Patti O'Shea's Blog

It’s strangely coincidental that last week’s movie was A Midsummer Night’s Dream and this week’s movie is Shakespeare In Love. I honestly didn’t plan it that way. This movie stars Joseph Fiennes as Will Shakespeare and Gwyneth Paltrow as Viola.

Will Shakespeare needs to write a play, but his muse is on vacation. He seeks a woman to inspire him. Eventually, after a misstep, he finds Viola, a woman from a wealthy family. Her father has bought her a title in the form of a penniless nobleman who she’s supposed to marry in a couple of weeks.

For her part, Viola is enamored of Shakespeare’s words. While everyone else in town seems to be lauding Marlowe and his works, she prefers Shakespeare. So for some reason I didn’t understand (I’ll confess, I was multi-tasking while watching), she dresses up as a boy and reads for the role of Romeo. Back then, only males were allowed to be on the stage. Shakespeare thinks she’s perfect for the role and wants her to take off her hat. Viola runs, but goes back with a male wig, facial hair and with her breasts bound so she takes on a more male appearance.

Viola quickly falls in love with Will Shakespeare and kisses him in her guise as a boy. Her identity as a woman is revealed while he’s standing there befuddled and he chases her. They fall into bed together and Viola’s nurse/chaperon covers for the lovers.

Much of the rest of the movie is the rehearsal of the play, more covert kissing and fondling by Will and Viola and Will producing more brilliant scenes every day. Until the culmination with the opening performance where Viola takes the stage not as Romeo (Will has to fill that role), but as Juliet.

I know this movie won awards and stuff, but mostly I was bored with it. While there were a few moments that I enjoyed, overall, I wasn’t overly impressed. Maybe I was expecting too much because I’d heard how good it was, but I found my attention wandering easily.

There were some things that made it difficult to suspend my disbelief. First, was that Viola would risk appearing on the stage. It was unheard of at that time, so why do it? I didn’t feel as if her motivation was strong enough to support that. Second, how easily she fell into bed with Will. Now granted, my grasp of European history in that time period is shaky at best, but I thought women were expected to remain chaste. Even if she was the maverick that appearing on stage would suggest, it just felt wrong that she would have sex with him so fast and with so little conversation between them.

Third, I had trouble believing that someone like Shakespeare who produced so much work (and beautiful work at that) would need a muse. This is where my being a writer gives me a tough time with something most people wouldn’t examine too closely. A working writer doesn’t wait for the muse to show up. If we waited for the muse, I think most writers would get about 3 or 4 days of writing in a year. Nope, a working writer sits down and writes even if it’s gritted out one damn painful word at a time. The real Shakespeare would have known this, I’m confident of it.

So what did I like? I loved Judi Dench as the queen! She was brilliant in the role and she was the one person/thing that stood out for me in the movie. The end, when she’s at the playhouse and setting things right (or as right as they can be), is by far the best part of the entire film and a payoff for the preceding 2 hours that bored me. The queen had a sarcastic wit and a keen eye as well as a deep understanding of human nature and the way Dench portrayed this was fabulous.

Overall, maybe I was expecting too much, but I found the movie boring and the main characters of Will and Viola lacking in motivation. I never believed the romance between them or had any real interest in it, nor did I care that the ending wasn’t happily ever after. (I’m trusting this doesn’t spoil the movie for anyone since it’s from 1998.) It wasn’t a horrible way to spend a couple of hours, but the only parts I truly enjoyed were when the queen was on screen.

My Rating: 3 stars

This adaptation of William Shakespeare’s play stars Kevin Kline as Bottom the weaver, Michelle Pfeiffer as Titania, Rupert Everett as Oberon an Calista Flockhart has Helena.

The movie really features three separate story lines. There is the story involving Kevin Kline. He’s part of a group of craftsmen rehearsing a play to perform for the grand duke’s marriage celebration. There’s the story of the fairies and an argument between Oberon and Titania over a young boy from India. And the third and final story is four young lovers, Helena, Hermia, Lysander and Demetrius. Demetrius is engaged to Hermia, but Hermia and Lysander are in love. They decide to run off together to prevent her marriage to the wrong man, but they confide in Helena. Helena is still in love with Demetrius, and hoping this will win his favor, she tells him of their plan.

Oberon enlists Puck to retrieve a flower that has an essence that, when rubbed on a person’s eyes, makes them fall in love with the next person they see. He plans to use it on Titania to get his way about the boy. When he sees the poor way Demetrius treats Helena, he tells Puck to put some on the young Athenian’s eyes. Puck, of course, mistakes the man and puts it on Lysander’s eyes instead. He sees Helena when he first awakes and falls madly in love with her. Demetrius also gets a dose and likewise is in love with Helena. Both men chase her, spurning Hermia, who becomes angry. Helena thinks the men are mocking her.

Meanwhile, the group of craftsmen are rehearsing their play close to where the fairy queen sleeps and Puck gives Bottom the head of an ass–complete with big ears. Bottom wakes Titania who has also had the essence put on her eyes. She becomes enamored of him and dotes on this mortal who looks like a donkey.

I adore Shakespeare. I took a class when I was in college, and since then, I’ve read (or reread) his plays for fun. The man really was brilliant. I saw A Midsummer Night’s Dream on stage when I was a freshman at the U of MN Morris and A&E has shown a taped version of the stage play on their channel a few times. I mention this so you know that I have some familiarity with this play and that it’s one I like.

Overall, this version of the story wasn’t bad, but unless I’m remembering everything horribly wrong, the film did my least favorite thing–they moved the play’s setting to another time and place than Shakespeare intended. The Guthrie Theater does this all the time and I can’t tell you how much I loathe it. For an example, I was watching Tartuffe by Moliere and enjoying the hell out of it–until the end when the actors (who up until that point had been in period costume) came out in 1930 gangster outfits complete with tommy guns and a car. This was a definite “Say what?” moment.

My memory of A Midsummer Night’s Dream is that it takes place in Athens and before the 1800s. The names in the play–Lysander, Hermia, Theseus, etc., as well as some of the references to Athens–lead me to believe my memory is correct. Unfortunately, that means this movie was moved to Italy in the 1800s and that leaves me a very unhappy viewer.

That said, Kevin Kline did a brilliant job as Bottom. Of course, I do love Kevin Kline, so again, I’m biased. I thought Michelle Pfeiffer also did well as did Rupert Everett. I didn’t quite get why Oberon wanted the Indian boy and why Titania didn’t want to give him up nor did I understand why she wasn’t angry later when Oberon did get the Indian boy. It seems to me she would have tried to get the kid back since she’d promised his mother to watch over him, but she just kind of shrugged and all was well between her and Oberon again. I can’t blame the movie for this, though.

All the actors and actresses did a credible job with the dialog IMO. Sometimes modern actors doing Shakespeare come across as stilted, like actors reciting Shakespeare rather than being their characters, but there wasn’t one person in this movie that didn’t do well.

The scenes/setting of the film were beautifully done and added to the authenticity of the time and place. No matter how briefly the setting appeared in the movie, it appeared as if all pains were taken to ensure it was well accomplished.

What didn’t I like? The time and place used–as I mentioned above. I also didn’t like the constant use of bicycles in the film. Even Puck, instead of using magic, rides a bike at various times. My other problem was that this is supposed to be a comedy, but there was very little that was staged to be funny until the end when Bottom and his group of craftsmen do their play.

If you enjoy Shakespeare, this might be worth watching, otherwise I’d rent Much Ado About Nothing.

My rating 3.5 stars.