A lot of what I want to do here is compare the 1935 and 1999 film versions of this play. I watched them both this week so they are pretty fresh in my head.
Let us start with something one to one comparison, the transformation of Bottom.
1935
1999
This side by side has quite a lot going for it. First of all we’ve got two popular and critically acclaimed actors in James Cagney and Kevin Kline. Sometimes differences in delivery are more down to director than actor with plays like this, but I think it’s a good guess that with stars of this caliber, you are seeing mostly their own choices.
I think they are both good and actually fairly similar for this scene but the stand out differences come from what’s going on around them.
This is the time to reveal that I find child actor Mickey Rooney to be insufferably grating. His Puck ruined my day when I watched the 1935 version.
So, Puck notwithstanding, the biggest differences are technological. Lighting and recording were much harder in 1935 so everything is unnaturally (but intentionally and intelligently) lit. I generally prefer more natural lighting but I dig the artistry of a film classic that has to work so hard within its constraints.
The sound recording was just not good back then. Soft sounds were pretty much inaudible so everyone was half shouting (it’s hard to do subtitles this way) and the swelling Mendelssohn is constantly distorted. The 1999 has my vote here but it didn’t do much to deserve it. The musical choices were fine but not inspired (except for the processional in which Mendelssohn and an aria or two). For me this one is a draw.
A standout feature with Midsummer’s Nights Dream is that it lends itself to great set work and design. There are opportunities for costume, makeup, backgrounds, and these days even CGI.
Both of these films knocked it out of the park given what they had to work with.
The 1935 was just coming of an incredibly successful stage production with literal tons of dirt hosting a small forest on a rotating stage to bring the enchanted forest to life. They had a full orchestra (100piece) and a ballet company.
The 1999 went all out on Roman tinged bacchanals with heavy prosthetic use, imaginative and colorful costume design, choreography and a lite hand on the fairy lights. They were shooting in Italy and you just can’t top that for scenery.
I’d give it to the 1935 version here. They were stuck with practical effects but they did so much with them.
In the above scenes you get a feel for the boundary pushing of the Reinhardt and the relative comfort of the Hoffman choices, reflected in Bottoms transformation above.
Lastly, for me, there is pure watchability.
The 1935 is very long, it’s 2 hours 33 minutes of Theater brought to the soundstage. It introduces a few scenes like the wedding processional and mixed in some choral and orchestral beats.
The 1999 was just under 2 hours even with its tribute processional and smaller musical breaks (banging use of opera here).
I loved both Titania's but especially Anita Louise who is radiant.
But Michelle Pfeiffer is always stunning.
Oberon are always meh for me because I don’t like the character.
Puck is my sticking point.
The obnoxious delivery and the godawful vocalizations coming out of that child make me want to throw things at the screen. Oooo I hate it.
Tucci is funny and quick and enjoyable.
I cant find a good clip but...
"This is the man, but not this the maid."
...
The lovers are all entertaining and interchangeable. Hippolyta is background, I prefer 1935 Theseus.
But I love the 1999 Mechanicals. They are sweet on top of 1935s bumbling. Klein and Rockwell grant some much appreciated grace and complexity.
Make no mistake, this is a hammy and silly play. For me it’s perfect for Klein who can be the cheesiest while still underneath it all connecting with his audience. I love his work.
In the same way that Rooney drags down the 1935, Klein elevates the 1999.
If I were recommending a single version to a modern audience who didn’t know the play it would be the 99. But I liked the 35 very much and if it weren’t for Rooney would happily watch it again.
Regarding the play itself.
The theory of its origin is a little fragmented. It was probably commissioned as an entertainment for a noble wedding and then latter that season or the next made its way out into the Globe and common production.
This is a quintessentially Elizabethan play and there is some possibility it was created for her for a holiday revel. Either way it’s light and fluffy and sweet and fun. James didn’t love it and it fell out of full production until the Victorians brought it back.
Midsummers Nights Dream - 4 stars for fun. Minus one for needlessly confusing semi twin plot conventions.
Mom score - 2 stars for Titania taking in the son of one of her deceased followers to raise. She wasn’t what you’d call an attentive guardian though.
No comments:
Post a Comment