The Tragedy of Coriolanus

Coriolanus is the most problematic of Shakespeare's tragedies.

Hamlet, Macbeth, Othello and Lear keep us posted as to their internal states in extended soliloquies. However, Coriolanus is a proud soldier who loves his mother and is totally useless in any other context. What goes on inside his head is either shallow, wrong or just plain uncommunicative. As a result, it is much more difficult than usual to understand what is happening, and to evaluate our own response to it.

Alan Howard brings his verbal precision and ready sneer to the difficult title part. No one's lip curls downwards more eagerly than his, but you may get confused as to how you feel about the progress of his downfall. Irene Worth works well with the camera in making her presence count as his mother, Volumnia.

The rest of the cast boasts some real vocal splendor - Joss Ackland, Anthony Pedley, Valentine Dyall all rumble away magnificently, and the normally resonant Leon Lissek dries his voice out for contrast (unlike, say, his performance in "Shogun.")

Mike Gwilym is perhaps a little too young for Coriolanus's arch-enemy Aufidias, but he acquits himself well enough. The homoerotic element of the Coriolanus-Aufidias relationship is fully justified by the text, but exactly how explicitly it should be shown is a subject for endless debate. It is worth pointing out, however, that the final chorus of "Kill! Kill! Kill!" is here reduced to a duet, with the crowd silent and only the two of them shouting in a kind of macho Liebestod.

The real problem with this video is a word beginning with "C," but it's not Coriolanus, it's Caravaggio. Director Elijah Moshinsky's key to the whole production is Caravaggio's paintings, much as Vermeer is to his "All's Well That Ends Well." Unfortunately, the melodramatic ripeness of Caravaggio's lighting seem not to blend well with the conceptual austerity of most of the conflicts in the text. So two artistic experiences play out simultaneously in parallel, but according to more than one viewer, the twain never meet.

"Coriolanus" is, among other things, a play about class. Unfortunately, the costumes of the period chosen here do not always indicate instantly the class of the wearer, and in the prevailing gloom, wholly black costumes don't always register. We shouldn't have to decode these things - they should be obvious and unobtrusive.

The editing is also a problem. Under the director's supervision, scenes often end abruptly and cut directly to the next, producing not the desired impression of speed, but irritation in the viewer. Sometimes we are staring at a reaction shot, when the reaction is not at all informative and we'd be better off watching the face of the speaker.

Perhaps part of the cause is the compressed production schedule, but some editorial rhythms seem clumsy, and that's not characteristic of the BBC's house style - occasionally somnolent, perhaps, but never clumsy.

In sum, the production is not bad, but does not make the case for bringing the play out of obscurity as Shakespeare's least honored tragedy. Mr. T. S. Eliot insisted that "Coriolanus" is a better play than "Hamlet." This video does nothing to force us to agree with him.

The Tragedy of Coriolanus (1984) (TV) was directed by Elijah Moshinsky for the BBC. The set of made-for-TV movies (cosponsored by Time-Life Books) provides a service to viewers because it presents all of Shakespeare's 37 plays. However, the production values are basic. This can be a good thing, because we don't get the heavy production-laden films like Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet or Henry V. And, I assume,what we see is closer to what Shakespeare's audiences would have seen at The Globe.

However, you can tell the director was dealing with budget realities when crowd scenes bring together six or eight people. And, in this film, the battle scenes are carried off without much battle.

However, all of this would have worked for me if the part of Caius Marcius (Coriolanus) had been played by someone other than Alan Howard. Howard was a noted Shakespearean actor, but he just didn't look right for the part. Coriolanus is proud, and disdainful of the common people. Howard did well with that aspect of Coriolanus's character. However, Coriolanus is a soldier. He's not just a great general. He's a fierce warrior who cuts down any enemy who gets in his way. Howard looked like the combat he was best suited for was a chess tournament. With a weak Coriolanus, the rest of the play doesn't work.

On the other hand, the movie is worth watching because of the incredible performance by Irene Worth. Worth plays Volumnia, Coriolanus's mother, and she is superb. She looks and acts like the mother who has turned her child into the ferocious warrior that he is. (Well, as he is in Shakespeare, if not in this film.) You don't want to miss this performance, so I highly recommend that you find this movie and watch it. (If worst comes to worst, you can fast forward through the scenes in which Worth doesn't appear.) Because the movie was made for TV, it works well on the small screen. I recommend it, even with the flaws I've described above.

A play like Coriolanus requires a linear adaption. For whatever reason, the people in charge of this production decided cut to different locations in A1S1 (compare to Richard II, where the camera and framing gives the audience understanding of where Aumerle &co. is in relation to Henry). A1S4 cuts from a speech to three seconds of Coriolanus's mother and wife sowing and then back to the scene because...? And the amount of abridgement is simply offensive.

Although the BBC Television Shakespeare series is an uneven one, as has been said more than once, it is also a truly fascinating one and a must for anybody who wants to see all of Shakespeare's plays done as part of one whole big project. A big brave undertaking that should be applauded regardless of the execution, whether continually good, continually bad or inconsistent.

'Coriolanus' is no exception. It is not an easy play to perform or stage and dramatically is not as concise or as consistently gripping as other Shakespeare plays. One of Shakespeare's most compelling and more complex titular characters is one of the main interest points. While it is not a perfect production, flawlessness was not seen a lot in this series even in the best productions, for me 'The Tragedy of Coriolanus' is among the higher middle ones of the series and is as above satisfactory a performance of 'Coriolanus' as one can get. It is not completely bloodthirsty and it could have seared more but it is a long way from bloodless or bland.

It's with some of the production values where 'The Tragedy of Coriolanus' could have been better. The abrupt transitions in the editing being especially the case, but some of the lighting is on the overripe, obvious side at times as well and this is one of the productions in the series where a more austere touch actually would have been a benefit and blended more. Most of the time actually though, it is one of the more interestingly lit productions and does look very striking.

Not all the more action-oriented scenes completely work either, veering on the clumsy side of things but smoother editing would have helped things much better, also along with the crowd scenes pretty under-populated.

However, the sets are beautifully designed, on the most part apart from the editing and at times the lighting 'The Tragedy of Coriolanus' struck me as one of the better looking productions of the BBC Television Shakespeare series. The staging is coherent and more often than not has enough dramatic intensity and emotional impact to make the drama interesting and investable.

Thought personally that Alan Howard very much excelled as Coriolanus, it is a very committed and often fiercely powerful portrayal. The other acting standout is Irene Worth, sincere and poignant Volumnia. The character interaction is done very well as is the rest of the acting.

Overall, very well done. 8/10

I don't want to be too critical of this, since it is the only available version of this play. Alan Howard does a great job in the title role, making you believe in his character, and all of the other actors do great jobs too. Of course, then there's the problem all of the BBC productions had with this cycle: the production never put in the money to make these plays seem like real films, something Olivier or Brannagh would make, so you get pretty dull sets and very little music, and of course no breathtaking battles or sword fights. Still, that's not the fault of this movie, and like I said, I'm thankful at least one version exists. The DVD comes with subtitles or you can follow along with the text if you're unfamiliar with the play like I was. It's worth checking out if you get the chance.