Eccentric Flower:199905/Robin shall restore AMNDs

I am an easy sell for movies. I have low expectations. I have not yet seen The Phantom Menace, but I believe that I will get all that I hope to get from it, because I hope to get very little.

I like almost every movie I see. Of course, I don't go see these long dreary Merchant/Ivory style dramas where the characters moan and sigh for three hours - I do exercise a little preselection in order to find movies I'll enjoy. But I am also an easy sell.

Of the crop of movies I've seen recently, there has only been one movie I left feeling let down - where I actually got less than I expected. You may be surprised to hear that it was A Midsummer Night's Dream.

Now, I should explain that I have some baggage here. I have seen AMND performed more times than any other Shakespeare play. I have worked it backstage and acted in it (not during the same production).

It is not my favorite Shakespeare play - that would probably have to be Hamlet. Nor my least favorite - pick a history play at random. Nor the one I should most like to see performed - that would be As You Like It, which I have never seen. You might say, though, that it's the one I have the most emotional investment in.

I didn't fully realize that, though, until I saw this movie. I didn't realize I had definite ideas about what the play should be and how it should be staged - and just how finicky I was about it - until I tried to track down what I thought was wrong with the movie.

Now, I've seen some weird productions of AMND. A high school in Baton Rouge did one where Theseus and Hippolyta were portrayed as Prince Charles and Lady Diana, preparing for their royal wedding. (This would have been around the time of the actual event.) This premise meant that the Tangled Lovers naturally became Sloane Rangers (British yuppies), and likewise converted the Rude Mechanicals into Brit working-class roughs. But the genius was in casting the Fey Folk as British rock stars; Puck was Elton John, and Oberon and Titania were done as Mick and Bianca Jagger (which made their feuding entirely believable).

I didn't have a problem with that. In fact, I loved it. So clearly you can mess with the formula and it doesn't bother me. Perhaps that's the problem with the movie: It doesn't mess with the formula enough. It's not different enough to be novel, and it doesn't do the same old things well enough to be exemplary.

The play consists of three plotlines - the Tangled Lovers, the Rude Mechanicals, and the Fey Folk. The Tangled Lovers were handled much better than usual. They were given real characterizations, so that when Hermia prefers Lysander to Demetrius, you can see why. I've seen productions where these four were so cardboard (and indeed, some of the blame there is Shakespeare's) that when Puck switches their affections, the audience needs a scorecard.

Plus, it's the first time I've seen Callista Flockhart actually act. Oh, and the bicycles are a lovely conceit - it gives them some instant blocking so they don't just have to wring their hands all the time, and later Puck can steal one and act silly.

Furthermore, this is the first time I have ever actually given a fig about Theseus and Hippolyta themselves. A great deal of that is due to David Strathhairn, a long-time favorite of mine for the simple reason that he's always good. Even when he is given very little to do.

So: An unqualified plus for the Tangleds.

The Rude Mechanicals, too, are done more competently than is typical. Frankly, Shakespeare only bothered to give Bottom a personality. Here, again, the other players actually exist for a change. But, as good as the acting is, I feel that the increased emphasis on this plotline is actually a mistake. You may disagree. Let me explain.

I find the Mechanicals hard to watch. I wince from the moment they start rehearsing and I wince every time they're on until the curtain falls on their pathetic excuse for a play. And even though it was exceptionally well-done this time, I will always squirm in my seat when they're on. More of it just means more squirming. I don't notice quality when I'm squirming.

I have never been able to see the humor in setups where people are making a fool of themselves and don't realize how bad they are. I cannot laugh. I ache for them instead. Movies such as Waiting for Guffman (on the high end of the spectrum) and Dumb and Dumber (on the low end) are impossible for me to sit through, because the whole premise of the humor here is that these people are real losers, true schlubs, who don't realize how clueless they are or how badly they act - and the audience is expected to join in their ridicule, to tacitly accept that it's okay to ridicule these people. It's not funny. Even when self-aware (The Producers) it's still not funny.

So: No score plus or minus for the Mechanicals. Better done than usual but the increased visibility makes them harder than usual to bear.

That leaves the fairies. And frankly, this is where most stage productions really let their hair down and let the whimsy out and have a good time, so it's where most productions of AMND excel. It's also the part Shakespeare obviously liked the best - all the best lines go to the fey.

Too bad that these fairies are so lackluster. Michelle Pfeiffer looks pretty but isn't nearly imperious enough and sleepwalks through her part. Rupert Everett has the requisite smoulder but is also oddly detached - and anyone who plays Oberon should have long hair, darn it!

Puck is played as an utter buffoon by Stanley Tucci, who in my opinion is dramatically miscast. I like my Pucks a little sinister - they should have a threatening edge. And of course all the other fairies are basically special effects, but Shakespeare doesn't give them much to do either.

If you'd like to see the closest thing to how I see the Fey Folk, you should read Neil Gaiman's excellent take on this play from the Sandman series. You'll find it in the volume Dream Country (which, in fact, has the four best single-issue Sandman stories ever). Charles Vess, who I followed for years before there was ever a Sandman, has always drawn fairies the way they're supposed to look.

But, hey, your mileage may vary.

At any rate: A big ol' minus for the Fey Folk.

I'm not sure where that leaves us, but hopefully it explains why the movie wasn't up to my expectations: My expectations are very specific and rather arbitrary.

Should you see the movie? Sure, if you like the play. It has novel features. (For example, there's an interesting twist in Thisbe's part near the end of the Mechanicals' performance which actually made me stop squirming for a few minutes!)

If you don't already love the play, though, it may not inspire you to begin loving it.