Shakespeare's Julius Caesar is easily picked up anywhere these days, even on youtube. In the BBC/Time-Life Films (1979) (Tragedies of Will. Shakespeare) TV movie set, Richard Pasco plays Brutus; his dark features lend to the idea that he actually is Italian, and the name Pasco supports the idea (however, imbd.com says he's English and England-trained, so I suppose they know what they are talking about. Also, since imbd.com lists Brutus/Pasco/bug-eyed-man-with-weird-eyebrows at the top of the list, he must therefore really be the protagonist: case closed). Keith Michell plays Marc Antony and David Collings as Cassius. Charles Gray is Caesar himself. Herbert Wise directed the film, and Cedric Messina produced it (more Italians; they're returning for their play and "first" emperor).
The production was filmed on a soundstage, probably in England. I doubt in Italy, and most likely not in ancient Rome either, since they did not have time machines yet in 1979 when the production was filmed. The set designers did include, however, many tasteful columns and Roman-esque buildings, and for a few scenes, what looks like fake, cut boulders. This was a BBC TV-movie, aka low-budget (aka, charming). For the wardrobe, all costumes for the senators were cut from a common cloth, one-size fits all (except for skinny, little Cassius); the historicity seems correct, because of the maroon touch for their office. The women's dress, except in a few cases, was merely a taken-in sheet. For Virginia McKenna (Portia), there must not have been but an inch of cloth, since she was half an inch wide and looked about to fall over. Perhaps she was trying to show that her thigh had truly bled out and taken all but bone with it. However, this was Roman fashion (the toga, I mean), so kudos to the BBC once again.
In comparison to the actual original manuscript (unless you get painstakingly into the folios &c &c &c, so don't), the movie is spot on. The actors enunciate and orate and elocute perfectly, and quite bring the writing to life. My favorite spot is when Casca relates to Brutus and Cassius how Caesar denied the crown thrice, the people shouted, and he himself had to hold his breath to avoid "the bad air." However, the production is dated, for time advances yet film is static (good thing; huzzah for historians and researchers). Shakespeare is for grown-ups, not children, as someone said. Many people are children in mind and don't know it, so––those who like it will, and those who don't. . . . I'm not saying anything more. As to American audiences: the tide turneth, and Americans are now discovering BBC; we will find this production wholesale one day, and who knows what will happen then?
As to liking, there were some moments when the cinematography was imperfect, or the acting ill-suited for a TV medium. Shakespeare is for the stage, not film. However, that does not mean the decision should be that the camera should pan up so close to the face so that only the eyes of Brutus are seen (and this is how one does indeed know he has brown eyes and tan skin: I got that a while ago) and left there. Or, while the camera stays in a position of awkward closeness, instead of a normal soliloquy, we have a pre-recorded voice-over of the actor, then the camera pans back, and the actor shouts!––then back to quiet voice-over. It felt random and misconstructed. However, certain parts were quite nice for TV. That I can go back and rewatch parts on youtube that made me laugh, either because of how time will misconstrue them (or how Sonnet 20 really does construe them), is a blessing of modern technology and a good joke on all of scholasticism.
The best review of this movie is this: that I would watch it again.
No comments:
Post a Comment