Gender is very long – should I break into two paragraphs (one Shakespeare one Pacino) and then do the

third
paragraph on one more idea (so two ideas total)

Gender

Although writing in a time where women were expected to be submissive and obedient  Shakespeare
challenges these values through introducing female characters who are powerful and bold

Shakespeare’s Lady Anne speaks to a context that understands events in morally absolute terms; a context
Shakespeare exploits, characterizing Lady Anne so that she is defending a murdered, saintly King. This
ultimately grants Lady Anne a sense of moral righteousness: the pinnacle of power in the Elizabethan period. In
doing so, Shakespeare is essentially characterizing his female characters to be bold and powerful, further
reinforced by their powerful voices, evident through “his venom tooth will rankle to the death… Sin, death, and
hell have set their marks on him”

However, it may be perceived by a modern audience that once Lady Anne falls for ‘Richards rap’, and decides to
marry him, she is ultimately subverting Shakespeare’s challenged values; conforming to the expected feminine
stereotypes of the time. However, in an Elizabethan context, it can be interpreted in the text that Lady Anne fell
victim to the seductive nature of the Vice, and thus still possessed her power as she was defenseless against
Richards supernatural powers.

Pacino alters the text to cater to a modern audience and manipulates this idea so that it may be understood my
a modern audience. This is evident through the casting of Lady Anne, where Pacino deliberately reshapes the
character of Anne as having “to be young, very young.” In doing so, Pacino is adhering to a modern
understanding in which, through reinventing Lady Anna as young, is insinuating her naivety and
impressionability, altering her to “easily be able to believe in Richard’s rap”; a woman who can easily be
exploited by a man.

However, although this may be perceived as Pacino altering Lady Anne so her values may be understood by a
modern audience, Pacino is inexplicably interweaving a patronizing tone upon the female characters. This is
further seen through his description of Queen Margaret as “a kind of ghost,” and a “hysteric’, this sexist remark
labels her as an overly emotionally women who should not be taken seriously, inviting themes of misogyny
within his text. Pacino writes in a context of an egalitarian society; where values of his time expect women to
be treated equally. By reinventing his characters to be young and impressionable, he is stripping the characters
of their agency and power and as such, Pacino is resonating with Shakespeare through challenging values of
women within their own context, yet ironically subverting and challenging Shakespeare’s ideas.
Corruption of Power (resonances)

Along with challenging the hierarchy, Shakespeare also attempts to expose the corruption within the hierarchy
through highlighting the manipulative nature of those in power.

Shakespeare judiciously presents this concept to his audience through interweaving themes of meta
theatricality within his text. This is evident through the use of language of theatre laced within the text, where
Buckingham claiming to “had pronounce your part, I mean your voice,” essentially demonstrates the noble’s
awareness that they are playing an act; a manipulative tool used to deceive everyone.

This manipulative nature of the noble’s is further reinforced through Richard planning to “get a prayer book in
your hand and stand between two churchmen,” where he is playing an act of a religious person, so that he may
be more appealing to the common people.

Despite living in a context governed by modern democratic politics, the same desires of “winning the people”
still prevail, such that, in a similar manner to Richard, Pacino plays the Naif in a way that underplays his talent
and knowledge. In doing so, Pacino is just playing “an act, and these people buy it, it’s a complete lie,” evident
through Pacino breaking the fourth wall to tell his audience, “I’m just confused saying it, I can’t imagine how
you must feel,” where a hand-held shaky camera shot creates an authenticity in the scene, allowing Pacino to
level with his audience, so that he may be more enticing to them

It is through this textual conversation between the texts, that Pacino is able to demonstrate that, despite their
differing contexts, the methods used by those in power still remain the same, revealing the enduring nature of
Shakespeare’s work and the complexity of our humanity
This is exemplified through Pacino breaking the fourth wall

In a similar manner to Richard, Pacino too plays the Naif in a way that underplays his talent and knowledge,
which is all just “an act, and these people buy it, it’s a complete lie.” Through doing so, Pacino expresses his
understanding that the key to the success of his production is “winning the people”

allowing modern audiences to resonate with him, so that they may be manipulated into understanding
Shakespeare.

This deceit of a politician is culminated through Richard playing the Naif, stating that he is “unfit for state and
majesty,” wherein the dramatic irony that laces this statement provides a direct contrast to him claiming that
(get an I want to be King already quote)

“its an act, and these people buy it, it’s a complete lie”

“all that’s left is winning the people”

However, although seemingly attempting to resonate with Shakespeare’s intentions and promote an egalitarian
society, Pacino’s role as director; which ultimately grants him power over the entire production, contradicts the
egalitarian nature of his text, subverting the (values of his time). In doing so, Pacino can be perceived as
attempting to unmask the deceit of the modern day democracy, alluding to the manipulative nature of those in
power; suggesting that, although living in an expected egalitarian society (all the power is still held at the top)

In a similar manner to this, Pacino too plays the Naif so that underplays his talent and knowledge, in what
appears an attempt to allow modern audiences to resonate with him, so that he can manipulate this audience
so that they are able to understand Shakespeare. This is exemplified through Pacino breaking the fourth wall to
tell his audience, “I’m just confused saying it, I can’t imagine how you must feel,” where a hand-held shaky
camera shot creates an authenticity in the scene, allowing the audience to

(get quote about mispronouncation)

This concept is (expressed within the film to the other actors aswell). This is evident through the multiple
meetings of the actors that pervade the film, in which, despite all their seeming contributions and suggestions
toward the play – which allow them to believe they have authority and influence over the film – Pacion
ultimately holds all the power as the glorified mediator, being solely responsible for all decisions about the
play.

This illusion is culminated through Pacino offering for someone to “say action around here,” where
Shakespeare builds upon the exposure of the deceit of modern day hierarchy, ultimately proving an allegory for
the political climate of the 20th century
Divine Punishment vs Post-Modern

By diverging from the traditional opening chorus of his other works, Shakespeare’s use of a soliloquy allows
him to dramatically establish the villainy behind Richard from the beginning of the play.

Audience is privy to the evil intent of Richard in not only being “determined to prove a villain”, but also “subtle
false and treacherous”

Within this Elizabethan World, Richard’s Machiavellian mantra, intensified by his “deformed, unfinished,”
appearance - reflecting his moral corruption - allows him to fit in to the Tragic Arc, calling for his expected
demise through divine punishment

This is culminated through the interplay between Richard and Richmond, where Shakespeare portrays a clear
representation of binary opposites; of good and evil.

This is evident through juxtaposing Richmond’s use of high rhetoric to denounce the evil of Richard though
“bloody day,” and “England weep in steams of blood,” in comparison to the “peace lives again,” and
the final word of the play being “Amen,” reinforcing the moral and virtuous rule of Richmond.

However, influenced by the post-modernism of his world, Pacino dissolves Elizabethan moral absolutism
though omitting the divine Retribution enacted by Richmond in Shakespeare’s play, and instead uses cross-cut
editing to display a conversation between Richard and himself.

In doing so, he presents a psychological deconstruction of Richard’s villainy to develop a textual conversation
accessible to his secular audience that rejects absolute truths

Pacino essentially humanizes Richard’s self-serving ambition as a psychological flaw rather than a fundamental
evil

This engenders sympathy for Richard in the film – which is a stark contrast to Shakespeare’s audience desire for
divine punishment – which essentially establishes a conversation about humanity; connecting the modern
audience with the character of Richard, demonstrating the universality of Shakespeare’s texts
Hierarchy

Further, Shakespeare also challenges divine right of kings within his context. Shakespeare establishes the
hierarchy at the beginning of the play, through (battle of King part)

However, as the play progresses Shakespeare demonstrates resistance to the expected hierarchical structure
through utilization of vox pop. By designating an entire act to (speech of commoners), He diverts from
established norms, and attempt to provide lower class members of society a voice; thus promoting
egalitarianism.

This idea is culminated through the murderer’s egalitarian comment, referring to himself as “a man, just as you
are,” in which Shakespeare judiciously questions the authority of nobility, undermining Clarence’s prominence,
insinuating that he disreputable as a murderer.

Through challenging the hierarchy – demonstrating the progressive nature of his texts – his text holds vales of
universality,

Hid text is asble to prevail against changing literary nroms

His progressive text holds values of universality…

that … - that he is universal

Needs like a finishing sentence

Although in a context of liberal western democracy, Pacino resonates with Shakespeare’s text by seemingly
promoting egalitarianism. Pacino also mimics Shakespeare’s use of vox pop to portray this, however, does so
through intercut scenes of interviews in the street with members of society.

It is through these interviews that it becomes apparent of Pacino’s attempt to promote egalitarianism, where
Pacino deliberately contrast a homeless’ man wise and insightful comments, with a scholar’s uneducated and
ethically questionable comment subverting the ideals of class within a modern society, (demonstrating
egalitarianism).

However, although seemingly attempting to resonate with Shakespeare’s intentions and promote an egalitarian
society, Pacino’s role as director; which ultimately grants him power over the entire production, contradicts the
egalitarian nature of his text, subverting the (values of his time). In doing so, Pacino can be perceived as
attempting to unmask the deceit of the modern day democracy, alluding to the manipulative nature of those in
power; suggesting that, although living in an expected egalitarian society (all the power is still held at the top)

“since every jack became a gentleman, there’s many a gentle person made a jack” – Richard
Manipulation of Power

In a similar manner to this, Pacino too plays the Naif so that underplays his talent and knowledge, in what
appears an attempt to allow modern audiences to resonate with him, so that he can manipulate this audience
so that they are able to understand Shakespeare. This is exemplified through Pacino breaking the fourth wall to
tell his audience, “I’m just confused saying it, I can’t imagine how you must feel,” where a hand-held shaky
camera shot creates an authenticity in the scene, allowing the audience to

(get quote about mispronouncation)

This concept is (expressed within the film to the other actors aswell). This is evident through the multiple
meetings of the actors that pervade the film, in which, despite all their seeming contributions and suggestions
toward the play – which allow them to believe they have authority and influence over the film – Pacion
ultimately holds all the power as the glorified mediator, being solely responsible for all decisions about the
play.

This illusion is culminated through Pacino offering for someone to “say action around here,” where
Shakespeare builds upon the exposure of the deceit of modern day hierarchy, ultimately proving an allegory for
the political climate of the 20th century

Along with challenging the hierarchy, Shakespeare also attempts to expose the corruption within the hierarchy
through highlighting the manipulative nature of those in power.

Shakespeare judiciously presents this concept to his audience through interweaving themes of meta
theatricality within his text. This is evident through the use of language of theatre laced within the text, where
Buckingham claiming to “had pronounce your part, I mean your voice,” essentially demonstrates their
awareness that they are playing an act; a tool used to manipulate (those below them)

This is manipulative nature is further reinforced through Richard planning to “get a prayer book in your hand
and stand between two churchmen,” playing an act of a religious person, so that he may be more appealing to
the common people.

This deceit of a politician is culminated through Richard playing the Naif, stating that he is “unfit for state and
majesty,” wherein the dramatic irony that laces this statement provides a direct contrast to him claiming that
(get an I want to be King already quote)

“to communicate how I feel about Shakeapera to other poele”

“im just confused saying it, I cant imagine how you must feel” close up shaky camera

“you know more about Richard than any fucking scholar”

further reinforced through

the manipulation becomes that bad that he manipulates himself  highlighting the defamation nature of
the hierarchyors

Richard – “alas, why would you heap this care on me? I am unfit for state and majesty. I do beseech you, take it
not amiss; I cannot nor I will not yield to you”

Richard utilizes acting to manipulate the audience and characters within the play  Machiavellian character
archetype

“for by his face straight shall you know his heart”  dramatic irony

Richard and pacino play the naif

Act 3 Scene 4
Pacino describes the scene as a “Gathering of the dons” à they are all criminals and deceitful

Meta theatricality

3.4.19-20

3.4.26-27

à meta-theatricality in the scene shows the tension and suspicions between the characters and the irony in
“had you not come upon your cue… had pronounced your part, I mean your voice” à they know it is all an act

Establishes the conversation about how performance/acting can be used to demonstrate power

 Example, Richard playing the Naif to act/perform that he is ignorant, wherein reality he actually is
aware and powerful
 Richard and Buckingham use the language of the theater à conscience of the fact that they are playing
a part à Richard making himself more appealing to the common people to try and make him look like
a religious person, who prays – 3.7.46-48 (and look you get a prayer book in your hand and stand
between two churchmen, good my lord, for on that ground I’ll make a holy descant)
 In the film, Pacino is trying to manipulate the audience by pretending to be ignorant (Pacino playing
the Naif) à make himself more appealing to the common people, by underplaying his talent and his
knowledge, so that he can manipulate the people so that they are able to understand Shakespeare

“irony is hypocrisy with style”

“they canvass like politicians”

“It’s an act and they buy it”

Richard and Buckingham tactics to illegitimate the truthful ruler

“the truth is that those in power have total contempt for everything they promise and everything they pledge”
 Comment that this is what Shakespeare’s play is really about
 Perhaps intention of Shakespeare (who is ahead of his time) to expose the corrupt nature of those in
power (the hierarchy)

Conversation between the text - although context of the stories are different, the
methods used to lie/manipulate are the same

“I feel that your Richard will have earned his death” à “your Richard” implores the actor and the role will
merge

 Pacino is trying to avoid his Richard dying

Conversation between Richard III and Al Pacino

Exploration of the corruption of power. That is the way in which the pursuit of power corrupts the individual

--> expressed through meta-theatricality of Shakespeare's play and Pacino's docudrama

Pacino establishes a relationship between himself and the character he is playng

Pacino is the actor/director exercising his creative power over the production

Richard III is also an actor who thrills the audience with his wit and cunning by “acting” in order to manipulate
and deceive

--> evidence:

1. “I will speak upon my queue”

2. Act 3 Scene 7 “and look you get a prayer book in your hand”

As the film progresses, the relationship between Pacino and Richard intensifies

--> seen through the tragic arc, which is Richards theatrical destiny, is mirrored by Pacino's own decline and fall
(he becomes ill and obsessed with self-doubt: “are we ever going to finish this movie?”)

--> also seen through Pacino becoming frustrated and impatient with the documentary making process and just
wants to get it done --> mirrors the desires of the character Richard when he says “I want to be King already”
After the death of Richard, Pacino collapses on the stairs of the Church in Manhattan and exclaims “O Richard,
after everything I’ve done for you”

--> what has Pacino done for Richard?

- Pacino’s purpose was to bring Shakespeare to America

- Pacino creates an empathy for and a reappraisal of Richards character that brings to life an individual
who is not just a villain, but a complex human individual being full of anomalies and contradictions
- --> does this by generating a conversation between actor/director and the character of Richard,
through exploration of method acting

Richard becomes a man corrupted by his own desire for Power. Evident in the descent of his language into
cruel incentive in Act V (compared with the magnanimous language of Richmond – more on this later) and yet,
Richard also reveals his vulnerability on the eve of the battle\”O coward conscience, how dost thou afflict me?”
and “is there a murderer here? No. Yes. I am” (Act V iii)

Shakespeare is also making a complex character that is not predictable but very human --> in that way not to
different from us
Hierarchy

Along with challenging of the values of women within his time, Shakespeare also challenges the expected
hierarchical structure within his context. Shakespeare establishes the hierarchy at the beginning of the play,
through (battle of King part)

However, as the play progresses Shakespeare demonstrates resistance the expected hierarchical structure
through utilization of vox pop. Shakespeare subverts traditional structures of text in his time, through
designating entire act to (speech of commoners), representing his distinction from norms, and attempt to
provide lower class members of society a voice; an attempt to promote egalitarianism.

This idea is culminated through the murderer’s egalitarian comment, referring to himself as “a man, just as you
are,” in which Shakespeare (cleverly has a dig at the hierarchy), undermining Clarence’s nobility, insinuating
that he is in fact as disreputable as a murderer.

Needs like a finishing sentence

Although in a context of expected liberal western democracy, Pacino resonates with Shakespeare’s text through
seemingly promoting egalitarianism. Pacino also mimics Shakespeare’s use of vox pop to portray this, however
does so through intercut scenes of interviews in the street with members of society.

It is through these interviews that it becomes apparent of Pacino’s attempt to promote egalitarianism, where
Pacino deliberately contrast a homeless’ man wise and insightful comments, with an educated scholar’s (dumb
comments), subverting the ideals of class within a modern society, (demonstrating egalitarianism)

However, although seemingly attempting to resonate with Shakespeare’s intentions and promote an egalitarian
society, Pacino’s role as director; which ultimately grants him power over the entire production, contradicts his
attempt to promote egaltarisnm.

In this aspect, it can be claimed that Pacino is still resonating with Shakespeare through both texts aimoing to
expose the hierarchy of their context, with Pacino unmasking to his modern audience the deceit of modern day
democracy. Pacino alludes to the fact that although living in a liberal western democracy; with an expected
egalitarian society, (all power is still held by the top)

“since every jack became a gentleman, there’s many a gentle person made a jack” – Richard