25th Hall of Fame
Chimes at Midnight (1965) -
This is both my favorite and the most unapproachable Shakespeare adaptation I've seen. I've noticed some people express difficulties with understanding and following along with the dialogue and that applied to me as well when I first watched this film. Unlike some adaptations of
Romeo and Juliet and
Macbeth I've seen, I hadn't read the plays this film was based on at the time I first watched it and had a reasonable amount of difficulty with following along, occasionally rewinding the film by a minute or so every now and then to catch myself up. Though I wasn't quite sure how I arrived to the ending, I found both the journey getting there and the destination quite emotionally powerful and I knew I would revisit this film at some point. Going into this film again for this Hall of Fame, I still hadn't read the source material, but I had already familiarized myself with the story of the film. Due to that, I was able to fully enjoy this film and recognize it as the masterpiece it indeed is.
As with my first viewing, I found the story and the character arcs emotionally powerful. What starts out as a disagreement between Hal and King Henry IV over the former's friendship with Sir John Falstaff in the first half slowly develops into a much greater conflict where the only way out of it will involve Hal betraying one of the men. This all culminates in a devastating final act which has an oblique emotional register, heightened by how Falstaff and (for the most part) King Henry IV weren't bad men. Beyond this, I think a lot of thought was put into the various steps of Hal's character arc along the way. Perhaps the most effective sequence in the first half of the film occurs in the tavern after the "failed" heist on a group of pilgrims. While talking to Hal, Falstaff tells him an increasingly elaborate lie on why his group lost all their treasures, boasting that he fought off 100 men while escaping in the process. Of course, Falstaff lies in a similar fashion during the Battle of Shrewsbury, but since the stakes weren't as high during the former incident, Hal reacted to his lie by playfully laughing and mocking his father, someone who greatly disapproved of Falstaff. I also liked the various scenes in the comparably slower second half where Hal's existential conflict was more at the forefront of the film. Overall, I think the strengths of Shakespeare's plays were realized to their full potential for this film.
The technical merits of this film are also great. As others have mentioned, the Battle of Shrewsbury is the main highlight. Not only is it technically impressive, but it's also edited quite frenetically and lovely to look at with the gusts of steam rising from the ground as it goes on. I also love how, in spite of all the brutality in that sequence, Welles still injects some humor into it with the occasional shots of Falstaff cowardly hiding throughout the battle. For 1965, it's a pretty breathtaking sequence. I also liked the various camera angles in the film, specifically with how the camera would look up at some characters to make them appear powerful and domineering, while looking down at other characters to highlight their inferiority. Finally, the various beams of sunlight which shined through some openings in Henry IV's castle into some darkened areas of it made for a pretty effect.
Overall, I'm glad I got to rewatch this film for this thread. Though it took me a few viewings to fully warm up to it, it was definitely worth it. My advice to anyone who couldn't keep up with the dialogue is to look up the plot to familiarize yourself with any details you were fuzzy on and rewatch the film with subtitles.