From the Paper
" William Shakespeare's Henry V and Kenneth Branagh's movie version from 1989 are certainly similar works, because they derive from the same text, yet by looking at the basic play and the movie's mise en scene it is possible to see that Branagh has used the Bard's words to serve his own images in bringing out a contemporary message.

Branagh's film version is not the celebratory work that Laurence Olivier's 1944 British motion picture was: Olivier directed and starred in this movie as the English and the Allies were close to victory against the Germans. Branagh is true to his generation and their anti-war sentiments that were created during the Vietnam War of the 1960s. Therefore, the recent movie version shows the real price of war--the violence and bloodshed.

Abstract
Honor, the central theme in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 1, is embodied primarily in the two main characters. This essay compares and contrasts the concept of honor as lived by Hotspur and Prince Hall, making frequent use of quotes to substantiate claims. Other characters, King Henry and Falstaff, who Shakespeare finds useful in this major treatment of honor, are also discussed.

From the Paper
"One of the main themes around which Shakespeare dramatizes the history of his country in The First Part of King Henry IV is honor. To the Elizabethans honor was a major topic of debate as it had been to Englishmen of all ages. Honor is a complex subject, highly personal to some, highly public to others. Honor can be something for which one quietly stands, or about which one shouts in flowery language. The purpose of this paper is to compare and contrast some of the various forms taken by honor as represented in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part I."

Tags:falstaff, hal, hotspur, prince, Shakespeare, Henry, IV, honor, Elizanethans

Abstract
This paper discusses how Shakespeare's characters always cause us to wonder, and how, in his play, "Henry IV Part I", it is interesting to consider how Hotspur and Hal's lives would have been changed had they become friends. It looks at how, certainly, both would have benefited greatly from the experience. Hal could have taught Hotspur to relax and enjoy life a little bit more, and Hotspur could have taught Hal how to be more serious about life, especially his duties as prince. By examining both characters, it shows how we can easily see how each character's weaknesses and strengths could have contributed to a friendship that may have achieved peace in a different way.

From the Paper
"On the other hand, Hal is slow to move toward his position as prince. He prefers to spend time in the tavern with Falstaff and our first impression of him is that he is quite lazy. He has fun with his friends and even repays the travelers the money that was stolen from them. In essence, Hal does not seem to want to grow up. This is most obvious in the scenes at the tavern. Hal seems to be aware that the happiness he finds at the tavern is something he will not or cannot find in a courtly life. He can also be himself there. He can drink and have fun. He tells the others, "I am now of all humors that have showed themselves humors since the old days of good man Adam to the pupil age of this present twelve o'clock midnight" (II.v.82-4). Although we have no problem understanding why Hal likes his life at the tavern so much, we also realize that Hal is not exactly eager to fulfill his duties."

Tags:falstaff, friendship, prince

Abstract
The essay attempts to determine how far the character of King Henry in Shakespeare's play, "Henry V", uses rhetoric to communicate what is true, or whether in fact he uses language to simply flatter his listeners with what they want to hear. The paper further attempts to show how far King Henry uses rhetoric as a method of manipulation in order to achieve his goals.

From the Paper
"Henry, like his father (and very unlike Richard II) is aware that the power of language can be used as a valuable political device. He uses his skill as a rhetorician to achieve success as a leader. He has the capability to change his emotions according to the situation, therefore adapting to the audience he wants to persuade. Similarly Othello's Iago uses rhetoric as a powerful tool of persuasion. Through words he is able to convince Othello of his wife's unfaithfulness, thus playing a major part in her murder. With Iago's extreme dishonest use of rhetoric, the question remains; how honest is King Henry V?"

Tags:rhetorical, ability, inspire, awaken, followers, intimidate, enemies, governor, harfleur

Abstract
The paper presents a discussion of the male characters in both plays and then constructs a comparison between the two plays in terms of the father/son relationships therein.

From the Paper
"Polonius and Laertes, on the other hand, are portrayed as opposites in character. Although the play sees more of their relationship in the play, the viewers/readers cannot conclude that a happy relationship exists between the two of them. Laertes is a good and trusting son, who obeys his father unconditionally. Polonius, meanwhile, is a suspicious character that perceives his son as an alcoholic and womanizer. Polonius' distrust in his son was seen at Act Two, Scene One, when he ordered his servant Reynaldo to spy on his son Laertes at France. He even went to the extent of making Reynaldo tell a lie by telling the Danes (Denmark people) that Laertes has full of vices to affirm if Polonius' suspicion is true. Laertes, a man who left in good faith that his father bids him well, is unknowingly "stabbed at his back" by his own father because of Polonius' suspicious nature. Although Polonius' has not been a good example for his children, Laertes showed unconditional love for his father when he returned to Denmark to avenge his father's death wherein Hamlet was the murderer. In the end, both Hamlet and Laertes died, two men who sacrificed their lives to give justice to the death of their fathers."

Tags:Polonius, Laertes, Reynadlo, denmark

Abstract
This paper compares the use of rhetoric in two of William Shakespeare's most famous soliloquies: The "To be or not to be..." speech in "Hamlet" and the "St. Crispins" speech in "Henry V". The goal of the paper is to compare the sincerity in each given the character speaking and the context in which the soliloquy is delivered. Hamlet is contemplating suicide. King Henry is trying to motivate his outnumbered army.

From the Paper
"Although a read of Shakespeare's "To be..." speech from Hamlet and a read of his "St. Crispins" speech from Henry V show similarities in the use of rhetoric, an examination of the context of each speech hints at more sincerity in the former than in the latter. This is not to say that young Hamlet doesn't show his own share of deception throughout the play; however, in this particular speech, he is wrestling with all that he has had to endure with the death of his father and the implication of his uncle and mother in the crime. Often referred to as the most famous speech in English literature, Hamlet's "To Be..." speech is an internal exploration of the dilemma he finds himself in the midst of the mystery of his father's death."

Tags:compare, rhetorical, speeches

Abstract
This paper looks at how both main characters in Shakespeare's "The Taming of the Shrew" and "Henry V" have either challenged or embraced traditional gender ideologies of the 15th century. Katherine, the main character in the "Taming of the Shrew", evidently challenges traditional gender ideologies, as she is deemed "shrewish". She ultimately exudes behavior unlike any other woman of that time, which leads us to believe that she is rejecting her traditional role as a female in this male-dominated society. The paper shows that, conversely, Katherine from "Henry V" embraces the traditional gender ideologies of Shakespearean time. The thesis in this paper is backed up by in-text citations.

From the Paper
"Her actions deem her to be independent, as she feels that she does not need to marry to be happy. This is illustrated when Petruchio feels that he must break her will in order to tame her, in other words, to make her more feminine. The fact that Petruchio has such a hard time doing this illustrates just how strong willed Katherine is in her pursuit to be independent. By being overbearingly masculine, Petruchio finally wins over Katherine as she becomes "obedient to his honest will" (5.2.74). It is at this point where Katherine's pro-feminine views seem to disappear as she states: ?I am ashamed that women are so simple/To offer ware where they should kneel for peace,/Or seek for rule, supremacy and sway,/When they are bound to serve, love and obey [?]? (5.2.161-164). Katherine is essentially "selling out", as she denounces her femininity along with her gender ..."

Tags:masculine, roles, stereotypes

Abstract
This paper looks at the similarities between Shakespeare's "Henry V" and Machiavelli's "The Prince", and the concept of the perfect king. The two plays are discussed, and the concept that either Shakespeare is drawing his inspiration for his dramatization from Machiavelli or that both Machiavelli and Shakespeare have similar ideas of what the ideal ruler would be.

From the Paper
"In Henry V, Shakespeare presents Henry as the ultimate ideal of kingship. The only question is where does this idea of a perfect king come from, and after reading Machiavelli's Prince and Henry V one begins to note similarities. Not the least of which is the passage quoted above, a true Machiavellian manoeuvre. In this passage, the governor of Harfleur, the French city under siege by Henry's troops, has refused entrance to the army of Henry. As Machiavelli says, "it is wiser to have a reputation for meanness which brings reproach without hatred, than to be compelled through seeking a reputation for liberality". Therefore, Henry, following this advice of Machiavelli, does exactly that, and frightens the innocent people of Harfleur into opening their city gates through the sheer grotesqueness of his command. We frequently see these similarities between the actions of Henry, at least through Shakespeare's portrayal, and the recommended actions of a good prince, as documented in Machiavelli's The Prince. Therefore, one might draw the conclusion that either Shakespeare is drawing his inspiration for his dramatization from Machiavelli or that both Machiavelli and Shakespeare have similar ideas of what the ideal ruler would be."

Tags:england, european, italy, kingship, leadership, machiavelli, relations, renaissance, rulers, shakespeare

Abstract
This paper takes a look at how Shakespeare shows his audience the noble and ignoble nature of honor and chivalry in the behavior of the play's main characters Henry Percy, Henry Prince of Wales, Sir John Falstaff, and King Henry the Fourth. An examination of "Henry IV" shows how Shakespeare demonstrates these 16th century values of honor and justice to his audience.

Tags:honor, elizabeth, I, england, virtue, valor, glory

Abstract
Lawrence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh both produced film versions of Henry V, but they were both very different interpretations. This paper concentrates on Act I Scene I and discusses both directors' editing of the original play and how that affected the portrayal of "King Henry V".

From the Paper
"A good king is a moral one who listens to his advisors, who fights only just wars and who has overcome youthful wildness to emerge as a man "full of grace and fair regard" (1.1.22). Or, a good king is a strong one who makes his own decisions, who fights any wars that benefit his country, and who has never had any youthful wildness to overcome. Shakespeare leaves the interpretation of his king in King Henry the Fifth to the audience, and Henry's character has subsequently been performed in multiple ways. Lawrence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh both portray Henry as a good king in their screen adaptations of the play, but Olivier tends towards the former version of Henry as the morally just king and Branagh is more inclined to the latter version of Henry as the strong but immoral king."

Tags:branagh, fustice, kenneth, lawrence, olivier, opening, scene