Though widely regarded as one of the best of Shakespeare's histories (some would say that it is simply the best), this play has been remarkably under-represented in the cinema. As far as I've been able to discover, there have been no theatrical releases whatever, and a handful of television productions, all of which are fairly hard to find. Fortunately, at least one is superlative.

1978, David Giles: The BBC Shakespeare Plays version of Richard II is one of the crowning achievements of the series. Derek Jacobi is possibly the finest living Shakespearean actor, and he brings a perfectly-attuned sensitivity to this very difficult role -- second perhaps only to Hamlet in its complexity and in the number of contradictions the character has to support. (I'd argue that Jacobi has also created the finest Hamlet on film, in the same series.) In the beginning, he must embody Richard's arrogance and caprice; by the end, he must show us a Richard who has grown in dignity, even as his powers are stripped away from him. To integrate the two parts is very difficult, but Jacobi does a completely convincing job throughout.

The remainder of the cast is likewise excellent. An aging but still healthy John Gielgud portrays John of Gaunt, and so has the delivery of Shakespeare's most lyrical encomium to England; Jon Finch makes the rebel Bolingbroke (Henry IV) likeable and appealing without ever letting us forget that he is, nevertheless, a usurper. His growing uncertainties about what he is doing mesh seamlessly with Richard's ultimate recovery of the knowledge of who and what he is.

If you can possibly find and view this performance, do so.

1982, William Woodman: Starring David Birney -- a variably interesting production, with some outstanding moments. It preserves the farcical scene in which everyone is challenging everyone else to a duel, unlike the Jacobi production above, though it is filmed with minimal production values.

Birney's performance, though, is at least committed, and the shape of the play remains intact under this handling.

Worth seeing, if you don't have to go too far out of your way to do so.

2001, John Farrell: Starring Matte Osian as Richard, this received almost no exposure. It seems to be riding the coattails of the trend in modern-dress Shakespeare histories established by the Ian McKellan version of Richard III, but it is made with almost unknown actors, and with a budget that just may have topped ten dollars. It seems to be set in the jungle enclave of a Latin American guerrila: everyone is dressed in fatigues and berets, and machine guns are everywhere in evidence. The score seems to have been knocked together over a weekend on a MIDI keyboard, like a weak imitation of the score from the game "Myst". The sets seem to be disused bunkers somewhere. Either the DVD transfer was very sloppily done, or the original was shot on an inexpensive digital video camera: for something made in 2001, the image quality is quite low.

The performances themselves at least some of the actors seem to be confused by the words, which they occasionally mispronounce (cf. "lowering hate" in the first section -- which should rhyme with "souring" rather than the opposite of "raising"). John of Gaunt's speech is cut almost completely, and the rest of the play is cut mercilessly. Pared back to barely an hour and a half, it occupies lengthy sections with gun battles lacking dialogue altogether, and seems too long by half an hour at least.

For all that, there are a few terrific moments, and a few inspired shots -- as when the exiles are passing down a long road with a huge looming moon overhead; on the balance, though, it doesn't come close to either of the other two productions -- all in all, it contains a few good moments and some terrible half hours.

Worth seeing chiefly if you are a completist, and want to see all the options, or if it would be a great deal of trouble to avoid.