Much Ado About Nothing Reviews

My second favorite film of summer 2013 after "Before Midnight." It's obviously not the uproarious comedy or SFX-laden blockbuster of typical summer fare, but the master of sci-fi-with-heart Joss Whedon's adaptation of the Bard is stylish, thrilling, and romantic with the light energy of a great summer romp. The black and white is sleek, the set design of Joss Whedon's own house is beautiful and sensuous, and the jazzy soundtrack is just ear ecstasy.

Shakespeare's romcom plot 1.0 is a bit...tame? for modern day. A rather huge deal is made over Hero's virginity, so much that when she is suspected of infidelity on top of fornication, Claudio, her betrothed, could enact such vitriolic public reprobation, her family could pretend she died at such horrific slander, and an otherwise gentle noblewoman would defend her cousin's honor by decreeing the slanderer's murder. Despite the dated material, Whedon adds some valiant updated touches: changing Conrade to a woman to add movement and intrigue to the scene with Sean Maher's icy and conniving Don Jon, hinting at Beatrice and Benedick's clandestine no-strings trysts and subsequent rancor because she presumably wants more and he's a confirmed bachelor, having Benedick deliver his Act II Scene 3 monologue while working out.

Whedon alumni Amy Acker and Alexis Denisof take on [their first] leading roles [in the Whedonverse] as attracting opposites Beatrice and Benedick. The pair rattle off Venusian versus Martian barbs, pratfall like seasoned Vaudevillians, and gradually generate palpable and ardent chemistry in the climactic scene of Beatrice commanding Benedick to murder Claudio as proof of his devotion.

The supporting cast is all charming and fun, especially sweet-faced Fran Kranz as the lovestruck Claudio. Having only seen Acker in supporting broad comedy or restrained drama roles on "HIMYM" and "Dollhouse," Denisof as the hair-helmeted ponce, Sandy Rivers, on "HIMYM," and Kranz as the exuberantly nerdy Topher on "Dollhouse" and stoner trope in "Cabin In the Woods," I'm really quite impressed with the acting of these three.

The iambic rhythms of Elizabethan speech did seem a mouthful for most of the cast at first, but it eventually ironed itself out, or I got over it. I'm always leery of contemporary Shakespearean adaptations that rely too much on physical humor and meaningful looks to clue the audience into the arcane dialect, but there was only a minimum of that, and what minimum there was, was organically funny.

Might not be for every audience but it should be. Full review later.

it may be much ado about nothing, and because of that the story is so simple, but good shakespeare adaptations capture the heart of the story, which this did, and good films capture many emotions and varying degrees of experiences, and this did that perfectly despite its massive simplicity. the right chords were hit at the right moments. i laughed, i grieved, i laughed, i welled up with thoughts of love, and then i laughed again. the film was well shot and perfectly acted, leaving me wanting more when all was said and done. each character brought a different element, lindhome the sexuality, fillion the humor, kranz and morgese the romance, diamond the good nature, acker and denisof the maturity, maher the deviance, and on down the line. i cant wait to watch this film again.

Shakespeare's blueprint for practically every romcom ever made gets dismissive treatment by Whedon and Co. who spit it up much as a cat does a hairball. Actually I had the feeling that Whedon watched Branagh's version during one afternoon of pot infused revelry and opined that he could make the same film - only cheaper. Only Whedon fans of the staunchest sort should endure this and then only to see their acting favs class it up for a minute.

Directed and adapted for the big screen from a play thought (my many) to be Shakespeare's best comedy (or the outline of the modern romantic comedy) by the nerd-God Joss Whedon and actually filmed during a two week hiatus amidst the post production of "The Avengers", "Much Ado About Nothing" is sadly nothing more than a hollow attempt at a modern independent film. Admittedly this version is only my second exposure to this title, be it film or printed word, but this doesn't change the fact that Whedon's attempt at adapting the beloved love story between Benedick and Beatrice into a relatable and witty romantic comedy, essentially comes off as a comedy where the first laughs enter in after the initial hour. Furthermore, held up to Kenneth Branagh's 1993 period piece, Whedon's version is wildly forgettable.
I shouldn't feel the need to say this, but Tony Stark isn't in this movie. That is to say, many audiences who are going to see "Much Ado About Nothing" on the Whedon name alone, may find themselves bored out of their skulls rather quickly. So know what you're getting into. Filmed in Whedon's own home, long stretches of "Much Ado About Nothing" come off as something reminiscent of a college film production, with an initial hour that's tediousness is unmatched by any film this year. This is pretty much all due to Whedon's direction; or lack thereof. He doesn't really bring much to the table here. There are a few well crafted/aesthetically interesting scenes, which show off his directorial skills, and he injects a jazzy soundtrack which is sure to be overlooked, but essentially this is a William Shakespeare stage play. In fact, this adaptation is so stripped down , that the lack of evocative mise en scene makes everything seems distractingly like nothing more than a bunch of actors spewing off lines of Elizabethan dialogue. Which I guess is a feat unto itself, but if that's all you got, it's simply not interesting enough to watch for 2 hours. But worse than that, his version suffers from the one thing every film director ballsy enough to adapt Shakespeare dreads, which is not being able to transfer the story onto the screen in a manner where the dialogue seems overwhelmingly comprehensible. With this movie, Whedon may be trying to step out of some kind of box given his reemergence of fame. But if co-writing "The Cabin in the Woods" was a giant leap forward, then "Much Ado About Nothing" is a dull leap back. Also, I can't be the only one who wants him back inside the confines of the Marvel box Disney so graciously built for him.
The acting, which should drive a Shakespearian adaptation, mostly falls flat here. I can't put into words how much Clark Gregg irritates me as an actor. I think it has a lot to do with that stupid Julia Louis-Dreyfus show he was on. And Amy Acker, who plays the role of Beatrice, does it with such a quirkiness that seems to drown audiences the same way an alligator would its prey. She never seems like anything more than an annoying thespian while on screen, overdramatizing every line that comes across her lips. Yes, I understand that Whedon has essentially made the role of Beatrice into a slapstick one, but what Acker's performance turns into is something of a bad SNL sketch. And she is no Kristen Wiig! As for Alexis Denisof (who if you close your eyes sounds exactly like John Michael Higgins) he is the only shining light of the entire film. So it's a good thing that he is playing the lead character, Benedick, as Denisof is absolutely the only reason to watch this movie.
Side Note: In this day and age I don't believe that a director can get away with a Shakespearian adaptation, without going the stylized, big budget route (a la "Romeo + Juliet" or "Coriolanus"). Hence, this Whedon venture is sure to be lost in the shuffle this summer, as its simplicity is partially the reason why it all comes off as fairly boring. By the way, I realize that there are still quite enjoyable Keira Knightley, large gown, pouty Brit, period piece films which come out every year, but a Shakespeare adaptation is another story entirely.
Final Thought: Whedon's "Much Ado About Nothing" is the type of film that would be playing in the background during a pretentious hipster New York (or New York themed) party. So, my only advice if you've read this far and are still planning on buying a ticket to see this, would be to not go into "Much Ado About Nothing" cold. That is to say, if you aren't familiar with the original text or have not taken a class where an instructor has spent countless hours explaining to you why this dialogue is so funny, then you might be one of the first in your screening to mentally check out. Oh, and I only pray that "Much Ado About Nothing" isn't your first go around with Shakespeare, because this is an adaptation which is assuredly far too Honors English Lit. to capture the imagination of any novice.

Written by Markus Robinson, Edited by Nicole I. Ashland

Follow me on Twitter @moviesmarkus

Joss Whedon nails his adaptation of the Shakespeare classic, with terrific performances, direction, music and cinematography. It truly succeeds in both capturing the modern setting and staying true to the class of the Bard.

'Much Ado About Nothing'. A wonderful adaptation with all the love and jest you could ask for. A ridiculous ensemble. In Joss we trust.

Wow. Joss Whedon never ceases to amaze me. I find it astounding that the same man made this, The Avengers and Cabin in the Woods, all of which I LOVED. Much Ado looks incredible, the acting is phenomenal, and for a guy who respects, but has never been able to actually READ Shakespeare, I am so thankful this movie exists. It brings a landmark piece of literature to a whole new audience, myself included. And it's just such a cool movie! It's modern, yet timeless. It's completely respectful of the source while very much carving it's own path. It's incredibly artistic while never feeling overly artsy. I could not recommend this more highly. LOVED IT.

With the wars being over with the exception of the constant bickering between Beatrice(Amy Acker) and Benedick(Alexis Denisof), Leonato(Clark Gregg) sees it as a prime opportunity to reconcile with the illegitimate Don John(Sean Maher). Except he has other ideas, like conspiring with his henchpeople, Borachio(Spencer Treat Clark) and Conrade(Riki Lindhome), to undermine Don Pedro's(Reed Diamond) efforts to woo Hero(Jillian Morghese) on the behalf of Claudio(Fran Kranz).

While probably not the best version of "Much Ado About Nothing," Joss Whedon still mostly manages to overcome the typical awkwardness of tranposing Shakespeare to the modern day to deliver an entertaining adaptation that hits the right notes, both high and low. All of which is aided by Whedon displaying a hitherto unknown visual flair while employing physical comedy to good effect. Plus, there is Alexis Denisof and Amy Acker, already previously adept at supernatural tragedy elsewhere, proving they can also handle romantic comedy together while nobody does clueless quite as well as Nathan Fillion.

Amazing that this was done in such a short time at Whedon's home. The story is familiar to many. It is a prototype romantic comedy with a minor fake tragedy built in for tension. There are a few clever visuals like the one used in the poster artwork. Modernizing the setting worked in most cases, except Sean Maher's character of the evil brother Don John didn't make a lot of sense. Nathan Fillion is hilarious as the bumbling security chief Dogberry. The young couple played by Kranz and Morgese are sweet and a bit foolhardy. The real stars though are Denisof as Benedick and Acker as Beatrice. The opening scene explains their history a bit and why their love is masked by insults when they meet again. Alexis Denisof, who looks better in a beard I think, does some funny pratfalls and posturing. However, I was especially impressed by Amy Acker as Beatrice. She too does a little physical humor, but her wit and strength and femininity shine through in every scene. Acker is what really makes this version worth watching.

I am such a fan of Kenneth Branagh's 1993 screen adaptation of MUCH ADO ABOUT NOTHING. It made me want to go to Tuscany, get a tan, and just sit and watch Emma Thompson seduce an entire world with her considerable charms. Branagh took this Shakespeare comedy and demonstrated his great ability to splash sexiness and vibrancy across a screen. Branagh clearly had a burning desire to elevate the material to bring sheer joy to an audience.

Joss Whedon's motivations for this new version are somewhat murkier. Shot in 12 days, mostly at his lovely house, this modern day adaptation has some lovely performances, clever new interpretations, and seductive cinematography, but it felt like an aesthetic experiment coupled with having a barn and shooting a movie with one's friends. It's the lark of someone who came off a huge blockbuster (THE AVENGERS) and wanted to make a simple, heartfelt movie as a palette cleanser of sorts. It shows. There's no burning desire for this movie to exist, no deep yearning or passion here. It's pleasant, and the actors are clearly invested and having a great time.

Clark Gregg and Nathan Fillion in particular bring a loose sense of fun to their performances, and Amy Acker as Beatrice is simply lovely. She has warmth combined with a bit of slapstick chops, and she's definitely one to watch. There's also eye candy for days with this utterly sexy, gorgeous cast. No matter your sexual orientation, there's sexiness oozing from any part of the frame, thanks to Reed Diamond, Sean Maher, Riki Lindhome, Ashley Johnson, Joshua Zar, and on and on. The very talented Tom Lenk plays Fillion's right hand man, and brings a humorous bewilderment to the party.

Technically, this very low budget film benefits from cinematographer Jay Hunter's black and white use of the EPIC Red camera. Having cut his teeth on reality television, his camera work is alive and yet there are many occasions where he brings beautiful compositions to the screen. Rest of the tech credits are modest, coming off like a low budget indie wherein the crew used what was at hand to accomplish their goals.

I don't want to sound harsh about this film, because the language is lovely and there's a breezy spirit to the whole thing. It simply pales in comparison to Branagh's memorable achievement. When I go to a film, I want to see the filmmaker's desperate need to tell a story and not see them go through the motions in order to clear their head. In a nutshell, Branagh celebrated ravenous love, while Whedon celebrates simple sweetness. I guess it all depends on your hunger needs.

Everything in this movie is done well, from the actors' timings to the use of music. Even though i had never read nor seen the play, I still followed and thoroughly enjoyed every minute of this movie. Much Ado About Nothing is my new favorite Shakespeare movie.

Easily one of the funniest William Shakespeare's comedies to grace the big screen, "Much Ado About Nothing" is helped by Joss Whedon's distinctive style of directing and producing humor from his brilliant and loyal cast of characters. As dense as the material can be, with Whedon using all the original text, the story eventually becomes easier to follow as the characters embrace their roles and bring their own spin on the line delivery. There are several moments throughout the film where you can pinpoint Whedon's additions to the humor, with a certain look or action, set piece or location that brings a fresh take on a classic and helps keep the film current. Though I prefer the tragedies of Shakespeare, if anyone is going to handle a sophisticate comedy like this, who better than Joss Whedon, who yet again proves there's no genre that he can't conquer.

Its exactly the unfussy, economical, back to basics film adaptation of Shakespeare that I'd wish we'd see more of. I like that the cast is comprised of no one particularly very famous, nearly all of whom do a solid job. Quite the little triumph from Whedon.

Very straight forward and noticeably low budget, Much Ado About Nothing is still a biting and artistically sound adaptation of Shakespeare's quick-witted and lusty comedy. This is being advertised as Joss Whedon and his friends just hanging out, doing some Shakespeare, and while there's no denying that this is true, there is also an elegance to the proceedings that the marketing sort of undersells. It helps that Joss Whedon's friends are all experienced and professional actors (Fran Kanz as Claudio is the most notable performance in my opinion) who give their all into their roles. Whedon does a good job making this feel a lot like a Whedon movie too. The pacing of the dialogue and expressive performances all feel very Whedonesque even though the script is completely Shakespeare. Much Ado About Nothing is a would-be weekend lark that's artistry is elevated by the effort and sincerity from the people who came together to make it so. A very pleasant surprise.

This didn't do much for me. It seems like this can be an okay Shakespeare play if there's tons of fun charisma and chemistry between Beatrice and Benedick, but there wasn't enough here to make me smile much. It's weird and jarring how this story jumps around between tragic and comic. For those of you excited about this because of Nathan Fillion, be warned that he plays the minor role of Dogberry, so he's not in it much. If you're a fan of this play, you'll find some of the updates curious and interesting, but not mindblowing.

So graceful and elegant, it's hard to believe that this movie is by the man who brought us "Buffy", "Serenity", "Cabin in the Woods", and "Avengers"....not because those weren't great or well done, but because it's difficult to believe that a man known for butt-kicking females and sharp dialogue could handle a Shakespeare movie. In a way, though, that is exactly what makes him so qualified, at least for "Much Ado About Nothing." The intelligent strength of its females and sarcastic buffoonery of its males practically cry out Whedon's name (as an example, check out Jayne and River in "Firefly"). Everyone gives it their all, treating it just as Shakespeare should be treated, and it comes out shining. The set -- or rather, Whedon's house and front- and backyard -- are beautiful, and the music -- set to Shakespeare's own lyrics and composed by Whedon's brother Jed -- is toe-tappingly addictive. The jazzy nature and subtle care put into this make this film a definite template for future Shakespeare adaptations.

I saw Much Ado About Nothing in a small theater and loved it. Amy Acker is superb as Beatrice and her performance alone is worth the price of the ticket. The modern location worked. My only complaint is some sexual material that is not in the play and dramatically distracting. Joss Whedon is talented, but it is time for him to grow up.