LULZ / TV & Film

Best Shakespeare films?

or just your favorite(s)

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I'm blue dabadee dabaday

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >i'm based dabadee dabaday

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Based

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Based and Bluepilled

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Throne Of Blood, Ran, The Bad Sleep Well, the list goes on...

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Laurence Oliviers hamlet is good

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Zulu

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Good choice, but I would pick either this ...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      .. or this.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Perhaps the real Sitting On Top of the World is the friends we made along the way, just rolling along.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        10/10 kinographie

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Probably this

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The Olivier adaptation is also kino. Richard III is my favorite Shakespeare character, he’s so comically evil.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Iago is still the most evil character. Ruining the lives of multiple people just for fun.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Othello asks him why he put him through all this torture
            >Responds with basically the 1600’s equivalent of “wouldn’t you like to know” and those are his last words
            Holy kino

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Is he the earliest example of a character doing bad stuff just for shits and giggles?

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                No.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                There's tons of characters in e.g. ancient mythology who fuck with people for no good reason.
                Also there's clues about potential motives throughout the play (being jealous of Othello's rank, just standard racism, also Iago may believe that Othello cucked him)

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >refuses to elaborate
              >leaves

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              with basically the 1600’s equivalent of “wouldn’t you like to know”
              god that would be worse than the torture

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >Refuses to elaborate
              >Exeunt

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >refuses to elaborate
              >leaves

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                "Watch your girl bro."

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            yeah but Iago is not really comical, he's a satanic character through and through, his archetype can be found in Satan of Paradise Lost, Richard is a more simple character.

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              >not really comical
              this is your brain on (((modern shakespeare studies))). Iago would have been played by the resident clown/fool of the theater company. he’s funny. satanic maybe, but funny too. cry about it.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                what the fuck is wrong with you lmao, why so angry? anyway, putting you weird attitude aside, I'm not talking about the performance, I'm talking about the character itself and he is not meant to be comical even if he is played that way. Iago is a double-sided character, he is someone playing someone else (something he repeats over and over throughout the play) him being comical is a mask, what lies underneath is not comical. Contrast that with Richard who doesn't have that nuance.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >he is someone playing someone else
                funny you say that, Iago to me always seemed to me similar to Hamlet in that both seem to be self-aware of their roles as actors/characters in a play.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Oh please. That’s a trait that every major Shakespeare character from the Henriad onward possesses. Hamlet goes crazy because of it. Meta-theatricality is not a groundbreaking theory. All the world’s a stage.

                >Iago would have been played by the resident clown/fool of the theater company.
                funny you understood this yet you still missed the point of the character, you were close though

                iago as le cHaOs has and never will be deep or interesting or true. he’s satanic but so are all villains on the renaissance stage.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >That’s a trait that every major Shakespeare character from the Henriad onward possesses
                never claimed he was the only one
                >Hamlet goes crazy because of it.
                Of course, he's the most popular character who is used as an example of this.
                >Meta-theatricality is not a groundbreaking theory.
                Never even attempted to make the claim it was, don't know why you even thought that.

                Your anger at some made up position you are ascribing to me made you miss the point I was making, that Iago is supposed to be more evil than he is comical and that him being comical is part of the "mask" the character as well as the actor is wearing, which goes back to the initial contrast I was making with Richard who does not possess this quality, which again is the whole point of the posts I was making but you have never addressed this to have a normal discussion. This is an interpretation of mine which I'm open to discuss.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >anger
                first off i’m just having some shakespeare bants, didn’t expect a (you) in the first place so i was being an overly aggressive LULZ autist. anyway, the post i replied to said he wasn’t comical, he was satanic through and through. i disagree, he is comical. he’s funny. he makes the audience laugh. he’s also awful, obviously, but his humor is a pretty significant aspect of the character, one that often gets overlooked.

                What makes him different from Richard, I think, isn’t the mask of a clown or a deeper and pure evil underneath of it. Both have that. Iago’s is just more pronounced because at that point Shakespeare was a better writer who learned that real character is contrast. That is, Iago is only as evil as his honest, oblivious foil (Othello) allows him to be. Richard doesn’t lack a mask, he lacks someone interesting to plot against.

                but enough of my theory. why do you think iago is satanic? there is a lot of heaven/hell/devil imagery in the play, i’ll give you that.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Don't get me wrong, I'm just glad I can have a conversation about Shakespeare with someone, and base this only on my own personal readings and some of Harold Bloom essays who I don't entirely agree with on several points. I didn't study Shakespeare or anything in a pozzed university lol.

                Anyway, my opinion is that Iago is satanic in the sense that he is constantly rebelling against the established order and not necessarily to gain anything (in the play he doesn't really care about money, or women or even the position of lieutenant that he feels robbed of), simply to impose his will due to his vain and prideful nature. Also like you said, there are numerous references yo heaven/hell, but I think the most obvious one is his line "I am not what I am" which obviously parallels God's "I am that I am", so he himself seems to accept this role, and then there's a soliloquy of his which ends Act 1 with him making what is essentially an invocation of the forces of night and hell. He also tempts the characters in the play to ruin themselves, with drink, with jealousy, with the promise of sex, he never acts directly.

                I think one of the main differences between him and Richard is that Richard is incompetent, something which Iago is not. But I do agree with you that he is better played comically, exaggeratedly even. I haven't had the opportunity to see the play live and see how he is supposed to be played.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Also, in case I'm not making a good enough case for my position, I recommend you read Harold Bloom's essay on Iago. It develops the idea further if you are interested.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >but so are all villains on the renaissance stage.
                that's patently false or you don't understand what Satanic means, not even other Shakespeare villains are satanic, like Macbeth or Lady Macbeth. Iago is not chaos, there's a method to his actions, which stem from his rebellious nature.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                -Edmund from Lear
                -Aaron from Titus
                -Percy from Henry IV
                All rebellious villains. Are you really gonna try and argue that Edmund isn’t satanic? Lmao. There are plenty others that aren’t Shakespearean btw. Marlowe invented iambic pentameter.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                Your reading comprehension is terrible. I never said Iago was the only satanic character in Shakespeare or in drama, but you did say all villains in renaissance stage are satanic, which again, is false.

                >Marlowe invented iambic pentameter.
                I don’t know what that has to do with anything I said or what point you are even trying to make with your posts.

              • 4 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                >Iago would have been played by the resident clown/fool of the theater company.
                funny you understood this yet you still missed the point of the character, you were close though

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            >Ruining the lives of multiple people just for fun.
            Richard III ruins the lives of many characters too, his the people who die directly because of him are much more than the ones Iago ruins

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Kinopilled

        kneel

        Based

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          (you)

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Not memeing, I unironically liked it.

            Still doing a little b8ing

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              Nothing to bait about it, it was legitimately good

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Richard The Third is /ourguy/

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        /threa

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          I really have been meaning to watch that one. It looks fucking awesome.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It's very good.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            It really is, check out the trailer if you need more of a push to watch it

            Speak for yourself bro, Shakespeare with guns is always kino (see [...] and [...])

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Should I watch the previous two movies first?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      to think dudes dressed like that. they look so fucking ridiculous.

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ha ha biggus tittus

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    my personal favorite

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      king lear, RAN, nice....btw ran means chaos.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      based.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    kneel

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I unironically love this goofy-ass film.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >do you remember me benny blanco from the bronx

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I literally watched carlito's way last night, are you me?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      K I N O
      I
      N
      O

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      unadulterated kino

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        why the fuck would you link the hungarian version

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          why wouldn't I?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >when the moonspeak kicks in

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I fucking hate the ADHD Looney Tunes shit in Baz Luhrman movies (annoying/childish grunting and weird-for-the-sake-of-weird camera movements). Moulin Rouge has the same thing.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Moulin Rouge gave me a headache. Genuinely awful film.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I got filtered hard, imo og dialogues and whatever the fuck the setting was produced cringe, not kino.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      so stylized it works.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This, but 100% unironically. It feels exactly like a stage play.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >saw my first pair of tiddies in english class thanks to this
      unless it doesn't have tits, which means they were in the other romeo and juliet movie we watched.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This was actually the first time I saw a full feature of Rome and Juliet, and it's the best.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      shouldn't it be "my only love sprang from my only hate"
      or "has sprung from my only hate"

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I honestly hate this movie. Don't get the praise for it. It gives me second-hand embarrassment.

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Henry's come to see us!

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      the GOAT

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Chimes at Midnight, starring Orson Welles as himself.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This
      Chimes is the real Shakespeare Kino

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Branaghs Hamlet.
    I don't care about shitty """purists"""" who insist that Laurence Oliviers lazy narcissism is a better manifestation of the character, it simply isn't. Branagh not only masterfully captures the vaccilations of Hamlet, he also has numerous, masterful allusions to Kierkegaard, he captured the quintessentially nordic temperament of the character with so much more skill than Oliviers faggy queening.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Branagh not only masterfully captures the vaccilations of Hamlet,
      I don't approve of corrupting Bill Shakespeare with Bill Gates mRNA microchips.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      yeah except I viscerally hate Kenneth Branigan

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This. Say what you want about Branagh being self-indulgent; It's easily the best film Hamlet.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Say what you want about Branagh being self-indulgent
        Branagh is self-indulgent and it's great

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      is that scut farkus?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        His name is the Postal Dude, and yes

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >all white cast

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Macbeth

  15. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Throne of Blood (1957).

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >tfw you gambled on a fart and lost

  16. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Watching Hollywood actors trying desperately to act to the same level as the theater actors was very funny.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      What do you mean?

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Don John is terrible anyway. Keanu was wooden but the character is a completely two-dimensional villain who can be hammy or straight depending on what the actor/director wants.
        Michael Keaton was a worse offender in that movie - Dogberry sucks but his performance was particularly annoying. Nathan Fillion did a much better job in the Joss Whedon film, and that's mostly because he played it straight-faced.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I saw Much Ado About Nothing on stage at the Globe a few days ago and loved it. The atmosphere was like pantomime which made it a lot funnier and more engaging. I think his comedies really need that audience aspect to work.

  17. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How does this get so slept on?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >directed by Ralph Fiennes
      I had no idea he started directing. Will check it out

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Its a great flick. Super over the top, Butler and Fiennes hamming it up past 11, real grimdark modern war setting, lots of fun

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I remember liking it. Has been some years though.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Why market a movie like this? People who love dumb Seagal-type army movies won't be interested because it's Shakespeare, and people who are into Shakespeare aren't into Seagal-type army movies.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Speak for yourself bro, Shakespeare with guns is always kino (see

        kneel

        and

        .. or this.

        )

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          checked

          Why market a movie like this? People who love dumb Seagal-type army movies won't be interested because it's Shakespeare, and people who are into Shakespeare aren't into Seagal-type army movies.

          and yet it works and is a good adaptation and a lot of fun

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          checked

          [...]
          and yet it works and is a good adaptation and a lot of fun

          No, I mean, why market it like it's a direct-to-DVD Seagal movie, complete with shittily photoshopping the star's head onto a soldier's body?

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            have you seen it? tbh it kinda is that lol

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            The cover looks tacky but I can imagine the reasoning: Shakespeare buffs will watch it regardless and they might get a boost in sales from people who saw an action movie DVD in stores and didn't realise that it was Shakespeare.

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Is it a shoop? I can't tell, but he does wear that costume in the movie

            • 4 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              100% in the movie

          • 4 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            That's not even the tackiest poster for that movie

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Coriolanus isn't that great of a play. I feel like aside from Julius Caesar, all of Shakespeare's plays based on ancient Rome are just ass tbh. I mean, yeah Coriolanus is an interesting character with a unique perspective, but I think plot wise it's just alright. Nothing special.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        All his histories are pretty bad imo

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Troillus and Cressida isn't. I remember liking it. Haven't read Anthony and Cleopatra but I'm hoping for the best.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Henry IV Part I is kino

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I don't disagree just find this particular adaptation very enjoyable with all the scenery chewing and the sense of it all being "very serious" stuff while the film plays it full tilt, very silly in a good way

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      This one has a couple great scenes but the rest of it is quite tedious, bordering on pretentious even

      Fucked up pacing in any case but if you want a high-brow kino it's a definite recommendation

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's fucking based and top tier kino

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        love it, the quasi-dystopian military aesthetic gives me the creeps in the best way

  18. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  19. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    BLUE SPANIARDS!

  20. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I just discovered 20 or so RSC plays are on Britbox so I'm going to watch all of those. It works better on stage anyway.

  21. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shakespeare without the dialogue isn't really Shakespeare.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      These use the original dialogue:

      .. or this.

      kneel

      Branaghs Hamlet.
      I don't care about shitty """purists"""" who insist that Laurence Oliviers lazy narcissism is a better manifestation of the character, it simply isn't. Branagh not only masterfully captures the vaccilations of Hamlet, he also has numerous, masterful allusions to Kierkegaard, he captured the quintessentially nordic temperament of the character with so much more skill than Oliviers faggy queening.

      How does this get so slept on?

  22. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Julius Caesar. Marlon Brando, James Mason

  23. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Lost

  24. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    /thread

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      not the best but one of my favorites

      >LULZ slept on these but gave their usual (you)s to luhrman, branagh, and denzel trash
      board full of pseuds

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I'm sorry I didn't give you a (you), ya fucking cry baby. I've been meaning to check out that version of Macbeth anyway.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          🙂

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Fassbender's Macbeth is pseud bait lmao

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I desperately wanted to see Macbeth in theaters but no theater in my city was playing it. It was just endless cape shit.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      n-word WHAT

      It is borderline unwatchable, a complete waste of the assembled talent.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        to be fair, the play itself is unreadable
        >enter jupiter
        will was just phoning it in at that point for the shekels

  25. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Watch Joel Coen’s Macbeth
    >Eager to see how Denzel lands the Tomorrow soliloquy
    >Just kinda goes off like a wet fart
    I don’t think hearing those lines are ever gonna sound as cool as they do in my head.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Kinopilled

      [...]
      [...]
      Based

      Not memeing, I unironically liked it.

      Still doing a little b8ing

      it couldve been better 🙁
      macduffs stupid wife and keed...

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I've long said that the issue with many takes on Shakespeare's soliloquys is that actors are so focused on giving their own spin on the words that they fail to capture the actual meaning. NOBODY speaks with the bizarre rushes and pauses that people inflict upon many of his most famous monologues. Half the time you get something like
      >Tomorrow... ANDtomorrowand... tomorrow... ... creeps IN this... pettyPACE
      When in reality the lines should be read... well, how they're written on the page. I've seen a fair few Shakespeare adaptations, and I can't think of any that don't fall into this at some point or another. Even Olivier. Maybe I should check out more of Branagh's stuff.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Stage performances are often better for this. Films overthink it.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Branagh does decent conversational Shakespeare but he always gives off this vibe like he thinks the audience are dummies and is trying to convey the meaning of the sentences as clearly as he possibly can. It's not very naturalistic.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        many modern actors don't understand that many of Shakespeare's dialogues/soliloquies are actual poetry (because they don't have any classical education) and hence don't speak the lines with the poetical intent that Shakespeare clearly imbued in them. The tomorrow soliloquy is a prefect example, one whose way of saying the lines is explicitly pointed out in the lines themselves: "creeps in this petty pace". Though of course I don't think that would have been the problem with Olivier, but I'm sure it was with Denzel and also maybe Fassbender.

  26. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    not the best but one of my favorites

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it's underrated for sure

  27. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Some of these are kino

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The stop-motion ones were cool and some of the stylistic 2d-animated ones, like the sort of eastern-european-style Macbeth: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfnUq2_0FOY.
      But some of them were fugly and looked like episodes of He-Man or something.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      all of those are great

  28. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What's the verdict? It's on my backlog since forever and I can't find the motivation to start it

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It sucks tbqh

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It’s good! Ignore this guy

      It sucks tbqh

      , when he sleeps he goes “honk mimimimimi”! LOL!!!

      Never seen that movie though.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        If you like Shakespeare (like really like it, not just posing) then it's absolute kino. Otherwise it's beautiful but way, way too long (literally over 4 hours).

        What's the verdict? It's on my backlog since forever and I can't find the motivation to start it

        >english teacher, the adaptation
        Branagh has never produced shakeskino and never will. He’s boring and sentimental.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      If you like Shakespeare (like really like it, not just posing) then it's absolute kino. Otherwise it's beautiful but way, way too long (literally over 4 hours).

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Thanks, the length is what discouraged me, obviously

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's a very solid adaptation - people who love Shakespeare and the language will probably enjoy it. On balance it's probably the best production of Hamlet on film. There's nothing wrong with any of the performances, some of them are fantastic and there are some amazing visuals (the main palace set is gorgeous).
      However it's not particularly ambitious, they speak very fast to try and get all the dialogue into a sensible runtime so some of the pacing feels off, and it's quite self-indulgent overall (even by Branagh's standards).

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      A little more than kin, and less than kind!

      it's fantastic. Stupidly good.

  29. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Complete and utter garbage that shits all over the character of Henry V

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        You're not wrong but I still find that movie very comfy, I just view it as it's own story than a story about history
        The depiction of Agincourt is pretty bad too though, for one of the most kino battles.
        Still like the movie

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Agreed, the part where Henry kneels to the Moorish refugees and apologizes for his fair skin was surprisingly kino.

  30. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    macbeth (polanski)

  31. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    You now remember Branagh's unnecessarily horny musical adaptation of Love's Labours Lost

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I preferred his bizarre weaboo version of As You Like It. It's quite funny that it's set in feudal Japan yet there's no more than two asian people in the entire cast (and they're very minor characters). Also it's clearly being filmed in a forest in the UK and colour graded to make it look like Asia.
      It completely fails as a comedy yet it does the sentimental stuff quite well (and it's probably the most beautiful Bryce Dallas Howard has looked).

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Bryce gets BLACKED in that movie tho

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          bro at that point bryce had done usimulated sex scene with black guy in von trier film. this shit is nothing.

  32. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Christopher Plummer, Robert Shaw, Michael Cane, and Donald Sutherland?? Kino.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I've never seen this will watch. I have the BBC's davit Tennant and Patrick Stewart edition where Tennant plays Hamlet as an autistic barefoot wannabe filmakker

  33. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    For me it's Kozintsev's Hamlet and King Lear

  34. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Makes me feel like Brutus might not be an honorable man.

  35. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I like the Othello movie with morpheus.

  36. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  37. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Does Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead count?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Doesn't really work as a film. There's something about the whole vibe and the timing etc. - you kind of need that live audience energy and in the film none of the jokes land and there are awkward pauses throughout.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >There's something about the whole vibe and the timing
        I completely agree. Couldn't quite put my finger on it before, but it is definitely better served as a live performance.

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          It's a shame because there's great actors in it and they clearly tried to do justice to the play.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Nope

  38. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I always think this is a film about 1920s american football based on the poster

  39. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      based. wish this had been the whole movie

  40. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    My favourite is the Norma shearer Romeo and Juliet. Its just luxurious and comfortable to watch.

  41. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Gonna check a lot of these out.

  42. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    there is only one correct answer

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      You know you about to see some artistic titties when the teacher rolls in one of these during Shakespeare Week

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That reminds me of how much I fucking hate how Shakespeare is taught in schools. I can only assume the person that makes the curriculum fucking hates Shakespeare because it's like they specifically designed things to suck as much fun and entertainment out as possible.

  43. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Taming of the Shrew

  44. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I know it's not actualy Shakespeare but it's still great.

  45. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Is this any good? I hadn't even heard of it but I saw a blu ray of it for like £2 so I bought it blind, not gotten around to watching it yet

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's not very good, I saw it in theaters when it came out, and I was bored. Maybe if you like the cast it's worthwhile

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's fine. Nothing special and it's kind of Whedonised (he focusses far more on the snarky elements of the play than the sincere romance stuff). If you've seen any half-decent stage production you've probably seen it done better. I really like Nathan Fillion as Dogberry though - he takes a standard clown role and plays it deadpan and it works surprisingly well.

  46. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How has Shakespeare held up so well after all this time? You'd think the dialogue would be totally incomprehensible but it actually still works even though other things written at the time are pretty alien. Did he just write so well that English stopped changing?

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      English has changed plenty and there's a bunch of stuff in it that's pretty incomprehensible without knowledge (for example: "Wherefore art thou Romeo?" which means "Why must you be Romeo?", meaning that she's lamenting the fact that she has fallen in love with an enemy of her family). I think though that Shakespeare endures because he's just such a good writer that ever since, people have recognised this and strived to learn it and keep it in memory, so that new generations can enjoy it. Whether that will continue indefinitely, I really don't know.

  47. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >no Theatre of Blood
    wtf

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      My man. Hammy kino.

  48. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    FUCK TITUS ANDRONICUS. IT'S LITERALLY HIS WORST PLAY. THERE IS NO SENESE BEHIND IT JUST A GOREFEST AND THATS IT.

    The only good thing that came out of it are Yo Mamma Jokes I guess.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's about revenge. It makes sense it's just unpleasant.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Bruh it's very lazily written, at one point Tamora leaves her children unprotected with her number one nemesis Titus, even though she knows he is a capable warrior and a respected leader. If it weren't for Aaron being a proto-Iago and shitting on everyone, the play would not be anything.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >THERE IS NO SENESE BEHIND IT JUST A GOREFEST AND THATS IT.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >is shakespeare’s most popular play during his lifetime
      heh, nothing personnel kid

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Nah thee most popular ones during his lifetime were the British Historical plays

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Nope. Titus was printed and performed way more than any history play. Seethe cope and dilate.

  49. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I really love Scotland PA. It's the one Shakespeare adaptation where MacBeth takes place in the 70's, in a fast food restaurant, is KINO. It got me into actually appreciating his stories and seeing how they can be adapted into the wildest shit and still work. If you haven't seen Scotland PA make sure to give it a watch sometime.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      There was a 2005 tv series called Shakespeare ReTold where they recontextualised a bunch of Shakespeare plays into different modern day settings.

      They did an interesting Macbeth where he was a chef.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Weird how MacBeth has ended up as a chef...twice. If anything it should have been Titus Andronicus.

  50. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Polanski's Macbeth. Has 70s grit and realism, felt like I was watching a movie rather than a play that someone happened to be recording.
    Highly recommend.

  51. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Throne of Blood became my favorite movie long before I even knew it was a Shakespeare adaptation. It still gives me chills every time I watch it.

  52. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  53. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous
  54. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    What was with all the little stubby shotguns?

  55. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    McLintock! Starring John Wayne and Maureen O'Hara is loosely BASED on The Taming of the Shrew. Mel Gibson's Hamlet is decent as well.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Gibson’s Hamlet is decent as well
      This. hamlet pretty much knows he’s in a play. he’s meta-theatrical but struggles to inhabit the role of the tragic hero that’s been forced upon him which makes Mel’s decidedly un-performative and lucid approach to the character pretty hilarious. hamlet the character would have admired and envied Mel’s tacky action-hero the same way he admired the Player’s speech and the same way he envied Laertes’ boyish grief at Ophelia’s grave. gibson’s hamlet truly is the bellcurve of Shakeskino, and i sleep well at night knowing it is probably closer to burbage’s hamlet than branagh or olivier’s softboy approach could ever dream to be (or not to be). seethe.

  56. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I can't stand the writing and dialogue and style of anything Shakespeare
    I'm totally filtered by him

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Yeah well I can't stand the writing and dialogue and style of anything African-American
      I'm totally filtered by them

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        me too

  57. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    This thread gives off based vibes. Bump.

  58. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    As a kid I always got confused by this thinking of the sitcom show Titus

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Same. I thought that was him in the picture too just with his face covered up

  59. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Chimes at Midnight
    Throne of Blood
    Julie Taymore's Midsummer Night's Dream
    RAN
    Titus

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      sauce

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Bearnaise Doppel

        • 4 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          thanks boss

  60. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Shakespeare is for fags lmaoooo

  61. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    i don't think i'm a brainlet, but honestly, 80% of Shakespeare's dialogue is fucking impenetrable. I cannot watch movies with the original dialogue and understand what is going on. Half the time I'm in the dark and have to draw conclusions from context and what's happening on screen.
    It's all very impressive sounding but you have to be brilliant to follow this guy in normal conversation. i can't be the only one.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It's like that at the start, but you get used to it. It's like learning a new language (very very close to the English you're used to)

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      It helps to both to read the play and watch it (in theater or in movie), but in my experience a good adaptation is one where you can understand what’s going on even if you don’t understand the words being said.

  62. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    > BIGUS TITUS

  63. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Since this seems like an appropriate thread, what's your favourite opera film?

    Other than Bergman's Magic Flute the only cinematically interesting filming I know is Chereau's Ring, which coincidentally Bergman was the first choice to stage.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I don't much care for most opera movies honestly. I'd rather read the libretto and listen along to the music. But if I had to pick I guess it'd be Horst Stein's Parsifal

  64. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Tittus
    hehehehehe

Your email address will not be published.