Cunk on Shakespeare (TV Movie 2016) Poster

(2016 TV Movie)

User Reviews

Review this title
5 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
8/10
A super episode.
Sleepin_Dragon24 September 2022
Philomena Cunk takes a look at Shakespeare, exploring why his writing is so popular to this day, and looks at the variety of his work.

A wonderful combination, the writing skills of Charlie Brooker, the talent of Diane Morgan, and the iconic figure of William Shakespeare.

It's the originality that I enjoy so much, I can't think of any other character who's quite like Philomena, Morgan is so good, so natural, so very funny. It's the absurdity that's so good.

Some wonderfully funny moments throughout, I really did enjoy that, I'm a huge fan of The Bard, and I'm the first to accept that his work isn't perhaps for everyone, sometimes documentaries and explorations of his work can be a little dry, a little stale. This is a light hearted look, but all it made me want to do was dig out the old Shakespeare's productions.

Marvellous, 8/10.
7 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Poor Will
Hitchcoc17 February 2023
Taking a side track from the most recent Cunk documentary, I found this on You Tube. Like so much of the Cunk stuff, we start off with an utterly bored narrator who can't imagine people of another era acting as they did. She goes though several Shakespeare genres and tell bits and pieces about the films, mispronouncing words and not accurately representing the plots. As is her usual method, she brings in experts and quizzes them with the most absurd questions. Like what would happen to the appreciation of Shakespeare if all the words were removed? She also compares Shakespeare's tragedies to a Liam Neeson thriller. And finally, says that Game of Thrones is Shakespeare's greatest play. It is hit and miss, but mostly hilarious.
1 out of 1 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
A few missteps but generally very funny writing and delivery
bob the moo22 January 2017
I caught up with this older outing for Philomena Cunk thanks to seeing her Christmas special this year. The most obvious thing about this episode is how good writers Charlie Brooker, Jason Hazeley, and Joel Morris really are; although of course the variety of Brooker's current output will get him the headlines. Cunk on Shakespeare is filled with great phrasing and nonsense sentences which are as funny as they are pleasing. Through these Cunk is a wonderfully real person, in her sweetly innocent ignorance.

Morgan's performance makes it come alive; she is fantastically empty in what she does, and is convincing in her wide-eyed delivery. That said, I thought the sections where she took the lead were a little weaker than the scripted material. This stood out more than normal because a large chunk of the episode was interviews. So while the 'what words did he make up' section was hilarious, the bits about needing glasses at the theatre, or about him inventing video games, fall quite flat. This is probably because in these sections it is obvious she is pushing the ignorance to get a rise from the expert, whereas the best moments are much sharper and smarter than that.

A few missteps here, but otherwise very funny thanks to the writing, and the delivery from Morgan.
3 out of 5 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Female Alan Partridge basically
Horst_In_Translation26 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"Cunk on Shakespeare" is a British television movie from last year (2016) and this one runs for half an hour only. The main character is Philomena Cunk and here we have a connection to Steve Coogan's work and it's fitting that lead actress Diane Morgan has already played in "Alpha Papa". The approach to comedy is very similar. The focus is on an important cultural figure and most of the comedy relies on the protagonist's lack of education paired with her and the "filmmakers" still trying desperately to turn this into an informative feature. Some of the jokes worked, others not so well. With references to "Taken" and "Game of Thrones" allegedly being by Shakespeare, it goes a bit over the top, but the interviews are fun when we see how she for example doesn't even know that the ending is unhappy and she calls Romeo & Juliet a romantic comedy. Oh well, one can only imagine what the interviewee was thinking, an expert on the subject of Shakespeare. Overall, the good outweighs the bad slightly and I give it a thumbs-up. Worth seeing especially for everybody who likes Partridge as the comedy style and presentation are really extremely similar.
2 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Limp Satire
l_rawjalaurence20 May 2016
Potentially CUNK ON Shakespeare could have plowed a rich satirical seam by making fun of the prevailing reverence for Shakespeare as a cultural icon, as well as parodying some of the more earnest presenters seen on BBC documentaries, such as Professors Brian Cox and Amanda Vickery.

What a shame, then, that the end result turned out to be so limp. Director Lorry Powles sends his eponymous presenter Philomena Cunk (Diane Morgan) out on a series of location shoots to understand why Shakespeare has been lionized in British cultures both during and after his death. She visits several locations, including the Shakespeare Birthplace Trust and Anne Hathaway's Cottage in Stratford, and the Globe Theatre in London; and talks to a variety of luminaries and academics including Simon Russell Beale and theater director Matthew Burton.

Her ignorance of history and literature is breathtaking, rendering the interviewees quite literally speechless. Clearly the intention was to make fun of the so-called "experts" that dominate the screen, and their perceived knowledge of their subjects (much of which is extraneous anyway).

PHILOMENA CUNK continues a tradition of mockumentaries that encompasses THE OFFICE as well as the KEVIN TURVEY cycle of programs created by Rik Mayall in the Eighties. The only problem is that despite the script being penned by three authors, including Charlie Brooker, it is simply not funny. Having Philomena making toilet jokes or uttering four-letter words in response to her interviewees' statements makes her (and the writers, by implication) seem boorish rather than entertaining.

In the end we feel sorry for the interviewees who have given up their time to participate in this farrago of nonsense.
4 out of 40 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed