God, remember one year ago? Tom Hiddleston was everywhere. Tiddles/Hiddleswift was cooling off, but we literally talked about Tom every single day, because the Glorious Tiddlebanging of 2016 was amazing. I would give just about anything for another Tiddlebanging right about now. As it is, Tom has been largely undercover for months. He did all of his promotional duties for Kong: Skull Island in the spring, and then I guess he was working on Marvel movies? Infinity Wars, perhaps? I guess. According to Hollywood.com, Tom has been trying to put together a movie version of Shakespeare’s Richard II though, only they are having trouble getting the financing.
Tom Hiddleston’s new movie adaptation of William Shakespeare’s play Richard II is struggling to obtain financing. The Avengers actor, 36, has been lined up for a role in the movie since 2015, but director and producer James Ivory says that despite a stellar cast, which also includes Homeland star Damian Lewis, 46, he can’t obtain funding from investors.
“They look at you like you’re crazy,” he tells British newspaper The Guardian. “There is an assumption that there is no money to be made from such an investment.”
Ivory, whose 1993 drama The Remains of the Day was nominated for eight Academy Awards, says that despite a superb script from Oscar-winning scribe Chris Terrio, financiers won’t get behind the project. He explains he’s been told the movie is a “terrific idea”, but that, “nobody comes forward with the money”.
Written at the end of the 16th Century, Richard II is one of William Shakespeare’s lesser known plays, and tells the story of how English monarch Richard II was overthrown by nobleman Henry Bolingbroke, who became King Henry IV. The play has never been adapted for the screen, although James Bond actor Ben Whishaw starred in a 2012 adaptation as part of the BBC’s The Hollow Crown TV series, a collation of several of Shakespeare’s historical plays. Hiddleston also starred in the TV series, playing British king Henry V in three later episodes.
Ivory, 89, wants around $19.5 million to make the movie, and ideally wants to film it in 3D.
“It would make a fantastic thing visually to do a medieval film in 3D,” he says. “We know very little about the medieval age. You read books about it. You go to museums and see the armor and so forth, but that’s really all we know about it. When it’s delivered as a film, you learn a lot.”
Just my opinion: the reason they’re having issues with financing is because James Ivory wants this to be 3D. I realize that Hollywood thinks 3D is the future and everything (I’m waiting to see if that’s really the case), but the cost doesn’t make much sense for what would likely be a pretty staid historical drama. That being said, it doesn’t sound like a huge budget in Hollywood terms, and I bet they’ll eventually find a way to get some or all of the financing. So Tom will likely get to do Shakespeare again eventually, maybe after he wraps on the stage production of Hamlet?
Photos courtesy of ‘The Hollow Crown’ and WENN.
It is not Hiddleston’s movie although he has been attached to it for years. It’s James Ivory’s movie. 3-d Shakespeare when nothing but Marvel is a guaranteed hit? I love Mr. Ivory, but his heyday was the ROOM WITH A VIEW and other lovely productions. I think money people probably find him very old-fashioned.
Yes. His only hope for this is to chop 75% off the finance and get the BBC to do it (they’ll do it any way he wants) or Netflix/Amazon (and they’ll annoy him by wanting input). Unfortunately, we’ve had the 200 anniversary so I think £20m for a straight film is unlikely. We have NTLive these days, dontchaknow.
Absolutely. TV is the place to go now for anything risky.
And I don’t even know why that would be a bad thing, you know? Like you say, he’s coming off dated here, holding out for a budgeted cinematic film.
Agree with both of you. With tv, you can do it right, make it as long as it needs to be, rather than squeezing it into a two hour film slot that today’s audiences will not leave home to see.
“Netflix/Amazon (and they’ll annoy him by wanting input). ”
Everyone who works with Netflix talks about how hands-off they are, and so far Amazon has only been buying movies already made, they aren’t producing (yet). He’d have to ditch 3D, but if James Ivory really wants to make RII, Netflix is probably his best bet. They’d love some award-baity artsy Shakespeare movie to put up for trophies.
@Sixer – well, given what I’ve seen in “The Hollow Crown” TV is not such a great option, either: the chopping was horrendous, characters’ lines were exchanged – the Bard is almost always cut up in some way, very rarely does the whole thing get through, and then there’s arguments about Quarto v. Folio . . . I belong to a Shakespeare Close Readers group and the brackets and other indications in the text of which lines come from which source can be maddening.
TV has even more time limits than film and I thought the cutting and line switching in “The Hollow Crown’s” Henry VI passed into the territory of unforgivable.
@seesittellsit, the first Hollow Crown series was great. The second was unnecessary: the plays themselves, with the exception of Richard III, weren’t as good; good actors were lost in a muddled plot; and Cumberbatch seemed to be acting in something else entirely and swallowed all the air and ate all the scenery, leaving nothing for the others around him.
Just FYI, there is no such thing as “the whole thing” with Shakespeare. He wrote for the stage, and for a collaborative company. Posthumously, his texts were collated and edited. Moreover, 18C editors, from whom we draw most current scholarly editions, edited with a specific and different aesthetic in mind.
👋 And it isn’t Tom who is trying to put this together. That isn’t his job!
Btw TG I saw Dunkirk and thought it was great. Oscar for the score?
So glad you enjoyed DUNKIRK!
Dunkirk blew. Me. Away.
ALL the awards for Nolan.
But don’t google “Dunkirk bloopers” ! 😯
Shakespeare and 3D do NOT go together. This is surprisingly ill-advised for Ivory. How about a modernized version instead, sir? I’ll write it. Could be quite pertinent right about now.
I would see Hiddles’ RII in a heartbeat, btw. In either iteration.
AND Hamlet. If I lived closer, dammit.
However close, you would need to have gotten lucky in the Hamlet ticket ballot. I wasn’t unfortunately. I loved the Ralph Fiennes set in the modern day “Serbian war lord” Coriolanus film, but this sounds odd.
The 3D makes no sense to me either, unless he’ll add dragons or some other not-really-medieval feature to it. ANd he’s 89, so better hurry up.
James Ivory has really struggled since the death of his producing partner Ishmail Merchant. He was the financing genius of the partnership whilst James directed.
Also, minor quibble which is giving me an eye twitch in that article, but Henry Bolingbroke was more than just a mere ‘nobleman’. He was R2’s first cousin. Through Henry, the crown acquired the duchy of Lancaster and the ducal title that the monarch still holds today.
Indeed. Issue of Edward III together set a lot of events that formed us, especially but only, the monarchy.
Not to mention Ricky’s guards helped save Henry’s life during a peasant revolt by hiding him in a castle wardrobe armoire.
It was a cupboard in the Tower I believe! Sorry I’m a bit of a nerd!
🎓
“There is an assumption that there is no money to be made from such an investment.”
Good assumption.
Seriously though he needs to go look up what Coriolanus and MacBeth made and cut that financing request by about 85%. At least. Plus you’ve attached two actors who can play the roles, but neither one can sell or open a movie on their name. Few can! So the concept must sell…and this concept is not going to sell.
Kind of sad it’s so hard to get financing for most projects but cartoons, action movies and feather light comedies. I used to be able to bring my older relatives to the movies quite often. Now there’s hardly anything for them.
word
Many independent directors have said that it is extremely difficult to get financing for small films. Jarmusch has been particularly vocal. Tom has never mentioned anything about this filmed version of Richard II. James Ivory has popped up about once a year for the past 3 years, usually in Italian magazines for some reason but this time the Guardian, to say he is trying to do this but can’t get financing. The fact that he is 89 years old might also be adding to the problem with insurance unwilling to take that risk. Also, Ivory has been saying it is next on Tom’s schedule for years now and that schedule hasn’t had much free time in it.
You kinda need to set your sights LOW (shoestring low) or go to TV. But that’s how people watch now, isn’t it?
Yes, he needs to consider the options that you and Third Ginger discussed above. But even still, he’s 89 years old. Many insurers still won’t take that chance.
Him being 89 makes me feel OLD myself!
Does there really need to be *another* RII, I wonder?
With Hiddleston? Yes.
I think he’ll be a great Richard, but we already have Whishaw, and the Tennant version is available on DVD and full-on Medieval. Outside of Hiddleston, the market for this isn’t big, especially if it isn’t innovative. There is a lot of Shakespeare that he could do; this doesn’t seem like a worthwhile choice at this time.
👍
@t.fanty – not after Whishaw’s. He totally blew me away. Hiddleston’s Henry V was pale by comparison in the same series, although I lay a great deal of that down to the director. Sometimes the emphasis on “accessibility” goes too far and drains the power and music out of the language, and given the speeches in Henry V, it was a mistake and deprived Hiddleston of a chance to strut his stuff vocally where it would have been entirely legitimate to do so. I thought Hiddlston did a much more memorable job as Prince Hal in the Henry IV section of “The Hollow Crown”.
Showed what could have been in Coriolanus!
I think Fizzy would make a good Richard II. I’ll bet he does hysteria really well. I would like to see him work with an innovative and dynamic director, though. Whishaw was great because a) he is great, and b) Goold gave the piece some amazing visual images, and c) Rory Kinnear. RII can really drag if it is an indulgent production.
Thanks Kaiser for the Prince Hal visuals. A two hour movie of Prince Hal (with at least one hour in the steam room) would be a better film in 3D. I for one would pull out my chequebook for that!
The entire film should be in the steam room.
Well some rooms would certainly be steaming! 🙂
Being a nerd again it did make me laugh in the Hollow Crown when he limped off the battlefield with an injured leg then had a shoulder injury in the steam room. In fact he had a horrendous facial injury when an arrow entered below his eye .
https://mattlewisauthor.wordpress.com/2014/05/21/the-scar-of-henry-v/
Mind you in the Agincourt scenes they did give him a little cut in his face!
Agree that the 3D makes no sense. I do hope this gets made as a regular film, though. Some of the speeches in the play are among the most beautiful and sad of all Shakespeare’s history plays. The language is so beautiful and Richard II is a great character. I know Richard III is more fun and meaty as far as roles might go, but I think Hiddles can really make Richard II come alive for an audience.
Ivory said he doesn’t want traditional Shakespeare though. Not the language, not the speeches. He wants a history-action spectacle.
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.
…We few, we happy few…
We band of brothers…
I once told a group of students that the Battle of Agincourt was on my birthday. Several said, “The same year??” That’s what you get when you teach for 37 years.
Okay, we seem to have veered from Richard II to Henry V. My lines were from John of Gaunt’s death bed scene in Richard II, the “this sceptered isle” speech. The band of brothers and happy few are from Henry V.
We’ve gone full Hollow Crown series now lightpurple!
Given that I sometimes forget my debit card pw, it’s no wonder lines I read decades ago occasionally run together!🤷🏻♀️🙄
I knew that, LP. I just had the Agincourt story on hand.
I understood that reference.
@MI6 Flying monkeys!
For the two versions of the sceptered isle in one https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fGas3e7p_9A
Wasn’t King Arthur a recent big budget flop? Can’t see another medieval story doing great unless it is pure fiction and includes fantasy/mythical creatures.
@Secret squirrel – it was a flop, and it was a flop because despite trying to pull off a medieval look, it totally moved away from the original and inserted extra story lines, ridiculous special effects for their own sake, and basically destroyed the meaning and charm of the original. It deserved to flop.
I might be in the minority here but as a black american woman I love a good monarch ousting and generally historical fiction adaptions and shows and plays. that said….NO BODY WANTS TO SEE IT IN 3D…. thats corny and lame.
Ousting or jousting or both?
Hiddleston as Hal and Henry were his best performances ever. And his looks back then…. Swoooon….. Nothing tops that look.
This isn’t Tom Hiddleston’s production, it’s James Ivory’s. Hiddleston and Damian Lewis are lined up to star, but it’s Ivory’s project. That said, they’ll go a long way, in my opinion, to beat Ben Whishaw’s brilliant portrayal of the conflicted, initially promising, but ultimately failed Richard II. In my opinion, even among other players in the Henriad presented by “The Hollow Crown” series, like Jeremy Irons, Rory Kinnear, and Hiddleston, Whishaw’s Richard II was the standout performance.
Studio’s are becoming more and more reluctant to fund mid budget movies anymore. They want the guaranteed big money with comic books or animation pics. Only low indie projects are getting green light. Monetarily less risk. That’s why some directors and stars flocking to Netflix and cable.
I hope that with “Hamlet” for the RADA benefit Hiddleston will return to his roots and go in for serious drama and theater work. I think he should give the “I want to be a global film star” campaign a rest – it isn’t working and I’m guessing that even if he made a good bit of money, it’s not really feeding his basic talent. I have my issues with him, but he’s highly intelligent and passionate about acting – stuff like “Kong” can’t be feeding that much. For that reason, also, I hope this film finds financing so he can return to who I personally think he was meant to be.
The Powerball is up to $510 million – if I get lucky, perhaps I’ll give Ivory a hand here. But one of the conditions will be to drop the 3D business – NOT ON!
Make sure you get an executive producer credit!! Actually, that would be enormous fun!!
Drop the 3D business and don’t let anyone fiddle with the text!
More Shakespeare. That is all.
Agreed, but maybe not Richard II? The Hollow Crown production was great, and Ben Whishaw was fantastic. I feel like they could pick another play (and with a smaller budget).
For that matter, Thomas of Woodstock or Marlowe’s Edward II have close ties to Richard II and would attract attention for being less known.
The RSC has done a Rome season recently, but I’d like to see Antony & Cleopatra and Julius Caesar get the Hollow Crown treatment. Technically, Coriolanus and Titus Andronicus are part of Shakespeare’s Roman set too, but Coriolanus has had several high-profile versions done already and Titus is pretty obscure (and bloody).
I’d love to see Tom as Anthony and Ruth Negga as Cleopatra. Read that idea somewhere and I really liked it
BBC & Sam Mendes/THC people are supposed to be doing the Roman plays next.
On a related subject, the ballot was just as I expected. Tuesday night 8 o’clock I got an email informing me that I had been unsuccessful and with the demand so high, it would be unlikely that they would draw again. I knew I always had the worst luck where luck was needed. /cries
Has anyone on CB gotten through?
My friend was “successful” yesterday, but this time RADA wrote to more people than they had tickets left. So when my friend finally managed to come through, the tickets were gone. So no Hamlet for us.
I hope it will work out.
I love Tom playing Shakespeare.
Is it anyone else who managed to get Hamlet tickets btw?