BBC Shakespeare: The Plan

BBC Shakespeare - From Start to Finish

Here are the whole lot laid out on my rug

I've been a fan of Shakespeare for years, ever since I first saw Kenneth Branagh's film version of Henry V and was swept up in its dynamism, its passion, its stirring music and terrific acting. But there was that thing about the language. I mean what the hell were these guys saying? Imagine, if you will, a young early teenage version of me (possibly younger - I may have been just over 12 when I first saw this film, I can't remember) sitting before this screening of Branagh's Oscar winning epic, trying to get my head round the language of the play.

And then realising it was as dynamic, passionate, stirring and terrific as the rest of the film. And done right it can't help leading to an exciting evening/afternoon at the theatre or the movies or listening to the radio or in front of the TV.

Now I've acted in a lot of Shakespeare plays since (heck I've even followed in Branagh's footsteps and given it a stab at playing Henry V) but I've never lost that sense that Shakespeare CAN lend himself very well to all mediums if its done right - because good drama, at the end of the day, is good drama.

So I wanted to explore how successfully (or not) the BBC managed to do this in the 1970s-80s when they transmitted the complete canon of the plays. So I thought, what better way to celebrate these but than to watch them all (not in one sitting) and share some thoughts and feelings about them - to re-evaluate these productions and see which ones stand up to time and which ones don't.

Because these BBC dramas have yet a bit of a bad rep in the past. When doing the interview round for his own filming of Henry IV Parts 1 and 2 (excellent by the way) Richard Eyre stuck the boot in with his typical straight talking: "The result was a catastrophe, because what [the BBC] churned out were hidebound versions, filmed in studios, that were not well-acted or well-designed. It was a chance squandered, and worse, these dreadful films are what has been shown ever after in schools all around the world as evidence of the BBC’s commitment to Shakespeare". Read the whole interview here if you like.

Now I've seen some of these productions and some of them are interesting and intelligent productions - but others are duffers. And I wanted to see, which ones were which. And more importantly to try and understand why.

As part of this I want to watch the whole lot in transmission order - to see how the techniques used to film them over the 7-8 years of the project developed and what impact this had on the productions, directing styles and acting.

The backstory

There is a very good run-through of the planning and development of the series on Wikipedia here.

A little backstory first though. The BBC Shakespeare series was commissioned by a chap called Cedric Messina, an experienced BBC in-house producer and director who believed that the BBC was the perfect body to do so. Read more about Cedric Messina here.

Messina's mission was to find the funding for the project, which was largely collected from American banks and businesses which set certain rules about the filming of the project. These were basically:

• That the series should have an education remit
• That the productions should only be set EITHER at the times the plays were set (e.g. ancient Rome) or set in Shakespeare's lifetime - they could not be modernised or moved into the present day

That's the thing to remember (particularly when watching the earlier series) that artistically many of the directors were straight-jacketed from the get-go. Messina also aimed for a "realistic" feel to the series - hence, even when sets were used (and they were frequently were) the intention was to suggest the action was in a real location and not a studio at television house.

Messina later retired and was replaced by Jonathan Miller. A famous polymath (scientist, author, comedian, acclaimed theatre director) Miller brought a more dynamic shine to the series, bringing on board theatre directors with fresh perspectives on television and largely ditching the realism of the Messina's age with a painting-inspired impressionism. He also was willing to "bend" the sponsor rules - such as moving Antony and Cleopatra to a 1600s setting and greenlighting Jane Howell's plans for a playground setting for Henry VI/Richard III. A little clip of Jonathan Miller at work can be seen here.

Shaun Sutton saw the thing through to completion. By which point it was mostly down to the unknown plays (as directors had actually really wanted to do the famous ones early on). Of course, with the pressure off with the less known plays, some of the more experimental (and therefore interesting) work was done.

So there is a quick background run through of the whole series. Let's see if the general perception is true or not when I start watching them. First up? Romeo and Juliet fresh from December 1978 - keep your eyes peeled as I try to watch this, review it, type up by notes and post it over the next few weeks...