BBC Sherlock Fan Forum - Serving Sherlockians since February 2012 / Richard III

**Posted by gently69** June 29, 2014 10:32 am

Oh, I love him with the beard.

**Posted by besleybean** June 29, 2014 11:03 am

I hate the beard.
But the modern interpretation of the play sounds fascinating.

**Posted by Biggles86** June 29, 2014 4:41 pm

Thanks for the heads up. I haven't really been a fan of setting Shakespeare in the modern day but yes, sounds interesting.

Must book me some tickets!!

**Posted by SolarSystem** June 29, 2014 5:17 pm

gently69 wrote:
Oh, I love him with the beard.

Me too! I bet if Sherlock saw him with that beard, he would forget about clean-shaven doctors.

**Posted by gently69** June 29, 2014 5:20 pm

Possible, Solar.

**Posted by Tinks** June 30, 2014 6:31 am

I was hoping, really, to hear that he would be doing this in the traditional setting, even though this concept does sound intriguing.
I'll be interested to know what those who see it think of it.

**Posted by besleybean** June 30, 2014 6:43 am

You know Tinks, I'm really a traditionalist too...
But I think for the director. actors and possibly the audience povs...maybe it keeps having to be reinterpreted.
I can see the relevancy of both traditional and modern.

**Posted by Tinks** June 30, 2014 6:49 am

There's always that danger of seeing it as being "dumbed down" when they modernise it, isn't there?
Although the idea behind this version does sound interesting.
If I'm honest, I'd like to have seen Martin doing something completely different - stepping right out of his usual acting skin, if you will.
I've no doubt this will be a huge success, though.

**Posted by SolarSystem** June 30, 2014 7:35 am

I think if you modernise a play like this one, you need to give good reason and really have an idea that makes sense. If plays just get modernised for the sake of it and I don't see a good reason behind it, that really pisses me off. But this sounds pretty convincing, so I can't wait to hear how the audience will react to it.

Last edited by SolarSystem (June 30, 2014 7:35 am)

**Posted by Germansherlockfan** June 30, 2014 9:35 am

I´m probably in the minority here but I really like it when a Shakespeare play is modernized, especially when the reason for it is to somehow actualise the play, to give it a connection to modern times, the times we live in and problems our society has to deal with.
I have seen Richard III before in Vieanna at the Burgtheater in a more traditional version and found it rather boring, so now I´m very excited to see it in a modern setting again.
And the theatre seems to be rather small and our tickets are more to the front, so there probably will be a more direct reaction or even interaction between the actors and the audience which makes a play even more gripping for me.

**Posted by SolarSystem** June 30, 2014 9:56 am

I'm afraid I had rather a lot of bad experiences with modernised plays (not just Shakespeare, also Schiller and you name it) in the theatre in the city where I live. Like I said, if the idea behind the modernisation is convincing, I'm all for it. But I have to believe it and don't want to ask myself constantly why they thought that it had to be set in the, I don't know, 1950s or whenever.
Years ago I saw "Richard III" in the RST in Stratford, it was what I would call a traditional production and totally blew me away. It probably had a lot to do with the actor who played Richard - maybe if you have great actors it's not even all that important if it's modernised or traditional, come to think of it.

**Posted by Tinks** June 30, 2014 10:47 am

I'm really hoping he's been misquoted in the Daily Fail actually, because they're making it sound as though Martin thinks the modern version is better because they've chopped out the "boring bits" - I just don't think that's the right approach to Shakespeare; the key is to learn how to approach it and, if you're acting it, to make it entertaining and gripping.

**Posted by SolarSystem** June 30, 2014 11:27 am

I would be surprised if he really had said something like that... in my opinion there practically are next to no boring bits in that play anyway.

Last edited by SolarSystem (June 30, 2014 11:27 am)

**Posted by tonnaree** June 30, 2014 11:48 am

Germansherlockfan wrote:
I´m probably in the minority here but I really like it when a Shakespeare play is modernized, especially when the reason for it is to somehow actualise the play, to give it a connection to modern times, the times we live in and problems our society has to deal with..

I would be in that minority with you.

One of the things I love about Shakespeare is how well it lends itself to adaptation. The possiblilites for reimagining the stories are infinate. And even if something ends up not working that well, I think it's always good to try different things.

**Posted by SusiGo** June 30, 2014 12:20 pm

I think it all depends on if there is an interesting reading behind the production. Then it does not matter if it is modernised or not. I really like the 1930s fascist style film with Ian McKellen which works very well for me. Next week I am going to see a German production which seems to be modernised as well and I am quite excited to see how they do it.
On the other hand adaptations like e.g. "The Hollow Crown" or my all time favourite Shakespeare film "Henry V" by Branagh show that you can do very convincing reading in period costume as well.

**Posted by Germansherlockfan** July 1, 2014 8:46 am

Tinks wrote:
I'm really hoping he's been misquoted in the Daily Fail actually, because they're making it sound as though Martin thinks the modern version is better because they've chopped out the "boring bits" - I just don't think that's the right approach to Shakespeare; the key is to learn how to approach it and, if you're acting it, to make it entertaining and gripping.

I really don´t think he had said it that way, I think what he wanted to bring in focus is that with that particular version of the play the cast and crew want to attract younger people to theatre which is a very good thing in my opinion.
I love going to the theatre and I really like classic plays mainly becuase of the expertly use of language, but I always notice that at least in my home town (ca. 200.000 inhabitants and a large university) the average age of the audience in classic plays is at least 60, maybe even 65 and a younger audience is only in the contemporary plays, even though there is a cooperation with the universitiy and the students can go to the theatre for free.
The only time the younger audience is interested in classic plays is when the play is modernized. We had an excellent modern version of Schiller´s Die Räuber where the woods had been brought on stage through a video installation, the village had been a miniature one above the living room of the Moor familiy´s house and the bandits looked as members of the alternative scene with leather jackets and hoodies and it had been a huge success with the younger audience.

So if the cast and crew of this production have the goal to make theatre and especially the classic plays attractive and interesting for younger people with their staging, setting and acting I think that is quite honorable and in my opinion you don´t have to cut bits from the play to put it into effect.

**Posted by SolarSystem** July 1, 2014 9:05 am

I guess we could debate about that for hours, in the end it's probably also a matter of taste.
It's funny you should mention a modernized "Die Räuber", because I saw a modern production of the play last year in my hometown and it was horrible. Apart from the fact that they just cut some really important dialogue short, the production felt cold, artificial, loveless and static.

I think you have to regard every production seperately and decide respectively whether or not it's convincing or not. And frankly, I don't see why a more traditional production shouldn't be able to attract a younger audience - every kind of production needs to be gripping, convincing and clever, traditional or not, modern or not.

Last edited by SolarSystem (July 1, 2014 9:05 am)

**Posted by Germansherlockfan** July 1, 2014 12:53 pm

Yes, that is certainly right, it was just an observation about the audience in my hometown, it also may be completely different in other cities or countries.
And how this particular production of Richard III turns out, if it´s gripping, convincing and clever enough to enthuse all kinds of audiences, we will see quite soon!

**Posted by miriel68** July 1, 2014 5:05 pm

Many of recent Shakespeare's plays in NT were modernised, for example Hamlet, Othello, King Lear... also, the best Richard III I've ever seen was the fascist McKellen's film.Well, in the video I saw MF did say that many people tolerate boring bits and moments they don't really know who is talking to who without confessing it and tbh I think he is right: there ARE some boring bits in Shakespeare, at least in some plays. Sometimes the characters just talk a bit too much for our modern taste, I guess. But of course it is rare someone will tell this aloud.Anyway, I am going to see the play on Saturday and I am very excited about it!

**Posted by Germansherlockfan** July 2, 2014 8:08 am

miriel68 wrote:
.Anyway, I am going to see the play on Saturday and I am very excited about it!

Oh hey, how great, have lots and lots of fun and enjoy the experience!! We have tickets for the 9th of september and I can´t wait to see it.
So far I have only seen rather enthusiastic reactions to Martin´s acting and the modernised staging and he even did the stage door, gave lots of autographs and let the fans take pictures with him.