King John. Yes. King John (Oh, Don't Get Like That!)

Unlike many of Shakespeare's kings, it's probably more likely that you've heard of the historical King John than the one in the play.

The historical King John was the younger brother of Richard the Lionheart. Richard left John in charge when he went off to the crusades. King John was the Prince John of the Robin Hood stories (in the Disney Robin Hood movie, he's a childish lion voiced by Peter Ustinov). He is also the king who was forced by the nobles to sign the Magna Carta, which we like to bring up here in the US because we like to think of it as the beginning of a line of constitutional governing documents running from the Mayflower Compact to the Articles of Confederation to the Constitution itself.

Shakespeare doesn't mention Robin Hood. Or the Magna Carta. There are four hundred years of history that hadn't happened yet, and perhaps it just wasn't considered important at the time. Isaac Asimov suggests this is because the strong monarch of Shakespeare's time, Queen Elizabeth, was not a fan of the Magna Carta, and would rather people are didn't think about it. He's got a point. A strong executive rarely likes a strong legislature, and Shakespeare was very careful to keep on the right side the people in power.

There's not much competition for the best film version of King John. I can only find one, although there are a few options on YouTube that I will link to below.

King John is usually considered one of Shakespeare's lesser planes and it's easy to see why. The story sort of lurch is from this happened to this happened with a lot of growth. King John starts is a bad king who is manipulated by his mother to a bad king who doesn't have anyone to pull the strings. It's not much of a journey.

I have to say, though, this play has some very good scenes and some very good speeches. It has battle scenes, betrayals, at least one great male character, and at least one good female character. In a skilled production, with a good cast, a good director, and an adequate budget, it doesn't have to be one of the lesser plays. It could do with some cuts, I think, but then there are parts of Hamlet that most productions ought to cut. Maybe King John will never be one of the great plays, but it doesn't have to be one of the lesser plays. It's better than you think.

A number of actors have used the good parts of King John for monologues, it seems. Especially Constance's speeches, which have quite a bit of fire to them. You can see Constance being played perhaps by the same actor who played Juliet. There must've been a player in Shakespeare's company who could pull off an intelligent and tragic female character.

It's really Philip the Bastard's soliloquies that shine for me. As portrayed by George Costigan at least, he's clever and funny. Whoever was cast as Mercutio would do well in this role too.Philip stands in for the audience as he sees the war with France turned into a temporary alliance, then a peace treaty, and then to war anyway. He eventually figures out that all of the powerful man are really motivated not by honor or the common good, but rather by self-interest, or “tickling commodity” as he calls it. Even the kings have a price, and even in the Middle Ages money talked. Some things never change.

The only full version I could find on DVD is the Leonard Rossiter version produced by the BBC in 1984. As far as I can tell there is no other full version is available. This one is okay. It's clearly not a very high budget production – the sets look cheap (at best), the costumes look recycled – but the performances are really really good. Leonard Rossiter stars as King John, usually with a glass of wine in his hand which fits. King John is always in over his head. The idea that he's a drunk works very well for the character. You'll recognize Rossiter if you've ever seen the 1970s British sitcom The Fall and Rise of Reginald Perrin. He was a very funny actor, and perfectly suited to King John. Unfortunately he died suddenly the same year this came out.

The Bastard is played by George Costigan. You won't recognize him, but he played Max Capricorn in the 2007 Doctor Who Christmas special. He's been in many many things over the years but you probably won't recognize him.

Eleanor of Aquitaine is played by Mary Morris, who was in the Doctor Who episode “Kinda,” but seems like she should have been in the Sisterhood of Karn.

Constance is played by the great Claire Bloom, who you will recognize from her roles as Hera in Clash of the Titans and as The Woman in the Doctor Who two-parter “The End of Time.” According to imdb.com, we're going to be seeing a lot more of her in Shakespeare, as she's going to turn up in Hamlet, Henry VIII, and Cymbeline, and possibly others.

King John. Dir. David Giles. Perf. Leonard Rossiter, Mary Morris, and George Costigan. 1984. DVD. Ambrose, 2001. (imdb.com)

I found this version at my local public library, but you can find snippets online, for example at 

As I mentioned, actors love the firey speeches from this play, and a few of these studies and audition pieces show up on YouTube. Here are a few of the better scenes I found:

Act IV, Scene I, Hubert & Arthur

Lady Constance Mourns for Arthur

Earliest Existing Shakespeare Scene on Film - the Death of King John

Here's the thing about being one of the “lesser plays:” It's just a popularity contest. If a play isn't popular now, that doesn't mean it was never thought of as one of the great (or at least good) plays. In the 1900s, for example, King John was much more popular than it is now. The earliest existing appearance of Shakespeare on film is this short part of King John. It makes me think – what will people be saying about Pericles in 100 years?

Richard II - The 1978 BBC/Time Life Version with Derek Jacobi

The 2014 Olympics are over, and I'm getting back into Shakespeare. I'll be putting up a few more posts about Richard II, then I'll be on to A Midsummer Night's Dream.

I've mentioned before that Richard II is my favorite of the history plays. The 1978 version with Derek Jacobi is part of the reason why. I don't remember which semester I took a Shakespeare class up at UMaine, but I do remember that I took seriously the concept that Shakespeare's plays were written to be performed and watched, not to be read. I found that Fogler Library had the complete works on VHS, and spent many hours in the media room watching these BBC/Time Life productions. Much as I'm doing now, I would do the assigned reading, and then watch the video.

Even if you've only seen a few Shakespeare films, you're probably familiar with Derek Jacobi. His work with Kenneth Branaugh includes appearing as the Chorus in Henry V  and Claudius in Hamlet. If you're a PBS viewer, you may also have seen him in I, Claudius on Masterpiece Theatre, and Cadfael on Mystery. Of his more recent work, my favorite is his appearance as the undertaker Mr. Ween in Emma Thompson's Nanny McPhee. You should check it out. He's hilarious. I think I had seen some of this before those long afternoons in the

Jacobi is great fun to watch as Richard. His voice is captivating. He's constantly twisting and turning his pitch and volume, so that even if you don't have any idea what he just said, you know that it sounded awesome. I know it's a cliche to say "I could listen to him read the phone book," but man, he would make the phone book sound amazing! This is perfect for the emotional, irrational Richard.  The problem is, that having seen Sir Derek in many many films and videos, it's hard to see him as Derek Jacobi playing Richard, instead of seeing him as Derek Jacobi as Derek Jacobi playing Richard. It feels like watching someone do a very good Derek Jacobi impression with all the lines drawn from Shakespeare.

The critical deposition scene comes out very well. It's very dark, just like the rest of the film. I don't know if it was a technological limitation (maybe the cameras they were using weren't very good, or the copies degraded over time) or an artistic choice, but the whole film is too dark. It might be they decided to save money on set dressing by putting most of the set in shadow, I don't know. Regardless, the heart of the deposition scene  is the contrast between the Bolingbroke and Richard. Bolingbroke is calm, and stoic, blandly putting up with his wildly emotional cousin. Richard is wallowing in self-pity, anger, and grief. That contrast, more than anything, makes this scene.

John Gielgud is John of Gaunt. That's really all I ought to have to say to get you to watch this.

Jon Finch makes a great Bolingbroke. He looks like a king, and is completely believable.

Charles Gray plays York. You will recognize him as the Criminologist from The Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Mary Morris plays the Duchess of Gloucester. You'll recognize her from the 1982 Doctor Who episode Kinda.

You probably won't recognize Jeremy Bulloch from his most famous role. He plays Hotspur in Richard II, but he played Boba Fett in Return of the Jedi.

Please feel free to leave any questions or comments about this post. And please click one or two of the ads you see here. Google tosses me a few cents with every click, which makes me feel less guilty about all the time I'm spending on this project.

Thanks.

Richard II. Dir. David Giles. Perf. Derek Jacobi, John Gielgud, and Jon Finch. 1978. DVD, Ambrose, 2004.