Sorry, this movie sucks

Really Surprised!

This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

I admit to being confused as to why this version of a Shakespeare play took place in much more recent times. At first, I thought it was talking about World War II, but instead it's some alternate civil war that the English fought. It's a pretty strange choice. It seems weird to modernize a story that wouldn't make sense within its new timeline. Still, this is a great movie if only because of the fantastic actors. I never realized how prolific Robert Downey Jr. is or how he's awesome in so many of his roles.It's actually quite faithful to the play. Well, I actually think this was based on another play that was based on the original play. They do that with Shakespeare a lot, I suppose. With the most credited writer ever, that makes sense. The best parts are easily when Ian McKellan (Richard III) directly talks to the audience. You get a real sense of intimacy with this guy in those scenes. I'm glad he keeps it up. The best single part is the final battle scene which is well worth the wait. It didn't seem as violent as other Shakespeare films, but it does get better near the end. Any great actors with a great writer can work anywhere. ***1/2

....understand the left (marxist-leninists) always love films that depict the 'evil' with a khaki uniform and the hardware in tow - i.e. 'Hitler'is such a 'lock' to embrace the college kids. What secured my affection was the remark (mind you truly Shakespeare) when Annette Benning replied to 'Richard's' (Ian McKellen) inquiry as to what she thought of him i.e. "What thinkest of me madame?" Her laser reply "Thou art a bottled spider!" We have today in 2013 some 18 years hence the reality of a world continuing into the 'abyss' and mind you, not a moment of pause as the patricians ignore the free fall - (abortion, gay gay all over, SEIU, the usual entitlement idiocy) this is all Richard III is about. No - not the clutter and self induced suicide of the antagonist but the wrecking of decorum to slate the thirst of licentiousness and most of all for 'power'.This is what tyrants loathe the most - use of satire to magnify the con - remember that great Jack In The Box TV ad some 12 years ago? The condescending monarch commenting on the sandwiches presented to him? "Peanut butter!" and the scullion daring to say "Where's the butter?" with the reply "SILENCE!"

The 1995 film is a masterpiece. I'm not familiar with Richard Loncraine, the director, but the cast includes such luminaries as Ian McKellan, Annette Bening, Jim Broadbent, Robert Downey, Jr., Kristin Scott Thomas, and Maggie Smith.McKellan adapted the play to a modern England where it has become a fascist state. King Richard is a kind of Hitler, and the wars are fought with modern equipment. We are sucked into McKellan's version so completely that the anachronisms between the language and the time don't matter. McKellan is excellent as the mad would-be dictator, and the rest of the cast is lifted to his level. As with all Shakespeare's work, I recommend reading the work before seeing the movie. I'd suggest a copy of the Folger's or Arden editions (either or both probably available from your local library for free) with explanations of the more obscure words and phrases. The language of Shakespeare is beautiful, and the cast here is equal to the words.McKellan is a superbly evil and maniacal Richard as he murders his way to the throne, and his death is one of the best on film. He nails the role; he nails the look as a sordid, dissolute tyrant.This adaptation is similar to July Taymore's adaptation of "Titus Andronicus" to modern times in her 1999 film "Titus." Taymore and McKellan have both done excellent jobs of introducing modern elements into classical tragedies from Shakespeare. They showcase the incredible genius behind the works, still relevant today.A reminder that this film is an adaptation and that McKellan rearranged scenes, removed characters, and rewrote dialogue. I have not seen Olivier's "Richard III," but it gets high marks as the best on film for the true play, not an adaptation.

In this version of Richard III the action has been moved to England in the 1930's. The move to this time period is flawless. While not as good as Titus (which is similar) this is a great film with fine performances. Maggie Smith as the Duchess of York steals this movie with her expert handling of Shakespeare. The scene she has with Ian McKellan (Richard III)by the stairs is amazing. Maggie Smith should have been a candidate for an Oscar for Best Supporting actress, a truly flawless performance. Annette Bening is very moving as Queen ELizabeth. Her best scene is in front of the building where her sons are being held prisoner by Richard. Krisitn Scott-THomas is riveting as Lady Anne. Ian McKellan is astounding as RIchard III. This is probably his best performance (even better than his performance as James Whale in "Gods and Monsters.") THe costumes and sets are also expertly done. Richard III is a near masterpiece.