Review of Much Ado About Nothing (2013) by Dylan A — 05 Jan 2014

Shakespeare and Joss Whedon?!? Yes ... please! While Whedon's version of this classic Shakespearian comedy is modern, fun and pleasant, I will confess that I believe the 1993 version by Kenneth Branagh to be the better film -- which got three and a half stars.

The twenty year old version has a better cast (Branagh, Emma Thompson, Denzel Washington, Kate Beckinsale), a better location (uh ... Tuscany) and it was a grander production which made the film more sweeping and romantic (the music .

..). Whedon has shrewdly (and wisely) decided to keep all of the action of his modern adaptation in the confines of his very own home -- a place well known to him and thus well-staged. The story is much the same and the bard's dialogue is also much retained which makes this one of those few modern Shakespeare adaptations that work with the older, theatrical dialect (as some simply cannot master his written word).

While the dialogue and wit remain the same, Amy Acker and Alexis Denisof's (both of Whedon's 'Angel') Beatrice and Benedick cannot compare to Thompson or Branagh's which makes them both feel a little more than "adequate" in their roles.

A few other Whedon "regulars" -- Clark Gregg, Nathan Fillion, Fran Kranz and Sean Maher -- come across better in their roles that don't require the same level of quick-witted banter required in the leads.

The film -- shot in black and white -- is nice to look at and fun to watch. It just doesn't stand up that well to a side-by-side comparison. Three words why: "Hey Nonny Nonny".