# data[].attributes.body
In the Elizabethan context the people were blinded by religious ideals as well as the bloodlines and legitimacy of the royal family. By standing between two bishops "“Two props of virtue for a Christian prince to stay with him from the fall of vanity” The personification of the props to make him seem most pious, as if they will stop him doing evil. The idea of royalty is emphasised through Buckingham's declaration "your right of birth, your empery, your own." The asyndeton influences the people's minds that there is no option other than Richard for king. In the contemporary context the public is influenced by their gullibility and want for a change. The public is seen as contemptible, foolish and dazzled by fame. This is portrayed through the high angle shot peering down at the streetlife below following Hastings' execution. This represents how the public are merely seen as pawns to boost a person's power.  Thus manipulating the crowds to follow him in pursuit for power. The dinner party scene uses cross-editing to make the women's views and opinions seem very confusing, making them seem foolish and ill-informed. Al Pacino then ironically contradicts the purpose of the docudrama, saying "get me out of this documentary," juxtaposing his earlier comment that "everyone has a right to an opinion." This creates interesting parallels between Pacino and Richard III's character.

The links between the common citizens of both eras are brought together through Vanessa Redgrave's proclamation, "truth is those in power have total contempt for everything they profess, everything they pledge, and that’s what Shakespeare’s great plays are about." The public are fooled by those in power in different ways in each context, but they both lie through leader's deceit, deception and irony.

# data[].attributes.body
The scene where Richard is crowned implicitly reveals his tactically deceiving nature, paying tribute to the overall idea of pursuit for power inherent within the text. Evidently, the scene in RIII implicitly demonstrates the replacement of integrity with deception, whereby Buckingham’s antithesis contrasting Richard to the old ‘false’ King, captures Richard as a devout Christian, true born king. This holds importance in a society under the scope of providentialism, where is it believed that God has a plan, and everything happens by his will, intending that any leader is appointed in charge by Gods will and with his blessing. Thus, in choosing to deceive the common people to assume control, Shakespeare demonstrates Richards willingness to stop at nothing to achieve power, presenting deception as a value that lacks relevance. However, Pacino has reshaped this notion towards in his contemporary re-examination, whereby now all they have to do is “win over the people” in a society dominated by democracy and politics. Evidently, deception is similarly utilized in this task, where the high angle shot of him looking down upon the citizens, whilst half his face hides behind shadows, draws particular attention to the fact that he is hiding behind a mask, displaying only what the people want to see in order to advance to seize control of the throne.

# data[].attributes.body
The idea of duplicity and deception is evident in Richard III and looking for Richard, due to the different context, different perspective are formed from the Elizabethan era and the contemporary audience. Through the use of various film and literary techniques. In looking for Richard the transitions of executioner to the high angle shot of the streets of New York, sees the a “god-like” view which is symbolic of the Power in which Richard (Pacino) possess. As “all that’s left is winning the people” which highlights how it shows power is still evident to the contemporary audience and the Elizabethan era. Also the common citizens of the Elizabethan era obey Richards command “Long Live King Richard!” in which he smirks as he has the world in his hand.

# data[].attributes.body
It can see in the docudrama that the idea of power and it relevance to politics has dramatically changed since the Elizabethan era. In the play, religious motifs have a more significant role in the eventual appointment of the leader. “but like dumb statues or breathing stones stared each on other and looked deadly pale.” Buckingham puts the people of the Elizabethan Era down stating that their gullible and irrelevant to the appointment of a new monarch. However Richard appeals to the other lords stating that they do matter, however this goes against the value of integrity in which he lies to gain his path to the throne. He false acts humble and states he is not worthy of such a title and that he should go read the bible, whereas this is ironically contrasted to his attitudes and demeanour towards society in which he is cynical in nature. In the play, power is seen as a lust and can be achieved through the manipulation of people similar to the context in the docudrama, however the influence of religion in this rise to power has dissipated over the course of time. Thus, in the docudrama, the high-profile celebrities are portrayed as the people who have power. This can be seen through the contrasting low angle shots of Kevin spacey and Al Pacino with high angle shots of the people the general public. This juxtaposition of camera angles puts celebrities on this platform above society suggesting their power and influence on a more secular society similar to the play. The “pawn” style depiction of the public as well also suggests the gullibility of the public. This is supported by the panning shot of two members in the public dressed in clothes which suggest that this is no problem. The public is portrayed as gullible and easy to manipulate to suit the those who have power i.e. celebrities. Highlighted when Kevin spacey quickly and easily quietens a crowded area.

# data[].attributes.body
It is

# data[].attributes.body
Governments that aren’t in power are always attempting to achieve their goal of control over the masses and the land; this has been a re-occurring theme throughout human history. The use of false ideals and propaganda are nothing new and they’re both explored in King Richard III and Looking for Richard. In the play, Richard and Hastings play to the strong, unchallenged belief in god; Richard is introduced and walks into the crowd with a bible in his hand and two cardinals by his side. Hastings continues to explain to the crowd how holy he is exclaiming “and see a book of prayer in his hand”; Richard also goes on to say, “I do beseech your grace to pardon me, who, earnest in my service of my god”.

Richard plays his duplicitous nature when telling the audience forgive me for I was completing religious tasks. Both Hastings and Richard know the gullibility of the public and they use this to their advantage; playing to the one aspect of their lives they can’t deny, their religious beliefs. Looking for Richard plays to this also but changes it slightly, in the docudrama the people succumb to Richard and his ruling much quicker with little injection for propaganda by Hastings; Kevin Spacey, who plays Hastings, begins to manipulate the narrative and narrate at this point to further the point of his once quote, “they can’t do it alone.” The docudrama also dials down the role of the religious aspects, removing the role of the cardinals knowing that the modern society has increased in their secular beliefs rather than that of traditional Christianity.

The society of Richard III believed in providentialism, the right to rule. As society changed and the contexts shifted it has become one where the right to rule is seen to only be achieved through democratic voting. Due to this shift the use of religious manipulation has become less and less effective; this is proven in the contrast of Richard in the play using both the bibles and the cardinals and just the use of the bible; still deemed an incredibly impactful object in society.

# data[].attributes.body
Corruption, power and political pursuit: stand still, transcend time and are perennial to humanity's functioning. Richard III, offering a religiously bound context, divulges a version of corruption through Richard, suggesting malevolence build upon natural evil. Looking For Richard however, delving into a secular context, reveals corruption as a human trait but a learned and educated value. Richard, combined with religious allusions and his already 'snake like back', as well as being blatantly called 'foul thing' and 'deformity' is portrayed as a moral deformity with a physical manifestation. Richard III, also blames those around Richard for their ambition and corruption for having created Richard. Whereas, Looking for Richard blames the people for accepting the corrupt due to their own naivety and stupidity. It seems to be that in the modern, secular, context, modern audiences fall to the paradox of naivety. Once naïve, can you ever relieve yourself of not knowing? This blends into post-modernism, and the lack of teleological meaning.

# data[].attributes.body
The idea that through false piety a political identity can gain the support of those who high certain beliefs in high regard. Richard does this in the Elizabethan context by professing to being an outstanding Christian. Though a comparison to a contemporary context a politician nonchalantly assuming the title of 'Christian' in order to attract voters and not differ from societal excpecaation of conformity.

# data[].attributes.body
The values of of cynicism, polititical corruption and the need for exploitation in order to gain leadership are present in Richard III and looking for Richard

# data[].attributes.body
It is important to keep in mind the context surrounding Shakespeare's play whenever examining the ideas it portrays. The fact that the Elizabethan context was one which placed high emphasis on religious morality impacts the way we understand why Richard did what he did to win over the people. His ironic use of the bible to deceive the general public into thinking he was a holy man plays on the value placed on christian morality of his time

On the other hand Looking for Richard examines this scene in a secular context and as such little to no emphasis is placed upon religious morality. In stead, Richards deceptive ways are looked at through a

# data[].attributes.headline
I am British therefore I am intelligent - LFR

# data[].attributes.subject
I am British therefore I am intelligent - LFR

# data[].attributes.body
How does the Talmud link to KING RICHARD III. sum1 hmu

# data[].attributes.headline
Politics, Power and The Common Citizen - JB

# data[].attributes.subject
Politics, Power and The Common Citizen - JB

# data[].attributes.body
The corruption of power and politics in manipulating the common people highlights the values of duplicity and deception which transcend contextual circumstances. This is seen in the film when Pacino requests to get out of the documentary. To the people he sees as inferior in their understanding of Shakespeare he demonstrates approval and acceptance to their face, but maintains duplicity by disrespecting them to Spacey. The transcending of these values is highlighted in the antithesis on  and repetition of ‘but’ “He is not lullin a lewd love-bed, But on his knees at meditation”. This type of antithesis is repeated through the use of the word ‘But’. Duplicity of Richard is examined here explaining that he is ‘praying’ whilst he isn’t, to show he is a rightful ruler, maintaining a fake demonstration of nobility in power to a naive audience.

# data[].attributes.headline
Politics, Power and the Common Citizen (AH) 

# data[].attributes.subject
Politics, Power and the Common Citizen (AH) 

# data[].attributes.body
In the docudrama deception and duplicity is shown through the various film techniques used. The scene where Richard is standing above everyone else shows the way he uses his power to look down on the general public below, and as they rejoice him and praising him, Richard smirks. This represents the deception shown by Richard, fooling his people and in his mind he is thinking that the public is stupid and being fooled by him. This is further expressed through Richard holding the bible, being a strong religious symbol, he uses its symbolism of good and power to influence and deceive the people. Showing the influence of religion during the Elizabethan era, being able to overpower the common citizen's ideas and judgement.

# data[].attributes.body
In both Shakespeare's Richard III and Al Pacino's reexamination, there is an emphasis on the notion that the price of power comes at the expense of the people, reflecting a contemptibility evident with hierarchy over the commoners of everyday life. In the original play, Richard's distain towards those who entrusted him with power is shown in " What tongueless blocks were they! Would not they speak?". Richard's use of the metaphor 'tongueless blocks', denotes a leader that has a disparaging connection with their people, referring them to an object as to dehumanise others to extend his own superiority. Likewise, the use of inclusive pronouns in "your King" accentuates the manipulation of citizens, with subtle subliminal messaging underscoring the disregard for the people in order to gain false power. This draws direct parallels to Pacino's appropriation of it, made evident in the dinner-party scene.

* Camera often looks down on citizens, looks up to leaders – power comes at the expense of the people (pawns in a game of influence).

* Hastings’ beheading fades into a high angle shot of New York’s streets. The people below are made to appear helpless and insignificant, almost as if the beheading was also intended for them. It relates to the idea that the real victims of the pursuit of power are the people.

* Richard is shown holding the Bible in his hand, yet exposes his middle finger in his other hand, it highlights that his appearance of religious piety is just a façade of deception and religious betrayal.

# data[].attributes.body
Both Looking for Richard and King Richard III convey the idea that power and politics are heavily reliant on the everyday individual, and the fact that those who strive for power are duplicitous and lack integrity through their means of achieving their ambition. This is demonstrated through the play with the notion of 'Tudor Myth', as Richard's rise to the throne is labelled as “Your state of fortune and your due of birth.”  The inclusive pronoun of 'your' highlights that the throne belongs to Richard through blood, which ironically, it doesn't. The role of Buckingham as the advisor of Richard is reflected in the docu-drama through the role of Kevin Spacey. The way in which Spacey takes control of the docudrama emulates the way in which Buckingham perpetuated Richard's monarchy. The cross-editing of Hastings beheading which flashes into the streets of New York with high shots, insinuates that the people are merely pawns of politcal reigmes and that political leaders manipulate the individual to aid their ambition.

# data[].attributes.headline
Politics, Power and the Common Citizen - 

# data[].attributes.subject
Politics, Power and the Common Citizen - 

# data[].attributes.body
The key values of Politics, Pursuit of Power and the Common Citizen are thoroughly expressed through both Shakespeare's 'Richard III' and Al Pacino's modern day reinvigoration 'Looking For Richard'. Exploitation of religious beliefs as a way of achieving power is explicitly commented upon through Act 3, Scene 7
Within Looking for Richard, Spacey takes over the narration of this scene in the film, this is suggesting that in the modern context he is an adviser and political spin doctor for Pacino’s Richard. While Buckingham was important in the original play, in the film he has more of an equal role to Pacino/Richard in helping chart the course to power. This is the same that any political adviser would have now in the modern context. In other words, spacey is advising Pacino/Richard on this scene as that would be a more contextually appropriate role for Buckingham/Spacey in the modern context.

# data[].attributes.body
In Richard III, the ideas of political corruption, cynicism, and the willingness of political figures to exploit the gullibility of the people through a religious context. The props of the two priests and the bible, supported with the dramatic irony of Buckingham's dialogue, clearly suggests an exploitation of the gullibility of the people, and how easy they are manipulated. The re-visitation of this scene by Pacino is expressed through the high angle shot of the common people, followed up by the low angle shot of Kevin Spacey. This supports the idea of the manipulation of the common people, but in a contemporary context, this is discussed in terms of modern politics and the corruption and manipulation they undertake.

# data[].attributes.headline
The Value of honesty and Integrity by Percival Redouchio

# data[].attributes.subject
The Value of honesty and Integrity by Percival Redouchio

# data[].attributes.body
The text explores the idea about the gullibility of the people. Particularly in the commentary scene in LFR. The citizens are displayed in a way that undermines their intelligence. This is illustrated through the positioning of Spacey above them as he talks, as well as the top down camera angle of the citizens. There is the idea that a facade is being developed to "win" over the people. There is no genuine purpose to carry out the promises and ideas that are advertised to the citizens. But they themselves do not know that. There is an exploitation of trust and responsibility as citizens look to their leaders or those above them for proper guidance, where those very same leaders have nothing but contempt for the "values" they uphold.

# data[].attributes.body
The ideas of corruption, cynicism, duplicity and deception are all ideas which are heavily explored in both texts. In the original Shakespeare play the concept of political power being gained by being duplicitous is explored through many literary techniques exemplifying the duplicitous nature of Richard. The ironic use of the Bible or holy book as a “prop of virtue” shows that he is “truly a holy man” as described by Buckingham. This extremely duplicitous move of displaying himself between the bishops and as a holy man when in fact he is the opposite exemplifies the statement which connects the two texts. “The truth is those in power have total contempt for everything they profess, everything they pledge, and that’s what Shakespeare’s great plays are about” Furthermore, since throughout the whole time Richard denies that he wants the place of king where in fact it is the only thing which he desires.
DO LFR NOT DONE YET

# data[].attributes.body
In a Elizabethan context, the audience would understand the use of such immoral tactics to gain power as a violation of the natural order ordained by God. This is made particularly clear by Shakespeare by staging of Richard between two bishops, highlighting the moral absurdity of Richard's positioning via the obvious subversion of piety shown through Richard's farce. The continuous comparison to Edward and the evidently outrageous praising of Richard's holiness by Buckingham furthers this notion, developing the idea that Richard's actions are distinctly scandalous and the opposite of how a leader is expected to behave. A more contemporary audience, on the other hand, would typically have a more cynical understanding of the use of these tactics to gain power, seeing them as par for the course in leadership rather than a morally flagrant anomaly. Pacino is clearly operating under this perception, as he portrays himself and Spacey (Richard and Buckingham respectively) as aloof from the citizenry and detached from their interests, implying that such deceptive tactics are practically conventional amongst leaders. The continuous analogies to politicians assist in developing this idea of the people in power having an essentially inherent contempt for those below them as an inevitable affect of their station.