Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Discussions
Movie Clips
DVDs
Labels
- As You Like It (1)
- Branagh (9)
- Chimes at Midnight (3)
- Discussions (14)
- Film Clips (13)
- Hamlet (5)
- Henry IV Part One (3)
- Henry IV Part Two (3)
- Henry V (5)
- King John (1)
- King Lear (2)
- Macbeth (1)
- McKellen (3)
- Merchant of Venice (5)
- Midsummer Night's Dream (4)
- Much Ado About Nothing (2)
- News (5)
- Observations (3)
- Olivier (7)
- Othello (3)
- parallels (1)
- Resources (16)
- Richard III (9)
- Romeo and Juliet (2)
- Summaries (1)
- Taymor (4)
- Tempest (1)
- Titus Andronicus (3)
- Twelfth Night (2)
- Welles (5)
- Zeffirelli (1)
Search
Contact
Subscribe
Posts
Comments
Line Numbers
Fair Use
29 comments:
I liked this movie a lot more than I anticipated. It moved a lot faster than the newer version of the play, which was good and bad. It was good in the sense that it moved quickly, but bad because it left out a lot of dialogue as an effect. However, I enjoyed the movie and picked up on a lot of similarities and differences between the two films.
I agree that the movies length and pace was easy to follow, but it also made the plot some what difficult to understand. I think I enjoyed the newer version more with Branagh. The acting was better and the so was the scenery. Although it was more wordy, it was easy to understand what was going on.
I actually thought the other version was better because I thought the other one had put more of a modern take on this play than this version by Orson Welles. I have to say that I have never been able to follow movies when they are in black and white. Never have been. Not that the movie wasn't good or anything, it was just the fact that was in black and white that didn't do much for me. I think that the more modern version of this shakespeare play was easier for me to follow after doing the reading because it was more modern than the other one, it was in color, and the more modern take of the play helped me understand what was in the book a lot more than the Orson Welles version did.
I enjoyed the other version better, for one I think the "Moor" in this version was a white guy with some black face paint on him. Also, the lines were very hard to hear and follow, thus the plot seemed very shaky at times with not being able to hear everything and with the upbeat tempo of the movie (very fast paced compared to the other version). It was interesting that Emilia in this version did not die next to her mistress (Desdemona), however she did die next to her side in the more recent version, I wonder what is the significance there?
i agree with cookie crisp on liking the other one better, but i still really enjoyed this version of othello. Lago was a weird looking charcter. the whole scene when roderigo was supposed to kill cassio was really weird especially when Lago killed roderigo through the wood, i thought that was all really weird.
Unlike Chimes At Midnight, I was actually able to follow this Welles film, yet (like everyone else on here) it definitely wasn't as captivating as Parker's Othello. And that's really not Welles fault. I'm sure back then, this style of film making was advanced, and very moving. But with modern audience, it doesn't quite pack as much of a punch. We're used to color, special effects, and stunning visuals. BUT...me not falling asleep during a black and white film is something not easily accomplished, so therefore I have to give some kudos to Welles. Good job guy ;)
i think this was a well done version of Othello, yes the other Othello is more modern and in color but i don't think those make a film better. i think a lot of its charm was lost on people because they don't like black and white films and plus the quality of this film wasn't the best so at times it was harder to hear. but over all i enjoyed this film just like i enjoyed the other Othello. they are both great films they were just done in totally different time periods so that is what the movie is reflecting not its caliber.
Again, this stuck more to the shakespearean version of the tale, while a more modern version of the play gets the audience more involved. It still portrayed all the characters in good form, but the color version of this movie helped emphasize certain scenes that didn't make sense in this version.
This movie was a very good movie. But I agree with Javier that the older movie that was in black in white really had more power then I think the one in color. The black and white movie had more of what shakespeare feel and seems like it would be something that Shakespeare would really be proud of.
i would have to agree with what most people were saying about this movie, it was easier to follow than Chimes at Midnight, but the Laurence Anthony and Kenneth Brannagh version is much more entertaining in my opinion. But then again I think I may be in love with Brannagh!
Excuse me I meant to write Laurence Fishbourne not Anthony!
Iago's portrayal seemed more sinister to me than Branagh's version and you could tell it was a Welles film by casting himself as the main role of Othello, who gives a stern version of the Moor. The fact that Othello's and Desdemona's corpses were being taken through the town while Iago is locked in a cage is very distinguishable compared to Parker's film. It was as if the tragedy starts the mood of the film.
This film is interesting if you wish to keep it a secret...Iago grew in jealousy while Othello, brainwashed.
Although some of the sound had been lost and remade, I still enjoyed this film for its originality and its ability to show the sinister side of Lago. The black and white added a dramatic effect to the film.
although this movie was made in the 50's it was still a great film. the story was easy to follow and I thought it as good if not better Branaghs version.
I thought it was interesting to see both the newer version of the film, and Welles’s black and white version. Instead of following the play word for word, Welles uses a more poetic approach and the constant use of symbols. I think this version focused more on Othello, as opposed to Iago. That shift could be positive or negative, depending on how you perceive the two men. I found it difficult to feel sorry for either of the men, considering they both did completely immoral things which lead to the death of almost all the characters. The camera movements and poetic tones made this version, in my opinion, harder to follow and to concentrate on than Parker’s Othello.
As seen in some of the other comments I also feel the movie went by fast, it did drag on in some parts but for the most parts it went by fast. I enjoyed the black and white aspect to this film as well. I i though it was interesting in our discussion before starting the film to hear what the director had to work with. It was pretty great how he could impervise a scene when they had no costumes on set.
I thought this film was easier to understand vs the previous one we saw. I was more confused on the previous one and had to rely more on the text to fully understand it, whereas in this film the dialogue was much easier to understand.
Even though it was made in the 50's it was better then I thought it was going to be. Im not really down for black and white movies. However, it turned out to be pretty good. One thing that made it not so bad was the fact that it was a little easier to understand and connect than the reading.
The film is not excellent, but good. I was delighted to see a movie version. The actors are good, especially Iago, and little Desdemona is very sweet but I had always thought that she should have dark hair. Orson Welles expresses Othello's fury and jealousy especially well, but I think Desdemona should always speak in a very delicate voice in this movie she may even shout. And I couldn't understand why she didn't cry when Othello said she had no more lifetime left after all, she is little Desdemona. However, the film is quite good, especially the beginning in which the men carry the dead Othello and Iago sees it from the cage.
What I really enjoyed about Welles’ Othello is that the action is followed through out the film with a clear specific intention. I never felt that the ball was dropped or that I didn’t understand what they were talking about and doing. Welles is a fine actor and magnificent film maker. His films we have seen have been very provocative and intense.
I was captivated by Parker’s adaption of Othello. However, while watching Welles’ I could barely keep my mind from wandering off to Whitney dining that would occur soon after its duration. The beginning was solid; I liked how angered senator Brabanzio becomes after becoming aware that Desdemona is “not in your house”. Yet Iago’s character is obscenely monotone and dull. Every time he speaks I became drowsy. The intensity could only be surpassed by sports radio and econ teachers. When I read the play I perceived Iago as being a corrupt, racist, hyperactive villain. Yet, was depicted as being intellectual and boring. Besides, he had funny looking armor.
The filming is good for this movie and I think that Macliammoir's performance as Iago is amazing. However, this movie is a little bit old and I didn’t get as much out of it as some of the newer films. I think that the stripped down set works well for the film but I like some of Welles other films much better.
I thought this film was just as good as the modern version of Othello. I thought that the modern version displayed the plot better, however some scenes were more dramatic in Welles' version. Such as the bedroom scene where Othello kills Desdemona. He kisses her as he's killing her. I thought that for the time period in which the film was made that that scene was very dark and ahead of its time.
I believe that the low budget that Welles had did NOT take away from this film. And although short he portrayed the story better than Parker did. The fact that it was probably more costly to add more clothes and to make the decision to have a spa like scene where everyone just wore towells is genius and gives the film a more personal feel. Welles idea of Othello is a bit different than Parkers as well. Othello to Welles, became more of a love sick puppy, more concerned with his lover than his friend. His friend, Iago just playing a snake and not so much a lead character. I believe i enjoyed the ending better in this film because the sense of the bars restricting every character in each of there cameos made me better understand the behind meaning of it all.
I would agree with the above post. I did not enjoy this movie as much as I have enjoyed a lot of the others. Welles puts a very different spin on his Othello, then Parker does. Well Parkers Othello is portrayed as strong and determined, Wells is more weak and easily manipulated. I thought this movie didn't grab my attention as quickly as Parkers, so in the end I was just comparing the two.
Even though Welles's version of Othello was similar to Parker's, there were many things that Welles did differently. One of the major differences was the ending and how it Othello already had the dagger and killed himself. Also, Othello killed his wife by placing a sheet over her mouth and kissing her to death. The movie was shorter and Iago was not killed at the end. Instead, he was put in a cage and hung in the air.
I liked the beginning more because Iago is more punished. In the modern film Iago suffers a quick death and isn't made as aware of what he did. Also, another thing was that roderigo seems more wimpy in this film. He is more easier to fool and he does not have the same passion for Desdemona as the Roderigo in the modern film. Also, I didn't like the quick pace of the movie it made it very hard for me to follow along.
Iago makes Othello feel abandoned and friendless with no soldiers with him. Iago decided to take advantage of Othollo while he is in this state of restlessness. Iago makes Othollo very angry when he states that he is now useless to their society and is no longer a suiting man, Othollo has been used to being a respected soldier now he’s just nothing.
Kelli Kirchhof
Post a Comment