A Midsummer Night's Dream

What one takes away from this production is the triumph of the artistic direction and the splendid performance of Alex Jennings as Oberon/Theseus. While I certainly liked other aspects of the experience, as a whole it left me a little cold. Much of this, I suspect, lies in severity of the cuts, most evident in the handling of the main plot (the Oberon/Titania quarrel is a sub-plot, after all-- although one wouldn't know it from this adaptation). True, there's not much difference between Demetrius and Lysander (which is sort of the point, I suppose), but, in this production at least, I never cared at all for Hermia and missed Helena's comic self-pity (trimmed as it was). To be even more frank, I didn't find one of the four principal lovers' performances to be more than competent (although one should not take even this for granted in a filmed production), much less memorable. Others have spoken derisively of the boy's dream that frames the play, but I thought it was an interesting conceit, if not terribly original. For the life of me I can't understand why it is so controversial here since he speaks no lines, and his presence allows for some very interesting point-of-view shifts. On the whole, I would recommend it, but as far as filmed adaptations go, I probably still prefer the (slightly stodgy) BBC filmed production from the early 80s (which, it will be admitted, has a host of problems of its own). In terms of imagination of conception, however, this one is truly remarkable and should not be missed by fans of the play (everyone, I hope).

This is the fourth rendition of Shakespeare's play I have seen on the small screen, and it is possibly the best so far, with the one reservation that it emphasizes one aspect of the play which I am not sure the Bard would have made quite so weighty. It is filled with modern gimmicks used to emphasize this aspect (which I am not revealing, should that be a "spoiler" for some.)One of the gimmicks in the play is that Theseus and Hippolyta are played by the same actors as Oberon and Titania and the Puck / Robin Goodfellow actor also plays Philostrate, the master of the revels. These fit, each for a different reason. The story is primarily about four pairs of men and women, and their relations, so it is a neat conceit to have two of those pair played by the same actors (although the costuming and makeup effectively hid that fact until I saw the credits.) I recognized the Puck / Philostrate dual role easily, partly because those who know the play easily think of Puck as the major domo of the entire story, not just the play within a play.Of the three main stories in the play, this version gives more attention to the story of the fairies and to the plot with the six "mechanicals" than it does to the story of the four young lovers. This is accentuated by the fact that Lysander and Demetrius wear similar garb, almost like a uniform, in order to add credence to part of the Puck / Oberon business.The story of the "mechanicals", especially the role of Bottom, is not quite up to the realization of that role by the cast of the 1999 Hollywood version, with Kevin Kline as Bottom, although overall, I prefer this film to the Hollywood version. There is something very reminiscent of the ballet in the way the business of the actors is blocked out, with surreal props of doors without walls and light bulbs hanging from bare wires to act as the stars. Oberon, Titania, and Puck are done better than in the Hollywood version.This version clearly adds to Puck's final monologue things which were cut from the Hollywood version, just as it cuts speeches from the story of the four young lovers.It is almost impossible to recommend this over the Hollywood version, which is easier to understand and follow, especially with all the familiar faces in the main roles. The Hollywood version has a better balance between the three stories, which means that the peril faced by Hermia is given its proper importance; although this version does a better job at showing the effect this situation has on the relation between Hippolyta and Theseus. I would watch the Hollywood version first, then watch this version.

This is not a good kid movie, it was difficult to see certain scenes for kids from age 13-18, I don't understand why the make these movie a classic one

I saw this RSC production four times while studying in London in 1995, and also saw Alex Jennings in his Olivier-award-winning performance in "Peer Gynt" at the New Vic. (He is an amazing actor.) I bought this to be able to relive the experience of the play, and I was delighted to see that the performers and many of the props and set pieces were just as I remembered them. It is the best version of "Midsummer Night's Dream" that I've ever seen, stage or screen. It put some new twists into a centuries-old play and made it so hilarious in the process, but not by altering the story or anchoring it in an incorrect time period. In fact, there are many periods mixed together here and it works well as a "dream". They didn't have to add the part of the little boy; he was not in the original stage production, and he detracted from the story. I wish they had left the play alone and not added sets (Theseus' palace, the boy's home, the Rude Mechanicals' rehearsal area) that weren't in the original. They seemed out of place and took away from the magical atmosphere that was, fortunately, still there in the fairies' forest. I loved it that they kept the lightbulbs!

I didn't find this version as entertaining as I had hoped but there are plus points as well as those that are negative. On the plus side this is quite an original slant on the more usual versions and it does include magical moments ghat are so important in this classic fairy tale. On the negative side modern day items such as a motor bike, umbrellas, clothing etc are incorporated and a number of cuts have been made to the original text.

By far the best interpretation of a Midsummer Night's Dream that I have seen. Wonderful cast, a bright but still dreamy colour palate, and much imaginative use of many light bulbs and umbrellas....It works for audiences of all levels. My 12 year grasped the plot very easily and was chortling along, not just at the rude mechanicals but at the many other humorous sections either scripted or visual. He particularly loved the portrayal of Oberon and Puck, and he was right to do so. Desmond Barrit gives a suberb performance as Bottom and (though if watching with kids do be warned as in this production he is certainly the rudest of the rude mechanicals). In fact all of this particular squad of rude mechanicals are so good that you almost wish they could be given their own spin-out play/show.

I have directed this play, been in it as Bottom and watched it many times. This is the standard by which I judge all other productions of the play. Certainly it is the best adaptation of the play and of a stage production I have ever seen. It has a surreal quality - the forest of doors, or the fluffy fairies for instance. It quips about other films - the motorbike ride across the moon.... but the whole has exactly that uncertain balance between dark and light,death and life that makes the play so tantalising.There are those who will gripe at Bottom not having an ass's head at any point; just a lot of hair, ears growing through his crash helmet Do not be put off! Be prepared to leave behind your troubles and enter a world where dreams come true!

I bought this to help my great grandson with his exams.

I watched 3 versions including those with Helen Mirren and Michelle Pfeiffer as Titannia and this is by far the best. Energetic, thought provoking, sexy, fun, well acted, well produced and well delivered. If you only get to see one version of the play on screen, this has to be it.