2000/10/26 by Harry Keyishian · 19 citations
Arts and Humanities · #Shakespeare, Adaptation, and Literary Criticism #HAMLET (protein complex) #Hollywood #Prestige #Studio #Art #Literature #Film genre #Visual arts #Art history #Linguistics #Movie theater #Philosophy
paper · doi:10.1017/ccol0521630231.005
published in Cambridge University Press eBooks, 72-82 (Cambridge University Press)
openalex publication_date 2000/10/26 · openalex created_date 2025/10/10 · openalex updated_date 2026/07/30
Film historians have tended, naturally enough, to think of movies based on Shakespeare's works as forming a distinct genre. Such films use his words, characters and plots; they are part of performance history of his plays; their rich language stands apart from standard Hollywood dialogue; and they were, at least back in the days of the studio system, perceived as 'prestige' works, distinct from the standard mass-market film product. It has often seemed, in Geoffrey O'Brien's words, as if 'there are regular movies, and then there are Shakespeare movies'. Recent Shakespeare films have so openly and conspicuously embraced traditional film forms that the distinction has become quite obviously untenable. But even Lynda E. Boose and Richard Burt, who applaud this development, speak of a past era of ‘direct’ or ‘straight Shakespeare’, a model they associate with the efforts of Olivier and Welles (and whose last gasp they identify as Stuart Burge’s 1970 Julius Caesar), which has been succeeded by a period they celebrate, in which the playwright couples creatively with popular culture.