The third, last and by far the weakest of the three Shakespearean films directed by Laurence Olivier. I have to admit that, of the Bard's plays with which I am familiar, "Richard III" is my least favourite. It largely lacks the subtlety, strong characters, superlative characterisation, wonderful exploration of themes and beautiful language that define his later plays, particularly "Macbeth" and "Hamlet". That said, the play is far more subtle than the film. I wish that Olivier had made "Macbeth", which would have starred himself and his wife Vivien Leigh, instead.
As both an actor and a director, Olivier failed to live up to the high standards that he set for himself in both "Henry V" and "Hamlet". His performance as the title character is too over the top, too obviously villainous, though he is very good in the quieter moments. The fake nose that he wears is unintentionally comical. This is the first time that I've ever been disappointed with one of Olivier's performances, though he is still one of my three favourite actors (the other two being Christopher Lee and Don Ameche). In contrast to the first two films, his direction is pedestrian. It feels like a filmed stage play rather than the film adaptation of one. It looks dull. This is particularly disappointing after the beautiful, vibrant Technicolor of "Henry V" and the even better black and white cinematography of "Hamlet". The Bosworth Field scenes are the best looking ones in the film but still fall far short of those films. At 2 hours and 38 minutes, it's far too long and not very well paced.
Unfortunately, it seemed that Olivier set the tone for much of the acting in the film. Claire Bloom (who later matured into a very good actress) and Cedric Hardwicke both devour the scenery as the Lady Anne and King Edward IV respectively. I wish that Olivier had cast either Jean Simmons (who played Ophelia in "Hamlet") or Vivien Leigh as Anne. Ralph Richardson is just dull as the Duke of Buckingham. Olivier had considered casting Orson Welles as Buckingham and I wish that he had. The best actors in the film are the only ones who give consistently subtle performances such as Andrew Cruickshank as Brackenbury, Alec Clunes (Martin's dad) as Lord Hastings, Laurence Naismith as Lord Stanley, Norman Wooland (who previously played Horatio in "Hamlet") as Sir William Catesby, Stanley Baker as the soon to be Henry VII and the great John Gielgud as the Duke of Clarence.
It also has many appearances from great characters actors such as Michael Gough, Michael Ripper, George Woodbridge, Patrick Troughton (who, unlike in "Hamlet", actually has some lines), Esmond Knight, John Laurie and Russell Thorndike. Knight, Laurie and Thorndike are the only actors other than Olivier himself to appear in all three of his Shakespearean films while Knight and the latter sister's Sybil Thorndike appeared in his next film "The Prince and the Showgirl".
As both an actor and a director, Olivier failed to live up to the high standards that he set for himself in both "Henry V" and "Hamlet". His performance as the title character is too over the top, too obviously villainous, though he is very good in the quieter moments. The fake nose that he wears is unintentionally comical. This is the first time that I've ever been disappointed with one of Olivier's performances, though he is still one of my three favourite actors (the other two being Christopher Lee and Don Ameche). In contrast to the first two films, his direction is pedestrian. It feels like a filmed stage play rather than the film adaptation of one. It looks dull. This is particularly disappointing after the beautiful, vibrant Technicolor of "Henry V" and the even better black and white cinematography of "Hamlet". The Bosworth Field scenes are the best looking ones in the film but still fall far short of those films. At 2 hours and 38 minutes, it's far too long and not very well paced.
Unfortunately, it seemed that Olivier set the tone for much of the acting in the film. Claire Bloom (who later matured into a very good actress) and Cedric Hardwicke both devour the scenery as the Lady Anne and King Edward IV respectively. I wish that Olivier had cast either Jean Simmons (who played Ophelia in "Hamlet") or Vivien Leigh as Anne. Ralph Richardson is just dull as the Duke of Buckingham. Olivier had considered casting Orson Welles as Buckingham and I wish that he had. The best actors in the film are the only ones who give consistently subtle performances such as Andrew Cruickshank as Brackenbury, Alec Clunes (Martin's dad) as Lord Hastings, Laurence Naismith as Lord Stanley, Norman Wooland (who previously played Horatio in "Hamlet") as Sir William Catesby, Stanley Baker as the soon to be Henry VII and the great John Gielgud as the Duke of Clarence.
It also has many appearances from great characters actors such as Michael Gough, Michael Ripper, George Woodbridge, Patrick Troughton (who, unlike in "Hamlet", actually has some lines), Esmond Knight, John Laurie and Russell Thorndike. Knight, Laurie and Thorndike are the only actors other than Olivier himself to appear in all three of his Shakespearean films while Knight and the latter sister's Sybil Thorndike appeared in his next film "The Prince and the Showgirl".