Can you read French? If not, you may want to rely on some online translator, just this once, because Hervé Dumont’s Encyclopédie du film historique – that is, the encyclopedia of historical films, is a real treasure trove.
Right now, I think that all you can find in English is the Author’s Note, explaining what and why. Amongst other things, you’ll find that Swiss film historian Dumont quotes Stanley Kubrick’s notion that “one of the things the cinema knows how to do better than any of the other arts, is to bring to the screen historical subjects.” Continue reading
So, this is my contribution to 
I had an interesting discussion with a friend, a few days ago – about… well, about past and future.
Almost exactly two-hundred and four years ago, 
For some reason, The Hessian Renegades put me in mind of William Shakespeare Burton’s The Wounded Cavalier.
Last week I watched Elizabeth for the first time – and was more than a little bewildered by the script.
said Winston Churchill… and write it he did. Authors of historical fiction usually go about “writing history” with more modest ambitions – or do they? Just look at Walter Scott or Charles Dickens… And I know Dickens was no historical novelist, properly speaking, but there is no denying that A Tale of Two Cities did much to shape the common perception of the French Revolution…
d History Will Be Kind, The Copperfield Review’s first anthology, provides an interesting exercise in “telling history”. A rich collection of historical short stories, poems and essays, it explores a range of historical periods, characters and events – from Empress Maud to Alexander the Great, from the Third Crusade to 1914 Mexico – and Kit Marlowe, of course. My own very young Kit Marlowe who, in Gentleman in Velvet, learns a hard lesson about consequences and prices to be paid.
One thing that we noticed while reading Faustus with the Paper Stage, was that perhaps a three-part reading doesn’t suit every play – and this is true of the 1616 B Text of Faustus.
It is a pet theory of mine that Hope’s intentions for Rupert may have gone a bit overboard. Unlike the hero Rudolf Rassendyll and his Ruritanian friends, the boy does not behave as a gentleman should – but, unlike them, he is certainly never boring. Charming, reckless, and with the moral compass of a coat-hanger, Rupert is easily the best character in the book- and in the sequel as well. While both narrators (Rassendlyll himself and his friend Fritz) take pains to inform us that he is a cheat, a liar, a womanizer and a murderer, that his wicked ways have broken his poor mother’s heart, and that he is evil in every possible way, they also spend a lot of words rhapsodising over young Rupert’s cleverness, charm, reckless bravery, beauty, superior horsemanship & swordmanship… Why, even his enemies can’t help liking the young rogue.
Fast forward fifteen years, then, to John Cromwell’s 1937 The Prisoner of Zenda, with 28-year-old Douglas Fairbanks, Jr. as Rupert. A tighter script helps, but Fairbanks is truly wonderful. His Rupert is a charming, devil-may-care young fellow with a ready laugh and a readier knife – and he is quite mad. Under the smooth insolence and the sunny smiles, this Rupert is dangerous. And yet one can’t help liking him as he cheerfully betrays whomever happens to be in the way, manipulates enemies and friends, duels with great flair and resents Rassendyll’s slights… For my money, this is Rupert of Hentzau.
first that I like James Mason – but I’m afraid Rupert was not his cup of tea. All else apart, in 1952 he was 44 – twice the character’s age – and looked older. Too old, too staid, and far too grim. Oh, he is intense, he is dangerous – but where is the boyish, laughing charm? Where is the mad light in the eyes? Mason’s Rupert plots and threatens with the general allure of a Prussian junker… How can we believe that his enemies like him despite themselves? The fact that the movie is an almost scene-by-scene remake of the 1937 version doesn’t help, either. I remember once discussing this movie with a friend, and trying to decide what other actor might have made a better Rupert in 1952… You know, we drew a blank – and I still cannot think of anyone*, but this doesn’t make me like Mason better in the role, although I’ll admit it was hard to measure up to Douglas Fairbanks.
Scribblings 