A Midsummer Night's Dream (I) (1981 TV Movie) User Reviews

Grim, with Curdled Tone and Little Magic

[tonstant viewer · 6/10 · 24 November 2006]

There is a ferocity about this production that is off-putting. Titania and Oberon are not ethereally at odds, but grimly at war. Puck has vampire fangs and looks like a hustler who'd offer to sell you club drugs. The rustics are not funny ever. In sum, the playfulness and magic we expect in this play are absent.

That said, it's pretty to look at, as director Elijah Moshinsky continues his progress through the catalog of Old Masters paintings, usually but not always in consonance with the text.

Helen Mirren is an iron-willed professional as Titania, even when the changeling child cries in her arms during a major speech. Peter McEnery's cold Oberon shows violent rage at the lovers' confusion, and in punishment holds Puck's head underwater a bit too long for comedy.

Cherith Mellor is particularly good as Helena, in her only appearance in the BBC Shakespeare series. Nigel Davenport is a pleasure to listen to as Duke Theseus, in his only appearance, other than the 1978 "Much Ado" with Anthony Andrews, Michael York and Penelope Keith that was supposed to inaugurate the series but was buried. Otherwise there is little delightful about this Dream, which all too often verges on Nightmare.

The slapstick dispute among the four lovers uses thickly overlapping dialog, which speeds things up but renders it unusable in the classroom. The rude mechanicals are gentrified here, killing Shakespeare's pointed class distinction and most of the humor with it. Geoffrey Palmer is ineffective as Peter Quince. Brian Glover gives his all as Bottom, but is Liliputian compared to the awe-inspiring Paul Rogers in the Peter Hall film.

In fact, that delightful Peter Hall film from 1968 is superior in every major aspect except the technical ones. There Ian Richardson and Judi Dench make magic as the Fairies' Rulers, Helen Mirren, Diana Rigg, David Warner and Michael Jayston are the lovers, Paul Rogers is Bottom and Ian Holm plays Puck as Oberon's faithful dog, tongue hanging out in eagerness for mischief - all shot outdoors in a wondrous twilight wood. Now that's one bewitching Dream!

Wonderful presentation

[rjanecook1 · 8/10 · 8 December 2005]

I thought this was fantastic, from beginning to end. There was nothing significant I could criticise or find fault with, there were a few dull moments, but the majority of the action was excellent. This seems to not be very well known, there is a video, it may be rather hard to get hold of though, and there is no DVD to my knowledge. Helen Mirren sparkled as Titania, I also enjoyed the way Phil Daniels brought Puck to life. I also was delighted by Cherith Mellor as Helena, she brought the comedy and the life to this production.

On the whole, this made a great impression on me, and I recommend it for the comedy brought out in the talented acting and the superb setting.

Two Shining Moments

[Bologna King · 6/10 · 19 April 2006]

There are two reasons why you might want to watch this version of Midsummer Night's Dream. One is Helen Mirren. She is lovely and perfect as Titania throughout and her delivery of the long monologue to Oberon in Act 2 Sc. 1 does not lose the viewer's attention for a moment. That is an awesome feat considering what a difficult passage it is.

The other shining moment occurs in Act 3 Sc. 2, starting about when Demetrius wakes up to find that he is in love with Helena. The ensuing lines are delivered over top of each other, as the lovers engage in a confused quarrel. The actors add to this by pushing each other, trying to get around or over or under to talk to someone other than the one that's talking to them. Great directing and perfect timing make this scene race by like I've never seen it before.

These two shining moments hardly make up for the rest of the performance which lacks sparkle. Some parts are sung (Puck's "Jack shall have Jill" speech) which is just incongruous. Perhaps the fact that Starveling sings his part as Moonshine is a bit of self-satire.

Which brings me to the rude mechanicals who are particularly lacklustre. Geoffrey Palmer is absolutely wasted here. "Pyramus and Thisbe" is absolutely boring. There are exactly two bits of comic business (Bottom steals food from the wedding table on the line "'Deceiving me' is Thisbe's cue" and Starveling as Moonshine tries to upstage Bottom by hanging the lantern in front of his face) and they aren't exactly hilarious. If it's not funny, it should at least be moving, but although Flute (a very feminine Flute) tries, the director has cut most of the wedding party's backchat and they seem to have little interest in what is going on on the stage. Small wonder really.

There's nothing about the sets and costumes, which suggest the English Civil War, to get us excited. The entire first scene is set in a library against a background of a ticking clock. What a great way to remind us how slowly the scene is moving!

Helen Mirren and The Dream

[gentlepuck · 7/10 · 28 February 2006]

This is the second time I've seen her in this play, first as Titania. The first time she was in a movie version of the Dream she was Hermia, one of the lovers. This is a good version for a class room viewing. It lacks the nudity and innuendos that Hall's and Hoffman's exhibited. This is also the one I know of where Puck is a punk. I love this version because it doesn't cut out any of the dialogue. It heightens the tension and passion Mirren's character had in the section about the environmental affects her feud with her husband has had. The costumes do not blend well with one another. It makes it hard to date and does not give the story a sense of timelessness. Also, you can get this on video. It's hard to find but it can be located at a library near you. Blockbuster will not carry it for whatever reason. PBS is a good source too but don't hold out for it.

Decent enough but too slow moving

[alainenglish · 7/10 · 28 February 2010]

Easily Shakespeare's most accessible play, with fairies, lovers and comical buffoons, "A Midsummer Night's Dream" is given a decent enough rendering here. The play could have been paced better, and some scenes made funnier but on the whole the production is acceptable.

The Duke of Athens Theseus (Nigel Davenport) is preparing to marry his bride Hippolyta (Estelle Kohler) but has problems with two noblemen, Lysander (Robert Lindsay) and Demetrius (Nicky Henson), fighting over the same woman, Hermia (Pippa Guard). A fourth woman Helena (Cherith Mellor) hankers after Demetrius but he's not interested. A troupe of amateur actors, including the demented Bottom (Brian Glover) rehearse a play for the Duke's wedding. Hermia flees with Lysander into the forest pursued by Demetrius and Helena where Oberon (Peter McEnery), king of the fairies, takes an interest in their affairs in between squabbling with his Queen Titania (Helen Mirren). With the aid of his trusty sidekick Puck (Phil Daniels), he attempts to resolve the lovers' dispute himself and in the meantime embarrass Titania by having her fall in love with Bottom...

At it's base this an actually quite complicated plot but the genius of the writing is that it's very easy to follow. The production does the play proud in this aspect and there's never any problem understanding what's going on.

The lover's fighting in the forest benefits from the use of overlapping dialogue, and there is some lovely choral work to complement the fairy scenes. The beginning and end scenes in Athen's court could have been directed with a little more urgency. As it is, they drag somewhat.

Phil Daniel's Puck, however, is too sped up. He is lithe and physical but too much of his dialogue is unfathomable. The scenes with the mechanicals could have been played for more laughs, despite the best efforts of Glover and Geoffrey Palmer as Quince.

The lovers are well portrayed, and their fickleness as they fall in and out of love with one another is given a nice comic edge by the actors. I feel for the actors, though, as they spend most of their scenes drenched in mud and/or water, not a bad achievement in the studio setting.

This series really needs a proper modern dress update these days. There is so much power and relevance in Shakespeare's stories that this project, though well-intended, didn't always take advantage of.

The essence of this movie will always be with me.

[tomfern · 10/10 · 26 May 2008]

After reading some previous comments, I can only conclude that some people were watching a different movie altogether. I found this version Of A Midsummer Night's Dream to be far superior to any other that I've ever seen .

This is my favorite of all Shakespeare's plays, so I generally stand to be critical of the various treatments offered. However, I found this cast and direction to be outstanding, visually, and emotionally. The costumes were spectacular, the settings haunting, and the acting...flawless. I loved Geoffrey Palmer's work as well. I was lucky enough to catch a repeat of it years ago, and quickly taped it so I could watch it every summer.I themed my wedding after this play.

I loved Helen Mirren's portrayal as the faerie queen, Titania. I found her to be perfect in the role. Judi Dench, I believe, played it all too 70s hippie-angsty, and could have done very well without the overexposure.

The casting of an older boy as Puck, while at first seemed unfamiliar, and wrong, he quickly won me over, and soon his age didn't matter a bit. He sure beat a manic Mickey Rooney in the Hollywood version of 1935! Who, by the way, was 15 when he played the role.

I saw some scenes on Youtube the other day, and the background music has been playing in my head for 2 days now. I'm hooked again.

My birthday is next month..my husband is buying me the entire boxed set of the BBC Shakespeare comedies! Helen Mirren as Rosalind in As You Like It is superb again...as is John Cleese as Pertruchio in The Taming of the Shrew. I can't wait till next month...I'll be in Shakespeare Utopia.

Pucks on Crystal Meth

[jonesclwyd · 12 September 2012]

I think reviewers like tonstant have said it all.

The main point for me is that Phil Daniels is way too weird and scary.

Drugs and flick knives are fine for a weekend in Briton - but Shakespeare's words aren't a bunch of rockers on a Brighton pier to be repeatedly whacked over the head by an East End bike chain.

(Imagine an angry Stephen Hawkins after having his computer reprogrammed by Bill Sikes and the volume set on full).

Also, hobgoblin's (I guess) do what they do, not in slavish service to a tedious inner psychosis, but simply for the fun of it.

But, there are a lot of things in the play which are very good, and for that, well worth watching.

A Midsummer Night's Dream (1981)

[eparis2 · 7/10 · 13 August 2022]

The strengths of this tribute to the Reinhardt-Dieterle film are compelling original music, an effectively magical if brooding atmosphere, and an angelically fiery Titania.

Its weaknesses include an Oberon who is at once too dangerous and too dull (an odd combination even for this play of opposites); distinctly unfunny mechanicals, who, like everyone else in the film, are forced into poses inspired by Dutch painters; a Helena who is played ugly in spite of all the lines to the contrary; and a Puck who seems a nearly mindless animal, as far from humor as he is from humanness.

Fantastic, but seldom seen

[artzau · 9/10 · 12 December 2004]

This little viewed BBC event is certainly worth watching if you're a Shakespeare fan. I certainly am and A Midsummer's Night Dream (or, as us buffs call it, "The Dream") is certainly one of my favorites. Most of the cast will be not well known to those outside of the ranks of the fans of British theatre and indeed, Helen Mirren, always a delight, may well be the only name that stands out.

There have been many versions of this play presented in both as films to be shown in theaters and as films made-for-TV. The rewarding feature of British theater is that seemingly, no matter what the venue for showing the performance, the acting is nearly always up to the highest mark of stage standards.

There is no DVD or Video of which I am aware but, if this little romp crosses your screen, be sure to check it out. It's delightful and fun.

Cumbersome and heavy-handed

[howard.schumann · 5/10 · 7 June 2009]

A BBC, Time-Life production from the early 1980s, this TV adaptation of A Midsummer Night's Dream has all of Shakespeare's words but none of the magic. Trying to ensure that none of the text is left out, the actors deliver their lines at a breakneck pace, almost sounding like the debating team in Rocket Science. Consequently, much of Shakespeare's nuance and poetry is lost. This is a play that relies on myth and allegory to make its point which is essentially that reality is malleable and can be influenced by the spirit world for either good or ill, yet its treatment here is cumbersome and heavy-handed rather than light and playful.

The play, replete with allusions to Greek mythology, is about a trio of mixed-up lovers: Hermia, Denetrius, and Lysander. Hermia's overbearing father Egeus is partial to Demetrius, his choice to be Hermia's husband. Indeed, Egeus' description in the play's first scene of his love for Demetrius sounds suspiciously like Shakespeare's entreaties to the fair youth in the Sonnets. In the same vein, Duke Theseus, who is marrying former enemy Hippolyta, sounds the refrain that the duty of a beloved youth is to make a copy of himself to preserve for future generations. Meanwhile Hermia is fixated on Lysander and will not consider anyone else as a husband, although choosing to disobey her father may lead to a potential death sentence or life as a nun which may be the same thing. To escape, Hermia agrees to run off with Lysander into the forest but naively conveys the information to Helena, a young maiden who longs for Demetrius.

She follows Demetrius into the forest to try and stop Hermia and Lysander but they come upon a group of fairies who have their own agenda, leading to a romantic farce of mistaken identities caused by the fairies magical potions. One of the subplots concerns a theatrical troupe of workers who offer a play within a play that bring the proceedings to a comic high. The cast is competent but uninspired with the possible exception of Helen Mirren as The Faerie Queen. Nicky Henson as Demetrius and Robert Lindsay as Lysander seem too old for the part of young lovers and speak their lines with a clunky earnestness that is all wrong for the mood. Phil Daniels plays Puck with a demonic grin, belying the characters' playful nature. All in all, work of nimble grace is turned into an often incomprehensible shouting match that makes one long for some of the magic fairies potion - to sleep, perchance to dream.

Another great Shakespeare play from the BBC

[Red-125 · 9/10 · 1 October 2013]

A Midsummer Night's Dream (1981/I) (TV), directed by Elijah Moshinsky, is a BBC video production. Between 1978 and 1985, the BBC produced all 37 of Shakespeare's plays for British television. They are now available on DVD.

Although Midsummer Night's Dream is sometimes considered just a frivolous minor comic piece, it's actually a sophisticated and thought-provoking play. When it was written, Shakespeare was already a successful playwright, at was almost at the peak of his powers. He had command of his medium to such an extent that he could add two additional plots to the usual high comedy/low comedy convention of his day.

We have two sets of star-crossed lovers-- Hermia, who is loved by Lysander and Demetrius, although she only loves Lysander, and Helena, who loves Demetrius, although he loves Hermia. Hermia's father demands that she marry Demetrius. (Her other choices are to be executed or to enter a convent.) That's just one plot.

Meanwhile, in a wooded area outside the city, Oberon, the King of the Fairies, and Titania, the Queen of the Fairies, are feuding over a young servant boy. The boy is with Titania, but desired by Oberon for his entourage. When these two fight, nature goes into disarray, and people suffer.

Theseus--the mythic hero--is ruler of Athens, where the play is set. He has defeated the Amazons and captured their queen, Hippolyta. He plans to marry Hippolyta in four days, so we know that all other matters must be settled by then.

Finally, a group of working-class men ("rude mechanicals") is preparing a play to celebrate the nuptials. The play is Pyramus and Thisbe, which is about two truly star-crossed lovers who die because of their love. (Perhaps not the best choice for a wedding celebration, but that's the play they've chosen.)

Midsummer Night's Dream is a comedy, so we know that the play won't end with dead actors being carried offstage. However, sorting out and bringing all these plots to fruition required the genius of William Shakespeare.

The BBC did an excellent job with this play. Helen Mirren is superb as Titania, the Queen of the Fairies. (It's interesting that 20 years earlier she had played Hermia.) Titania is surrounded by her entourage of fairies, played primarily by children, and you really get the sense that something magical is happening. The fairies don't float in the air like Tinkerbell. They stumble and tumble along in front of, alongside, and behind Titania.

I checked the bios of the other principle actors, and they are all solid professionals. However, as far as I could tell, none of them ever attained the stature of Helen Mirren. Nonetheless, they play their parts well and they work well together in ensemble.

As I wrote in my review of the BBC's Hamlet, this movie presents us with good, solid Shakespeare. It's a very satisfying production, and definitely worth seeing. The BBC Shakespeare series was particularly popular for use in schools, colleges, and public libraries. Because they were made for TV, they work very well on the small screen.

The DVD's are expensive to purchase individually, although the boxed sets are more reasonably priced. My suggestion is to check the DVD out of your local or college library, and treat yourself to over two hours of excellent Shakespeare.

a very disappointing production of a splendid play

[mhk11 · 4/10 · 9 December 2012]

Most of the productions in the BBC's Shakespeare series range from good to excellent, but there are a few duds. This production falls into the latter category. It is perhaps the worst, and certainly one of the worst, in the whole series.

The shortcomings arise chiefly from the inept directorial job by Elijah Moshinsky (though Nigel Davenport doesn't help with some painfully bad acting -- or, rather, expressionless reciting in lieu of acting -- in Act I). The four actors who portray the young lovers deliver excellent performances, but their efforts are undermined in Act III.ii by the director's disastrously ill-advised decision to have them speak quite a few of their lines simultaneously. Equally bizarre is the director's tendency to chop up and rearrange portions of the dialogue and to delete other portions. (Contrary to what is stated in two of the other reviews on this site, it is certainly not the case that all the dialogue is included in this production. A few of the deletions are well judged, though most of them are at best pointless.) If a director has so little respect for Shakespeare's art, why would he take on the task of directing this play at all?!

The performance by Phil Daniels as Puck is quite good, but it could have been much better if a competent director had reined Daniels in when he became too brisk and shrill in his articulation of his lines. Directorial incompetence is even more woefully evident in Act V. The mechanicals' play within a play is grimly unfunny. Having seen 60-70 productions of "Dream" during the past quarter of a century, I have never come upon a worse rendering of the final Act.

Helen Mirren is superb, but Peter McEnery is far too fierce in his portrayal of Oberon. He is clearly an adept actor, but he was let down by the director; a competent director would have reminded him that "Dream" is a comedy and that he ought to be striving for more humor and less ferocity.

This production does not altogether obscure the magic of Shakespeare's wonderful play, but it is overall a sore disappointment.

ADDENDUM: Having watched this production four more times since writing the review that appears above, I want to add a few comments. First, although I fully stand by my remark about the disastrously ill-judged directing of scene III.ii, I should note that the simultaneous uttering of lines blessedly comes to an end after Lysander and Demetrius exit cheek by jowl. Thereafter, the scene is well presented. Second, although Nigel Davenport does sometimes briefly descend into expressionless recitation in the opening scene of the play, my remark above now strikes me as too harsh. Third, likewise somewhat too harsh is my remark about the final Act. Though I have witnessed far better renderings of the play within the play, this rendering is sometimes mildly amusing. Fourth, I'm inclined to intensify my remark about the deletion of portions of the dialogue. In such a short play, there is no adequate justification for the deletions.

See this version!

[d2mgh0 · 9/10 · 5 February 2005]

I stumbled upon this production as a teen on PBS one night and have never forgotten it. I'm not particularly a Shakespeare buff but this production gave me a serious soft spot for "Dream" and I've seen several productions of it. This one puts the rest to shame. This is perhaps the most palatable of the Bard's works and the staging and direction make it even more embraceable but do not dumb it down. A taste of this and you may well find yourself going out of your way to rent "Hamlet", "Othello" (or Lord help you) "Titus" (no, can't honestly recommend that one although Sir Anthony Hopkins, Jessica Lange and Alan Cumming all performed wonderfully).

A classic classical - well worth watching.

[Bernie4444 · 10/10 · 18 April 2021]

When you see the full play in all its glory, you will never settle for Cliff's notes or some modern-day bacterization of the play.

Too many versions of this play are just venues for popular actors as is "hamlet" and "The Tempest" which includes female leads.

Yes, I know this has Helen Mirren at 36 years old, but she fits well and does not stand out as an actor trying to outdo others and Shakespeare himself.

Keep in mind that this is a British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC), Time-Life Television Productions, television version so no exotic CGI tricks.

It is so packed with the real wording that you will need to watch several times to take it all in. (1h 51min)

Even though the play was meant to be seen you will also want to read it. There are overlapping themes of the misadventures of lovers, enthusiastic thespians, and fairies as part of a Midsummer Night's Dream.

"So doth the woodbine the sweet honeysuckle gently entwist. The female ivy so enrings the barky fingers of the elm."

Not that much of a dream

[TheLittleSongbird · 5/10 · 5 May 2019]

Absolutely adore 'A Midsummer Night's Dream', ever since primary school when studying it and reading it the text out loud when playing a character (loved that way of learning, not everyone did). Love the colourful characters, the magic, the playfulness, the hilarious comedy and at times pathos. The story may seem complicated on first glance, with a lot going on, but actually 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' is one of Shakespeare's most accessible plays, and it is one of my favourites of his and adore the amazing text and how he uses it.

The BBC Television Shakespeare series is an interesting one and well worth watching if you want to see productions all of Shakespeare's plays compiled into one series. It is an uneven one though, with some productions great, some very good, some decent and some disappointing. This production of 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' is one of the disappointments, it is not that much of a dream if not quite a nightmare. It has its plus points, but overall magic is missing as well as fun and considering that the play is full of both that is a big problem. Others have summed up the plus and minus points of the production very well already but will offer my opinion anyway.

Lets start with the plus points. The best thing about this 'A Midsummer Night's Dream' is Helen Mirren's superb Titania, if there is any magic that comes out of the production it comes from her and the same goes for nuance and wit. Her big speech, which is not an easy one at all, is beautifully delivered and it is also one of the better staged scenes because of the subtlety. Also thought the lovers were well portrayed on the most part (apart from some occasional over-earnestness from Nicky Henson), especially Cherith Mellor's Helena. Brian Glover gives it everything as Bottom and doesn't over-do the humour or over-confidence.

Some of the production values are very striking and raise interest, particularly the painterly sets. The choral work was lovely and fits well. Act 2 comes off best, if mainly for Mirren, and will never get enough of Shakespeare's text.

On the other hand, not all the cast work, with Phil Daniels' too manic to the point of being annoying Puck and Nigel Davenport's bored sounding Thesus coming off worst. Geoffrey Palmer does his best as Quince but has too little to work with and Peter McEnery to me, and a couple of others here, is too cold and fierce as Oberon.

Found myself very disappointed in Elijah Moshinsky's staging which was enough to bring down the production significantly. Especially disappointing considering he did such a good job with the BBC Television Shakespeare production of 'All's Well That Ends Well'. There is just very little life to the production and it all feels overly grim and too serious, while the humour so hilarious in the play lacks wit and either over-played or with little comic timing. The drabness of some of the production strips the play of its magic, while the playfulness is replaced by (sometimes inept) clumsiness. The staging of Act 3 Scene 2 agreed is a major misjudgment and will confuse anybody studying the play via this production and the last act is dull.

In conclusion, not nightmarish but not dream-like. 5/10

Could have been good, let itself down

[fraser-rew · 8/10 · 3 October 2009]

Let me say first of all that this is easily my favourite of all Shakespeare's plays. The way that it interweaves the fantastical and the real is exceptional. But this production did not do it the credit that it deserves.

There were a lot of good things here. All Shakespearean productions seem to have at least one actor who doesn't seem at home with the language. It looked for a while as if this one would get away from that. Unfortunately, Puck's entrance kind of spoiled this for me, and as he is a major player it was doubly disappointing. He was totally miscast, and some of his better known lines were almost painful.

Having Titania's bed chamber looking like a Rubens painting was a great touch - to say nothing of Titania herself, who, played by Helen Mirren, was outstanding. Making her attendants so numerous and so young was also excellent - in theory. But again, none of them (in their, admittedly few, speaking parts) seemed in any way comfortable with the language. I realise that Shakespeare can't be easy for 10-year-olds, but surely they could have done a little better.

The sets were also a disappointment, the forests clearly being indoors and the puddles therein being miraculously free of mud. I don't know what would have been wrong with just shooting that part outdoors.

It must be a tough production to get right. There were certainly some good things there, but some unnecessarily bad ones as well. I enjoyed it, but the Hollywood version from 1999 is better, and probably easier to source.

The worst (professional) Shakespeare production I've ever seen.

[mmaggiano · 1/10 · 14 January 2013]

Unsalted, humorless, and without a charm, this is mind-bogglingly the work of professionals from the BBC. Line by line, the actors strangle the life out of one of the bard's most accessible yet most wild and original plays. The lovers aren't in love, the dreamer Bottom has no insides with which to dream, Hippolyta and Theseus are soporific and some of the fairies have cheaply synthesized voices. Believe it. Any time, money or talent captured by this film seems to have gone into production design. A few sources (including reviewers here) mention the production's use of the Old Masters' paintings for tableaux vivants in the scenes. If they had just made a nice, corny little series of staged paintings, instead of trying to glue the paintings on to a Shakespeare play, I wouldn't be wondering, thirty years later, why the director Elijah Moshinsky has such contempt for the art of acting, or even the proper use of glue.

A wonderfully dark, fantasy-esque, and rich version of the play. Helen Mirren the perfect Titania. Old production quality but very enjoyable

[mickman91-1 · 8/10 · 7 February 2022]

There is something wonderful about this BBC Television Shakespeare adaptation. It is slowed paced and rather academic in its production, but there is a darkness within it. The staging is dark and it really isn't afraid to highlight the darker aspects of the arguments between Titania and Oberon or the codependancy of the main players. Which makes the humour and the fun of AMND come all the more to life when contrasted with this. Helen Mirren was the perfect Titania: full of sexuality and power and mischief and humour. Phil Daniels was a smile-inducing Puck. You really feel like you spend a few hours lost in the fantasy land of the forest with this magical and whacky play. One of the better screen versions available for sure.

Not that good

[AngelofMusic1998 · 5/10 · 13 March 2020]

I fell a bit sad writing this review,because I actually like A Midsummer Night's Dream very much.The sets don't look the best and much of the comedy is either too much or too little.The biggest dissapointments were Puck and Oberon,but Helena and Titania were very good.Unfortunately,a lot of the cast seems bored.Quite a dissapointment,considering I actually like A Midsummer Night's Dream.5/10

Static shocker

[scolaighe-1 · 3/10 · 18 June 2021]

In stage directing class we were taught that stage movement should be arranged so that if the actors were to stop at any given point the scene would look like a well composed painting or photograph. Here they director and DP have made a holy virtue of this principle. The production seems to have been shot with a single camera locked in as tightly as possible, limiting the actors' movements extremely. The result is beautiful looking but immensely dull to watch.

Available in the Complette BBC Shakespeare

[Dr_Coulardeau · 31 August 2011]

This play is magic in Shakespeare because it deals with fairies and other supernatural magical beings, which was slightly difficult in those days under Queen Elizabeth I, though she had gotten rid of and had alleviated the worst legislation against witches and other follies of that type that her father Henry VIII and her sister Mary I had instated. That explains the great carefulness with which Shakespeare introduces these fairies and other Puck and Company. Yet he makes the reconciliation of Oberon and Titania, King and Queen of that underworld one of the four couples that get united or in that case re-united at the end of the play.

This gives away the essential architecture of the play. It is a total hymn to marriage and Hymen, an unspecified God that appears at the end of As You Like It to bless four marriages there too, could have come and paid a visit. But no Hymen here since one of the four couples is supernatural. But the architecture is there and at the same time three human couples and something must be awry since we are in Shakespeare and three is the signal of trouble, and here trouble is expressed in two ways. The play in the play couple of lovers, Thisbe and Pyramus, that are doomed to die in the good old Romeo and Juliet style: Pyramus believing Thisbe is dead and killing himself and then Thisbe coming by finds Pyramus dead so she kills herself in her turn.

And of course it is the epilogue by Puck announcing that during the night the real world is taken over from under the carpets and under the table by the supernatural underworld. Something is really awry in this simple real world when we are sleeping.

But that would not make a good play by Shakespeare. He adds a lot more and particularly one elopement that will not succeed but will not be needed any more on the following day. A full night in the forest for two couples, two young men and two young women who are at the center of the plot. And Puck will play or tinker about with charms and philters and create havoc with the two men loving the same woman who was rejected by both at the beginning. But Oberon will sort things out and solve the human problem of the forced marriage that the father of one of the girls wanted to impose.

Note here that we are one century before Molière under Louis XIV in France deals with the same subject in some of his plays at the end of the 17th century. England has always been ahead of times.

Puck will definitely create worse havoc with the craftsmen who want to be actors and the poor Nick Bottom, a name Puck mixes with asshole, or rather just ass, two meanings intended, Puck turns that poor Nick Bottom into an ass, one meaning, that of donkey, intended here, and Titania falls in love with that ass she sees when she opens her eyes. That's a change since she was infatuated with a young, very young indeed Indian boy before. Who spoke of Pedrophilia? Could that one repeat because I did not get it very clearly.

It will take more charms and philters from Oberon to sort that mess out and all will be end that ends well.

The last remark we can make is about the play in the play, a trick often used by Shakespeare in tragedies as well as in comedies, generally to create a hiatus between reality and fiction that reveals reality, some hidden secret dark side of reality, like in Hamlet. The French and the snobs in Los Angeles and Hollywood would say it is a "mise en abîme", which is a metaphor for that confrontation of two elements that reveal a third one deep under the surface. Here it is a tragic love affair that is caused by the simple existence of a wall between the two lovers and in fact it reveals to Theseus and Hyppolita that their marriage is the only sane solution to clear up the horizon of Athens and the Amazons and establish some peace, or at least one little piece of peace in that ancient Greece.

As if things had not changed a lot concerning that country. They are living on credit and sooner or later their credit card is forfeited and they start getting up in arms, as if it were going to change anything. Better get settled in good husbandry and a stable economical if not niggardly marital situation and try to live with the means you have and not the means other people have more or less on your request.

Shakespeare made it a comedy, but apparently the two dead ones are actors, hence fake, but the pregnant woman who got burned to death in Athens was not a pregnant actress. I am telling you… these Mediterraneans! Dr Jacques COULARDEAU