FILM REVIEW: Romeo & Juliet

Julian Fellowes, he of the popular Sunday night entertainment and now morality play Downton Abbey, has written an adaptation of William Shakespeare's most famous romance, the tragedy of Romeo & Juliet. It turns out, tragedy is entirely the right term, though not necessarily in the context meant by the Warwickshire wordsmith. For Fellowes has crafted what I am confident in saying is the worst adaptation of a Shakespeare that I have ever seen. And that's a list that includes She's The Man.

When tackling a play with such a lengthy, memorable performance and cinematic history as Romeo & Juliet, it is necessary to take a new approach to the material and provide audiences with a chance to look with fresh eyes at this giddy teenage (and very silly) romance. Zeferelli provided a beautiful, timeless adaptation that took a historical approach to the material, casting teen leads and giving us a story for the ages. Laurents, Bernstein and Sondheim gave us an all-singing, all-dancing version in one of the best musicals ever.  Luhrmann cranked it up to eleven and brought the play screaming into the modern day, launching stars Leonardo DiCaprio and Claire Danes in the process. All wildly different interpretations of the same play and each with something to say about the material. So what do Fellowes and director Carlo Calei give us? The flattest, dullest and most bog-standard interpretation of Shakespeare's text.

Now I am no Shakespeare purist by any means; he is one of those rare writers that can be transported into a wide variety of locations and situations that bring new meaning to his centuries-old words. Fellowes and Carlei could have taken us anywhere, done anything with the text that they wanted to. So we got 16th century Verona. Right. Not only that, but Fellowes kindly did us the honour of each character repeating all the major plot points first in modern(ish) language and then the actual Shakespearean line. Sometimes, just in case we poor souls were completely lost, he even let us hear the same line in modern English again. Thanks Julian. It's just so hard to pay attention to films these days. It's nice to have it repeated at great length.

This insulting and arrogant attitude to the audience was not confined to Fellowes' additions to existing scenes, but also in his creation of entirely new ones. Sometimes, this can be used to great effect, much like re-setting the play in a different location. Here, it seems to have been simply to give supporting cast member Damian Lewis more scenery to gnaw through. These extra scenes served little to advance the plot beyond making sure the audience knew exactly what was going on at any given moment. There were odd scenes such as the one in which Tybalt (a hilariously growling Ed Westwick) swore Juliet's honour was his only care. It set up an odd dynamic to their relationship that was picked up and dropped again as Tybalt's corpse hit the ground. Poor Natascha McElhone got saddled with the brunt of these scenes in an attempt to flesh out her character of Lady Capulet. It didn't work.

It also ensured that the pacing to the film was completely off. Big moments like Romeo (Douglas Booth) and Juliet's (Hailee Steinfeld) meeting at the dance is sped through and culminates in a scene my friend memorably described as a 'kissing behind the bike sheds' moment. Likewise, Mercutio (Christian Cooke) is barely a footnote in a play in which he's one of the most popular characters. His death scene that is full of fantastic language and damning speeches is reduced to about three lines and a bloody cough. Even the many fencing scenes are boring, badly choreographed and over far too quickly. Instead, we get the lengthy scene in which the Friar tells Juliet of his plan that gives us an alternate reality version of climax of the play for seemingly no other reason than to labour the tragedy of the ending. 

Scenes that should carry some emotional heft barely even register; Mercutio and Tybalt's deaths carry so little weight that as the turning point of the play, it feels like a slight bend rather than the complete hairpin that it should do. In fact, Fellowes seems in such a rush to get to the final scenes, because we all know how it happens, that he forgets to make us care about these characters. None of the family dynamics are present, none of the conflict that family loyalty brings is present for the central pair beyond the words they speak. For someone so confident in his audience not understanding the play, Fellowes has managed to completely misread it in just about every way possible. Relying on the tragic ending alone to inspire sympathy for your characters is just lazy.

The butcher's approach to the text bled into the performances of the cast, a random hotch-potch that felt like every single one of them was in a completely different film to the next character along. Westwick tries to bring a weighty gravitas to Tybalt by scowling and stalking through every scene he's let near; the effect is rather comical and I defy anyone not to laugh when he appears for the duel, hair blowing in his face and dust rising from his heavy footsteps. Paul Giamatti's Friar Lawrence manages to bring actual gravitas to his role and seems to be the only person who understands the emotional beats of the scenes he is in. Damian Lewis, on the other hand, veers from comical to patriarchal tyrant so fast, it feels like he's filming various different films at once.

As central duos go, there could have been a less appealing combination than Hailee Steinfeld and Douglas Booth. Though their delivery of the Shakespearean dialogue occasionally reminded me of many an afternoon sat listening to classmates murder blank verse, they imbue their characters with a wide-eyed enthusiasm that carries them through the film as the rest of it falls apart. She is pretty and floaty, he is heroically masculine yet sensitive. Just to hammer that home, Romeo's introduction finds him carving a statue whilst wearing a shirt open to the navel, bearing his sweaty, manly, manly chest for all to see. I think I was supposed to swoon, but instead I rolled my eyes. It was the first of many.

Perhaps the only positive that can be salvaged from the film, and I am really struggling to find much more, is that it looks beautiful; light casts down in angelic beams that highlight the production design. The costumes are beautiful though the colour schemes seemed a little confused when it came to distinguishing Montagues and Capulets. The fact that it looks so pretty softens the blow slightly as you are watching Shakespeare's text ripped to shreds in front of your eyes.

A film so heavy-handed, it feels like being bashed over the head with a copy of The Complete Works, Romeo & Juliet will do absolutely nothing to challenge the existing iconic adaptations of the play. In fact, it may just make you appreciate them that little bit more.

*

- Becky

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page

FILM REVIEW: Much Ado About Nothing

Often described as the original romantic comedy, Much Ado About Nothing is one of Shakespeare's most beloved plays. Don Pedro (Reed Diamond) celebrates a victory over his wayward brother Don John (Sean Maher) by visiting his friend Leonato (Clark Gregg). He brings with him the self-proclaimed eternal bachelor Benedick (Alexis Denisof), who has a history with Leonato's niece, the quick-witted Beatrice (Amy Acker) and his friend Claudio (Fran Kranz) who soon falls in love with Leonato's daughter Hero (Jillian Morgese). A wedding is quickly arranged, but in the build-up to the big day, Don John conspires to tear apart the romantic relationship of Claudio and Hero whilst the rest of the company plot to unite the sparring Benedick and Beatrice, both using the cunning ruse of eavesdropping with a touch of voyeurism.

Much Ado About Nothing was shot by Joss Whedon over 12 days during a break from The Avengers, filmed in his own house with a cast handpicked from his assorted company of players. The results are nothing short of wonderful as the film is a witty, sexy and entertaining update of the Bard's romantic comedy. The use of predominantly one location works well within the context of the play and this is also helped in no small part by Whedon's house. The open plan architecture allows for plenty of eavesdropping opportunities whilst also building familial atmosphere as we look in on the lives of the central family and their friends. 

The modern setting could have been incongruous with the classical text, but Whedon has put a lot of thought into making the combination work. The sheer amount of alcohol drunk by the characters over the course of the film makes the paranoia more plausible, the pratfalls more comical. The score composed by Whedon well befits the shifts in mood and his arrangements of songs from the original text sound and feel like modern pop songs, particularly the beautiful Sigh No More. 

Shooting in black and white proves to be an inspired choice, giving the film a classical look that enhances the action, particularly the noirish elements of Don John's plot. There are a couple of moments that jar with the modern setting, particularly the emphasis on the female characters' virginity towards the end of the film. Especially as we've seen a glimpse of Beatrice's past that tells us something entirely different. However, this is a relatively small gripe and has very little impact on the quality of the film.

It is also one of the more accessible Shakespearian productions, aided by a cast who clearly understands what they're saying, a blessing in any adaptation of the Bard. If you're a fellow fan of the Whedonverse then one of the biggest delights is seeing the vast array of actors plucked from the director's various shows and it certainly adds to the family feel of the proceedings. There is an easy ensemble chemistry that ensures all are working well towards the vibrant atmosphere of the production; even Sean Maher as a deliciously evil Don John can't help but have a twinkle in his eye. There are a few performances that stand out, particularly Clark Gregg's Leonato; his scene with Morgese's Hero after the revelations is heartwrenching, particularly because of the comedic scenes leading up to it. Kranz' Claudio also manages to be one of the more sympathetic interpretations of the character and his double act with Diamond's Don Pedro has some great comic moments.

However, the stage will always belong to Beatrice and Benedick in this particular play. They exchange some of the best barbed conversations and have one of the most prickly yet adorable relationships in the Shakespeare oeuvre. Acker and Denisof rise wholly to the challenge, bringing their charm, comedy and dramatic ability to the fore to give us a Beatrice and Benedick for the ages. Denisof balances the buffoonery inherent in the character well with the maturity that emerges more in the latter stages of the film and his chemistry with Acker still crackles like it used to in Angel (yes Angel fans, seeing Wesley and Fred back together is every bit as good as it sounds).

Then there is Amy Acker at the centre of it all, bringing the audience a Beatrice that is at times spiteful, witty, venomous, charming, vulnerable and wicked all at once. The addition of the opening scene of a tryst between her and Benedick at some point in the past (hinted at but never confirmed in the text itself) gives Acker an excellent platform from which to launch her interpretation of Beatrice and grants an added layer to her relationship with Benedick. Her showstopping moment is naturally the 'If only I were a man' speech and Acker gives it her all, delivering with such passion that she completely steals the film. It's an impressive performance, one that I hope is recognised in amongst the usual Oscar bait fare.

One of the best Shakespeare adaptations of recent times, Much Ado About Nothing is a joy from start to finish, as capable of making you cry as it is of making you laugh. What elevates it above the rest is just how accessible it is from every conceivable angle; fans of the Whedonverse get to see the Whedon Company Players, Shakespeare fans can delight in the interpretation and those are neither can just enjoy the ride. Masterful.

*****

- Becky

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page

FEATURE: Top Five Worst Holiday Destinations According to Shakespeare

It's that time of year again as theatre-types and general lovers of literature celebrate the birth of the Bard, William Shakespeare, this year reaching the ripe old age of 449. Last year Assorted Buffery took part in the Happy Birthday Shakespeare blogging project and we are delighted to be doing it again this year for www.happybirthdayshakespeare.com. The project aims to share what Shakespeare means to various people across the world and as you've probably noticed, we're rather large fans of the man from Stratford. Last year, we decided to celebrate the Unsung Heroes of the Shakespearian canon and we're approaching the proceedings from another odd angle this time around.

Famously, Shakespeare used a wide variety of locations in his plays to offer his audiences a little bit of escapism. From the African continent to muddy East Cheep, there are a lot of places that can call themselves Shakespearian locations. Now the 23rd April was an absolutely gorgeous day in Stratford-Upon-Avon (I happen to be lucky enough to work there) and we are fast approaching the time of year in which people decide to go gallivanting off to exotic locations to enjoy a nice, relaxing holiday. So if you decided to take a nice Shakespearian themed vacation, there are a whole host of places you should avoid because 'relaxing' would not exactly be the term used to describe them. Because we care for our readers' well-being, and because the thought of writing a Bard-themed holiday guide was just too much fun, we now present to you a tour of the Top Five Worst Holiday Destinations According to Shakespeare. 

Disclaimer - we're positive that in reality, these places are really quite lovely - we've actually been to some of them - we're just looking at the Shakespearian versions.

England - 'This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle' (Richard II - A2.S1)

As seen in: The History Plays, King Lear

It's fair to say that according to Shakespeare, this green and 'sceptred isle' is not the best place to go a'roving at pretty much any period in history from your early mediaeval kings right up until the Tudors. If the country isn't in the middle of a civil war, it's in the grip of a tyrannical King going bonkers because one of his daughters answered a tough question perfectly logically. It's torn apart in Richard II, sort-of rebuilt again briefly in the Henry IVs before the Percys and Glendower decide to muck it all up. Henry V makes a decent stab of putting it back together again by buggering off to France and much later on Richard III seizes power and kills a bunch of people. If you're in the Royal Court and on the wrong side, it won't be too long before you find yourself locked up or missing your head. If you're in the peasantry and capable of wielding a pike, it's a good chance you'll find yourself up to your knees in mud whilst people poetically die around you. Put simply, it's probably best not to stick around. 

So the solution is to head up north to Scotland then is it? 

Scotland - 'Now o'er the one half world/Nature seems dead, and wicked dreams abuse' (Macbeth A2.S1)

As seen in: Macbeth

Probably not actually. The above quote may not refer directly to the Scotland of Macbeth, more the general landscape itself, but there's no denying that it pretty much sums up the location of the play that must not be named. Whilst it may seem like an ideal idyll away from the tumult of England, it's not something that lasts. Witches lurk around dark and foreboding corners waiting to pounce on the nearest ambitious general and promise him the throne and it goes on to be ruled by a man with a delicate grip on the throne whose wife may be a little more than completely and utterly mental. Then of course, there's all of the ghosts wandering around the place, prophecies coming true left, right and centre and the small matter that trees develop a habit of moving about. Granted, this does tend to be if you're holed up in the Royal residence, but given that a lot of violence also takes place on the road (poor Banquo), it's probably not best to stay put.

Therefore, the solution must be in foreign climes.

Athens - 'May all to Athens back again repair / And think no more of this night's accidents' (A Midsummer Night's Dream A4.S1)

As seen in: A Midsummer Night's Dream, Timon of Athens

One of Shakespeare's many inventions, amongst his many contributions to the English language, was the discovery of woods outside Athens which, as far as I'm aware, don't actually exist (Athenians, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong). Athens itself is pretty bad; if you want to marry someone who your father doesn't like, you might end up as a nun, or worse, dead. If you love someone who doesn't love you back, you'll end up outside of the city and later on wrestling against your former best friend who everyone seems to have inexplicably fallen in love with. Timon hated Athens that much, he actually preferred to live on his own in the wild. Then of course once you make it into the woods, you may find yourself at the behest of the fairy-folk who aren't exactly kind to city dwellers. They have a tendency to give you the head of a donkey and make you sleep with a fairy queen. Of course you may like that sort of thing...

Let's move swiftly on eh?

Bohemia - 'Our ship hath touch'd upon/The deserts of Bohemia?' (The Winter's Tale A3.S3)

As seen in: The Winter's Tale

For the majority of the play, Bohemia is largely a nice friendly place, full of shepherds, bawdy lasses and the odd comedy peddler. Indeed, if one of the most recent productions is anything to go by, it's a world where endless morris dances take place and people in disguise get up to all sorts of hijinks. So in that case, you may be wondering what it is doing on this list. You see, the key to unlocking Bohemia's rich treasure of sheep and jingling anklets is to actually survive that long to see it because the country is going to throw all sorts of things in your way to try and stop you getting there. Much like Shakespeare's fictional Athenian woods, Bohemia in this play is actually on the sea, so finding the real landlocked region whilst on a boat is your first task. Then there is a massive storm that kills your entire crew and smashes up on the rocks on a shore that doesn't technically exist. If you've managed to survive all that then there is the small issue of a great big bloody bear ready to chase you offstage and then eat you.

Let us not stop there. It is a silly place.

Anywhere in the Roman Empire - 'Shall Rome stand under one man's awe?' (Julius Caesar A2.S1)

As seen in: Julius Caesar, Coriolanus, Antony and Cleopatra, Titus Andronicus

A lot of bad stuff goes on in the Roman Empire according to Shakespeare; there's maiming  mutinies, betrayals, wars, sieges and the odd death by snake. Much like the England of the History Plays, the Roman Empire of the tragedies just isn't all that fun for any member of the strictly hierarchical society. A celebrated general who can't talk to the people will find himself exiled, any member of the proletariat is probably starving, a woman in the knowledge of a vicious murder will be raped and mutilated, a leader who just wants to show Rome a good time (sort of) will be assassinated by his closest friend and if you happen to be a queen across the sea in love with a Roman general? Yeah, you're probably not going to survive all that long either.

Well that's exhausted most of Shakespeare's known world... How about instead we all take one of those staycations people are talking about these days? Let's just lock the doors, ignore any calls to arms and just play a board game. It's probably for the best.

- Becky

You can read our previous Happy Birthday Shakespeare post here and find out more about the project here.

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter.

Or like our Facebook page.

THEATRE REVIEW: As You Like It

Tuesday saw the 449th birthday of that most hallowed of playwrights, William Shakespeare, and I happened to be fortunate enough to see As You Like It, the latest production to grace the stage at The RSC.

Photo by Keith Pattison

It also happened to be one of the warmest days of the year so far as the lengthy winter turned reluctantly into a warm spring day - a transition similar to that of the play itself - a development which makes it perfectly suited to kick off The RSC's summer season. Despite it being one of Shakespeare's most beloved plays, As You Like It was not one I was familiar with so I approached this with a hearty level of enthusiasm. This, unlike many other of the Bard's works, was going to be a complete surprise; and a surprise it was, of the most wonderful and heartwarming variety.

Beginning in the dark, wintery monochrome of the court of Duke Frederick (John Stahl), we are first introduced to Orlando (Alex Waldmann), a young nobleman spurned by his brother Oliver (Luke Norris) into a life of servitude, living on the outskirts of society. In the court itself, Rosalind (Pippa Nixon) has been forced to remain behind after her father, Duke Senior (Cliff Burnett) is banished, spending her days with her best friend and Frederick's daughter Celia (Joanna Horton). However, no sooner has she fallen in love with Orlando in a chance meeting, she is banished and forced to hide as a boy, Ganymede, in the Forest of Arden, meeting with her love and unable to declare her feelings.

One of the most publicised aspects of this production was the music as it was composed by award-winning musician Laura Marling and it is certainly a highlight. The harsh, percussion-driven music that backs the scenes at Duke Frederick's court compliments the stark atmosphere well. However, it is once the action transfers into the Forest of Arden that the music really excels. The Forest scenes take place in a folksy other-world of dreadlocks, hammocks and dancing, presided over by Duke Senior looking like an ageing rock star. Whether it's a thoughtful song about falling in love, a comical declaration of the very same or a celebration of marriage, Marling uses the text to wonderful effect, giving the play an absorbing and playful atmosphere.

Aiding Marling's music is the production design; as mentioned, the folksy theme of the Forest of Arden allows for all sorts of great costume combinations. Nixon wears Rosalind's boyish costumes well in an exaggeration of masculinity, whilst Celia looks like she's wandered in from Glastonbury. It works well, linking in with the pastoral setting of the final two thirds of the play, providing the set dressing for what is an otherwise a largely minimalistic stage. The past two productions I've seen (reviewed here and here) were far too fussy with their sets, but Naomi Dawson's design was beautiful in its simplicity, a revolving stage with wooden pillars to signify the trees, inspiring the required amount of awe whenever it was employed. 

The lack of complicated staging also allowed for the ensemble cast to shine with each actor performing their parts, big or small, with a wonderful wit and understanding. Waldmann cuts a dashing figure as the lovelorn Orlando, expertly balancing the comic and the emotional. Horton's Celia nearly manages to steal the show with an excellent musical number and Oliver Ryan's Jaques performs the famous Seven Ages of Man speech energetically. However, As You Like It is a play that lives or dies with its Rosalind so it fell to Pippa Nixon to portray one of Shakespeare's most famous and beloved heroines. Nixon gives a masterful performance, delivering Rosalind's many one-liners with aplomb and taking to the stage with such energy that you can't help but be swept up along with her.

It is that energy, of the entire production, that makes As You Like It feel like one big party you just happened to wander into, complete with songs, dodgy dancing and even a wrestling match. One of the play's big set pieces, the wrestling match is extremely well choreographed and with more than a few hits that make you wince. Likewise, when the celebratory songs begin, you might find your toes tapping along unwillingly, or in my case, head nodding enthusiastically. 

As You Like It is the perfect way to herald in the warmer weather; it's riotous, mesmerising, hilarious, bawdy, anarchic, tragic and simply brilliant. A properly feel-good production, it is one of the most fun evenings I've had at the theatre for a long time. I may already be planning to go again...

*****

- Becky

Follow @AssortedBuffery on Twitter
Or like our Facebook page.

THEATRE REVIEW: The Winter's Tale

The Royal Shakespeare Theatre hosts a new production of The Winter's Tale before it sets off on tour, featuring madness, romance and an unusual amount of Morris dancing.

The Winter's Tale follows the tragic collapse of several relationships at once after Leontes (Jo Stone-Fewings), King of Sicilia, believes his wife Hermione (Tara Fitzgerald) is having an affair with his best friend, Polixenes (Adam Levy), King of Bohemia. Everything goes wrong in spectacular fashion, leading to Leontes and Hermione's daughter Perdita being abandoned on the shore in Bohemia, Hermione dead and Leontes deeply repentant yet ultimately powerless. Many years later, Perdita (Emma Noakes) meets Florizel (Gavin Fowler), Polixenes' son, and begins a romance that could redeem and restore the happiness that has been lost.

The first thing to be said about both the play itself and the performance of it is that it is all a very mixed bag. For the play, this is due to Shakespeare's mix of genres and styles, leading to a narrative that goes from tragedy to comedy and just about everything in between. It's a heady mix that provides a fascinating tale of relationships, both familial and romantic, and all the ups and downs that come with them. In performance though, this was unfortunately translated into a varied medley of great acting, dodgy accents and some weird directional choices. I went to see it with my friend Thomasin, who has also reviewed it on her blog, which I think you should definitely check out. It's a great review, and though our opinions differ greatly on some aspects (more on that later), we've agreed about most things.

First up, the good stuff. The central performance of Stone-Fewings as Leontes was pitch-perfect, capturing the wild, sudden descent into madness which the character must go through, whilst tempering it wih the mournful need for redemption in the second half of the play. Rakie Ayola as Paulina, Hermione's loyal friend, was a fantastic performance that embraced the capriciousness and bullish nature of the character without falling into full caricature as the temptation could often be. In the second half, Pearce Quigley's Autolycus was the stand-out character and the actor had a real gift with the Shakespearian language, seemingly knowing instinctively where the jokes were. It was a masterclass in comic timing which was unfortunately lessened by the occasional switches back into modern English, but for the most part, it was a highlight in what wasn't a great second act.

The set was another example of the 'mixed bag' effect that this performance generated. In the opening scenes, the set looked luxurious, a pre-Raphealite palace full of cushions and rugs that perfectly fitted the ostentatious royal party, all leisurely drinking and bare-footed dancing. At the back, though, was an animation projected on to a screen that depicted the edge of the castle and the sea beneath. Contrasted with the beauty of the stage set, the screen looked out of place and though it was used in a rather neat way of conveying the mood of the scene and the passage of time, it achieved nothing that could not have been done better with the right sound and lighting effects.

One of the major points of contention between Thomasin and myself was Tara Fitzgerald's debut RSC performance as wronged queen Hermione. Whilst Thomasin loved the 'vivacious', loud and brash performance giving by Fitzgerald in Hermione's trial, I felt that it lost the character somewhat. Hermione is supposed to be the calm to Leontes' storm and her logical speech is the complete antithesis to his unfounded rage. Whilst I wouldn't expect her to be as still as a statue (Literature Joke Klaxon) in this scene, I felt that a lot of what makes Hermione's character so brilliant was lost amongst Fitzgerald's over-emphasis and wild gesticulation. I liked her in other scenes of the play, particularly the opening, but I felt that the trial scene didn't pack the emotional punch that it could, and should, have done.

Now, The Winter's Tale is a play famous for possessing within its hallowed pages one of the most famous stage directions in cinematic history; exit, pursued by a bear (coincidentally, one of mine and Jen's Shakespearian Unsung Heroes). Part of the excitement of going to see this play was to see how they do the bear, which not only functions as a form of entertainment, but also as a destructive device that heralds the end of the tragedy half of the play and begins the comedy. It's so important, I found myself speculating beforehand; Would they make it comical? Would they make it horrific and scary with sharp pointy teeth? Would they get a man in a bear suit? Would they, in fact, somehow get a REAL bear?! (Ok I may have got carried away with that one). So which option did they go for?

Well, none of the above.

No, the directorial decision here was to utilise the ugly video projection screen at the back to animate some sort of weird sea bear thing that loomed across the back wall for a second before disappearing and leaving a wave of incredulity in its wake. "That was it?" I declared to Thomasin, staring aghast at the screen which at this stage, was also obscured by the huge tower construction that Leontes lay trapped on so the bear couldn't even be seen properly by the audience. When the shepherd and his son come on afterwards to talk about the animal attack, much of the comedy was lost from the conversation, simply because the bear hadn't had enough of a presence to warrant it. A man in a bear suit may have looked cheesy, and I don't necessarily think that would be the best option, but it would have at least garnered a major reaction from the audience.

Unfortunately, this also marked the downturn in the quality of the play. The second half was a muddled loud affair that seemed more like a showcase for the cast's Morris-dancing talents than it did for their acting skills. By the time we got on to the third iteration of a giant, seaweed monster thing thrusting about the stage, I was just willing the story to continue. It also didn't help that Emma Noakes' Perdita was an odd interpretation of the character; many comments are made in the play about Perdita's inherent nobleness, revealing her identity as a princess, but this made no sense with the decision to have Perdita speaking in an awful northern accent and making crude jokes.

What struck me most about this production was the feeling of lost potential. Despite my personal issues with Fitzgerald's interpretation of Hermione, the first half was a very strong affair, capturing much of what makes The Winter's Tale such an interesting play. Had this continued into the second half, it could have been a great interpretation of what is a very odd, yet brilliant play. A muddled second act let it down and unlike Leontes, could not be redeemed by the final, and iconic, statue scene.

***
In case you missed it, here's the link to Thomasin's review.

- Becky

You can now like Assorted Buffery on Facebook to get all our latest reviews and features - just click here!

Or follow us on Twitter @AssortedBuffery

THEATRE REVIEW: The Merry Wives of Windsor

William Shakespeare's The Merry Wives of Windsor sees the return of one of his most famous creations, Sir John Falstaff (Desmond Barrit) as he attempts to woo Mistress Ford (Alexandra Gilbreath) and Mistress Page (Sylvestra Le Touzel). However, little does he know that the two women are as thick as thieves and hatch their own plot to avenge themselves on Falstaff, whilst Mistress Ford gets the chance to prove herself to her jealous husband (John Ramm). Meanwhile, Mistress Page's daughter, the lovely Anne (Naomi Sheldon) finds herself with three suitors, Master Slender (Callum Finlay), the choice of her father (Martin Hyder), Dr Caius (Bart Soroczyinski), her mother's choice and the outcast-yet-obviously-the-right-one choice, Master Fenton (Paapa Essiedu). In the midst of all these goings-on is Mistress Quickly (Anita Dobson), the only person who seems to have any clue as to what is actually happening.

The RSC production of The Merry Wives of Windsor is easily one of the most accessible performances of Shakespeare I've seen recently. Having no real knowledge of the plot, other than Falstaff's appearance, I had no idea of what to expect, nor of how everything was going to unfold. Well, that's not strictly true, it is a Shakespearian comedy after all. They only ever end one way; all of the fools get their comeuppance, the right people marry each other and everyone ends up happily ever after. The real skill in this production then, was making it the journey to that inevitable ending a really good one, full of pratfalls, witty one-liners and some truly hysterical visual jokes.

While Shakespeare's plays are littered with well-written puns and comic lines, the real skill in directing one of his comedies lies in finding the moments in between the lines that yield the most comic potential. Phillip Breen's direction at the textual level was superb throughout, identifying these gaps and allowing his actors to fill them with some truly hilarious moments, particularly in the seduction scenes between Barrit and Gilbreath. The ensemble cast all rose to the challenge and performed excellently, sharing a great chemistry that only added to the hilarity of the situations in which the characters found themselves. Anita Dobson was an excellent Mistress Quickly, capturing the busy-body side to the character that makes her so funny. Whilst I would argue that Gilbreath's Mistress Ford and Le Touzel's Mistress Page stole the show, there was no bad performance in there which made it all the more entertaining.

The necessity of establishing all of the characters with little or no introduction from the Bard himself is often one of the downfalls of the lesser known plays whereas characters like Hamlet or Macbeth are easily identifiable. The Merry Wives of Windsor does have an ace up its sleeve with the inclusion of the instantly-recognisable Falstaff but nevertheless, the performance got off to a slow start, not helped by the constant scenery changes. The modern-day setting was an interesting choice, allowing for a Merry Desperate Housewives of Windsor interpretation of the play, all middle-class dinner parties and tweed. Yet, unlike say the military setting of Ian McKellan's Richard III, this modernisation didn't really add anything to the play, it just made it easier for underwear-related jokes to be made a little more obviously.

Another downside to the updated setting was the decision to have a huge amount of scenery for each scene. With each new scene requiring several mechanical stage manoeuvres, including a bed appearing from underneath the floor, unnecessary rugby posts descending from the roof and a very unstable house frontispiece for the back of the stage, I found that every scene change took me straight out of the action. Granted, various scenes did not follow into each other but rather chopped and changed between the different subplots, but I found it very difficult to get back into a scene once I had been sat watching the scenery shift for over a minute. I was also sat in the upper circle which meant I could see the majority of the under-stage mechanics and it became very distracting. Shakespearian works never need to be over-produced and this production should have had a little more faith in its audience's imagination.

The Merry Wives of Windsor was very enjoyable, a funny, well-acted piece of entertainment that for the most part, honoured its source material and it would have been far better if the staging decisions had been stripped back to allow the exceptional cast to work their magic uncluttered and moving-scenery free.

*** (and a half for the most inventive use of melons in a Shakespearian production)

- Becky

You can find out more information on The Merry Wives of Windsor here.

Follow Becky on Twitter @beckygracelea

Or follow her blog beckygracelea.wordpress.com