Hollow Crown series, see my reviews of Richard II, Henry IV Part 1 and Part 2, and Henry V. For the previous episodes in the Wars of the Roses series, see Henry VI Part 1 and Part 2.

Richard III (Benedict Cumberbatch) rises to and falls from power in this adaptation of Shakespeare's popular play. Richard is a man of cunning and ambition with no apparent sense of goodness in him at all. He manipulates his family members and the nobility with horrifying ease and effectiveness, always redirected responsibility and guilt on others. He acknowledges his guilt to viewers (he makes many asides to the camera to clarify what he's really up to) and has no remorse. In spite of killing two brothers, two nephews, a wife, and a host of other nobles and relatives, he gets his comeuppance at the end.

The production is very elaborate. Scenes are filmed in historic locations and battles occur in towns and fields, giving the movie a very cinematic feel. Richard starts the movie with an aside to the camera (the "Now is the winter of our discontent..." speech) so his talking to the camera seems natural, though the previous episodes haven't had anyone speak directly to the camera since the Chorus actually appears at the end of Henry V. Since the story is an intimate portrayal of Richard, the asides work well.

On the other hand, just because it's intimate doesn't mean it's accurate. Critics of the play like to rail against it as Tudor propaganda (Henry VII beats Richard III at the Battle of Bosworth and winds up with the crown) and character assassination. Setting those (legitimate) concerns aside, this story gives a compelling picture of the most Machiavellian man ever. Dramatically it is very exciting and Cumberbatch gives a great performance, sliding around from fake meekness and icy calculation to moral outrage and anger with amazing ease. It's a great performance of Shakespeare's take on Richard III.

This is well worth watching and a fine end to the series.

TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Henry VI Part 2 (2016)

The Hollow Crown: The Wars of the Roses: Henry VI Part 2 (2016) directed by Dominic Cooke based on Shakespeare's plays

For the previous Hollow Crown series, see my reviews of Richard II, Henry IV Part 1 and Part 2, and Henry V. For the previous episode in the Wars of the Roses series, see Henry VI Part 1.

The Wars of the Roses rages on as King Henry VI is assailed by the house of York with their claims as rightful ruler. Henry is too mild and pious to hold the crown on his own. His scheming wife Margaret is certainly more aggressive if not entirely faithful. They have a son, Edward, whom Henry disinherits in a moment of weakness while negotiating with the Duke of York. There are plenty of betrayals among the Yorks as well. The plot requires a bit of attention.

For a Shakespeare play, this production includes a lot of violence and bloody gore. There's no stagey-ness or skimping on the battle scenes. They show the full horror of battle. Coughing up blood happens a lot; many throats are slit. Heads are cut off and piked on the walls of cities (a common practice in dealing with traitors back then). So squeamish viewers need to beware.

The story moves along at a rapid pace, almost to the detriment of the storytelling. Loyalties reverse many times throughout the show, sometimes happening a bit too quickly to be believable. The story takes place over 15 or 16 years. Things slow down at the end as the focus shifts to Richard, Duke of Gloucester, (played well by Benedict Cumberbatch) who does the dirty work needed to ensure his brother, Edward IV, remains King of England. Richard will wind up as Richard III, the subject of the final movie in this series. The other actors do a good job as well. The story just looks stripped down to the bare bones.

This movie is better as a connective tissue between Part 1 and Richard III, I'm not sure that it can stand on its own as a story. Certainly it was produced as part of a trilogy, and Henry VI was originally three separate plays, so a lot of material was condensed to make it to the finale.

TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Henry VI Part 1 (2016)

The Hollow Crown: The Wars of the Roses: Henry VI Part 1 (2016) directed by Dominic Cooke based on Shakespeare's plays

For the previous Hollow Crown series, see my reviews of Richard II, Henry IV Part 1 and Part 2, and Henry V.

Following the death of King Henry V, his infant son is crowned king. Naturally Henry VI cannot rule so his uncle, the Duke of Gloucester (Hugh Bonneville), becomes Lord Protector. Henry V's conquests in France begin to slip away. Henry VI grows up but hardly seems like an adult among the lords of Parliament. Gloucester always acts with his nephew's best interests. Others strive to undermine his influence and take his place as trusted advisor. Some even maneuver to become king of England. The reconquest of France goes poorly (thanks a lot, Joan of Arc!), enabling further mischief and machinations in the royal court. Somerset (Ben Miles) finds a French noble wife for Henry, though she is more in Somerset's sway and has many more ambitions beyond being Henry's wife. Henry himself is a weak king. His interest in religion and prayer are a detriment to his royal duties. Like his father before him, he seems unfit to wear the crown. Unlike his father, he does not have a transformative experience into a warrior king, leaving Henry VI subject to whatever  political wind prevails. It's not a good situation and leads the country into civil war.

This second series of The Hollow Crown is subtitled The Wars of the Roses. In an early scene, Richard Plantagenet confers with a handful of other nobles. He has a claim to the throne and wants to find out who would back him. He plucks a white rose from a nearby bush. Others pluck white roses in support of him or red roses in support of Somerset from the house of Lancaster. The Duke of Gloucester is not there and he does remain the king's true servant, even after his wife is banished for consorting with the occult against Henry. Gloucester's enemies use this as an excuse to implicate Gloucester, with tragic results. By the end, Plantagenet makes his claim for the crown and rallies his sons, including his hunchbacked son also named Richard (Benedict Cumberbatch).

The political intrigue is more fascinating than I was anticipating. Backstabbing nobles don't always make the most interesting or compelling characters, but the writing is excellent and the characters well drawn. The actors are uniformly wonderful and deliver the Shakespearean dialogue with naturalness and conviction.

I can't wait for Part 2!

TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Henry V (2012)

The Hollow Crown: Henry V (2012) directed by Thea Sharrock based on the play by Shakespeare

In 2012, England hosted the Summer Olympics. The BBC decided to have a "Cultural Olypiad" which included a series of William Shakespeare's historical play. In the first series, they presented Richard II, Henry IV Part I, Henry IV Part II, and Henry V.

Prince Hal (Tom Hiddleston) is now King Henry V. He wants to re-establish England's rule over France. His claim is a bit sketchy but when the Dauphin sends him a box full of tennis balls to mock him, Henry gears up to go. Politics mostly take a back seat to reflections on war, honor, duty, and the amazing transformation of party boy Prince Hal into noble and just warlord King Henry V.

The story is, of course, great. Hiddleston does a fine job transforming from the foppish prince to a respectable, if not respected, head of state. He's convincing in giving the great speeches and in fighting the big battles. The battles are filmed in realistic settings with all the grime and blood of war, making this very much a film version and not a stage production. Even so, the Chorus (who provides a running commentary and often asks the audience to imagine the greater scale of events that can't be presented on a theatrical stage) is retained for the production. He is mostly voice over and works for the film.

This movie is a very satisfying finale to the first series of The Hollow Crown. A second series was produced in 2016 including the Henry VI plays and Richard III. I will definitely continue on with the series!

TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part 2 (2012)

The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part 2 (2012) co-written and directed by Richard Eyre based on Shakespeare's play

In 2012, England hosted the Summer Olympics. The BBC decided to have a "Cultural Olypiad" which included a series of William Shakespeare's historical play. In the first series, they presented Richard II, Henry IV Part I, Henry IV Part II, and Henry V.

Prince Hal (Tom Hiddleston) continues his turn away from his drunken party boy lifestyle. His tutor in debauchery, Falstaff (Simon Russell Beale), is being called to account for his lifestyle but strives through wit and trickery to avoid the consequences of his actions. He's being taken seriously as a knight and has been called to raise troops to oppose the Earl of Northumberland and the archbishop of York, who are allying against King Henry IV (Jeremy Irons). The king's health is deteriorating. He still wants to fight the uprising and has misgivings over his oldest son's friends and behavior (he says the famous quote, "Uneasy lies the head that wears a crown").

Loyalty, duty, and betrayal are the big themes here. Prince Hal shifts his loyalty away from Falstaff and to his father, especially when the kingship looms over him. Falstaff wants to live a life of merriment; he heeds the call of duty but does not embrace it and is not transformed by it. He wants to stay good buddies with Prince Hal. By the end, Hal has become King Henry V and sees the need to renounce his former way of life and his former friends. The moment is sad and hard for Falstaff, who for all his loutishness is still well-rounded enough to evoke sympathy from the audience.

The actors are uniformly great in this production. The overall production values are still fairly dark though they do lighten by the end. Prince Hal's coronation is a big turning point visually and for the characters, making me very excited for the next play, Henry V.

This play is much more interesting than Part 1. I can't recommend skipping over Part 1 since it does set up the characters and the situation so well. Part 1 really needs the second part to complete the story.

TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part 1 (2012)

The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part 1 (2012) co-written and directed by Richard Eyre based on Shakespeare's play

In 2012, England hosted the Summer Olympics. The BBC decided to have a "Cultural Olypiad" which included a series of William Shakespeare's historical play. In the first series, they presented Richard II, Henry IV Part I, Henry IV Part II, and Henry V.

The aging Henry IV (Jeremy Irons) is beset by hardships. Henry Hotspur, son of the Duke of Northumberland, is angry that the king would not pay a ransom for his brother-in-law. The situation grows out of hand, i.e. Hotspur and some Welsh nobles take arms in rebellion. A closer hardship is Prince Hal (Tom Hiddleston) who is living a rather dissolute life with his companion Falstaff and others. They play pranks on each other. Falstaff is older, fatter, and drunker, so he usually gets the short end of the stick. Their good times end when the king summons Prince Hal to battle against the uprising. Hal and his friends do the right thing and go to war.

This movie is less colorful and less resonant than the first film, Richard II. The story here is slow. A lot of time is spent with Hal and Falstaff playing tricks and having barroom banter. Maybe out of respect for Shakespeare the movie makers didn't want to cut anything out, but I thought the story would be better served with less. Hiddleston is a charming scoundrel and makes the turn to a more serious person believable. Jeremy Irons is good as the king but he definitely is a secondary character to Prince Hal, despite the title.

The production is also very dark visually. The royal court mostly wears black and takes place in grey, underlit rooms. The pub where Hal and Falstaff hang out shows the typical medieval grunginess and poor lighting. Even the battle at the end takes place on a snow-covered battlefield, leaving a rather bleak appearance.

A good, not great, movie.

TV Review: The Hollow Crown: Richard II (2012)

The Hollow Crown: Richard II (2012) co-written and directed by Rupert Goold based on Shakespeare's play

In 2012, England hosted the Summer Olympics. The BBC decided to have a "Cultural Olypiad" which included a series of William Shakespeare's historical play. In the first series, they presented Richard II, Henry IV Part I, Henry IV Part II, and Henry V.

Shakespeare's Richard II is a vainglorious and somewhat effeminate king from the late 1300s. As played masterfully by Ben Whishaw, Richard is at first sight like those ethereal, otherworldly Jesuses seen in various religious epics from Hollywood's 1950s and 1960s. He's fair skinned, skinny, soft, and doesn't quite make eye contact. He's a bit above it all, almost as if he is in love with his own kingliness. He has to settle a dispute between Henry Bolingbroke (Rory Kinnear) and the Earl of Mowbray. Henry has accused the earl of treason and has challenged him to duel to defend his claim. Richard doesn't want bloodshed on English soil, so he banishes them both, though Bolingbroke only for a few years while Mowbray may never return. The unsatisfactoriness of the arrangement is worsened when Richard visits Bolingbroke's father, John of Gaunt (Patrick Stewart), on his deathbed. After John is dead, Richard seizes all of his assets (i.e. the inheritance of Bolingbroke) to finance a war in Ireland. Richard has already taxed the rich and poor alike to finance his wars, so he is not exactly popular in England. While Richard goes to Ireland, Bolingbroke returns ostensibly to recover his lost inheritance. He quickly sweeps many nobles to his side and threatens to take the throne from Richard, making himself Henry IV. Henry's revenge on Richard and his supporters is swift and almost merciless.

I am completely unfamiliar with Richard II's story, so I can't comment on the historical accuracy. But dramatically the story is quite excellent. Richard at first seems ethereal and kind-hearted but his flawed ambition is soon revealed. He retains his sense of self-importance all the way to the end. At first he's annoying and easy to root against; as his fortunes turn sour he becomes more pathetic and sympathetic. The transition is partly to do with the writing (it is Shakespeare, after all) but also with the acting. Whishaw (who I have only seen as Q in the recent Bond flicks) gives a spell-binding performance. The rest of the cast performs admirably too.

The contrast between Richard and Henry is interesting as well. Richard is soft and weak but has a sense of his own authority and importance as the king. Henry is hard and strong with a respect for the king if not full trust in him. Richard's sumptuous living shows a detachment from others. Henry appears mostly in his armor and travel clothes. Even as king, his wardrobe is still simple and reminiscent of his battlewear. The two men have some respect for each other, but for both of them that respect gives way to harsh ambition with some devastating consequences.

This TV movie has very high production values. The locations look as good as any theatrical release and the buildings' interiors and exteriors look authentically medieval. The camera work is decidedly unstagey, with some interesting and meaningful shots that a theatrical audience could never see (at one point the crown is handed between the two men and the point of view if from beneath, so the screen shows Richard II framed by the crown then Henry; it's hard to describe but amazing to see).

Highly recommended!

The next play is Henry IV Part 1 with Jeremy Irons as King Henry and Tom Hiddleston as Prince Hal. I will definitely watch that!