I just re-watched "O" for the first time in 8 years and Odin's fall from grace really terrified me the second time around. To think that somebody who seemed so well-rounded, romantic, and level-headed could be manipulated into killing his girlfriend and want anyone who stands in his way murdered...is just frightening.
Josh Hartnett was really effective, especially in his conversation with O in the weight room, at being a manipulative *beep* Julia and Mekhi's characters seemed genuinely happy with one another, and it tore me apart to see Josh's manipulation. Shakespeare knew how to write a tragedy all right.
"This will not be over quickly. You will not enjoy this."
I agree. Hugo was a wretched manipulator. And the said part of it is that this type of manipulation has been around for a long time especially in the deep south of the U.S.
Iago's motivations in the original have been long discussed as it is difficult to see why exactly he did what he did. There are some hints at racism and even some of jealousy, but really it's a mystery.
I think the play makes it quite clear why Iago hates Othello. The main one is that Othello promoted Cassio to be his lieutenant instead of Iago, and Cassio is inexperienced. Also, he thinks Othello may have slept with his wife, Emilia, and so did Cassio. So we have two characters that he hates and sets out to destroy. These things are stated by the character himself, so I don't know why scholars or commentators say it's a mystery when it's really not. Is it because they believe a villain has to have ONLY one reason to hate and destroy the protagonist? If so, that's ridiculous. It adds to the character and makes him more multi-dimensional if he has multiple reasons.
Not to let the Hugo/Iago off the hook for anything but he could not have gotten the O/Othello character to murder the Desi/Desdamona character if there wasn't already a propensity for violence, cold-bloodedness and lack of trust there anyway.
What evidence was there that she cheated? A scarf that could have been - and was - stolen? And the word of two men who could have been lying? Hardly concrete proof.
He behaved abusively towards her before he even knew for sure that she cheated and even if she was unfaithful there are ways of dealing with that apart from killing people. So Hugo/Iago can't get all the blame.
There is a scene in O before Hugo starts planting doubts in his mind were Desi and Michael hug after he scores a basket and O looks bothered by this so there was a bit of possessiveness in him already that Hugo tapped into. Not to mention his violence towards Roger and his troubles with the law. Hugo was simply exploiting weaknesses in O's character (and Iago with Othello).
Lornamd-1, you're absolutely right! I noticed that scene you mentioned in the beginning where O was noticeably jealous even before Hugo started planting ideas in his head. Although I do feel that Hugo was extremely manipulative and was a huge factor in the deaths that occurred in the end, it was ultimately O's fault. The film plays well in that we sympathize with Othello's character because he appears to be very friendly and is being manipulated. The audience almost blames Hugo for violence that was entirely O's choice.
"This will not be over quickly. You will not enjoy this."
Jealousy isn't a fault; it's a weakness based on feelings of unworthiness, fear and self-doubt. Hugo (Iago) sees the weakness in Odin (Othello) and decides to exploit it to his advantage.
"The value of an idea has nothing to do with the honesty of the man expressing it."--Oscar Wilde
I agree with this, and I feel it makes Iago/Hugo even more menacing. The character is obviously an intelligent one, able to read others, and would have certainly picked up on these signs, subtle as they may have been, and exploited them. I think it adds yet another level to a character that some consider to be Shakespeare's most villainous.
On the run from Johnny Law...Ain't no trip to Cleveland.
It is clear to me that you weren't paying any attention to the movie.
There is a scene in O before Hugo starts planting doubts in his mind were Desi and Michael hug after he scores a basket and O looks bothered by this
When this scene took place it was Hugo who told Mike to start hanging out with Desi. The reason why O got bothered was because it was out of character for Desi and Mike to be hugging like that. obviously they never use to spend so much time together thus O's suspicion. The thing with Hugo was that he not only manipulated O he manipulated everyone. So when he continues to tell O about Desi and Mike is was planting prove for O to see. Look at how he twisted a conversation to make O think that Mike was talking about him and desi.
Hugo was simply exploiting weaknesses in O's character
So you say that O was already violent in nature that means Hugo was the devil in nature then; he had all of that wickedness inside him and its not because he didn't get any attention from his Dad. Hugo Killed;manipulated everyone he was a demon and i hated him so much. With O i hated that he allowed someone to manipulate him like that so stupid.
Desi says that Michael is a good friend of hers who she's known for years so its not unusual for them to be hugging. O had jealousy and violence in him anyway. Hugo's worse than him but he still chose to murder 2 people.
While I haven't seen the movie yet I know the play by heart and there wasn't really a choice for Othello once Iago got his claws into him. That moment in the play when Othello becomes suspicious is so masterfully played by Iago from the start - the way he pretended to be ignorant and kept saying it was "nothing", Othello was just driven crazy. There is a streak of sadist in O, but his main problems were insecurity and gullibility. Iago's manipulations made him lose his mind and turn into an animal by the end... So sure, he had a tragic flaw, he couldn't be a hero in a tragedy without it, but allowed it? It implies option, action, and Othello in the play didn't have that. Now, this is the case in the original and I will definitely have to see the movie, to see if there are difference in characterization and motives.
Of course Othello had a choice. He had a choice to believe Iago when he had very little evidence just a lost handerchief that he saw Cassio with and boasting from Cassio that could have been lies. He didn't have to kill Desdamona that was his choice as well.
Would a normal person, or some random character have a choice in that situation? Yes. Did Othello have the choice, with his flaws, state of mind, and suspicions that were fueled by Iago and got ten times worse over the course of the play? No. Maybe it isn't realistic to us now, but Shakespeare worked hard to show the psychology of both Othello and Iago, and Othello's decline which includes lack of rational thought and conscious choice.
"Did Othello have the choice, with his flaws, state of mind, and suspicions that were fueled by Iago and got ten times worse over the course of the play? No"
Ordering one person to be killed and strangling another is a choice. He can't help being a suspicious person but he didn't do much to fight against it and he chose to listen to Iago rather than his own wife.