Richard II is such an interesting character, he goes from the height of hubris and opulence to the depths of despair and poverty. Shakespeare does an excellent job of humanizing him in the narrative. You start off rightly hating Richard for the actions he takes against Gaunt and Bolingbroke, but you eventually see things fall apart for him and you feel the loss of his kingdom to those who swore him allegiance. You understand that his plight, while well deserved, is still tragic.
I feel like his decision to intervene in the duel is understandable, he doesn't want bloodshed and prefers peace, but it's at its core somewhat cowardly, indecisive, and it's this decision that dooms him. I love how the Hollow Crown shows him as this naive, boyish king, a bit foppish. Then when he finally makes a decisive action to leave England and lead the war in person, he is punished for it and loses everything.
It’s part of the brilliance of Shakespeare. Two sides nearly always, sometimes I don’t clock it until listening to scholars, Harold Bloom is one of the more famous but there are others. The more you learn the better it gets. It’s a crime we can’t make this interesting for school children.
@@michaeldeboer I agree that's a perfectly reasonable interpretation. There is an alternative one; there's a back-story, which Shakespeare's audience would probably have known, where Richard had is uncle Thomas Woodstock, duke of Gloucester, assassinated in Calais and left it to Mowbray to arrange the assassination; there is a scene in the play that comes immediately after the scene where Hereford accuses Mowbray, where Gloucester's widow urges John of Gaunt to do something to avenge his brother's murder, but he says that he cannot since basically it was Richard who was responsible for it - this scene is omitted from the Hollow Crown version. Bolingbroke's accusation of Mowbray is therefore a way of getting at Richard, and Richard sends them into exile (a) to sideline Bolingbroke who is popular, whereas Richard is not, and therefore a possible threat, and to get Mowbray completely out of the way because his presence is awkward. In other words, it's politics and Richard's justification that he does not want to see bloodshed a cover for his true motives.
I ADORE THIS- such passion, and Richard, disdainful, looking “down” on him, proud, knowing not what is about to happen. “Landlord of England thou art” fantastic
Ah the King who lost his show....should have in fact cut down his rich uncle.....put his cousins in prison....confiscated their lands and he would have prevented alot of problems in years to come....and maybe a plantagenet King/Queen would sit on the English throne today....
"A thousand flatterers sit within thy crown whose compass is no bigger than thy head", that pretty much sums up every vain and ignorant so-called leader in the history books whose arrogance/fear led to their downfall. Narcissistic rulers hate everyone who doesn't agree with what they claim, so they surround themselves with flatterers instead of having graceful temperance, and so eventually they grow so arrogant, addicted to attention and afraid of being seen as unworthy, that they foolishly self-destruct with other people serving as their instruments of self destruction. Honestly Richard the second is the best of the hollow crown, because the characters in it : John of Gaunt, Richard the second, and the archbishop prophecize loads of the things that happen next which shows how well aware they are of how people, both individually and collectively, think. They also really reflect on how the crown misleads, tempts, tortures and ultimately lures to their despaired doom, monarchs, wannabe monarchs and might-as-well-be monarchs, and the consequences that await those that obey them and are related to them. The show really does explore the idea of beautiful power being ultimately and spiritually hollow. The curse of craving that which you think you need for something you enjoy but are dissatisfied by it in the end for it doesn't bring you what you thought it would that you enjoy. Of course, Shakespeare's history dramas are not historically accurate and the plays on English kings especially are full of historical lies and propaganda. Still, it's really very educational in terms of ways by which people get obsessed with power, glory and wealth and how they damage others and themselves.
I agree with much of what you have written - but maybe the accuracy of Gaunt's, Richard's and Carlisle's prophecies has more to do with the fact that Shakespeare was writing 200 years after the events of the play than with any special awareness on the part of the characters?
Me too. I've always considered Richard II to be Shakespeare's most underrated play. For sustained poetic brilliance, it is the equal of any of the better known masterpieces that most people would rattle off in a list of Shakespeare's greatest plays and, if well produced and acted, is immensely powerful and moving in performance. I thought this production did it full justice. As for Measure for Measure; did it as an A level set text - takes a long time to recover :-)
@@onlynameMrBlank Coriolanus is one of the few Shakespeare plays I've never seen or read, but I shall get round to it. A few years ago now, I bought the boxed set of the BBC "complete Shakespeare" that they did in the late 70s/early 80s. A lot of them aren't very good - studio bound, performed in a "stage" style which doesn't work well on television, and some of them horribly miscast. I'm watching them in the generally accepted chronological order of composition, sometimes leaving months between them, I have two to go before I get to Coriolanus. I shall look forward to it.
@@adolforodolfo6929 Responding to an older post, I know, but I thought Coriolanus is one of the better ones. I haven't watched it in years but I do remember Alan Howard and Irene Worth are both magnificent. If memory serves, it's fairly heavily cut which may not be such a bad thing.
It will truly be sad day when we lose Patrick Stewart. They cut out huge chunks of that monologue and I don't even care. His performance was still fantastic.
Grandpa John of Gaunt, addressing the son of grandma Joan of Kent. Grants a whole new perspective when reviewing history, and historical drama, and a much deeper appreciation of it all. A salute to Sir Patrick - brilliant, as always!
Of all the scenes that they dumb down and cut for the public this one shoudve been left intact. "Now he that made me knows I see THEE ill!!!!! Ill in myself to see and in the seeing ill!!!!! Thy deathbead is no lesser than thy LAND!!! Wherein thou lyest in reputation sick!
Richard II is my favourite play and always has been. Ben achieves something really special in this role. He is one of the best actors alive, I think. Especially after seeing him in Layer Cake. He's so completely different it's wonderful to watch him.
Richard II was a brat from the time the dark prince died. He was no warrior and was no match for any knight of the era. His biggest mistake was stealing John Of Gaunt's estates and forcing Gaunt's son Henry to return to England and take the crown from Richard II. Richard fought with heavens angels. Henry fought with knights.
@@ulfricstormcloak3507 Instead he "took the grander approach of giving himself up and going to prison... and dying." ^.^ Truth is, Richard had no popular support against Henry IV's usurpation. After the death of his Queen, Anne of Bohemia, who was posthumously credited with being a calming influence on a possibly bipolar Richard II, he just went to pieces and made a string of politically suicidal decisions. By the time Henry IV came back with an army, Richard II was just done. He's basically the real life Joffrey Lannister screaming I AM THE KING but nobody gave a shit about that by that point.
To Richard II: "We are the hollow men We are the stuffed men Leaning together Headpiece filled with straw. Alas! Our dried voices, when We whisper together Are quiet and meaningless As wind in dry grass Or rats' feet over broken glass In our dry cellar
"Shape without form, shade without colour, Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
"Those who have crossed With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom Remember us-if at all-not as lost Violent souls, but only As the hollow men The stuffed men." --T.S. Eliot, "The Hollow Men"
He REALLY was!!! I went into the episode not knowing what to expect and he literally blew me away - he was so GOOD at conveying so many different emotions and also in evoking different emotions from the audience. Truly fantastic and incredibly emotional
Ben Wishaw outshines Patrick Stewart here, surely a remarkable achievement. Wishaw well deserved his BAFTA for his compelling performance as Richard II.
Capt. Picard: Return that moon to its orbit. Q: I have no powers! Q the ordinary. Capt. Picard: Q the liar! Q the misanthrope! Q: Q the miserable, Q the desperate! What must I do to convince you people?
6 ปีที่แล้ว
Capt. Picard: Well... I suppose that is the end of Q. -AU CONTRAIRE, MON CAPITAINE! HE'S BACK!
I've been waiting for a quality adaptation of Richard II for the longest time. Now all I wish is for Measure for Measure to be given equal treatment. : )
Great acting Patrick Stewart, acting as John of Gaunt. It is said that our current Queen Elizabeth II is descendant of John of Gaunt and he's also the son of Edward III.
The greatest Richard II of his generation was Derek Jacobi. He took a different approach, but it's really interesting to compare the two. Here's the same scene from the BBC Shakespeare: (You'll have to search for it because it won't let me put the url in "The Demise of Old John of Gaunt" Sadly studiobound and made as a film of a stage play, for which it suffered, it nevertheless gives us John Gielgud as Gaunt and Jacobi as the King. The actual bit of the scene shown here is about 5 minutes in.
ive been saying this !!!! covid came cause we're all a bunch of fools who needed to be humbled like this king right here foolishness God bless us all inshallah ameeen
Patrick Stewart is the ham of all hams ! positively glows with " I am an actor" smugness - his pretentiousness is , along with Great Wall of China , one of the few objects astronauts have seen in orbit.
In that moment when he drew the sword I hoped that Richard would become the king. Instead he failed. There was a moment that he had but to reach-out and take it. He let it pass and it cost him everything.
Helen Trope I know he was the king. But you can be something without really being that thing. Think about it terms of being puppet or figurehead rather than than the leader. Yes he was the king but vain and manipulated. But when he takes up that sword even though he is wrong he is the most in control. I don't know if that makes any sense but that is what I am thinking.
Adarcus Who is manipulating him? Richard was once a boy King and may have been manipulated then but not when he was an adult. He was not a very good King except in his support of the arts and unlike Henry IV who ousted him, he did not persecute heretics, but Shakespeare makes him sympathetic when he loses power.
@@elsacristina9 At least 3 times. John of Gaunt is, so far, my GG 3 times in my tree, meaning she is at least my Great Aunt 3 x so far. I am working on it bit by bit. I just put Auntie in the Scotland (Stuart) side and she comes out as being my 20th Great Aunt. I did find I already have her pic in my pictures saved so either I have put it in another profile or she might be a GG at somewhere. These royals married each other and my tree looks like an entangled mess at spots. I would love to have a genetics professional count how many times I am my own cousin. 😂😂 Seriously though, it is fascinating and started with a window, through the Halcro's in Orkney, Scotland. It is an honor I do not take likely
@@Paulsmuse John of Gaunt firstborn Philippa of Lancaster it is one of the most beloved Queens we ever had, and She is actually my favorite Queen. Recently I was near her tomb where she rests with her husband our great King João I
@@Paulsmuse I'm reading a book from Isabel Stilwell called: Philippa of Lancaster, English Princess, Queen of Portugal. The book is in English so you can buy it and read it. it is a romance but it also mix with histórical facts and it is so far awesome. The picture of my profile picture it is actually the monastery where she is buried. it is called Batalha Monestary. search for their tomb it is beautiful.
Can someone please explain to me why they always abridge and make it shorter and cut out so much. This is one of the most epic speeches in Theatrical history why on Earth would they cut Patrick Stewart's ability to render the whole thing. Why do they keep under estimating the masses attention span for Shakespeare they can wait...
I suppose that if you didn't know the play, it wouldn't bother you. But I agree with you; this is one of a small number of Shakespeare plays, my personal favourites, that I have read/seen so often that I just about know them by heart - and so every time the text is altered or abridged it jars. This production was so good, easily the best Shakespeare I have seen on television, that I still enjoyed it hugely, but some of the cuts I think went too far. Richard II is not a particularly long play and almost nothing in it is superfluous - maybe just the scene where York and his wife plead with Bolingbroke for Aumerle's life, which goes on a bit too long and is essentially a comic interlude which works well enough in the theatre when it's played for laughs, but can't really work on television. The "cuts" which annoyed me most were the cuts to Richard's soliloquy in prison shortly before he is murdered; that soliloquy is crucial to understanding Richards journey and the impact it has made on him, but they cut more than half of it out. I don't think that, in this case anyway, the cuts were made to "dumb down" the text, but simply to compress the action and to shorten the running time. If you go to see Shakespeare in the London theatre, some plays (Hamlet and Richard III for example) are inevitably cut because the full text takes over four hours to perform and people would not otherwise be able to get home after the performance. As for "dumbing down" the text, replacing "difficult" words with a more easily understood alternative, yes, that does happen a little - not very much, just the occasional word here and there, but it's totally unnecessary and for me it jars; but, again, if you don't know the text, you're not going to notice.
@@adolforodolfo6929 now he that made me knows I see thee ill, lll in myself to see and in thee seeing ill. It was just one extra sentence that adds to the poetry. But cutting it out I know it seems Superfluous but it's so necessary in the dance of the words
i agree, but it's likely production constraints. even abridged, this ran 2 hours and 21 minutes, which is considerable for a "movie," especially one that i assume was meant to air on television as well. for those who are familiar and interested, there will always be plays (which are sometimes abridged as well..) and of course, the text. but i really appreciate this series for making shakespeare more accessible to those who are unfamiliar. this approach is also clear in the decision to not speak in iambic pentameter. i would like to think that the hollow crown helped garner some interest in the bard. :)
Strange how most medieval media is about the English and not literally anyone else in Europe. Does no other country have their own BBC equivalent to produce something similar?
Most countries do their own stuff, you just haven't seen it yet maybe. In the 1970's (God, I'm getting old!) , French television did a series called "Les Rois Maudits" (The Accursed Kings) based on a series of historical novels by Maurice Druon, which are about the French kings and queens of the 14th Century. It's not highbrow stuff, sex and violence basically, so perfect television :-) Just about all of the episodes of this series are on TH-cam, including ones with English subtitles, so you can easily watch them if you want to.
Just few days ago I could watch this here in Brasil, I realy loved, I don't now each seasion Iliked more. ALL cast amazing ... well, Richard lll is fantastic..
But in Shakespeare's play the character Richard II was 32 years old. Derek Jacobi is now of an age to play King Lear, and likely he'd be a great one ... perhaps recycle some of his Emperor Claudius in his dotage.
Hey, no hard feelings. My comment was very tongue in cheek, but that doen't always come across through such a remote medium of communication. So here's a smiley face to make it all better :-)
I find it good because it is good - absolutely fucking brilliant imho. I will confess to an education though... Not my fault, it's that complusory schooling thing the government imposes on us.
Richard would have been bi-lingual; by Richard's time English was in common use by the nobility; the royal family almost certainly still spoke Anglo-Norman (basically French) amongst themselves, but that does not mean that they spoke only "little English".
It's absolutely worth watching. If you only watch the Patrick Stewart parts, you won't see much of it, because his character dies less than a quarter of the way through the play 😁. This is a great play with some marvellous scenes - this is not even the best of them.
No they weren't - Shakespeare's plays were written for a wide audience, a lot of it well educated and discerning, but some of them just there for the beer and a laugh, which is why there is a mixture of high art and low comedy in many Shakespeare plays.
Richard II is such an interesting character, he goes from the height of hubris and opulence to the depths of despair and poverty. Shakespeare does an excellent job of humanizing him in the narrative. You start off rightly hating Richard for the actions he takes against Gaunt and Bolingbroke, but you eventually see things fall apart for him and you feel the loss of his kingdom to those who swore him allegiance. You understand that his plight, while well deserved, is still tragic.
Yep, absolutely.
I feel like his decision to intervene in the duel is understandable, he doesn't want bloodshed and prefers peace, but it's at its core somewhat cowardly, indecisive, and it's this decision that dooms him. I love how the Hollow Crown shows him as this naive, boyish king, a bit foppish. Then when he finally makes a decisive action to leave England and lead the war in person, he is punished for it and loses everything.
It’s part of the brilliance of Shakespeare. Two sides nearly always, sometimes I don’t clock it until listening to scholars, Harold Bloom is one of the more famous but there are others. The more you learn the better it gets. It’s a crime we can’t make this interesting for school children.
@@michaeldeboer I agree that's a perfectly reasonable interpretation. There is an alternative one; there's a back-story, which Shakespeare's audience would probably have known, where Richard had is uncle Thomas Woodstock, duke of Gloucester, assassinated in Calais and left it to Mowbray to arrange the assassination; there is a scene in the play that comes immediately after the scene where Hereford accuses Mowbray, where Gloucester's widow urges John of Gaunt to do something to avenge his brother's murder, but he says that he cannot since basically it was Richard who was responsible for it - this scene is omitted from the Hollow Crown version. Bolingbroke's accusation of Mowbray is therefore a way of getting at Richard, and Richard sends them into exile (a) to sideline Bolingbroke who is popular, whereas Richard is not, and therefore a possible threat, and to get Mowbray completely out of the way because his presence is awkward. In other words, it's politics and Richard's justification that he does not want to see bloodshed a cover for his true motives.
I ADORE THIS- such passion, and Richard, disdainful, looking “down” on him, proud, knowing not what is about to happen. “Landlord of England thou art” fantastic
LANDLORD OF ENGLAND ART THOU NOW, NOT KING!
This is the phrase I firmly utter to my cat after it steals my rightful place in the bed : Landlord of our house art thou, not king!
Isn't Patrick Stewart brilliant? As always?
Tom Cruise taught Patrick Stewart everything he knows.
Patrick Stewart-a man who can inspire loyalty for men to draw swords in his defense in the prescence of a king.
Um, they are not defending Patrick Stewart, they are defending John of Gaunt, and they are drawing their swords because the director told them to.
@@adolforodolfo6929 lol.
Ah the King who lost his show....should have in fact cut down his rich uncle.....put his cousins in prison....confiscated their lands and he would have prevented alot of problems in years to come....and maybe a plantagenet King/Queen would sit on the English throne today....
"A thousand flatterers sit within thy crown whose compass is no bigger than thy head", that pretty much sums up every vain and ignorant so-called leader in the history books whose arrogance/fear led to their downfall.
Narcissistic rulers hate everyone who doesn't agree with what they claim, so they surround themselves with flatterers instead of having graceful temperance, and so eventually they grow so arrogant, addicted to attention and afraid of being seen as unworthy, that they foolishly self-destruct with other people serving as their instruments of self destruction.
Honestly Richard the second is the best of the hollow crown, because the characters in it : John of Gaunt, Richard the second, and the archbishop prophecize loads of the things that happen next which shows how well aware they are of how people, both individually and collectively, think. They also really reflect on how the crown misleads, tempts, tortures and ultimately lures to their despaired doom, monarchs, wannabe monarchs and might-as-well-be monarchs, and the consequences that await those that obey them and are related to them.
The show really does explore the idea of beautiful power being ultimately and spiritually hollow. The curse of craving that which you think you need for something you enjoy but are dissatisfied by it in the end for it doesn't bring you what you thought it would that you enjoy.
Of course, Shakespeare's history dramas are not historically accurate and the plays on English kings especially are full of historical lies and propaganda.
Still, it's really very educational in terms of ways by which people get obsessed with power, glory and wealth and how they damage others and themselves.
I agree with much of what you have written - but maybe the accuracy of Gaunt's, Richard's and Carlisle's prophecies has more to do with the fact that Shakespeare was writing 200 years after the events of the play than with any special awareness on the part of the characters?
i bought the hollow crown series from amazon based on this clip. i agree, richard ii is the best of the series.
John of Gaunt's giving Richard a warning: amend your ways before you lose your crown. Too bad Richard did not listen.
An incredible production, not a bad actor in the bunch, great sets and costumes - please give us more!
1:13 'Live in thy SHAME, but die not shame with THEE'
Me too. I've always considered Richard II to be Shakespeare's most underrated play. For sustained poetic brilliance, it is the equal of any of the better known masterpieces that most people would rattle off in a list of Shakespeare's greatest plays and, if well produced and acted, is immensely powerful and moving in performance. I thought this production did it full justice. As for Measure for Measure; did it as an A level set text - takes a long time to recover :-)
jmharrison51 yeah, Richard II was a brilliant work. I need to reread it again.
Yes, it is a great one.
Coriolanus is also underrated.
@@onlynameMrBlank Coriolanus is one of the few Shakespeare plays I've never seen or read, but I shall get round to it. A few years ago now, I bought the boxed set of the BBC "complete Shakespeare" that they did in the late 70s/early 80s. A lot of them aren't very good - studio bound, performed in a "stage" style which doesn't work well on television, and some of them horribly miscast. I'm watching them in the generally accepted chronological order of composition, sometimes leaving months between them, I have two to go before I get to Coriolanus. I shall look forward to it.
@@adolforodolfo6929 Responding to an older post, I know, but I thought Coriolanus is one of the better ones. I haven't watched it in years but I do remember Alan Howard and Irene Worth are both magnificent. If memory serves, it's fairly heavily cut which may not be such a bad thing.
Nice to see Captain Picard getting one over Q again...
"LANDlord of England art thou, now!"
So are all kings, apex owners in feudalism. fee simple absolute.
It will truly be sad day when we lose Patrick Stewart. They cut out huge chunks of that monologue and I don't even care. His performance was still fantastic.
Especially for Sir Ian.
May it not be for many years.
Especially when his own personal passion is theatre and classics such as this series.
THERE.ARE.FOUR.LIGHTS!!
lol, that's what I thought at the moment I first saw Stewart's face
Make it so, you goddamn landlord.
That is comment perfection.
Well done Number Two!
Should have been at the Battle of Mortimer's Cross.
"THERE ARE THREE LIGHTS!"
"Landlord of England art thou now, not king..." pretty apt description of how the real Richard II actually ruled.
Reasons Patrick Stewart is awesome... see this scene. Nuff said.
ben whishaw is so incredible as richard ii, i wish i could see him perform the role in an unabridged version of the play.
This is one weird holodeck projection. Picard is one drama queen
Patrick Stewart is scarily brilliant at Shakespeare! His Macbeth was truly terrifying!
Grandpa John of Gaunt, addressing the son of grandma Joan of Kent. Grants a whole new perspective when reviewing history, and historical drama, and a much deeper appreciation of it all. A salute to Sir Patrick - brilliant, as always!
Truly, the hollow crown must be the most star-studded cast the BBC has ever put together
There art four candles!
Of all the scenes that they dumb down and cut for the public this one shoudve been left intact.
"Now he that made me knows I see THEE ill!!!!! Ill in myself to see and in the seeing ill!!!!! Thy deathbead is no lesser than thy LAND!!! Wherein thou lyest in reputation sick!
Richard II is my favourite play and always has been. Ben achieves something really special in this role. He is one of the best actors alive, I think. Especially after seeing him in Layer Cake. He's so completely different it's wonderful to watch him.
Richard II was a brat from the time the dark prince died. He was no warrior and was no match for any knight of the era. His biggest mistake was stealing John Of Gaunt's estates and forcing Gaunt's son Henry to return to England and take the crown from Richard II. Richard fought with heavens angels. Henry fought with knights.
Richard should have killed henry
@@ulfricstormcloak3507 Instead he "took the grander approach of giving himself up and going to prison... and dying." ^.^
Truth is, Richard had no popular support against Henry IV's usurpation. After the death of his Queen, Anne of Bohemia, who was posthumously credited with being a calming influence on a possibly bipolar Richard II, he just went to pieces and made a string of politically suicidal decisions. By the time Henry IV came back with an army, Richard II was just done. He's basically the real life Joffrey Lannister screaming I AM THE KING but nobody gave a shit about that by that point.
“Forcing.” He committed treason and sparked the Wars of the Roses.
I've never seen Professor X being angry. Now I can see it.
This is what happens when you bring together two incredible actors and Shakespeare. Saturday cannot get here soon enough.
The great thing about Patrick Stewart reciting this kind of work is he makes it sound like someone really is saying it for the first time.
To Richard II:
"We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats' feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar
"Shape without form, shade without colour,
Paralysed force, gesture without motion;
"Those who have crossed
With direct eyes, to death's other Kingdom
Remember us-if at all-not as lost
Violent souls, but only
As the hollow men
The stuffed men."
--T.S. Eliot, "The Hollow Men"
Aptly quoted so!
Ben Wishaw was fabulous!
He REALLY was!!! I went into the episode not knowing what to expect and he literally blew me away - he was so GOOD at conveying so many different emotions and also in evoking different emotions from the audience. Truly fantastic and incredibly emotional
God, watching this scene with this 2 excellent actors was such a pleasure !
Ben Wishaw outshines Patrick Stewart here, surely a remarkable achievement. Wishaw well deserved his BAFTA for his compelling performance as Richard II.
Capt. Picard: Return that moon to its orbit.
Q: I have no powers! Q the ordinary.
Capt. Picard: Q the liar! Q the misanthrope!
Q: Q the miserable, Q the desperate! What must I do to convince you people?
Capt. Picard: Well... I suppose that is the end of Q.
-AU CONTRAIRE, MON CAPITAINE! HE'S BACK!
Worf: Die.........
And Richard ll had such a good start as a mere teen he quelled a peasants revolt,by riding in front of an angry mob. Great scene!
Whoever's playing King Richard is quite good.
PEASANTS EARLY GREY HOT
This sceptered isle, this....Number One.
Watched this tonight ... brilliant, just brilliant. Can't praise it highly enough. Can't wait for the rest of the Hollow Crown productions.
Jean Luc, it's nice to see that you still know how to enjoy your time on the holodeck!
Now that’s funny!!
the wait for the next series is killing me.
John Keats, Captain Picard, and swords! This is just like my fan-fiction!
Interestingly the historical character is the mayor inspiration for GOT/ASOIAF's Tywin Lannister
I've been waiting for a quality adaptation of Richard II for the longest time. Now all I wish is for Measure for Measure to be given equal treatment. : )
Ok, now I need to see him do the Septered Isle speech.
Only in 480p? Are you nuts, BBC?
Great acting Patrick Stewart, acting as John of Gaunt. It is said that our current Queen Elizabeth II is descendant of John of Gaunt and he's also the son of Edward III.
The greatest Richard II of his generation was Derek Jacobi. He took a different approach, but it's really interesting to compare the two. Here's the same scene from the BBC Shakespeare:
(You'll have to search for it because it won't let me put the url in "The Demise of Old John of Gaunt"
Sadly studiobound and made as a film of a stage play, for which it suffered, it nevertheless gives us John Gielgud as Gaunt and Jacobi as the King. The actual bit of the scene shown here is about 5 minutes in.
oh God no! I beg to differ - Patrick Stewart is the star graduate from the Jacobi finishing school for actorly pretensions and pomposity
ive been saying this !!!! covid came cause we're all a bunch of fools who needed to be humbled like this king right here foolishness God bless us all inshallah ameeen
A lot of business. The work of a very confident director
captain picard is getting out of hand here
Patrick Stewart is the ham of all hams ! positively glows with " I am an actor" smugness - his pretentiousness is , along with Great Wall of China , one of the few objects astronauts have seen in orbit.
no
@@alalalala57 you spelt "I know" wrong there
Every so often, someone flunks out of the Xavier school.
The New Star Trek series looks good
I can't watch the RSC nonsense now we know the language they use is false, & not the way the Bard spoke or wrote.
John of Gaunt - "There are FOUR candles!!!"
In that moment when he drew the sword I hoped that Richard would become the king. Instead he failed. There was a moment that he had but to reach-out and take it. He let it pass and it cost him everything.
Adarcus ? Richard was already the King when he drew the sword.
Helen Trope I know he was the king. But you can be something without really being that thing. Think about it terms of being puppet or figurehead rather than than the leader. Yes he was the king but vain and manipulated. But when he takes up that sword even though he is wrong he is the most in control. I don't know if that makes any sense but that is what I am thinking.
Adarcus Who is manipulating him? Richard was once a boy King and may have been manipulated then but not when he was an adult. He was not a very good King except in his support of the arts and unlike Henry IV who ousted him, he did not persecute heretics, but Shakespeare makes him sympathetic when he loses power.
+Adarcus
Where can be any power of king before a dying men?
Adarcus you are completely off base here..I think you have Richard ii Confused with someone else
John of Gaunt is my 20th Great Grandfather so I am so jazzed to see this ... and by non other than Patrick Stewar! 😍😉
So you and my favorite Queen Phillipa of Lancaster are related???
@@elsacristina9 At least 3 times. John of Gaunt is, so far, my GG 3 times in my tree, meaning she is at least my Great Aunt 3 x so far. I am working on it bit by bit. I just put Auntie in the Scotland (Stuart) side and she comes out as being my 20th Great Aunt. I did find I already have her pic in my pictures saved so either I have put it in another profile or she might be a GG at somewhere. These royals married each other and my tree looks like an entangled mess at spots. I would love to have a genetics professional count how many times I am my own cousin. 😂😂 Seriously though, it is fascinating and started with a window, through the Halcro's in Orkney, Scotland. It is an honor I do not take likely
@@Paulsmuse John of Gaunt firstborn Philippa of Lancaster it is one of the most beloved Queens we ever had, and She is actually my favorite Queen. Recently I was near her tomb where she rests with her husband our great King João I
@@elsacristina9 That is awesome!
@@Paulsmuse I'm reading a book from Isabel Stilwell called: Philippa of Lancaster, English Princess, Queen of Portugal. The book is in English so you can buy it and read it. it is a romance but it also mix with histórical facts and it is so far awesome. The picture of my profile picture it is actually the monastery where she is buried. it is called Batalha Monestary. search for their tomb it is beautiful.
Only an idiot draws a weapon and doesn't use it.
Remember, all of Shakespeare's heroes had a 'tragic flaw'. Richard could be no different.
John of Gaunt was dying anyway.
Or a coward.
Professor X vs Young Q...Sweet :)
DragonHeart613 Jean-Luc Picard vs Jean-Baptiste Grenouille
They'll have to get mr T, Malcolm X and V in on this alphabet-I-cast. They also have James bond's "M".
A plague o' both your houses!
Can someone please explain to me why they always abridge and make it shorter and cut out so much. This is one of the most epic speeches in Theatrical history why on Earth would they cut Patrick Stewart's ability to render the whole thing. Why do they keep under estimating the masses attention span for Shakespeare they can wait...
I suppose that if you didn't know the play, it wouldn't bother you. But I agree with you; this is one of a small number of Shakespeare plays, my personal favourites, that I have read/seen so often that I just about know them by heart - and so every time the text is altered or abridged it jars. This production was so good, easily the best Shakespeare I have seen on television, that I still enjoyed it hugely, but some of the cuts I think went too far. Richard II is not a particularly long play and almost nothing in it is superfluous - maybe just the scene where York and his wife plead with Bolingbroke for Aumerle's life, which goes on a bit too long and is essentially a comic interlude which works well enough in the theatre when it's played for laughs, but can't really work on television. The "cuts" which annoyed me most were the cuts to Richard's soliloquy in prison shortly before he is murdered; that soliloquy is crucial to understanding Richards journey and the impact it has made on him, but they cut more than half of it out.
I don't think that, in this case anyway, the cuts were made to "dumb down" the text, but simply to compress the action and to shorten the running time.
If you go to see Shakespeare in the London theatre, some plays (Hamlet and Richard III for example) are inevitably cut because the full text takes over four hours to perform and people would not otherwise be able to get home after the performance. As for "dumbing down" the text, replacing "difficult" words with a more easily understood alternative, yes, that does happen a little - not very much, just the occasional word here and there, but it's totally unnecessary and for me it jars; but, again, if you don't know the text, you're not going to notice.
@@adolforodolfo6929 now he that made me knows I see thee ill, lll in myself to see and in thee seeing ill.
It was just one extra sentence that adds to the poetry. But cutting it out I know it seems Superfluous but it's so necessary in the dance of the words
@@Vpopov81 I completely agree.
i agree, but it's likely production constraints. even abridged, this ran 2 hours and 21 minutes, which is considerable for a "movie," especially one that i assume was meant to air on television as well. for those who are familiar and interested, there will always be plays (which are sometimes abridged as well..) and of course, the text. but i really appreciate this series for making shakespeare more accessible to those who are unfamiliar. this approach is also clear in the decision to not speak in iambic pentameter. i would like to think that the hollow crown helped garner some interest in the bard. :)
Brilliant
Man, so good.
Tem algum canal onde possa assistir essa série aqui no Brasil??
Strange how most medieval media is about the English and not literally anyone else in Europe. Does no other country have their own BBC equivalent to produce something similar?
Most countries do their own stuff, you just haven't seen it yet maybe. In the 1970's (God, I'm getting old!) , French television did a series called "Les Rois Maudits" (The Accursed Kings) based on a series of historical novels by Maurice Druon, which are about the French kings and queens of the 14th Century. It's not highbrow stuff, sex and violence basically, so perfect television :-) Just about all of the episodes of this series are on TH-cam, including ones with English subtitles, so you can easily watch them if you want to.
Try the TH-cam channel called German Period Drama
@@adolforodolfo6929 les rois maudits was born to be on starz
Can they translate this show to English? 😂😂
Just few days ago I could watch this here in Brasil, I realy loved, I don't now each seasion Iliked more. ALL cast amazing ... well, Richard lll is fantastic..
Jacobi is a bit of a luvvie and his performance looks a bit wooden these days. I agree with him that he could do it much better now.
But in Shakespeare's play the character Richard II was 32 years old. Derek Jacobi is now of an age to play King Lear, and likely he'd be a great one ... perhaps recycle some of his Emperor Claudius in his dotage.
Make it so - king Richard.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE PBS get this!
If Worf was there Richard would have been spitting teeth.
epic
Oooh, Patrick Stewart in my favourite Bill Shakes play! I'm sold.
Wish I could see the entire movie, alas, I can not afford to purchase it.
I hate how I have to wait till january or february to watch the hollow crown series cause live in u.s
Hey, no hard feelings. My comment was very tongue in cheek, but that doen't always come across through such a remote medium of communication. So here's a smiley face to make it all better :-)
I find it good because it is good - absolutely fucking brilliant imho. I will confess to an education though... Not my fault, it's that complusory schooling thing the government imposes on us.
Poetic Elizabethan English
Nope but I wasn't born in 1412 so it might as well be an alien language to everyone now lol
Richard could actually spoke french. He could only speak little English
edit: speak*
Richard would have been bi-lingual; by Richard's time English was in common use by the nobility; the royal family almost certainly still spoke Anglo-Norman (basically French) amongst themselves, but that does not mean that they spoke only "little English".
*Is-is that... Prince Albert and Mr. Francitelli??*
I understood none of this 😂
Make it so
I'm not implying it isn't, or that everyone is disingenuous about liking it.
The Internet suggests the description has spelled "Whishaw" incorrectly.
This is finally coming to the US in a couple months, and is now available for Region 1 pre-order on Amazon!
Ok I will be so happy if someone puts the Hollow Crown on TH-cam this summer in good quality!
Q! Q! DAMN YOU, Q! WHERE HAVE YOU PUT ME NOW
Is this one worth watching? Or just the Patrick Stewart parts?
It's absolutely worth watching. If you only watch the Patrick Stewart parts, you won't see much of it, because his character dies less than a quarter of the way through the play 😁. This is a great play with some marvellous scenes - this is not even the best of them.
And to think, these plays were written to entertain illiterate laborers.
No they weren't - Shakespeare's plays were written for a wide audience, a lot of it well educated and discerning, but some of them just there for the beer and a laugh, which is why there is a mixture of high art and low comedy in many Shakespeare plays.
Man like John whips out a glock
A Great performance 🌷
he is good , richard the thrid top cat
THERE ART... FOUR... LIGHTS!
Captain Picard and Q! 😜
@rantanplanx that is hilarious
To know that this man also did the emojie movie.
Maybe he thought it would be fun.
🤍 🦌
Game of thrones this
Lol
To infinity and beyond!