In Looking for Richard, Al Pacino attempts to make Richard III (and, by extension, Shakespeare) more accessible to a modern audience. He does so by conducting man-on-the-street interviews, asking strangers questions about their experiences with Shakespeare, and by talking to professional actors about their experience with Shakes. Many of the finest actors in the world confess to the difficult times they’ve had accessing Shakespeare’s poetry, so you aren’t alone in struggling with it. Ultimately, though, they find the meaning and the deep human emotion behind the words and see Shakespeare’s verse as a real treasure.
Describe one thing that you can take away from the first half of the movie that helps to illuminate either Shakespeare in general, or Richard in particular, and discuss what surprised you. You can reflect on a quote from one of the actors or one of the random people on the street, or think about one of the scenes from the play itself that made more sense seeing it performed by professional actors.
Leave two comments: the first should be dated 1/18/12 and the second 1/19/12.
One really interesting comment that struck me was the when random people on the street were being questioned and one man said that Shakespeare taught us how to feel. In addition he stated that Shakespeare should be taught in school so young people can learn how to feel, and they won’t go around shooting each other because they feel nothing towards one another. I agree with him to an extent because I believe not only does Shakespeare teach us how to feel, but literature in general.
I agree with ST. His response in itself amazed me because it’s something I never really thought about, or at least in that context (Learning Shakes -> Learn to feel -> Learn to not shoot each other). However what I believe mostly affected my astonishment was who made the comment: a man missing, most likely, his two front teeth, un-shaved, and poorly dressed. All physical traits that scream uneducated. Boy was I wrong! As for the comment, I completely agree! Not only would learning the language of Shakespeare teach young adults how to feel, education in general would do that. Shakespeare can be the opening to such learning because it is so difficult and once the reader gets beyond the challenging text, one will find that the issues and themes of the main characters correlate with the issues and themes of young adults in this generation. I believe Shakespeare can open the minds of young adults to the world of literature and its powerful impact on the world.
One thing that Al Pacino said that really struck me and made a light bulb go on in my head was when his actor and random people on the street were saying that they didn’t understand Shakespearean language even after they’ve been taught how to read it time after time. But the interesting part was when Al Pacino said that he doesn’t understand why the audience needs to understand every word that is being said. Because all you really need to know is the gist of the play and you can follow it, that’s all that matters. When he said this i just thought “this is exactly how i feel.” There’s no point in understanding an entire Shakespeare play. As long as you understand the plot and the feelings behind the play you can experience Shakespeare the way die heard Shakespearean fans do.
One thing that I really took out of the movie is just how devious and intelligent Richard actually is. So far from reading Richard the III, I thought he was just a crazy murderer, that killed for the power. But after hearing Al Pacino talk about it, he displayed to me that, Richard thrived off arguments between his enemies, and his intelligence made his enemies turn against each other which made it easier for him to take power. Yes he was an absolute monster, but he has to be one of the smartest villains this world has ever seen. Another thing that caught my attention was how Shakespeare illustrates him as an actual Monster. As Al Pacino, described him as having a deformed arm and hunchback , which made him that much more frightening.
One thing that I took away from the movie is that many people had difficulty understanding the complex language of Shakespeare. I thought it was just me, but seeing how others felt the same way made me not feel terrible for not naturally understanding his work. I also found it interesting how the actors/actress used cliff notes to try and understand and decode the language. I agreed with the gentlemen who stated that Americans feel they can’t read Shakespeare because they were told they can’t. We often feel since its not an American piece of work that we can’t understand it, which is completely untrue. A second gentleman said Shakespeare made him feel, and it’s a problem with the younger generation today, which results in gun violence. Last, I found interesting how adults who were twice our age and older couldn’t understand Shakespeare, or enjoy his work. An older gentlemen said, “To be or not to be” which I found hilarious that it was the only thing he could relate to Shakespeare. The lack of passion for his work displays why our generation must learn Shakespeare, and breakthrough the stereotypes portrayed about Americans and Shakespeare.
The scenes of Richard III performed by Al Pacino and his cast of actors have much more passion and power to every word. Compared to how we have read it, both by ourselves and in class, it does not have that same feeling. Those actors have a better understanding of Shakespeare, therefor performs it better. Our reading of it is boring and kinda dead.
1/18/12
In, Looking For Richard, Al Pacino truly got me wondering about the way people in general read Shakespehere. Many complain about how his works are difficult to read and say that he has his own language and it is hard to translate. Despite these common comments that appear often, Al Pacino has personally enlightened me and got me to see that it isn’t the writing style that’s not allowing us to understand the context. It is simply the way we are trying too hard to understand it. Instead of just trying to see little by little what shakesphere is insisting, through a couple of words. We are trying to go word by word and put everything together. Over the break when we were assigned to read Richard III, my biggest conflict was comprehension because i tried to understand exactly what Shakesphere is saying. Now, i realize that understanding exactly what he was trying to say wasn’t his objective. His writing style is unique and at times a simple phrase can be a sentence in his writing.
1/18/12 From watching the film by Al Capone I realized that the Shakespearean plays aren’t as welcoming as expected even if it is named the greatest work of all time. When Al Capone interviewed random people, they all mentioned that the plays are either boring or they have little knowledge of it. I believe the reason that they may feel bored by the play is because they do not understand the context of the play since Shakespeare uses a fancy dialect that we no longer touch upon. I remember one guy that Al Capone interviewed said that he doesn’t understand the play because we do not use the same dialect in this present time. Maybe if the plays were alternated into a different dialect people will feel more attracted to it. Or maybe like Al Capone said instead of saying line for line he could just summarize the play with simple words and put in more action. In that way, the plays could be more interesting and it could attract more people to watch the plays and learn more about Shakespeare.
1/18/12
One thing that I can take away from the first half of the movie about Shakespeare in general is that there is a story that can relate to everyone. Though it may be difficult for one to depict the Shakespearean language the various plots in his plays can be easily attainable to any audience member when translated in a form that is recognizable. Something that surprised me was the fact that Al Pacino utilized a different approach to deciphering Richard III because usually people just act out the scenes but he delves deeper into context making it more exciting to act out. This also brings life to the story because then it makes it more interesting for the audience.
1/18/12 One thing that surprised me was how put down Americans are when it comes to Shakespeare. I didn’t know that our actors have bee told that they couldn’t do Shakespeare. Yet, at the same time, I wasn’t really surprised because based on the on-the-street-interviews, no one seemed to really know anything about Richard III or Shakespeare in general and I think thats because we as Americans lack interest in learning about it. Not to say all Americans are like that, but I’d say it seems there are a lot more non-shakespearen fans out there. One theory of why that is, many people here feel detached because it’s not really American History, and it’s not written in a language that’s easy to understand. I thought it was funny how one of the Actors explained Richard as a man who likes to tell what he’s going to do, then does it, then proudly pats himself on the back for his cleverness. When he put it that way, I had a Shakspearen “aha” moment. And I think by Al Pachino trying to communicate Richard III this way is great because he’s trying to find the line between making it interesting for the audience yet, not completely taking what makes it Shakespeare in the first place.
1/18/12
One interesting thing that I took from the first half of the movie was that Shakespeare uses the iambic pentameter very brilliantly. When the actors broke down the rhyme scheme and explained the rhythm, I was able to understand how it’s meant to flow. It has a certain beat or rhythm, and the words Shakespeare uses in the play, fit the rhyme scheme perfectly. As the actors read their lines, it all made sense to me.
It made more sense seeing Richard III done by professional actors because they are trained in the art of acting. In the documentary we saw them explain the play and what was going on. We also saw them practice what emotions go with the script so the audience understands. Al Pacino asked a random person on the street what he thought about Shakespeare and the person’s response was Shakespeare should be taught in school. The random man also said Shakespeare is filled with emotion that not many people capture or understand. Before watching Al Pacino’s documentary I did not understand the emotion I’m Shakespeare and why actors like to
in *
… perform Shakespeare.
A quote that stuck out to me from one of the people on the street was the old man that said Shakespeare taught us how to feel. He went on and said that if Shakespeare was integrated into the curriculum then people or rather children would grow up and a sense of feeling for one another, they wouldn’t depend on picking up a gun to act on their feelings. I thought that his statement was really profound towards Shakespeare. For him to think that reading and understanding Shakespeare would change the attitudes of people makes me think differently about Shakespeare as a whole. Maybe if I had a deep understanding of his work then maybe that could be true, but how profound could that really be to me and my life?
A scene that I really understood while watching the movie was the scene between Richard and Anne. While reading it on my own, I didn’t put much emotion into it. And when we read it in class, I think we put the wrong emotion in it. Because when Al Pacino did it in the movie, I understood why Anne gave in. Before I saw that I didn’t really understand it. At first I thought it was simply because she wanted to remain queen, and I didn’t think he was being as flirtatious and persuasive as people said he was. But after watching that scene in the movie, I saw how serious it was, and how easily it was for Anne to fall into his trap and to marry him. I think Al Pacino really made it clear and really acted that role well because it was extremely believable.
I also think that seeing the documentary, hearing about so many their feelings and knowledge of Shakespeare brought a realness to Al Pacino’s journey with the play Richard III. I was able to really understand Richard’s struggle and breakdown of his demise. I understood that Richard was his own enemy. Everyone that he killed and lied to for the glory was only hurting him, it was never a real victory and it would never be based on a foundation of evil. Shakespeare morals are still relevant to what many of us learn while being raised; for example, do onto others what you would like to be done onto you!
1/19/12
One scene that made more sense to me when being performed by the actors was when Richard was speaking to Lady Ann about courting her. At first I truly didn’t understand how convincing he could be because it is very unlikely that a woman scorn would be with a man who has killed those she loves. But he uses his charm to convince her and something Al Pacino made clear was that the reason he pursues Lady Ann is to assure that no one comes after him for killing the previous King what better way to do it then if she tells the people she forgave him. I also understood the lineage within the family during this scene.
One comment that caught my attention was that Americans are so focused on converting the British text into understandable English that we rarely on the meaning of Shakespeare’s words. I completely agree with this statement because I feel like I try more to really translate the language other than grasping the meaning of the text.
The scene in Act 2, where Richard convinces Lady Anne to marry him was beautifully performed by the actors. I understand why she would marry Richard but I could not picture the image of the scene in my mind, it was to odd. Marrying your husband’s killer over your dead husband’s body? Very odd. But Al Pacino’s performance made it feel more realistic, the way he would sway Lady Anne with his words and body language.
1/18/12
I think one thing that I took away from the 1st half of the movie was when a random person on the street said, “If we only felt what we said, we can say less and it will mean more.” When he said that it makes you think of the way Shakespeare talks and writes. He uses words in such a way that you might have to think about it longer, but they cause you to feel a certain way. The connection Shakespeare wants his readers to make when going through the play is intense. When you consequently feel what you say, you only need few words. It’s just like saying I love you. Three short words that mean way more then saying a paragraph confessing one’s love.
1/19/12
After watching the full Al Capone film of Shakespeare I started to fully understand Richard more. At first I believed he was an intelligent lunatic who used various methods to achieve his way to position as king, but then I realized in the end he wasn’t as intelligent as he seems because of a bad move he made. In the beginning I understand why he wanted to kill all his brothers because he was power-hungry. First he decided to kill King Edward, second is Clarence then last but not least is Hastings. In the end he decided to kill the children which I don’t understand why because he already had his place as king so why would he care about two harmless kids? It was a huge mistake because killing the two kids threatened his throne. In addition, after watching act between Richard and Anne I realized that Anne spared Richard’s life because he was quite persuasive not because she wanted to keep her place as queen. Richard’s charismatic voice and his charming speech was able to convince Anne that he really loved her. Watching the enactment of the scene was more helpful than reading the actual play itself since sometimes visuals are better than words.
1/19/12
From the second part of the movie, the scene of Between Richard and Lady Anne was very unexpected. I thought she would show more hatred and anger towards Richard, but since Shakespeare doesn’t incorporate play direction this is where the actors get creative. When he wooed her and she accepted, then unbelievably let him kiss her was shocking. I didn’t understand. Even though he has killed her father and husband, she should have fought harder to resist the flirtatious vibes. I don’t picture this scene the way it was illustrated and I am excited to see the one we are going to see in the future.
1/19/12
After watching the second part of the movie, it’s made things a bit clearer for me to understand. One thing I learned is that one doesn’t fully have to understand every word in the play; the concept of the play is the most important part. The actors have made it clear that they don’t understand every part of the play and had to do their best. They even discuss going to scholar’s for help, the scholars themselves didn’t have all the answers. The movie gives us a visual of how Richard is human just like us; he exhibits the same type of behavior as individuals in the twenty first century. The scene between Lady Anne and Richard showed how heartless, and greedy people can be. It’s a reality, or wake up call. The actors/actresses did a fantastic job playing their parts and made it extremely realistic, and easier to understand through their performance. When Lady Anne easily falls for Richard over the dead body and he gives her a kiss it sparked a reaction from me, which displays how real the scene felt to a viewer such as myself.
1/19/12, One thing that I found interesting, that both ST and I discussed in class was that there was a comment made about how Americans are trying so hard to convert the original Old English text into post-modern day American English that we rarely focus on the meaning of Shakespeare’s actual words. I found this interesting because, reading it myself, I’m more focused on just understanding what’s happening and once I hit the surface I don’t really care to further understand it.
1/19/12
Actually seeing Lady Anne and Richard talk explains how good Richard really is. Good in the sense of getting his way and ultimately what he wants. This truly shows that he can handle any task and he can manipulate people to think that he has the best interest at heart for everyone. Although he is able to do this, towards the end it shows how Richard is left alone and unsure what to do. He goes from not caring about anything in the world and kills anyone and everyone that will stand in his way. To a man who is paranoid and feels as if he has to watch his back all the time. I think Al Pacino breaks down the story of Richard in an interesting way and his documentary truly allowed me to understand the novel better.
1/18/12
One thing that stuck to me was the fact that even these people, way older than us, dont even understand what Shakespeare is saying in his plays. It makes me feel like im not the only one having hard times reading this crazy language. It also surprised me on how all the actors seem to be trying hard to understand the meaning of this play so that they can fit in the role and understand how to play it.
1/19/12
The scene when Richard and Lady Anne made more sense to me when i saw it. Richard’s choice of words made Lady Anne submit to his power. That scene was greatly played by both of them and made Richard seem way smarter than what he is in the book. Although he reached his goal of making Lady Anne her queen he becomes crazy at the end although he was already crazy. All of his killings caught up with him in his sleep.
1/19/12
After watching this movie, I was able to understand the scene between Richard and Lady Anne a little clearer. I understood that he wanted to get with her in order to make amends for killing her husband and father in law. This was his way of making up for his wrongdoing. Although this is not very common in real life, I believe he was successful because he is very deceitful. The kissing scene was a bit unrealistic however, because who would kiss their husband’s killer right away. I think she should have played a little more hard to get.
In watching the documentary/play I got to see how devious Richard really is and how easily people are persuaded. While reading the play I thought it was pathetic but now seeing it portrayed by people it strengthens my opinion tenfold. The fact that Richard could be the catalyst behind his brother being thrown in jail and eventually murdered is horrible enough but seeing it acted out makes it that much worse. Also, Lady Anne giving herself over to Richard after he killed her husband and her father-in-law is a demonstration of how easily manipulated people are.
1/19/12
What also surprised me is how Shakespeare uses similar scenes in different plays. In Richard III, Richard is visited by the ghosts of those who he has killed and that particular scene reminded me from Julius Caesar. The scene when Julius Caesar visited Brutus right before the battle that determined the fate of Rome. The scenes are parallel to each other in a way that surprised me in many ways.
1/18/12
One thing that helps illuminate Shakespeare in general is that the actors make the scenes very relateable. Before watching the movie, I couldnt understand what was going on in the text but after seeing Al Paccino and the other actors perform the scenes, I understood. I liked how Al Paccino really tried to understand Richard so that he can thoroughly portray him as who he was in the play.
1. Throughout the 1st half of the movie there were a lot of interesting interviewing sequences between the actors themselves and random people on the street, but i belive the most memorable sequence was when the homeless man was interviewed. That impacted me the most because it made me realize that if a homeless man can comprehend the use o the shakespearian language than anybody can; not to dis-credit him of any knowlegde but who would’ve thought he understood the basis of shakespeare’s use of words. In addition the interviewing sequences with the actors themselves made me realize that I’m not the only one who is confused by shakespeares w
cont. ^
ord choice. Even Al pacino himself stated, “You don’t have to understand every word…for what?! As long as you get the jest of it you’ll be ok.” This quote within itself made me feel less embarassed about not comprehending every word of shakespear.
1/19/12
After seeing the entire movie, I completely undestood the book. It was actually better seeing it being acted out rather than reading it. When you read it, the text is pretty challenging but when it is being acted out, especially by Al Paccino, you learn the emotions along with him. He tries to completely understand Richard. Even in the scene where he was having a nightmare was I learning the emotions. I really liked the film.
2. The second half of the movie really inspired me to want to learn shakespeare’s craft even more. After observing how the actors situated themselves for the roles of the play and prepared themselves to deliver their top emotional performance…I really felt empowered to learn this trade as an aspiring actor and also as a student of the shakespearian craft.
19.1.12
As I watched the star actors struggle with Shakes text, I couldn’t help but think, Richard III is not that difficult. What I find difficult about the play are the words that Shakespeare uses, that make it challenging to read through it. However, the words do not change my understanding of the themes and struggles that are presented by the characters. In fact, once I find the meaning to the Shakespearean text, I am able to see the themes/symbols/motifs clearly because of the descriptive and metaphorical language. The actors in Al Pacino’s documentary are shown having difficulty in understanding motives and reasons. For example, Fredrick and Al Pacino get into an argument about having a professional speak about the situation between Lady Ann and Richard, as opposed to a ‘regular intellectual,’ but to me neither are necessary. It is obvious that Richard is using Lady Anne to be seen in a better light for killing her husband and father in-law, and Lady Anne is also using Richard because she still wants to be in a royal household instead of the covenant. Lady Anne is persuaded so easily by Richard because of her own insecurities and shaky future, Richard is aware of this and is able to use this to his advantage, as he does with many other of his victims. I don’t understand how much farther the actors in the documentary were trying to get. These emotions are human and, I believe, are more relevant today than they were back then. The only thing challenging about Shakes are the meaning of his words, not the way they are portrayed to the meaning of the play.
I agree with L.R. , Richard III isn’t that difficult to read. The words that Shakespeare uses are difficult to us because we don’t use those anymore. Another thing I found surprising was how they interpreted some of the play. They acted scenes out differently than I imagined they would. It still makes sense because the screen director tells the actors what to do, its not listed in the play.