Ralph Fiennes's directs, stars in Shakespeare's 'Coriolanus': movie review

Shakespeare's 'Coriolanus' gets an update in Ralph Fiennes's new production, packed with acting talent.

Larry D. Horricks/HONS/The Weinstein Company/AP
Ralph Fiennes (third from l.) leads a strong ensemble that includes Vanessa Redgrave (second from l.) as the bloodthirsty mother Volumnia.

"Coriolanus," one of Shakespeare's least-known major plays, is also perhaps the one most "relevant" to today's headlines. Maybe this is why Ralph Fiennes, who directed John Logan's adaptation and stars as the Roman military hero, decided to modernize it so that it summons up Iraq and Afghanistan and other hot spots.

First the good news: Fiennes leads a cast that, at least in the major roles, is uniformly powerful. It's wonderful to hear actors like Brian Cox, Vanessa Redgrave, and Jessica Chastain (yes, she's in this, too), speak these great incendiary lines.

Fiennes's Caius Martius, later known as Coriolanus, is contemptuous of the clamoring Roman citizenry he defends and idolatrous of his enemy Tullus Aufidius (Gerard Butler). His downfall lies in these divisions. His fall from power, once set in motion, is horrifyingly swift. Fiennes played Martius at least once before, 10 years ago, on the London stage and at the Brooklyn Academy of Music, and it's a role that clearly galvanizes him. If you want to see what Voldemort is really capable of, see Fiennes here.

The greatest performance, though, is Vanessa Redgrave's as Martius's blood-lusting mother, Volumnia. It's an extraordinarily powerful piece of acting, all controlled rage. When, in the end, that rage erupts, her vehemence splits the screen.

The bad news is that this production is yet another attempt to update Shakespeare. The play is brought into a world where not only the dress is modern but so is the technology. TV news bulletins punctuate the (not particularly well-staged) warfaring action.

I admit to being old-school when it comes to Shakespeare. I think the great plays do very well by themselves – and speak to our age more clearly – without all this hyped-up hoopla. But be thankful for small favors: "Coriolanus" is a lot better than Baz Luhrmann's "Romeo + Juliet." Grade: B- (Rated R for some bloody violence.) 

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.