You won't be disappointed!

Too much of everything

Terrible acting, screenplay and direction.

By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

The spirit that animates this version of the play is not that of William Shakespeare but Felix Mendelssohn. Shakespeare's text has been trimmed to a nubbin and hashed up by the "arrangers," Charles Kenyon and Mary C. McCall Jr., and it's gabbled by the all-star cast. Strangely, Olivia de Havilland as Hermia and Mickey Rooney as Puck are the worst offenders, and they are the only members of the cast of Max Reinhardt's celebrated 1934 Hollywood Bowl production, which inspired Warner Bros. to film the play, who made it into the movie. De Havilland delivers her lines with heavy emphasis on seemingly random words and with odd pauses, while Rooney punctuates every line with giggles, chortles, and shrieks that affect some viewers like fingernails on a chalkboard. Nobody in the cast seems to be aware that they're speaking verse. Fortunately, the decision was made to use the Mendelssohn overture and incidental music (along with snippets of other works by Mendelssohn), and to have it orchestrated by Erich Wolfgang Korngold. The result is an opulently balletic version of the play, taking advantage of what can be done in movies that can't be done on stage. Is it good? Maybe not, but it's much more fun than the stodgily reverent version of Romeo and Juliet (George Cukor, 1936) that MGM came up with the following year. Casting James Cagney as Bottom/Pyramus and Joe E. Brown as Flute/Thisby was a masterstroke, and if they had been directed by someone with a surer sense of American comic idiom than Reinhardt, the Viennese refugee from Hitler who spoke very little English (Dieterle acted as interpreter), the results would have been classic -- as it is, they're just bumptious fun. Much of the movie is sheer camp, reminiscent of the twee illustrations for children's books in the early 20th century. But there is a spectacular moment in the film when Oberon (Victor Jory) gathers the fairies, gnomes, and bat- winged sprites to depart, under a billowing black train that sometimes resembles smoke. The cinematography by Hal Mohr won the only write-in Oscar ever granted by the Academy. (charlesmatthews.blogspot.com)

It's a maddening movie, hard to get a handle on. On one hand, there's the Anglo world's leading playwrite, Shakespeare, along with the glorious strains of Mendelsohn; on another, there're a bunch of Hollywood contract players who made their bones as gangsters or low comedy relief. Add a wild card of downright ethereal imagination, and you've got a movie like no other. I can see why the two hours and more failed at the box-office. After all, how many movie-goers want Shakespeare with their gun-toting Cagney, even if he does well. Then too, two hours of poetic dialog, along with goofy mugging, can strain more than just the backside. Frankly, I fast-forwarded through some of the mugging passages. But what kept me going were those ethereal passages, especially the early ones. Now ordinarily, I'm not too much on fairies, nymphs or wood sprites. But the sight of those wispy creatures snaking up beams of light and into some nether world is darn near as good as Randolph Scott striding down a lawless street. In fact, it may be even better, certainly more exotic. Whoever staged those unearthly scenes deserves an Oscar of superlative design. Anyhow, I'm in no position to really judge the film since I wouldn't know Shakespeare from Albert Einstein. But I do know that visual imagination doesn't come anymore striking. And if the beams preview a stairway to the Pearly Gates, then count me in, even if I have to put down my beer bottle.

Probably my choice for Shakespeare's most overrated play. I actually think this thing is a very dark comedy. It's views on love are twisted and cynical and cute little Puck is a sadistic little bastard. If I were to direct a production it would probably depress people. This particular production has great things about it, namely Jim Cagney as Bottom. Brilliant performance and one of the best Shakespeare to screen interpretations I've ever seen. He has such manic energy and excitement which is perfect for the character. The problem is when he get's his ass's head which is painfully fake looking it really takes away from the performance. I suppose this might be an instance where I might crave for CGI but I don't see why every production of this play insists on making the ass head so literal. Some practical make-up effects and a humanized ass head allowing for expressiveness from the actor are sorely craved.Reinhardt was a brilliant theatre director and this is really the only thing we have left of his work. It gives us a nice feel of what his production of this play would have looked like theatrically. He seems to really love the close up though and I kind of wished he would move back so it would be closer to a theatrical experience. There are elaborate spectacles with the fairies which are beautifully choreographed and sung.My big problem with the film? The Mickster as Puck. A little bit of Mickey Rooney goes a long way. Of course they wanted him in this thing to show how cute he was and hearing his voice go through Shakespeare is irritating.

You have to view this 1935 Hollywood version of Midsummer Night's Dream in the same laid-back spirit that the Athenian court watches the mechanicals perform "Pyramus and Thisbe." Let yourself be tolerant of the errors (most glaring, Mickey Rooney's Puck), let yourself be amused by designers, performers and directors all trying too hard to be antic and magical, let yourself be interested in the inventive but no longer believable special effects, the cobwebs and fairy dust and the rest -- and you may find this "Dream" not only charming but heart-warming. The performers, especially Cagney, are likable in their roles, and even Rooney has some funny moments of mimicry. And you can experience something no contemporary production of "Dream" would offer: Mendelssohn's glorious, polished music in the background.