Scan barcode
A review by nahret
Much Ado about Nothing by William Shakespeare
adventurous
emotional
funny
inspiring
lighthearted
fast-paced
- Plot- or character-driven? Character
- Strong character development? Yes
- Loveable characters? Yes
- Diverse cast of characters? No
- Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes
5.0
After having a bit of a Much Ado marathon - we watched two very different* productions of the play on a Sunday afternoon - I felt inspired to read the play again, because it probably is my favorite Shakespeare play.
While the story is ostensibly about the trials of Hero and Claudio, whose desire to be wed is foiled by the evil machinations of the Prince of Aragon's bastard brother, John, the true stars are Benedick and Beatrice, forever locked in a pointed battle of wits. It is the development between the two of them that carries the whole play. The way they are "tricked" into falling in love with each other is simply genius writing.
I was inclined to take off a star for the piss-poor treatment of Hero, of course. I understand Shakespeare's point; many of his plays are based on people not properly talking to each other. And I make the usual allowances for the time period. But still, both Claudio and the Prince, as well as Leonato, commit the age-old error of believing another man, however untrustworthy they might already know him to be, over the words of a woman they claimed to love. On the other hand, we have Beatrice, who not only believes her cousin, but who laments her station as a woman that prevents her from exacting vengeance upon those who wronged Hero.
Sheldon P. Zitner's introduction does a good job of explaining that Shakespeare not only deliberately painted the three men in an explicitly cruel manner (apparently, their treatment of Hero did not fly with contemporary audiences at the time, either), but follows a pattern of outrage and redemption that was a well-liked formula at the time. Also, the theme of deception comes up time and again, sometimes malignant, sometimes for sport, but occasionally in the name of love itself. As usual with Shakespeare, even this blueprint for romcoms offers layers upon layers of genius.
10/10, would rewatch this very instant.
* The first one was the 2011 Westend theater production, featuring David Tennant as Benedick and Catherine Tate as Beatrice. Its setting is modern, and it errs on the side of slapstick. What got to me was the choice to dress Hero in a wedding gown that looked like a copy of the one Princess Diana wore; much like Hero in the play, Diana, upon her death, turned from whore to saint in the eyes of the British press.
The second one was the 1993 film directed by Kenneth Branagh, who also stars as Benedick, opposite his then-wife, the fabulous Emma Thompson. While hilariously funny, it gives space to the very dramatic moments of the story. Also, the stand-out in the star-studded cast has to be Michael Keaton as Dogberry. Remember: he is an ass!
While the story is ostensibly about the trials of Hero and Claudio, whose desire to be wed is foiled by the evil machinations of the Prince of Aragon's bastard brother, John, the true stars are Benedick and Beatrice, forever locked in a pointed battle of wits. It is the development between the two of them that carries the whole play. The way they are "tricked" into falling in love with each other is simply genius writing.
I was inclined to take off a star for the piss-poor treatment of Hero, of course. I understand Shakespeare's point; many of his plays are based on people not properly talking to each other. And I make the usual allowances for the time period. But still, both Claudio and the Prince, as well as Leonato, commit the age-old error of believing another man, however untrustworthy they might already know him to be, over the words of a woman they claimed to love. On the other hand, we have Beatrice, who not only believes her cousin, but who laments her station as a woman that prevents her from exacting vengeance upon those who wronged Hero.
Sheldon P. Zitner's introduction does a good job of explaining that Shakespeare not only deliberately painted the three men in an explicitly cruel manner (apparently, their treatment of Hero did not fly with contemporary audiences at the time, either), but follows a pattern of outrage and redemption that was a well-liked formula at the time. Also, the theme of deception comes up time and again, sometimes malignant, sometimes for sport, but occasionally in the name of love itself. As usual with Shakespeare, even this blueprint for romcoms offers layers upon layers of genius.
10/10, would rewatch this very instant.
* The first one was the 2011 Westend theater production, featuring David Tennant as Benedick and Catherine Tate as Beatrice. Its setting is modern, and it errs on the side of slapstick. What got to me was the choice to dress Hero in a wedding gown that looked like a copy of the one Princess Diana wore; much like Hero in the play, Diana, upon her death, turned from whore to saint in the eyes of the British press.
The second one was the 1993 film directed by Kenneth Branagh, who also stars as Benedick, opposite his then-wife, the fabulous Emma Thompson. While hilariously funny, it gives space to the very dramatic moments of the story. Also, the stand-out in the star-studded cast has to be Michael Keaton as Dogberry. Remember: he is an ass!