So, last night Fathead (my spouse and near-constant companion in the viewing of most media) and I decided to watch Kenneth Branagh's Othello. I'd heard this particular version was pretty good and Fathead has always rather liked Othello because he's always liked Iago. So, this viewing was to be the great experiment about what my preferences on Shakespeare really are: in a nutshell, this was to be my test case on whether or not I only like Shakespeare when I'm watching it performed or whether I only like Shakespearean comedies as opposed to dramas.
A little bit of background before I give my verdict and then go on to discuss the movie more generally: up until last night, I was in the rather odd position of having only read dramas (Othello and Romeo and Juliet) and hated them but having seen comedies (a high school performance of A Midsummer Night's Dream and Kenneth Branagh's Much Ado About Nothing) and loved them. I wasn't really sure, this being my experience, what made the difference between whether I loved Shakespeare or hated him. Was it simply that the dramas didn't really move me but the comedies are legitimately hilarious? Or was it that Shakespeare doesn't really come alive when it's not performed and that, as such, you miss a lot of the more enjoyable nuances that really make you connect with the play? I had my suspicions, of course, but they were somewhat conflicting and, in any event, I didn't really know the answer. For instance, I was pretty sure that Romeo and Juliet would be dreadful no matter what simply because the tragedy seems to come from actually being upset that these two kids died, instead of thinking the stupid gits got what they deserved and that their love was really just lust anyway. On the other hand, I'm pretty sure that A Midsummer Night's Dream would suck if you read it. I just can't imagine Bottom (who was played in the version I saw by a very talented and completely hilarious young man who had also been my middle school sweetheart) being funny if you can't actually see him sitting around with a donkey head or engaging in physical comedy. Yes, Shakespearean jests are funny by themselves but I do think they lose something without being able to see what's happening.
In any event, I got my answer last night and it is (drumroll, please) . . . both. Shakespeare is definitely better when seen but I also prefer the comedies to the dramas.
So, my verdict on Othello itself? It was okay. I definitely liked it a lot more than I had in high school---for instance, I hadn't connected with Iago at all then but I definitely really appreciated his manipulative bastard talent when watching this. Furthermore, I think Othello himself made more sense to me. Frankly, when I read the play in high school, I really just didn't pick up on exactly how intricate and well done Iago's plan was and I think that missing that really just ruins the whole play for one. It makes Othello seem nuts if it's not there and you can't appreciate how awesomely clever Iago is if you're missing that.
On the other hand, I still didn't really connect with the play enough for it to really pluck my little heartstrings and really see it as a tragedy. While Othello worked a lot better for me than he had in high school---when he simply seemed to jump to conclusions and in general just be an out of control maniac whose tragic flaw was too large to let me feel for him---I still didn't really connect with him. Honestly, I'm not even entirely certain why not. Some of it, I suppose, is that his passion didn't really save him from going over the moral event horizon when he killed Desdemona. He didn't just become convinced that his love had cheated on her and then immediately go kill her, he premeditates it by planning it out with Iago beforehand (deciding to strangle her in her bed instead of poisoning her, as he initially planned) and then even asks if she's said her prayers before doing the dead. Frankly, that kind of killing is just really cold. I think a rage killing would have made the realization that he killed an innocent woman much more tragic. That said, I'm not convinced I would have been crying at the end if he had killed her in the heat of passion instead because I hadn't exactly liked him overmuch before the premeditated killing and I can't really put my finger on why.
My other problem with this play that keeps it from being a glorious tragedy for me is Desdemona, who is so loyal that I just can't like her (and therefore be overly upset at her death, unjust as it is). She gives up everything for the love of this man and then he accuses her of sleeping around and yet she still loves him wholeheartedly, not even a little bit mad at him, and stays with him even though she thinks he may kill her. I liked much better Emilia, Iago's wife, who has her wonderful speech about why women cheat. That's more my kind of gal ( ...and this is where it will surprise no one to learn that Beatrice of Much Ado About Nothing is thus far my favorite of Shakespeare's characters).
My final problem with the play was simply that I wished that Iago had gotten away in the end. Now, obviously his treachery needed to be revealed or the play wouldn't work---Othello must find out that he's been tricked in order for the tragedy to really take place. That said, once his treachery has been revealed and Othello's dead, I would have loved to see Iago slink off into the darkness, his plan foiled (I, for one, am convinced that he never meant to be discovered, so I'm perfectly okay with his treachery being discovered serving as the reminder that this sort of behavior is bad and never really turns out well). Frankly, with a character as epically clever as Iago it's a just a shame to not see him manage to weasel his way out of justice. In other news, I think I may have made an emotional connection with the wrong character.
Regarding Kenneth Branagh's film itself, I can say that it was, overall, a pretty good adaptation of the work. The scenery is, as is to be expected, gorgeous. Branagh as Iago is delightful and Laurence Fishburne also turns in a very nice performance.
On the other hand, there were two things that drove me absolutely nuts and really pulled me out of the movie. The first was Iago talking to the camera. Now, I often love breaking the fourth wall in fiction but I firmly believe it should only be used for comedic purposes. When it's used for comedic purposes, I get something out of it happening---it's funny and I usually laugh (it's a type of humor I especially seem to appreciate). When it's not, however, it just pulls me out the story while giving me nothing. I much prefer my Shakespearean soliloquies to be dealt with as though they're the character's private musings.
The second was the fact that Othello's rage cum sickness/epileptic fits were not cut into something less dramatic. Now, I understand that this is from the original text and that the idea that such great anger could cause such a thing probably seemed like good sense in the late sixteenth and early seventeenth centuries but every time I saw it happen there was always a long "what the hell?" moment until the text explained what was going on. Frankly, I just don't think it works very well for modern audiences (where most of what happens in Shakespeare really is, overall, timeless) and I think it would have been best cut around.
Having said all that, however, about Othello and how, overall, it doesn't really entirely do it for me even in spite of Iago and his wife Emilia, I will say that I haven't given up entirely on the idea that maybe I could really love some of the dramas. Othello certainly wasn't a complete flop for me, even if it has convinced me that the comedies are overall much better. I think it quite possible that the right drama could really be a favorite for me. To that end, I'm thinking the next Shakespearean drama I watch really should be Macbeth. I've been told that I'll really love Lady Macbeth and that sounds like reason enough to give the play a shot for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment