The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

Through painfully honest and emotional moments, the movie becomes irresistibly relatable

Adrian Noble created cinematic greatness with his take on William Shakespeare's A Midsummer Night's Dream. This 1996 version brought together Lindsay Duncan, Alex Jennings, and Kevin Doyle for a vibrant different take on a classic Shakespeare comedy. Different worlds are woven together in this delightful adaptation of the Bard's work.Theseus (Alex Jennings) is preparing for his marriage to Hippolyta (Lindsay Duncan). He is committed to finding the best amusement for the four-day festival. Simultaneously, deep in the woods live two very different groups of people. A band of fairies led by Oberon (Alex Jennings) and Titania (Lindsay Duncan) King and Queen of Fairies, respectfully lives in the woods and have been commissioned to bless the marriage of Theseus and Hippolyta. Then there is a group practicing a play that they hope to perform at the wedding affair. Traveling between the two worlds simultaneously was a brilliant decision by Noble and created a wonderful screen adaptation of Shakespeare's work. This film is so well done. The set design was fantastic, the colors were incredible, and the zany acting was amazing. I've been struggling trying to find a way to write this review in an unbiased fashion, but not finding a way to succeed. I felt changed by this film, much like my first experience with a David Lynch film. I also find the film a bit difficult to explain. The colors are incredible among so much else in the film. Please carve out some time for this film. You will not be disappointed.

This is a fantastic play.With the exception of Daniel Evans, who's strong Welsh accent becomes grating when reciting Shakespeare, so were the players.Congrats to RSC on keeping the original idea of each actor playing two characters.They could've easily gone the easy route.However, you lose all that in the presentation.The bright colors and bizarre props( bubbles,bicycles,umbrellas etc)distract from the actors.The whole thing has a very sixties acid trip vibe. Thumbs up for Barry Lynch. He made an excellent Puck.And Philostrate. I recommend the version with Stanley Tucci over this one, however. now they're saying I need at least ten lines which I thought I had but o well, I'll try to fix it.

I studied this play at school, saw several stage productions, and loved it, so I was looking forward to this RSC production.So first of all - what's with the little boy? I found his presence annoying and distracting. Sadly, the opening scene was delivered with practically no life, and that's where I switched off, too bored to continue.So obviously, you should take this review with a big pinch of salt, cos I only watched a few minutes.But just a few weeks later, the Kevin Kline version was on TV, late one night. I was highly suspicious, but gave it a chance. I was hooked almost straight away, and all the way through. So make of that what you will....

The Royal Shakespeare version of "A Midsummer Night's Dream" is highly conceptual; in fact it is quite abstract. However, as an English teacher I prefer this version over the Michelle Pfeiffer/Calista Flockhart/Rupert Everett version; mainly because it does not mess with Shakespeare's text. My students have watched both versions as they studied "Midsummer..." (although it should be noted at this point that this version is a bit naughty...the Royal Shakespeare Company brings out that quality which is found in Shakespeare's comedies). During the viewing I suggested that they tried to follow along in their texts. We quickly found that the latest film version rearranges chunks of text freely (for example part of Helena's last speech in Act I: Scene I occurs after Act I: Scene II where the rustics are introduced). I did not find this interpretation disappointing at all. One must remember that it is based on a stage production. Perhaps the fact that I hold a degree in Theatre is the reason I found it so enjoyable. I agree that the adding of the boy is a nice touch for the film; however, it did confuse some of my students. This version provides a nice contrast to some of the other versions.