Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Movie review at bottom

This is the most enjoyable play I’ve yet read in my Shakespeare project. Aside from the Elizabethan words that required me to check the footnotes, it had a very modern feel to it. The complicated plot, the good and bad characters, the denouement, the happy ending all reminded me of light comedies that I’ve seen performed on the modern stage.

The play was probably written in 1598. In my Complete Works it has been placed in between Henry IV Part II and Henry V.

The Introduction states that the incident causing Claudio to renounce his love for Hero is a device used, in various forms, “not uncommonly� in the sixteenth century, citing two examples: one version in Spencer’s Faerie Queene (book II, Canto IV), another by Matteo Bandello in an Italian novel published in 1554. The final verdict is that the direct source for Much Ado is “quite likely some play that has now been lost.�

Regardless of where Shakespeare got the general story of Claudio and Hero (who before his version of the play were no doubt the main characters, and even could be so-considered in his version) to this reader they were clearly upstaged by two other characters that are listed below them in the Dramatis Personae: Benedick and Beatrice. Not surprisingly, these characters are entirely of Shakespeare’s own invention (so far as we know), and they provide perhaps the main source of comedy in the play.

Benedick, a young lord of Padua, is introduced as a man who disdains women, and disdains the very idea of marriage. Beatrice, Hero’s cousin, is introduced as a woman who disdains men, and, agreeing in this only with Benedick, disdains the very idea of marriage.

Here’s the first repartee between these two, in the opening scene.

BENE. If Signior Leonato be her (Hero’s) father, she would not have his head on her shoulders for all Messina, as like him as she is.
BEAT. I wonder that you will still be talking, Signior Benedick. Nobody marks you.
BENE. What, my dear lady Disdain! Are you yet living?
BEAT. Is it possible Disdain should die while she hath such meet food to feed it as Signior Benedick? Courtesy itself must convert to disdain if you come in her presence.
BENE. Then is courtesy a turncoat. But it is certain I am loved of all ladies, only you excepted. And I would I could find in my heart that I had not a hard heart, for truly I love none.
BEAT. A dear happiness to women. They would else have been troubled with a pernicious suitor. I thank God and my cold blood that I am of your humor for that. I had rather hear my dog barking at a crow than a man swear he loves me.
BENE. God keep your ladyship still in that mind! So some gentleman or other shall ‘scape a predestinate scratched face.
BEAT. Scratching could not make it worse an ‘twere such a face as yours were.
BENE. Well, you are a rare parrot-teacher.
BEAT. A bird of my tongue is better than a beast of yours.
BENE. I would my horse had the speed of your tongue, and so good a continuer. But keep your way, ‘I God’s name. I have done.
BEAT. You always end with a jade’s trick. [A jade being a bad-tempered horse]

Are these two ready for prime time? You bet.

Shakespeare then adds considerable dialogue among other members of the cast, completely outside the traditional story, in which other male characters conspire to trick Benedick into thinking that Beatrice loves him; while separately, Hero and her attendants decide they will trick Beatrice into believing Benedick has fallen for her.

The other main source of comedy in the play is Dogberry, a constable who plays an important part in Shakespeare’s resolution of the traditional plot-line. But Dogberry, like many minor characters in his plays, is portrayed as a complete idiot, basically by having him spew out one malapropism after another (in fact “Dogberryism� is another term for malapropism). Here are examples of Dogberry’s Archie Bunker-like mix ups, from his first scene: (III.iii)

Says allegiance when he means treachery
Says desartless when he means deserving
Says senseless when he means sensible
Says comprehend when he means apprehend
Says tolerable when he means intolerable
Says present when he means represent
Says statues when he means statutes

All this, and more, in the space of less than a hundred lines (about half are his) while giving the Watch (a group of responsible citizens who would take turns patrolling the parishes of London at night) their instructions for the evening.

Even when Dogberry manages to say what he means, what he means to say is often exceeding strange. When he is asked by the Watch what they should do if they command a vagrant to “stand�, and he will not: “Why, then take no note of him, but let him go, and presently call the rest of the watch together and thank God you are rid of a knave.�

When he is asked what they should do if a drunkard does not obey them when told to go home: “Why, then let them alone till they are sober. If they make you not then the better answer, you may say they are not the men you took them for.�

And, the Watch asks, when they apprehend a thief, “shall we not lay hands on him?�

Dogberry replies with his own ruthless logic, “Truly, by your office you may, but I think they that touch pitch will be defiled. The most peaceable way for you, if you do take a thief, is to let him show himself what he is and steal out of your company.�

1993 movie

Kenneth Branagh adapted the play for the screen, then produced and directed the movie for BBC Films. Branagh also starred as Benedick. Filming was done at a villa in Tuscany.

Other cast included

Emma Thompson (at that time married to Branagh) as Beatrice
Robert Sean Leonard as Claudio
Kate Beckinsale as Hero
Denzel Washington as Don Pedro
Keanu Reeves as Don John
Michael Keaton as Dogberry

The movie is splendid. Branagh and Thompson are superb in the lead roles, Reeves gives a solid performance as the bad guy, and Michael Keaton is way over the top as the buffoon Dogberry. The language is Shakespearean throughout, with unnoticeable cuts in the dialogue and only slight elision of Elizabethan archaisms. Everything a modern audience could ask for. The music is a wonderful plus in the production, and I found myself laughing out loud inordinately often. I’m at a loss to imagine how Shakespeare’s play could have been produced on film more enjoyably. 4 stars (out of four) from me.

Here’s the trailer:

(view spoiler)[There’s also on YouTube (as of now) a two part recording of the play (in a modern setting) done at Wyndham's Theatre, starring David Tennant as Benedick and Catherine Tate as Beatrice. Don’t know how long it will be there.
Part I
Part II (hide spoiler)]


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Previous review: Genius in Disguise Harold Ross of the New Yorker
Next review: The Sound and the Fury
Older review: The Girl Who Played with Fire

Previous library review: The Life and Death of King John
Next library review: As You Like It