Zimmer

Mollie Zimmer Professor Camargo ENG 2100 1 May 2013 A Midsummer Night's Dream: The Play vs. the Films Setting As pieces of literature become successful works of art, an opportunity arises for them to be made into a film. With this exchange, many aspects of the literature can be altered to the filmmakers preference. This entails that settings, characters, and interpretations are able to be tweaked. Director Michael Hoffman saw potential in Shakespeares A Midsummer Nights Dream and developed it into a film in 1999. Popular actors such as Kevin Kline, Michelle Pfeiffer, Rupert Everett, Stanley Tucci, Calista Flockhart, and Christian Bale, to name a few, helped create Hoffmans vision of A Midsummer Nights Dream. While some of the original aspects of Shakespeares play remained the same, some of the aspects differed. The most obvious contrast between the film and play is the setting. The play takes place in Ancient Greece, in Athens and the forest just beyond it, while the films setting is in Monte Athena, Italy during the 19th century. Though the settings differ, references of Athens are still retained in the film. I believe Hoffman decided to change the setting in order to show a greater depth of fantasy between the fairies and the humans. Had Hoffman kept the setting in Ancient Greece, the humans and fairies alike would have somewhat minimal clothing on. With the film taking place in the 19th century, the humans are dressed more formally and conservatively and the fairies wear close to nothing. To me, this was easier to show the differences between the fun, trickster fairies and the quarreling humans.

Zimmer

Deciding whether the change of setting helped or hurt the film is unclear. As a viewer I did not mind it and I thought the scenes in the film relating to Italy were beautiful to look at. The blatant references to Athens Greece in the movie were somewhat confusing when one knew that the movie was taking place in Italy. Shakespeare is a literary genius so it does pain me to say this. As an individual who learns much more effectively through visual aids, I did enjoy the movie more than the play. Being able to see the facial expressions of the actors was very beneficial. It gave me a greater insight into how Shakespeare and the director wanted the audience to see how emotion was expressed. Shakespeares language is rather difficult to understand. Seeing a visual interpretation of Shakespeares work was a great help and assisted me in my understanding of the play. When I go back to re-read the play, I do have a greater appreciation for Shakespeares use of language. There are bound to be some differences when interpreting Shakespeares A Midsummer Nights Dream into your own creative formula. This is what Michael Hoffman experienced when he turned Shakespeares play into a film adaptation. Though there are similarities, some of the differences really stand out. The setting in particular was the most obvious difference between the two works. In some instances, changing the setting can change the story completely. The adjustment of setting from Ancient Greece to 19th century Italy does not seem to have a profound effect on the themes between the play and film.