>Fiennes' debut as film director
>makes great film, 9/10, on the same level as Drive
How did this become such a commercial failure? More importantly: Why the fuck was it denied US wide cinema release?
>>64610887
>Why the fuck was it denied US wide cinema release?
It was a case of the crows pecking at eagles, anon.
>>64611109
I think it's because it wasn't filmed in the US. They did it for 1/10th of the budget in Serbia and Croatia and US got mad because muh monies. There is an economic term for it, but can't think of it now.
>>64610887
>on the same level as Drive
I respectfully disagree.
>>64610887
people in the us are conditioned to hate anything shakespeare related because public schools do such a shit job teaching anything by him
>>64610887
>How did this become such a commercial failure?
Gerard Butler.
>Fiennes
how the fuck do you say this name
>>64612095
Not even people who like Shakespeare read or see Coriolanus very often. Its just not one of the more popular plays.
it was based on one of shakespears less popular works
>>64610887
No one wants to watch a fucking Shakespeare play on film
>>64612281
Fines?
>>64612017
Subsidies?
>>64612312
I think it's "Fee-Anus"
>>64612281
Apparently "Fiennes" is like "Fines", but the "Ralph" isn't like "Ralf", it's like "Raef"
I really don't fucking get it, but I guess it works out
>>64612377
>"Ralph" isn't like "Ralf", it's like "Raef"
dude w0t
>>64612017
>US got mad
You mean had no involvement and no studio had incentive to release or advertise it
>>64610887
It was a critical success, wasn't it?
>>64612288
T.S. Eliot was the original edgelord in proclaiming this was Shakespeare's best play.
It's an amazing play, yes, but it's not on the level of Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth or Lear.
I'd rank it alongside The Tempest (another contrarian favourite), Henry V and Julius Caesar.
It's above Merchant, but Merchant is still good.
>>64612404
Yeah, he's all fuckd up and his shit's retarded, but that's the way it is
>>64612431
Ya I agree with that. I really like Julius Caesar though that's just my opinion.
>>64612377
Centuries of various spellings from various languages from various countries around western and northern Europe makes for odd pronunciations.
>Recorded in an extraordinary range of spellings including: Fine, Fines, Fynes, Fiennes, Foine, Finn, Fynn, Phinn, Phinnis, Finnes and Finnis, this is basically an English surname, but with some overlap in Scotland, Ireland and even France
>>64612569
>I really like Julius Caesar
Me too. It's my favourite of the histories. It's nearly at the level of the tragedies.
is this actually good? why does he use shakespeare speak from a lesser known play
It's a shit production. The conceit of setting it in modern times doesn't accomplish anything and leads to a lot of dumb moments (DUDE 1V1 ME WITH KNIVES EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE GUNS). The line delivery kills all the native humor in the text (which also obscures the meaning of certain passages). This leaves it with a really leaden, pompous tone that's completely un-Shakespearian.
There are very few Shakespeare movies that are actually good, and American audiences at some level know that. The system works.
>>64612569
Well your opinion is wrong faggot
>>64612703
>There are very few Shakespeare movies that are actually good
Such as?
>>64612703
I hate Shakespeare in modern settings it screams "We don't have the budget for period costumes". Only time it ever really worked was Henry III in WWI britain.
Although not exactly a Shakespeare film based on one of his plays, I liked the film|Shakespeare in Love.
>>64612703
>>64612811
You guys know that Shakespeare's theater put on all his plays with the actors in Elizabethan clothes, even plays set during the Roman Empire and whatnot, right?
I remember watching this and thoroughly enjoying. The idea of a modern roman empire was interesting and the performances were quite well done in my opinion. To be fair though I have a bit of a tolerance for this kinda stuff. I once saw a version of pulp fiction in the style of Shakespeare done on stage at the Toronto fringe festival
>>64612924
Adding to this, it's been a theatrical tradition to perform Shakespeare plays in contemporary costumes since they were first performed.
>>64612281
ralf finns
>>64612790
Polanski's Macbeth
Branagh's Henry V, Much Ado, and Hamlet
Whedon's Much Ado (I know, I know, but it actually plays very well to his strengths)
I've heard Loncraine's Richard III is great, but I haven't seen it
There may be some others I'm forgetting
>>64613038
It's Raef Fines really.
Though his full name is Ralph Nathaniel Twisleton-Wykeham-Fiennes, which makes it funnier and extremely English.
>>64612924
Duh, yeah, everyone knows that. His plays fit Elizabethan society and morality, so it works to them with Elizabethan costumes.
>>64613165
So you basically want faithful adaptations? Where's the fun in that? Just watch a good stage production then. I think the best Shakespeare movies are one that keep the spirit of the play while expanding on its themes while utilizing the cinematic medium well. Like Prospero's Books, Throne of Blood, Chimes at Midnight, Taymor's Titus, Tarr's Macbeth.
>>64612811
It works sometimes.
Certain works should never be modernised, but I think Richard III worked well in a fascist Britain setting, even though the film itself wasn't amazing -- McKellan was superb as Richard, though, in an over-the-top evil kind of way.
Fiennes missed a chance to set Coriolanus during Mussolini's Fascist Italy, however -- or a similar setting. Mussolini was usurped as he fell from favour when the Italians realised what a mess they got into with such a buffoon. Coriolanus could've been an alternate history of this event, in a more protracted manner.
>>64613165
>Whedon's Much Ado
Christ
>Loncraine's Richard III is great
It's fun, but it's not a classic production, even though McKellan is great.
You left out Kurzel's Macbeth, Kosinzew's Hamlet, and Peter Brook's King Lear.
>shakespeare film
Always bet on it being terrible. Always.
>>64612790
10 Things I Hate About You
>>64612811
You're a pleb.
Orson Welles set Julius Caesar in fascist Italy and it was all the more resonant for it.
The text remains the same -- get past your petty grievances.
Last good Shakespeare fillm was Henry V.
>>64613340
>So you basically want faithful adaptations?
I'd prefer that unless the director has something more interesting or moving to offer, which they probably don't.
>Where's the fun in that? Just watch a good stage production then.
I don't live in New York, London, or Los Angeles, so I can't "just watch a good stage production."
>>64613485
In fairness, Julius Caesar translates into the early 20th century a lot better than Coriolanus translates into the early 21st.
>>64613521
>I'd prefer that unless the director has something more interesting or moving to offer, which they probably don't.
Watch some of the movies I mentioned.
>so I can't "just watch a good stage production."
Or listen to an audiobook version
The language/dialogue is all that really matters in Shakespeare
>>64613165
Oh I love Polanski's Macbeth
The Charles Manson'ing of King Macbeth was a very interesting choice.
>>64611109
Same reason Macbeth is rejected, distributors know Shakespeare has a terrible ROI with Americlap audiences.
>>64613558
I'd disagree.
He could've set Coriolanus in the closing stages of WWII in Italy -- think 'Rome, Open City' and battles in the ruins. It would play like a fictionalised account of the fascist party's turmoil at the end of the war. Aufidius would be a von Stauffenberg figure.
>>64612304
Roman Polanski's Macbeth was pretty fantastic though
I know most people would never consider watching it, but still.
romeo and juliet with di caprio was pretty rad 2bh
The true patrician has spoken.
Strike One: Shakespeare, he's very intimidating to people
Strike Two: Small budget film, meaning not much publicity
Strike Three: The main cast consisted of Ralp Fiennes (fine actor, but not one to bring in big crowds) and Gerard fucking Butler.
Meanwhile the new Macbeth, which has a biggger budget, and stars Fassbender who's really popular and Marion Cotillard who has some intentional renown, so far has made only half of its budget.
>>64613340
>expanding on its themes
This is impossible. Shakespeare beat literature on legendary difficultly. Even the most patrician director today could lick the boots of a single sentence written by the Bard.
t. Harold Bloom
>>64613797
Is Brody gay? What if he and Armond got married?
The Hollow Crown was alright.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dUjckkIxu1w
Plus you get to see Jeremy Irons smack Tom Hiddleston for real.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ctSiq-J2-7A
>>64612281
Raith Fines
>>64612281
Ralph Fiennes
Pronounced
Ray Fines
Bribing not even once
>>64612703
>DUDE 1V1 ME WITH KNIVES EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE GUNS
In Roman reality it was actually: DUDE 1V1 ME WITH SWORDS EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE ARMIES.
Even during the 19th century wars officiers would sometimes challenge each other to duels with swords even though their units had guns. (google Russo-Japanese officer duels or something). It's a matter of honour, more important than life and death.
The tone is perfectly Shakespearean in the spirit of his histories and the lines are perfectly delivered (as opposed to any theater play you will see). The text is not supposed to be humorous. The contemporary setting makes it much easier to sympathise, and also introduces a whole new aesthetic (US-style uniforms and Balkan streets, modern technology but ancient population size). Art does not reproduce history, it merely uses it. I hope you'll learn that some day you Hollywood-watching pleb-trash. "The American audiences" consist 95% of obese imbecils.
TL;DR: You're a dimwit and a pleb.
>>64613521
>Never been to theater
>has strong opinions on film and art
Just kill yourself right now.
>>64614265
Fassbender is not "really popular". His biggest roles have been X-Men and 12 Years a Slave, neither of which succeeded based on his name/performance alone
>>64610887
>More importantly: Why the fuck was it denied US wide cinema release?
Because it has the word anus in the title.
HELLO TITUS ANDRONICUS
HELLO RICHARD III STARRING SIR LAWRENCE OLIVIER
