The film Much Ado About Nothing contained many different components that I liked, and a few I didn’t. I enjoyed the casting for the most part, with the exception of Keanu Reeves who just didn’t seem to fit in. I wasn’t sure about Michael Keeton either, he was funny, yet sometimes I felt he was trying too hard for laughs. Robert Sean Leonard’s depiction of Claudio seemed over the top at times, especially when he was emotional. I thought Denzel Washington and Emma Thompson were great and Kenneth Branagh was hilarious. All other members of the cast were good as well. I enjoyed the music and songs that were intersected into the film, just like the play. I especially enjoyed the costumes and scenery because I felt transported to a different time …show more content…
Dogberry didn’t comprehend the meaning of certain words and he used certain words incorrectly, such as when he said, “Thou wilt be condemned into everlasting redemption for this.” When he should have said, “everlasting damnation.” And he took Leonato’s comment of his tediousness as a complement. In the play, Dogberry was obviously a humorous character, but it was interesting to see Michael Keeton’s interpretation of him. The play doesn’t contain much direction for the characters besides entering and exiting a scene and kissing. This leaves a lot of interpretation for the actor such as how to say a line, when to pause, what gestures to make, and if they should sit, stand, or walk around. I thought Michael Keeton did a great job adding depth to the character through his gravelly voice, posture, and how he walked. The film added dimension to his character though clothing, hair, setting, and props. His hair looked greasy, his clothes were dirty, his overcoat looked slightly too large, he had a small pot belly, and his teeth were filthy. He also wasn’t allowed in Leonato’s house. This showed that he was poor, dirty, and lowly. However, he would smooth his hair using spit and his finger, he had a sword because he was a watchman, and he pretended to ride a horse. These examples displayed Dogberry’s pride and vanity. He felt he was important and high class. The props, clothes, hair, and …show more content…
In the film we see Beatrice leaving from calling Benedict to come to dinner and as she is walking she comes across Hero and Ursula. In the script, Beatrice leaves Benedict and exits the stage. Benedict says some lines and then exits before Hero, Ursula, and Margaret come on stage. Hero sends Margaret off to fetch Beatrice and then talks to Ursula about the plan to get Beatrice to fall in love with Benedict. Then Beatrice enters the stage. The explanation from Hero to Ursula is a bit redundant, the audience already knows that a trap is being set up for Beatrice and Benedict. The film utilizes this knowledge and makes the flow of the story