CONSENSUS #6. Henry V (1944)

 

SYNOPSIS: "Henry V" is based on the Shakespeare play. It covers the political background to Henry's invasion of France, the siege of Harfleur, the Battle of Agincourt, and Henry's wooing of the French Princess Katherine.

BACK-STORY: “Henry V” is a masterpiece acted, directed, and produced by Laurence Olivier. His work was so amazing he was awarded an Academy Honor Award at the Oscars. It was nominated for Best Actor, Score, Art Direction, and Picture. (It lost to another war film – “The Best Years of Our Lives”). It was designed to be a morale booster for WWII Britain. Mission accomplished. It was specifically dedicated to England’s commandoes and airborne troops. What better subject than the battle that is considered the greatest upset in military history? The story of a small, exhausted army defeating the cream of French knighthood certainly resonated with a Britain facing the supposedly all-powerful Wehrmacht.  The movie was a box office success and inspired the British people to carry on. It was the most expensive British film up to that time. Wartime shortages impacted production. For example, shortages of metal led to the decision to “make” the chain-mail out of hand-knitted gray wool. Many of the extras were servicemen. The official title – “The Chronicle History of King Henry the Fift with his Battell Fought at Agincourt in France by Will Shakespeare [sic]” – is the longest title to be nominated for Best Picture.

TRIVIA: 

1.  The sets were inspired by the medieval Book of Hours.

 

2.  It is considered the first Shakespeare movie that was critically and commercially successful.

 

3.  The screenplay omitted the harsher aspects of Henry’s personality (supposedly due to pressure from Churchill).  The movie omits the beheading of the traitors, the threat to sack Harfleur, and the murdering of the prisoners in the Battle of Agincourt.

 

4.  Olivier asked William Wyler, Carol Reed, and Ralph Richardson to direct, but they all told him that he was capable of doing it himself.  He was only 36 years old at the time.

 

5.  Olivier’s wife Vivien Leigh really wanted to play Katherine, but David O. Selznick refused to let her out of her contract because he felt the role was too small for her.  She never forgave him and never worked for him again.  Renee Asherson was chosen because she was the same size as Leigh and thus the costumes could be used for her.

 

6.  The model of London that opens the movie was 50’ x 70’.  It was made of plaster and took four months to construct.

 

7.  It was filmed mostly in Ireland to be away from the war and because the Irish could provide the necessary extras.

 

8.  There is only one line that is not from Shakespeare.  Pistol at the end of the Boar’s Head scene quotes Christopher Marlowe:  “Farewell, farewell, divine Zenocrata…”

 

9.  Olivier did his own stunts and also instructed the extras on their stunts.  This resulted in numerous injuries for him, including broken shoulders.

 

10.  Olivier agreed not to appear in another movie for eighteen months in order to keep focus on the movie.  He was rewarded with 15,000 pounds, tax-free.

 

11.  The battle lasts ten minutes, but it took six weeks to film it.

 

Belle and Blade  =  N/A

Brassey’s              =  5.0

Video Hound       =  5.0

War Movies         =  N/A

Military History  =  #75

Channel 4             =  #36

Film Site                =  yes

101 War Movies  =  no

Rotten Tomatoes  =  #14 

ACCURACY: The movie is very faithful to the play. Only one line is not from Shakespeare. The movie does not cover the whole play, by the way. It leaves out some material that tended to show Henry is less than a saintly light. For example, Olivier omits a scene where Henry hangs one of his old buddies for violating his ban on looting.

When examining “Henry V” for accuracy, let’s look at whether Shakespeare got it right. The background to the invasion is accurate in its portrayal of Henry’s motivation. Even the tennis ball incident apparently occurred. Shakespeare goes off the historical path a bit when the army reaches France. The audience is led to believe that “once more into the breach” resulted in the fall of Harfleur, when in actuality the next assault failed and the city gave up when word arrived that a relief army was not coming.

The Battle of Agincourt is significantly different than depicted. The play and movie make little reference to the really deplorable state of the British soldiers. They were suffering from dysentery (which we can be thankful is not graphically depicted) and exhaustion. The battle itself is fairly accurate in a simplistic way. The first attack was by cavalry, but the subsequent one was by knights wading through the mud on foot. There is not nearly enough mud in the movie! The melee aspect is realistic, but clearly there was no duel between Henry and the Constable (that is pure Hollywood). There was also no ambush of French cavalry in the woods by archers leaping from trees.

The French attack on the baggage train with its killing of the innocents was accurate (even though the movie falsely implies that the French leadership was behind the assault), but Henry’s response was not. In fact, he did not respond by returning to the battle. Instead, he gave the infamous order to kill the French prisoners (who were being held for ransom) out of fear that they might rearm themselves and return to the fight. You can debate Henry’s decision, but it is no surprise that Shakespeare (ever the patriot) and Olivier (making an inspirational movie) chose to omit this facet of the battle.

The aftermath of the battle is pretty spot on. Henry did marry Katherine and was promised the throne when the king died (which did not happen because the much younger Henry died first). I find it hard to believe the wooing scene actually happened, but it’s a play.

OPINION: This is an amazing movie. Olivier does an amazing job – possibly the greatest all-around performance in movie history. He justly deserved the special Oscar. One wonders if the Academy felt guilty for choosing an inferior film (“The Best Years of Our Lives”) for Best Picture (guess which one was a patriotic American film). He was already a renowned actor, but this was his first directing job. (He modestly looked for others to direct it until he was pursuaded he was the best man for the job.) His decision to start the movie in the Globe, then shift to sets, move on to the great outdoors for the battle, then back to sets, and end back at the theater , was nothing short of brilliant. The audience gets a taste of an Elizabethan play and the action of a movie. The use of The Book of Hours as the inspiration for the set designs is awesome. But the kicker is Olivier made a Shakespeare movie that audiences and critics liked. This was a first and is still a rare accomplishment.

The only flaws are some inaccuracies in the military aspects. However, Shakespeare did do research for his plays, so any discrepancies are for entertainment purposes or to advance the theme of the play. Olivier’s decision to downplay the negative aspects of Henry’s personality (he could be a jerk and ruthless) are understandable given the patriotic purpose of the film. If you want to see the warts, see Kenneth Branagh’s 1988 version.

Another slight quibble is with the acting. Some of the actors chew the scenery a bit. I know this will be defended as realistic portrayals of Elizabethan acting, but it still comes off as over the top.

For those wanting consistent excitement, this movie is not your cup of tea. The first half hour is mostly expository. The Battle of Agincourt stands out as a shining diamond in the middle of the movie. Then the last part is a return to the more languid style of the first part. Blame Shakespeare for that, if you must. But just like Mel Gibson with “Braveheart”, Olivier might have been wiser to end the movie after the big battle scene.  Oh, and did I mention that it is not clearly a war movie. It is more accurately described as a Shakespeare play with a battle in the middle of it.

In conclusion,  every cinephile should see this movie because it is a tour de force by a master movie maker. Every cinephile should see this movie and then Branagh’s version to see how movie-making and film attitudes changed from 1944 to 1988. It makes for a perfect comparison because the source material is the same. Every literature lover should see it because it is arguably the best rendering of Shakespeare ever filmed. People who do not like to read books can see it and not have to read “Henry V” (warning to lazy British Literature students – it only covers about half the written play).  However, as great as it is as a movie, it is not that great of a war movie.  I find it greatly overrated on this list.  And, by the way, the Branagh version is better.