|
Edinburgh University
Film Society 47 Years of Student Run Cinema 1963-2010 Student Film Society of the Year 2002, 2005, 2006 |
| home | what's on | reviews | join | the society | mailing list | discussion forum |
Peter Greenaway, UK/France 1991, 124 minutes
Shakespeare definitely seems to be in for 1996/7 but being the awkward bastards that we are E.U.F.S. bring you a Shakespeare adaptation (The Tempest) from 1991 and in doing so brings you possibly the finest and most adventurous one of all; Prospero's Books.
Like most Greenaway films the keyword to this film is ambition. While the film may remain faithful to the text, its treatment and delivery could hardly be more different. Greenaway equates Prospero (Sir John Gielgud) with Shakespeare himself by having Prospero invent and speak the lines for all the other characters, until the final act. visually Greenaway takes Shakespeare into a realm only badly explored by others (until Baz Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet) - the future. As ever the screen is bombarded with images, both superimposed and cut, cinematically new territory is explored via the use of high-definition video. The locations are breathtaking and dazzling (despite being shot entirely indooors) and the sheer volume of naked flesh on display is almost surreal.
However, as the concept belongs to Greenaway, so the screen belongs to Gielgud. Greenaway uses the 24 books Prospero took into exile for the title of his film (his personal vision of Prospero's exile). He then structures the film around the subject matter of these books water, cosmology, pornography, ruins, hell, music etc. Contained in these books is all the knowledge the Duke needs to take his revenge but, as in the original, knowledge and power is contained and signified by speech. Gielgud's role is exemplifed by this as the originator and constuctor of all action. Gielgud himself plays Prospero as a grand wizard, stranded but hugely powerful; Prospero is a magician extraordinare in a world of magic. We see Gielgud, at the end of his screen career, exploiting and enhancing the words of the Bard to an almost unimaginable degree. Michael Nyman was, incidentally, responsible for the music, adding in no small way to the affecting nature of the film.
The film essentially deals with issues of power, yet its trick lies in the power it holds over its audience: It captivates and hypnotises with every second and leaves you begging for more.
Review by Andrew Hesketh
Taken from EUFS Programme 1997-98