Culture: Jude Law may have underdog appeal as Hamlet
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Reddit
Google
Stumble Upon
Fark
Newsvine
YahooBuzz
Bebo
Twitter
Independent Minds
Poor Jude Law. He must be quaking in his boots. He's been talking about playing Hamlet in the West End for at least seven years and the moment has finally arrived. He opens as the Dane at Wyndham's Theatre on Friday – and rarely have the critics' knives been so far out of their scabbards.
To begin with, he's a movie star and nothing is more likely to raise the hackles of a self-respecting drama critic than a celebrity taking a break in their busy schedule to do 12 weeks in the West End.
Then there's the fact that Hamlet is just about the most demanding role an actor can play. Look at the kicking Mel Gibson received for daring to take on the Dane in Franco Zeffirelli's 1990 adaptation – and that was meted out by movie critics, a much more charitable bunch.
But most importantly, there's Law's tarnished reputation. Last time he trod the boards – as Dr Faustus at the Young Vic – he got a fairly easy ride, but that was back in 2002, when he was still considered an up-and-comer. Since then he's become a poster boy for overexposure. Next time James McAvoy, Matthew Macfadyen or Damian Lewis are weighing up an offer from one of the big Hollywood studios, a quick glance at Jude Law's career will give them pause for thought. Saying "yes" too often is never a good idea.
There have been a number of lows in Law's career – Alfie, The Holiday, Sleuth – but the worst was probably Chris Rock's gag at his expense during the 2005 Academy Awards ("You want Tom Cruise and all you can get is Jude Law?"). Law can't even claim it was tinged with affection. It was out-and-out abuse and Sean Penn was obliged to spring to his defence (spouting that Law was "one of our finest actors"). He was paying the price for having spread himself too thin.
Yet, Law's career is in such a pitiful state it could conceivably work to his advantage. Drama critics like bashing movie stars who wander on to their patch because they can't resist the urge to topple some big shot. But they can scarcely take Law any further down than he already is. Indeed, he may have underdog appeal – the theatrical equivalent of Jade Ewen, Britain's entrant at the Eurovision Song Contest. For his sake, let's hope so.
'Hamlet' is at Wyndham's Theatre, London WC2, from Friday to 22 August
View all comments that have been posted about this article.
Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.
- Print Article
- Email Article
-
Click here for copyright permissions
Copyright 2009 Independent News and Media Limited
Comments
Firstly, Law's alleged "overexposure" was not his doing...all of the movies he did in 2004 were filmed over a 2-year period, and the studios made the decision on when to release them, not him. It was beyond his control. Also, out of 6 films, one of them was a cameo and the other a narration, he wasn't even seen in it. It seems that this bit of nothing, overblown newsbite should be laid to rest once and for all, it's old and tiresome, and really, irrelevant. And Chris Rock...who is he? Someone who tried to be funny but only ended up alienating himself because he was rude and didn't know when to quit. And just what is HE doing these days? Sum of that equation? Big freakin' deal!
Secondly...exactly what can YOU say about Law's career? Who are you? Do you pay his bills? Do you take care of and spend time with his children? What measuring stick are you using by which to judge where he should be or what he should be doing? The picture media paints of actors versus the reality of their lives are totally different. Do you know his goals? Do you know what goes into his decision making process? Do you know what scripts he has rejected and why? If you, as a media person yourself, ever read any of his interviews, you would know that his children are very important to him and that he chooses not to be away from them for long periods of time, which makes it hard to be that big-Hollywood-shot that YOU claim he should be.
Thirdly, I agree with the above poster, this is a pretty low road for you to take just days before his opening. But don't worry, Toby, it'll come back to you, big-shot writer for the Independent that you are. And no, I'm not Jude's mommy, but I am a person who gets tired of seeing actors who don't deserve it being picked apart by little simpletons like you trying to come off smart and smug.
And yes, of course he's probably quaking in his boots....it's Hamlet, who the heck wouldn't? Simpleton.
You must criticize these participants of reality shows and young stars of dubious reputation that only seek publicity, they probably enjoy the lines in you blog.
Readers who are not familiar with Young's ridiculous and offensive attempt to pretend to be a theatre critic can see, just from this short entry, that good writing is not something that comes naturally to him. He has to work at it--but doesn't bother. In one very short item, he is lazy (or ignorant) enough to spout three cliches--quaking in his boots, raise the hackles, trod the boards. Nor, in this item, does he avoid ignorant (or lazy) mistakes in grammar. The fourth paragraph begins with the adverbial phrase "But most importantly" when what is meant is an adjectival one, "most important"--an abbreviation of "what is most important." "Importantly" means "in an important (pretentious) manner." The sixth paragraph begins with a pronoun (it) that has no antecedent.
Young ends this puerile rubbish with the pious hope that Law may profit from the underdog status that Young has taken such pleasure in portraying. Once again, it doesn't take any acquaintance with him beyond this one brief item to see him for what he is. Oh, by the way--if Hamlet is "just about" the most demanding role an actor can play, would he please tell us what IS the most demanding one? He can't, though, can he? That "just about" is, like "arguably," the ignoramus's attempt to sound knowledgeable and judicious.
All the previous commenters make valid points. I would also add that if Jude Law were actually "quaking in his boots", then that would be proof that he's got guts, doesn't it? Certainly he has taken on Hamlet knowing full well that 'critics' such as Mr. Young would have it in for him. But wait a minute, maybe it's just proof that people like Mr. Young don't matter.
Next time, Mr. Young, have the courtesy to sheathe the knife until after the performance.
and exposed the drought of talent and sympathy in the British system of critique. I agree with all of
you and embrace your" telling it like it as"(tried and true expression but so aptly fitting the situation.
Obviously Mr. Law is still high enough in anyone's ratings chart to sell out the run and garner an
audience of fans of his and fans of Shakepeasre from every continent in the world.(A verifiable piece of
imformation. ) He has prepared for this for a long time and made plans several times until this finally
came to fruition. He possesses the intelligence and aility to employ acting talents comprising the use of his body like an instrument and acting chops that have been honored by two Oscar hominations and
many, many awards. Theatre was his training ground and is still his first love but the money is made in film.
In films his beauty is a considerable asset and never gioes unnoticed but onstage he can really show
how it all comes togther under hs control. I am breathlessly awaiting my experience this summer with
Jude and Hamlet. If I prejude on the side of aprobation, it's because i know i will nit be dissappointed.
Side note to Tobey's boss, If you are striving to sell more papers by this kind of journalism, it's too
beneath contempt to discuss - if you didn't know quite how bad this guy's work was, you do now - I
would do something about it.
being a critic requires some responsibility of fairness. such vitriole without basis is immature. jude law is an actor who is happy to experiment with new directors, avant garde directors. he doesn't
aspire to be brad pitt. he is happy taking cameo roles if it affords him a challenge. he is a working father supporting three children and his choices on how to do so, wise or not, are his own. who excactly are you and what have you accomplished to be so cruel and judgemental.
Toby's core point is not necessarily without merit. If JL were a starrer of blockbusters such as Dark Knight or Casino Royale, Toby is pointing out that critics will be more apt to dismiss him. "How dare he return here, the sell out!"
With his convoluted summation of JL's career, Toby is concluding that critics may be kinder and gentler.
Which raises the question, if the critique of a stage actor's performance is subject to such incongruity, why does anyone pay them any mind, since it's likely they had their review written before the curtain went up? I will choose to judge for myself and leave the critic reviews for the brainwashed masses.
I saw Hamlet last night and all I can say is that Jude Law was simply sensational. Probably his finest performance and he carried the whole show... Outstanding, simply outstanding!
I saw Hamlet last night and just wanted to say the Jude Law was outstanding and seemed a natural in the role which he played with great power, expression and emotion. His performance actually helped me to appreciate and understand what I feared were the complexities of Shakespeare and I plan to go out today to buy Hamlet and read it again.
Who's quaking in his boots now, eh?
I have never felt moved to respond to a blog before on any topic but having been to watch Hamlet at the Wyndham's Theatre yesterday I was so cross at the Toby Young "article", I just had to respond.
I am not a big film watcher and honestly haven't seen Jude Law in any of his film roles so I had no knowledge or expectation of what he could deliver as an actor. I also deliberately didn't read any reviews before I went because I didnt want any preconceptions.
What I saw on stage was someone who has clearly done his time in the Theatre, with good stagecraft, use of voice, really good physical use of his body in the space (and I dont mean in an obvious pin up boy way).
But I also felt that his film experience added another dimension because he is used to working on the detail, the look, all the small things that bring genuine emotional authenticity to a role. The stagey mannerisms that can plague many an RSC production ( I did really like David Tennant in the role but you know what I mean) have obviously been beaten out of Law by the likes of Anthony Minghella. Law's Hamlet was a realy intelligent genuinely modern portrayal of the Danish Prince.
So, why couldnt' you at least give someone the respect of waiting until after the opening night before you threw in your two ha'peth worth.
Oh and Toby, if everyone's a critic, you came across as a real twerp on Come Dine with me (Really - cook your own dinner!) but maybe I should have predicted this even before you did the programme.
I am off now to read some reviews.
By the way, has anyone noticed what a fine actor Ron Cook is