Scan barcode
p_t_b's review against another edition
5.0
Way better than part I-- the deathbed exchanges between the king and Hal are amazing. Still needs more falstaff.
thaurisil's review against another edition
3.0
The main plot of this play features a rebellion against King Henry IV which s eventually quashed. The king subsequently dies and his son Hal is crowned King Henry V. Scenes featuring the king and his sons alternate with scenes featuring Falstaff and his companions as they engage in merrymaking, drinking and cursing.
This is the third play in a quartet that also contains Richard II, Henry IV Part 1, and Henry V. I did not like this as much as the the first part of Henry IV. I read somewhere that Part 2 is fanfiction for those who liked Falstaff from Part 1, and the description is apt. The scenes featuring Falstaff are mainly there to inject humour. They do little to move the plot forward as nothing much happens in them except for bawdy joking and vain boasting, and even then, the jokes fall flat when Falstaff does not have Hal around to joke with. At the end, when Hal rejects Falstaff and imprisons him, I felt Falstaff had earned his just punishment for his arrogance and selfishness.
In both parts of the Henry IV plays, Henry IV is portrayed as a king who is fearful of being dethroned by the same people who supported him in his rise to the kingship, and thus oppresses them. While the previous play questioned whether such a king who reign securely and peacefully, this play suggests that Hal's reign will be more peaceful and he will have better support from the people, simply because he has gained the crown as an inheritance and a divine right rather than as the result of rebellion. His father and brothers do have doubts about his fitness for the crown, but he proves them wrong as he shows himself not to be the prodigal son he once was, but an upright king.
This is the third play in a quartet that also contains Richard II, Henry IV Part 1, and Henry V. I did not like this as much as the the first part of Henry IV. I read somewhere that Part 2 is fanfiction for those who liked Falstaff from Part 1, and the description is apt. The scenes featuring Falstaff are mainly there to inject humour. They do little to move the plot forward as nothing much happens in them except for bawdy joking and vain boasting, and even then, the jokes fall flat when Falstaff does not have Hal around to joke with. At the end, when Hal rejects Falstaff and imprisons him, I felt Falstaff had earned his just punishment for his arrogance and selfishness.
In both parts of the Henry IV plays, Henry IV is portrayed as a king who is fearful of being dethroned by the same people who supported him in his rise to the kingship, and thus oppresses them. While the previous play questioned whether such a king who reign securely and peacefully, this play suggests that Hal's reign will be more peaceful and he will have better support from the people, simply because he has gained the crown as an inheritance and a divine right rather than as the result of rebellion. His father and brothers do have doubts about his fitness for the crown, but he proves them wrong as he shows himself not to be the prodigal son he once was, but an upright king.
readingonfogo's review against another edition
adventurous
challenging
funny
lighthearted
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Plot
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.25
lizziestudieshistory's review against another edition
3.0
I'm reviewing both Henry IV plays here because they do need to be seen as a pair or continuation of the same story.
So, on the surface I should really love these plays - Shakespeare's histories are consistently high ranking on my list of favourites, with Richard II being my absolute favourite of his plays (it's just SO GOOD!) Henry IV explores a lot of the same themes as Richard II - power, duty, corruption of the state, etc. - with the addition of the difficult father-son dynamic between Henry IV and Prince Hal. The themes at the core of these plays are ones I usually love to explore, and Shakespeare handles them well (how could he not?!)
However, I just can't bring myself to love these plays and it's down to one character: FALSTAFF. If I could remove one character from English Literature it would be Falstaff. I would press the button to burn him out of the canon with GLEE. I'd even pay for the privilege! I'd be dancing around the pyre if I could burn him out of the book. Seriously, I loathe him that much. WHY would I possibly want to read about a debauched, drunken, old lecher with no redeeming qualities. I have no sympathy for him and find no enjoyment in his antics. I don't find his sections funny, appealing, or entertaining in the slightest. Perhaps I sound like a puritan over it, but I also don't care? He is deeply unpleasant. I know it's partly the point, I know WHY he's there, but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy his presence in the story. I wouldn't want to meet Falstaff in real like - so why would I want to read about him in fiction, particularly when he's not even compelling...
In addition to this, Henry IV part II in particular falls victim to Falstaff becoming the main character, he's certainly where Shakespeare wants to point our attention to. Personally, I'd rather read/watch the main drama of the fraught relationship between Henry and Hal and their attempts to consolidate their power/control over England - I really didn't sign up for the antics of a drunken buffoon. When we do get to explore the key drama and themes of the plays then they're wonderful, but the presence of Falstaff and the interminable focus on his "comedic" misadventures killed the interest I had in these plays very quickly.
So, on the surface I should really love these plays - Shakespeare's histories are consistently high ranking on my list of favourites, with Richard II being my absolute favourite of his plays (it's just SO GOOD!) Henry IV explores a lot of the same themes as Richard II - power, duty, corruption of the state, etc. - with the addition of the difficult father-son dynamic between Henry IV and Prince Hal. The themes at the core of these plays are ones I usually love to explore, and Shakespeare handles them well (how could he not?!)
However, I just can't bring myself to love these plays and it's down to one character: FALSTAFF. If I could remove one character from English Literature it would be Falstaff. I would press the button to burn him out of the canon with GLEE. I'd even pay for the privilege! I'd be dancing around the pyre if I could burn him out of the book. Seriously, I loathe him that much. WHY would I possibly want to read about a debauched, drunken, old lecher with no redeeming qualities. I have no sympathy for him and find no enjoyment in his antics. I don't find his sections funny, appealing, or entertaining in the slightest. Perhaps I sound like a puritan over it, but I also don't care? He is deeply unpleasant. I know it's partly the point, I know WHY he's there, but that doesn't mean I have to enjoy his presence in the story. I wouldn't want to meet Falstaff in real like - so why would I want to read about him in fiction, particularly when he's not even compelling...
In addition to this, Henry IV part II in particular falls victim to Falstaff becoming the main character, he's certainly where Shakespeare wants to point our attention to. Personally, I'd rather read/watch the main drama of the fraught relationship between Henry and Hal and their attempts to consolidate their power/control over England - I really didn't sign up for the antics of a drunken buffoon. When we do get to explore the key drama and themes of the plays then they're wonderful, but the presence of Falstaff and the interminable focus on his "comedic" misadventures killed the interest I had in these plays very quickly.
intoxicatedturtle's review against another edition
5.0
I think this is one of the bard's best works, although it does have its detractors. A good mix of comedy and drama and the theme of betrayal is very well done.
cs4_0reads's review against another edition
slow-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? It's complicated
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
3.0
baronet_coins's review against another edition
medium-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
4.5
kxtaro's review
adventurous
dark
reflective
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? A mix
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? No
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated
3.5
euro_trashed's review against another edition
4.0
Oddly, given its less prominent use in conflations, I found this more accessible than the first part. But I’ll definitely be watching Phyllida Lloyd’s Donmar Warehouse production tonight on Broadway HD
emmaemmaemmaemma's review against another edition
3.0
Another history that again, I enjoyed because of thy dynamics between Prince Hal and his lads. He did get a bit more boring as he became more responsible, but I suppose it’s for the greater good of England. Although the histories are my least favorite of Shakespeare’s works, I am actually looking forward to seeing how Hal fairs as a king in Henry V.
Another one down! Here’s a few cool quotes,
Northumberland: See what a ready tongue suspicion hath! He that but fears the thing he would not know. Hath by instinct knowledge from others’ eyes.
Chief Justice: I am well acquainted with your manner of wrenching the true cause the false way.
Prince Hal: What wouldst thou think of me, if I should weep?
Poins: I would think thee a most princely hypocrite.
King Hal: Presume not that I am the thing I was; For God doth know, so shall the world perceive, that I have turn’d away my former self.
Pistol: si fortuna me tormenta, spero me contenta (a garble of languages that translates to “if fortune torments me, hope contents me”)
Another one down! Here’s a few cool quotes,
Northumberland: See what a ready tongue suspicion hath! He that but fears the thing he would not know. Hath by instinct knowledge from others’ eyes.
Chief Justice: I am well acquainted with your manner of wrenching the true cause the false way.
Prince Hal: What wouldst thou think of me, if I should weep?
Poins: I would think thee a most princely hypocrite.
King Hal: Presume not that I am the thing I was; For God doth know, so shall the world perceive, that I have turn’d away my former self.
Pistol: si fortuna me tormenta, spero me contenta (a garble of languages that translates to “if fortune torments me, hope contents me”)