The Restricted Review: Henry IV

(Rated 5/5) In my youth I had two portly gentlemen who took on the roles of my Step-Grandad and my Self-Chosen’ Grandad; the first being married to one of my blood Grannies, and the second married to my Self-Chosen Granny! I loved their sizes – though my Step-Grandad with his twenty stone made my Self-Chosen Grandad look like a sylth, their cuddliness, their charm, their wit, their naughty cheekiness, their warmth, and, in a sense, most of all the feeling that with them I felt protected from the harsh world of responsibility. So, I can fully relate emotionally and psychologically to Prince Hal’s choice of his ‘other’ Dad – Sir John Falstaff – who for him provided a world ever so far removed from that of his Dad, King Henry IV, and the responsibility of his birthright to become King Henry V. Of course, my own life is also far removed from the much more heightened drama of Shakespeare’s ‘Henry IV, Parts 1&2’, except that I had to study that first part for ‘O’ Level English Literature, and at the time, that felt much more serious an endeavour, than watching Robert Icke’s adaptation of the two plays together, ‘Player Kings’. Not that I was thinking about any of that when I chose to go – Sir Ian McKellen was the draw, and though I felt somewhat anxious at the prospect of the length it might be with two plays combined – two full-length Hamlets together would be 8 hours – I decided to face it for the greater good 😉 – Oh, also persuaded by Michael Sheen’s comment that seeing Sir Ian McKellen give us his Falstaff would be a moment of theatrical history. And, I can honestly say, that for me Act I did feel like it flew by in the matter of moments – in reality 2 hours! (Act 2 felt a little slower, and some fatigue set in, but that can be forgiven, and no marks docked off as a result 😉)

My high school introduced me to the task of learning about ways to analyse and assess Shakespeare, and my Mum introduced me to a profound deep love, emotional experience and appreciation of it. Similarly, the ‘Newsreader’ characters in the opening of ‘Player Kings’ – courtiers to Henry IV – introduced us to the context of the history and serious politics of the play – with Shakespeare in prose mode – and then with a blast of intense, lively jollity (and a dash of almost nudity and crudity!), we are transported to The Boar’s Head Tavern on Eastcheap, whilst Shakespeare’s language is transformed to its highly expressive emotional poetic. In spite of once playing one of the ‘newsreaders’, (Salarino in ‘The Merchant of Venice’), I tend to struggle with the newsy or exposition bits in Shakespeare’s plays. And during that part of ‘Player Kings’, I was a little worried about whether I’d follow it. It’s oh so many years since those studies at school 😉. But, once ‘Plump Jack’ appears, slouched back in his armchair with his large, rotund belly presented to us in all its glory 😉, and Hal (Toheeb Jimoh) and fellow riotous reprobates dance around him, I knew all would be well 😊.

The captions like scene headers in a script giving us time and place in lights above the action on stage really help the audience as well, together with just a few modern expressions being allowed in. We are placed now as well as then, so to speak. This is a modern dress version of Shakespeare. For me that felt fine, but I know others disliked it. Staging-wise, I also really liked the use of the arras/curtain to change scenes - each time one or other of the performers drew the arras just enough to conceal one part of the stage, whilst doing their ‘business’, giving time for actors and props to get in place behind it, so when drawn back again, you’re in the next scene. Really simple yet really clever and effective. I also love the use of music – Countertenor singer Henry Jenkinson is exceptional in his performances of ‘I Vow to Thee My Country’ and ‘Jerusalem’ and other themes, whilst composer Laura Marling created a wonderfully haunting soundtrack to the battles and chases including – and there’s a long story around my trying to identify this lol – sections from Massive Attack’s ‘Angel’, and similar tracks.

Robert Icke’s adaptation is very Falstaff-heavy – no pun actually intended – but, I am certainly not complaining, and I think it was deliberate to really give as much meat – and maybe beloved sack – as possible for Sir Ian to use in his performance. I honestly don’t remember, Henry IV being more about Falstaff than anybody else, though Henry IV has always felt like a bit part as the titular character. Prince Harry/Hal does feel like a supporting role to Falstaff in this production, though, for me, the essence of the play was always around the future Henry V growing up and coming of age whilst facing the huge conflict of choice between his two father figures and a life of fun & frivolity or a life of serious responsibility. Toheeb Jimoh’s Harry is gently calm, whilst giving us a sense of all sorts of emotion lying beneath. His smile is so engaging and hints at secrets he might be teasing us with and he handles Shakespearean poetic language with ease. Sir Ian McKellen is exceptional, an exquisitely attentive master to every single detail of Falstaff, including all the mannerisms and bodily noises from an overweight sack-addict performed so naturally, as well as the acerbic wit, pomposity and wonderful, engaging, yet at times shocking confidences with the audience. He gives us a figure we might love to hate, which in some ways is a bit of a shame. Like my overweight, cuddly grandfather figures, I remember Falstaff as being more endearing somehow. That doesn’t in any way take from the tour de force of Ian’s phenomenally impressive performance, but does take something from the power of Hal’s rejection of him at the end. Or, could it be after all that I know the play too well. I certainly never forget – in part as my Mum used to ‘perform’ it for me – the two-chair therapy session with Falstaff playing Hal and Hal his own father the King and the lines from Falstaff, ‘… Banish Plump Jack,… and You Banish The World…’, with Hal -supposedly as Henry IV – replying ‘I do, I will’. It somehow feels actually he is speaking for himself, which takes away from the drama of what should be an emotional shock at the end. That said, Toheeb and Ian were a supreme double-act, which I will treasure having seen for the rest of my life.

I feel I have really neglected the rest of the cast of characters in this. Richard Coyle played a very serious, troubled Henry IV very well indeed. Clare Perkins was an excellent Mistress Quickly, and everyone else ably played their parts (for some actors multiple parts), but were somehow outshone by that extraordinary star presence on stage. Robert Icke’s direction did produce one shock for me. Hal discovers Falstaff on the battlefield and believes him to be dead. Hal exits, and the curtain starts to come down. I was thinking ‘Oh goodness, he really is dead… but surely not… but yes the curtain is coming down… but…’ And then Sir John-Ian Falstaff-McKellen rises up repeating one of the endearing insults Hal has piled on him thinking him gone. Just as – contrary to his own concern and worry about playing Falstaff - Sir Ian McKellen rises up as the supreme star of this production, made so clear at the final, true, curtain call. As a friend said, William Shakespeare himself would have given him a standing ovation.

(Rated 4/5)

And this time...
Not quite perfectly excellent so I'm taking a mark off ;)!
Still great cast, great writer, great production! But perhaps in a strange way it can't quite match up in emotion and drama with its prequel. Reports on Shakespeare's own writing history differ; some say he planned the entire Hollow Crown series - in effect as the story of the legacy on Henry V of his father's gaining the thrown by killing Richard II, others that Henry IV Part 1 was so well received by the audience, that William wrote a sequel. And are sequels ever as good?! In my experience of current movie sequels usually not.

Still, this is powerful drama. What does it really mean to Henry IV to die and how is he coping with the guilt of the manner of his gaining the thrown? What is he feeling about the prospect of his errant son, Hal, becoming King? How do they resolve things between father and son if at all? And does Hal really banish "plump Jack" and his other non-Royal friends? Or instead does he favour them and honour them?

Life as a royal at the time of these Henrys, and even later in Shakespeare's time was so different to today. Watching Tom as Hal in Part I, I couldn't help thinking of our young Prince Harry and how he would face these issues? He is happily interacting with 'common people' but these days that is so encouraged! (Of course it is his brother William, who we expect to be in Hal's position, but I'm sure William will also not even consider banishing anyone or stopping his friendships with his more lowly subjects! The very idea may seem farcical to us now.) The pressure on them is so much less in that sense. They have been part of revolutionising the monarchy in any case. The crown is perhaps not such a heavy burden as it was. The responsibility and power less. But monarchs still a sacrifice of normal life and cope with being celebrated (or not!).

And so Hal fully becomes Henry V next Saturday...

http://www.facebook.com/TheRestrictedReview

Twitter: @RestrictReview

The Restricted Review

Thursday, 13 June 2024

Player Kings – Noel Coward Theatre – Saturday 8th June 2024

Monday, 16 July 2012

‘The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part II’ - BBC2 - Saturday 14th July 2012

Monday, 9 July 2012

‘The Hollow Crown: Henry IV Part I’ - BBC2 - Saturday 7th July 2012