Customer Reviews

Arms and the Man

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

I almost didn't buy this because, although I have always enormously enjoyed reading this play, I had a sneaking suspicion that it would be impossible to stage well. So many of the characters spend so much time being histrionic if not idiotic, and I was afraid that what was charming and funny in print might prove to be merely irritating when portrayed by an actual flesh-and-blood human.

But I am delighted to say that I was wrong; this performance was delightful. Much of the credit must go to a really lovely performance by Helena Bonham Carter that gives Raina exactly the right balance of real wit and gallantry with extraordinarily silly romanticism. The other performances were all also excellent; not one struck me as off or untrue to my readings of the play, though I could wish that the Sergious had been toned down just a tad.

It's really a very delightful story, and this performance is a keeper. If you know the play and are looking to see it performed, I recommend this wholeheartedly; if you don't know the play but are looking to see a very nice production of one of Shaw's lightest and funniest plays (well suited to kids -- I loved it when I was 12 or so) then this might an excellent option to consider.

I will admit that I purchased this title thinking it would give me advice on how to use my arms. I am a man and I have arms, even though for many years I did not use them. Exercising with Aquabells dumbells have allowed me to regain strength in and use of my arms, and now I wanted to get to the next level of arms care.

Instead of a how-to video on arms, "Arms and the Man" is a 1989 BBC production of the 1894 George Bernard Shaw play he subtitled "An Anti-Romantic Comedy". The distinctly English Helena Bonham-Carter plays a Bulgarian living in 1885 at the end of the two-week Serbo-Bulgarian war. That in itself is pretty farcical. Not the war per se, because state-sponsored killing is still killing, but the fact that the war epitomized the vain and nationalistic European wars of the 18th and 19th centuries. No borders changed, but Bulgarian unification became internationally recognized and the Serbians found another reason to hold a bloody grudge. Also Helena Bonham-Carter playing a Hungarian is farcical, since she is English and doesn't look particularly Bulgarian, although my only experience with Bulgarians is watching Bulgarian powerlifters during Olympic games, so I really can't be counted on to know Bulgarian physiognomy.

The real farce, however, is Shaw's use of the conventions of romantic comedy to subvert romantic and idealized notions of warfare. Captain Bluntschli, a Swiss mercenary fighting for the Serbs, hides in the bedroom of young Bulgarian Raina Petkoff, played by a young Ms. Bonham-Carter. While hiding from the victorious Bulgarians, Bluntschli disabuses the naïve Raina of the heroic efforts of her fiance, Sergius, in winning the war, as well as the nobility of warfare and soldiers in general.

In the second act, the war is over and Sergius and Raina are together again. Each goes through the postures of romance even while Sergius pursues the family maid Louka, played by a young Patsy Kensit, on the side. Patsy Kensit is not on her side, but rather Sergius pursues her that way. Actually, Sergius is not on his side either, but rather the pursuit itself is done discreetly. As discreet, however, as nosy servants will allow. Bluntschli reappears to return a borrowed coat and is welcomed by Sergius and the patriarch Major Petkoff, both of whom hold no grudges from the war, since they won. The third act brings out the truth of both Sergius and Bluntschli, and Raina finds herself much wiser, if not happier, and about to be married to someone.

As with most BBC productions, "Arms and the Man" boasts an excellent cast with crisp performances, and as with most early Shaw, "Arms and the Man" adopts the ideals of well-known dramatic conceits and gestures only to puncture them with the realities of imperfect life and non-ideal characters. These reasons alone would be enough to recommend the DVD. The inclusion, however, on the DVD of the bonus play "The Man of Destiny" (1981), starring a young Simon Callow, fairly well demands, in a polite and enthusiastic way, that everyone obtain this DVD, especially by fans of Shaw, Ms. Bonham-Carter, war, romance, heroism, or Bulgarians.

The characterizations and direction were all excellent; maybe Bluntschli seemed a little young and 'smooth'. The voices were easily understandable, in contrast to many new TV dramas where the speech is so fast that older people like us (79) simply can't follow! We guess there aren't many versions of this to choose from, but we'd certainly recommend it -- it's one of Shaw's favorite plays for us. F.J.H. and I.R.H.

I have to admit up until I watched this dvd the other day I'd never read or seen anything by Shaw, so this was, in a sense, a really pleasant new experience for me. Given this, though, perhaps not in the best position to provide a reliable critique, so I won't even venture an attempt. Generally speaking, it seems to me that "Arms in the Man" isn't all that original (perhaps it was in its time) and the ending wasn't exactly unpredictable. Still, quite enjoyable to watch; the presence of Bonham-Carter alone makes it worthwhile. But to be honest, I preferred watching "The Man of Destiny." An interesting study in characted, with sharp and witty dialogue. Callow is truly a superb actor.

This is my favorite Shaw play. I first saw it performed at the old Guthrie Theater in Minneapolis when Michael Moriarty played the roll of the Swiss mercenary soldier, Captain Bluntschli. I was delighted with it then, and I have to admit it still pleases me now. At the time, the Viet Nam war was in progress, and the play seemed to resonate with my own feelings about it.

Like most of Shaw's plays, Arms and the Man deals with a social ill---in this case war---by making fun of the behavior. As the author tells us through the dialogue, war is only glorious to those who've never faced the bloodshed and the deprivation of it. The author implies that the audience, safe in its ignorance, is just as naive as the Bulgarian girl Raina. Men die horrible deaths, while other men escape by shear accident and others by flight. Some of them fight for the honor and glory they think will be theirs, others for money, and some because they are compelled to do so by circumstances. In the end everyone goes home, and even enemies become friends. So what was the fight really about? What's the point? It's a very good question, and one that has yet to be answered. Shaw wrote the play in 1894 to standing ovations--only one person in the audience booed, and Shaw, ever the wit, said, "My dear fellow, I quite agree with you, but what are we two against so many?" Yet World War I and World War II were still to come, and Shaw himself lived to see both of them. (He died in 1950).

The BBC production is a delight. Helena Bonham Carter, in a roll early in her career, plays the young Raina Petkoff to whose room the Swiss soldier retreats. Her portrayal of the proud local aristocrat is delightful. At one point she seeks to impress by stating that she washes her hands at least once a day, and that her house is quite splendid because it has real stairs by which to climb to the second floor. Her attitude towards war and its glory is a perfect foil for that of Pip Torrens' Captain Bluntschli, who sees it for what it is: something to be gotten through by whatever means possible. The real star of the presentation, however, is a young Nicholas Chagrin, whose Sergai is quintessential: part baffoon, part acrobat. He reveals to the audience the weaknesses behind the facade of bravado; he is both hero and fool. Of all the characters, his is the one who learns most about himself. Probably the wisest of the characters is Nicola, who reveals to us that everyone is someone's servant and that there are trade offs to be made in every life and at every level of society.

Because the production is an older one, it has the feel of a stage production. Even action that takes place outdoors is performed on a stage set, so the entire work has the character of theater as opposed to TV or cinema. In short it has a more intimate ambiance. For anyone who has not had the opportunity to attend a live performance, this will give you at least an inkling of what live theater is like. Since the audience to some extent participates in the production---at least in so far as it suspends disbelief and provides feedback to the actors---it is a much more active experience than TV.

I enjoyed watching "Arms and the Man" (starring Helena Bonham Carter) and "Man of Destiny" (starring Simon Callow). The acting for both films was pretty good, and the setting was adequate.

Both films (based on plays of the same name) poke fun at some aspect of war. (Bernard Shaw was not in favor of war, thinking it would be better for the soldiers to shoot their generals and go home.)

This said, the films follow the scripts of the plays quite loyally. Occasionally, the setting is changed to allow for the fact that the plays are not being performed on a stage but rather being performed like the productions in the Charles Dickens BBC collection or Jane Austen BBC collection.

One warning:
Subtitles are not included in the films. Therefore, you may wish to follow along with the scripts of the plays, which you could print off from most literary internet sites such as Wikepedia. Sometimes it is difficult to follow the arguments of the characters because the language is so different from that spoken today.

Good adaptation of the shaw play. Basically a play about the futility of war,honor, and the human condition. Slightly dated but still effective view of mankind and the upper classes in particular and their pretensions
and foibles.

I enjoy watching this play. It had a good sense of humor. Thank you.

I would only give this a higher rating "IF" I were in NY live in the audience watching "the play" and then only if a relative or friend was playing a part that required me to be there. I could barely make if through the first 15 minutes.

I am an unabashed Anglophile and have read this play several times and loved it, so I was excited to see the DVD. But I expected something more modern, more realistic, less hokey. Maybe I tried to watch it too late at night, as I kept falling asleep. I prefer the characters in my imagination to the actors on this DVD.