Henry V Mise En Scene

Explain why a scene, chapter, sequence or speech has been added or omitted from one or more screen variations.
Act Three, Scene Three of Shakespeare's Henry V was omitted from the first film adaptation, which was directed by Lawrence Olivier in 1944. The language in the hypotext is extremely hostile and the scene itself is controversial. Shakespeare's use of lexis such as 'shrill, shrieking ' and murdering the old and putting them 'on pikes'
Henry V is set during a wartime period and the first film adaptation was released in a wartime period. Olivier tries to conceal the monstrosities of war and places Shakespearian England behind a strong and capable leader, Henry. This would have been an important motif to an audience of 1940's Britain
Gorman Beauchamp criticises Olivier's adaptation labelling it a 'distortion' as the film diverts the audience's attention away from the problem of the war's justification. The chorus at the conclusion of the hypotext is also omitted. Adaptations take points and keep them but omit others things to fit time restraints and to keep with Hollywood convention . Concluding the film with the English losing the war would have not been conducive to British morale in 1944, therefore the effect of the film is moral boosting and sucessfully in its 'endeavour to project a romantic illusion' of
The Branagh adaptation was also filmed in a war time epoch, after the Falkland's war. Arguably the scene was also inappropriate for a post-Falklands war film to feature. However the 1989 adaptation does not omit the final scene of Shakespeare's play where the chorus explains the loss of the French throne and therefore maintains the authenticity that Olivier's adaptation does not. The scene was likely left in because unlike the Olivier version the film was made post-war rather than mid-war, therefore would be easier for a post-war Britain to empathise with. The inclusion of the chorus may also have been kept as a sombre message or out of respect for the post Falklands veterans. However, Henry's depiction in the 1989 adaptation is still heroic, we are provided with a long tracking shot of Henry cradling a child which maintains his heroic image and does not remove the sense of patriotism that is still present in the film. Branagh wanted the play to be ‘reclaimed from jingoism ’however Branagh's adaptation retains some of the patriotic tones from Olivier's adaptation. Cooke notes that Branagh's film pointedly operated within the generic arena of a host of mainstream war films during the decade and contrives parallels with Platoon (1986) and Full Metal Jacket (1987)’. These are also films that capture the hardship and shatter