Love's Labour's Lost (Globe Theatre Version)

'Love's Labour's Lost' is not one of "The Bard" William Shakespeare's best or most accessible plays despite being one of Shakespeare's shortest. Mostly for all that wordplay and dialogue, difficult to remember and not always easy to follow. It is a lot of fun to watch though and one of the most striking aspects of it is the very meaty character of Berowne. So it does deserve to be better known like many of Shakespeare's lesser known plays.

This production from Shakespeare Globe is proof that 'Love's Labour's Lost' should be better known and deserves to be. It is not always easy making such a wordy and sprawling play accessible, entertaining and emotionally impactful. But all three are accomplished absolutely brilliantly here and the production just flies by with very few bumps. It may not be one of the best filmed Shakespeare Globe productions, but it is still a very solid representation of why it deserves its reputation as one of the leading Shakespeare companies.

So much works wonderfully here. The production has a lot of atmosphere visually and is very tasteful and like being there at the time watching it first time. Which is enhanced by the intimate video directing, where so much entertainment value is garnered looking at the audience reactions. Also enhancing the production is the absolutely beautiful music score. Just loved the song in the closing scene.

Also liked the stage direction very much. It is very creative while always being very respectful to the text and the drama, a great job is done making the drama easy to follow and always engaging. A big standout being one of the most creatively choreographed and fun to watch interpretations of the brawls seen anywhere. The comedic moments are played to the hilt and suitably broad (had no problem with it being treated as a farce), also not played too safe, yet the production also doesn't forget to bring out the heart of the play and doesn't miss the point of it. The ending is touching and isn't too civilized.

On the most part the performances are excellent, especially from the complex Berowne of Trystan Graville and Seroca Davis as a scene stealing Moth. The characters that could easily be overacted and too much like caricatures are played very well and are not annoying.

Really did wish though that the female roles were on the male cast's level, but they don't match their complexity or maturity and don't seem as sure of what the play is meant to be or the approach the production was going for judging from the histrionic acting style. Michelle Terry actually is a gifted Shakespearean actress, but the personality is bland (which shines in meatier roles like Beatrice from 'Much Ado About Nothing') and there are other times where she over-compensates. Only in her final scene is she in keeping with everything else going on.

In conclusion though, very impressive indeed. 8/10.

Love's Labour's Lost (Globe Theatre Version) (2010) (V) was directed by Dominic Dromgoole. (For some reason, the director isn't listed by IMDb.) LLL isn't one of Shakespeare's great comedies. There are four intertwined subplots. One involves the King of Navarre and three of his young courtiers/companions, and the Princess of France and three of her ladies-in-waiting/companions. Another involves a stereotypical Spanish nobleman and his love for a country lass. A third involves the same country lass, who may or may not be in love with a country lad (The lad wanders in and out of all the plots.) The fourth plot involves three bourgeois officials--the preacher, the teacher, and the constable. There's also a major role for Moth, the witty servant to Don Armado, the Spaniard. To add to this there are men disguised as "Muscovites," mistaken identities, and a pageant performed by the three bourgeois men.

Surprisingly, Love's Labour's Lost is loaded with wordplay. There are endless puns, endless poems, and endless commentary about puns, poems, and words. Shakespeare was warming up. Knowing what we know now, we can sense the genius flexing his mental and verbal muscles-- warming up for Much Ado About Nothing and Midsummer Night's Dream.

Anyone putting on this play has to deal with a weak premise and an intricate--and not very funny--plot. The BBC series played it straight. This is Shakespeare's play, and we're going to perform it as he wrote it. If it's not a great play, that's not our fault.

The Globe version, on the other hand, appeared to be aimed at high school students, and they went for slapstick. During the intermission, the cast came out and mingled with the audience, threw candy to them, and basically said, "Look--Shakespeare can be fun." I'm not criticizing this approach. For all I know this is closer to what Shakespeare's audience saw than the BBC approach. However, if you're looking for a serious production, this one isn't for you.

I rarely single out an actor for criticism, but I have to make an exception in this case. Michelle Terry is miscast as the Princess of France. The Princess of France isn't an untutored girl. She has come to Navarre on an important political mission, and everyone accepts her as someone who could fulfill a diplomatic role. There's nothing regal about Michelle Terry. She would be better cast as Jaquenetta, the country lass. Ms. Terry may be the right actor for the right role, but she's the wrong actor for this role. However, the other cast members were excellent, especially Seroca Davis as Moth.

We saw this movie on DVD. It would probably work better on a large screen. (It would work even better at The Globe, or at Stratford, Ontario, where we saw it in 2015.) Still, if you want an antic version of LLL, this is the one to watch. I enjoyed it.