A fun Shakespeare adaptation (Love's Labour's Lost (DVD))

Member Name: Deb_C

Product:	Love's Labour's Lost (DVD)
Date:	18/11/09 (55 review reads)
Rating:

Advantages: fun musical numbers, good acting

Disadvantages: singing & dancing could be better

NB: this is a film-only review.

The play Love's Labour's Lost was written by William Shakespeare around the year 1595. It is based around the King of Navarre & his three companions (Berowne, Dumaine & Longaville) who together swear an oath to study for three years & not to see any women during that time. However, the Princess of France & her three ladies in waiting are due to visit the court, so the King decides that they are allowed to see the ladies briefly for the sake of politeness & diplomacy, but that the ladies must not come within the walls of the palace. As you may be able to guess, the four men end up falling in love with the four ladies, & make amusing attempts to try to hide this from each other. One of the main points of the play consists of the witty exchanges between the men & the women as they woo each other. The play could be described as a comic love story.

There are also sub-plots involving a fool named Costard, a Spanish nobleman named Don Armado & two scholars named Nathaniel & Holofernes.

For this year 2000 adaptation of the play, Kenneth Branagh has taken the unusual decision of turning it into a 1930s-style musical featuring well-known songs by people like Irving Berlin, Jerome Kern, & George & Ira Gershwin. The play was adapted & directed by Branagh, & he also stars as Berowne. In order to fit in the musical numbers, the play has necessarily been very heavily edited & has apparently been cut down to only a quarter of the original number of lines (according to Wikipedia).

This film has generally received very poor reviews, however I think perhaps these reviewers were taking it a bit too seriously. I see the film as a bit of fun & very enjoyable if approached in the right way. Yes, it is a shame that so many of Shakespeare's wonderful lines have been cut; however Love's Labour's Lost is not exactly one of his most well-known plays so I see this film as a good way of introducing it to people. Then if they like what they see, & want to see a 'proper' version, they can look out for it at the theatre (although they may have to wait a while as it's not performed that often). It would also be good for people to watch who generally think of Shakespeare as a bit dull & that the plays are too long & difficult to understand. (The film only lasts 90 minutes so you couldn't really say it was too long.)

I knew nothing about the play when I first watched this film, & I think it was a really good introduction, & I have since seen the play on stage & it's now one of my favourites. Perhaps if I'd already loved the play then I wouldn't have enjoyed the film as much as I would have been too busy noticing what was left out rather than what was left in.

The film begins with some lively music which instantly makes you feel like you're watching an old film musical from the 1930s or '40s. In another old-fashioned touch, the credits also appear at the beginning whilst the intro music plays (although there are extended credits at the end of the film as well).

Every so often during the film there's a small bit of black & white newsreel-style footage, giving you an update of what's happening & adding to the 1930s feel (I should mention at this point that the film is set in 1939 to fit in with the period of the great film musicals that inspired it). The costumes & sets also add to the overall impression of a classic musical film.

One of the first things you may notice about the film is that the characters/actors have a mixture of English & American accents. Some people don't like American accents reading Shakespeare, but I think that's a bit silly as it's not as if modern English accents sound anything like the accents people had in Shakespeare's time. And as this is not exactly a serious drama I don't think it's worth getting upset about the fact that the characters all have different accents.

It doesn't take long to get to the first song & the musical numbers are all great fun, & fit into the dialogue without the transitions seeming awkward. Clearly with the characters all bursting into song every so often you can't exactly describe the film as realistic, however this fits well with the play as Shakespeare comedies aren't meant to be especially realistic, & indeed it was quite a long time after Shakespeare until naturalism was seen as a good thing in the theatre. The film includes typical Shakespearian silliness such as people hiding really badly yet the other characters still don't realise they're there; or characters not recognising each other just because they're wearing tiny masks. This all just adds to the fun though.

Apparently the casting of the film was purposely based on acting ability rather than singing & dancing prowess, as Branagh wanted "to highlight energy and enthusiasm rather than smooth competence" (again according to Wikipedia). It is very clear which of the cast have experience in musical theatre (Nathan Lane as Costard & Adrian Lester as Dumaine), however the other cast members' singing & dancing is perfectly acceptable. Having said this, the presence of Adrian Lester with his elegant dance moves & clear singing voice does make me wonder how much better the film could have been if all the cast members were able to sing & dance so beautifully.

As for the spoken lines of the film, it impresses me that the actors speak Shakespeare's lines very clearly & in a way that makes it very easy to understand their meaning (not always the case with Shakespeare). Branagh, with plenty of experience of appearing in Shakespeare, of course stands out with his delivery of the lines, & also makes the character of Berowne quite loveable (as I think he should be!). Handsome American actor Alessandro Nivola is also a pleasure to watch & listen to as the King of Navarre (Nivola is better known for films such as Face/Off, Best Laid Plans & Coco Avant Chanel).

I have already mentioned Adrian Lester as Dumaine, who is perhaps the cast member the most 'suited' to the film, having plenty of experience in both musical theatre & Shakespeare plays. His acting, singing & dancing are a pleasure to watch (plus he's very good looking too!); it's just a shame he has such a small role in the film. Despite the poor reception of the film, Lester received a British Independent Film Awards nomination for his role. Lester is probably best known for playing Mickey in the TV series Hustle.

The fourth member of the group, Longaville, is played by American actor Matthew Lillard, who is most well known for playing Shaggy in the Scooby Doo films, & for his role in the first Scream film. Unfortunately when I see him in this I just can't help thinking of his stupid character in Scream & I just can't take him seriously. Luckily his is one of the smallest roles in the film!

One of the most well-known members of the cast is Alicia Silverstone as the Princess of France. Sadly I think she is very badly suited to the role. She comes across as very annoying, & never sounds particularly comfortable speaking Shakespeare's lines, which in turn makes them less easy to understand. She also has the weakest singing voice of the cast & it's not particularly pleasant to listen to. Luckily she doesn't have much solo singing to do.

Timothy Spall appears as the comic Spanish nobleman, Don Armado. Spall is an excellent actor, however his very exaggerated Spanish accent gets extremely annoying & I don't really enjoy his scenes. It can also be quite difficult to follow what he's saying.

Other cast members include the three ladies in waiting played by Natascha McElhone, Carmen Ejogo & Emily Mortimer (who is now married to Alessandro Nivola after they met on this film!). Boyet is played by Richard Clifford, & as mentioned Nathan Lane plays the fool Costard (he's quite funny but isn't in it much!).

Richard Briers & Geraldine McEwan (famous for playing Miss Marple) appear in a sub-plot as scholars Nathaniel & Holofernia (who in the original play was actually a man called Holofernes). Of course they're very good actors but their parts have been cut so much that they don't get to do much.

The sub-plots have been cut so much as to make them almost pointless, as you don't get to know much about the characters, & the best parts of the film are definitely the scenes involving the King & his pals.

Unlike in a typical Shakespeare play, there are not many long speeches in the film, which many people would see as a good thing! Berowne does retain a couple of longish speeches, however Branagh is a pleasure to listen to & they never get dull.

One thing that I don't particularly like is the unneccessary newsreel footage stuck onto the end of the film, which shows what happens to the characters during the war (the film is set just before the outbreak of the Second World War). It has nothing to do with the play & doesn't seem to fit in with the rest of the film; there was no need for it at all.

Another thing you do have to accept is that though it is 1939, France has a king (seeing as one of the main characters is the Princess of France). This doesn't really matter but I just thought I'd mention it I was a little confused when at one point you see a newspaper with a headline about the King of France! Obviously there was no King of Navarre either in 1939, & you just have to accept that the play has been transported to 1939 & not everything may quite 'fit'! (Navarre is a region in the Pyrenees for anyone who was wondering!)

The songs featured in the film include I'd Rather Charleston, I Won't Dance, The Way You Look Tonight, Cheek to Cheek, Let's Face The Music & Dance, No Business Like Show Business, & You Can't Take That Away From Me.

I only have the film on video, but according to Amazon the DVD extras include a commentary by Kenneth Branagh, out-takes, deleted scenes & a featurette. As mentioned above, the film lasts 90 mins. Its RRP is £12.99, & it's currently available for £4.08 on Amazon. Certificate: U.

Summary: Recommended