BBC Shakespeare: The Hollow Crown, BBC2 / BBC HD

[JFLL]

Your problems are caused by there being only one tuner. They have nothing to do with the hard drive.

Thank you for clarifying that, but it's in effect the same problem, isn't it (the tuner goes with the hard drive)? But I do have another freeview box doing nothing, so presumably I have two independent tuners. As I see it it's a question of how to get one of them to record onto the hard drive and the other (the old box) to feed through the TV while the recording is going on. Any ideas how to do this?

Caliban said:

But then, there is almost never a situation where I want to do that, when repeats and/or iPlayer are available.

As I said, I find that firstly repeats are often not forthcoming these days, at least in the immediate aftermath, e.g. for The Hollow Crown, Schama on Shakespeare, Nunn/Irons et al. on Shakespeare, and secondly the iPlayer is no real solution – I don't want to watch a programme on a computer, but on my TV in the sitting-room.

[Nick Armstrong]

As I said, I find that firstly repeats are often not forthcoming these days, at least in the immediate aftermath, e.g. for The Hollow Crown, Schama on Shakespeare, Nunn/Irons et al. on Shakespeare, and secondly the iPlayer is no real solution – I don't want to watch a programme on a computer, but on my TV in the sitting-room.

Agreed, no substitute. But can be a useful fall-back if all else fails, esp if the visuals aren't the be-all and end-all. PLus a lot the of the stuff I watch does seem to be repeated - I forgot about the 5th in the "Secret History of Streets" series last week... Along it pops again this week...

[Anna]

...I found the dialogue too rapid, lacking in colour and correct emphasis....stress....given as a stream of words, rather than broken to give significance....

I'm glad you said that and that aeolium in a later post agreed because that was my thought exactly but not a problem with RII last week.

[Resurrection Man]

Thank you for clarifying that, but it's in effect the same problem, isn't it (the tuner goes with the hard drive)? But I do have another freeview box doing nothing, so presumably I have two independent tuners. As I see it it's a question of how to get one of them to record onto the hard drive and the other (the old box) to feed through the TV while the recording is going on. Any ideas how to do this?

....

It is very straightforward (assuming that both machines are SCART..which I suspect is the case.). You take your aerial lead and simply loop it from one machine to the other. Chances are that at least one of them will have an aerial loop in/out. If not the you will need a splitter for your aerial.

Next, get thee down to Ye Olde Shoppe called Maplin and get something like this http://www.maplin.co.uk/multi-scart-...ing-unit-33166. You may need an extra SCART lead if you don't have enough. You plug the output of this switch box into your TV SCART input. Then simply plug each of your freeview gizmos into two of the inputs on your SCART switch and away you go.

Of course, you might be lucky and actually have a second SCART input socket on your TV in which case you don;t need the SCART switch as the TV becomes the 'switch'. Any more help just PM me.

[JFLL]

It is very straightforward (assuming that both machines are SCART..which I suspect is the case.). You take your aerial lead and simply loop it from one machine to the other. Chances are that at least one of them will have an aerial loop in/out. If not the you will need a splitter for your aerial.

Next, get thee down to Ye Olde Shoppe called Maplin and get something like this http://www.maplin.co.uk/multi-scart-...ing-unit-33166. You may need an extra SCART lead if you don't have enough. You plug the output of this switch box into your TV SCART input. Then simply plug each of your freeview gizmos into two of the inputs on your SCART switch and away you go.

Of course, you might be lucky and actually have a second SCART input socket on your TV in which case you don;t need the SCART switch as the TV becomes the 'switch'. Any more help just PM me.

A million thanks, RM, that sounds really useful. I'm pretty sure both machines have SCART leads and sockets. My other half will bless you if I can get it to work, as she's feeling severely deprived of news (God knows why), what with all this Shakespeare hogging the late evening schedules.

[Nick Armstrong]

I think the lack of posts here about the play may say it all....

....I thought it generally a poor attempt, mainly due to the AUDIO....I found the dialogue too rapid, lacking in colour and correct emphasis....stress....given as a stream of words, rather than broken to give significance....

I thought Hal was a complete miscast....

I too had some misgivings about Part I, though not as sweeping as yours, 8thO. The rumbustious scenes in the Boar's Head didn't come off well i thought, not least for the reasons you say. I also had reservations about Irons in the early scenes (too stagey). But I didn't think Hal was miscast, and Irons came good in the scene with Hal half way through (Act III sc. 2 "Lords, give us leave; the Prince of Wales and I | Must have some private conference" etc etc). I thought SRB's Falstaff looked wonderful but that his voice wasn't strong enough in the riotous scenes - but again, later on, he came into his own and was heartbreaking in the quieter moments ("banish not him thy Harry's company: banish plump Jack, and banish all the world").

And I though Part 2 last night took all the strong elements from Part 1, and was a magnificent achievement. Probably a more successful play anyway, I thought they scarcely put a foot wrong, the touching moments given full effect and the whole thing looking wonderful.

Really great stuff, I though. No one should miss Part 2.

[ferneyhoughgeliebte]

And I though Part 2 last night took all the strong elements from Part 1, and was a magnificent achievement. Probably a more successful play anyway, I thought they scarcely put a foot wrong, the touching moments given full effect and the whole thing looking wonderful.

Really great stuff, I though. No one should miss Part 2.

... 'though I wouldn't agree about it being "a more successful play": the father/son relationship is superb in both plays, and one of the best experiences I've had was "doing" Part One with a class of fourteen-year-old boys.

[DracoM]

Another rivetting and compelling performance from Jeremy Irons. Less is more. Riddled by guilt, self-doubt and unwilling to hand on the crown, asking Hal if he knows what he's wishing for in trying it on, and the advice about giddying busy minds with foreign quarrels well delivered. Those beady-eyed foxy faces of the courtiers, everyday plotting, hard-faced shifters and compromisers in front of both of them as he talks. You just knew that Jeremy Irons' H4 has never once lost his unerring suspicions and / or skill for knowing a rum'un when he sees them and sniffing out the plotters.

For me. he has dominated the middle reaches of this cycle more than any other actor.

SRB is terrific at the off the cuff throwaway lines, looks great, lovely sense of timing, his movement - or lack of it - is excellent, and his growing fear of old age and distance from London / power / headlines in the company of others eg Shallow etc is the geriatric world he hates was beautifully conveyed in a kind of slow comic anger, and the final scene with Hal as H5 was chilling - just done by a look, long camera take of his face. Yes. BUT. but, but.....don;t think much of the Bardolph and Pistol, sorry. And the Boy who plays so much a part in H5 looks too well-fed to me. he should be a shifty-eyed ferret of a boy. This one just looks sad, depressed and browbeaten. No flickering spark? Quickly and Tearsheet are being shamefully under-used - Walters / Peake....blimey, two top quality doxies and hardly on screen.

[Northender]

I'm looking forward to seeing all 4 once The *lymp*cs have started.

[Nick Armstrong]

... 'though I wouldn't agree about it being "a more successful play": the father/son relationship is superb in both plays, and one of the best experiences I've had was "doing" Part One with a class of fourteen-year-old boys.

My father (former English teacher) made a very similar comment on the phone this evening! Fathers and sons, eh!

I shall hereafter, my thrice gracious lord, be more myself.

[amateur51]

I too had some misgivings about Part I, though not as sweeping as yours, 8thO. The rumbustious scenes in the Boar's Head didn't come off well i thought, not least for the reasons you say. I also had reservations about Irons in the early scenes (too stagey). But I didn't think Hal was miscast, and Irons came good in the scene with Hal half way through (Act III sc. 2 "Lords, give us leave; the Prince of Wales and I | Must have some private conference" etc etc). I thought SRB's Falstaff looked wonderful but that his voice wasn't strong enough in the riotous scenes - but again, later on, he came into his own and was heartbreaking in the quieter moments ("banish not him thy Harry's company: banish plump Jack, and banish all the world").

And I though Part 2 last night took all the strong elements from Part 1, and was a magnificent achievement. Probably a more successful play anyway, I thought they scarcely put a foot wrong, the touching moments given full effect and the whole thing looking wonderful.

Really great stuff, I though. No one should miss Part 2.

Yes, yes, yes!! - many thanks for your insistent recommendations earlier Caliban

I thought there was some very useful tho judicious cutting too - made it fly along very pleasingly. All-in-all a very moving and top-class affair. What a relief

[Pipisme]

I watched Richard II and found it absorbing with speeches of great eloquence and pathos. I didn't watch Henry IV Part One, Part Two was alright, but didn't capture my interest like Richard II. I will not be watching Henry V. I can't really get interested in Henry IV and Henry V, both the plays and the title characters. Because Richard II is androgynous he is a much more interesting character than the two Henries. Except for that famous speech in Henry V, the Henry plays don't have any memorable speeches or lines.

[DracoM]

Oh dear, oh dear.

H5. Ahem.

Sorry - I thought that production ponderous, so many scenes clumsy and slow, unstructured, plus some of the script editing highly suspect, and they never seemed to make up their minds what stance they were taking. We had visuals that implied battered, brave jingoism, but when it came to the big set pieces, the verse speaking [ apart from the excellent Anton Lesser/Exeter] was very poor - no unified and agreed style, such that sometimes it was iambics as prose, and sometimes very odd emphases on parts of lines - Hiddleston particularly guilty here - and sometimes the older actors reaching for the limpid rhythms that Shak's verse has within it. Tom Hiddleston just looked embarrassed and out of this depth. He had been truly excellent in the H4 plays, but here, he just look bafled as to how to play it, and the big speeches went for nothing. Yes, I fully appreciate that our day and age is not ripe for the Olivier-heroics, but in the attempt to blend stirring rhetoric with modern undemonstrative language, the production just stumbled and wilted inside the enormous 'thing;' that TV has to make out of spectacle. I kept thinking 'they're doing this for the American market, and it shows'.

Why on earth OPEN the play with scenes of H5's funeral? Weird, weird decision? Why leave out the Boy's crucial speech in which HE is the one who changes sides, rejects the relentless cowardice and predatory activities of the 'three swashers' - far more effective as a criticism of the whole Falstaff ethos than trying to do it by visuals? One of their very own sickened by the ethos?

After the excellence and coherence of the R2> H4 sequences, I was really looking forward to this, but it disappointed at almost every turn. And given the huge talent on show in front of the camera, even more depressing.

It was dreadful.

[Scorrevole]

Agreed. And missing out most of the opening speech of KHIV Part I:

So shaken as we are, so wan with care
Find we a time for frighted peace to pant
And breathe short winded accents of new broils
To be commenced in strands afar remote..

which sets up the whole atmosphere of Henry IV's disfunctional court, was also a weird, weird decision that I've found it very difficult to forgive them for.
Hiddlestone was good as Hal, though.

[DracoM]

Very surprised there are so few postings on H5!