User Reviews (10)

Add a Review

  • This adaptation is one of the most impressive of the often variable series of Beckett on Film productions. Anthony Minghella - I must admit I have not seen his well known films - is spot-on with an interesting interpretation; replacing the quick-fire spotlighting of a dark stage with subtly worked angles, and largely close ups of the three main actors.

    Juliet Stevenson, Kristin Scott Thomas and Alan Rickman are magnificent; what a task it must have been to have learned all those rapid-fire lines. The camera itself is a player, with its buzzing, denoting fore-grounding and focus on characters. A brilliant editing job is achieved; the play's cyclic repetition is negotiating excellently. This is a very inscrutable text at first viewing, but considering the same material is repeated, many of the verbal tricks become clearer. A convoluted narrative, made up of three different perspectives; always, the language is masterful in its precision.

    A fine adaptation; perfectly captures the material of a sometimes-overlooked play: one of Beckett's shorter and less lauded works, but one every bit as deadening and obliquely shattering in its impact as the others.

    Rating:- **** 1/2/*****
  • Play by Samuel Beckett, this film is available on You Tube. Stars Alan Rickman, Kristin Scott Thomas, Juliet Stevenson
  • matthewjbond9 February 2007
    Warning: Spoilers
    Anthony Minghella follows much of Beckett's stage directions with his filming of "Play", but he also takes some pandering liberties that hurt the internal logic of the piece. In a stage production, we would see three characters in urns: from left to right, W1, the wife; M, the husband & lover; W2, the mistress. (This, by the way, was not Beckett's published arrangement, but one he chose when he directed "Play" some years later.) They are in urns, and we can see only their faces, covered with some of the same material as the urns. They speak only when a light, shone from below, is upon them, and the light flits from face to face, fragmenting each monologue, so that we slowly pick up the thread of the love triangle & that each of them is now in some afterlife, not knowing that the other two are beside. They speak rapidly and in a monotone, and the entire play is repeated.

    Minghella changes the light to a camera. He places these urns in a larger field of many urns, each babbling its own story, and he gives the feeling of old film, with the sounds of film rattling in the projector in the start & snapped off at the end. These are intelligent means of adapting the play to a film. He, however, cannot keep the camera still, so that we see the characters from the side, not merely from the front. This lessens the intensity & the logic of the questioning coming from a single point. Part of what makes "Play" effective theater is the strong sense of confinement. This is more difficult in a film, and even more difficult on video, but it loses even more of that sense when the camera cuts from one angle to another.

    The play is well-cast & well-acted. The actors keep to the rapid-fire rhythm & the flat voices. Minghella's rhythm gives nothing to an audience. We must pick it up on the fly, very quickly. If he could only have kept the camera still, close up, face front, then it would've been perfect.
  • This, being cutting-edge modern drama, I approached with not a little trepidation when Channel Four started its "Becket on Film" season. I'd already watched the five-minute short "Catastrophe" with John Gielgud and I didn't know what the hell that was on about.

    For the newcomer, "Play" is bizarre and difficult to get to grips with. Three disembodied heads gabble away incessantly in monotone voices, each relating their own versions of a love triangle while a frantic CCTV camera cuts between them. I applaud Becket's decision to play the story twice, as otherwise I would not have fully appreciated this complex tale.

    Essentially, "Play" is "Rashomon" at Warp 9. The shaky, noisy camera cuts between the three heads (Kristin Scott Thomas, Alan Rickman and Juliet Stevenson) as they fulfill their punishment to talk about their sins for eternity. It gets more and more frantic,cutting away first in mid-speech, then in mid-sentence, then in mid-word. Then Stevenson starts laughing hysterically. At times the film itself breaks down, as if it has been retrieved from hell itself.

    At the end of 15 frantic minutes I was left a little confused by the three-layer dialogue. I shall need to watch this a few times, preferably with a script, to pick out the separate narrative strands. However, Minghella's direction was nothing short of sensational. He may have taken liberties with Becket's original text, but the rapid cross-cutting, repetition and the intrusive whir or the camera as it selected its target, made for one of the most breathtaking fifteen minutes of film I have ever had the privilege to see. This will not appeal to everyone, but I recommend it to the more adventurous viewer.
  • One would think that three people sitting in urns, not moving, telling the same story twice would be dull and boring, but its not. Using cross cutting and cinema tricks to make what on stage is a very static, very dull and over rated piece of twaddle, Anthony Minghella had fashioned an interesting and quite stimulating piece of film. What the point of it all is or is not I will leave up to the viewer.

    The real achievement of this film is how it makes essentially a play where nothing physically happens into a movie with motion and movement and excitement (of a sort). Film students would be hard pressed to find a better example of what it means for the cinema to be in motion.
  • This is a brilliant work, and for me the highlight of the Becket on Film Series. "Play" tells of the horror, the purgatory of broken human relationships. Yes it is banal, yes it is repetitive, but that is precisely the point. The menage a trois depicted has trapped each of the three characters in an endless hell, the same thoughts over and over, the same self-justifications, the same loss. No one can hear the others. Mingella brilliantly shows us in cinema what could never be shown on stage, that this pain goes on forever, to the end of life and even into death. In showing the three urns surrounded by hundreds of others, we see everyone else trapped hopelessly within the tyranny of their private griefs. The most challenging, the most arresting short film i have ever seen. Highly recommended.
  • jruhym16 September 2002
    This film would do the micro machine man proud. I came across it on PBS in progress. I quickly switched on the cc on my TV to see if it could assist my understanding, but the captions could not keep up. It was even hard to tell if the characters were enunciating properly. The frantic pace and striking utterances go far to stir the emotions. It was so intriguing that I plan to read the script and see if I can rent the short somewhere. I also think CK will attempt to rip this play off for one of its commercials.
  • 'Play' is one of Beckett's most delightful confections, a farce, a vision of hell, a discordant fugue, a logorrheic din: as much a parody of Sartre's 'Huis Clos' as Sunday supplement suburban entanglements.

    Three heads - a man, wife, and mistress - look out from urns, and relate the story of the man's affair and the wife's reaction to it, in a rhythmic, overlapping gabble, repeated twice to convey the idea of eternity. These lives, brought to crisis point by a very physical interruption - adultery -are condemned to a disembodied, inhuman, mechanical repetition of a previous existence.

    Here, Beckett's interest in memory is at its most alienated - recalling the past is not an act of retrieval, an attempt to piece fragments of a shattered identity as in, for example 'Krapp's Last Tape'. It is a punishment, devoid of poetry, oppressively banal. Worse, the reminiscences are prompted by an unseen lighting man, like a Gestapo interrogator, switching speedily between characters, creating the play's rhythm, forcing them into 'life'. Much as they might like to, they cannot hide, they are at this man's mercy.

    You can imagine the effect in the theatre: not only is the mundanity of everyday life shown to be mechanical, barren, dead, with the urns and the repetition not a metaphor for hell or limbo, but for life; but the way these insignificant lives are interrogated, as by the Gestapo, or God, or their own conscience, or paralysed desires, or us, or SOMEBODY, forces us to admit that we don't live very well.

    Minghella, unlike his 'Beckett on film' collaborators, eschews over-fidelity. He keeps Beckett's words, but is radically unfaithful (a compliment!) to the play, liberated from theatrical constraints. His bombardment of montage; his intrusive use of colour, sound, camera angles; his turning Beckett's lighting man into the camera, with its clicks and whirrs and zooms; all fundamentally destroy Beckett's theatrical space.

    A condition where hell mirrors suburban life, where immobility , darkness, emptiness, inertia are the tenets, is given an incongruous energy, a visual excitement. Beckett's verbal and lighting rhythms are transformed into those of editing. Life in hell no longer seems that dull and repetitive; neither, by extension, do our own lives. The intrusive, oppressive interrogation of the light becomes the more distanced voyeurism of the camera - it is not this latter that breaks the space but the editing.

    This is an excellent example of an artist freeing himself from constraints, undermining his text, while remaining superficially faithful. Surely the appropriate response to 'Play' is to play. A very brave adaptation.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    "Play" is a 15-minute short film based on a work by Samuel Beckett. The director is the late Anthony Mingella and he cast a trio of actors that he worked with on several occasions again: Rickman and Stevenson on "Truly Madly Deeply" for example and Kristin Scott Thomas on "The English Patient" of course. Rickman looked a bit like Geoffrey Rush in here I thought. Anyway, we see a world full of urns with heads coming out of these. These heads keep constantly rambling and shouting, but only talk to themselves, not to each other. The makeup work was maybe the best thing about this little movie. It added a nice atmospheric touch to it. i cannot say I was too amazed by the contents however. I did not care for any of the 3 main characters to be honest, neither in a positive nor negative way, and that's usually the worst that could happen. Also, if you are not an English native speaker, make sure you get subtitles, because the dialogs are incredibly fast from start to finish. Final verdict: not a great watch.
  • dipsy1726 January 2003
    Almost impossible to understand for a non-native speaker (I bet even native speakers would have difficulties). But worth seeing. Thrilling, in some way. I didn´t understand much of the story (if it has one) and would need to see it again and again, but it is impossible to get it in Germany (lucky I´ve seen it at all!). It´s a shame, because "Play" is just fascinating.