I have never read Henry VI but saw something like a 7 hour production of it some years ago that was riveting. I think the plays are not as popular as Henry V because they're a downer and because perhaps its unpalatable the way Shakespeare hates on Joan of Arc and the commoners.

Considering that I thought the decision to portray Falstaff as a completely repellent and pathetic loser was a disastrous mistake, I'd say this production was a step up from the Henry IV - though was still not very good.

I really like most of what you said, but dispute one thing: that Falstaff is a 'common' man.

Some years ago Chimes was released on VHS - and until pretty recently my library still had tapes in their collection so that's how I saw it.

A 'consensus'? I don't know about that.

Longtime Lurker & Condorcet:

You would better ask the question why there are not males playing female parts - since that is how these plays were originally done.

I always figured Romeo and Juliet was written because there must have been a particularly talented boy actor at that time able to take on the part of Juliet.

I really liked the hollow crown Richard II - but would definitely direct people who want to see the Henry plays to Chimes at Midnight.

Well I have to disagree, I didn't like the way Part I was going and Part II made it even worse.

"It seemed to me that Hiddleston wasn't playing the 'genuinely obnoxious adolescent'"

I think a B+ is fair - it was OK but lacked a genius performance of the same level as Ben Whishaw's in Richard II.

Really interesting - thanks.

Another really sad thing about America is so many of our actors are fantastic singers and dancers - but there is really no GOOD (i.e, "Smash" does not count) showcases for them outside of the grind of Broadway theater.

I have not read Richard II - the first time I saw it was long ago with Derek Jacobi playing the main part. I vaguely remember liking it - but since I was such a huge fan of I Claudius I might have been kind of biased.

Yeah - portraying kings was like playing with dynamite. Even though in most of the history cycle Shakespeare was dealing with family lines deposed by the Tudors, he STILL had to tread very carefully.

Is it known where Richard II was buried?

It seems to be airing at different times in different locations.

I have to say, I don't think as a self-contained play, Richard II stands up with Shakespeare's best (granted, the highest bar there is). To a large extent it is about NOT taking action. Richard NOT letting the joust take place and leaving the argument unsettled, Richard NOT fighting back against Bollingbrook,…

Actually at my local NPR affiliate WNYC they are currently doing a series of staged readings to be recorded for posterity of Wilson's plays.