Othello

The National Theatre production of 'Othello' was legendary - one of Laurence Olivier's iconic roles from the era when white actors still blacked up to play the lead part.

But is it really any good on the screen? It is essentially filmed theatre with an overpowering performance from Olivier, which is perhaps too large for viewing away from the stage - but it does benefit from three key parts of excellence in support (Frank Finlay as Iago, in Shakespeare's longest role as far as numbers of lines is concerned; Maggie Smith as a delicate Desdemona; and a very young Derek Jacobi as Cassio, resplendent in fine clothes and groomed hair).

Trimmed slightly from the full play, it nevertheless keeps the main characters and the sense of the story, and plays at nearly two and a half hours. Tight direction, good diction, and - as far as filmed theatre can be - adequate sets give this Othello an edge which means it is still relevant today.

This is a filmed play. Second, his interpretation is a valid one and I didnt know there was a rule that actors could not play characters of different races. That kind of reverse racism is exactly what is to be avoided. Judge the acting for acting's sake. Olivier uses a full octave voice lower for the performance, unatural to his usual tenor voice. If one simply judges the acting, it should be seen as a powerful piece of work. Another performance of this is by Anthony Hopkins, also quite excellent, with different shadings.

This is the best film of a Shakespeare play that I have ever seen. (Throne of Blood is a great movie, but it's an adaptation, not really Shakespeare's Macbeth.) What makes the difference for me are the outstanding performances by the entire cast, not just Olivier. Maggie Smith's Desdemona is truly touching as a woman overwhelmed by fate. A young Derek Jacobi hits all the right notes as Michael Cassio: smart, loyal, eager to please, but a little immature. I haven't seen any other roles played by either Frank Finlay or Joyce Redman, but in any case, they're excellent here. I much prefer Olivier's Othello to his film role as Hamlet. That's because too many of Hamlet's lines were cut from that version. More text gives more characterization to Othello, and gives Olivier the chance to really fill the role, which he does beautifully. My only real complaint is that on the videotape, the widescreen picture is cropped too much. Everybody who is a fan of Shakespeare or any of the above mentioned actors should see this movie!

Olivier got a lot of flack at the time for the Al Jolson performance, from people who failed to take into account the exaggeration of gesture and make-up that goes with a stage production. That's all it is, a film of a stage production, but visually the stage design is good and the photography presents it excellently.

I am very fond of Shakespeare's work so I was all for seeing Olivier's Othello having loved his Hamlet so much. There is some stiff competition, namely the brilliant Orson Welles film, but this doesn't overshadow or is in the shadow of this stiff competition, if anything it is on par with them. In short I honestly believe it is one of the finest Shakespeare adaptations and films. It is very well made, with exemplary photography and settings without ever feeling too stage bound. The music is haunting and evocative, the writing is outstanding(not only in terms of written quality but also how it is delivered and how well adapted it is), the characterisations have complexity especially Othello and the story still is compelling and moving. You couldn't have had a more perfect cast either, I think Laurence Olivier's Othello has more depth than his Hamlet, and to this day I still consider it one of his best performances on films, he is extraordinary. Maggie Smith is poignant, delicate and determined as Desdemona, and a young Derek Jacobi is excellent as Cassio. Frank Finlay's Iago is clever, conniving and altogether brilliant, for me the best of the supporting turns. In conclusion, fantastic really. 10/10 Bethany Cox