King Lear film review.
Date Submitted: 11/20/2003 05:30:14
Category: / Arts & Humanities / Film & TV
Length: 4 pages (1085 words)
Category: / Arts & Humanities / Film & TV
Length: 4 pages (1085 words)
Michael Elliott's adaptation of "King Lear" is not simply a bad movie, but a lousy pictorial of William Shakespeare's original play. This film version of William Shakespeare's "King Lear" looks as if it was shot on three horribly designed sets: an "outdoor" field, an indoor set with poorly designed pillars that are suppose to resemble rocks, and the interior of a garage. You would think that having Michael Elliott's creative mind combined with producer, Laurence …
Is this Essay helpful? Join now to read this particular paper
and access over 480,000 just like this GET BETTER GRADES
and access over 480,000 just like this GET BETTER GRADES
…disappointed me a great deal because of Laurence Olivier's poor acting and how poorly designed the set was. Coming out of this tragic, Shakespearean movie, I felt angry, and even asked myself, "Is this what Shakespeare's plays were like? This bad?" Michael Elliott's "King Lear" film deserves 90 out of 153 Sonnets. No more. No less. If you want to see a good version of King Lear, I recommend the Japanese version by Tatsuya Nakadai called "Ran".
Need a custom written paper? Let our professional writers save your time.