Richard II 3.2 from Shakespeare's Globe

From the BBC4 broadcast, aired 7 September 2003. This is the other thing (besides "this earth, this realm, this England") that everyone knows from the play -- the speech with "sad stories of the death of kings." Mark Rylance plays Richard II, Chu Omambala is the Duke of Aumerle, William Osbourne is the Bishop of Carlisle, and Patrick Brennan is Sir Stephen Scroope.

[@henryrobinson8219]

If acting were supposed to be formulaic, it would lose its capacity to surprise us. I admire Rylance for trying an approach I’ve never seen before. What is more apparent than anything else in this speech is the way Richard is using humour and light-heartedness to hide profound fear and grief and loneliness. It’s beautiful and intuitive on Rylance’s part. You feel from the very start that everything is not as it should be and it’s paced so delicately that his breakdown at the end of it catches you completely off guard

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Really? Is that the intention? Nice try to defend the indefensible. Why then is the audience laughing?

[@richardwilliam8007]

You Mr Yorick,.. are but an old turd. (Listen)

[@MrYorickJenkins]

If that is your attempt to be poetical , it is not very impressive

[@richardwilliam8007]

Yorick Jenkins it is such a pleasure to take notes from a man who directs the plays at his local village hall 😂😂

[@MrYorickJenkins]

I expect the idea was not his but given to him by the producer. The idea is not original. What I object to is not the psychological realism on which the notion is based (humour to disguise grief) but that the humour, the determination to get cheap laughs out of the audience, is based on the fact that the twentyfirst century audience will tend to sense that there is something absurd about this admiration of monarchy and when that is highlighted by a comical pausing and accentuation, which any half way competent performer can carry off, the sense of the absurd will turn to mocking laughter. .The acting is poor independently of the dumbing down and the poor acting is not only Rylance's, all of the actors here look and sound second rate, would be judged only adequate hardly in a sixth form school performance. A key manifestation of poor acting in Shakespeare is that the audience or listener cannot escape the sense that the language is "foreign" typically "Shakespearean", therefore alien. The sense is inescapable that "I am watching a classic being acted" and this sense is stronger than the tragic of the tragedy or comic of the comedy or historic of the history. Kenneth Branach's Henry V or Olivier's Hamlet escape this formality this sense of "I am acting Shakespeare" to the extent that the audience "forgets" it is Shakespeare. Seeing Olivier in Hamlet and comparing that perfomance to this, reveals an unbridgeable guilf of talent between the two actors. If anyone had the fortune to see Susan Hampshire as Rosalind in As you Like it in was it 1974? in London, they will only shake their heads at this miserable show.

[@steerpike66]

I thinks it's masterly. He actually has the skill to play the most dolorous line for laughs and then slowly reclaims the tragedy. I've seen this happen with great singers; they get delighted laughs as the audience hears a favourite song, which dies away to spellbound melancholy as the power of the music takes over.

[@carmencollor1224]

Hear, hear.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

What absurb hyperbole for a conceited stuck up second rate actor. Are you namby boy Rylance's agent by any chance?

[@jacobprice2579]

I have to say, the humorous take Mark Rylance went for in this role caught me completely off guard. David Tennant, in an equally fantastic performance, screams and pulls his hair out and it’s uncomfortable but mesmerising. Ben Whishaw in the 2012 TV adaption is melancholy and quiet, but captivating as an effeminate man who is simply in over his head. Humour is a new one on me and as of writing I haven’t seen the rest of this production, but it puts a unique spin on this scene. Shakespeare is what you make of it. He only wrote the words after all.

[@secondact77]

This performance is so memorable, humane, endearing...something in his delivery calls to my mind George W. Bush; perhaps it is the little chuckle and sad smile he employs after lines of such pathos. I love it.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Pass the sick bag.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Perhaps because they are both ham actors putting on act of niceness?

[@J.B24]

Its the moment where Richard realizes he's not all that.

[@stormmichel373]

I really rather like this, it’s a great juxtaposition to Tennant scooting across the stage tearing out his hair (a brilliantly visceral and uncomfortable scene) this is so… sad. It’s funny, but tragic and quiet and hits something very true about the monologue and the character.

[@artbrent23]

This is your opinion. A subjective reaction. I find no slapstick in the scene. Rylance finds the humor in it and by contrast makes the poignancy and awkwardness of Richard's state even more painful. He is a character who is unsuited for his position, but nonetheless feelingly human; therefore, an uncomfortable humor is appropriate. The audience finds that moment funny because there is a certain absurdity in it and Rylance finds it and communicates it. Shakespeare is full of contrast. as is life.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

You may not find any slapstick, but the intention was clearly to make it funny, as can be heard at once from Rylance's deliberate stress on eg "tell sad stories of the death of kings", which to modern ears will sound slightly bizarre. Stressed, it becomes ridiculous. Rylance obliges. The audience chortles and laughs.

[@swannavon]

Yes, yes! Well said about how the language works in this speech! So beautiful!

[@MrYorickJenkins]

The language is beautiful. The actor makes a travesty of it.

[@vrsq0863]

you can feel the tragedy in it. the humanity and the genuine mortal fear. excellent rendition.

[@naly202]

I was shocked at the laughs at first, but in the end, I had to agree it's a fresh interpretation. Strangely enough, the chap interpreting Richard II looks and sounds like Kenneth Connor in the Carry Ons: someone hiding profound sadness under a mask of amusing clumsiness.

[@vintagebrew1057]

Yes, the Tragic Clown mask.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Its not a fresh interpretation. The suspicion of Richard's homosexulaity was there from the start. It was Shakespeare who hints at it but avoids it. Rylance with no origionality at all plays it up for laughs. Cheap, slick, facile.

[@NewKwanTung07]

Wow. This is the best rendition of Richard's rumination of kingship and death. Such poignancy. Such depth. Such unrelenting pathos. And Rylance's designed slip at 2:40 - What genius!

[@NewKwanTung07]

This is one of the outstanding traits of his acting. At particular scenes he deliberately hesitates or stumbles to add weight to a later, more important line. Simultaneously it gives a brief pulse of revelation of what is the true psyche of his Richard. Consider the scene above. The line reads: "I live with bread like you". But by making Richard slip, Rylance shows that the king (both the person and the position) is and feels alone. This loneliness was always subdued and covered by the golden decadence of court. That is now being taken away. His emptiness strikes him. The facade begins to crack. And where does Richard fall apart? At 2:50, when he says, "...need friends." Hollow is the crown indeed.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Poignancy? A nancy boy crying and you call that poignancy?

[@MrYorickJenkins]

I hope you are being ironical but fear you are not. this is ham acting at its very worst

[@richardwilliam8007]

Ladys and gentlemen! The homophobic bigot MR YORICK JENKINS! Peace ye fat guts! HV A2 S2

[@richardwilliam8007]

Your comments are the rankest compound of villainous smell that ever offended nostril. MWW A3 S5

[@RobSinclaire]

Mark Rylance - thank you Sir, excellent!

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Appalling

[@tndowns1122]

I could not agree more. The globe often plays up the comedy so much that it is misses the heart of the drama. This is a very sad, ironic speech. Here it seems as if Mark is winking at the audience.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Yes, this is a nasty intentional denigration/persiflage, intended to get cheap laughs and keep the punters rolling in.

[@Sjcb99]

2:39 Him stammering to show how he's starting to be overwhelmed with his emotions right before he breaks down and starts to cry, 👨‍🍳 💋

[@EvilEddtheRed]

Heartbreaking.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Heartbreakingly dreadful

[@richardwilliam8007]

Your life you mean? Come on Yorick, move out of your mums house and stop directing those awful am drams at the village hall. (he actually does)

[@rfcbeilfuss]

matthewmacphail12, you said it!!! Indeed, you said it! I agree with you 250%! Well put. I've just had the pleasure of working with Giles Block, the Globe's text coach, and friend of Mark's, and I can now definately understand, and feel, what the Globe stands for: truth indeed; and its complexities, and its ambiguities: humour and sadness.

[@dglekjofg]

Many thanks for posting!

[@strangebrooch]

I seem to recall he's going to be doing an original-practices tour of Othello (as Iago, yay!). Also, he's in "The Other Boleyn Girl" and is by far the best thing about it.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

He might succeed as Iago. Not much acting required for him in that role I suspect

[@rosiecider100]

I saw lots of Shakespeare plays last year.The Globe is on my to do list this year!

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Getting British sit com videos might be more amusing, and certianyl cheaper and better acted

[@MrYorickJenkins]

If you are discerning, give it a miss. Pleased with itself with producers and actors overestimating their own abilities

[@jjm121]

@orchote It's because it is said in such a passing manner. He makes light of a very serious subject; which draws - and often does - the laugh. I thought it was an interesting choice.

[@sebastianmelmoth685]

Exceptional

[@Dous88]

@orchote i disagree. i studied shakespeare also and this and stuhlbargs are my personal favorite interpretations of richard II. but if you didn't like thats fair, everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but dont think it's a bad choice at all. gerald freedman said "theres no such thing as a bad choice, theres wat works and what doesnt work" this works pretty well.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Work to do what? If you judge a tinopener by whether it works, you are probably talking about its efficiency in opening tins but you might be talking about profit or design, so the expression "it works" needs to be defined. If you mean it "works" in rawing punters and getting backsides on seats and raises cheap laughs and gives American tourists the feeling they've "experienced Shakespeare" in THOSE senses I dare say "it works".

[@Dous88]

@@MrYorickJenkins 11 years later! Wonders of the internet. By ‘works’, I mean does it clearly and effectively communicate the story and a clear picture of an interpretation, whether you’re into it or not? I also think you may be forgetting that Shakespeare was enjoyed by the common man, the theatrics, bawdiness and direct address to audience is something that was standard, as opposed to many productions I grew up watching, lifeless, self serious and entirely unengaging to anyone but dramaturgs and scholars. Shakespeare is for everyone, and I love to see an audience engaged as opposed to tolerating it because it’s supposed to be great art.

[@jovanrameau3578]

Splendid!

[@abisaijorgevegaperez5289]

For what can we bequeath but our bodies our lands our souls our very best.... Interesting the Declaration of Independence ends with precisely this pledge

[@thomassimmons1950]

Fooking bloody brilliant!!!

[@MrYorickJenkins]

The comment of the dumbed down

[@shrimpee502]

Brilliant

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Providing American tourists with a cheap imitation of Kenneth Williams is by no stretch of the imagination brilliant.

[@lizclegg7556]

Great. Is Rylance in the deposition scene anywhere?

[@MegaJw99]

Rylance , Ry-is-pants more like !

[@jmharrison51]

I saw Ian Richardson play Richard in Stratford in 1974. I didn't know the play at all before then; this scene had the whole audience, everyone near me at least, in tears. It made a lasting impression on me. I saw this production at the Globe - my second live Richard - I felt kind of cheated by the way the scene was performed. There were many enjoyable things about the production as a whole, but, as you say, this was a strange directorial choice and, in my opinion, a very poor one.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

It is awful and you dont have to feel ashamed for saying so loud and clear

[@MrYorickJenkins]

You are lucky to have seen Ian Richardson.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

I agree I think Rylance is overrated. I cnat stand him.

[@dglekjofg]

I totally agree.

[@daniyalrazakazmi7249]

I wish somehow I can watch the whole play

[@CashMoneyMoore]

He's laughing at his own ineptitude.

[@Bootrosgali]

Thought we had a knock knock joke coming at 2:26

[@tomservo75]

I'd love to find the full performance of this! Anyone know where to find it?

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Hopefully trashed and forgotten

[@smnwbb]

Undoubtedly the best ever. For trash, see Tennant's self-indulgence.

[@matthewp2164]

if anyone knows where i can buy this on dvd then please tell me tell me tell me tell me tell me tell me (it's not on the globe website)

[@danielmistak9866]

I second that!

[@kapannier]

Rachel Barkley Thank you Rachel for posting this, I can't thank you enough. I have purchased this and have happily watched the entire DVD this past week.

[@mayfieldcourt]

Now go watch Ben Whishaw

[@khi590]

@schizovreni he is doing lots of new plays with great success - unforgetable - and some films (watch out in Wikipedia or just google) - the best I saw ever

[@rexivan]

oh my god, he was actually able to draw laughs from that line.. so interesting compared to more morose deliveries.

[@raoulio351996]

In this scene, Richard is distraught

[@PhillipeBosher]

Any chance you could post the whole thing? :)

[@bbbotc]

Interesting to play up the comedy... I find Rylance's Richard affable and I feel sorry for him on the level that he is inept, however, I always feel as though there is an arrogance and a self-importance in Richard's mellifluous speeches which sits a little ill here. The self-conscious poetry he delivers is shattered when he moves into the two word clauses "feel want, / Taste grief, need friends" and that's where his true nature is exposed - a failure, a man who has been "subjected" (ie made into a subject, not a King) and most importantly, a human being. A fallible human. And playing up the laughs so constantly maybe undermines the potency of this moment, but I do still find the jocular delivery quite refreshing!

[@ken-ip4ih]

This scene is just short of brilliance. I can see what Rylance was trying to do but I just wish he didn’t deliver it in such a robotic, memorised way…it came off unnatural

[@cnj67]

Why can't one see this whole performance anywhere? Or buy the blu ray or something?

[@eljoco9729]

Ayo is Macbeth good???

[@donaldwebb]

He lives with Fred

[@starclassic89]

2:38 'I live with Fred'. Only Rylance,

[@pvonberg]

Of course he goes up at the beginning. Starts recovering while dropping lines. Some cheap laughs, followed by brilliant moments.

[@libbyhargreaves6265]

lol

[@shrimpee502]

Libby Hargreaves you ‘aving a laugh?

[@MrYorickJenkins]

This scene is supposed to be serious but you might not think so from watching this.

[@shrimpee502]

Yorick Jenkins you’re an absolute fool

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Is that the best you can do? How about trying to justify this perfromance if you can instead of saying someone who disagrees with you is a fool

[@shrimpee502]

Yorick Jenkins Okay. Your original comment reveals a major problem with your understanding of acting Whose end is to hold the mirror up to nature. Rylance does several brilliant things in this scene and one of them is just that- he holds the mirror up to nature. That is to say- he achieves total realism. He does so by aiming at the truth of the present moment rather than attempting to conjure up some external imitation of an emotional state as so many other actors have done. The humor in the scene that seems to alarm you is Richard’s tool. Rylance’s Richard uses humor and levity as a weapon to combat the inevitable end of his kingship and the demons in his head. In real life when I find myself in a state of distress, sadness (I recall a few funerals where this social technique was applied) I find myself and others tend to use humor to stay above water. Sometimes a situation becomes so dire that all you can do is laugh or cry. Many of us will choose laughter. So I don’t think this performance is messy or cheap. I feel strongly that this is a brilliantly honest performance that realistically displays the human thought process and defense system in times of extreme distress and that Rylance uses the truth of the moment to elevate this often dull, one-note speech to something quite complex and extraordinary. Also you’re a fool.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Do you always call people fools who dare to disagree strongly with you? I have no problem with acting being an actor myself. What Rylance does NOT do is hold a mirror up to nature if by that you mean perform so that one might think he Is the king. throughout the perforamnce the spectator is very aware that he is Rylance very uncovincingly pretending to be a king. I do not know what you mean exactly by "aiming at the truth of the present moment" but if you mean that is how the King or anyone would have conceivably reacted in that moment then no, nobody would have put on that ham act having just heard that they had lost a kingdom, except conceivably someone of the character of Henry VI but then Shakespeare was not potraying Henry VI here but Richard II and even Henry VI in his docile madness would have been consistent and passionate and Rylance is neither. The point about the levity is that it is fake. In what way is it fake? It is fake because it is levity which would only raise laughs from an audience of another era (ours) by contrasting the sentiments of the time when the play was written with the very different sentiments of another age. The sentence let us sit down and tell sad tales of the death of kings easily sounds ridiculous to modern ears. It is easy to make fun of it just as it is easy to make fun of the Three Witches in Macbeth or the Ghost in Hamlet. Making a joke out of this speech would not amuse-how could it? spectators at the end of the sixteenth century. So it is easy , it is cheap. This is what is so demeaning about this God awful piece of acting. It is very easy to raise laughs from a modern audience like this-just make the break at the right moment and yup you've got it chortle chortle. Anyone could do it. Any half way competent schoolboy could have acted better than this. You dont need to go to RADA for that. The fact that you describe this poignant speech as "dull, one note"gives an indication of what your feelings about the play may be and I am sure the greater part of a modern audience would feel the play dull and one note so the theatre needs slapstick and cheap hamming to draw the punters. I dread to think what Rylance did to the prison speech.

[@johnnyjohnny2650]

I dunno. I find his acting silly.

[@raoulio351996]

with the thought of losing his kingdom. That is why turning it into a comical scene doesn't work. It is wholly opposite to what the scene and speech mean.

[@gknipe]

Clearly you've never watched the last 10 minutes of Blackadder Goes Forth. 'Comedy' can magnify the impact of poigniancy. Laughing at tragedy because there's nothing else left to do.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Is his weeping intentionally bad acting or part of the joke?

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Yes, but if you express this view too strongly, you will be violently insulted

[@MrYorickJenkins]

I totally agree

[@adolforodolfo6929]

I saw this at the Globe and I have to say I didn't enjoy Mark Rylance's performance at all, especially in this scene., where he throws away one of the most moving speeches Shakespeare wrote to get a few easy laughs from the audience. Having watched the re-runs of Blackadder 2 lately, I've realised what was nagging at me all the time I was watching this. It's Richard played as Lord Percy...

[@bengerber735]

"For God's sake, let us sit upon the carpet"

[@lumpfish99]

crap really poor---not enacted well and quite evidently misunderstood

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Indeed and sad evidence of how Shakespeare is being dumbed down for our times

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Absolutely agree

[@Nightmarigny]

I'm glad he gets laughs but this is pretty bad.

[@noelpurdon1098]

This is ABSOLUTELY fucking AWFUL,an insult to Shakespeare's lines and the audience's intelligence. At their best the Globe performances complete the force of the verse and imagery by direct interaction with the audience. at their worst,and this inane drollery must be pretty near the pits,they play for laughs and generic spectacle.

[@Jonmad17]

You completely misinterpreted this. It's through his amusing ineptitude that the audience is able to empathize with him, which makes the melancholy turns infinitely more affecting.

[@Zinnober]

+Noel Purdon It's astonishing how often people overwrite about how much they've underthought.

[@nateandalis4964]

Learn the rules like a pro so you can break them like an artist

[@puppyfaces]

and you are....?

[@tomservo75]

I disagree... I don't think the actor's trying to be funny about it. Part of the play is Richard's descent into madness when he sees his rule collapsing. Sometimes madness can portray itself as being funny in inappropriate situations. I actually like the performance - it's.... different.

[@henryvagincourt]

Fairly poor, acting is dreadful.

[@richardwilliam8007]

henryvagincourt apparently, after reading your comment, he never worked again,.. 😂😂

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Richard II is in my opinion underestimated. I saw an appaling production at the Globe and this one does not look any better. Tourism has damaged the quality of the London theatre, encouraging actors, directors and producers to dumb down.

[@richardwilliam8007]

Yorick Jenkins it’s a tour de force of a performance. It’s heart felt and realistic. That’s why he’s currently one of the worlds greatest actors. But then it’s all subject to opinion.

[@shrimpee502]

henryvagincourt you’re mad. This is absolute genius.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

To call someone mad because they disagree with you! In fact if Mark Rylance were not a big name more people would see that it is an abysmal, ham, shoddy performance fishing for cheap laughs, which it gets. It is easy to camp up Richard II for laughs and going even further, either the actor or the director or both sees fit to make a persiflage out of what is obviously intended to be a serious speech. The "tell sad stories of the death of kings" for Shakespeare whatever we think a serious statement about the fate of the anointed, is camped up (and not even WELL camped up!!) with pauses of nod nod wink wink to titilate a modern audience, which is unlikely to feel the empathy for the view of the writer (deposition akin to sacriledge) . I wonder is Ryland's ham acted weeping is intentionally bad as part of the persiflage/satirical unseruious camp act making fun of Shakespeare or is it just plain BAD ACTING? The play is not supposed to be humorous but this production tries to compete with Morecombe and Wise or Up Pompey which most of the audience would probably be happier watching anyway if they were frank. Any school could do better than this and has done. I have seen a much better school performance. It is all part of the sad tendency to "dumb down" Shakespeare in order to satisfy the punters many of them tourists, whose capacities would be over taxed by an intelligent and well acted production.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Stunningly bad performance from Mark Rylance. In fact so bad that I ask myself how he got his reputation as a good actor. Unclear whether the producer or Rylance is principally responsible for this cynical sneering badly acted badly performed facile mockery of what is in my opinion Shakespeare's most underestimated play. This scene is not supposed to be funny for how would the writer, obessesed as he was with kingship and the divine right of kings, mock what was sacred to him? But a modern performance has no qualms about making this play look and sound ridiculous. This is Richard II for Dummeis performed in the style of Up Pompey but Frankie Howard was a much better actor than Mark Rylance will ever be

[@carmencollor1224]

Thing is, the audience is not laughing because it is funny, but rather because it is desperate... A very fine tuning. Quite clever and subtle.

[@seansimington6145]

Your remarks have no balance. Your lack of insight and bias are clear.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

@@seansimington6145 Oh I know, anyone who describes Rylance as a "brilliant actor, unsurpassed in his generation" is understood to be making a balanced judgement, whilst anyone (such as yours truly) who writes about his "stunningly bad performance" "lacks insight" and is biased. The fact is that Mark Rylance, like Kenneth Branagh, that other overrated actor, are at best average and at worst downright poor actors hyped up wildly by critics as brilliant to the point that the public often doesnt believe its own eyes and ears and see them as the mediocre thespians which they in fact are. There was nothing clever and nothing difficult about Mark Rylance's Kenneth Williams version of Richard II! And Branagh? No better example than Branagh's risible and instantly forgettable attempt to portray Hamlet.

[@seansimington6145]

When can we expect to see and appreciate your own performance of the play so we might enjoy comparing the two?

[@MrYorickJenkins]

@@seansimington6145 I one played the Earl of Salisbury in Richard II, a minor role but if you wish to audition me for the big role in an upcoming production, I'd like to hear from you although Im a bit long in the tooth to play Richard now maybe John of Gaunt? I don't think I'd be any worse than Rylance and I might possibly be better. I have seen Richard II twice, in the theatre not counting this monstrosity on youtube one so dreadful I walked out in the middle and the second in The Globe a few years by some Irish producer, in a class ineptitude and inanity all of its own with the crowning arrogance which I have never witnessed before of the producer appearing for the curtain call to actually tell the audience, mostly American tourists, how good his own production was. I had to grit my teeth. I was with someone who had invited me and who had paid for my tickets so I couldnt for the sake of courtesy walk out or boo. I was so disgusted havent been to the Globe since. Dont think Im all negative. Seeing the Hamersmith Production of Ben Jonson's The Alchemist circa 1983 and Susan Hampshire as Rosalind in As you like it in the Dolphin Theatre in the mind 70's and a production of the Country Wife in the mid 1980's in a London theatre cant remember which and The GlassMenangerie in the York Arts Theatre in 1971 were highlights of my life absolutely. Makes me all the angrier about rubbish.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

This is appalling. A truly dreadful performance. Rubbish acting by Rylance.

[@MrYorickJenkins]

Embarrassingly bad performance if this scene is anything to go by

[@beecee2205]

alas poor yorickhe knew nothing Horatio

[@frasermcconachie9879]

@@beecee2205 HAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHA