If I had to describe this production in two words, I would choose ‘underwhelming’ and ‘overwrought’. As an avid fan of Shakespeare, and as someone who is perfectly happy to accept that the adaptation from stage to screen involves changes to the script, I must confess that I felt this adaptation missed the mark.

It is beautifully set the whole way through, with Clarence’s prison and Edward’s palace being particularly visually striking. The costumes are very elegant, and using the proliferation of Nazi uniforms to demonstrate Richard’s slow march to power is a nice visual trick.

So where does my issue arise? For the most part, it is with the actors, who seem to have universally decided to overplay their roles so that their characters go from melodramatic intensity to absolutely bland acquiescence in the space of a few lines. Particularly weak are the American performances of Annette Bening and Robert Downey Jr., playing King Edward’s wife and brother-in-law. These performances, which consist mainly of shouting and soap opera glares, occasionally leave the production feeling more like daytime TV than Shakespeare.

It is to the supporting cast that we must turn to for the real performances. Kristin Scott-Thomas plays a wonderfully languid Lady Anne, seemingly one of the only actors not infected by the 90’s melodrama of the rest of the production. Tim McInnerny plays a quietly insidious Catesby and Maggie Smith gives an appropriately shrill performance as the Duchess of York. Beyond this, despite the star-studded cast, there is little to impress.

And what of the eponymous Richard, played by the renowned Sir Ian McKellen? Accomplished actor as he is, this is not his best work. With many of the soliloquies being delivered direct to camera, there is much face-twitching and hand-shuffling to demonstrate his character’s emotional state, but this is mostly external rather than internal, as though the actor himself doesn’t quite believe what he is saying, and the overall impression is of a somewhat unconvincing performance.

Ultimately, my chief concern lies with the adaptation itself. All of the events in the play happen, but in shortening the script for cinema audiences, anything that was not an action scene was either missing or non-existent, to the point where there is a section in the middle of the film that feels more like Titus Andronicus than Richard III. The film leaves little time to explain the cause and effect of certain deaths before another occurs.

Perhaps this film is successful for people who aren’t particularly interested, or who haven’t seen much Shakespeare. By shifting the focus away from the dialogue to the action, and by updating the drama to the 1930’s, they are potentially making the play more accessible to an unfamiliar audience. But for an audience which was expecting to be blown away by an award-winning Shakespearian actor, I was left distinctly unimpressed.