IMDb > "Great Performances" King Lear (1974) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb

Reviews & Ratings for
"Great Performances" King Lear (1974)

« Prev | 319 of 364 Episodes | Next »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Index 6 reviews in total 

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Three words: James Earl Jones

10/10
Author: brzeczyk from Poland
28 October 2005

I have always *felt* that James Earl Jones is a great actor. Unfortunately, I've only seen him in a handful fairly unimpressive movies, I've also known his voice-over work. However, I always had a feeling that this actor is capable of much more than he normally has a chance to show. I have bought the DVD of this production of King Lear because of James Earl Jones although I was not entirely sure what to expect.

Mr Jones' performance surpassed my bravest expectations! James Earl Jones is born for the role of King Lear! I get goosebumps when he delivers the monologues, like the one from Act II scene IV: "You think I'll weep. No, I'll not weep: I have full cause of weeping; but this heart shall break into a hundred thousand flaws, Or ere I'll weep. O fool, I shall go mad!" I have been watching this phenomenal performance for many times now and I can't get enough! I am so grateful that this unique New York open-air performance has been taped and released on DVD. Otherwise, one of the most impressive and moving theatrical performances given by an extremely gifted but underrated actor would get lost.

B.

Was the above review useful to you?

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

The greatest voice in the world

10/10
Author: Mr_Mirage from Mishawaka, IN
13 March 2001

Read the cast listing again... think about it... Rosalind Cash, Raul Julia, Rene Auberjenois, Paul Sorvino... James Earl Jones as Lear... the best voice in the biz, period...

I am a die hard Sir Laurence fan, and this is the version of Lear I prefer. It is alive, and angry, and funny, and violent, and dirty, and everything we are told Shakespeare CAN be and very rarely is: entertainment on a grand scale.

Was the above review useful to you?

4 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

memorable and significant

10/10
Author: dldutton from United States
23 April 2006

This was one of the great experiences of my life, seeing this production on television, and it formed an impression that helped me develop my love for Shakespeare. The open stage in Central Park at night, with nature and the city looming in the background is the ideal venue for this great play. The titanic James Earl Jones makes Lear a force of nature, and the storm does indeed seem to be coming from inside him. I have seen other Lears, but this is the only one that represents the life and breadth and humor of this play with reducing it to an existentialist parade of stereotypes. And Rene Auborjonois' portrayal of Edgar is the quintessential performance of the role.

I also have a vivid memory of Nikki Giovanni's answer to the question of this Lear being accessible to urban audiences, "You don't know King Lear, you don't know your Mama."

Right on.

Was the above review useful to you?

3 out of 6 people found the following review useful:

A generally fine production

8/10
Author: brainmeatjuice from United States
7 December 2006

Jones is good, it's true. He delivers a satisfactory performance in Acts I and I, but he really makes the role his own when he appears, his wits completely "turned," in Act IV Scene vi. I've seen many Lears who can spew curses and invoke the elements. Few can really pull off "Lear mad," and this, to me, is what makes Jones's performance special.

Cordelia sucked.

Regan sucked.

Goneril was decent.

Kent was decent, but Kent is an easy part.

Albany was good.

I thought Edmund was actually pretty convincing. His "astrology" in Act II Scene I was hilarious.

Edgar. Hm. I think a lot of people are wowed by actors who do a lot of jumping around and shouting. It's true that his physical acting is impressive on stage, but it's not an interpretation of the role I agree with. I live in San Francisco, and I see homeless lunatics every day. That's not how they act. They just don't have the energy for all that jumping around. They're half-present, and they mumble as much as they shout. This Edgar followed a fairly standard interpretation, but for me, I doesn't work.

Sorvino was excellent as Gloucester. He imbued the role with a touch of vulnerability that did so much. Gloucester's actions are rash and belligerent. But Sorvino makes his rashness believable, by showing his weakness and perhaps his own self doubt.

I am always disappointed with film productions of Shakespeare, because they always de-emphasize or even cut out the best lines. In this case, they chopped out the messenger's speech in IV.iii, which is simply the Bard's best stuff, and they downplayed Gloucester's beautiful lines in IV.i, where he hires Poor Tom to lead him to his death. Shakespeare had a way of "hiding" the real poetry in the play. When he chose to really use his poetic talent, he would often put the poetry in the mouth of a slave, a messenger, or some unimportant character. Sadly, these lines are frequently lost or hurried through, and that is the case with this production.

When I saw the cover, which shows Jones and a black Cordelia in bonds, I was afraid they were going to make _Lear_ into a race play, by having black actors play all the good characters and white actors play all the bad ones. Fortunately, they didn't stoop to that. There were plenty of black actors and white actors on both sides of the tragedy. It does make you wonder what the producers were going for. Cordelia is portrayed by a black actress. Goneril is definitely part black, but light-skinned, like Jones. Regan is played by a dark-complected but probably not black actress. Edmund has a darkish complexion. Presumably if the daughters were all white, it would color Lear's threat in II.iv differently:

I would divorce me from thy mother's tomb, Sepulchring an adultress.

Was the above review useful to you?

6 out of 12 people found the following review useful:

Viewable because of Jones.

Author: timbasa77 from United States
27 August 2005

Not an altogether excellent production. Many cast members don't seem 100% suited to their character or particularly invested. The Fool just sort of spouts his lines, which is unfortunate because his character is so integral to the play's message, Raul Julia as Edmund seems bored with his character or striving too hard for deadpan, and the daughters are just bad across the board. But James Earl Jones' Lear is an absolute revelation. It's difficult to believe this is a live performance, because he hits every dramatic note so precisely and throws himself so recklessly into the role that you can scarcely believe it when he's able to do it again in the next scene. He gets totally lost in the character and when watching this performance we forget he is the vigorous, majestic, noble James Earl Jones and totally accept him as the belligerent, feeble, arrogant King Lear.

Was the above review useful to you?

0 out of 41 people found the following review useful:

Beware of old age?

Author: ivan-22 from Los Angeles
14 September 2003

I can never understand Shakespeare. What's he trying to say, if anything? That old age is a misfortune that ruins everyone's life? I can discern no other message in this pretentious jumble. They say the Bard is often quoted. The only thing in this play I've heard quoted is "more sinned against than sinning". Brilliant! Let's quote it again: "more sinned against than sinning"! Once more: "more sinned against than sinning". So good! Bob Hope has more quotable one-liners than the Bard, and I think Henny Youngman is wittier than Bob Hope. I will keep trying to give the Bard a chance to impress me, but this is reputed to be his greatest play.

Was the above review useful to you?


Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history