VividSimon Simply Perfect

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Taha Avalos The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

Justina The film never slows down or bores, plunging from one harrowing sequence to the next.

clivey6 This is great to watch with the subtitles, and it's generally quite comprehensible, whereas reading the Aarden Shakespeare meant I had to consult the notes to figure out what the characters meant.That said, there's more than a touch of camp about Derek Jacobi's titular king, to the point where I wondered if he had a bit of the Edward II about him. Jacobi's effete manner reminded me of another, even earlier king, King John, as played by Claude Rains in The Adventures of Robin Hood. All very good up to a point, but it began to lack a certain range for me. As his self-pitying histrionics rose to a pitch near the end, I began to think of Richard Dreyfus in the 1990s sitcom Gimme Gimme Gimme, and how he might expostulate over some handsome hunk he'd had within his grasp, only to let slip through his fingers like slimy spaghetti in cold water - while an unimpressed, gum-chewing Kathy Burke watches on.It's 2 hrs 40 minutes, btw. Look out for a great supporting cast including Clive Swift (Keeping Up Appearances, Excalibur) among the more obvious names.

Alain English Coming early in the BBC's run of Shakespeare's plays, and kicking off his eight-play History Cycle that ends with "Richard III", "Richard II" is one of the best that I have seen so far in this series.I have previously trashed Derek Jacobi's performance as Hamlet elsewhere on this site, but that had more to do with my dislike of the over-rated character he was playing. As an actor, Jacobi is usually superlative, especially with Shakespeare, and he outdoes himself here in the title role.Richard II is widely assumed to be the 'weak king' of Shakespeare's monarchs, owing to his lyricism, and the fact that he is easily deposed by Bolingbroke (here played by Jon Finch). But I think that this assumption owes more to the plot than the actual character. In reality, Richard was a cunning ruler who was kicked off the throne not once but twice.In Jacobi's interpretation we get a man is arrogant, unwise and self-indulgent, prone to tears and self-pity, but who is definitely NOT a weak man. Note how he draws out his abdication from the throne, sowing the seeds of guilt in his usurper by thoroughly embarrassing him. Not to mention the way he fights off the guards near the end and dies nobly. Jacobi catches all these moments well and truly lives the character.He is well-supported by Sir John Gielgud as John of Gaunt and Charles Gray as York along with a host of other competent Shakespearean performers. The result, though well over two hours long, is a highly compelling piece of Shakespeare.

pae-sk Richard II is Shakespeare's first great tragedy, for here he realizes that character is destiny, and no English King was so brought to ruin because of his flawed character than the weak and stupid Richard II, son of Edward the Black Prince and grandson of Edward III.Jacobi's performance gets to the very root of Richard's personality: his arrogance, poor judgment, false bravado, impulsiveness - and in the end, his elegiac suffering as he collapses in tears, shorn of his crown and titles. "I cannot see," he wails when signing his abdication papers. "My eyes are too full of tears!" And was there ever a line in literature more heartbreaking than this: "I wasted time and now doth time waste me." A brilliant performance from start to gut-wrenching finish. Shakespeare has never been done better. The entire cast is marvelous.I hear too many complaints that BBC productions have poorly designed sets and costumes. Puh-leeeze! Shakespeare is all about the WORDS. If you want impressive spectacle, go rent one of Cecil B. DeMille's adaptations of the Little Golden Book of Bible Stories. BBC gives us truly GREAT actors reciting Shakespeare, uncut, unedited, and unexpurgated.Richard II was the first play in a cycle of eight plays that cover British history from 1377 to 1485 and chronicles the rise and fall of the high-hearted, ill-starred Plantagenets. Richard II is followed by Henry IV, Parts I and II; Henry V; Henry VI, Parts I, II, and III; and concluding the cycle, Richard III. This was part of a project by BBC to televise ALL of Shakespeare's plays for television. I don't know if they ever finished the series, but what they did complete was excellent, play after play.If American PBS stations really want to raise money for their support, stop with the stupid pledge drives and auctions! Get all these great performances on VHS and DVD and sell them to a public ravenously hungry for good and intelligent entertainment.

frostl Richard II is one of those plays that hangs almost wholly on the performance of the leading actor. While the action centers on the deposition of a king, the play is not so much a political drama as a psychological one. Shakespeare's interest, and therefore ours, is focused primarily on "unking'd Richard" rather than on his conflict with Henry Bolingbroke, the "silent king." Fortunately, the BBC version gives us a central performance that does the play justice: Derek Jacobi (one of my favorite actors anyway) does a turn here that's nothing short of splendid. Most of Richard's longer speeches have a nearly operatic quality to them, and Jacobi's reading does not disappoint. It's a great portrait of a petulant young king who gains -- if not true wisdom, then magnificent pathos.The deposition scene alone is worth the price of admission. :-)(I now apologize for the pretentious opening. I'm writing a thesis on Richard II at the moment -- indeed, I should be writing it *now* -- so I'm still in literary critic mode... ;-) )Although Jacobi's bravura performance dominates the production, there are a few others that really stand out, chief among them Sir John Gielgud's amazing, intense John of Gaunt (whose last scene is just riveting -- his elegy for England gave me chills), Jon Finch's calculating Bolingbroke, and Charles Gray's York, who fortunately is not played as comic relief.All this praise is not to say there's nothing about the production that doesn't work. For instance, the confusing and allegorical garden scene is rather unimpressive -- it's difficult and stylized anyway, and neither Janet Maw as the Queen nor Jonathan Adams as the head gardener really pulls it off. And the scene where York accuses his son Aumerle of treason while his wife pleads for pardon, rhyming all the while...well, it isn't one of Shakespeare's finest moments, but these actors, to their credit, went a ways toward making it watchable. And then there are the usual quibbles with the BBC production values -- the sets and such are not particularly impressive-looking; it's more like watching a stage production on film. But that doesn't matter if the performances are good -- and for the most part, these are first-rate.