Quote:
Originally posted by hotpie
Wow, I guess I'm one of the few who could appreciate this stylized version of Shakespear's first play.
Maybe you should say what you disliked instead of just saying it was a bad adaptation... is there some point you are trying to make?
|
-"stylized" is code for "really bizarre interludes that are inconsistant with stage instructions included in the original" . . . it's a heroin nightmare at points, and a low-budget-feeling one at that
-I don't find the acting all that impressive (better than most of the branaugh versions, however)
-the over-the-top attempts to 'shock' the viewer, while similar to shakespeare's actual play's impact (although NOT the intent), become more like schlock, including a serialized, pulp-novel rendition of the final scene
-however, i did like the inference of suicide/sepuku/whatever the fuck he put in that final scene . . . however I've not a clue where he got that, it's not shown in any other materials i've ever studied
-and so on, and so on
So yeah - you can act like I just lack the capability of appreciating the work, but just 18 short months ago I spent time working on a comparison/contrast piece for a professor about this exact movie and the original work.
I personally find it to be a terrible, terrible adaptation. Should I expound further? It's cool you liked it, it's definitely different, but I was unimpressed.
How did you like the original piece? Which version of the original did you read?