A Conversation for Antonin Artaud and Absurdist Theatre

No Subject

Post 1

Steve K.

" ... his influence on later playwrights who veered away from the conventions of language and the rationality of theatre is enormous."

I suspect that includes Tom Stoppard. From the online Brittanica:

" ‘Rosencrantz and Guildenstern Are Dead' focused on two minor characters in Shakespeare's ‘Hamlet' who lacked a life outside the play and were destined to die."

I saw a stage production that for me was more impressive than the movie (directed by Stoppard, I think). The stage was mostly a raised section, with a narrow border surrounding it, maybe a foot lower. Other characters could come and go at will, stepping on and off the raised section. But our two "heroes" would walk toward the edge, appearing to be about to step down, then stop. An effective way of indicating they were trapped.


Tom Stoppard

Post 2

Tony2Times/Prof. Chaos

I've never had the chance to see Rosencratz And Guildernstern are dead but I've always thought it best to leave it until I had a greater understanding of Hamlet. I've read an excerpt though and it had very witty wordplay, though I doubt I'll watch the film to see it in action as theatre loses too much in filmic versions.


Tom Stoppard

Post 3

Steve K.

Agreed. I don't think a deep understanding of "Hamlet" is required to appreciate "R & G are Dead", but some understanding of their roles (very small pawns in a very large game of chess) is needed.

One tip, probably controversial, the 1990 movie of Hamlet with Mel Gibson is surprisingly good IMHO, nominated for two Oscars. As one reviewer says:

"Mel Gibson does not play the contemplative bits very well - he seems kind of in awe of the verse - but he's excellent in anguish, humor, anger, and charisma, and really makes the prince his own. He even makes us laugh in the best duel scene by far."

More here:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0099726/

One interesting item in the above link:

Trivia: Director Franco Zeffirelli reportedly wanted Mel Gibson for the titular role after seeing his near-suicide scene in Lethal Weapon (1987) ("To be or not to be" with a .45 caliber pistol?)

So its not (just) a commercially successful actor deciding he can be Hamlet.




Tom Stoppard

Post 4

Tony2Times/Prof. Chaos

Yeah my lit lecturer told us a few days ago Zephorelli was basing his "Hamlet" on a multi-faceted protagonist; though he did rather scoff at the famous "to be or not to be" scene which apparently Gibson does not stop moving in throughout.


Tom Stoppard

Post 5

Steve K.

That reminds me of another Shakespeare movie, "Richard III" (1995) with Ian McKellan doing, IMHO, an amazing job. One reviewer (and I agree) said the entire film " ... does not stop moving ... throughout."

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0114279/

I do agree, BTW, that movies and stage plays require different approaches. But both can work.

You might ask your lecturer about Gibson's portrayal of Hamlet watching the "play within a play". He was literally "chewing up the scenery", and I was rolling on the floor.


Key: Complain about this post

More Conversations for Antonin Artaud and Absurdist Theatre

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more