Excellent but underrated film

A Disappointing Continuation

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

The individuals works of William Shakespeare are probably the most studied works of fiction in history. Then again, a lot of his stories were based on real life. Here we get a great movie based on one of his lesser known plays, "Henry V". I feel bad for not being more familiar with the time period this takes place in. I know that it's in the Hundred Year's War. Most people remember this as the war Joan of Arc fought in, but this takes place long before that. Well, it is a hundred year's war after all. I remember reading about Edward, the Black Prince.The set up of this film is great. It's actually put up exactly like a play. As the story goes on however, this aspect disappears and it does get more serious. It was hard to make a truly great movie while World War II was being fought in real life. You can see the dedication these people put into portraying their roles. We get a lot of epic scenery and battles. My only complaint is that there a few times where the backgrounds look fake. Still, it's great that we've always had practical effects. ***1/2

This was commissioned by Churchill to help rally the Allied troops for the invasion or liberation of Nazi-occupied France in 1944. After all, Shakespeare's play deals with the Plantagenet king's success in sailing for France and defeating their forces at Azincourt against all the odds.It's odd to watch this, as it's a history lesson in triplicate. First there's the fact it's a sort of propaganda piece. Then it's of the Shakespearian era, as the stunning opening shot in technicolour is a sweeping view up the Thames of Elizabethan London, from the Tower of London to the Globe Theatre. The conceit is that the play is being staged during the time it was written, and Olivier et al are Shaky's contemporaries. But of course, the events of the play took place some 180 years earlier, in 1415.I admit I could only follow this with my No Fear Shakespeare guide providing a translation! But I had to turn several pages at a time to keep up, as large chunks are omitted from this version. Usually anything that hints of discord in the British camp, this being a propaganda piece of sorts. So the barons' plot to topple the king on the eve of his departure for France is omitted - though the barons do appear, just without Henry V's Blofeldesque pay off. Also, Henry's talk of ensuring Scotland is subdued as they always used war with France to invade through the backdoor. Not wise talk in 1944 when you want the whole of the UK to rally behind you! Also, some historical references: that the King is descended from the French himself, or his remorse expressed over his father Henry IV's actions. (Henry IV aka Richard Bollingbrook was a baron who overthrew Richard II, arguably the last medieval king, and had him starved to death in the tower, casting doubt on Henry V's legitimacy, which he helped assuage by having Richard disinterred and reburried in Westminster Abbey, the proper place for kings.) They also omit Henry's 'let us in peaceably or I can't be help responsible for my soldiers raping your women' speech to Harfleur, their first port of call on arriving in France.Anyway, just shy of the half hour mark the play opens up away from the Globe and becomes a real film, albeit with cardboard backdrops etc, and Olivier looks more like the real king.The best bit is the eve of battle. In the night, the two camps face opposite each other, readying for the next day. The atmosphere as the king walks among his people by night, eavesdropping on their fears and prayers, is wonderful (look out for a very young George Cole - St Trinian's, Minder - as a young lad of the Skins age group!) and quite affecting.That said, the battle itself is a letdown in a way. Oh, it's a sunny English summer's day but the real Agincourt took place in October in northern France and was a nasty, bloody, claustrophobic affair. It had rained and the French cavalry charged, getting massacred by the English longbows (nasty, effective weapons, not the Robin Hood bows and arrows depicted here). They fell in the mud and were unable to rouse thanks to the heavy armour, they were sitting ducks. The reason only around 8,000 English, worn out by their travels and dysentry, could defeat 30,000 French (see Wiki for details) was because the French were rubbish and lambs to the slaughter.This is glossed over a bit in the film, which seems to be a jolly canter about in the English Kent countryside! Almost like a boy scout's war game activity! There's also a fabricated section (not in the play I believe) when Henry personally intervenes to avenge a death, in modern Hollywood 'I'm mad as hell' style. Excised, understandably, is the 'war crime' in which he executes the French prisoners when the enemy begins to rally.All in all a highly enjoyable movie in glorious technicolour, but I will see Branagh's version, to balance it out. And also Luc Brssson's Joan of Arc, as let us not forget that Henry V's achievements were wiped out within only 20 years, so it wasn't an enduring victory, unlike those of, say, Alfred the Great. Or Churchill, of course.

It's perhaps surprising that when people from a theatrical background turn to film directing, they tend to produce pictures that are purely cinematic and freed from staginess. This is the case with Laurence Olivier, as it was with Rouben Mamoulian and Orson Welles. Here, with his debut feature as director, Olivier not only created a landmark propaganda film, but also redefined the screen Shakespeare adaptation and established a new precedent of renowned actor turning competent director.Shakespeare's play of Henry V was of course ideal for a wartime morale booster, featuring as it does heroic action, rousing speeches, historical parallels with the landings at France, a protagonist who is valiant yet warm and humane, as well as plenty of little extra touches such as exploring the psychology of the troops on the eve of battle and stressing the need for unity between English, Irish, Scotch and Welsh. It was also the perfect play for Olivier to test his ideas on how a Shakespeare play should be turned into a film. The chorus of Shakespeare's original text tells the audience that the great battles and courts can scarcely be contained on a stage and that you must "on your imaginative forces work". Using this idea as his starting point, Olivier begins the film with a recreation of a contemporary production of the original play at the Globe theatre, complete with backstage glimpses, bumbling actors and a rowdy Elizabethan audience. Then, as Leslie Banks' chorus commands the audience to "work your thoughts", the theatre disappears, and the action subtly opens out into larger sets. Eventually, we are transported to location with thousands of extras for the climactic battle scene.This was not only a complete reworking of screen Shakespeare, it was part of a whole approach to cinema. Olivier's Henry V, although totally different in content, is stylistically in the same tradition as Michael Powell's The Red Shoes or the elaborate ballet sequences of MGM musicals, which also expand would-be stage performances into pure cinematic fantasy. The originator of this approach was probably Busby Berkeley, who also made the switch from stage to screen, albeit from the music hall to the role of choreographer for screen musicals. The musical sequences that Berkeley constructed for Warner Brothers musicals in the mid-1930s always begin with a stage production, but then turn into tour-de-forces of choreography, camera positioning and massive sets, all of which could never be contained or properly appreciated on a stage. Olivier is effectively doing the same thing with a Shakespeare play as Berkeley did with a dancing chorus line.Of course, all this alone isn't what makes Henry V a great work. For a first-time director Olivier's eye is remarkably sharp. He keeps the action smooth in dialogue scenes by making use of long takes, and preferring to move the camera to change the framing rather than breaking the shot with a cut, often dollying in on a single actor to achieve a close-up. He's not quite experienced enough yet though to give these shots a really natural flow, and he doesn't really get the chance to show off his talents as a dramatic director as he would later in Hamlet and Richard III. Having said that, he does manage to give remarkable tenderness to Henry's soliloquy on the eve of battle and his courtship of Kate towards the end of the film.The highpoint however is the impressive Agincourt battle sequence, which was influenced by the battle in Eisenstein's Alexander Nevsky, but is actually an improvement on the Russian master's equivalent work. He similarly builds up tension as the opposing army begins its charge, using a rhythmic editing pattern and dynamic close-ups. However, whereas Alexander Nevsky's battle occasionally looked obviously staged and unrealistic, in Henry V you could as well be witnessing a genuine medieval battle.Olivier selected a top notch cast composed of actors with theatre experience like himself, with exuberant performances from Robert Newton as the cowardly Pistol and Esmond Knight as Welsh captain Fluellen, and too many other great names to mention. Olivier himself, after a decade of learning how to act for screen, perhaps relished the chance to give huge, concert-hall-filling Shakespearean delivery again, although he does manage to rein his performance in again for the quieter scenes.Henry V is remarkable for a director's debut feature. Olivier would direct two more prestigious Shakespeare adaptations, as well as a few dramas, but Henry V is his freshest and most engaging work as a director, and still remains the best.

Laurence Olivier's HENRY V could very well be the premier Shakespeare film on which to judge all others. Shakespeare's play Henry V is not regarded among his greatest works, yet Olivier's film HENRY V represents the pinnacle of the Bard's translation to the screen.HENRY V works well on film because of the stirring subject matter and Olivier's brilliantly conceived 'play-within-a-play' idea. This concept allows moments of Shakespeare's wonderfully bawdy humor to come through alongside his powerful monologues and stunning language. HENRY V also contains a very fresh, almost Post-Modernist feel to it, with the narrator constantly reminding the viewer that they are watching a play.Olivier's performance as the King stands tall as one of his very best. His Battle Of Agincourt speech is justifiably famous, yet he also delivers many other wonderful pieces of theatrical acting throughout the film. His soliloquy in voice-over as he visits his soldiers is subtle and compelling, equally effective as his inspirational cries preceding the battlefield sequences. Olivier is always convincing, whether as a King leading his men or in his romantic wooing of Princess Katherine.Robert Krasker's fine Technicolour enhances the production, with HENRY V holding up very well in terms of it's visuals and cinematic scale.9/10.