The Tempest (1980)

When I first saw this production many years ago, I was repelled by the sight of Ariel and some of the other male fairies in jock straps. My dismay at that feature of the production blinded me to the excellence of the acting. However, having watched this DVD (along with each of the other DVDs in the BBC Shakespeare series) several more times subsequently, I now can recommend this production enthusiastically. I still wish that the fairies had been better clothed, but I ignore their attire and concentrate on the quality of the acting and the overall staging.Michael Hordern is outstanding as Prospero. His peroration is deeply moving, and throughout he captures the nuances of the role superbly.Christopher Guard and Pippa Guard are fine as Ferdinand and Miranda. Some of the other reviewers on this site have criticized them for blandness, but any blandness lies in the roles rather than in the performances.Likewise, although I find the characters of Stephano and Trinculo tiresomely unfunny, the fault lies not with Nigel Hawthorne and Andrew Sachs but with Shakespeare's writing of the roles. At any rate, the magnificence of the line "Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows" is more than sufficient to offset the tedium of many of Trinculo's other lines.Derek Godfrey (who died only a few years after this production was staged) is entertainingly psychopathic as Antonio, and he is well paired with Alan Rowe as Sebastian.David Waller is a bit wooden as Alonzo in the first half of the play, but he raises his level of acting much higher in the final Act. John Nettleton is memorably poignant throughout the play as Gonzalo.Most of Shakespeare's beautiful wording is included in this production. The main excisions (reasonably well-judged excisions) are abridgments of the exchanges among Gonzalo and Antonio and Sebastian in Act II, and curtailments of the pageant in Act IV. The whole of the preliminary portion of the pageant has been removed.I'm glad that I waited for several years before writing a review of this production. Having now become attuned to the many merits of this rendering of Shakespeare's magical play, I can recommend it warmly.

One of the most mysterious plays by Shakespeare that will remind you of other plays they may be remakes of, like "Twelfth Night" and a shipwreck there too. The usurper is also common in "As You Like it" for example, or "Hamlet" in a tragic mode. The use of fairies, spirits and even monsters are not uncommon in his plays like "A Midsummer Night's Dream", or "The Merry Wives of Windsor", or "Macbeth" of course in a tragic mode.But this play is special because it actually starts the action on the ship when it is being shipwrecked by a storm. The situation on the absolutely isolated island is difficult for the "survivors" because it is in the hands of a "sorcerer" who has enslaved some monster, Caliban, and has put to his service Ariel and his band of spirits. That gives the island a magic look and sound that is charming and disquieting, and the master, Prospero, can control the tempest, the shipwreck and the survival of the victims.In fact he knows who is on the ship and he manipulates the elements to both get a husband to his daughter, get reinstated in his position of Duke of Milan by forgiving the people who ousted him, get his real vengeance from the manipulators and plotters, and go back home after liberating Caliban and freeing Ariel of his dependence.All together it is a simple play, a comedy of sorts and hence there would be little to say about it. And yet it is somewhere more complex than that. What makes it different, deeper? It is the belief that if you have the proper knowledge, the necessary books, the patience and the peace of mind necessary you can control the world both in its physical essence and in its supernatural dimension. And that is not only a simple trick used on the stage. The whole plot, the whole play cannot work if those spirits do not exist. Somewhere there is a real belief you can move tempests and mountains with proper spiritual faith.There is also the exploitation of the local and slightly underdeveloped native enslaved to do all the hard work and difficult tasks. Colonialism is all contained in that attitude that considers that local native as not being in anyway able to get to the civilized level that might provide him with a soul. And he insists on the vicious nature of this native who can get drunk easily and then become murderous, and who can only dream of killing his master out of some vengeance.Then the rest is more common with the social vignettes on the political plotters, and on the servants that only dream of getting drunk on their master's wine and of stealing all they can from their masters or anyone else. There is a deep social pessimism in this play: the social servants are unredeemable and are unredeemed even if they are redressed.Finally this play does not work at all like many others. It could have been a tragedy but it was made into a comedy and there are no tricks like four weddings or whatever. Just one plain and simple wedding. There is no vengeance really since it all ends up in forgiveness and some verbal repentance. And the tempest that comes out of the mind of one man is there to bring that fake justice. It repairs nothing and it does not re-establish the balance of before. It is very fine and dandy to go back to Milan but you have lost so many years being no one in an island lost in the middle of some ferocious ocean. It is not even a comedy because the end is just a dull rebalancing act that brings no fun and no justice, and there is no justice if there is no punishment and reparation, and no fun if there is no justice.I like the play because of its mysterious and magical atmosphere and because of the pure and virginal love affair it contains, but it is like some after thought or testament, a regret before going for good, or whatever you may think, but after such a play that ends in such a flat leveling there is nothing to add or say and you could add long dancing interludes or singing intermezzos that would not add one iota of depth to this play.I have seen that play so often and in so many countries and places that I start knowing it by heart, and yet I do not discover anything new in it any more, as I do with practically all other plays by Shakespeare. It is a case where I would easily accept that this play was written in the circle in which Shakespeare was shining, but maybe not by the master himself.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

This must the worst move I've ever seen! I thought that by the fact that it said BBC on the cover, that it had to have some kind of quality or at least be ok. This is ridiculous! some excuse it must get since it was made in 1980 but still. To actually dress up the air and water sprites in thong and cover them with baby oil and glitter is not the best way to take a dramatic play of Shakespeare seriously. The one actor I could actually watch without getting attacks of laughter was the drunken servant! And the scenography looked like it had been brought in from a school play. Everything look as if it were made of papier-maché! well maybe I do ought to recommend it after all, not if you want to see a good Shakespearian play but if you would like to get hysterical laughter attacks from oiled men in thongs crawling over each other...erh...wait a minute...was this a PG-13 movie? I think not....

The production values are weak, the handling of the spirits is laughable, the wedding masque is tedious, and Ferdinand's hairstyle seems, to our current sense of fashion, ludicrous. BUT this television of Shakespeare's play is to be prized for some excellent performances, most notably Michael Hordern's restrained, intelligent, compassionate and emotionally profound performance as Prospero. Listen to him handle the difficult exposition in Act I, watch how he gives his approval to his daughter's marriage, how he releases Ariel, and the wonderful transition he makes into the final epilogue. There are some fine performances here--you just have to look past some unfortunate design and directorial choices.