Customer Reviews

King Lear [VHS]

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(15)
2 star:		(14)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

Considering the fact that the characters in this 'King Lear' are played by some very well-known actors and actresses in England, I was a little worried at first that it would be spoilt as I had seen them playing several other roles on television. However, the acting, especially Ian Holm as Lear and Barbara Flynn and Amanda Redman as Goneril and Regan respectively, is superb, and you can really allow yourself to be 'swept away' with this production. The only real criticism is that Edgar may be viewed as a little too 'soppy' and gullible, and Edmund as being almost 'caricature-like'. The red sets reflect the general tone of the play very accurately, and the fact that it is adapted for television means that there is the bonus of having the storm scenes outside, as opposed to still being inside as is the case with a few productions. Certain parts of the original dialogue are cut, but although this may be confusing if you don't know the play well, the omissions do not affect the overall power of the play. This, along with the Paul Scofield and Laurence Olivier versions, and Jonathan Miller's 1980 film, is one of the best 'King Lear' adaptations around. Each has it's own individual strengths, but this version is definitely worth watching.

I have seen three versions of the play, and this one is tops. Ian Holm is at the high point of his art. I like the way he plays the King, not as a gentle but old man whose age makes him misjudge people, but as a man who has always lacked judgment. We see it in the very first line the king says, when he tells his old friend Gloucester to "attend the lords of France and Burgundy", when he should have had his place at this most important meeting where the king tells his daughters he is going to part his kingdom in three. I thought every actor was well directed, and the filming was done professionally. Some people say the fool is hard to understand. But remember that he speaks cockney: what else can you expect? I have seen this video about 50 times(when you're a teacher...) and still think that just as much as the play is a masterpiece, this rendition is masterfully done.

A brilliant production of a notoriously difficult play. This is a theatre production adapted for television, which means you get no horses and windswept landscapes; what you get is a compelling story told by a director with a contemporary vision, and some incredibly powerful acting. Ian Holm's hard-edged Lear is a victim of his own violent passions, the fool, old and fat, is both funny and heartbreaking, the usually wimpy Cordelia in this version emerges as a strong-willed, compassionate young woman, and her evil sisters are real human beings, not fairy tale characters. Some of the soliloquies are missing, but otherwise the text is only slightly abridged and rearranged. A performance of 'King Lear' worthy of Shakespeare's play. The Bard is back - with a vengeance!

The video is superb. The actors brilliantly navigate the nuances of their roles. Not a gesture is misplaced, not a word pronounced with blandness.

Sadly some words are left out. For instance, the encounter between Edmund and Curan (II, 1, 1-19) is omitted, despite its value in revealing the way in which Edmund plans to take advantage of the trouble between Cornwall and Albany. Edgar's soliloquy (II, 3, 1-20) is reduced to but one line, despite its importance in explaining "Poor Tom's" ensuing behavior. Watching the movie, one could get the impression that Edgar literally goes insane. Yet this passage explains that he "will preserve himself" by adopting the "most poorest shape". Several interesting exchanges between Fool and Lear are omitted from Act I, though the essence is never lost.

Ian Holm and cast are in top form as the tale of the collapse of two families is examined. This version is rich in nuance and texture and is not afraid to take chances with the set and it's modern-abstract setting.

The only short coming to my taste was the actor who played the Fool. Being totally subjective, I found his diction hard to understand at times and that makes things doubly difficult considering the Fool is difficult to understand even with the best diction.

This version gave me a new appreciation for the roles of Edmund and Edgar, as well.

Very well done!

King Lear on film will always be compared to Olivier's version near the end of his life. All the performances, especially his, were so nuanced and clear. Holm isn't a bad Lear, but he just doesn't master it the way Olivier did. The Fool's character was edited too much. Some of the play's most poignant moments came from him and his interaction with Lear. Unfortunatly some aren't here. Do yourself a favor: FInd Olivier's version.

Beautiful red sets that conjure a sense of foreboding. Actors, particularly Helm, rush through their lines as though they're in a hurry. The soundtrack is inaudible and the text is mumbled.

It was a decent production with good acting but was obviously budget judging from the boring stage and costume. The acting was decent despite several yelling and mumbling problems and King Lear seemed crazy long before the play called for it. It had decent acting and if you're familiar with the play keeping up won't be a problem. Otherwise, go read it.

I thought that the acting was over all pretty good. There is deffinately room for critism though. I thought that there was way too much unnecessary screaming and mumbling throughout the play. At the beginning of the play when King Lear is speaking to his daughters, he becomes overwhelmingly angry and jumps up on the table. This event confussed me because I wasn't sure if he was already insane or not. I did like the idea of having all of the walls red. That was a good idea so that the viewer could pay attention to what was going on in the play. Overall I did not enjoy the movie though. I guess I was able to learn somethings from the film and benefited from watching it...Hopefully if someone remakes the play in a movie again, it will be more interesting and exciting...

The movie overall was not very good. The actors either mumbled or screamed so it was hard to understand what they were saying. The setting was cheap, which would not have made it to Hollywood and I didn't like the one main color of red although it did fit the tone of the movie. The actors and actresses did a good job at acting and making their emotions present, it was just that they were close when when talking to each other. The costumes could have been from the same time or could have been created a ceratin theme. David Burke did a very well job at disguising Kent. Also, Barbara Flynn and Amanda Redman did a very well job at showing how evil Goneril and Regan were. My portrayal of Cordelia did not fit the movie, because I thought she would have been prettier even though she was young. The ages of Goneril and Regan could have been younger. Edgar was suppose to be a beggar, but everytime he was in a new scene he was in a new costume. Lear's character would have been more believable if he didn't start acting crazy at the beginning. Some scenes such as the storm was staged poorly. Therefore, I believe this movie would have been better if character fit my potrayal of the play.