Comparing Whedon and Branagh

560 Words3 Pages
Plays in general do not contain much detail with them about how to put on the play or what type of person to get for a certain character. This causes the person who wants to put on said show to put out how they viewed the character to be and represent it as that for that production. This however does not apply only to the basic plays in general, it also counts for great works, even shakespeare's “much ado about nothing” has little to no details about how the characters should be performed. For example two movie Directors wished to put on the play as a movie and capture its essence within the movie. The two Directors: Branagh, and Whedon put on entirely different movie even though the script was the exact same. In Branagh’s version of the movie he decides to go with a much more “realistic” version where he sticks to the setting that it was written in as well as the original location. However Whedons version in stark contrast takes place in the modern day and doesnt take the classic approach that Branagh did. I personally think however that it was a good decision on Whedons film to make it take place in modern times since the true stem of shaekespeares comedy is that it uses the inherent traits of human personality. by making it take place in a current day setting it makes it much more relatable as far as the events go. Although at times the events seem a little odd in whedons version such as when don john is talking to benedict who he pretends to believe is Claudio. In the movie their swimming and they just emerge out of the water, however the reason in the play that they could get away with this trickery was because at the time they were having a masqaurade party. However this is balanced out by how well they portrayed Hero's father, Leonato. In the play Leonato is quite distraught over his daughter being accused of incontinence. And I believe that in the whedon
Open Document