Historical Background –The Wars of the Roses (1455-1485):

 In 1455, Richard of York captured King Henry VI and was appointed Lord Protector, but
still pursued a claim to the throne.
 In 1460, Richard of York died and his son, Edward IV inherited the claim to the throne.
Thus, he was later crowned king Edward IV of England.
 In 1464, Edward IV married the Lancastrian Elizabeth Woodville and had 3 children with
her.
 In 1472, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, married the Lancastrian Anne Neville.
 In 1478, Edward IV accused his brother, George of Clarence, of treachery and forced him
to flee.
 Edward IV died in 1483.
 In the same year, the late king’s twelve-year-old son, Edward, was crowned King Edward
V for 78 days until he was deposed by his uncle, Richard III.
 Richard III imprisoned both his nephews in the Tower of London and later assumed the
throne.
 In 1485, Henry Tudor returned from exile and claimed the English throne challenging
King Richard III.
 In the same year, Henry defeated and killed Richard at the Battle of Bosworth Field.
Afterwards, he assumed the throne as Henry VII, and married Elizabeth of York, the
eldest daughter and sole heir of Edward IV. Thus, both houses were united, starting the
reign of the Tudor dynasty.

Summary of the Play:

  Shakespeare bases the play on the true historical events of the Wars of the Roses,
changing only a few details, and adding a subtle touch of his favored supernatural
element.

 In the play, Richard, Duke of Gloucester, is an unattractive hunchback determined to gain

the crown of England from his brother, King Edward IV. Thus Richard convinced Edward
that a prophecy foresaw his murder at the hands of a relative with the letter ‘G’ in his
name. As such Edward grew more suspicious of his brother, George of Clarence, and
gave the order for his imprisonment.

 Next, Richard meets Lady Anne in mourning for her father-in-law Henry VI and her
husband Edward of Westminster, the king and heir to the throne before Richard killed
them both. Richard is determined to marry her to advance his rise to the throne and,
though Anne understandably detests him, he manages to sweet-talk her into accepting his
ring. Alone, Richard gloats at his coup.

 At the palace, Queen Margaret, the former Queen who was supposed to be banished,
steps out and begins cursing everyone for depriving her of her husband, son and rightful
place on the throne. She curses each person present and prophesies that Richard will ruin
everyone's lives.

 Later on, Richard secretly arranges Clarence's murder, King Edward dies, and the young
prince, Edward, is brought to London to be crowned the new king; however, Richard
quickly has the Prince and his brother lodged in the Tower.

 Richard is later offered the crown and accepts it with pretended reluctance, putting on a
false display of humility and decency.

 As king, Richard plans to imprison Anne and marry his niece, Elizabeth, to secure his
throne. He intercepts Elizabeth in mourning for her sons and, though she loathes him,
Richard eventually manages to convince her to coax her daughter into marrying him.

 Reports arrive that the Earl of Richmond, a member of the house of Lancaster,
approaches England with troops, aiming to usurp Richard's throne.

 The night before the battle between Richard and Richmond, the ghosts of all Richard's
victims rise into the night and hurl curses at Richard while giving Richmond their
blessing. The next day, Richard is defeated and killed and Richmond takes the crown,
resolving to end the Wars of the Roses and establish peace by marrying young Elizabeth,
the daughter of King Edward, uniting the houses of York and Lancaster forever.

Documentary-Making techniques:
  The 6 Modes of Documentaries as Proposed by Bill Nichols:
 Poetic: depends on capturing and creating feelings as opposed to facts &
characterized with a loose narrative style.

 Expository:
 provides the audience with an exposure to a certain issue.
 strongly narrative based.
 aims to raise awareness and educate the audience about the subject matter
by iterating thorough details and information.

 Observational:
 the director rolls on the cameras and simply observes silently.
 the director is not an active part of the movie itself.
 the audience is offered the chance to witness intimate moments where all
sides of the issue are given a voice.

 Reflexive: the director’s reflection on the subject matter: the filmmaker is the
main focus of the film.

 Participatory:
 subjective.
 depends on the filmmaker’s interactions with the cast, crew and even the
audience.
 the filmmaker directly affects the narrative of the film and guides the story
line.

 Performative:
 experimental.
 merges different genres.
 deeply personal.
 particularly well-suited to telling the stories of filmmakers from
marginalized social groups, offering the chance to air unique perspectives
without having to argue the validity of their experiences.
 depends on creativity as opposed to sound reasoning.
Being a docudrama, the film combines a number of these modes in order to convey several
messages and evoke different feelings. In its core, it is a participatory and performative film,
focusing on the filmmakers process of making the movie.

 Constructing the Narrative:

 The Three-Act Structure:
 Act One:
- Opening: This is where the main characters and the documentary
topic are introduced. It's crucial to emotionally invest the audience
in the characters and topic from the beginning to pique their
interest and encourage them to keep watching. Using a cold opener
or teaser sequence can also be a useful tool to tease an intense
moment happening later in the documentary.

 The movie starts with a voice over, narrating part of Prospero’s

speech in The Tempest. Not only is the speech a great example of
Shakespeare’s immaculately crafted language, but it also alludes to
actors and the Globe theatre.

 The opening continues with a scene of Al Pacino stepping on a

small stage, staring into the eyes of the only man present in the
audience, the bard of Avon in the flesh. The symbolic moment
signifies Pacino’s personal connection with Shakespeare in
addition to establishing the notion of Pacino being handed over the
beacon of literary enlightenment as he is now the one responsible
for educating the masses about the greatness of true art.

 The scene then changes to Al Pacino asking, “who’s going to say

action around here?” It can be said that perhaps Pacino is trying to
establish that although he’s the director, producer and star of the
film, it is not only his own; it’s one for the masses.

 The first thing Al Pacino does is ask random people on the street
about
Shakespeare. He asked students, children, adults, a beggar, and
what I believe was an insane person who suddenly started rambling
about the US versus Japan for some reason. Now why is this
significant or how does this pay tribute to Shakespeare or is in
itself a Shakespearean technique?
Shakespeare was known for trying to appeal to the masses and
spread his art without limitations, and he would always make sure
that his plays are accessible for all social classes from the
richest/the elite/the educated to the poorest/uneducated. Similarly,
Al Pacino wanted to do the same thing.

- Inciting Incident: This is when the primary character's desires and

goals are identified, and an obstacle appears, setting off the
characters on their journey.
  In a voice over, Pacino declares that it had always been his dream
to communicate his passion and understanding of Shakespeare.
Thus, a deep and intimate personal connection is established
between the filmmaker and the subject matter. This genuine
intimacy and true passion dramatizes the film and compensates for
the typical documentary’s lack of emotional depth. This also helps
capturing the audience’s attention as they now accompany the
filmmakers on his personal journey to pay tribute to his idol.

Shakespeare did extensive research before writing Richard III, and

that is what Al Pacino also did along with his crew. They did their
own research on the historical background, they also got the help
of scholars, and the scholars also provided a historical background
to you, the audience. And by throwing in their interviews every
once in a while and in between lines acted out, you start putting the
pieces together and it’s not boring. And as the movie progresses,
and as scenes of the play get acted out, you find yourself able to
understand
everything. But of course, the historical background is not the
ONLY factor that matters in the production of the play. Emotions
matter as well; and I know it’s a funny jump from talking about the
historical background and then emotions but bear with me. Al
Pacino and the crew understood the importance of the historical
background, but they also took a deep dive into the characters’
emotions and why they are behaving or feeling a certain way. Take
the actress who played the queen for an example. In one scene she
was explaining why the character of the queen was hysterical. Also
she really got into the character to the point where after explaining
why her character is hysterical she says, “and that’s why I am
hysterical”. She did not say “and that’s why she is hysterical.” I
think this really does Shakespearean characters justice, because
usually you’d assume Shakespearean character = an actor using
excessive body language while yelling out a bunch of words
without any understanding of the character’s
emotions, and this takes the life out of the character and it just
makes the acting very dull.

 Act Two:
This is where tension builds, and the audience begins to wonder how the
characters will tackle the challenges that lie ahead.
 This is typically halfway through the film. It is when the protagonist is
heading towards their goal, and an unexpected setback occurs, forcing the
character to introspect and shift their course to achieve their goal.
 Several issues arose while making the film, including:

- Choice of location.
- Interviewing scholars.
- Al Pacino catching a cold.
- Disputes amongst actors regarding the course of the movie.

- Casting Lady Anne:

Throughout the documentary, Al Pacino emphasizes the need for
actors who truly understand Shakespeare. When looking for a
young actress for the role of Lady Anne, which they later selected
Wynona Ryder for, Al Pacino stated he wanted someone young, yet
still understands Shakespeare. Through picking those who truly
understand Shakespeare and his works, he managed to create a
lasting art that will keep your mind buzzing for a while. As such,
Pacino put a huge effort into doing Shakespeare justice.

Method acting. Another aspect that is connected to the idea of

including emotions and actors trying to connect to the characters is
the setting. Throughout the movie, scenes from Richard III are
acted in buildings with a medieval setting, and that allows both the
actors to truly live the atmosphere of the era and be able to embody
the characters and do them justice, and also for the audience to live
the experience as if they are actually living the play.

- Language Barrier.

The language barrier in Shakespeare was definitely a huge issue that was talked about in the movie .
Shakespeare and his language. Language and feelings.at the beginning of the movie everyone was asked
what do you think about Shakespeare ?. a man said that if kids were taught Shakespeare they would learn
how to speak with feelings ,instead of pointing guns at each other in another words people need to feel
more and Shakespeare teaches us that. Other people simply said it was boring. Even some of them left the
theater because the language used by Shakespeare was difficult for them to understand. Actors reading
Shakespeare for the first time needs to untangle Shakespeare’s creative use of language Grammar and
syntax. When an actor reads a piece of Shakespeare, we really do need to get stuck into the text. The first
thing you notice when you read Shakespeare, is that there are quite a few words you don’t know. This can
make even the most learned scholar feel a little silly, so hang in there.

VERSE vs. PROSE

 In mid-16th century England, the time and home of Shakespeare, the upper-class – being better educated
– had a wider vocabulary and were able to express themselves in elaborate details, while middle and
lower-class individuals were thought to put their thoughts in a straightforward, simpler manner. The
question is: how did people enjoy the same entertainment if there was this prevalent language
barrier? The genius that is Shakespeare scripted his plays in both verse and prose to accommodate the
masses. Typically the nobility in Shakespeare’s plays speak in blank verse and the commoners speak in
prose; however, sometimes the nobility speak in rhymed verse instead.

What are Prose and Verse?

 PROSE: Ordinary language with no accented rhythm. A long passage in prose is typically printed in your
text like an ordinary paragraph with right and left justification.
 RHYMED VERSE: Rhymed verse in Shakespeare’s plays is usually in rhymed couplets, i.e. two
successive lines of verse of which the final words rhyme with another.

 BLANK VERSE: Blank Verse refers to unrhymed iambic pentameter.

 If you are unsure if a passage is in blank verse or in prose, READ IT ALOUD. If you can discern
the regular rhythmic pattern of iambic pentameter (da DUM da DUM da DUM da DUM da
DUM), it is in blank verse.
 Ex : to be or not to be .

With this being said, the men who would attend Shakespeare’s performances at The Globe Theater and
pirate his plays were usually from the lower or middle-class (they might have been merchants or sailors,
for example). So, these men were not well educated and therefore their written versions of Shakespeare’s
plays were rudimentary at best.

Translation Part:

So how do you feel ? you can see what I’m talking about . The language is challenging let me read to you
its translation in simpler words
the translation: I am deformed, spit out from my mother’s womb prematurely and so badly formed that
dogs bark at me as I limp by them. I’m left with nothing to do in this weak, idle peacetime, unless I want
to look at my lumpy shadow in the sun and sing about that. (the war was the war of the roses between the
Lancasters and the Yorks and the Yorks won)
See what I’m talking about , you can definitely notice the induced self-hate ,the wittiness in his words .
Richard the third was a very manipulative character.
It can feel like translating an entirely new language. But the key is that it is poetry. Sometimes the phrase
is the poetic use of something we already know. And sometimes it’s a word that’s new to us and other
times it's a reference we have never met before.

Language also changes over time. Shakespeare also coined, or made up a lot of words and phrases. He
called Jealousy - the green eyed monster. He had Hamlet say that he could see something in his ‘Mind’s
Eye’. He was the first to use the word ‘Assassination’.

Shakespeare used words to create the worlds in which his characters exist. But the good news is that once
you get to know Shakespeare’s language, you can apply it to his other plays too.

Just like any language, it’s about the level of immersion that you’re willing to engage in. If you read a lot
of Shakespeare, watch a lot on tv or in the theatre, you’ll quickly get used to it. You won’t find the need
to translate everything, you’ll let more and more wash over you instead of feeling like you have to
translate, you’ll let the words and actions of the actor inform you of their importance in the moment.

- Making a movie for a target audience that is ignorant of

Shakespeare’s work.

Americans and Shakespeare : Al Pacino raised this question why are

Americans intimidated by Shakespear ? why do they feel inferior to the British when it comes to doing
Shakespear plays ? that is because critics kept telling them that that they can’t do it which made them
self-conscious and also this idea of the sophistication of Shakespeare and the idea of the British being
more sophisticated but of course this idea contradicts with the works of Shakespeare being for the masses
and common people . to end this part on a lighter note I will share with you a quote that I loved from the
movie : “If we think words are things and we have no feelings on our words,
then we say things to each other that don't mean anything but if we felt what
we said we will say less and mean more”

 Act Three:
Here, the stakes are heightened and the main characters are nearing their
goal.
The narrative reaches its climax: a moment of peak emotional intensity.
It's when the main characters reach their goal after a significant struggle.
The movie ends with a resolution where all loose ends are tied, all
conflicts resolved, leaving the audience with a sense of closure.
 The movie ended with the enactment of the play’s final battle
scene where Richard III is slain.
 Al Pacino paid tribute to Shakespeare’s comic relief scenes
through acting out very intense scenes from Richard III using the
costumes, the medieval settings, and giving the audience the fully
intense Globe theater experience, only to end the scene’s intensity
by switching from the character of Richard III to Al Pacino’s
playful character with the crew. And that in itself is part of giving
the audience a modernized version of the
full Shakespearean experience.

 Al Pacino pronounces his appreciation of silence, stressing its

necessity in order to allow the audience the chance of processing
such tragic scenes. This pays tribute to Shakespeare as he, too,
would incorporate a few moments of silence of relatively
irrelevant, or reflective scenes for the sake of a dramatic relief.

 The closing scene of the movie pays tribute to the opening scene
as the same speech is repeated in voice over once more, while
showing slow-motion aesthetic shots. Similar to Shakespeare’s
plays, became a cycle. Thus, Al assert his dedication and love for
Shakespeare.

 Foreseeing potential criticism of his directorial debut, Pacino

sarcastically includes a shot of a disappointed Shakespeare. He
also acknowledges that he has nothing to add to the Bard as he
says, “Whatever I say, I know Shakespeare said it.”

 Shooting Techniques:
 Distance and Angle:
 Different distances between the cameras and the filmed subjects have different
indications. While wide shot is usually meant to expose the viewers to the
environment, a close up shot is used to direct the viewers’ attention to minute
details, the subject’s significance, or the actors’ feelings and expressions.

 The close-up shots were used and abused in Pacino’s film during instances of
great turmoil in order to immerse the audience in the plot’s intensity and the cast’s
own perspective. During one of the table reads scenes, the cameraman was sitting
on the table with cast and simply rotating the camera around the table, closely
capturing each actor’s instant reaction and feelings. The instability of the camera
movement in such a scene is reflective of the actual turbulence and tension in the
air.
 Those shots were also used during interviews in order to convey a sense of
relatability; viewers of the film can metaphorically see themselves in the
pedestrians interviewed for the movie as they are common people of all sorts of
different backgrounds.

 In one scene, while Pacino is performing one of Richard’s soliloquies, the camera
is placed at a lower angle, making it seem as if Pacino was looking down upon us,
and we, as the audience, are looking up to him. This technique does not only
communicates Richard’s own feelings of superiority, but also mimics the
audience’s perspective at a theatre.

 Montage and Editing:

 The film depends on fast cuts and transitions between various scenes, instances
and different settings altogether.

 While some of the transitions are between the cast or interviewees and the acted
scenes of the play, other transitions intercept a single scene from the play, cutting
back to the actors’ discussion and rehearsal of the very same scene.

 Such rapid transitions help to fasten the overall pace of the film, allowing it to be
easier to digest while constantly engaging the viewers with various characters,
settings and subplots, eventually denying the audience any chance of boredom.

 Chapters: Dissecting the movie into smaller chapters/sections allows the

audience to get a sense of achievement marked by the completion of each part of,
not only the film, but the artistic journey as a whole.

 Breaking the Fourth Wall:

Al Pacino followed another Shakespearean method which is called “breaking the
fourth wall”. If you are unfamiliar with what “breaking the fourth wall” means, it
simply means that the character knows it’s fictional and addresses
the audience. Most of the time it aims to create a sense of connection
with the audience, which was quite common in Shakespeare’s plays.
Al Pacino managed to pay tribute to Shakespeare through
establishing that type of connection through making eye contact with
the camera. He made your attention divert to the connection that was
established rather than the difficulty of the lines being said, and once
that connection is established, you find yourself connecting with the
emotions of the character and therefore, the barrier in understanding
starts to get resolved. Shakespeare used soliloquies to engage
with the audience to let the audience know the thought process of the
 characters and the characters’ plans. This is a form of breaking the
fourth wall. While Shakespeare used soliloquies to engage with the
audience, Al Pacino did the same through breaking the fourth wall
and looking into the camera.

Criticism:
1) Excessive Pandering to Younger Audience/Americans:
It seems evident by the frenzied cutting from one thing to another that Pacino is
trying to appeal to the younger American audience, raised on the quick-cut style
of MTV videos and accustomed to playing frenetically-paced computer games.
 “The intended audience for this film seems to be the average American: a
creature known, at least among the cultural elite, for its inability to
comprehend or identify irony and its disinterest in any form of culture that
might ask it to think on an intellectual or artistic level of any depth.”

 “Al Pacino's Looking for Richard. . . really ought to be called "Richard

goes to Sesame Street." It is a film based on the by-now old-fashioned
notion that Shakespeare can be made "relevant" to the happening youth of
the nineties--kids who might not, were it not for Al and his pals (…), ever
bother to tear themselves away from MTV. But I doubt the efficacy of
slicing and dicing Shakespeare and serving him up in quick cuts to pander
to a bunch of no-mind slackers. They probably won't like him anyway, and
they won't realize that the real Shakespeare takes work--though not so
much work as they might imagine.”

2) Extreme Self-Indulgence:

 In fact, in Time magazine Richard Corliss criticized the film for being
"naive" and "wildly self-indulgent," asserting that in approaching Looking
for Richard, "You come Looking for Richard and find Al."

 Stanley Kauffman says, "textual explication doesn't seem to me the basic

reason for this film. It's a very slim gloss of the play"; instead, he believes
Pacino is really only selling himself: "I know of no previous instance in
which a film star wanted to assure his film public that he was more than a
film star." Kauffman is another believer in the "vanity project" theory. This
theory proposes that some creative works are ostensibly meant to
 showcase someone’s talent as an actor, director, writer, etc., but fail
miserably to achieve their goal.

 Refuting the argument:

An English professor declares that the majority of his students had
responded overwhelmingly positively to the use of Looking for Richard in
the classroom. Almost all of the students who had watched the movie
wrote that it helped them understand and appreciate Richard III, and
several students said that Looking for Richard motivated them to seek out
other Shakespearean films.

Rather than viewing the actor's process portrayed in the film as narcissistic
and self-indulgent, the students also remarked that watching actors they
respected struggle with the interpretation and understanding of
Shakespeare made them more comfortable with their own struggle for
comprehension. The students empathize with the often scruffy and
haggard-looking cast as they grapple with the text. A few students
commented that seeing these celebrities pursue Shakespeare with so much
passion, and obviously for little remuneration, has stimulated them to look
at Shakespeare in a new and more exciting light.

 The film’s purpose was also put into question since it is a documentary
about the making of a movie that does not exist. Thus, this leaves more
room for the belief in the theory of Pacino’s attempt in flexing his literary
intellect over his audience.

 Refuting the argument:

Pacino started his career in theatre. He performed on several prestigious
stages all over the world, including Broadway and London. On top of that,
he also played the lead role in Cort Theatre and Broadway’s Richard III
performance in 1979, 17 years prior to the film’s production. He is also
nicknamed “The Godfather of Broadway.” Thus, it seems rather needless
for Pacino to assert his theatrical and literary intellect and passion.
3) Wacky and Fragmentary Narrative/Adaptation Technique:
 Despite the overall positive reaction to the film, other students still
remarked that "Looking for Richard was nothing more than a movie based
on Cliffs Notes." In fact, a number of students compared the film to Cliffs
Notes, calling it a video version of the same. It is clear that some students
feel that the "Cliffs Notes" style of explication in Looking for Richard is
condescending.

This criticism is reflective of the belief in film’s inferiority to literature.

Those students and other critics alike thought the film to be doing more
harm than good in terms of commemorating the Bard’s work. They found
the oversimplification of the text to be ridiculing and reducing
Shakespeare’s genius to the mere plot of the text. Thus, the film, and other
attempts to paraphrase and summarize the Bard’s texts, are considered to
be a huge offense to one of the main pillars of, not only English literature,
but all forms of art in general.