Self-important, over-dramatic, uninspired.

Nice effects though.

A Brilliant Conflict

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Although this BBC televised play would as a matter of course lack the production values that Laurence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh brought to their films of Henry V, this adaption is second to none in the quality of the performance. In fact David Gwillim who had played Prince Hal in both parts of Henry IV grew into the role in a way that Olivier and Branagh never did.It is interesting to speculate how history might have changed had Henry V gotten a few more years. While British historians proclaim one of the greatest of monarchs, the French see him as slightly below Hitler as one of the greatest enemies of their country. As well they should, the English got battlefield glory, the French buried battlefield dead as the 100 Years War was fought in their country. He died a couple of years older than that other conqueror Alexander the Great and had both of them lived who knows what they might have achieved.Henry V is fulfilling the promise of greatness that he showed so little of as Prince Hal. The play concerns itself with his taking full command of the throne, executing some conspirators who were planning to assassinate him, and then achieving one of the great battlefield triumphs of the Middle Ages, the English victory at Agincourt over a French army that outnumbered them. Gwillim plays Henry with authority and decisiveness that rank with what Olivier, Branagh and others have done with the part.The BBC series of Shakespeare plays were productions of the highest quality. I only wish that they were all available in this country as this one was. I saw it when it first aired on American public television back in 1979 and it is still as good as I remembered it from then.

Reviewer "anne-25" from England was evidently so exercised by what she perceived as shortcomings in this excellent production of "Henry V" that she neglected to listen to the words. In the opening Chorus, we are advised that, since the entire combatants of Agincourt could not be incorporated into the production, we must "into a thousand pieces divide one man." A little further along, the Chorus enjoins us thusly: "O, pardon! since a crooked figure may attest in little place a million." Shakespeare obviously knew something that "anne-25" does not -- it's unfeasible to expect two medieval armies to be incorporated into a humble stage production; therefore, we must use our imaginations, as per, again from the Chorus, "upon your imaginary forces work." Even Olivier's and Branagh's film versions left a lot to be desired in this aspect. Olivier's Agincourt was confusing and brief (although the arrow flights, abetted by Walton's glorious music, were stunning); and Branagh's, although more realistic and bloody (fought in the rain as was the real Agincourt), made us suffer through excruciating and over-used slow motion, a device that never adds to action sequences. And by my count, there were far fewer than sixty thousand French soldiers in either production.So, "anne-25," a little advice -- listen to the Chorus next time, and perhaps you'll enjoy yourself much more.

The production has been well-covered above. I just want to add that, to me, this is deep Shakespeare without piffle-paffle, as the good Captain Fluellen would say. It presents the full story as Will wrote it, with minimal, if any, cuts. As an American, I must say that British actors never cease to amaze me. They must get a lot more training than Yank actors do. For instance, Tim Wylton as the 'actively annoying' Captain Fluellen to my mind created a memorable comic character. He made me laugh or at least smile in every speech he made, which is exactly Fluellen's purpose (other than representing the rough, honest courage of the common soldier.) And I woke up thinking about his portrayal this morning, and I was still chuckling.I particularly wish to thank 'gerlynga' for his or her thoughtful review clearly based on a deep knowledge of the play's many productions. I look forward to reading all her stuff.

I'll start with a correction to another review: Like most or all of the other BBC Shakespeare productions I've watched, this has some minor abridgments, e.g., the haggling about "Heir to France" in V.2. It's nothing like as extreme as the "Good Bits" approach that Branagh took, and indeed leaves in some passages that suggest that even Shakespeare nods, such as Fluellen's nattering about Macedonian and Monmouth rivers immediately after mourning the massacre of the boys.Like most of the other BBC Shakespeare I've watched, it's mostly competent, low-key, and not very dramatic. (After Olivier and Branagh, it was kind of interesting to see a sedate Crispin's Day speech.) There are some outright mistakes in the directing, at least in the light of Branagh. I don't see how anyone, for instance, could ever have directed Nym's leave-taking from Mistress Quickly as casual. But there are bits of Shakespeare here you won't see anywhere else, so it's worth watching, once you've seen Olivier and Branagh.