Richard II is deposed, his cousin Henry Bolingbrook is now King Henry IV and his son Hal is a profligate and idle prince.
Henry IV pt 2 has even less going on than Henry IV pt 1.
This play see Hal’s transformation completed. He leaves his frivolity behind him and become, what the Teaching Company lecture pointed out, the ideal Protestant King. He is now full of honor and justice and upright daring do.
But, we don’t really get to see any of that until the last 5 minutes of the play.
This is, once again, a play about Falstaff. The problem for me with that is that Simon Russell Beal who plays him here, does not play him funny.
He has 3 modes: mercurial and semi charming, grasping and desperate, pitiful and repulsive.
I concede that all of those traits exist fully in Falstaff but without the humor for which this part is famous, he is not, to me, lovable.
Beal got a BAFTA for this performance so clearly other people found this interpretation moving. Not I.
His vulgarity was without redemption and I found myself not minding when “I know you not old man.” hit.
That’s the strongest line in the play.
It’s an iconic Shakespeare moment.
I’m a little mad about it actually.
Without a compelling reason to care for Falstaff his banishment is nearly meaningless.
I’ve seen some Falstaff that were 100% clown and those aren’t better but this version left me a little bored and a little annoyed.
I hope Mariam enjoys it more.
We went back and forth on which version to watch. The list we are working from recommended My Own Private Idaho and I love that version but it’s not as true to the text as all that.
In point of fact if you don’t know you are watching a Shakespeare play here it would blow right by you.
I’m putting it on the, let’s watch this one later list with Ran.
I am glad we are skipping over to 12th Night next. It will polish off the Falstaff and clear the pallet.
I’m super looking forward to the Branagh Henry V though. It’s one of the very best.
Henry IV pt 2 - 3 stars for getting up to Henry V and for cinematography.
This play for me is a bridge play. The next one is also a bridge play. They are useful connectors between Richard II which I love and Henry V which I love.
They don’t have a ton going for them except for some fun characters like Falstaff and Henry Percy.
In this play we see the old and insecure Henry IV, who in the last play was Bolingbrook, struggle with national insecurity and a disappointing heir.
His disappointing heir Henry V, here called Princess Hal, hangs out with a bad crowd and gets up to lawless self indulgence. Hal says this is so that when later he ‘reforms’ the world will stand amazed. Henry IV sees too much deposed Richard in his son.
King Henry IV admires young Henry Percy, called hotspur, and wishes that his Henry were more like that Henry.
Unfortunately Henry Percy does what Henry Bolingbrook did and throws a rebellion. So the King has to put him down.
To prove himself an honorable heir, prince Hal takes on his rival and kills him.
Henry IV pt 1 is a pretty light-on-plot play with some great characters and good lines.
Henry Percy, when played well, is engaging and hot headed and captivating.
Some of the wives and women are interesting.
But really this play is all about Falstaff.
Falstaff is irredeemable and funny. He’s full of drunken failure and cowardice and lovability.
I’ve seen him played funny and I’ve seen him played risible but in the Hollow Crown he is pitiable.
He is old and fat and corrupt and a tragic father figure for Hal who mostly has inward focused Bolingbrook and his disappointment to contend with.
Hal knows he’s about to leave the world of frivolity behind and regrets it. You always feel that.
Hiddleston does a wonderful job of portraying it.
Inevitably everyone winds up on the battlefield to move into their next incarnations.
Henry IV is frail and sick.
Hotspur is noble and mislead.
Falstaff lies to gain rewards.
They Hal proves he’s got some Henry in him as the battle of Shrewsberry is won.
