McKellen’s version of Richard III succeeded in using the original scenes from the play and adding his own twists to portray that Richard was evil and hungry for power. It succeeded in showing facial expressions and body language that readers had to imagine themselves, while reading. The director did an exceptional job using lighting, different camera angles, the extreme closeups, choosing the height and age of the characters and the way he placed certain images inside the frame. Joseph D. Noshpitz stated that since Shakespeare was never able to create a film, directors who followed his work had no other option than using their own imagination and creating their own variations. McKellen did spinoffs of the original setting, River’s death, Clarence’s death, and Tyrrell’s importance. These scenes were weird and odd, but in the end, it was a positive translation of the written play.
The opening scene was incorporated into the fim to add suspense to the story, give the viewers background information on the play and expose Richard’s evilness.
McKellen exposed the viewers to the modern setting as men were dressed in modern military officer uniforms. A message was received that Richard was advancing toward them at Tewkesbury via a twoway communication device. Then, without warning, a tank burst through the wall. Richard pulled out a gun and shot two men in the head.
Based on the play, Richard killed Prince Edward and his father, King Henry VI in a civil war. His brother Edward was the next heir to the throne. While making the play more modern, he included advanced technologies such as guns, tanks, cars, trains, and
twoway communication devices. At the end of this scene, Richard stood in the frame with a gas mask on. His breathing mimicked the rhythm of a heartbeat. The audience felt a villainous presence as Richard looked directly into the camera without any emotions. At that point, the viewers were aware that the film would be centered around
Richard’s sinful behaviors and his will to do anything to become king. I was expecting to see men dressed in extravagant robes and riding on horseback with swords based on the language in the play. I also, was surprised that they did not communicate by sending letters with messengers from one castle to another.
Richard became less appealing as both the film and play progressed. They both made the audience dislike Richard based on his evil actions and thoughts. The film did a better job of displaying his evil intentions because the audience actually gets to see
Richard in action versus hearing or reading about it. He was fully emerged into his desire to become king and was completely willing to murder his brother Clarence, his nephews, and his wife. Mckellen changed the way Clarence died, but kept the same events leading up to it. Guards took him away after being secretly informed the that
Clarence was planning to kill the king. Of course, this lie was started by Richard, since
Clarence was the next in line to become king. Therefore, he had to be eliminated. The director did an amazing job capturing the scene of Richard promising to get Clarence freed. He seemed sincere, concerned, and oblivious to the situation, but he was just showing off his skills of manipulation. The closeup of Richard after the boat pulls away, informs the audience that Richard is a liar and has sent his own brother to be executed.
In the play, the two murderers enter Clarence’s cell while he was sleeping. They beat
him with their swords and drowned him in keg of wine. In the film, Clarence was drowned by two men, including Tyrell. As a viewer, this adds to Tyrell’s importance. He was a minor character in the play who became relevant during Act VI. It was a good idea on the director’s behalf to fully create a new character. He gave him masculinity, heartlessness and evil qualities. He became an important aspect in
