Much Ado About Nothing (12 Whedon) [*** out of 4] What can I say- its a charmer. Shot in less than two weeks at Whedons house with a case comprised largely of old friends and collaborators, MUCH ADO is a rare breed, a movie made as a lark thats actually enhanced by its tossed-off nature. It helps that Whedon has just the right touch for the material, never leaning too hard on either the comedy or the plot machinations, which might have come off as contrived in a more heavy-handed treatment but go down fairly easy here. That is, of course, until the point when Claudio spurns and humiliates Hero at the altar, a scene that hits harder than it might have otherwise because everything that has come before has been so light-hearted. Of course, the casts easy rapport doesnt hurt either. While Alexis Denisof never quite settles into the character of Benedick (every line reading feels too arch by half), Amy Acker makes a wonderful Beatrice, sparring like a classic screwball heroine while settling capably into the cadence of Shakespeares language. Also good, if more surprising, is Fran Kranz as Claudio, whose nebbishy tendencies complement nicely the characters boyish uncertainty. And I would be remiss not to mention Nathan Fillion, whose Dogberry is about 180 degrees removed from Michael Keatons flopsweat-drenched turn in Kenneth Branaghs version of the material, and at least twice as entertaining for it. In a way, the contrast between the two Dogberrys pretty much sums up how I feel about the two adaptations as well- Branaghs was flashy and star-studded but tried too hard, while Whedons more easygoing approach, though not perfect (not sure the invented history between Benedick and Beatrice was a wise idea) is a heck of a lot more fun.
Posted on: Tue, 22 Oct 2013 22:29:39 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015