Sunday, September 6, 2015
Richard II, BBC version
So I didn't get to go see the play live as I am out of town - which at first was a bit of bummer, but now I'm kind of glad! Because, instead of that, I watched the BBC version of Richard II and it was incredible. It was so well done and I was riveted to my computer screen for two and a half hours! Seeing it acted out, even though just on screen, really made me appreciate the play even more. I also really liked the actor for Richard. The one thing that really fascinated me about this version, however, was their portrayal of Richard as a Christ figure. I know we touched on this in our class discussion, but it was very prominent in this version, and it was very deliberate. Multiple times, the actor made gestures and speeches and was even dressed in a way reminiscent of Christ. And in the scene of Richard's death, he becomes a living version of an earlier painting in the show that looked like it was of Christ. Even the actor himself bore some resemblance to Christ. Overall, I just really thought it was interesting how they portrayed him thus, especially because Bolingbroke just seemed like the better person (really the better person to be king), even at the beginning. And Richard was a little less ...charismatic. So it almost seemed as if his portrayal as Christ went against his own character. It was very interesting.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's interesting that they portrayed Richard as Christ, but almost as a false Christ. It would be really interesting to see a rendition where Richard was portrayed as an actual Christ figure, and where Bolingbrook was portrayed as Satan. I also agree that watching the play made it come to life. I think everyone felt like that, from what I can gather in the comments.
ReplyDeleteI like that you loved his portrayal of Richard! I wasn't a huge fan, as I mentioned in my post, but I like the points you brought up about why you were a fan. I think you hit the nail on the head, calling him a Christ figure. Costumes were mentioned in another post and I think especially considering his white, regal robes, we can think of him as a kingly Christ. I also like what Alyssa says above about making Bolingbrook a Satan figure. The interesting thing here is that Richard really wasn't Christlike as a person, but because of divinity in Kingship, he is portrayed that way. Fascinating
ReplyDeleteI definitely see why you didn't like him... he, as a person, was not likable. but I think it was so interesting how they portrayed him!! And near the end, I really just pitied him.
DeleteI think that it fascinating how there is this Christ-like complex in the BBC version. The actor that played King Richard II in the Grassroot production decided to play him in an effeminate manner that was completely different. He came out very weak and childish whereas, from what you guys are describing, this other Richard comes out stronger, or at least more of a martyr. I love the different interpretations available in each production of a play.
ReplyDeleteWell... he was still pretty effeminate (that's a good word for it!!) that's one of the reasons it was kind of weird to see him as a Christ figure, too... :/
DeleteI thought the connections between Richard and Christ were pretty interesting as well. In the text I saw the references to Christ as merely Richard trying to make himself look even more pitiable, but in the BBC version it seems to really play up the idea of Richard as a martyr and make Bolingbroke look more unfeeling and perhaps even evil. It definitely deepens the feeling of tragedy at the end.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting too! I also think that BBC was maybe trying to emphasize how much Richard was obsessed with material wealth. He seemed pretty comfy in his gold shoulder pads and fancy crown. But I guess that's what you should expect from a king who is somewhat self-obsessed.
ReplyDeleteThat's an interesting take! I didn't even think of that but, looking back, I could see that.
Delete