As a admirer of David Tennant's work, I went to go and see this production in Stratford upon Avon's RSC twice. Both times, it is safe to say that this adaptation of Richard II is unfailingly amazing! The performance of David Tennant as well as his fellow cast mates must be applauded for its consistency across its run at the RSC in Stratford. In addition, the casting for Bolingbroke was spot on as he appeared both likable and despicable according to his interaction with Richard. It may be because of my love for David Tennant's acting but I sympathised heavily with his version of Richard II, like no other I have seen. The use of the stage and the lighting to go with it was remarkable and really set the scene for the mood of the scene. The choir singers used throughout the production were also amazing and really added to the production This play will shortly move to London at the Barbican Theatre and is to my knowledge sold out which just goes to show how popular Tennant's performances in theatre are. An outstanding performance which could easily rival Tennant's other performances at the RSC.
5 Reviews
a decent effort
gilleliath14 November 2023
I hadn't heard of this, but I should have realised it was at least 10 years old. TV Shakespeare has evolved a lot since this production, which - although it doesn't boast the sort of cast which the BBC could have mustered in the 70s or 80s - does include several notables and was clearly cast on ability, not diversity. As with his Hamlet, David Tennant shows here that he actually can act, and can handle Shakespeare's dialogue (funnily enough, these are the 2 Shakespeare plays I studied at A level). There is no stupid gimmick guiding the production: it is actually set in the Middle Ages, with appropriate costumes and some beautiful medieval-style music.
But there had to be a catch, and it comes about halfway through when the King starts snogging one of his aides (can't remember whether it's Bagot, Bushy or Green but it seems most likely to be Bushy). And, without actually altering the text of the play, they proceed to work a bit of a gay love story in there. It seems to be the received wisdom these days that, if a classic writer did not stress race, sexual orientation, substance abuse or other themes characteristic of our delightful modern world, it is not because they were either not conscious of them or not interested in them - it was only because, in the climate of the time, they didn't dare be explicit about them. So modern writers and producers actually convince themselves that they would have the original author's blessing in pursuing whatever hints of such issues they - in their woke consciousness - believe they find in the work (a particularly notorious example was the Beeb's new production of Great Expectations this year). But you can find anything in anything if you look hard enough.
However, they don't lean on this so much as to spoil the play. Other than that, the production tries too hard to wring laughs from what is really a very sombre and tragic story, and as part of that Tennant's performance is a little too florid and modern - he plays the king as a pampered C21st drop-out. But overall it's pretty good, and the three hours skip along smoothly enough.
But there had to be a catch, and it comes about halfway through when the King starts snogging one of his aides (can't remember whether it's Bagot, Bushy or Green but it seems most likely to be Bushy). And, without actually altering the text of the play, they proceed to work a bit of a gay love story in there. It seems to be the received wisdom these days that, if a classic writer did not stress race, sexual orientation, substance abuse or other themes characteristic of our delightful modern world, it is not because they were either not conscious of them or not interested in them - it was only because, in the climate of the time, they didn't dare be explicit about them. So modern writers and producers actually convince themselves that they would have the original author's blessing in pursuing whatever hints of such issues they - in their woke consciousness - believe they find in the work (a particularly notorious example was the Beeb's new production of Great Expectations this year). But you can find anything in anything if you look hard enough.
However, they don't lean on this so much as to spoil the play. Other than that, the production tries too hard to wring laughs from what is really a very sombre and tragic story, and as part of that Tennant's performance is a little too florid and modern - he plays the king as a pampered C21st drop-out. But overall it's pretty good, and the three hours skip along smoothly enough.
Like being there
ANeary3 December 2013
I was lucky enough to see this at the theatre in Stratford, and took the opportunity to see it in my local cinema when it was transmitted live a couple of weeks later.
It was surprisingly like being there for real, while at the same time, being able to see things you wouldn't be able to see when seated in the theatre. The quality of filming & direction was excellent, much higher than I have seen in other filmed live performances.
Greg Doran keeps the work in period (as opposed the modern dress Hamlet). The RSC still reigns supreme for Shakespeare (as well it should) and the verse is well-spoken. Tennant is charismatic as usual; Jane Lapotaire astonishing in her pivotal scene.
Highly recommended.
It was surprisingly like being there for real, while at the same time, being able to see things you wouldn't be able to see when seated in the theatre. The quality of filming & direction was excellent, much higher than I have seen in other filmed live performances.
Greg Doran keeps the work in period (as opposed the modern dress Hamlet). The RSC still reigns supreme for Shakespeare (as well it should) and the verse is well-spoken. Tennant is charismatic as usual; Jane Lapotaire astonishing in her pivotal scene.
Highly recommended.
"I wasted time, and now doth time waste me"
TheLittleSongbird16 October 2020
Although 'Richard II' may not be my favourite Shakespeare play, it does deserve to be performed a lot more. It's thematically fascinating, especially from a political standpoint, has great characterisation (especially the titular character and Bolingbroke) and while some may find the verse heavy dialogue too rambling it's still distinctive Shakespeare. It has been performed well many times and of the filmed adaptations 'The Hollow Crown' version is particularly stunning.
So is this 2013 Royal Shakespeare Company production, every bit as brilliant in its own way, with a great cast at the top of their game and in a production that's intriguing, entertaining and accessible. Of the filmed productions from the company of Shakespeare's plays in the past fifteen years or so, this production of 'Richard II' is one of the standouts and is proof of why 'Richard II' deserves more recognition (regardless of how it compares to his other work, which is actually not unfavourably).
Visually, 'Richard II' is very well done. The period costumes are very elegant, as is all the not too elaborate production design. There is back projection but it never looks cheap and is tastefully used, not done in a gimmicky way or in a way that distracts. The lighting is very atmospheric and the quality of the video directing makes one feel that they're there. Really liked the music (having a choral background the style appealed to me immensely), how well it fitted and how it was used. It was not over-used and didn't over-explain or over-emphasise, nor did it again feel like a gimmick.
Have no qualms with Shakespeare's dialogue, personally have never found it rambling and the wide range of emotions and intrigue still remain. It may alienate those not familiar with it beforehand, but with more familiarity of the play it shouldn't be as alienating. The staging is always done in good taste, no pointless or perplexing touches, and is always compelling. A great job is done making the drama coherent and in a way that would appeal to modern audiences without resorting to any dumbing down. The interaction between Richard and Bolingbroke is particularly well done.
David Tennant is mesmerising in the title role and to me it's one of his better performances for the Royal Shakespeare Company. He is especially good in the Westminster deposition scene, and there are even little things throughout that makes one go weak at the knees (i.e. the piercing stare given to Mowbray). Also spot on is Nigel Lindsay's dangerous but also oddly likeable Bolingbroke, that sounds oxymoronic but it's a complex character performed with complexity.
Oliver Ford Davies is amusing and moving as York and Michael Pennington's rage and grief is performed beautifully with intensity and pathos. Jane Lapotaire truly haunts and moves in her crucial scene.
Altogether, wonderful production. 10/10
So is this 2013 Royal Shakespeare Company production, every bit as brilliant in its own way, with a great cast at the top of their game and in a production that's intriguing, entertaining and accessible. Of the filmed productions from the company of Shakespeare's plays in the past fifteen years or so, this production of 'Richard II' is one of the standouts and is proof of why 'Richard II' deserves more recognition (regardless of how it compares to his other work, which is actually not unfavourably).
Visually, 'Richard II' is very well done. The period costumes are very elegant, as is all the not too elaborate production design. There is back projection but it never looks cheap and is tastefully used, not done in a gimmicky way or in a way that distracts. The lighting is very atmospheric and the quality of the video directing makes one feel that they're there. Really liked the music (having a choral background the style appealed to me immensely), how well it fitted and how it was used. It was not over-used and didn't over-explain or over-emphasise, nor did it again feel like a gimmick.
Have no qualms with Shakespeare's dialogue, personally have never found it rambling and the wide range of emotions and intrigue still remain. It may alienate those not familiar with it beforehand, but with more familiarity of the play it shouldn't be as alienating. The staging is always done in good taste, no pointless or perplexing touches, and is always compelling. A great job is done making the drama coherent and in a way that would appeal to modern audiences without resorting to any dumbing down. The interaction between Richard and Bolingbroke is particularly well done.
David Tennant is mesmerising in the title role and to me it's one of his better performances for the Royal Shakespeare Company. He is especially good in the Westminster deposition scene, and there are even little things throughout that makes one go weak at the knees (i.e. the piercing stare given to Mowbray). Also spot on is Nigel Lindsay's dangerous but also oddly likeable Bolingbroke, that sounds oxymoronic but it's a complex character performed with complexity.
Oliver Ford Davies is amusing and moving as York and Michael Pennington's rage and grief is performed beautifully with intensity and pathos. Jane Lapotaire truly haunts and moves in her crucial scene.
Altogether, wonderful production. 10/10
"My Kingdom for a horse!"
adamjohns-425757 December 2023
Royal Shakespeare company: Richard II (2013) -
Sadly it was difficult to take David Tennant seriously in the leading role of King Richard II, because I kept expecting him to shout out Allons-y and run off somewhere waving a sonic screwdriver. If he had played the part without the usual exaggeration associated with his time travelling character, he probably would have been superb in the kingly role, but otherwise I actually found myself wondering why 'Doctor Who' (2005-) was pretending to be a Shakespearean actor and which alien threat was he trying to prevent and what were they doing in a theatre?
And a lot of the cast struggled with the concept of the difference between vocal projection and shouting. Simon Thorp as The Earl Of Salisbury, was particularly guilty of that.
I was also slightly distracted by the Duchess Of York's (Marty Cruikshank) runny nose. I'm all for realistic performances, but I've never really been in to watching people expel bodily fluids, except for the obvious one.
I did think that Oliver Ford Davies was far better here than he was in his role in 'Star Wars I: The Phantom Menace' (1999) where he was quite over the top.
Alas, Henry IV (Bolingbroke) played by Nigel Lindsay was not so good. I certainly didn't think that he would be able to pull off the part of Henry IV as a leading man in the full play also by Shakespeare.
As for the journey of the story itself, I felt that the passing of time was hard to keep up with, one minute Gaunt (Michael Pennington) was saying goodbye to his son and the next he was unwell and about to die, which is just one example of the issue.
I don't know my history well enough to just watch this as a story and not be curious about the actual facts of it, so I did spend a lot of time trying to trace the royal family tree on my phone, but that wasn't the only reason I wanted to fiddle on the device. I actually didn't really feel enthralled by the play either.
I did however like the simplistic set, which, having worked in theatre, I know is a compliment that you're only given when people are struggling to find something nice to say about the performances.
As such, I might be inclined to seek out an alternative version of this story and to establish the historical facts before watching it. I wasn't sure that I would blame Wills for his script, although his dialogue has always been heavy, because I just thought that it could have been delivered in a lighter way that didn't have to be comedic, but also didn't have to be so stoic and iron weighted.
625.88/1000.
Sadly it was difficult to take David Tennant seriously in the leading role of King Richard II, because I kept expecting him to shout out Allons-y and run off somewhere waving a sonic screwdriver. If he had played the part without the usual exaggeration associated with his time travelling character, he probably would have been superb in the kingly role, but otherwise I actually found myself wondering why 'Doctor Who' (2005-) was pretending to be a Shakespearean actor and which alien threat was he trying to prevent and what were they doing in a theatre?
And a lot of the cast struggled with the concept of the difference between vocal projection and shouting. Simon Thorp as The Earl Of Salisbury, was particularly guilty of that.
I was also slightly distracted by the Duchess Of York's (Marty Cruikshank) runny nose. I'm all for realistic performances, but I've never really been in to watching people expel bodily fluids, except for the obvious one.
I did think that Oliver Ford Davies was far better here than he was in his role in 'Star Wars I: The Phantom Menace' (1999) where he was quite over the top.
Alas, Henry IV (Bolingbroke) played by Nigel Lindsay was not so good. I certainly didn't think that he would be able to pull off the part of Henry IV as a leading man in the full play also by Shakespeare.
As for the journey of the story itself, I felt that the passing of time was hard to keep up with, one minute Gaunt (Michael Pennington) was saying goodbye to his son and the next he was unwell and about to die, which is just one example of the issue.
I don't know my history well enough to just watch this as a story and not be curious about the actual facts of it, so I did spend a lot of time trying to trace the royal family tree on my phone, but that wasn't the only reason I wanted to fiddle on the device. I actually didn't really feel enthralled by the play either.
I did however like the simplistic set, which, having worked in theatre, I know is a compliment that you're only given when people are struggling to find something nice to say about the performances.
As such, I might be inclined to seek out an alternative version of this story and to establish the historical facts before watching it. I wasn't sure that I would blame Wills for his script, although his dialogue has always been heavy, because I just thought that it could have been delivered in a lighter way that didn't have to be comedic, but also didn't have to be so stoic and iron weighted.
625.88/1000.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
