Laurence Olivier's acting style in Shakespearean roles and film

Olivier and Shakespeare: An Analysis

Laurence Olivier is still regarded as one of the greatest actors ever to live, both on screen and on stage. He embodied so many of the classically regarded technical skills and yet was able to touch audiences with his renditions of Shakespearean characters. His acting style and visual presence is quite different than many modern day actors, and even compared to some of his peers, like Marlon Brando or Dustin Hoffman, Olivier shines in a very unique way as a mixture of old-world technique and modern style and grace. Olivier's work overlaps in many ways, and his work in the body of Shakespearean theater and film is no exception. In his roles as Hamlet, Henry V, and Richard III, Olivier is able to show audiences the perils and pitfalls of the human psyche and experience while giving some of his most technically and classically acted performances of his career.

Style

Stylistically, Olivier was keen to bring much of the old world acting flair and flamboyance to the 20th century audiences who enjoyed his work. In the Shakespearean body of work, Olivier was cast as a variety of characters, yet he was able to capture the same flair on stage as he did on screen. Those that came after him, including Brando, would embody a more "natural" acting style in which the pomp and circumstance of wigs, putty noses, and flashy accents were regarded as out dated (Spoto, 110). Yet in his roles in Shakespearean cinema, he was able to unite both the artificiality of acting and character with his keen ability to draw audiences' attention to the emotions and words that were spilling from him.

In delivering lines, Olivier was more of a classical actor than many of his cohorts (Cottrell, 45). Yet on screen, Olivier himself admits that he had his own trials and tribulations trying to adapt his stage acting to acting in front of a camera. Olivier's style was slightly muted as he was not able to act as flamboyant and flailing as he did originally on stage (Cottrell, 76). Yet his ability to learn to be more subtle and accurate with his lines and his emotion helped add to Olivier's prowess as one of the greatest actors of all time. Though it is rather difficult to observe in some of his Shakespearean roles, Olivier rides the fine line between overacting and under-emoting, and is able to deliver characters that are true to their intentions, thoughts, and actions, yet still dramatically inclined and interesting to watch.

Theme and Visuals

Thematically, Olivier's body of work relative to Shakespeare was quite varied. Shakespearean acting was and often still is regarded as the end-all in the acting world (Spoto, 103). It is a true test of skill, talent, and technical ability as an actor or actress. Olivier did much to add to the thematics of the films and on stage, as he was a master craftsman of theme and tone. He also worked to resurrect the true emotion and grit within the themes of his work.

In Hamlet, his "To be or not to be" soliloquy is still regarded as perhaps the greatest of all renditions of that very famous monologue (Cottrell, 9). It is no accident that Olivier was able to take a 300-year-old piece of theater and create visual magic. The scene was shot with Olivier reciting the famous lines atop a large rock outcropping. His body sprawled out in a sort of careless yet comfortable manner. This is the scene of a man contemplating death, suicide, and Olivier knows that in order to set a scene of inner dialogue and the search for inner peace and understanding, that the role of Hamlet should be played as casually and as simply as possible. Overly dramatic and visually clutter scenes, according to Olivier, took away from the beauty of the lines and of the thoughts that were being conjured in the minds of audiences as the lines, which were already so familiar, were being read.

The Shakespearean body of work was never really taken much out of context by Olivier (Spoto, 69). He acted in films and on stage and the visual appeal was never meant to draw away from the raw acting and pure line delivery. His films were set in the time periods that Shakespeare had intended his plays be set in. This is unlike many later directors and producers who insisted on taking Shakespearean genius and setting the plays in modern-day or in other time periods or settings (Spoto, 72). In this way, the Olivier films that represent his Shakespearean body of work hold true to the way the author intended his plays to be seen. There is very little adaptation in Olivier's body of work, and that goes for his Shakespearean works as well.

Attitude

Oliver appreciated classic theater as much or more than anyone in his day. In his body of work dealing with Shakespeare, he took each character quite seriously, only giving his very best efforts in a blended form of old and new (Spoto, 44). He delivered lines in a way that Shakespeare himself would be proud of, and didn't leave very much room for linguistic or attitudinal interpretation. He took the classics at face value in an attempt to breathe new life into them. These classics were meant to be a test of classical acting technique, and Olivier was a true professional in this manner. Later, in many of his films and acting forays, he began to deconstruct his own art, as actors who could portray characters from a more "natural" acting standpoint began to take center stage (Cottrell, 99). But for his roles in the Shakespearean body of work, Olivier was playing characters as classically as possible.

Some of Olivier's greatest contributions to screen and stage shine through in his Shakespearean characters. Olivier was a master of divulging his characters' intentions and feelings through no-visual cues, or through the attitudes and interactions that these characters exhibited. Olivier himself was very intrigued by psychologist Sigmund Freud's work (Spoto, 194). In Hamlet, which is steeped in oedipal connotations and desires, he plays a role that can very easily be construed as Freudian, though Shakespeare himself likely provided just as much insight into the world of the sub-conscious as Mr. Freud. Never the less, Olivier was a master at delivering the sub-conscious to the audience, while keeping the other characters in the films in the dark about his own desires and hidden agendas.

Overlap and Conclusion

Nearly all of Olivier's work overlaps in some ways. Many impersonators, including Peter Sellers were able to take Olivier's style and dramatic character delivery and make fun of the consistency and hyper-dramatic nature (Spoto, 88). Yet the experience of being impersonated, even with much hyperbole and exaggeration shows that Olivier certainly had a specific acting style and attitude that was easily identifiable and universally recognizable. Olivier is perhaps known best for his dramatic style, yet all of his movies in the Shakespearean body of work exhibit certain similarities between the way the characters were portrayed and how Olivier chose to both deliver lines and give the audience a candid glimpse into the world of Hamlet, Richard III, and Henry V (Spoto, 90). All of these roles were roles where Olivier could use his genius in sculpting a very believable character and story out of his own dramatic and thematic actions.

Throughout Oliver's career he was forced to adapt his style and delivery in many ways and on many occasions. All in all, Olivier was a true master at theater and acting as his ability to subtly yet recognizably change his acting style to accommodate different roles is evidenced in his body of work. Yet at the same time, Olivier is able to stay true to his own classical acting genius, and in this way carries his talent and knack for timing and emphasis through all of the Shakespearean films he was involved in.