Continue with Google
>
Chimes at Midnight Reviews
Falstaff (Chimes at Midnight) is on a shortlist of greatest films ever made. It is the greatest Shakespearean adaptation in existence. The poor dubbing even somehow adds to the film's greatness. It's as if someone back in the 1400s had a cinema camera and filmed it. Certain elements of the film which might be considered technical flaws in another film are assets to Chimes at Midnight. Orson Welles was born to play Falstaff. I highly recommend! 100/100 🏆
Welles is obviously a great Falstaff but not in the ways you'd expect. His bold performance consistently defies conventional takes on the character.
I watched it when really tired and fell asleep :( Essentially its a lot of Shakespearean dialogue outside of a play. Good to see Orson Welles. the battle scene was gruesome.
Welles twistedly demonstrating a version of himself and Gielgud glibly delivering presumably the best Shakespeare monologue in cinema history
Superlatively photographed and well-acted version of Shakespeare's Henry IV Parts 1 and 2, concentrating on the changing relationship between Falstaff and Hal, as the responsibilities of kingship force a cooling of their hedonistic games. The final cold rebuttal and Falstaff's subsequent death are especially moving. A very fine adaptation by Welles.
Superb Shakespeare adaptation by a great director, with an excellent twist on a character of Falstaff and probably the best of Welles's acting career on display. In fact, this is might as well be an improvement on a how Falstaff was handled by the master himself and all that is communicated by just one look and a smile.
If Olivier was the master of Shakespeare the dramatist and Kurosawa the most keen interpreter of Shakespeare the philosopher, then Welles may be very well be the the filmmaker with the greatest understanding of Shakespeare the humanist. What defines this director's take on the film is its tragicomic depiction of mankind - a character motivated by base desires whose worldiness and wit allows him to float between shades of morality while remaining endearing. Falstaff wanders between taverns and amusements with a sense of carelessness, before the jovial tone suddenly gives way to an unrelenting, mud-filled battle, which for all its brutality does not dim his spark; it is only an ultimate betrayal of social structure that deals a mortal blow to a cowardly, boastful knight in patchwork armor who found satisfaction in ridicule. While Welles is the real focus of the film, the performances are all around excellent, with Gielgud's Henry IV forming a compelling presence whenver he takes the screen, and Webb's doddering and strange Justice Shallow is a great bit of humorous casting. The thematic heft and weight of the performances are complemented by sweeping sets, creative camera angles, powerful use of light and shadow, all of which lends itself to a great rendition of a character that grows beyond his original supporting roles. What if Welles' notorious obesity and drunkenness later in life was only the manifestation of decades of ambition, to employ method acting in pursuit to properly represent one of Shakespeare's most discussed characters? (4/5)
Chimes at Midnight is a taut and unique achievement, bounding from a screenplay carefully and cagily cobbled together from five separate but related Shakespearian plays. Likewise, Welles' editing here is downright pioneering. At every phase, it has a formal snap-crackle-pop that keeps things constantly fresh, never at all soggy. The world Welles has built on a shoestring is tremendously admirable. One of the several experts on the numerous bonus features tells about how he personally had a say in every single costume on screen. Long beams and cross beans with support beams, all made of solid, aged wood, are so ubiquitous and tactile as the scenery, one can almost feel the splinters.
Very masterful cinematography. All the wide angles showing off all the beauty of the locations and subject matter are very interesting. And the restoration of this movie looks immaculate. This movie reminds me so much of The Seventh Seal. The look and feel of it all. The aesthetic. Just a little more campy and funny. I just wish the dialogue wasn't so Shakespearean. It kind of throws me off when they speak that way and especially if I can't understand some things they say. It takes away from the whole experience. I didn't really feel compelled to watch the entire movie but I'd definitely give it another go. It seems interesting enough.
Orson Welles' classic; discarded as drivel when released but has withstood the test of time. Welles' Falstaff seems like self parody but he hits the mark solidly and the viewer is given a great film.
An incredible Shakespeare adaptation with gripping performances and phenomenal images, this is a forgotten masterpiece from Orson Welles.
Like much of Shakespeare, it's hard to appreciate on the first viewing. Good to see Welles working with Gielgud though.
Chimes at Midnight is a decent film. It is about Sir John Falstaff as the roistering companion to young Prince Hal. Orson Welles and Jeanne Moreau give good performances. The screenplay is a little slow in places. Orson Welles also did an alright job directing this movie. I liked this motion picture because of both the humor and drama.
If it is hard to understand Shakespeare, Chimes at Midnight tells the story beautifully with fast, innovative editing, magnificent lighting and seemingly perfect composition in photography that showed how fantastic Welles' gutsy project became.
Welles is obviously a great Falstaff but not in the ways you'd expect. His bold performance consistently defies conventional takes on the character.
Welles tackles a couple of Shakespeare's greatest histories, and the result is one master doing another complete justice. The movie perfectly captures the tension between responsibility and farce, which is the central theme of the plays.
Never have a Shakespeare adoption been this crispy and entertaining. Welles is using his every pound of flesh and even more, to bind humour and witts into his underlying goal. Set to live in brutal honest locations and giving us somehow the feeling of dive into the past, yet into the madness of kings.
CHIMES AT MIDNIGHT was Orson Welles' favorite film of his own catalog. It's was a passion project for decades to tell the tale of Falstaff and his father/best-friend relationship with Prince Hal (later Henry V). Failing upon release, the film gained cult status by legal issues keeping it from being seen often. It's obvious watching the film how much Welles loves Falstaff and the other characters in history and Shakespeare. He loves them so much that the film is often bloated and drags; scenes go on forever meandering through the dialogue and plotting (hope you are familiar with the basics of the story; I am and was still somewhat lost over who was who and fighting whom for what several times) It doesn't help that the directorial touches in great camera work that define CITIZEN KANE and TOUCH OF EVIL are nowhere to be seen. The camera work is merely point and shoot and is filmed in the same dull grey causing the image to bleed into one dull color. This could be so the audience will focus on the characters and dialogue. Despite the long-windedness they are interesting to watch and very well portrayed; led by Welles' wonderfully bombastic performance of Falstaff. I'm honestly torn: I was simultaneous bored and drawn to it. I suppose it's the strength of Welles and other performers on a backdrop of a dully shot, over-long film. The battle sequence in the center of the production is very impressive though; perhaps the most engaging part of the film (particually Falstaff barely moving in armor) A good run though with edit may make a better film. C... I guess? From my site: http://www.ageeknamedbob.com/#!siff-2016/wiq67