Comparing the Play versus the Film of William Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing ?Much Ado About Nothing'' is a postwar love story. Its principal subject is that of romance that may settle over the land after soldiers come home. I noticed that Much Ado is actually two love stories. One concerns sweetly innocent lovers who are driven apart by the plotting of enemies. The other involves very sarcastic lovers who are swept into each other's arms by the benign machinations of friends. I had a lot of trouble understanding the dialect, I grew up a country boy and we didn?t do much of this in my 14 persons graduating class. None the less I didn?t think it was a waste of time either. It was of very good quality as far as a plot is concerned. It had evil, jealousy, lust, love, romance, comedy and of course tragedy. If I were to do it over again I would go see the movie first, the play second. I was able to understand more from the movie than I did the play. I think that if I had done this I might have got more from the play. As the good prince of Arragon, Denzel Washington did a superb job, and as Claudio, the love-struck innocent, Robert Sean Leonard performed great just as he has done in any other theatrical movies that I have seen him in. But in the lesser role of the prince's evil half brother, Keanu Reeves didn?t appear to be all that special, at times he did look evil but I have never been a big fan of Keanu?s acting. He always sounds like a baboon when he opens his mouth. Maybe I am just remembering too much of Bill and Ted?s Excellent adventure? Beatrice and Bene*censored* are adversaries united only in their contempt for marriage. Once the two finally let down their guard and allow their true feelings to blossom... ... middle of paper ... ...and several more keeps you and your emotions on a roller coaster ride. Which is brilliant because we all know that as humans we adhere to stimulation and that is what it does, it stimulates us by incorporating all these emotions and jumping around with them. With the movie it also adds a score and soundtrack as well as camera shots and things that appeals to our senses that much more. At least it does for me. Branagh's interpretation of Shakespeare's play leaves the viewer with the impression of a fairy tale in which everyone (except the villain) will live happily ever after. The film is good, but even as I am partial to the movie I do believe to properly appreciate Shakespeare's work it is necessary to take the time to peruse the play in a leisurely and contemplative manner, and if anything to get the WHOLE play in which the movie did not give.
Whedon's production of Much Ado About Nothing is a modern, black and white retelling of the famous Shakespeare play of the same name which tells the story of love and deceit between two couples: Hero and Claudio, and Beatrice and Benedick. While Hero and Claudio court and prepare to marry each other, Beatrice and Benedick steal the show away with their wit, humor, and constant bickering. Though they both insist that they hate each other, the flashback presented at the start of the film suggests that there is far more to the story than meets the eye. While the style of the film certainly enhances the story being told, making it a timeless classic entangled with modern society, it is the ensemble cast that work both individually and as a unit which make the film a true masterpiece, as well as the genius idea of a change in scenery that propels a sense of realism not often found in your average Shakespeare adaptation.
William Shakespeare said: “Women may fall when there's no strength in men” (Romeo and Juliet). Throughout history gender role have been a big, whether someone is a feminist or someone believes there is no equality between males and females; everyone has different opinions when it comes to the matter of gender roles. The same thing can be said about William Shakespeare who was a feminist (Shakespeare of Stratford). This ideology can be seen in his play Much Ado about Nothing. In this comedy Shakespeare focuses on two pairs of lovers named Claudio and Hero who are set to be married in a week but before their marriage day, they plan to conspire with Don Pedro, the prince of Aragon to trick their friends Beatrice and Benedick to admit their love for each other. Don John, the brother of Don Pedro, meanwhile plots to prevent marriage of Claudio and Hero by accusing Hero of being unfaithful. Don John initially succeeds in his plan as Hero is accused and ashamed at the marriage ceremony, but at the end Claudio and Hero are united and marry each other. Also, Beatrice and Benedick finally declare their love for each and dance at the end of the play. Shakespeare uses a lot of sources for this comedy and one of them is “Orlando Furioso” written in 1591, which gave Shakespeare the idea of Hero and Claudio’s marriage and Don John’s plot to prevent it. Another source Shakespeare used to write the play is the courtier written in 1588, which gave him the idea of the romance between Beatrice and Benedick. And also “La Prima de la Novelle” written in 1554 by Matteo Bandello gave Shakespeare the idea of putting the setting in Messina, Italy (Shakespeare in quarto). Because Shakespeare was a feminist, some of the women appear as supporting and central...
...ot be as great as it is without him. Caviezel had a large challenge when he took on this role. He almost had to play two different characters and mold into one another throughout the film. His character changes greatly from before and after the prison. He did it well and I enjoyed his performance in this film. Sir Richard Harris who played Abbe Faria did a great job and was one of my favorite characters in the film. He did so well in fact, that every time since I saw this film, I will always see him as Abbe Faria in other films.
I liked Curley best in the first movie. In that movie the actor who played him really looked the part. He looked like the sniveling little weasel that he really is. The clothes fit the part and the mu...
As an amazing play is moved to a movie, it is very sad to see characters or scenes lost. In Branagh’s “Hamlet'; very little is lost in his adaptation. This is very pleasing as the play is sensational The only problem faced is that of the comedic actors. This did not effect the outcome of the movie and many are looking forward to more of Branagh’s work.
Jeremy Irons’s acting was flawless. His experience in acting is clear, and unlike his younger colleague, successfully portrays every emotion with effortless seeming grace.
John Malkovich did a fantastic job playing Lennie, he was large and small, weak and strong, and old and childish all at the same time, just like Lennie is. Lennie is a carefree guy with mental disabilities, and back then not much was known about mental disabilities or how to help people with them. Lennie never knew his own strength, often killing small animals if he tried to pet them, and this leads to a big conflict at the end of the movie.
In Much Ado About Nothing, characters Beatrice and Benedict initially insult each other, but was a way to fend off their true feelings. Although they had to be tricked to do so, when confronted, their love eventually overcame their pride. In the same light, Mr. Darcy and Elizabeth faced obstacles as noted above, but eventually love conquered over all.
Each element helps each other by making the next scene better than the one before. It has the storyline come to live, and having people thinking what can happen next or who has the power in the movie. By seeing this movie it can make someone feel complete and satisfied for a long time.
... He really sold the part and did the part justice. Furthermore in the beginning of the flashback I had no idea who the main character was, but Christian developed the character subtly yet effectively.
Beatrice and Benedick are in love throughout the play, but are scared to admit it. They continuously insult each other in attempting to hide their true affections. Beatrice differs from Hero a great amount, in that she does not fulfill the social norms of a female. Their relationship is not patriarchal like Claudio and Hero’s, but both Beatrice and Benedick take part in running the relationship.... ...
Each of these characters enjoys fighting in battles of wit between themselves, insulting each other in turn. That is why it is surprising when their friends decide to deceive them into falling for each other. The friends position themselves so that at different times Beatrice and Benedick will overhear their friends talking about how one has confessed love towards the other in confidence. As a result, Beatrice and Benedick are deceived into believing the other is in love, and in the process fall in love themselves. In this way, eavesdropping is used to bring about a positive
...om that point on the play began to slow down and unravel the conflicts. This was a play I which everything happened very quickly. The problem was presented right at the beginning, the conflict was established along with subsidiary conflicts resulting from our central conflict itself, and the was then resolved rather quickly. The theme of conflict was apparent throughout the play as well, and is the cause of the problems that befall the characters. Overall there was never really a difference or a change in the main idea or conflict or setting of the play to the film, besides a few content difference and alterations with he context and words of the play to the film, I believe that the film was a very good portrayal of the play, the plot and other literary elements used in drama. All were established and addressed the final resolve at the end in A Midsummer Night Dream.
Although through the reading of Shakespeare’s work someone may form a mental depiction of how each actor sounds, looks, and interacts with other characters, films bring to life, through visual representation, both the director and actors interpretations of the play. The ability to pick up on the actor’s subtle body language, the tone of voice, and visual interactions with other characters can lead to a better understanding for someone who is unable to internally visualize the intended meaning and characters of a written play. Such interpretations may slightly skew Shakespeare’s intended representation of each character, however, the overall connotation is not lost but some of his subtle innuendos translated to film are.
"[. . . E]mblems of mafia gang-land hostility: guns, fast cars, and tattoos [. . .]" (Walker 5) are not the usual images found in a Shakespearean play. Baz Luhrmann's 1996 production of William Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet is: