Reviews

King Edward III: Third Series by William Shakespeare

ian_2's review

3.0

An anonymous play, increasingly believed to be a collaborative work of Shakespeare and another playwright, perhaps Kyd, Marlowe, Drayton, Nashe or Peele. I can see Shakespeare, based on the style. In fact, I see more of Shakespeare in Edward III than I did in Pericles, which I also read this month. Not sure why Marlowe is a contender; he writes interesting stories, but in a morbidly boring style that I didn't recognize in this play. I'm not familiar enough with the works of the others to have an opinion.

As for the story here, it's not particularly interesting, but the style tends toward engaging. I struggled to find a connection between Edward's attempted seduction of the Countess of Salisbury and the invasion of France. He was not welcomed by either? He had no right to either? The latter would be strange given that there is considerable pro-invasion propaganda, unless intended ironically (which would be even more odd).

cornelio3's review

adventurous emotional inspiring tense medium-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? A mix
• Strong character development? It's complicated
• Loveable characters? It's complicated
• Diverse cast of characters? It's complicated
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.25

cagebox's review against another edition

1.0

This play is tangentially a work of Shakespeare play and is by far the worst play to have any sort of connection with him. It is thought he helped write the work or at least a part of it, but the play doesn't feel like Shakespeare at all. The prose doesn't flow, the characters are lifeless and the plot is jumbled and feels without direction. No character is developed enough to care about. King John, Edward III, and Prince Edward are there but not of particular interest. We see King Edward III courting a noblewoman who is not his wife for quite a chunk of the play, but nothing becomes of it. What is the point of anything in this drama? Edward III ruled for an extremely long time, even by today's standard and outlived his impressive son. There is room to make an interesting play about his life, but this is not it. When compared to Shakespeare's other histories, this pales in comparison, and is much inferior to Marlowe's Edward II as well.

oliverho's review against another edition

3.0

A little dull after Richard III--the heroes and villains weren't as compelling. I suppose it's mainly about duty and honour, the heroes doing what they considered to be the right thing at the time, and the villains...not.

smilem15's review

3.0

"To die is all as common as to live." -- Act IV, Scene IV

primesinister's review against another edition

3.0

I’m finished (or almost finished) with all of shakespeare’s histories and this one ranks somewhere in the lower half but not bottom. Love the Countess’ speeches, and the events in Scotland, but sort of drags on in the second half despite being a very short play

leslie115's review against another edition

3.0

I am grateful for the Shakespeare 2020 project for introducing me to this play. Edward III repels me, from his wooing of a married woman to his careless attitude about his heir's safety in war. This 2020 Zoom production is quite good, and makes me consider the significance of oaths.

kaykerrigan's review against another edition

3.0

Much better than I expected. Some nice language and some nifty irony. Still, no characters really stand out - although the Countess of Salisbury is a pretty strong and sharp chick. Shakespeare really played up that national disparagement of the French and the Scots.

ellarose_03's review against another edition

adventurous slow-paced

• Plot- or character-driven? A mix
• Strong character development? Yes
• Loveable characters? No
• Diverse cast of characters? Yes
• Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

2.25

adastra_hh's review against another edition

2.0

This play is ostensibly by Shakespeare; the Oxford edition asserts that he wrote 3 of the 18 scenes. I just couldn't get into it, personally.