So why HENRY V instead of any other Shakespeare skit, selected at random? I would never have thought of this one being particularly spiritual, apart from the general Elizabethan world picture that comes through in all Bill The Bard's stuff. I mean, good flick and all, but... What's up?

Ron's a pacifist and I'm the biggest accused warmonger around here and I agree. Great film. Where's the spiritual import?

Further, how dare we sully this fine enterprise with the despicable The Color Purple?

Well, there’re a few reasons for my part:

Henry V is the most ‘devout’ of Shakespeare’s Kings (at least, those in pivotal roles and not incidental.) and the most honorable. This piece contains some of the most inspiring and stirring dialogue Shakepeare put to pen in his ‘History plays,’ including the ‘Once more unto the breach’ entreaty and the ‘Saint Crispian’s Day’ compelling his men forward through the odds to victory. IMO, no film, including Braveheart and Lord of the Rings, has yet to touch Branagh’s stirring delivery before the battle of Agincourt.

From his prayer to God before battle, pleading for the strength of his men and mercy for the faults of Richard before him—to the giving of thanks and due in the moments following (Praised be God, and not our strength, for it!--Branagh also chose to include ‘Non Nobis Domine’ after the epic battle: Not To Us O Lord Not To Us But To Your Name Give Glory)-- and the moments throughout the film, when he wrestles with issues of leadership and duty and the hollowness of empty ceremony to the caring for the condition of his men, he consistently invokes God’s wisdom, or might, or mercy. (I believe Henry actually mentions God in the piece more than any character in any other of Shakespeare’s plays.)

This piece was also instrumental in rekindling a contemporary love for the classical text—Branagh’s eschewing of the rote iambic in favor of more modern flexible verse may have had the classicists up in arms, but for fledgling students of the Bard’s work and for the general populace, it opened the door for new appreciation of the text. And even if one hates Branagh, one must concede that his passion for the Bard has been pivotal to reintroducing modern audiences to the joys of Shakespeare—the most recent before Henry V with any remarkable quality, for my memory, was Zefirelli’s Romeo and Juliet…not including Ran.

I vote Henry V stays. For God, and for Harry.

[quote]Further, how dare we sully this fine enterprise with the despicable The Color Purple?[/quote]
Come again? I'd consider it lacking without it...

I like that. Thanks. This is one of my favorite Shakespeare films and better than Olivier's as a film.

My case against Purple is a simple one: Cardboard gender distinctions. No redeeming male characters, all but one unrelentingly bad; the one good character is made a clown. The main female characters are the way they are for no explained reason and are presented as good. There is no reason that I can see that Goldberg's character is treated the way she is. That's just the way things are. The problem is cardboard good and evil with no setup or explanation. Further, that this arbitrary moral distinction is presented in the most raw and chafing way with respect to the emotions of at least this viewer. Such basic manipulation is beneath good art IMO. I suppose if one were to read the book, more would be explained, but such dependence makes it a severely flawed film under the best of circumstances. I was offended to see this thing on the original list.

Well, don't be offended, Rich. It sounds more like you have an honest disagreement of opinion.

I composed and put that post up before you responded and was editting it when you commented, Alan. I, of course hated the film when it came out, despite being disposed to give it a good chance at the time. What raised my bile forever on this thing was the way it was fauned over to the exclusion of almost any mention at all of Soldier's Story, one of the better films of the '80's and out the same year. I guess I don't understand why it is not seen by the wise eyes of this board as despicable as well, or at least a black hole in Spielberg's career. Yes, I have strong opinions about this film, the strength of which is reserved for few films that I have seen. My hostile language I guess is meant as not only a true statement of my feelings, but also a gauntlet to one who might see something defensible at all in this thing. Take it away whoever. This would not have survived the cut if Alan were the only one to vote for it. FWIW, I won't get into an argument about it. I have stated my views. If I have convinced anyone of its weakness, I will leave the rebuttal to them.

[quote]Henry V is the most ‘devout’ of Shakespeare’s Kings... From his prayer to God before battle, pleading for the strength of his men and mercy for the faults of Richard before him—to the giving of thanks and due in the moments following (Praised be God, and not our strength, for it!--Branagh also chose to include ‘Non Nobis Domine’ after the epic battle: Not To Us O Lord Not To Us But To Your Name Give Glory)-- ...he consistently invokes God’s wisdom, or might, or mercy. [/quote]
Excellent points, Jason. Yes, now that you mention it, that "O God of battles" speech is pretty remarkable. I've seen the play a number of times, but you know, I've never seen more than scenes from the Branagh version. And I don't have the aversion to Sir Kenny that some have (well, I loathe his HAMLET, but that's a problem with his director, not with his acting). So I'm thinking maybe I'll give this one a look, maybe it can become a late addition to my ballot.

[quote](I believe Henry actually mentions God in the piece more than any character in any other of Shakespeare’s plays.)[/quote]
Well of course, he does have more lines than any characer in any other of Shakespeare's plays, so the law of averages would indicate...

:wink:

[quote]Well of course, he does have more lines than any characer in any other of Shakespeare's plays, so the law of averages would indicate... [/quote]

Heh, true--but only if you count his lines in Henry IV. He only has 1063 lines in Henry V, which Hamlet doth smite a mighty blow with a whompin' 1569 mojo in all of his post-daddy angst.

[quote][quote]Well of course, he does have more lines than any characer in any other of Shakespeare's plays, so the law of averages would indicate... [/quote]

Heh, true--but only if you count his lines in Henry IV. He only has 1063 lines in Henry V, which Hamlet doth smite a mighty blow with a whompin' 1569 mojo in all of his post-daddy angst. [/quote]

Well see, I didn't know that. Stick around here, you learn stuff!