Kate Maltby Kate Maltby

A compelling but unheroic Richard


Thanks to some mistake of history, Shakespeare’s Richard II has never quite been recognised as one of those roles against which the great actors are measured.

But it takes a virtuoso to bring Richard to life: like all the toughest roles, he’s a heap of contradictions out of which only the most talented actors can construct a consistent man. We despise him in the first half and then weep with him in the second. He’s a decadent and incompetent king but, once deposed, he becomes an introspective tragic hero, a cousin of Hamlet.

Against this challenge, newly minted film star Eddie Redmayne never quite finds the dignity needed to make Richard truly heroic. He excels as the young king drunk with entitlement yet shaking with insecurity but this nervy Richard never quite becomes contemplative enough to make the final scenes courageous: the hands never stop twitching, the grandiose gestures never calm.

There’s none of the intellectualism that Sam West brought to the role ten years ago, in what remains one of the exceptional Richard IIs.

Get Britain's best politics newsletters

Register to get The Spectator's insight and opinion straight to your inbox. You can then read two free articles each week.

Already a subscriber? Log in

Kate Maltby
Written by
Kate Maltby
Kate Maltby writes about the intersection of culture, politics and history. She is a theatre critic for The Times and is conducting academic research on the intellectual life of Elizabeth I.

Topics in this article

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in