BlazeLime Strong and Moving!

VividSimon Simply Perfect

Noutions Good movie, but best of all time? Hardly . . .

HeadlinesExotic Boring

mosamah-99962 "I sin in enying his nobility. And were I nothing but what I am, I would wish me only he"

eric262003 Ralph Fiennes can fall into similar pool of talented performers who can also have a knack at direction just like Robert Redford, Mel Gibson and Clint Eastwood. In his directorial debut, "Coriolanus" Fiennes combines a Shakespeare film that anyone can grasp at. Even if you don't have a degree in Shakespearean literature. In his 30 year career, Fiennes has built an impressive reputation of really getting emotionally deep into his characterizations and going out of way to make the complexities of his characters something to get his audience a reason to root for. His direction has similar traits to his performances. The film explores the strengths and vulnerabilities of his character along with the many triumphs and failures while keeping his characters look and feel real.Fiennes stars as Caius Martius Coriolanus, a mighty but questionable general in the Roman army. During a altercation with a rival army brigade, he goes beyond protocol that cause his civil liberties to be in doubt. An activist elite wants Coriolanus evicted for his violations. For his heroic accomplishments, his supportive mother Volumnia (Vanessa Redgrave) suggests he be ranked to the position to the high office of the Consul. But he must get support of from the destitute who were the ones most affected by his questionable deeds. Many people want him to reach out and restore peace which also includes his wife Virgilia (Jessica Chastain). He agrees to get support, but the activists don't want any of that. Feeling rejected from those he stood up for, Coriolanus joins forces with his enemy Tullus Aufidius (Gerard Butler). The consequences come into play once these two form an alliance.I may feel like a complete idiot, but I may as well make confession to all of you. I have always had trouble deciphering Shakespeare. The language and the lingo was all so complex. Even simple tales like "Romeo and Juliet" are hard to fully translate. On the plus side, "Coriolanlus" was quite easy to get invested in. Thanks to the script from John Logan his technical skills make it easy to get under without insulting our intelligence. In various scenes, mock TV newscasts appear to gather updates during the coarse of the action. A real added treat is that some of the characters actually speak in more modernized language so that not all Shakespearean literature geniuses will be lost in translation. The actors also contribute to the worthy cause by generating emotions that are effective and their language tones are clear enough so that we can care about the characters while the performers understand that we're not living in the 16th century and our language has altered a bit over the years for better or worse.The ensemble cast is quite remarkable. Fiennes is just genuinely jacked up as the titular character. His rage and intensity sends chills as he plays a man who doesn't act, but demands our respect. If you put this guy down in any way, vengeance will be just a motion away whether you deserved it or not. Fiennes is just powerfully scary. Redgrave is equally ambitious as his mother who is there at all times for her son. In an extended scene, we see Volumnia trying to get some sense into Coriolanus, but her efforts end up becoming ostracized. Butler as Tullus Aufidius is just the perfect foil of an adversary to Coriolanus. There clashes are fierce with neither of them backing down. Jessica Chastain and Brian Cox show get support as Coriolanus' boss and his trusty confidant are brilliant in their respected performances.It must've took a lot of work to adapt a Shakespearean story told in modern times. But Fiennes and Logan manage to accomplish that by finding the theme while modernizing the scenarios for our viewing pleasures. The action scenes are plugged in fantastically to keep us over the edge and supports the plot flawlessly. In our lifetimes, we had very powerful figures and they all shared one thing we all strive for, to earn respect. People have not always made choices to seek our approval without concern of who will face the consequences. We've been victims under leaders who have been barbarians, psychopaths and cynics. The film explore all those surfaces which makes it very symbolic and accurate.Well executed cinematography, perfectly placed editing and very well performed, "Coriolanus" went beyond my expectations to being a very entertaining film. The intense atmosphere will likely suck you in. It might help that you understand Shakespeare to get the grasp of the story. If you don't understand the old English of Shakespeare, fear not, the Bard's work are still effective while also has the liberal license to offer new approaches to the classic play. This is clearly a great adaptation to a Shakespearean classic.

Richard ParkerII Excellent. But I found that I had to use the English subtitles on the DVD.Stands head & shoulders over the usual Hollywood pap that is pumped out.Shakespeare's critique of democracy? 'Pressure Group' politics shown. Confusion about who should Lead, be the CEO.Warfare scenes in early part of movie seemed very realistic - urban battles, house to house. Also, a group similar to the modern 'Occupy Wall Street' movement seems to be portrayed demanding bread & confronting the army of General Martius.Also, General Martius has an Arch-Enemy, the leader of a nearby terrorist nation, who threatens the modern 'Rome' of the 21st century .Kept my interest (thanks to the help of the subtitles) all the way. IF YOU WANT TO SEE GOOD ACTING, i.e., EXCELLENT ACTORS AT WORK, SEE THIS.SPOILER ALERT: Shakespeare's tragedy could have been called 'From Hero to- Enemy of Rome - to Zero'

Cosmic_Penguin The text has been modernised and brought forward to resemble a modern war. However this war is a fictional one made to resemble the war between the Volscans and the Romans, a more effective way would have been to place this within a modern conflict which would have resonated more with the audience. All of the settings have been kept true to how Shakespeare intended yet that seems to be the end of what he intended. I had my doubts when I saw that a screenplay had been written and my fears were realised when watching the film. I tried to follow the film with the play however I soon hit trouble when I realised that Logan had changed most of the script. There was no real fluidity in the film and I realised that there was many changes within the script in order to fit it to the big screen. The character of Valeria is all but forgotten in the film and in what I can only guess is poetic licence the character of Menenius kills himself on the bank of a canal. This I thought was strange as Menenius was a key character in the play and yet Logan decided to write his screenplay so that Menenius took his own life, something I deem out of character of him. John Logan has all but butchered the original script and as far as I can tell only one full passage remains from the original text, this comes from scene 3.3 and is spoken by Coriolanus. The passage 'you common cry... There is a world elsewhere' is the only one I could follow in its entirety from the book while watching the film. The female characters of Volumnia and Virgilia are cut and a smaller role than in the script with almost an entirety of one of their scenes cut from existence. It seems lines have been removed to add in unnecessary violence. Through the entirety of the film there were moments when violence seemed like it was just added to create a brutal and bloody storyline. While that is important in this particular play, the main theme found throughout is betrayal. Coriolanus is betrayed by his people when they banish him, Aufidius is betrayed when Coriolanus decides on peace, Coriolanus betrays the people of Rome when he looks down on the poor. These moments seem to be lost amongst the violence. The film soon became just another war film instead of honouring the plays beginning as a Shakespearian Tragedy. As well as losing some of the lines to Logan's screenplay we lose some lines to the intense noise present in some scenes. During the scenes at war the sound team have taken the idea of conflict too far. Gunshots were all to frequent and the shooting of innocent people made it hard to watch in places. I found this far too brutal to class it as anything but a war film and whilst good in its own right, the film lacked the finesse expected from something that began life on stage. Scenes had a specific order and a lot of the war is not shown on stage, when changing this you run the risk of losing the flow, which this did in some places. Sometimes it seemed rushed whilst the 'epic' battle scenes were slowed right down. This could be due to the screenplay being written by the same man who wrote the screenplay for Gladiator. I find it quite easy to follow and understand old English; however the changes and cuts made caused much of the meaning to be lost and lost to what. Violence and blood. This is all that I could really take from it. A good film in its own right, however a bad adaptation of a piece of Shakespeare.