Comments on: Shakespeare photographs

Shakespeare photographs

thomas j wise — Sat, 27 Sep 2003 09:47:24 -0800

Cleveland Press Shakespeare Photographs Er, no, not photographs of Shakespeare--that would be difficult--but of Shakespeare's plays in performance, 1870-1982. Covers productions in all media; photographs can be browsed by dramatic genre (tragedy, comedy, etc.). On a related note, see also Harry Rusche's Shakespeare Illustrated (outstanding and extensive site devoted to nineteenth-century paintings of scenes from Shakespeare's plays).

By: trivirgata

trivirgata — Sat, 27 Sep 2003 12:20:25 -0800

Nice link. I've always loved stills from stage productions. Then there's the added kick of seeing a young Tom Hanks performing in some early stage roles.

By: Joey Michaels

Joey Michaels — Sat, 27 Sep 2003 20:48:28 -0800

[this is good]

By: philfromhavelock

philfromhavelock — Sat, 27 Sep 2003 21:28:58 -0800

Groovy. I'm glad you posted this. Ben Kenobi and friend, 1976. Cleopatra, 1917.

By: feelinglistless

feelinglistless — Sun, 28 Sep 2003 00:43:15 -0800

I really hadn't realised how many old men had played Romeo over the years. And I wish someone would get around to making a film of 'Measure For Measure' in the noir-thriller style it deserves.

By: RavinDave

RavinDave — Sun, 28 Sep 2003 05:09:03 -0800

Ack! A pox on "updated" Shakespeare set upon a foolishly inappropriate backdrop. Save me from Falstaff in the bayou with gators nipping at his ass. No more MacBeth with tommyguns and molls. King Lear wasn't a cowboy and Othello never heard of Viet-Nam.

By: feelinglistless

feelinglistless — Sun, 28 Sep 2003 06:45:17 -0800

Oh well yes, but done well, more contemporary settings can really illuminate a play. Branagh's 'Love's Labour's Lost' was a joy and certainly better than raw version of the play which is a bit simplistic anyway. Although as you say, done badly it can be just awful. I once saw Macbeth in a WW1 setting. Nooooo....