I agree that Mark Rylance played Richard quite magnetically as a stuttering clown, and that gave a delightful twist to his evil. But the story made no sense. I remember his mother and Richmond were played by the same actor, and there were other confusing doublings. It was impossible to follow, unless you knew all the twists and turns. (Which I did).
Sure, Richard’s wooing of Anne works, and the way he puts it to Queen Elizabeth, and the scariness with the little boys, and, sure, those set pieces and Richard’s talking to the audience work fine. But…I think a good director and actors could make all the subtle bits clear too.
I strongly recommend a director who can show you what it is the Elizabethan audience already knows/knew. (The G and the George and the Gloucester prophecy; and why Elizabeth’s family is such a monkey wrench to Richard’s hopes, etc.) I think adding on some of the end of HENRY VI Part 3 at the beginning, especially King Edward’s wooing scene and something to show these three brothers winning their victory.
It’s the kind of stuff that directors can do. |
