A Midsummer Night's Dream

It's been a very long time since I saw this -- near the original airing, and that's the only time. I'd love to get it/see it again. What I remember most positively...beyond overall good quality, and the outdoor theatrical setting, which gave it the charm of a performance (vs. a movie)... is William Hurt's acting as Oberon. Particularly his diction...which (although this is a distant memory) was rather "otherwordly", and gave a dimension to the fairy character that I'd never seen (or heard). If I am recalling it right, he extended certain syllables and phrases, intoned words in unusual ways -- and as I said, the effect was of a truly alien character -- which makes perfect sense, since that's what a King of the Fairies would be. I know it's worth seeing again to confirm my remembrance -- just have to find it.

This version of Shakespeare's play is well-acted but not particularly exciting. The funniest performance comes from Christine Baranski as Helena. The 1999 and 1935 versions are more interesting than this sometimes long-winded production. Granted, this is a televised stage production whereas the others had the freedom of the cinema. But a lot more can be done with Shakespeare on stage -- as exemplified by the recently televised (1998) "Twelfth Night" and by countless live performances.

I was dissapointed in James Lapine's depiction of the fairies of the Athenian forest. Their costumes and acting was fun but in general, it was without the magic that continually glimmers through in Shakespeare's verse. With the exception of a few scenes i.e. Helena and Hermia's fight, the whole play lacked the humor it deserved. Finally, Bottom was miscast. He seemed like he was playing the comic character for children rather than for a discriminating audience. Only at the end when he sees Titania in the shadows does he achieve the complexity that the character deserves and that Kevin Kline delivered in the 1999 movie.

I am an English teacher and use this version for its hilarious Pyramus and Thisbe segment. It is done perfectly and raucously, just as Shakespeare would have wanted! Bottom is excellent. The students always fall out - even those too cool to laugh! My VHS is almost completely deteriorated from use. Does ANYONE know where I can get another?? I like this version - it is indeed a bit dated and I find the Puck in this one REALLY annoying, but William Hurt, as others have pointed out, is appropriately otherworldly. Christine Baransky is also quite good in this. I think the fact that it's really outside in a forest adds to its magic.

This is the best version of Midsummer's I've seen, of the three I've seen (1935, James Cagney as Bottom; 1981 BBC version, Nigel Davenport as Theseus; this one). I'm afraid, though, that all the fairy characters seem to be acting just a little too full of themselves, especially William Hurt. Not that that's too bad, especially in Hurt's case, because he's supposed to be kind of self-centered anyway. The rustics (eg. mechanicals, clowns) were very funny, especially in the Pyramus and Thisby scene at the end. This is the funniest version of Quince's prologue you'll find, and it's probably the way Shakespeare intended it, to boot! The lovers, though their haircuts and makeup date them like anything, act their parts well, and you can actually enjoy their super-long mid-play scene (if Hermia's voice doesn't drive you crazy). In this show Bottom and Puck don't seem to be the centers of the play, as in most productions. Probably the most engaging thing about this version of Midsummer's is that its live; although Shakespeare does remarkably well on film (considering its age), his works are still enjoyed best by the group he originally wrote them for, the live audience. I recommend this film for drama, Shakespeare, and film buffs alike.