Much Ado about Nothing (1993) review

 Number 858 on the top 1000 films of all time is Kenneth Branagh's 1993 adaptation of William Shakespeare's play 'Much Ado about Nothing.'

Don Pedro (Denzel Washington) and his noblemen Benedick and (Kenneth Branagh) Claudio (Robert Sean Leonard) are visiting their friend Leonato (Richard Briers) in Messina Sicily, after having crushed a rebellion by Pedro's half-brother Don John (Keanu Reeves.) In Messina, Pedro acts as match-maker, deciding to match Benedick and Leonato's niece Beatrice (Emma Thompson) who both seemingly hate each other. He also decides to match Claudio with Leonato's daughter Hero (Kate Beckinsale.)

Much ado about nothing is the best way to describe this film. It was beyond tedious. Granted, I'm not a Shakespeare fan, so I'm no doubt ignorant of the play's cultural significance. Call me a philistine, but I don't think that Shakespeare translates well to the big screen. At least not in its current form.

With Hamlet, Branagh ripped the dialogue straight from the folios. No doubt he did something similar here, as the dialogue was so expository. And it just went on and on. It was so verbose it was like the characters were reciting the dictionary. Plus Branagh and Thompson monologuing endlessly bored me beyond belief. This might have been okay for the 1500's, but not in 2024. Not even in 1993 when this was released. I'm not saying that I need gunfights and explosions, but I need more drama than Benedick trying and failing to figure out how a deck chair works.

Plus, this dialogue made the film so slow. It crawls toward a conclusion that I couldn't have cared less about - probably because I didn't care about the characters. Maybe if I was seeing it on stage, it would be different. But as I didn't care about the characters, I wasn't at all engrossed in the conflict. I say conflict, but a will they/won't they between either an annoying couple or a soppy one hardly makes the biggest stakes int he world.

It didn't help that Keanu Reeves was positively awful as Don John. True, as the villain, he doesn't really do much. He does some scheming in the shadows, promptly disappears, only to be caught and smirk at the camera at the end of the film. But Reeves never looked comfortable with the Shakespearean dialogue. No wonder he got a Razzie nomination.

I'm sure there are some Harold Bloom types out there ready to denounce me as a philistine, but this film was really much ado about nothing.

Hamlet film review

 Number 544 on the top 1000 films of all time is Kenneth Branagh's 1996 adaptation of Hamlet by William Shakespeare.

Hamlet (Kenneth Branagh) is the crown prince of 19th-century Denmark. But when his father is murdered by his evil Uncle Claudius (Derek Jacobi,) Hamlet swears revenge. The huge ensemble cast includes Jack Lemmon, Julie Christie, Robin Williams and Kate Winslet.

There is a reason that film-reviewing will always remain my hobby rather than my profession. There so many films that are objectively-enjoyable, but I have no interest in. Hamlet is one of them. Most of that is down to how I have no interest in Shakespeare, but also in relation to Kenneth Branagah's direction.

Branagh's adaptation is the first un-abridged version with all the dialogue coming straight from Shakespeare's original folios. It has been transcribed verbatim. This means that there is a monologue every five minutes where characters would speak for whole paragraphs, but say very little. Some of the dialogue was needless exposition whereas others were purple prose. I'm sure I am sounding ignorant, but I had very little idea what they were talking about. And Hamlet was four-hours long. If the monologues were cut down, the run-time could have been easily reduced to one hundred and twenty minutes.

But also Brannagh made extensive use of extended long shots, having the camera rest on a focal object for much longer than necessary. This really killed off any narrative pace. It made the film feel much longer than four hours.

Although Kenneth Branagh has won an Oscar, it was for writing Belfast and not acting. Having seen Hamlet, I understand why. I was not impressed by his performance. It was so over-the-top.

I'm sure if you're a Shakespeare lover, you would love Hamlet, but I hated it.