I don't know which out of this film from Laurence Olivier and Kenneth Branagh's film I prefer because I do put them on an equal level. Though I am not sure whether I'd go as far to say that either film is their best overall work as director, for me Olivier's was Richard III and Branagh's was Much Ado About Nothing. If I were to make any preferences, Branagh's conveys the brutality of war more evocatively than Olivier's, which was glossed over in comparison and has the better reading of the St Crispin's Day speech, while Olivier's has the better music score and the better costumes and sets. I consider the directing and lead performances equal too. Anyway enough with the comparisons. Under review here is Olivier's film, and I have to say that it is a truly impressive one, great even, especially considering that it was Olivier's debut as director. If there is anything that I wasn't so crazy about it was Fluellen's welsh accent which didn't seem all that convincing to me. Everything else though I loved. The costumes and sets are gorgeous, really sumptuous in detail and colourful. The standout was the opening sequence. Then there is William Walton's score, which is magnificently rousing stuff, second to Walton's score for Richard III as far as I'm concerned. Shakespeare's dialogue I have always been compelled by, and it is faithful and brilliantly delivered here. In fact what I love about both Olivier and Branagh's Shakespeare films is how much they respect his writing, same with Orson Welles actually. The story here drew me right in and never bored me even with its length, the opening sequence is wonderful and while not as brutally real as in Branagh's version the battle sequence is still colourfully staged. Olivier's direction is every bit as impressive as the film, even for a first-time director, and he also gives a wonderful performance in the title role. The supporting cast, while not quite on the same level as him, are very good as well, the standouts being Robert Newton(pitch-perfect as Pistol),Esmond Knight(even with the accent, it was still a commanding performance) and Leslie Banks(often coming close to stealing the show). In conclusion, very, very good. 9/10 Bethany Cox

Previous to this film, Laurence Olivier had only one experience with Shakespeare on the screen, 1936's As You Like It. It was not a work that Olivier was terribly proud of. He did determine right there that if he were to do Shakespeare again, he would have complete creative control. Olivier did just that, on this film and every other filmed adaption of the Bard that he was involved in.

Olivier's desire happily coincided with Winston Churchill's desire to make some good British propaganda for the war effort. Churchill was fond of what he called Shakespeare's "war plays" and Henry V definitely qualifies in that category. He gave Olivier whatever logistical help he needed and remember a war was on. Even to the extent of arranging with Eamon DeValera permission for Olivier to bring the entire Henry V crew to the Irish Republic so that the outdoor scenes could be filmed away from Nazi bombardment.

Olivier chooses an interesting method of introducing the play. It opens with a scene of 16th century London at the Globe Theatre at the opening night. The play begins with Leslie Banks as the Chorus reading the introduction and the first scenes are filmed as simply a photographed stage play. After that first scene at Henry V at his court, spitting defiance at the French herald and having his retainers go through an elaborate justification for his claim to the French throne. We then as the Chorus bids us have our imagination take flight until the end of the play when it returns to the stage this time with Henry V marrying the French princess and sealing his claim to their throne.

I believe what Olivier wanted to do was show the play through two sets of eyes. He wants the audience to imagine they are in Elizabethan England watching the events of a century before and know that things looked pretty grim then for England and they pulled out of it.

The battle scenes at Harfleur and at Agincourt are nicely staged and photographed. Olivier's Henry V is a strong and virile leader, convinced of the rightness of his cause and he has the confidence in himself as military leader to see it through. Kind of like the Prime Minister who was in office then.

Certainly in the Middle Ages the high point of English arms was at Agincourt. It was truly one lopsided victory, English long-bowmen against French knights. The French cavalry was truly decimated on that day and a lot of their nobility was killed. And the French were the betting favorites.

Seen today though it's a bit different. The Hundred Years War, and this was the second phase of it, was quite frankly a naked war of aggression by the English to obtain the French throne. In 1944 audiences thrilled to remember this impressive feet of arms by the English, but the reasons were kind of glossed over.

Still Henry V is an impressive motion picture and I'm sure it did what it set out to do, be a morale booster for the English public. Among other performers I liked in this were Robert Newton as the ancient Pistol and Leslie Banks as the chorus and Valentine Dyall as the Duke of Burgundy.

But I would wager that Charles DeGaulle was not invited to the premier showing of Henry V.

Starting at the Globe Playhouse in London, the audience watches the play being performed. As the play leaves London, the setting expands into the wider world. It has the iconic Saint Crispin's Day speech. The battle has lots of men, lots of horses, and lots of archers. It is brightly colored. Laurence Olivier plays King Henry V. The disappointing part is the battle action. There is no doubt that some expense was given. There are lots of extras in war costumes. The horses are impressive. It's just not shot that well. Worst of all, I really hate the archers charging into the fray. Individual archers would never do that. It doesn't have the grit to be intense. It needs a bit of Hollywood magic. Hollywood westerns do much better action. There are no stunts and no thrills. Now, it does have Sir Laurence Olivier doing Shakespeare. That is worth a ton and he's breathing new life into what was probably stodgy source material. I just wish that he has some action expert to spice up the final battle.