Henry V (1944)

  'Henry V' is a 1944 British film directed by and starring Laurence Olivier, taken from the play written by William Shakespeare.

  Henry V has inherited the throne after the death of his father Henry IV. He has a wild and lively reputation, so when the French Prince Dauphin sends Henry an insulting message in response to Henry's claim for French land, he starts a full on war. After the death of Falstaff, Henry and his small army travel to France, where the French large army wait for him.

  I have seen a couple of direct adaptations of Shakespeare's plays, and none of them have surpassed mediocre. Polanski's Macbeth was forgettable, Branagh's Hamlet was long, and Luhrmann's Romeo and Julliet was the movie equivalent of gherkins in a Big Mac. However it didn't help that my English teacher kept replaying the film over and over, I must have seen it five times. The question you are asking yourself now is, Is Henry V the first truly great Shakespeare film adaptation. erm... no.

  Maybe Shakespeare isn't my thing. This being my first Olivier film, I think my hopes were too high, and were inevitably destroyed after the first five minutes. Firstly the positives. For 1944, the film is ahead of it's time, and in colour! It doesn't feel like a 1940s film, which I think is a good thing. Partly due to the cardboard set design and the costumes, which are colourful and different to anything around that time.

  The negative list is quite long. With Shakespeare, the most important thing is the acting, and while most characters were portrayed decently, there was no outstanding performance. With all the hype surrounding Olivier, you can understand my disappointment. He was effective, but I feel Branagh did a superior job in 'Henry V' (1989). Without great performances, Shakespeare adaptations are don't work.

  I know the story of Henry V quite well, but in this version, Olivier managed to bore me to death. The first 25 minutes is set in The Globe, which was dull, and the last 20 minutes was Henry's stupid proposal for a girl he just met, who doesn't speak his language. You get the feeling he is a pimp or a womanizer rather than a great and loving king. My advice? take out the first and last 25 minutes. In the 1989 version, the story builds up to the bloody and brutal war scene. But here, the build-up is slower and the battle is not as satisfying, even if it's the best part of the film.

  The biggest problem of all is the language. They were speaking so fast, I couldn't process what they were saying. Luckily the film has a simple plot, but it felt like I was watching a silent film. The actors were rushing through their lines, there was no time to think about what they were saying.

  I'm sure I'm in the minority with disliking this film. So trusting other reviews is a better idea. A way better idea. One of these days I will find a good direct Shakespeare adaptation.

TO CONCLUDE
137 minutes of boredom. I tried to like it, but from the start, it wanted me to sleep.

SCORE
51