A Midsummer Night's Dream (1968)

It is a performances centric movie

Great Film overall

A Surprisingly Unforgettable Movie!

Each character in this movie — down to the smallest one — is an individual rather than a type, prone to spontaneous changes of mood and sometimes amusing outbursts of pettiness or ill humor.

This spectacular film is currently experiencing a rebirth on cable TV this month, I've seen it listed several times, in its' completed version, without having the aggravation of commercials or editing. When viewed in it's entirety, you'll gasp and squeal with delight at how so many of these budding young English Shakespearean actors became legends in their chosen field decades later.. A fresh and youthful Judi Densch is spectacular, along with the always sexy David Warner, but Diana Rigg's performance is the one that hammers home the reason why this stunning and statuesque actress was the darling of the 60's and 70's in the acting community in Britain. I'm sure so many of these performers, who'd already made a name for themselves in the Shakespeare community later became absolute legends in film and stage. I was hoping to see a youthful Alan Rickman or Maggie Smith, but beggars can't be choosers... Highly recommended and if you get a chance to watch it on the Hi-Def channels on cable, take the phone off the hook and stock up on the mead...

I have seen many versions of the play in my life, both on stage and screen. For that matter, I actually played the role of Puck as a child. And this is unquestionably the worst version I've ever seen. The actors are stiff -- probably mostly due to the director, as they never, ever move. The camera angle, however, leaps whimsically and frequently. Characters, too, and not just the fairies, appear suddenly before freezing in place to say their lines. It reminds me of the Confuse-a-Cat sketch from Monty Python's Flying Circus. Regardless of the high-powered cast, only Ian Holm as Puck and relative nobody Michael Jayston as Demetrius show any energy at all ever. I'd also like to concur with regards to what others have said about how dirty the lovers get, the strangeness of the costumes, and a number of other points. The overall effect is that of a remarkably boring two hour long drug trip, best appreciated through open mocking.On a side note, I would not allow any daughter of mine on screen naked but for green paint.

This movie looks like it was hastily committed to film by high school students. The lighting changes constantly so one is never sure whether the scene is intended to be at night or during the day. The fairies appear to be various shades of green at different times. The lovers get muddier and muddier as the story progresses, and the stains migrate around their clothes and faces. The sound is exactly the same wherever the action is. There is a frequent use of jerky stop action to move the scene from place to place and to show fairies moving at the speed of light. The dreadful music is earnestly trying to be avante-garde and succeeding in being cacophonous and out-of-place. The costumes were trendy then but look rather silly now.The virtually uncut script, an advantage for students, has the disadvantage of occasionally slowing the action to a near stop.It's a pity because these are great performances by an amazingly talented cast. Helen Mirren's Hermia, less strident than most, Ian Holm's doglike Puck and Judi Dench's near naked Titania are standouts certainly. Best of all for me was Derek Godfrey as Theseus. He brings a lot of dignity and urbanity to a part often played as a pompous bore or a chump. Theseus is given a lot of lines, sadly cut in many productions, which comment on literature and drama. "The best of this kind are but shadows, and the worst no worse, if imagination amend it." You need a fair bit of imagination to amend the shortfalls of this film, but the effort is well worth it.

This adaptation of "A Midsummer Night's Dream" seemed like it was trying to be a liiiittle too arty. It resulted in looking downright silly to me. Here's a rather lengthy list of reasons why. First of all, the male characters' costumes looked like simple modern suits with ruffly collars added. The females were all wearing extremely short mini dresses, making it very clear that the movie was made in the 60s.Puck, Titania, and Oberon are running around naked and green. I don't mind the naked part, but...must they be green? It bothered me slightly - it's a neat way to think of fairies and spirits, being green. But if they were going to take that route, they could have done a slightly better makeup job - the makeup seemed thick and shiny, stopped on certain parts of the body, and also seemed to be irritating Oberon's eyes - they looked redder-rimmed and puffier through each shot.The lovers get muddier and muddier as they go through the woods. This is slightly exaggerated. I mean, what were they DOING? It wasn't THAT muddy, and they weren't falling down on their face every few minutes! People simply don't get that muddy walking in the woods!When we did this play at the school, it was stressed that we should USE our body gestures and hands, and so after having that pounded into my mind, the actors' almost completely inanimate bodies really bugged me, and Oberon seemed to be telling himself "Must not move face must not move face must not move face..."Puck's tongue thing was really odd, and the way the spirits teleported around...priceless! And don't you love it when all the little fairies come jumping out of the trees and the camera flashes around? Deliciously weird.Speaking of the camera - how about that camera work? It reminds you a little of those "Blair Witch Project" trailers.And what kind of animals were those in that forest? Where did they get those sound effects?However, I did love the rude mechanicals. They were just as I would imagine them (and I recognize Snug from Keeping Up Appearances!). And Puck went on to be Bilbo Baggins - it's so perfect! All the actors were good - it's just that the film was put together so strangely. It was an extremely interesting approach, but they got a little too creative. 5/10.