Friday, March 9, 2012

Coriolanus (2011)

I saw a stage production of "Coriolanus" four years ago at the Ashland Shakespeare Festival and I must say I wasn't at all impressed. I'm not sure if it was the production, the play itself, or the fact that I was unknowledgeable in the works of Shakespeare. I suspect it was a mixture of the three, but I would guess it was mostly due to what I originally thought: this is simply not material that is interesting to watch on stage for it it too constricted by the limitations of the theatre. This is a heavily political piece of drama that has to skirt around the violent repercussions of the ample dialogue which doesn't make for interesting viewing. So when I heard that Ralph Fiennes was directing and starring in a film adaptation of one of the English master's more obscure work I was more than skeptical.

This film goes to show, however, what visionary talent can do with a mediocre piece of material (mediocre Shakespeare compared only with himself, that is). Fiennes is probably slightly mad, but this self-assured directorial debut is a seismic piece of cinema and he is the fault line. "Coriolanus" is a triumph of political film-making, made fresh and uncomfortably relevant when mentally placing it on the backdrop of our economically turbulent Europe.

Fiennes stars as the title role. Caias Martius Coriolanus is the greatest war hero that Rome has. A viciously blood-thirsty fighter, unscrupulously elitist, and with a huge presence he comes to political stardom after a triumph against a warring neighbor. But Rome is in turmoil; it is fighting an internal war as well as its foreign conflict as hunger and repressive political measures bring protesters to the streets in violent form.

When he is voted to be a member of the consulate crafty politicians and his own mother (a superb Vanessa Redgrave) seal an unfortunate fate for Coriolanus, as he is asked to earn his legitimacy through popular support of the public. But the plebeians are easily swayed, and power-hungry senators turn the masses against him. Banished and vengeful, he turns to Rome's foreign enemy and his greatest rival, Tullus Aufidius (Gerard Butler), to exact his revenge on his family and his nation to which he was once so devoted towards.

The stage production I saw was modernized as is this film version, but Fiennes' vision is so much more fully realized than the Ashland production, I think, in part because of his ability to show the aggression, anger, and chaos of the state. The first half of the film is unflinchingly violent, taught and bracing, and unnerving in the zeal in which every character down to the last extra played his part. The military engagements are so gripping that a missile's explosion comes as a relief.

Fiennes has created a world scarily close to what I imagine a fascist Italy to be like. It is world of metallic colors, camouflage, symbols, icons and stark beauty. The police are a faceless, solid wall of black and guns, and Coriolanus' crystal eyes and rigid, grey uniform distance him from the masses. He is a dragon who can move the earth with his gaze; a figure of rage and contempt who was born to lead, but not to guide. It is a bleak Rome with an ugly poetry.

This film works so well because everyone involved was able to understand the point of view of the director and they added to it with gusto. I would have shied away from such a project and consequently would have missed out in being a part of a very skillful adaptation. Shakespeare (whose language has been kept) would have been proud, I think. This is what he had envisioned: a stark world, a god-like man amongst pandemonium, and a mass of sheep all too willing to be directed by cunning minds. He has created a monster, but he has also revealed monstrous truths. I await Fiennes' next work with anticipation.

4/4

No comments:

Post a Comment