The Tempest (Julie Taymor, 2010)

[truepenny]

So, Julie Taymor is directing The Tempest, with Dame Helen Mirren as Prospero. (I am ignoring the change from Prospero to Prospera, because honestly (a.) not necessary, (b.) what's wrong with some good old-fashioned genderfuck?, and (c.) to me it kind of suggests we don't think Dame Helen is up to the challenge of playing Prospero, which is nonsense. But if that's the worst mistake they make--and hopefully, this is really a very carefully thought out feminist statement that will persuade me of its rightness when I see the movie--we are all so very golden.)

The Tempest is not my favorite of Shakespeare's plays, nor even my favorite of Shakespeare's late plays, but I have to tell you, the trailer goes a long way towards persuading me to rethink that opinion:

Because:
1. Helen Mirren.
2. Alfred Molina.
3. HELEN MIRREN.
4. This, seriously, is what CGI is for (check out those hellhounds, OMFG), and if there was ever a Shakespeare play that could take the bling, THIS IS THAT PLAY. I am really almost deliriously grateful to see that here, finally, is a production of The Tempest that takes Prospero's magic seriously.
5. Hard to tell from the tiny clips we get, but it looks like they're also taking Caliban seriously. Which not all productions do.
6. And did I mention, HELEN MIRREN.


glvalentine has some excellent discussion of the costuming (which is where I lifted the still from). Zippered doublets FTW.

It also looks like, from the trailer, they understand what Stephano and Trinculo are in the play for (again, not all productions do, nor do all Hollywood versions of Shakespeare understand what the clowns are for. See Much Ado About Nothing, re: Michael Keaton.). The casting of Alfred Molina, aside from rocking my socks, is a good sign.

And, in conclusion, HELEN MIRREN.

---

ETA: if anyone else would like a very simple Helen Mirren icon, you may feel free to use this one:

And don't hesitate to add text if it pleases you. Currently, my only image-editing software is, um, Paint.

Comments

[papersky.livejournal.com]

No, this was in the eighties. "Lost sight", as with Fiona Shaw playing Richard II or Gwynneth Paltrow playing Romeo (or Keen playing Desdemona for that matter), isn't a problem, but making the character female really didn't work for me. It's odd that Prospero seems like a mildly neglectful father but a mother who's practically child abusing, and it says a lot about gender roles. But Prospero is all about trading one kind of power for another kind of power, neither of them kinds of power women normally have, and if you're going to write directly about that great, but if you're going to go against the grain of the text to go at it... it can come out saying something you didn't mean to say that underlines the wrong things, as in the production that I saw.

One doesn't want to see exactly why Antonio usurped the Dukedom of Milan or that he had a very good reason for doing it.

[smills47.livejournal.com]

I think I partially misconstrued your comment...beg pardon. I do see what you mean. Also, if Prospero becomes a woman, then you lose the suggestion of him being Caliban's father.