Customer Reviews

A Midsummer Night's Dream [VHS]

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

It's first of all, Midsummer Night's Dream, always a winner. But also, this film is full of some magnificent stars when they were young.. Diana Rigg -- if she were all ya got, that would be enough. However, you get Ian Holm, who was the android in the first Aliens movie and also in Branagh's Henry V, and many other wonderful shows. Then, a young Dame Judi Dench.. a great performance and she's nearly nude to boot!!

And if you're a fan of the british comedy Keeping Up Appearances, you get a treat of watching a young Clive Swift (Richard in KUA).

This is fun, campy, and well deserving to be a keeper. Someone complained about the quality.. yes, this transfer of film to video has a couple of old-age problems, but they are way too few to notice by the discriminating eye.

This movie is awful. This movie is brilliant. Either way, Peter Hall brings *A Midsummer Night's Dream* off the screen and into your gut. The trick lies in enjoying the sensation of being disoriented: the film opens; it rains English rain; an English bird chirps; we see a stately English mansion; the word on the screen reads "ATHENS". The joke has begun.

But the film is more than a joke. Hall's filming constantly jars the viewer and wakes him/her up to the fact that logic and continuity are just concepts that we impose on an essentially chaotic world. At one moment Lysander and Hermia are in the court -- cut to them in a boat (although no time appears to have passed). Helena recites a soliloquy and, while doing so, pops up disconcertingly next to a pillar and then a bush and then a tree. We see Titania and Oberon run towards each other and come face to face -- only to cut to a view of them running towards each other all over again. Time, as in *Hamlet*, is out of joint. The performances are muted, almost sullen. The atmosphere, dark. And everyone gets muddy.

This film is not light and bright and sparkling, but it's a treat to see young Helen Mirren, Diana Rigg, Ian Holm and Judi Dench (watch her age, classically, through *Henry V*, *Hamlet* and *Shakespeare in Love*). The film, too, reveals how embedded in culture our Shakespeare is: the women wear eyeliner a la sixties; Hippolyta is in a leather miniskirt and go-go boots, and the fairies are very green partially naked flower children. The magic plant, love-in-idleness, is the drug of choice. Enjoy this dark ride through *A Midsummer Night's Dream.* Better yet, make an enormous bowl of popcorn and watch it back-to-back with the new version starring Michelle Pfeiffer. Do, however, make sure it's a very big bowl of popcorn.

I just had to weigh in when I read the wide range of opinions posted regarding this film -- most seem to have strong feelings about it, either favorable or decidedly not so. OK, so the film quality is not ideal, and the jerky camera shots are intermingled with cheesy special effects... so what, the ACTING is excellent! The feeling and expression behind each and every actor and actress in this production is sincere and intelligent. Unlike certain "hot" actors on the current scene (Ahem... Mr. Branagh), these young players (many of whom have become the revered masters of today) deliver the goods with moderation, humility, humor, intellect, and yes, passion. They are also all eminently well trained in the classic style (it is the Royal Shakespeare Company, after all) and it shows. Throw all the modern special effects and scenery to the dogs... Fine acting like this is all I'll ever want.

But he really ought to reconsider displaying his ignorance in such a public forum. Admittedly, this production is not for everyone; if you cannot appreciate a production which strips away special effects and slick editing to allow the Bard's magical words to be spoken by well-cast (particularly Ian Richardson as Oberon) actors, you should stick with Titanic and Phantom Menace. I can't imagine what you were expecting, but I'm truly sorry you didn't get it. To answer your question, this IS the RSC's performance (albeit it bit more adventurous a production than one would expect from today's RSC). Lastly, let me quote from Allan Bloom's excellent work, "Shakespeare: The Invention of the Human." "Unfortunately, every production of [A Midsummer Night's Dream] that I have been able to attend has been a brutal disaster, with the exception of Peter Hall's motion picture of 1968, happily available on videotape."

This fantastic version of Midsummer's Night Dream will keep any viewer glued to the screen. However, it is best for those who have a liking for the absurd in arts. For example, the choppy close ups, odd sound and bizarre lighting effects might turn some viewers off. If you love the story enough, you can use those effects to your advantage as the viewer. If you like big budget Hollywood versions of Shakespeare, don't bother with this one. However, if you enjoy true art, this video will find a place in your permanent collection.

The text is about the dislocation of dreams and how we attempt to make sense of them, impose order on their unruliness -- both while we are in the middle of them and after they are thought to be over. It seems to apply to dreams dreamed while awake as well as those when one sleeps--the dreams of youthful love, the dreams of a parent for their child's future, the dreams of ambition on stage or the dreams of a ruler for peaceful resolution. The cutting and the imagery strike me as totally appropriate--including an overcast day, a night full of lights, and lovers covered in muck so as to be completely indistinguishable to us as well as each other. It is a delightful interpretation done by a cast that deserves all the knighthoods they've later earned--and more. The two Sir Ians are a hoot, it's a treat to watch Mirren and Rigg trade insults, and Dame Judi is a very sexy lady in green paint. Really. See it and decide for yourself.

A great cast and good direction. Unfortunately the quality of sound on our copy renders the tape essentially unusable. The great lines and superb delivery are wrecked by static like an AM radio on a thundery evening. Don't waste your money on it.

In this late 1960s production of "A Midsummer Night's Dream", we are presented with Shakespeare for the Hippie Generation, complete with barely-clothed flower-children fairies in bad paint, courtesy of the Royal Shakespeare Company.
However, it is an overall thorough and winning production of the Bard's comedy, and what is striking is not only how well the two young female leads fit Shakespeare's description of them, but also, how the couples are each other's physical counterparts in so many ways. Barbara Jefford and Derek Godfrey lend dignity and elegance to the loving noble couple, Hippolyta and Theseus. Interstingly, they are both blue-eyed brunettes. One truly gets a sense of their happiness together. But a short while later, they are compelled, as rulers, to address the issue of young, fair, petite, Hermia (a young, sweet-voiced Helen Mirren, who has only improved with age), who is being forced to marry a man she does not love, with the alternatives of joining the Ancient Greek equivalent of a convent, or execution.
But the equally fair Lysander(David Warner), the man she does love, is planning to elope with her. As she anticipates a new life with her beloved, she consults her best friend, Helena (Diana Rigg), who is as tall, dark-haired, and large-boned as Demetrius (Michael Jayston)whom she loves, but who spurns her.
In the meantime, trouble in the fairy world will soon result in the wreaking of havoc among the mortals. The fairy prankster, Puck (aptly, eagerly, and impishly played by Ian Holm--a role that seems tailor-made for him) is recruited to squeeze a love potion for his master, Oberon, King of the Fairies(a solemn Ian Richardson)to divert his Queen Titania (a convivial and precise Judi Dench, whose green coloring vividly compliments her blue eyes,even if the make-up does wash off at one point)just long enough for him to snatch a disputed young Indian boy from his wife's protection.
Elsewhere, a humble group of tradesmen are preparing to put on a play for a wedding couple. The most prominent of these is the weaver, Bottom (a country-bumpkinish Paul Rogers), whose life will become very interesting when he crosses paths with Titania and her court in the woods. Clive Swift, who would later be known for his role on "Keeping Up Appearances", plays Snug.
As the four young mortals meet in the woods--Hermia to elope with Lysander, and the pathetic and prideless Helena to chase the comically exasperated Demetrius--Puck's knavishness gets a little out of hand, and relationships change from positive to negative and back again before night is over.
It is interesting to see the young actors so mod-clothed and muddied considering that this was released in the U.S. just months before Woodstock.
Of course, all does go well in the end, and everyone is matched with their correct partners (which at least in this production, as was mentioned before,is largely based on coloring). Amends are restored,and fairies give their benediction before they bid adieu.

There are funny, and unfortunately, ignorant reviews about how this production should be passed over due to the crappy sound, not so good make-up, or late 60's style. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but those reviews are only touching the superficial elements. This "Midsummer Nights Dream" is definitely of that time/period, but Peter Hall's direction of the actors is what really shines through. Then, Judi Dench, Ian Holm, Diana Rigg, Helen Mirren, etc., etc. I haven't yet named a name that isn't recognized in as a "star" (as one reviewer mentioned that there were no "stars" in the film). Granted this was made before most of cast were doing huge budget gigs, but each one has made incredible names for themselves over the years. Not to mention that they were all pretty much household names in the theatre of the UK back when they made this film. Just the mention of "No Stars" in that one review cracked me up. I mean, even if you don't know anyone else in this film...you at least HAVE to know who Judi Dench is by now. Otherwise, man, have you been living in a CAVE for the past 9 years!!?? Or Helen Mirren...really! (That's speaking Hollywood wise...on a more worldly scale Judi Dench has been a veritable artistic tsunami since the 60's, and Helen Mirren comes in at a close clip after that.)
To conclude, this 1968, made for film, RSC production has BRILLIANT verse speaking (Shakespeare is most amazing in the hands of these geniuses)! The film quality is dated, yes, and the sound is rough, yes, but willingly passing up Shakespeare's "Midsummer..." with all of these GENIUS artists would almost be a crime. Pay no attention to mis-guided and ill-informed reviews...please, don't sacrifice your pleasure for incredible verse speaking, theatre, poetry, and brilliant artistry over a ridiculously ignorant review.

An independent film Directed by Peter Hall and The Royal Shakespeare Company, Stratford-upon-Avon. This is one of those gems that allow many famous personalities of the time to display a little culture.

There are many fun facets of this film; right off, we notice all the actors in a much earlier version. Who would have thought that Judi Dench was once so cute? In addition, Helen Mirren before she was queen. Each version of midsummer Night's Dream displays a different star cast; this is the 1967 version many people will recognize Diana Rigg as Helena. Each version is to our advantage displays a different emphasis and dialog of William Shakespeare. Too many individual actors to point out.

Then there is the negative side. Look closely and it looks like an Italian film with English dubbing; the words and voices are not quite in sync. The cameraman is the one that filmed "The Blare Witch."

Believe it or not it is better the second time through.
This film is a must for the collector.


A Midsummer Night's Dream