2/13/09
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Discussions
Who best performs the "To be or not to be" soliloquy?
Movie Clips
DVDs
Labels
- As You Like It (2)
- Branagh (11)
- Chimes at Midnight (3)
- Discussions (16)
- Film Clips (13)
- Hamlet (8)
- Henry IV Part One (3)
- Henry IV Part Two (3)
- Henry V (5)
- Julius Caesar (1)
- King John (1)
- King Lear (1)
- Macbeth (5)
- McKellen (3)
- Merchant of Venice (5)
- Midsummer Night's Dream (8)
- Much Ado About Nothing (3)
- News (4)
- Observations (3)
- Olivier (8)
- Othello (7)
- Resources (20)
- Richard III (9)
- Romeo and Juliet (4)
- Summaries (3)
- Taming of the Shrew (1)
- Taymor (5)
- Tempest (2)
- Titus Andronicus (3)
- Troilus and Cressida (1)
- Twelfth Night (2)
- Welles (9)
- Zeffirelli (3)
Search
Contact
Subscribe
Posts
Comments
Line Numbers
Fair Use
Prince Hal is a unique character because he is the only one that can move between the worlds of tavern, court and battlefield with ease. This makes him a very dynamic character and apt to change and develop into something much more than the other characters. By the end of the movie, the bond between Falstaff and Prince Hal irreversibly depletes. Falstaff represents a vice, a comic or clever character, who temps Prince Hal while others, like the King, try and convince him not to fall astray. Hal is his prey in the movie and is torn between allegiances to Flagstaff and his father. This could also be symbolic of the loyalty Prince Hal has for both the tavern and the court. Ultimately, Prince Hal chooses the crown over Falstaff.
ReplyDeleteI think Welles exerted Falstaff’s presence in the distance during Prince Hal’s first soliloquy as a means for visual self-reflection and foreshadowing (when Hal as King rejects Falstaff and denies their relationship).
ReplyDeleteI find it stange that such an old man represents Prince Hals need to grow up. Falstaff is a carachter that represents somebody who has never really grown up. Hal likes to hang out with Falstaff because he makes him feel grown up while not having to accept responiblity for ones actions. Falstaff hangs out with Hal because he makes him feel young and helps him out with the reponsibilities that he never accepted.
ReplyDeletefound this movie to be very compelling. Welles' choice of black and white film, the sets, especially the interior of the castle - huge, reminescent of, I beleive a set designed by Robert Edmund Jones for a production of Hamlet. I may have this wrong. But it was a similar feeling - huge, high sets, with lighting from above so that it played wonderfully with shadows. Very powerful. The use of black and white, and a different play with light and shadows used with the character Falstaff, gave him an almost "film noir" aura,a propos for the way Welles' played him. He becomes much more sinister, degenerate - yet at times watching him stumble and flail, both physically and emotionally is somehow pathetic and incredibly sad. In the same vein, Hal's use of him becomes equally as sinister.
ReplyDeleteI think the fact that Prince hall chooses the crown over flagstaff shows his responsibilities are shifted over and portrays the kind of man he is. Also the fact that Hal hangs out with certain men so that he will appear more impressive when he ultimately deserts them shows what kind of evil youre dealing with. Its almost like an ultimate ego trip for him.
ReplyDeleteThe tavern was where Prince Hal’s second home was. It was a place he could drink, particularly with Falstaff, have fun and spend time with women. It was comical how Shakespeare used the tavern as a hangout, where the characters would make jokes about popular plays. The tavern was there for anyone who wanted to have a good time and served its community with alcoholic beverages. This significant place is where the characters were able to let loose and have a good time.
ReplyDeleteThe battle scene in Chimes at Midnight was amazing for the time that it was filmed in with the resources that were available. It seems to remind me much about the opening scene in Saving Private Ryan in how it was meant to impact the audience.
ReplyDeleteFalstaff is definitely the type of character I would expect to find drinking in a tavern back in those days. Hal is pretty much just trying to have a good time and put off inevitable responsibility, something many people do prince or not. The emphasis on the Falstaff character in the film is not surprising seeing how it was the character Orson Welles was playing in his own movie.
ReplyDeleteTrue emphasis is put on Falstaff because Welles plays him, but Falstaff makes the serious play comedic. The behavior of Hal and Falstaff together reminds you of how real life buddies are, best friends or father and son or even an uncle and a nephew. They pick on eachother constantly and yet are reminding eachother of the responsibilities they should be attending to.
ReplyDeleteInteresting how Prince Hal turns out to be a mature yet ignorant king. I did not expect that at all. The sypnosis makes it sound like Prince Hal was a coward and he put himself low. However, in the end of the film Prince Hal is quite someone else to Falstaff.
ReplyDeleteI believe the relationship between Prince Hal and Falstaff is the most intriguing one throughout the story. As Harry matures he seems to distance himself away from Falstaff ever so slightly, like the scene at the battlefield when they are presenting his cousins dead body in front of his father. The one crucial point in this story is the fully developed King Harry, which is represented by Falstaff fading away in the final scenes.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the openness of the castle set emphasizes how troubled Henry IV is. He's always thinking about how he came to own the crown, and how his son supposedly wants him dead. The castle set where we see him is open and cold and everything looks hard and uncomfortable. It seems to reflect the way he is feeling. It also definitely makes me better believe that he is as stressed and lacking of sleep as he says he is. It may be grand, but someone who is under as much stress as the King would benefit from grand surroundings that weren't also cold and hard.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was interesting how the play was entitled "Henry IV" or "Chimes at Midnight" for the movie, but yet a huge chunk of it was devoted to the character of Falstaff. Another interesting aspect to the movie/play was the character developments of Falstaff, Hal, and Hotspur. Falstaff and Hotspur seem to represent each end of the spectrum (Falstaff is very fat and doesn't believe in honor and Hotspur is very devoted and loyal) and Hal is stuck in the middle wondering which side to lean towards.
ReplyDeleteEach scene was beautiful, almost as if it could be framed. However, it was sometimes hard to heard the dialogue because of the poor sound quality and how it was recorded. I did like how the character would be looking right into the camera when he/she is really talking to someone across the table. You rarely see this in movies now and days, so to me this was odd to see. The movie was also a little slow for me, and I wished there could have been a few more battles.
ReplyDeleteThe exterior scenes and the battles, are spectacular, and deserve a place in history. The scenes grime and brutality is one of the best of its kind. It brings home that it was not all jolly and also helps in character building, as Falstaff, risible dressed in armor to contain his girth, effectively hides from the fighting until it is over and he can walk out of his shelter unscathed to praise Prince Hal on his victory. Seeing Falstaff at the center of the story for the first time, we can see what a gentle, pathetic, boastful, and good-hearted man he is. When Henry betrays him at the end it's all the more powerful for Henry V.
ReplyDeleteEven though this movie was a little long, I really enjoyed seeing Welles protray of this dark story, The battle scene were amazing, and made its mark in cinematic history.
ReplyDeleteI agree with marloweman. Although I found the story and dialogue hard to hear and follow, I enjoyed how wells used shadows in the movie. The castle and the woods I felt were the most interesting.
ReplyDeleteChimes at Midnight
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed watching Chimes at Midnight. I thought that Welles’ character was a little hard to follow up on. I really liked the cinematography in the film. I thought the music was not over done, and it didn’t distract me from the movie. I thought the battle scene was shot amazing for the resources they had to film it. The relationship between prince Hal and Falstaff reminded my best friend and me.
I really enjoyed the ominous factor of the film. The music worked very well with the characters and sets of the film. The battle scene was very intense and I was thouroughly invovled in the film.
ReplyDeleteOrson Welles impressed me with his ability to act and direct a great film. My favorite part of the film is when Jack Falstaff is in battle. There was humor and a fierce battle at the same time. The film could imput subtitles and it would be easier to understand. The plot and storyline is good and enjoyable. Overall interesting film. KodiakJack
ReplyDeleteI too was impressed and surprised to find out that Falstaff was Mr. Welles himself. Without him the movie would not have been nearly as good. My favorite part in this film is definitely the facial expressions of the character. My two favorite characters that kept me entertained was the old woman in the common house and Falstaff. Didn't expect this movie to be funny but glad it was!
ReplyDelete-brigg
The character Falstaff is what makes this film great. Falstaff is a complex character that provides comic relief throughout. It is amazing how Orson Welles combines several Shakespeare plays into an interesting story, while acting the most important role and directing the entire film.
ReplyDeleteI was quite interested by the portrayal of Falstaff prior to and during the battle prior to it he seems to be composed less joking than normal but during the battle he seemed to in a different way become a comedic character, which felt out of place in a battle scene said to have inspire so many serious war films. Anyone have any ideas as to why Welles portrayed him this way?
ReplyDeleteThis film was not my favorite. I really didn't like how it was in black and white, and I found myself being very distracted by this aspect almost the whole time I was watching the film. Being used to color films spoils our generation! The story was also a little confusing to me. I liked Falstaff as the main character. I thought that he was really funny how he was all these different people rapped up into one. The battle scene where Falstaff kept running away from the actual action that was going on was also amusing to me. I really liked how well the film was put together, considering how many different stories it was telling all at once.
ReplyDeleteThe film was long but at times very enjoyable. The relationship between Falstaff and Hal is what interested me the most in the movie. Also the battle scenes were intense and at the time really captured the audiences attention
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the creativity on the directors behalf when it comes to the baqttel scenes. The way they were presented really grabbed the sttention of the audience
ReplyDeleteEven though the movie was in black and white, i thought the movie was rather interesting with the whole plot where people are suppose to die then all of sudden somebody else kill them, the ending was bad for Falstaff but the movie was not to bad.
ReplyDeleteThis is truly a lost classic. A true masterpiece by Orsen Welles. Chimes at Midnight can be a jarring experience due to inconsistent film quality, low budget sets and Welles' flair for shock cuts, but it's a truly rewarding experience once you adapt to the style and limitations. Chimes at Midnight has a little of everything: low comedy, highly artistic camera angles, exciting battle scenes (the battle of Shrewesbury scene influenced Braveheart) and a deeply moving story that Welles has 'discovered' between the lines of Shakespeare's histories.
ReplyDeleteI love the way that Prince Hal seems to have more of a father-son relationship with Falstaff than with his own father, but when Falstaff takes the credit for killing Hotspur, the realtionship shifts and changes to the point where Hal completely rejects Falstaff in front of everyone, to prove he is not who he used to be.
ReplyDeleteThe film has a little bit of everything involved in it, such as creative and artistic camera angles and intense battle scenes. The battle scene and the scene starting from when Falstaff hears the news about the newly enthroned Hal were amazing.
ReplyDeleteTo me this film by far has been the hardest to understand. It was made in black and white and the audio was hard to hear. In this play Price Hall shows his responsibility, and how his priorities have changed. Falstaff however, is one that has not yet learned how to act mature.
ReplyDeletei very much liked watching this movie. i liked how the music was portrayed and similar to the characters personalities. i found it interested how Prince Hall's priorities changed throughout the film and how we see this change changed so abruptly.
ReplyDeleteBeing the first film watched in this class, it was one of the most memorable. Although it was the frist, it still sticks in my memory the best. It was a bit confusing to remember the names of the characters and who falls in love with who throughout the film, but at the end it all made sense. :) This film was creative with its characters and the use of costumes it used. For example the donkeys costume and the queens costume were very intricate and interesting. The use of effects kept the audience entertained and very pleased.
ReplyDeleteWhile I was watching it, I found myself like cringing and curious as to who was going to receive the magic potion next. And more specifically if it was going to mess up the original love sequence. I was curious and anxious as to who was going to fall in love in the end with helps of the potion. I was hoping that it would end in everyone being happy and sure enough it did! :)
I really enjoyed this movie and how it showed that some people, especially in the political aspect of life, are willing to do anything and step on anyone to get ahead. Hall used Falstaff to be able to make himself look good to the nobility around him once he took the throne, to show that he had turned from his old ways and renounced his former friends. Even though the sound quality and the picture itself made this movie somewhat hard to follow, I still enjoyed it and was able to figure out the general sequence of events.
ReplyDeleteChimes at midnight was a very old movie, it incorporated many of Shakespeare stories in one movie. It was very dark and mysterious at the beginning. It was a very creatively filmed movie
ReplyDeleteChimes at midnight was my least favorite play so far. It was to long and did not hold my attention. When you have the background knowledge on Henry IV the play is a little easier to understand. however I did enjoy the relationship between Hal and Flagstaff, even though Flagstaff does bring out Hal's immature side considering he has yet to grow up himself.
ReplyDeleteAfter watching Chimes at Midnight I feel that this film was not one of my favorites but I felt that it did a good job at including all of the different Shakespeare's stories into one movie. I did enjoy getting to know the character FLagstaff, because he is a very funny character in general. I feel like in our lives we all know someone who is very similar to Flagstaff. I did feel really bad for Flagstaff because he was betrayed by his old friend, just because he was a different individual. ALso I though it was vert interesting to watch Welles's act out the part for Flagstaff. I felt that he did a very good job with it.
ReplyDeleteI didn't really like the film mainly because of the age and the length of the film. I think it would have been better if they had split this moovies into a couple different movies. But there were good characters in the movie such as Falstaff which added humor to the movie which somewhat kept my attension.
ReplyDeleteThe relationship between the prince and Falstaff is quite funny. Falstaff is older yet still has fun and I think that’s what draws the prince to him. The prince is escaping his royal responsibilities by hanging out with Falstaff. It was also funny to watch Falstaff hide behind the tree while the prince was fighting.
ReplyDeleteI found it really hard to understand what was going on in this film because of the way the characters speak. I really thought it was interesting how they could portray the battle scene in a day when film making wasn’t really perfected. It didn’t really help that the screen wasn’t fit to the resolution either.
ReplyDeleteWhen I watched this play, the concept was hard to catch, because there were so many different aspects to it. It was harder for me to follow and pay attention, I would have to say this play was my least favorite.
ReplyDeleteI suppose for the time period it was filmed in this movie was fairly decent, the black and white really contributes to the mood in certain scenes. Its time for an updated version though...
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed Welles' film. Through the use of amazing cinematography and talented actors Welles is able to create the gloomy tone and feel of medieval Europe. This can be seen especially during the battle with Henry Percy.
ReplyDeleteThis film wasn't the easiest film to follow but it was still enjoyable. You can relate the relationship between Falstaff and the Prince to a lot of people. In the beginning everything is great they drink, lie, and cheat together. As time goes by the Prince matures more and more while Falstaff stays the same person.
ReplyDeleteThis movie was the hardest to comprehend, the sound quality was terrible as well as the visual quality and black and white. However, the tone of the movie was easily seen through the movie
ReplyDeleteThis was and interesting movie and dymanic in how Prince Hal openly states that he will not associate with none of his old friends when he will become king. I think The Orson cast this play very well. All the actors fit to their characters
ReplyDelete+MJH+
I thought that Orsen Welles' "Chimes at Midnight" was a very well done film considering the time period (1950's), but it was a hard film to watch due to the film quality and complicated language. Despite this, I thought the acting in the film was good and I loved Falstaff's dual personality and his giving off the impression of a man who has not yet accepted the fact that he has grown up. Overall, I thought the best parts of the film were Falstaff's interactions with Prince Hal (Henry V).
ReplyDelete-Jordan Williams
Though I thought this film was humorous, it was probably my least favorite Shakespeare play. I do not particularly like black and white films, so that also influenced my opinions greatly. I did on the other hand enjoy the battle scenes and actor's diverse personalities.
ReplyDeleteNicola Lore
This was definitely not one of my favorite one of Shakespeare’s films, mainly just because I had trouble keeping up with the plot. However, I did enjoy the brief moments of comedy that were scattered throughout. My favorite scene was when Falstaff thought someone stole his belongings while he was sleeping. The acting was a little faulty, which only added to the comedy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Micheal,
ReplyDeleteIn Chimes at Midnight the overwhelming theme has to be coming of age for the young prince Hal who is shown transforming into King Henry V. Chimes at Midnight helped me to understand King Henry V and the King Henry IV plays better as well
Loved this movie. It was very different than what I was expecting when I went to go see it, but it was interesting to see what Wells did with Shakespeare's work. It was a bit hard to follow, but I really enjoyed following Well's vision of Shakespeare. It brought a new comical way to see Shakespeare's work.
ReplyDeleteThe film is filled with the fury of betrayal as Falstaff’s influence on young Prince Hal threatens the integrity of the monarchy. Instead of looking at the emphasis of Henry’s rise to power such as Shakespeare portrays, Welles depicts the film in a different way by instead encouraging us to look at the world from the perspective of those he left behind in his climb to the top. Falstaff’s overall image throughout the film is pretty comical and is poked fun at seldom throughout the film. Henry’s drive for power makes him an image of 20th century tyrants
ReplyDeleteI agree with what nick west stated about how the battle scene was filmed on such scale and with such resources to truly impact the audience and just as the opening scene in saving privet Ryan and other films about war show you the battle scenes themselves. It is meant to impact us.
ReplyDeleteOne of the most interesting observations I had when viewing this movie was the change of pace the film takes, how it goes from so serious to comedy almost instantly. For instance, during the battle its suppose to be serious and they’re charging but then it just shows Falstaff falling on his horse with everyone passing him. Also, when the king dies, it switches from him about to die to a bunch of people dancing. I believe that this change of pace makes it really interesting and easy to watch.
ReplyDeleteAlthough the movie was in black and white, the epic battle scene made up for all of it. The filming of the battle scene was shot so skillfully. It actually seemed as though they were filming an actual battle. Other than that the black and white graphics and the language threw its off.
ReplyDeleteBlack and white! Although I found this film to be comical, I would have to say that this was definitely not one of my favorite films. It was extremely hard to follow partly due to the language used. However, it was refreshing to see Welles place a different spin on the film. I would have to contribute to the theme of the discussion presented and agree that the "battle scene" was fantastic!
ReplyDeleteFor me this had to be one of the hardest films to follow all year. I did not especially like the black and white picture, but i thought the battle scene was awesomely portrayed.
ReplyDeleteThis film was made in the 1950's, and i believe due to the time period the language used was very difficult to understand. I did not like this movie simply because it was hard to keep up with
ReplyDeleteI found this movie very difficult to follow. I personally am not a huge fan of black and white movies, but I still thought even though this movie is a little older, the acting was really great. I found it interesting that this movie is a blend of multiple Shakespeare stories. I found it very interesting how the director chose to excentuate Falstaff's character more than he was portrayed in the actual Shakespearean play itself.
ReplyDeletethis movie was great. the use of camera angles to add to the story and interplay between falstaff and the prince was very well done and the facial expressions on both those characters while in the back ground of scene helped put a new level of understanding to the story
ReplyDeleteI agree with a lot of the previous comments, this film was by hard the most difficult film to follow. The black and white picture made it hard to keep my attention but I will say I loved how the movie had some comic relief. Although there was intense battle scenes, there were always little portions that would pop up throughout the movie that would make me laugh a little.
ReplyDeleteI thought this movie was pretty decent. The main thing that bothered me with this movie was the fact that in the fight scene Falstaff was a pretty lame. He was either hiding or pretending he was dead the whole time.
ReplyDeleteI find it genius that prince Hals is played by an old man. its ironic that it repreents his need to grow up. i also like how he is constantly with Falstaff because Falstaff is young and represents someone who has never really grown up. Hal enjoys hanging out with Fallstaff because it makes him feel older without having to make any mature, conscious decisions.
ReplyDeleteSir John Falstaff was a character I would not usually have associated with Shakespeare. Falstaff was chubby, always appeared intoxicated, and humorously charming. This film had a strange twist in the mood but also Falstaff's character. I found he resembled a sad clown, he was witty and funny on one side yet an interesting twist of sadness came in. Falstaff had a certain youth to him with his humor, but also the sadness of an old man.
ReplyDeleteThis was definitely a hard film to follow and the black and white picture didn't help out much. The fight scene was one of the best parts of the movie and it seemed to grab everyones attention by reading the other comments. I just thought falstaff was a coward when it came to fighting.
ReplyDeleteI particularly like the scene where the two actresses begin to argue and it lead them straight into the mud hole. I think this was a great use of the visual components of film by the director that was not in the original film. i thin that it showed just how fierce these women were with one another that was hard to tell by the language that they spoke, but the anger one must have to tackle the other
ReplyDeleteFalstaff is such a likable character that I wish there was more material on him. He is one of the first drunken party heros in literature and commands the screen/stage with his infectious presence. Language was a challenge in this film tho.
ReplyDelete