Kenneth Branagh and Laurence Olivier are often considered to be quite
similar. This is based on obvious similarities such as the fact that they
are both actors and directors and that they have both acted in and produced
adaptations of Shakespeare's plays. One effective way to compare the two
is to consider how both have approached the same film. This will now be
completed by analyzing and comparing the film "Henry V." This will show
that Branagh and Olivier are very different, with many of their differences
related to the time in which they directed.
The first difference that is seen in the two films is that Olivier's
version seems more like a movie of a play, than a movie. This has several
impacts on the way the film is viewed. The first is that is makes you more
aware that you are watching a Shakespeare play. As a viewer, this changes
expectations of what will be seen. In movies, you generally expect to see
a realistic chain of events, where you follow those events. While you are
being shown various scenes, there is a tendency to be drawn into the scenes
and to experience them almost as if you were part of them. In this way, a
good movie actually allows the viewer to forget that they are viewing a
movie. This does not occur in Olivier's version because the play format
makes the viewer aware that they are being told a story. In this way, the
viewer actually becomes like part of the audience, almost as if they were
sitting in the Globe Theater in London. It is difficult to decide whether
this is a positive thing or a negative thing. In one way, Branagh's
version is more effective because it is easier to get drawn into the scenes
and journey with the characters. In another way, Olivier's version is
effective because it allows you to watch the scenes as an outsider and
question them. Overall, it is like the two versions result in two
different ways to view ...