MOVIEmeter
SEE RANK
Down 9,986 this week

The Life and Death of King Richard III (1912)
"Richard III" (original title)

 -  Drama  -  15 October 1912 (USA)
5.7
Your rating:
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 -/10 X  
Ratings: 5.7/10 from 158 users  
Reviews: 7 user | 1 critic

Richard of Gloucester uses manipulation and murder to gain the English throne.

Writers:

, (play)
0Check in
0Share...

On Disc

at Amazon

Editors' Spotlight

IMDb: What to Watch - The One I Love

Interview with Charlie McDowell and Mark Duplass


User Lists

Related lists from IMDb users

a list of 49 titles
created 15 Oct 2011
 
a list of 31 titles
created 20 Feb 2012
 
list image
a list of 543 titles
created 29 Jun 2013
 
a list of 73 titles
created 09 Aug 2013
 

Connect with IMDb


Share this Rating

Title: The Life and Death of King Richard III (1912)

The Life and Death of King Richard III (1912) on IMDb 5.7/10

Want to share IMDb's rating on your own site? Use the HTML below.

Take The Quiz!

Test your knowledge of The Life and Death of King Richard III.

Photos

Learn more

People who liked this also liked... 

Richard III (1995)
Drama | War
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.5/10 X  

The classic Shakespearean play about a murderously scheming king staged in an alternative fascist England setting.

Director: Richard Loncraine
Stars: Ian McKellen, Annette Bening, Jim Broadbent
Short | War
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.3/10 X  
Directors: Luigi Romano Borgnetto, Giovanni Pastrone
Stars: Luigi Romano Borgnetto, Giovanni Casaleggio, Madame Davesnes
Three Ages (1923)
Comedy
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.2/10 X  

The misadventures of Buster in three separate historical periods.

Directors: Edward F. Cline, Buster Keaton
Stars: Buster Keaton, Margaret Leahy, Wallace Beery
Drama | Fantasy | Horror
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.5/10 X  

A poor student rescues a beautiful countess and soon becomes obsessed with her. A sorcerer makes a deal with the young man to give him fabulous wealth and anything he wants, if he will sign... See full summary »

Directors: Stellan Rye, Paul Wegener
Stars: Paul Wegener, John Gottowt, Grete Berger
Short | Drama | Fantasy
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.1/10 X  

Based on the story by Charles Dickens: Ebenezer Scrooge is well known for his harsh, miserly ways, until he is visited by the ghost of his former business partner, and then by three other spirits.

Directors: J. Searle Dawley, Charles Kent, and 1 more credit »
Stars: Marc McDermott, Charles Ogle, William Bechtel
Fantomas (1913)
Crime | Drama
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.8/10 X  

Fantômas makes it as the emperor of Crime. First is the robbery at the Royal Palace Hotel. Then he abducts Lord Beltham. As Fantômas' fame increases actor Valgrand creates the rôle of ... See full summary »

Director: Louis Feuillade
Stars: René Navarre, Georges Melchior, Renée Carl
Greed (1924)
Drama
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.8/10 X  

The sudden fortune won from a lottery fans such destructive greed that it ruins the lives of the three people involved.

Director: Erich von Stroheim
Stars: Gibson Gowland, Zasu Pitts, Jean Hersholt
Cleopatra (1912)
Drama | History
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 5.2/10 X  

The fabled queen of Egypt's affair with Roman general Marc Antony is ulimately disastrous for both of them.

Director: Charles L. Gaskill
Stars: Helen Gardner, Pearl Sindelar, Miss Fielding
Richard III (2005)
Drama
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 7.1/10 X  

Shakespeare's classic play is transferred to warring gang factions of a notorious, contemporary Brighton housing project.

Director: Maximilian Day
Stars: Matthew Beggs, Michael Bowlby, Judy Carey
Frankenstein (1910)
Short | Horror | Sci-Fi
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.6/10 X  

Frankenstein, a young medical student, trying to create the perfect human being, instead creates a misshapen monster. Made ill by what he has done, Frankenstein is comforted by his fiancée ... See full summary »

Director: J. Searle Dawley
Stars: Mary Fuller, Charles Ogle, Augustus Phillips
Animation | Short
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.5/10 X  

Short film of 300 individually painted images.

Director: Émile Reynaud
Biography | Crime | Drama
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 6.4/10 X  

True story of notorious Australian outlaw Ned Kelly (1855-80).

Director: Charles Tait
Stars: Elizabeth Tait, John Tait, Norman Campbell
Edit

Cast

Complete credited cast:
Robert Gemp ...
Frederick Warde ...
Richard, Duke of Gloucester, afterward Richard III
Albert Gardner ...
James Keane ...
George Moss ...
Howard Stuart ...
Virginia Rankin ...
Violet Stuart ...
Carey Lee ...
Carlotta De Felice ...
Edit

Storyline

Shakespeare's tragedy of the hump-backed Duke of Gloucester, who rises to the throne of England by chicanery, treachery, and brilliance, only to find that his own methods have prepared the groundwork for his downfall. Written by Jim Beaver <jumblejim@prodigy.net>

Plot Summary | Add Synopsis

Genres:

Drama

Edit

Details

Country:

|

Language:

Release Date:

15 October 1912 (USA)  »

Also Known As:

III. Richárd  »

Box Office

Budget:

$30,000 (estimated)
 »

Company Credits

Show detailed on  »

Technical Specs

Runtime:

Sound Mix:

Color:

| (hand-tinted)

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1
See  »
Edit

Did You Know?

Trivia

Far from being a representation of a typical stage production of the play when the film was made, star Frederick Warde related in his autobiography that "I found the action of the camera necessitated entirely different methods of acting from the stage. Spontaneity must be replaced by deliberation and concentrated expression take the place of words. I had much to learn and considerable to unlearn but the director and photographer were very considerate, although my ignorance of the necessities of the camera must have tried their patience almost to the limit." See more »

Connections

Featured in Shakespeare's Women & Claire Bloom (1999) See more »

Frequently Asked Questions

This FAQ is empty. Add the first question.

User Reviews

 
Definitely a Film, Not a Play
11 February 2007 | by (Backwoods Canada) – See all my reviews

The viewer would do well to compare this film with Frank Benson's British film of the same play released in 1911, one year before Warde's. Both the similarities and differences are illuminating. The costumes are of course very similar--it would be years before modern dress Shakespeare would get onto film. The way the scenes of Edward's court are set are very similar. Such scenes were the staple of Victorian Shakespeare. Both films use narrative title cards to explain to the viewer what is going on; later in the silent era they would contain dialogue more than narration. The similarities show us what was the state of Shakespearean production and cinema standards at the time.

The major difference that one sees is that Benson tries to put you in row fifteen of the Drury lane theatre during one of his performances. The camera never moves and every shot is a long shot. You can't see Benson's face in any of them. All have what is clearly a stage set behind them, and the actors move from side to side primarily because they feel constrained by the backdrop and the footlights.

Warde's approach is best shown in a scene where Richard is riding to the Tower to do in Henry VI. It is shot outside on location. The camera is raised above head level. Richard rides from the distance toward the camera passing behind the camera to the right. It is a scene only possible in film; you could never see such a thing on stage.

Warde's camera is consistently closer to the action than Benson's so that the actor's faces are usually visible. He makes use of high level cameras to see Richard on a balcony and a crowd below and intercuts these with interiors so that one imagines the balcony to be attached to the interior.

In other words, the scenes here are conceived cinematically not theatrically. Warde was not the first to do this even in a Shakespeare film but it does make his film easier and more interesting to watch than his contemporary's.

Alas, his characterization of Richard leaves something to be desired; he stomps about like a troll from a Brothers Grimm story. Before closeups became standard, the only tool an actor could use in a silent film was his bodily movement, and Warde's lacks the subtlety to convey anything more than a caricature. As a result the film, despite being of historical interest, reasonably well paced and shot with a cinematic eye, will fail, I think, to really grip most modern viewers' interest.


3 of 3 people found this review helpful.  Was this review helpful to you?

Message Boards

Recent Posts
rubbish wapdoy1

Contribute to This Page

Create a character page for:
?