Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Tue, 16 Jan 1996 22:01:47 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
On Mon, 15 Jan 1996, Donald Larsson wrote:
> Peter Latham wonders if there is a difference in the "poetic license" granted
> to Shakespeare in HENRY V and Oliver Stone's in NIXON.
>
>
> In the larger scheme of things, I'd say no. But (of course) there are
> signficant differences. WS wrote his play to support the Tudor claim to
> the throne and crafted a villain of nearly pure evil which continues to
> fascinate people as a literary character (and I, for one, can't wait for
> Ian McKellen's version to hit the screen).
And we might also point out that Shakespeare, or even more recent
creative artists who have made works such as "Pride of the Yankees",
weren't working with a subject that their audiences are so familiar with
through the medium of television.
It's one thing to make a film about a king who might be quite distanced
from an audience on a day-to-day basis, quite another to tackle a film
about a president who was in the homes of millions of Americans everyday
for a decade.
Perhaps Stone is being held to a higher standard, in one sense; but it
still ain't Shakespeare.
Randy
----
To signoff SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message. Problems? Contact [log in to unmask]
|
|
|