Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

Claysaba Excellent, Without a doubt!!

Teringer An Exercise In Nonsense

evening1 Poor King Richard III. He's killed all his rivals for the throne and there's no one left to bow and scrape. And he can't even find a horse to ride away.Al Pacino doesn't explain why he chose this play of Shakespeare's 37, but he very successfully uses this gory history drama as a prism through which to demonstrate that Shakespeare is full of sound and fury, signifying a lot -- if Americans will just take the time to be aware.Wearing shades and a baseball cap, and clutching a copy of Cliff Notes, Al Pacino travels from New York to England talking to all manner of folk about the Bard, from men-in-the-street to ivory-tower English scholars. And he dramatizes the best scenes from the play with an ensemble of crackerjack American actors. The result is a compelling argument for giving old Will another look.I read in the IMDb notes that Pacino had originally intended to film his own version of "Richard III" but decided against it when he realized he couldn't outshine Lawrence Olivier's 1955 masterpiece.It was probably a good call.Pacino comes up with something entirely unique here and it's a delight through and through. Highly recommended for anyone who'd like to know more about the writer who knew us best.

to_bornotb Though I have watched this documentary many times I find that now after watching it during my enrollment in a documentary film class I am able to appreciate the film all that much more. Pacino's passion as an actor is vividly captured in this documentary and the breaks that he offers in order for the audience to "catch-up" illustrates that he understands his notions as an actor place him in a better understanding of the Shakespearean play, Richard III; but, he does not impose that notion upon the viewer. He is dedicated to helping the viewer understand the play and in doing so gives off a great sense of authority over the play and the production. I enjoyed the rehearsal readings that showed the actors were somewhat in the same boat of misunderstanding as the audience was. By walking the streets of New York and discussing Shakespeare in the most usually of places demonstrates how Pacino envisioned Shakespeare to be a more intricate part of our daily lives. As a participatory film, Pacino demonstrates the art of documenting by choosing the scenes in which he is selecting the settings for the shots to be filmed, he controls the dialogue that takes place on camera and decides which scenes of the play with be discussed more extensively on camera. This film gained a new appreciation from an old fan by noticing the different cinematic techniques that Al Pacino considers while they take place on film.

rajah524-3 I'm not sure I have ever given a -10- to anything I've ever reviewed here (including the fifty or sixty I have removed) - BUT - if you are an actor, director, scenarist, dialog writer, director or pretty much anything else in stage or cinema... and -haven't- seen this...You have -really- missed something remarkable.We have seen Pacino be artful (in the Godfathers, in "Glengarry Glen Ross," in "Sea of Love," in "Serpico"). We have seen him strike us dumb (in "Scarface," in "The Devil's Advocate," in "And Justice for All"). We have seen him slip us a mickey (in "Scent of a Woman," in "Dog Day Afternoon," in "Dick Tracy"). Here, however, we get to see him do -all- of this, -and- provide access to the man's boggling mind and force of charm.We can surely see here why – and how -- Al has gotten his way for decades (even though Richard himself only got –his- for two years).And see him do it in the context of the play that really "made" Bill Shakespeare when it hit the big time in 1633 -40 years- after it was written... along with a cast of stage monsters who make this 450-year-old revelation... Come... To... Life.Bear in mind, as well, how all this revelation must have been viewed a mere 125 years after all this blood-soaked chicanery in a court so similar to the one viewing it.For the king and queen who saw that first performance, this might have been rather like watching "Gone With the Wind" had it been screened for the first time in about 1880 when the world was as little changed from 1865 as 1633 was from 1485.Talk about "The Godfather," this is the -original-. The intrigues are like torpedoes coming from everywhere. NO one can be trusted. NO one is safe. And we get to see it here in a way no film version (of pretty much anything by Old Bill) has ever made so evident... and relevant.This is worth a trip to Blockbuster in a hail storm.

amosduncan_2000 Al Pacino is one of the most dynamic and charismatic film stars ever; yet he has always been hampered by his inability to pick good projects other than his hits for Coppla and Lumet. This film gives some clue as to why: he appears to be as stupid as a block of stone. A big screen version of Henry "Fonize" Winkler's Shakespeare T.V. show, "Looking For Richard" is a harebrained idea run into the ground. "Richard The III" is one of the easiest to follow of all the Bard's works, that the dark prince is the bad guy stabbing everybody in the back is about all you need to know. Yet Pacino begins with the idea that the play is impossible to bring to modern audiences, it's just too complicated. His solution? Only do the juiciest bits with his Hollywood pals. Unintentional hilarity ensues. Beyond that, Pacino is a ceaseless bore, surrounded by sycophants who encourage him to make a behind of himself. In one scene, Pacino seems to be suggesting to young people that Shakespeare is cool because you get to seduce Wynona Ryder. In another, he keeps interrupting a bored John Gielgud. It's never mentioned that Pacino's on stage Richard III was an infamous production laughed off Broadway in about a week. Maybe it wasn't Al's fault. But the critics were a lot kinder to this silly film than they were to Pacino when he really took a crack at the Bard.