The First Part of King Henry the Fourth, with the Life and Death of Henry Surnamed Hotspur

Anthony Quayle was one of last century's most effective Falstaffs on stage. His performance here is brilliant but encumbered by the overall interpretation.

David Giles called the second tetralogy a "Henriad", the story of how Hal grows up to be Henry V, and the plays are cut accordingly. For instance, Falstaff's words to Hal, "thy love is worth a million, thou owest me thy love," are gone, as is much of the warmth between the old knight and the young prince. As a result, Falstaff becomes a secondary character who hums and haws with nervousness.

David Gwillim is engagingly ingenuous as Hal, and he very nearly succeeds in carrying the additional weight that Giles has loaded on him.

The rest of the cast is also strong, with Jon Finch a guilt-ridden usurper, Tim Pigott-Smith a fiercely mock-heroic Hotspur, and Richard Owens a pompously magical Glendower.

A literal interpretation of this history play. It is interesting to watch the words become action, especially in the case of H. Percy, played with impatience and gusto by Bruce Purchase (he looks like a young and wild Ben Cross). If you've read the play, his performance is worth the view. Price Hal is done well, as is blustery, mumbling Falstaff; but the king, I thought, was played with very little artistry. It's a shame that his opening speech sets the tone for the play, because it sounds like it's being read rather than acted. It makes the whole production seem a little stiff.

DVD: The sound is terrible in some places, and it's difficult to get all of the dialogue. Subtitles were not available, which I think would have added to the production.

Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 1 (1979) was directed for the BBC by David Giles. Like most of the BBC productions, the acting is solid and the text is respected.

Although the play's title would make you assume that King Henry was the central role, that's not correct. The real story of the play--and the movie--is the coming of age of Henry's son, Hal, the Prince of Wales. A major theme is the contrast of the Prince with his warlike contemporary, another Hal, called Hotspur. (In reality, Hotspur was much older than the prince, but Shakespeare's version is much more dramatic.) Also, of course, this is the play in which Shakespeare introduces the roguish fat knight, Sir John Falstaff.

David Gwillim as Hal, Tim Pigott-Smith as Hotspur, and Anthony Quayle as Falstaff are all excellent. Almost all of the BBC productions are shot indoors, but I think director Giles shot the battle scenes outdoors. As usual with the BBC, the supporting actors are good, as are the actors playing minor roles. Costumes are great, settings are minimal. (It worked for the Globe, and it works for the BBC.)

If you know the play well, you'll be happy with this version. If you don't know the play, Henry IV, Part 1 is a good history play with which to start. (It's not the first play in chronological time, but it's a great introduction to Shakespeare's history plays.)

The BBC films were made for TV, so they work well on the small screen. I saw one scene on a large scene in a classroom setting, and that also worked well.

You need to remember that these were all filmed for the BBC/Time-Life Shakespeare plays; the budget did not allow high production values. Still, (disagreeing with the other comment) Jon Finch's Henry IV is a highlight. Twisted up, obsessive, but still with something regal, the performance seems better every time I watch. Finch was Polanski's Macbeth. It is Tim Piggott-Smith who does Hotspur (not Purchase, who does Old Percy) in a fine performance. Quayle's Falstaff is spitty and reptilian, and Gwillim's Hal nuanced. One of the gems of the series. The histories are some of the gems of Shakespeare, too often ignored in the US. You must know Falstaff, and this is as good an intro as any. Review the characters in advance, and you'll be fine.

Though I admire the BBC for doing the complete works of Shakespeare unabridged, I would only recommend this Henry IV if your motivation for seeing it is completely utilitarian. The only advantage to seeing this over reading it is that it might be easier to understand and quicker.