This article from The Idler on Shakespeare movie adaptations doesn’t cover the same old ground that everybody else does. Rarely do you see mention of Edward II or Middleton’s Revengers Tragedy amid the praise for Heath Ledger’s work in 10 Things I Hate About You.

I’m linking the article for the list at the bottom – the author has gone into Netflix and made a list of all the Shakespeare adaptations that are available for instant streaming.  I’ve often browsed the listings myself, stumbling across items such as Jarman’s 1979 Tempest (Mentioned in the article) or James Earl Jones’ King Lear. I wonder how complete her list is?  That would be a great resource if it was kept up to date somewhere.

(This story comes to us by way of JCKibbey, on Twitter.)

I’d not heard of “unrehearsed Shakespeare” when JC Kibbey mentioned it to me over the weekend, but I have to say that I think I get it, and I think I like it.

Let me see if I can do it justice.  Start with a group of actors who have at least some degree of training in Shakespeare – how to read a First Folio, paying attention to punctuation cues and whatever stage directions might be at hand.

Now, hand them cue scripts – where they see only their lines, not the entire play. I don’t know how much time they get to learn their part, or if we’re literally talking about a performance where the cast is still “on book”.  But, regardless….action!  The cast and the audience alike get to watch the play unfold, not knowing what’s coming next.

This is supposed to mimic original practice, according to proponents of the style.  Costume and props are minimal, and the audience is encouraged to be just as … lively? … as they would have been in Shakespeare’s day.  Audience participation and interaction is encouraged.

Sounds like a neat idea.  I have to admit that, as an audience member, I’d never even consider sitting down to a Shakespeare play without having read it.  So the “cast and audience watch the play unfold together” thing would be lost on me.  But, obviously, original audiences did not often have that luxury.

Thoughts? Surely the emphasis alone on First Folio text, and using punctuation as your director, makes this an effort worthy of some respect.

It seems that George R.R. Martin’s Song of Fire and Ice books are very popular these days (something to do with an HBO series?).  I don’t know much about them, but thought that this crowd might appreciate a writeup showing that it’s basically the story of Richard III.

Anybody out there familiar enough with both to comment on the similarities?

I’m going to attribute it to bad PR/marketing and not Oxfordian conspiracy, but for the last few days I’ve had a steady stream of commenters who say nothing but “Hey have you heard about the new Anonymous movie?” along with a link to the Youtube trailer.  This is clearly not coincidence.  I expect that whoever is doing the marketing for the movie went onto Amazon’s Mechanical Turk (or some other service where you can pay people 50 cents for a simple task) and told them, “Go drive up interest in this movie.”

Dear marketing folks,

I watch all comments on this blog.  When I think they’re spam, I delete them.  If someone’s entire contribution to any given thread is to link your movie? It’s spam. So you’re wasting your time.

Have a nice day,

ShakespeareGeek