The link this makes between personal, selfish, revenge-driven motives and the futility and pain of a civil war creates a solid, well-rounded thematic center which is echoed in the best scenes, including Rutland's murder, the King with the father/son murders, and Richard's fantastic speeches. I wonder if I would have enjoyed this so much if I weren't familiar with & looking forward to Richard III, because he was absolutely my favorite thing about this play, but he's a great character regardless. The momentum, language, and thematic consistency in this play reminds me of the better, later Shakespeare plays with which I'm more familiar; a solidly enjoyable experience.

This is easily my favorite of the three Henry VI works. I find myself wishing that I was more familiar with the English history surrounding these plays, as I read them. I think they would mean more to someone who is. I can't help but wish that Shakespeare was around to write about the drama in today's politics. There would be less beheadings and swordplay, but plenty of political intrigue to make something of! I would love to see what he made of it all!

One last note, I think that for an actress, Queen Margaret would be one of the most entertaining characters to play. She is certainly a character who stands out!

okay i'm still first and foremost a henriad stan but this one was definitely the best henry vi imo! i really enjoyed getting to actually SEE the titular man himself (and margaret... margaret my beloved she has an ARMY this time... 1.4... fucking girlboss behavior...). probably would be a solid 3 stars but im adding one for richard my bestie richard my good friend richard. the third

The first 1/2 of this play is so good and face paced but it fades a little toward act 4. Its full of drama and switching sides and Richard III gets he footing in this play which is fun to watch.

Shakespeare in a Year, 8 out of 37 plays: With Part 3, the Henry VI saga comes to a close. I'll admit, the plot is hard to follow on this one. There are so many oaths, betrayals, and stabbings that you almost have to keep a chart to keep the Lancasters and Yorks straight! I had to Wiki the War of the Roses to make sure I was getting the plot right.

Throughout the saga, I was particularly interested in Queen Margaret. Usually Shakespeare's women figures are weaklings that spend most of their speaking parts sobbing. Margaret, however, is blood-thirsty and powerful (a foil to her weakling husband Henry VI). I also liked how Shakespeare starts to develop the character of Richard III of later plays (though, only the Duke of Gloucester here) at the end of the play.

“Why, what is pomp, rule, reign, but earth and dust?
And, live we how we can, yet die we must.”

I enjoyed this slightly more than the other two Henry VI's.

Yay! I finished this set of the history plays! Again, I still know precious little about British Royal history, but after watching The Hollow Crown: Wars of the Roses and a YouTube video that showed how Game of Thrones was influenced by the actual history, I could much better piece the plot together. Probably not ever going to be favorites of mine with Shakespeare, but I’m glad I was able to preserve and finish all three parts!

So much violence! But not as much as is coming...

George RR Martin said his inspiration for the war between the Starks and the Lannisters in Game of Thrones was the War of the Roses. Now, I know Shakespeare is not a historian, he is a playwright and thus takes some license with history. But wow, I saw echoes of Game of Thrones in here! After winning some victories, Edward IV usurps Henry and becomes king! He sends Warwick to negotiate a politically necessary marriage in France, only to choose to marry another woman for love. This, naturally, loses him the support of Warwick. Sounds like Robb Stark, doesn't it?

This play is filled with action and, like the previous, makes me want to watch a performance. It is a bit confusing. One character, Montague, changes sides with no mention of when or why. In one scene is is with Edward, then he's with Henry. Did Shakespeare forget whose side he was on? Or was this to sort of who how fluid alliances were and how confusing it was to keep track? Also, the change in names is frustrating. Richard becomes Gloucester, okay, I got it. I missed that George became Clarence so didn't realize at the first read that when Clarence changed to Edward's side this was actually his brother returning to him. Again, this is probably a good reminder these were stories to be watched, not just read.

Anyway, on to Richard III!