Shakespeare uses the chorus to introduce and set the scene before every act. He
tells the audience that they must use their imagination to understand the play, but this
only happens in the play and Olivier’s version, but the chorus in the Branaugh’s version is
completely different. They are told to imagine a cockpit as the vast fields of France and
told to imagine fleets of boats going to France, by the chorus. When they get to Harfleur,
they have to use their imagination to see the big war happening. The chorus refers to ‘this
wooden O’, because he is in a theatre in the shape of an ‘O’ and it is wooden, but then he
empathises to them that they’re still in the theatre which you don’t normally do. He asks
them to use their imagination. He is always asking for their forgiveness, ‘thus with
imagin’d wing our swift scene flies in motion of no less alenity than that of thought’. This
sets the audience up for Henry’s speech which is coming next. If they use their
imagination during Henry’s speech, you think you are part of his army, but if the chorus
didn’t have such an impact and said in a dull tone ‘this is just a theatre, we can’t make it
real, so you have to use your imaginations’, then the audience would not be geared up and
motivated for the oncoming speech by Henry.
In the play, there are two main types of speech used: Blank verse and Prose. The
noble and upper – class characters speak in blank verse, but occasionally may speak in
prose if the subject matter is not important or if they are addressing or speaking to lower –
class characters. Blank verse elevates or raises the level of the language and is associated
with nobility and noble ideas. Prose is what we call everyday speech. This can vary a lot.
When Henry is in disguise and he is speaking to the soldiers, he speaks in Prose but it is
well structured and rich – “Gloucester, ‘tis true that we are in great danger. The greater
therefore should our courage be. Good morrow, brother Bedford.” This shows unity and
brotherhood, which motivates the audience by creating a sense of comrade spirit.
In the different versions of the original play, Olivier’s film and Branaugh’s film,
they are all a product of the different historical times in which the play was written, and
the films produced. In Shakespeare’s time, war was a thing where the whole country was
involved, but at a distance. During the war, the English army thought God was on their
side, ‘We are in God’s hand, brother not in theirs’. This shows their conviction regarding
the superiority of their position and their Christian religion.
Olivier’s film version came out during the second world war. England’s morale
was low, just as it was back in Shakespeare’s time. This is why the government funded
the film, also for propaganda. Propaganda is where the media get involved and where the
media can influence what the British public are thinking. The public can be manipulated
this way. Another reason as to why the government funded the film is because the film
was used to portray war as a good thing. The film came out when colour could be shown
in films, so it showed the war as a colourful happy place and not the grim truth in black
and white. Olivier also had scenes showing actors dressing up and rehearsing back stage
and having fun. This was to take away and real issues from the play. Also, Olivier cut
scenes out from the play in his film, noticeably the scenes including the traitors, the
hanging of Bardolph and Henry’s bloody speech in Harfleur. This was so the public’s
morale wouldn’t drop after seeing their were traitors in England, their were hangings in
England and the speech, so that they didn’t show the real bloodiness of war. The
government and Olivier worked together to be selective with the scenes they showed and
didn’t show. They do not allow us to question the monarchy or the government at the
time. They present to us that war is a happy place, a ‘just cause’ and is a jolly occasion.
On the contrary, Branaugh’s film was funded by the government and propaganda,
so Branaugh could show the reality of war. Branaugh wanted to make a true version of
Shakespeare’s play showing all the gory details. He said “There would be no question
about the statement this movie was making about war.” The chorus of Act 3 has roused
our imagination and excitement levels. Henry’s speech in Act 3 scene 1 is a dramatic,
patriotic speech designed by Shakespeare to entertain and motivate.
King Henry’s appeal to the soldiers is full of psychological and powerful language
– emotive speech, emotive language. He keeps reminding the soldiers how great a win
they could get as well as individual glory (because there were so few of the English, to
the French the win would be even more surprising and would seem greater.) An example
of Henry showing what the results could be good is “That those whom you call’d fathers
did beget you. Be copy now of men to grosser blood and teach them how to war.” (Act 3
sc1, lines 23 – 26). Henry keeps on calling for them to call up every fighting spirit in their
bodies – “Stiffen up the sinews, conjure up the blood, Disguise fair nature with hard –
favoured rage.” (Act3 sc1, lines 7 – 8). Such use of rhetorical questions is a characteristic
feature of effective motivational speech. He also keeps questioning the men’s worth, in
the hope that they will answer by winning the war. For example, “dishonour not your
mothers” and “And you, good yeomen, whose limbs were made in England, show us here
the mettle of your pasture.” “Let us swear that you are worth your breeding, which I
doubt not,” is another example. King Henry conjures up the feeling of patriotism in each
and every one of the soldiers, then persuading them to fight for their country – “On, on,
you noble English, whose blood is fet from fathers of war – proof.” Finally, Henry tries to
give the impression that every soldier has the energy and eagerness to go and fight. He
does this by referring to dogs straining on a leash, as in tugging; ready to go when the
owner unleashes them (in this case Henry). He says “I see you stand like greyhounds in
the slips, Straining upon the start.” Henry is their superior, a lofty figure that delivers the
speeches with great formality intended to impress his soldiers and inspire their confidence
in him.
In Olivier’s version Henry is appealing to his soldiers against a colourful
background. He does not appeal to each individually, but as a group. There is not much of
a determined expression in his voice. Olivier at the beginning of his film makes everyone
around Henry seem silly, even the noblemen so Henry appears to the public as more
noble and sensible, so the public trust him. Branaugh’s version is more realistic. The
battle takes place during the night to create the effect of darkness, danger and death. The
are fires all over the place, lots of muddy ditches at to the realism.
After Act 3 scene 1, Shakespeare introduces comedic characters in Bardolph,
Pistol, Nym and Boy. They have fun with each other and provide light-relief comedy to
the audience after the previous intense scene. This gives to audience a chance to relax,
take things in and renew the situation. Another light-relief scene is the comical use of
language. In Act 3 scene 5, the French princess Katherine is having an English lesson and
is learning parts of the human body. The comedy is the use of her French accent
pronouncing the English words.
Lawrence Olivier’s film version of Shakespeare was entirely based on creating
morale for the British public. The film was made for propaganda purposes and did not
show the reality of life and war. Kenneth Branaugh’s version on the other hand, had
nothing holding him back as he depicts to us the true realities of war. This is why I think
Branaugh has recreated Shakespeare play better than Olivier and as Shakespeare
would’ve wanted.
GCSE: English Vishal Kapoor