Amazon.com

Kenneth Branagh's four-hour production of Shakespeare's full text for Hamlet is visually lush (shot in 70mm, which is rarely done) and full of fascinating story moments that normally get cut from shorter stage versions. (Your idea of what kind of fellow Polonius is may change quite a bit.) The unexpurgated approach is truly enlightening, and Branagh intermittently succeeds at giving familiar moments in the drama an original cinematic spin, including Hamlet's spooky confrontation with his father's ghost (Brian Blessed). (Branagh also imposes some Hollywood glitter on the proceedings by casting the likes of Robin Williams, Billy Crystal, Charlton Heston, and Jack Lemmon in the smaller parts.) The pre-Titanic Kate Winslet is very good as the doomed Ophelia, and Derek Jacobi delivers a wonderfully nuanced performance as Claudius, whose character is definitely filled out by the restored material. Branagh's own performance is a little revisionist--some viewers have quibbled with it while others seem fine with it. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (211)

Stellar Acheivement
The 1996 film "Hamlet" directed and starring Kenneth Branagh is by far the best film adaption of the play! Even though its 4 hours, you hardly notice it because of how much is going on. His acting job is superb, as are Julie Christies as Gertrude, Derek Jacobi's as Claudius, and Kate Winslet as Ophelia (a role much better than her overrated one in "Titanic'). But what's really amazing is Kenneth Branagh's direction. He is such a genius and everyone involved with the movie should have gotten Oscars. Also, what I liked were the great visuals. Elsinore is so cool, especially the main hall with the mirrored doors and checkered floor. Plus he changes the play very subtlely, such as putting Claudius in a confessional for the praying scene or having him and Polonius watch Hamlet deliver the "to be or not to be" speech from a one-way mirror. I've heard Branagh say that he didn't want his movie to be gloomy and infatuated with death and deciet like the other films are. Instead it's a celebration of life and love, and adventure. END

Superior to all other versions.
Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet combines lush and breathtaking visuals with the complete, unabridged text of Shakespeare's masterpiece. In other versions of Hamlet, such as the ill-cast Mel Gibson film, the play is mistakenly cut down to a "more reasonable" two-hours-or-less atrocity. The unexpurgated method allows for the inclusion of important scenes that, if removed, take away from the overall effect of the drama. Despite its length of more than four hours, the film keeps the viewer entertained until the startling last scene. The stunning visuals can be attributed to the rarely used 70mm film on which the play was captured and the exceptional set design involved. The play is actually done in a 19th century motif, a unique departure from other versions of Hamlet. Impressive costume design add to the remarkable images in the film. The star-studded cast includes Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Kate Winslet as Ophelia, and Branagh, himself, as Hamlet, all parts delivered with brilliant authenticity. Other well known actors such as Robin Williams, Charlton Heston, and Billy Crystal also appear in small, but equally well-implemented roles. Some argue that Branagh's execution of the part was overdone, but it fits perfectly within the film and is, therefore, quite believable. The acting is overall a big plus to the end effect of the film. Beautifully executed in an outstandingly well-calculated manner, Branagh's film made Hamlet more accessible to modern viewers and will certainly remain popular for a long time to come.

Excellent Film
Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet" works so well on the big screen because the guy has a knack for Shakespeare, acting, directing, and knowing what "modern" audiences wanted out of a Shakespearean play. He takes the tale of Hamlet, prince of Denmark, and transports it to more of a modern setting (well, more modern than the 16th century). He assembles an all-star cast that includes Kate Winslett, Charlton Heston, Derek Jacobi, Billy Crystal, Jack Lemmon, Robin Williams among others in this adaptation of Shakespeare's classic.

Although 4 hours in length (mainly because every word in the play is inserted in the script), the stunning effect of the play is extraordinary. The backdrop for the ghost of Hamlet in the opening scene, the mirror used when Hamlet (Branaugh) is making his "To be or not to be" soliloquy, the palace in which Hamlet and Laertes fight, and the snowy landscape in which Fortenbras and his men arrive are all instances of using scenery and directing to update this version of the play.

Although the setting and interpretation of what Shakespeare intended are left in doubt, the movie itself is visually stunning and the acting is great. Although Branaugh hired a few American actors to take on some of Shakespeare's characters (for instance, Robin Williams plays Osric and Billy Crystal plays one of the gravediggers), there "American" accents are hardly noticed in the film.

As an educator, I also think this is a fantastic version to use as a resource for a study of the play. Because the dialogue is accurate to the play, it works well. Also, this version seemingly makes the work of Shakespeare easier to understand. (Although, as a warning, there is one scene with Winslet (Ophelia) and Branaugh (Hamlet) that is definitely "adult" in nature).

Overall, a great gamble by Branaugh to update Shakespeare's work into his own insight. There is also a few extras on the VHS version: interviews with many of the cast members as well as a behind the scenes about the movie.

Also recommended: Hamlet (Mel Gibson version)

Great Film for learning
This film is a great tool to be used within a classroom to reinforce Shakesperian lessons. The film presents one of the best adaptations to Shakespeare's original work. Awesome production!

Good.
This version of 'Hamlet' starring and directed by the one and only Kenneth Branagh is a joy to watch and might be the best version of the famous play. It follows the play word by word, so one has to read it and understand it fully to understand the film. Better than the Mel Gibson 'Hamlet'. ... Read more

Description

To be or not to be?To act or not to act?The questions are the same to Joe, a struggling (read:jobless) actor whose every sinew and synapse cries out to performand to soften the blow of not landing a part in a megabudget sci-fi movie.So in the stalwart (read:desperate) tradition of actors everywhere, Joe vows to put on a show, a special (read:even more desperate) version of the greatest play in the English tongue.

Writer/director Kenneth Branagh serves up Hamlet on wry with this salute to dyed-in-the-wool and other woolly-brained thespians.Michael Maloney (Truly Madly Deeply) portrays Joe, maxing out credit cards and his wits to realize his dream.Does he succeed?Well, with Richard Briers (Branagh's Hamlet), Joan Collins (Dynasty), Nicholas Farrell (Chariots of Fire), Absolutely Fabulous alumna Jennifer Saunders and Julia Sawatha and more joining Maloney, one thing's certain.The show must go on! ... Read more

Reviews (24)

A great little movie with a top-notch cast
We knew Kenneth Branagh could act, direct, and adapt Shakespeare, but who knew he could write comedy? This film is a discovery. Branagh got some of his friends together (you'll recognize many actors from his other films) and made this gem about an amateur theatre company putting on Hamlet at Christmas time! The audition scenes are priceless.

The script is excellent, the acting is wonderful, and--a rare treat in films--you will care about every character. They all go through changes and become better people as a result of their time together.

Michael Maloney is fine in the lead role of the director (playing Hamlet himself, of course; the comparisons to Branagh are unmistakable), and the rest of the cast give it their all. A standout is John Sessions as the drag queen playing Gertrude. He has the most heartbreaking scene in the film.

All in all, an inspired concept rendered beautifully. A movie with a heart as well as a funny bone.

A Side Note: The original title was "In the Bleak Midwinter," suggesting the Christmas aspect, but I prefer the alternate "A Midwinter's Tale" as it is more Shakespearean.

Hilarious And Heartfelt
Here's a story for you: Joe, a depressive, out-of-work actor, puts on a no-budget production of Hamlet, as a benefit for a church that's about to be bulldozed by developers; he's plagued by money problems, disinterest from the locals, and a cast of actors that spend their time arguing and sniping at one another. They cannot seem to focus on the play very often-and when they do, they can't get things right. Despair begins to overtake Joe.

Now: picture this as a comedy.

Can't do it? That's okay, because Kenneth Branagh already did it for you.

A Midwinter's Tale (originally titled In the Bleak Midwinter for its British release) takes that concept and weaves comic gold out of it, presenting the viewer with a film that is by turns clever, slapstick, hilarious, and heart-wrenching. After Henry V it's probably Branagh's best film, and funnier by far than his other two comedies, the uber-schmaltzy Big Chill ripoff Peter's Friends, or the intelligently done (though occasionally miscast) Much Ado About Nothing. A Midwinter's Tale surpasses them both with a tightly written script, able and artful direction that owes a debt to both Woody Allen and Frank Capra, and a truly great ensemble cast.

Casting is an integral part of any film, of course, but when one is adapting Shakespeare (or, in this case, doing a film about adapting Shakespeare), good casting is essential. Branagh has been hit-or-miss with this over the years-most notably in the case of Keanu Reeves, hopelessly out of his depth in Much Ado-but in this particular film it's spot-on. From Branagh regulars like Michael Maloney and Richard Briers, to semiregulars like Gerard Horan, Celia Imrie, and John Sessions, to newcomers Julia Sawalha and Joan Collins (yeah, that Joan Collins), everyone does a tremendous job, and each actor approaches his or her role with a verve and a dedication that is extremely fun to watch. Sawalha in particular is a delight as the incredibly nearsighted Nina, Joe's love interest; she brings a vulnerable humanity to her role that not only heightens the humor in her more slapstick scenes, but deepens the drama of the more solemn moments as well. Likewise Sessions (probably most familiar to Americans from his appearances on the British version of Whose Line Is It Anyway?) is given the seemingly one-dimensional/stereotypical role of the female-impersonating homosexual, Terry . . . which would seem unrewarding. But he turns in a three-dimensional characterization that is screamingly funny throughout the film-until his role takes a gutwrenching turn for the dramatic in one of the film's best scenes. And so it goes for each of the characters; they all have something to do in this film, and they all do it superbly, hilariously, and when it is called for, tenderly.

Branagh's script is another key element to this movie's excellence. It's impeccably written, using both Shakespeare and its unique bunch of characters to tremendous advantage. One of the keys to this is that Branagh never makes fun of these people, even when they are at their worst, their silliest, their most pompous, or venal. Branagh has an obvious fondness for these people (presumably based on actors he knew during his own struggles to make it in the business), and he treats them like people, rather than as fall guys or as the means to get to a lame punchline. Every line the characters speak, every scene they're in, shows their humanity, and shows it lovingly. A lot of the humor in the script grows out of character, and that really makes this film shine. It builds the laughter naturally, rather than forcing it through meanness and being shocking or crude, as in the case of many so-called "comedy" writer/directors today.

As I said above, Branagh's direction borrows a page or two from other comedy directors before him, mainly Woody Allen and Frank Capra. The Allen influence shows through the strongest, especially through the dialogue and the first half of the film, which bears a lot of similarities to both Manhattan and Stardust Memories. The opening credits are strongly reminiscent of Allen's classic "middle period pictures; Joe directly addresses the camera, as a lot of Woody's characters do, and this is juxtaposed with music-Noel Coward's delightful "Why Must the Show Go On?", a sardonic look at the gung-ho attitude actors have. The song becomes a leitmotiv throughout the film, with the action echoing Coward's cynical lyrics . . . until the turning point in the film, when the troupe unwittingly comes up with the answer to Coward's question, and demonstrates precisely why the show must go on. From here on in the Capra influence takes over-and I can't say too much about that without giving the ending away, unfortunately. What I will say is that like Capra at his best, A Midwinter's Tale favors sentimentalism over cynicism-something a lot of modern critics find distasteful for some reason. I can't imagine why, especially when the sentiments expressed here-in particular, the value of loyalty and family-are so genuine and loving, especially when contrasted with the phoniness and cruelty that passes for humor these days in far too many films. Branagh is more intelligent than that-and willing to take the risk that the audience is, too. A Midwinter's Tale is like a breath of fresh air compared to the stale stench of most modern comedies; take a chance on it. I guarantee you'll be happy you did.

Please release this on DVD. I keep wearing out my VCR tapes
A great movie. Full of laughter and tears. I laughed and I cried. The only thing that could have made this movie better (10 stars!) would be if they had actually shown the entire Hamlet. That would be the coolest DVD extra ever!! What a great bunch of misfits.
PLEASE release this movie on DVD! I wore out my VCR copy.

The greatest comedy you've never heard of
Don't let the fact that you've never heard of this deter you from seeing it! When I saw A Midwinter's Tale in a New York movie theater I went back either the next day or within a couple of days and it was GONE. I couldn't believe the movie ran for such a short period. And, although the VHS has been available for a few years, Amazon.com didn't even carry it at first. So, I figured "something" was going on at the distributor. Since the other reviews already say enough about it, all I can add is, this film is destined to be a CLASSIC. Branagh pays homage to Woody Allen's Stardust Memories & Manhattan in the beginning but develops the film into so much more as the characters reveal themselves in the way that only British comedians can! I believe the reason for removing it was more economic/political than actual interest -- indeed, the movie never had a chance to be seen!

Such a pity this is not available on DVD
VHS has gone the way of the dinosaur! This movie was fantastic. A must see for anyone who has taken an interest in theater (professional or amateur). I can't help wishing it was available on DVD! I have looked and looked (and searched and searched) and if I have missed something please let me know. My search for the DVD will continue till I reach my grave. ... Read more

Reviews (211)

Stellar Acheivement
The 1996 film "Hamlet" directed and starring Kenneth Branagh is by far the best film adaption of the play! Even though its 4 hours, you hardly notice it because of how much is going on. His acting job is superb, as are Julie Christies as Gertrude, Derek Jacobi's as Claudius, and Kate Winslet as Ophelia (a role much better than her overrated one in "Titanic'). But what's really amazing is Kenneth Branagh's direction. He is such a genius and everyone involved with the movie should have gotten Oscars. Also, what I liked were the great visuals. Elsinore is so cool, especially the main hall with the mirrored doors and checkered floor. Plus he changes the play very subtlely, such as putting Claudius in a confessional for the praying scene or having him and Polonius watch Hamlet deliver the "to be or not to be" speech from a one-way mirror. I've heard Branagh say that he didn't want his movie to be gloomy and infatuated with death and deciet like the other films are. Instead it's a celebration of life and love, and adventure. END

Superior to all other versions.
Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet combines lush and breathtaking visuals with the complete, unabridged text of Shakespeare's masterpiece. In other versions of Hamlet, such as the ill-cast Mel Gibson film, the play is mistakenly cut down to a "more reasonable" two-hours-or-less atrocity. The unexpurgated method allows for the inclusion of important scenes that, if removed, take away from the overall effect of the drama. Despite its length of more than four hours, the film keeps the viewer entertained until the startling last scene. The stunning visuals can be attributed to the rarely used 70mm film on which the play was captured and the exceptional set design involved. The play is actually done in a 19th century motif, a unique departure from other versions of Hamlet. Impressive costume design add to the remarkable images in the film. The star-studded cast includes Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Kate Winslet as Ophelia, and Branagh, himself, as Hamlet, all parts delivered with brilliant authenticity. Other well known actors such as Robin Williams, Charlton Heston, and Billy Crystal also appear in small, but equally well-implemented roles. Some argue that Branagh's execution of the part was overdone, but it fits perfectly within the film and is, therefore, quite believable. The acting is overall a big plus to the end effect of the film. Beautifully executed in an outstandingly well-calculated manner, Branagh's film made Hamlet more accessible to modern viewers and will certainly remain popular for a long time to come.

Excellent Film
Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet" works so well on the big screen because the guy has a knack for Shakespeare, acting, directing, and knowing what "modern" audiences wanted out of a Shakespearean play. He takes the tale of Hamlet, prince of Denmark, and transports it to more of a modern setting (well, more modern than the 16th century). He assembles an all-star cast that includes Kate Winslett, Charlton Heston, Derek Jacobi, Billy Crystal, Jack Lemmon, Robin Williams among others in this adaptation of Shakespeare's classic.

Although 4 hours in length (mainly because every word in the play is inserted in the script), the stunning effect of the play is extraordinary. The backdrop for the ghost of Hamlet in the opening scene, the mirror used when Hamlet (Branaugh) is making his "To be or not to be" soliloquy, the palace in which Hamlet and Laertes fight, and the snowy landscape in which Fortenbras and his men arrive are all instances of using scenery and directing to update this version of the play.

Although the setting and interpretation of what Shakespeare intended are left in doubt, the movie itself is visually stunning and the acting is great. Although Branaugh hired a few American actors to take on some of Shakespeare's characters (for instance, Robin Williams plays Osric and Billy Crystal plays one of the gravediggers), there "American" accents are hardly noticed in the film.

As an educator, I also think this is a fantastic version to use as a resource for a study of the play. Because the dialogue is accurate to the play, it works well. Also, this version seemingly makes the work of Shakespeare easier to understand. (Although, as a warning, there is one scene with Winslet (Ophelia) and Branaugh (Hamlet) that is definitely "adult" in nature).

Overall, a great gamble by Branaugh to update Shakespeare's work into his own insight. There is also a few extras on the VHS version: interviews with many of the cast members as well as a behind the scenes about the movie.

Also recommended: Hamlet (Mel Gibson version)

Great Film for learning
This film is a great tool to be used within a classroom to reinforce Shakesperian lessons. The film presents one of the best adaptations to Shakespeare's original work. Awesome production!

Good.
This version of 'Hamlet' starring and directed by the one and only Kenneth Branagh is a joy to watch and might be the best version of the famous play. It follows the play word by word, so one has to read it and understand it fully to understand the film. Better than the Mel Gibson 'Hamlet'. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Kenneth Branagh's 1993 production of Shakespeare's Much Ado About Nothing is a vigorous and imaginative work, cheerful and accessible for everyone. Largely the story of Benedick (Branagh) and Beatrice (Emma Thompson)--adversaries who come to believe each is trying to woo the other--the film veers from arched wit to ironic romps, and the two leads don't mind looking a little silly at times. But the plot is also layered with darker matters that concern the ease with which men and women fall into mutual distrust. Branagh has rounded up a mixed cast of stage vets and Hollywood stars, among the latter Denzel Washington and Michael Keaton, the latter playing a rather seedy, Beetlejuice-like version of Dogberry, king of malapropisms. The DVD release has optional full-screen and widescreen presentations, Dolby sound, optional Spanish and French soundtracks or subtitles.--Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (129)

funny and just plain enjoyable! by a 14 year old
This movie is so, as I said, enjoyable! It's hilarious - it has both physical and oral comedy. The scenes with Benedick and Beatrice are great.

Shakespeare's play is about two romances. One with a young, innocent, beautiful Hero and a naiive guy (I forget his name). The other is with Beatrice and Benedick, a couple who love to hate each other and don't realize their true feelings without a little help from some friends. Unfortunately, all is not completely happy. Someone is trying to put a damper on everyone's fun with lies and false accusations. But don't worry! Much Ado About Nothing isn't a tragedy.

The music and scenery is beautiful and the who feel is the movie is sprightly and energetic. I think everyone did a good job. Branagh and Thompson obviously were wonderful. Everybody says Michael Keaten (spelling?) and Keanu Reeves were terrible, but I strongly disagree. Perhaps they were a little prejudiced by former viewings of the actors. Keaten was so funny - I am sure Shakespeare was not always refined - and Reeves was evil. They both were fine!

I recommend this movie to Shakespeare lovers (though it may not be COMPLETELY true to the original text) and to anyone who wants a good laugh.

Much Ado About Something!
This is my absolute favorite Branagh version of Shakespeare's "Much Ado About Nothing"!!
Thank you, Mr. Branagh, for creating interpretations of Shakespeare's masterpieces which are entertaining, understandable, and excellent in quality. If the thought of reading Shakespeare makes you nervous, please do yourself a favor and rent one of Kenneth Branagh's movie versions first. He does an EXCELLENT job of interpreting Shakespeare's text and of helping to bring the stories to life (in a way that almost anyone can understand what's going on!) The casts of these film versions are equally talented and greatly contribute to the success of these movies. If it obvious that the actors understand what they are saying, and understand Shakespeare in such a way that allows them to pass that understanding on to the viewer.
This version of "Much Ado About Nothing" is wonderful in it's imagery and dialogue (interaction between the actors/characters). Emma Thompson (Beatrice) and Kenneth Branagh (Benedick) bring their characters to life with wonderful humor and personifications. Their dialogue and bantering is absolutly amazing in it's flow and "natural-ness"-- they truly make the movie. Please see this one-- it's most definitely the best!!!!!

Best Movie Ever!! by melmcc13
This movie is one of my favorite movies of all time!! I am a huge fan of of Keneth Branagh and Emma Thompson and think they are both wonderful! I absolutely loved this movie and thought that all the actors did a very good job. There were absolutely no confusing parts, and everything from drama to comedy in this film was perfectly displayed. The directing was excellent, and Kneth Branagh makes the movie seem very real. This movie does an excellent job at making Shakespeare fun and exciting!!

yuck!
I'm no fan of the original play and this film version is even worse. The film adds pointless scenes (nudity, along with others) not in Shakespeare's work and twists others; all aimed at an audience that doesn't care about solid acting--of which this film has none (spoiling the few interesting bits of the play)--to begin with and many of the actors simply shouldn't have even been considered-both Reeves (who can't act at all), and Keaton could never work out in a drama movie.
It should be said that nearly every big-screen Shakespeare translation (apart from Zeffirelli's version of Hamlet and Branagh's Henry V) have stunk. Parker's Othello is just as bad as this piece of trash to say nothing of Luhrmann's Romeo and Juliet or Hoffman's A Midsummer Night's Dream. It's my suggestion, that if you really want to see Shakespeare off the stage, then look for BBC material.

A little ado about not much
I believe that the reading of this book/play shouls be encouraged for students across the country, because it shows a comical yet realistic view of love, and the effects it has on people.
When Shakespeare wrote this play, I believe that his purpose was to show the two differing sides of love. He uses two examples, the first being Hero and Claudio, who embody the spirit of romantic, superficial love. The two of them never seem to talk, and as far as the reader knows, they don't have a whole lot in common. Claudio puts so much stock in his "love" for Hero that he overreacts too easily. For example, at a party where Don Pedro agrees to woo Hero for Claudio, Don Pedro's bastard brother Don John tricks Claudio into believing Pedro wants Hero for his own. WIth this fresh in his mind, Claudio stomps off in a huff, without even checking the facts. This kind of love is based on gazing wistfully at the one's partner across the room, and sunshine, lollipops and rainbows.
The other kind of love that Shakespeare chooses to display in this play is the realistic kind of love that is displayed more often in society around us. This is shown in the couple of Benedick and Beatrice. These two quick wits are constantly bickering and at each other's throats, until they are tricked by their friends into each believing the otehr loves them. At this, all of their criticisms of love and claims to remain unmarried until death go right out the window. Suddenly, they are seized by a desire to be with each other, and their true feelings come out. It shows how love actually works in real lifeI would reccommend this play to anyone who enjoys a good comedy with just a twinge of love intrest in it. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Let's be honest: this should be titled Wretched Excess' Frankenstein. Swooping, wild, bloody, and energetic, this is bad moviemaking from the best, which makes it all the more lovable. Kenneth Branagh plays Victor Frankenstein, a man so obsessed with conquering death that he decides to create life. What he gets, after a protoplasmic mud wrestle, is a Mean Streets monster (Robert De Niro) that isn't particularly happy to be back from the dead or thrilled about all the stitches. Helena Bonham Carter may, at several points in this film, actually be channeling Ramtha. The supporting cast couldn't be peopled with better performers (Tom Hulce, John Cleese, Ian Holm) but they all look like they're ringside at some Ultimate Fighting competition. A must for any midnight movie collector for the shock factor alone. A hoot. --Keith Simanton ... Read more

Reviews (90)

not too scary, more sad
This was a good movie with a good point about the way society doesn't always accept people who are different. But, I was really disappointed. When I read that Robert De Niro was in this movie playing Frankenstein's monster, and that it was a horror movie, I was expecting an entertaining, wild, bloody, eerie, and terrifying horror about a mad monster. But, instead, it was a very sad film. I almost wanted to cry. Just thinking about the scene in which Frankenstein's monster kills a good-hearted woman makes me sad. And, what's so sad is that the monster wasn't truly a monster at heart. He had love inside him, but nobody understood him, so he reacted with violence. The sadness of the film makes it less enjoyable to watch. Overall, it is a good movie though. But, don't watch this film if you are prone to weeping about sad scenes in movies. And, I wouldn't recommend watching this movie if you're looking for a scary movie, because it's not all that scary. If you like science, and you enjoy creating strange experiments, and science fiction, and watching tragedies befall upon good people, I recommend this movie.

A worth-while version
As film adaptions of Frankenstein go, this is more accurate than most. It's good to see the Arctic climax restored, as it is so often omitted. Kenneth Branagh has made a satisfying, staightforward version of the story, thankfully containing little of the wayward characterisation and tricksy camera work which combine to sink Francis Ford Coppola's Dracula. The horror element has been toned down a bit, although the section where Frankenstein ressurects Elizabeth (Helena Bonham Carter) is quite disturbing.

Just a word about the creation scene, which is somewhat different to the 'thunder and lightning' scenario we have become used to. The monster floats in a tank full of amniotic fluid, which Frankenstein moves about the laboratory by means of chains and pulleys. The spark of life is provided by power generated from electric eels. Frankenstein, stripped to the waist, slips and slides on the fluid that has now poured onto the floor, and strikes the monster on the back, in the manner of a doctor slapping a new-born baby. It certainly gives a novel slant to a familiar situation.

Branagh directs and also plays the part of Frankenstein with energy and gusto. Robert DeNiro makes a formidable monster, but also manages to elicit our sympathy for his plight, which is just how it should be. The supporting performances from a host of well known British actors are generally good, perhaps the most interesting being John Cleese. He does well in a straight role as Dr. Waldemann, who takes Frankenstein under his wing at medical school. The comic relief is provided by Tom Hulce as Frankenstein's friend, Henry Clerval.

This is a good and entertaining version of Frankenstein, and well worth a look.

Not an authentic adaptation of the book, but still fun.
"Mary Shelley's Frankenstein" is an incredibly melodramatic adaptation of the book that takes huge liberties with the plot, but I still find it thoroughly entertaining. The movie is perfectly cast, and I think that the embellishments that Kenneth Branagh takes with the story only make the film more enjoyable. Even though I doubt that Dr. Frankenstein ran around without a shirt on as much as Branagh does in the film, most women will probably find it quite enjoyable. Robert DeNiro is amaing in his role of "the creature," and Helena Bonham Carter gives a great performance as Elizabeth. If you're the type of person who detests it when filmmakers stray too far from the text of the book they're adapting, then this film probably isn't for you. If you're a bit more open-minded and are just looking for an entertaining movie to watch, this is a perfect film to add to your collection.

Ingolstadt,?
The scene with the crowd was gathered during the lynching,
did'nt the caption say Ingolstadt and is'nt Ingolstadt in
Germany?

I am wondering why De Niro was talking like an englishman
and the crowd sounded like english too?

Maybe I missing something; should'nt the people so german?
I remember like thirty years ago about you should be true
to your heritage.

Excellnt film!
This is bye far, the best remake of Frankenstein ever. This is better than the Frankenstein sequel's to, well MOST of the Frankenstein sequel's at lest. Comes very close to the perfect book written by Mary Shelley. Some people said this was bad because there was to much drama. Will people stop being Nerd's! ... Read more

Reviews (107)

Stunning
This may be the best Shakespeare film ever made. In 1942, Laurence Olivier delivered a jingoistic, stylized wartime production of "Henry V" that nonetheless stood as the standard interpretation. Nearly fifty years later, Kenneth Branagh's film appeared not only as a powerful and amazingly accessible recasting of the text, but a serious examination of the nature and the costs of the war that was Henry the Fifth's only real achievement.

Although studded with a fine array of subsidiary characters, "Henry V" is essentially a one-man play, and Branagh's performance informs and naturally influences all of the rest. His character has most of the lines, and he delivers them with a refreshing naturalism and candor that re-infuses the humor into the funny bits and cuts a lot of the potential for stilted jingoism out of the patriotic and warlike ones. If the real Henry's delivery of the St. Crispin speech was anything like Branagh's, it's no wonder the English won.

Slogging through the mud and rain of Harfleur and Agincourt with Branagh is a masterful supporting cast, including the incomparable Judi Dench as Mistress Quickly, Brian Blessed as a marvelously solid Exeter, and Ian Holm, wonderful as the irreverent and sarcastic Fluellen. On the French side, Paul Scofield's King is weary and indecisive rather than weak and mad; Michael Maloney's Dauphin is entertainingly arrogant, and Emma Thompson delivers a small but charming performance in playwright-broken English and much better French than Shakespeare likely spoke. Tying it all together is Christopher Ravenscroft, who invests the herald Mountjoy with a sympathy that extends to both sides, and a phenomenal showing by Derek Jacobi as the earnest, mocking and informative Chorus.

"Henry V" was released and went to video before the heyday of production for DVD, and as such, a "deluxe edition" has not been produced- this disc contains no making-of documentaries, no in-depth interviews with the cast, no online screenplay. But at least in this case, that's all for the best. The film is stunning enough on its own to need no such accompaniment, and its magic is thereby undiminished.

Oh, for a muse of fire...
For a first effort at feature-film direction, now-veteran director/writer/actor Kenneth Branagh provided an astonishing introduction to his many talents in filmmaking with his 1989 production, 'Henry V'. There is a gritty realism brought to the screen in this production that combines in dynamic and interesting ways with the Shakespearean dialogue and situations. The battle scenes are some of the best in cinema for depicting the kind of royal and knightly battles. A special commendation goes to cinematographer Kenneth MacMillan, art directors Martin Childs, Norman Dorme, John King, and costume designer Phyllis Dalton for combining elements of stage and screen together to complement the story perfectly without overpowering it. Indeed, the picture won the Oscar for Best Costumes; Branagh was nominated for Best Leading Actor and Best Director. The film and crew were nominated for and won many other awards as well.

One of the problems of Shakespeare on the silver screen is that the situations, settings, and acting often ends up somewhat contrived. That rarely happens here, because of this remarkable team.

The principle writing credit of course goes to William Shakespeare, but as is always the case, the play is recast to make the film medium more natural for the story. Kenneth Branagh is the one credited here, and has shown himself several times after this film as a master of adapting Shakespeare faithfully to the screen.

The play itself is one of Shakespeare's history plays -- remember the broad three categories of Shakespeare: history, drama (some say tragedy), and comedy. Like most of the history plays, there is creative license taken with the actual history, as it is invariably adapted to make the present regime look good, credible and more legitimate. This explains why Richard III in Shakespeare is far more villainous than in actual life; in Henry V, the country had a great and (for the period) uncontroversial hero - the last king of England to be acknowledged the dominant power in Britain and in France, succeeding in unwinnable situations, and, as befits a good historical hero, dies young before he has the chance to destroy his image. The play has always been popular in times of national crisis - see Olivier's production of Henry V during World War II depicting the king as a national saviour against continental foes.

The action of the play and film turns on the legitimacy of Henry's rule in France (an issue still for Elizabethan audiences, as Elizabeth was crowned with supposed rights to France). The French are depicted as haughty and disdainful of the young king (interesting how some things don't change), and the battle lines are drawn. The film here sets the stage for a far more ambiguous justification for war than is often depicted in the play, leaving the viewer wondering if, for all the glory of the battles, was there a real point, or was it legalistic/diplomatic trickery?

There is also the interesting scene with the conspirators against the king, unmasked as the forces are about to depart for France. Cambridge, Scrope and Grey are exposed, but the dialogue and acting hints as a more intimate relationship with Henry V - possibly this references obliquely the rumours of homosexuality, or at least bisexuality, in the historical Henry.

The players are excellent here, from Branagh himself as Henry V, and Brian Blessed his strong right arm Exeter. Paul Scofield (Thomas More in 'A Man for All Seasons') plays the ancient French king, Charles VI, and his son the Dauphin is played by Michael Maloney. This is, on the whole, a rather 'young' film, as Branagh himself was not yet 30 at the time of production, and most of his aides and friends in the play are similarly young, save for a few senior advisors. Emma Thompson, a staple in Branagh's films, plays the only significant female role, the princess Katherine, to whom Henry will be wed. Her part is almost entirely in French. Her maid, Alice, is played by Geraldine McEwan (perhaps best known from 'Mapp & Lucia').

The famous speeches here are preserved; Branagh does a fantastic job with his spirit-raising monologue for the troops prior to the battle of Agincourt, on Crispin Crispian day. The speech on horseback in the early seige of Harfleur, 'once more into the breech!' is also remarkable. The lines delivered by all the actors are done with care and precision - Exeter's report to Henry at the opening ('tennis balls', said with great sneer) and to the French party ('scorn', said with so much scorn the word need not be spoken) are but a few examples of this.

The film expands upon the play's use of Falstaff's companions as a comic relief, by incorporating what would be flash-back scenes from events in the Henry IV play cycle, premonitions of events currently in the play. Robbie Coltrane turns in a good performance as Falstaff; look for Judi Dench in a minor role as the Mistress, and a very young Christian Bale as the boy.

The music for the film is triumphant, foreboding and dark. This is a wonderful score produced by Patrick Doyle, known for work on other Branagh films such as 'Dead Again' and 'Much Ado about Nothing', as well as other films such as 'Indochine' and literature-based films like 'Gosford Park' and 'Great Expectations'.

Derek Jacobi, veteran Shakespearean, portrays 'Chorus', the narrator of the action, one who casts the right spirit from beginning to end, and appears throughout. There are few Shakespearean asides done by the actors here (a few under-the-breath comments that might qualify), but Jacobi's role is always directly to camera, directly to us as the spectators. The ending portrayed by Chorus is both victorious and tragic, much as the cycle of history must be.

This is a glorious film.

Great Film, Less than Great Transfer
Kenneth Branagh's splendid Henry V is the best Shakespeare film of the last forty years. Unfortunately, the picture quality of this DVD is only so-so. MGM really needs to do a better job than this.

"Cry Harry! England! And Saint George!!!"
Kenneth Branagh is truly inspired. As both the director and lead actor he is simply superb. Of all the Oscars this was nominated for, including Best Actor and Best Director for Branagh, all it walked away with was Best Costume Design. The costumes are great, by the way. But what makes this film work is the authentic emotional element that all the actors bring to their roles. Tears fall, hearts soar, and blood flows! This is easily my favorite film from director/actor Kenneth Branagh. There is a huge cast of name actors, such as Ian Holm, Judi Dench, and Emma Thompson, and all acquit themselves with honorable performances worthy of singular recognition. There are complex tracking shots and finely tuned film editing, all adding to the immense grandeur that envelopes this film. It is easy for me to recommend this outstanding Shakespearean adventure. If you love Shakespear, this film is an absolute necessity for your collection. Thank you.

This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England....
From various reference sources, in brief, here's the historical background both to Shakespeare's play and to this film. Henry V, the eldest son of Henry IV and Mary Bohun, was born in 1387. An accomplished and experienced soldier, at age fourteen he fought the Welsh forces of Owen Glendower; at age sixteen he commanded his father's forces at the battle of Shrewsbury; and shortly after his accession he put down a major Lollard uprising and an assassination plot by nobles still loyal to Richard II . He proposed to marry Catherine in 1415, demanding the old Plantagenet lands of Normandy and Anjou as his dowry. Charles VI refused and Henry declared war, opening yet another chapter in the Hundred Years' War. His invasion of France served two purposes: to regain lands lost in previous battles and to focus attention away from any of his cousins' royal ambitions. Henry possessed a brilliant, strategic military mind and defeated the French at the Battle of Agincourt in October of 1415. By 1419 he had captured Normandy, Picardy, and much of the Capetian stronghold of the Ile-de-France.

By the time the Treaty of Troyes was signed in 1420, Charles VI not only accepted Henry as his son-in-law but passed over his own son to name Henry heir to the French crown. Had Henry lived a mere two months longer, he would have been king of both England and France. However, he had prematurely aged because of having lived the hard life of a soldier, became seriously ill, and died after returning from yet another French campaign. Catherine had given birth to his only son while he was away but Henry died without ever seeing the child.

The historian Rafael Holinshed, in Chronicles of England, summed up Henry V's reign as follows: "This Henry was a king, of life without spot, a prince whom all men loved, and of none disdained, e captain against whom fortune never frowned, nor mischance once spurned, whose people him so severe a justicer both loved and obeyed (and so humane withal) that he left no offence unpunished, nor friendship unrewarded; a terror to rebels, and suppressor of sedition, his virtues notable, his qualities most praiseworthy."

It would be a disservice to compare and contrast this film with the version which Laurence Olivier directed 45 years earlier. Each has its own unique strengths and both are worthy of high regard. When Shakespeare's play and this film begin, newly crowned Henry V (Branagh) attempts to resolve animosities between England and France. When those efforts fail, he and a small army invade France and defeat the French troops at Agincourt. Branagh brings to the role exceptional energy and dramatic impact, most evident in two scenes: when he delivers his St. Crispin's Day speech just before heading into battle and then afterward as he rides amidst the carnage, carrying a dead boy across one shoulder. The resources and technologies for special effects available to Branagh were far more abundant than those available to Olivier. Branagh makes the most of them, recreating the gore and grime of Agincourt with a series of indelible images. (I suspect that Mel Gibson carefully studied the tracking sequence when preparing to film Braveheart.) The acting throughout is first-rate, notably Paul Scofield (King Charles VI), Judi Dench (Mistress Quickly), and Ian Holm (Captain Fluellyn). Sir John Falstaff does not appear in this film version (as he does in Olivier's) and scant attention is paid to the "corrupting influences" in Prince Hal's "decadent" youth. Branagh focuses primarily on the human dimensions prior to and following the magnificent military victory at Agincourt. It is also a pleasure to observe Branagh's interaction with Emma Thompson in her role as Katherine. The "word games" courtship scene is delightful.

This is a visually stunning and emotionally stimulating tribute to Henry V and his warriors, of course, but also to the country which produced such men:

This royal throne of kings, this sceptred isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,-
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

(Richard II, Act II, scene 1) ... Read more

Description

Friends for ten years, they gather together one New Year's Eve weekend to share laughter, tears, sex, no sex, old friendships and new discoveries, all the while making absolute fools of themselves. ... Read more

Reviews (17)

A great movie is hard to find, but I found one!
A truly touching film about 6 friends (not exactly Friends), this independant from 1992 film won my heart. With a brilliant opening scene, and the credits traveling from the last time they were all together in 1982 (with political break throughs and famous people littering the screne set to the great Tears for Fears tune "Everybody Wants to Rule the World") and a brilliant story line, Peter's Friends is once of the best independant films out there. Directed and acted by the great British Kenneth Branaugh with Emma Thompson, Hugh Laurie, Stephen Fry as Peter, and Imelda Staunton, it's no wonder this is such a terrific flick.

Set on New Year's Eve, 1992, each person comes to Peter's estate for one last new years in his house, since Peter's father died. It has been 10 years since they had all been together, performing a small cabaret show to anyone who would actually want them there to perform. Now, all the friends have been married, movied away, or in destructive (or no) relationships. During the course of the weekend, they all rediscover one another as well as discover who they are. With an pwerful script, setting, and cast of characters, Peter's Friends is one of the best. I completely recommend you see it and enjoy yourselves. It's brilliant, so have fun!!!

A Friend of Peter is A Friend of Mine
This is a fabulous movie and rates in my top five. It is funny and poignant. The premise is that a group of university pals reunite after they have each gone their separate ways. Some are married or are in permanent relationships, others have remained single, some are coping with being new parents...you know, stuff that happens when we all grow up.

The ensemble cast work very well with each other. Smashing performances by Stephen Fry, Hugh Laurie, Kenneth Branagh, Emma Thompson.

Often unfavourably compared with the US's _The Big Chill_, _Peter's Friends_ is a true gem of a movie. In my opinion, _Friends_ is far superior to _Chill_ in writing and acting. Perhaps it is a generational thing (_Chill_ seems to appeal to the Baby-boomer set, while _Friends_ seems to be more in tune with the Baby-busters). Or perhaps it is a cultural thing (from what I can tell, Americans seem to prefer _Chill_, while more Canadians and Brits appear to prefer _Friends_). Whatever ! it is, do give this film a chance. I think you will be very pleasantly surprised. END

Why no DVD?
A delightful movie.

Why no DVD?

...from a friend of "Peters Friends"
I like that everyone has some positive comment about this movie and I love that many of the supportive comments come from americans .Its somehow gratifying that on such a diet of mindless sitcoms and soulless blockbusters some of our american cousins can still discern between quality vs quantity. Naive of me I know but there you are. Peters Friends is by no means the most talented ensemble of actors ever cast but it is up there in the top ten. The synopsis of the story has been retold many times so I need not belabor the point except to add that this was an exceptionally good film that deserved better than what the critics gave it...hire it out today.

The Story Of Friendship
What can I say about this movie that hasn't been said? This is a very well made movie with some of the best performances I have ever seen. Everyone gives 110% in their respective roles. I was familiar with Branagh, Thompson, Fry, Laurie, and Rudner before seeing this, and even the ones I wasn't familliar with still played convincingly. There was just so much chemestry between all of the actors. I showed this to a friend yesterday, and he loved it. The humor (especially Branagh's) was right on target, and it made us laugh even after the film was over. My friend (who is an aspiring writer) told me that some of the scenes in the film sounded like something he would've thought up. I liked the opening credits of Peter's Friends as well. They go through all the pop culture starting in 1982 (where the movie begins) and ending up in 1992 (where the movie picks up after the credits). A soundtrack of familiar '80s songs in also helpful. Many people will compare this to The Big Chill, but this one stands alone and in most cases, better than The Big Chill. Peter's Friends is an example of how to make a funny entertaining film that people can relate to a personal level. The lesson it gives is no matter how messed up your friends get, they will always be there for you. Way to go, Branagh. ... Read more

Reviews (211)

Stellar Acheivement
The 1996 film "Hamlet" directed and starring Kenneth Branagh is by far the best film adaption of the play! Even though its 4 hours, you hardly notice it because of how much is going on. His acting job is superb, as are Julie Christies as Gertrude, Derek Jacobi's as Claudius, and Kate Winslet as Ophelia (a role much better than her overrated one in "Titanic'). But what's really amazing is Kenneth Branagh's direction. He is such a genius and everyone involved with the movie should have gotten Oscars. Also, what I liked were the great visuals. Elsinore is so cool, especially the main hall with the mirrored doors and checkered floor. Plus he changes the play very subtlely, such as putting Claudius in a confessional for the praying scene or having him and Polonius watch Hamlet deliver the "to be or not to be" speech from a one-way mirror. I've heard Branagh say that he didn't want his movie to be gloomy and infatuated with death and deciet like the other films are. Instead it's a celebration of life and love, and adventure. END

Superior to all other versions.
Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet combines lush and breathtaking visuals with the complete, unabridged text of Shakespeare's masterpiece. In other versions of Hamlet, such as the ill-cast Mel Gibson film, the play is mistakenly cut down to a "more reasonable" two-hours-or-less atrocity. The unexpurgated method allows for the inclusion of important scenes that, if removed, take away from the overall effect of the drama. Despite its length of more than four hours, the film keeps the viewer entertained until the startling last scene. The stunning visuals can be attributed to the rarely used 70mm film on which the play was captured and the exceptional set design involved. The play is actually done in a 19th century motif, a unique departure from other versions of Hamlet. Impressive costume design add to the remarkable images in the film. The star-studded cast includes Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Kate Winslet as Ophelia, and Branagh, himself, as Hamlet, all parts delivered with brilliant authenticity. Other well known actors such as Robin Williams, Charlton Heston, and Billy Crystal also appear in small, but equally well-implemented roles. Some argue that Branagh's execution of the part was overdone, but it fits perfectly within the film and is, therefore, quite believable. The acting is overall a big plus to the end effect of the film. Beautifully executed in an outstandingly well-calculated manner, Branagh's film made Hamlet more accessible to modern viewers and will certainly remain popular for a long time to come.

Excellent Film
Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet" works so well on the big screen because the guy has a knack for Shakespeare, acting, directing, and knowing what "modern" audiences wanted out of a Shakespearean play. He takes the tale of Hamlet, prince of Denmark, and transports it to more of a modern setting (well, more modern than the 16th century). He assembles an all-star cast that includes Kate Winslett, Charlton Heston, Derek Jacobi, Billy Crystal, Jack Lemmon, Robin Williams among others in this adaptation of Shakespeare's classic.

Although 4 hours in length (mainly because every word in the play is inserted in the script), the stunning effect of the play is extraordinary. The backdrop for the ghost of Hamlet in the opening scene, the mirror used when Hamlet (Branaugh) is making his "To be or not to be" soliloquy, the palace in which Hamlet and Laertes fight, and the snowy landscape in which Fortenbras and his men arrive are all instances of using scenery and directing to update this version of the play.

Although the setting and interpretation of what Shakespeare intended are left in doubt, the movie itself is visually stunning and the acting is great. Although Branaugh hired a few American actors to take on some of Shakespeare's characters (for instance, Robin Williams plays Osric and Billy Crystal plays one of the gravediggers), there "American" accents are hardly noticed in the film.

As an educator, I also think this is a fantastic version to use as a resource for a study of the play. Because the dialogue is accurate to the play, it works well. Also, this version seemingly makes the work of Shakespeare easier to understand. (Although, as a warning, there is one scene with Winslet (Ophelia) and Branaugh (Hamlet) that is definitely "adult" in nature).

Overall, a great gamble by Branaugh to update Shakespeare's work into his own insight. There is also a few extras on the VHS version: interviews with many of the cast members as well as a behind the scenes about the movie.

Also recommended: Hamlet (Mel Gibson version)

Great Film for learning
This film is a great tool to be used within a classroom to reinforce Shakesperian lessons. The film presents one of the best adaptations to Shakespeare's original work. Awesome production!

Good.
This version of 'Hamlet' starring and directed by the one and only Kenneth Branagh is a joy to watch and might be the best version of the famous play. It follows the play word by word, so one has to read it and understand it fully to understand the film. Better than the Mel Gibson 'Hamlet'. ... Read more

Amazon.com

British thespian and sophomore director Kenneth Branagh follows up his adaptation of Shakespeare's Henry V with this abrupt change of pace, a slick, stylish thriller evocative of Hitchcock, classic film noir, and gothic shockers. Sporting an exaggerated American accent, Branagh stars as L.A. private eye Mike Church, a hard-boiled but softhearted detective who takes on the case of a mysterious amnesiac (Branagh's then-real-life wife, Emma Thompson). With the help of an offbeat furniture dealer and part-time hypnotist (Derek Jacobi), Grace (as Mike has named her) dredges up her hidden memories. Little do they realize that her recollections are of a past life in L.A.'s recent history, and as she recounts the details of a famous marriage that ended with a notorious murder (played out as black-and-white flashbacks starring Branagh and Thompson), events of the present begin to mirror the past, as if fate were pulling the two into fatal replay of history. Branagh's flashy, flourished direction echoes with an array of '40s and '50s classics and near classics (most notably Hitchcock's Rebecca and Spellbound) and drives the story with an edgy urgency, all the better to distract from some of the sillier elements of the plot. But while this film may not make literal sense in the harsh light of day, in the twilit, shadowy world of classic Hollywood this slyly inventive thriller is a bravura bit of old-fashioned entertainment, done up with modern flair. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (58)

A trio of fine actors....
I'm an Emma Thompson fan and have seen all her films including those she made with her now ex-husband Kenneth Branagh (their recent breakup occurred over "another woman" reputed to be Helena Bonham Carter). My all time favorite by this pair of actors is "Much Ado About Nothing." "Dead Again" is probably my least favorite film, however, Miss Thompson is a fabulous actress, so a bad day for her is good day for most other actresses.

The storyline of this film is interesting, particularly for those who think past lives are possible. According to one of the main characters, we not only have past lives, but everyone with whom you shared a past life shows up again in some form in the next life. It's as if human existence consists of a repertory company playing endless roles through eternity. Well, why not. I have a lot of unfinished business with various people I've lost in this life and there is some comfort in thinking I might get closure in the next life, or the one after that...or the one after that.

Branagh must have been attracted to this script because of it's Shakespearen elements...dreams, ghosts, unfinished business, a jealous husband killing an innocent wife (or being framed for the deed), and downright wickedness (out damn spot, out).

Derek Jacobi (Cadfael and Claudius) plays an eccentric antique dealer who tries to help the haunted Miss Thompson (nameless at first) through regressive hypnosis. Regressive hypnosis is used by psychiatrists to help trauma victims remember events they have subconsciously blocked that cause conscious distress.

Miss Thompson has been exhibiting some very distressed behaviour. Mike Church (Branagh) was raised at the Catholic convent school where Miss Thompson was found one dark and stormy night. The senior clergy have asked Mike to help Miss Thompson.

But, what if the patient remembers events from a previous life, and what if that person was not the victim at all but rather a witness...or worse yet, the perpetrator of the crime?

This film must be what is considered "high camp" as it is obvious to me a great deal of tongue in cheek stuff is going on. Picture a disturbed artist with a loft full of paintings, sculptures, etc. all depicting one or more pairs of sharp scissors. Jacobi's antiques dealer isn't the only eccentric in LA.

The actors had a great deal of fun making this film and while I was scared the first time I watched it, the next time it struck me as really funny. Too bad Kenneth and Emma aren't "Together Again."

Open Your Eyes, er...Grace?
DEAD AGAIN is a highly underrated suspense/thriller from 1991 that was also the inspiration for Dream Theater's 1999 masterpiece SCENES FROM A MEMORY. After watching the movie and listening to the album afterwards, there are a lot of similarities in the plot. I'm not accusing DT of ripping off the story, since they put their own spin on it and the characters in SFAM have different motives than the ones in DEAD AGAIN. Personally, I perfer SFAM because it's like a movie written in music which is more original, but this movie is still worth checking out.

Kenneth Branagh (who also directed the film) stars as Mike Church, a smooth L.A. investigator who knows how to talk to people and get secrets out of them. His next case, however, is much more difficult. He's assigned by a Catholic rehab center to take away one of their guests, an amnesiac woman (Emma Thompson) who doesn't talk much and keeps screaming in the middle of the night. The reason she screams is because she has nightmares of a man named Roman Strauss killing her with a pair of scissors. Mike decides to let her stay at his house, but even he doesn't know why he's suddenly drawn to her.

Out of nowhere comes a man named Franklin (Derek Jacobi) who turns out to be a hypnotherapist and is drawn to the woman's story. Franklin practices in hypnotic regression, meaning that he hypnotizes people that act like somebody else from a past life during the session. As it turns out, the woman (now called Grace by Mike) was actually Margaret Strauss, Roman's wife, in the 1940's. And in another strange twist, Mike turns out to be Roman reincarnated. Mike starts to fall hard for Grace, but when she starts to think that he might actually be Roman, that's where the tension begins to unravel.

The story is very interesting for the most part and the twists are pretty nifty, if not predictable. I like the fact that the scenes in the '40s were filmed in black and white and the scenes in 1991 were filmed in color. A perfect balance between past and present. Also, the acting is very good. There's even a hilarious supporting performance by Robin Williams as a former psychiatrist who now works at a supermarket ever since he was caught having an affair with a patient.

My only problem is that the ending is kind of disappointing. After the finale, you want more explanations. They gave enough throughout the movie, but at least one more to bring a forthright conclusion. Oh, well. That's more of a wish than a plot point. DEAD AGAIN is a solid, well-made mystery and makes for good viewing on a Friday night. Recommended.

not at Hitchcock's level.
This movie has a good cast but it is not up to the level like the Hitchcock's movies.I like Emma Thompson and the cast in other movies that were good,but I had a hard time getting into the story.If Alfred Hitchcock was to had seen this movie he may be very angry at the writers and director.

Film Noir as only Branagh can do it
This movie captures the world of Hitchcock and Bogart, in dramatic black and white (with color episodes) in a truly great presentation. Yes, the plot is threadbare, but no more so that those of Hitchcock's best, and irrelevant in any case, as the tension winds tighter and tighter, seeking a violent conclusion. Branagh is his usual self, so completely disappearing into his two roles, both with American accents, that he does not seem the same man who thrilled us in Henry V, delighted us in Much Ado, and took our breath away with Hamlet.

See it on a dark, winter night, with the lights low, and your arms around someone you adore. You will NOT be disappointed!

Mary F. Byrkit
20 January 2004

mfbyrkit@comcast.net

Hypnotic Thriller
The casting for this movie is great. Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson are wonderful as the detective and woman who has no memory. Derek Jacobi is excellent as the hypnotist/antique dealer. Even Robin Williams small part of the Grocer/Ex-Analyst is good. I don't want to give to much away. In a nutshell a lovely lady is being lodged at a church until they can determine her identity. Better that than sending her to a mental institution for her screams of panic and fright that has her propping a chair against her door each night.

When they can no longer take her disruptiveness, the church calls on a detective that will work for gratis. The detective puts out an article in the paper and a two mysterious strangers appear. One to help her recall her identity with hypnosis and another to take advantage of her. When her hypnosis reveals a previous life and a murder, things get very interesting and suspenseful. I have seen this twice on TV and am now planning to buy it. The love story that evolves along with the mystery is very romantic. I think this must be underrated as I am surprised it didn't get more exposure. ... Read more

Reviews (58)

A trio of fine actors....
I'm an Emma Thompson fan and have seen all her films including those she made with her now ex-husband Kenneth Branagh (their recent breakup occurred over "another woman" reputed to be Helena Bonham Carter). My all time favorite by this pair of actors is "Much Ado About Nothing." "Dead Again" is probably my least favorite film, however, Miss Thompson is a fabulous actress, so a bad day for her is good day for most other actresses.

The storyline of this film is interesting, particularly for those who think past lives are possible. According to one of the main characters, we not only have past lives, but everyone with whom you shared a past life shows up again in some form in the next life. It's as if human existence consists of a repertory company playing endless roles through eternity. Well, why not. I have a lot of unfinished business with various people I've lost in this life and there is some comfort in thinking I might get closure in the next life, or the one after that...or the one after that.

Branagh must have been attracted to this script because of it's Shakespearen elements...dreams, ghosts, unfinished business, a jealous husband killing an innocent wife (or being framed for the deed), and downright wickedness (out damn spot, out).

Derek Jacobi (Cadfael and Claudius) plays an eccentric antique dealer who tries to help the haunted Miss Thompson (nameless at first) through regressive hypnosis. Regressive hypnosis is used by psychiatrists to help trauma victims remember events they have subconsciously blocked that cause conscious distress.

Miss Thompson has been exhibiting some very distressed behaviour. Mike Church (Branagh) was raised at the Catholic convent school where Miss Thompson was found one dark and stormy night. The senior clergy have asked Mike to help Miss Thompson.

But, what if the patient remembers events from a previous life, and what if that person was not the victim at all but rather a witness...or worse yet, the perpetrator of the crime?

This film must be what is considered "high camp" as it is obvious to me a great deal of tongue in cheek stuff is going on. Picture a disturbed artist with a loft full of paintings, sculptures, etc. all depicting one or more pairs of sharp scissors. Jacobi's antiques dealer isn't the only eccentric in LA.

The actors had a great deal of fun making this film and while I was scared the first time I watched it, the next time it struck me as really funny. Too bad Kenneth and Emma aren't "Together Again."

Open Your Eyes, er...Grace?
DEAD AGAIN is a highly underrated suspense/thriller from 1991 that was also the inspiration for Dream Theater's 1999 masterpiece SCENES FROM A MEMORY. After watching the movie and listening to the album afterwards, there are a lot of similarities in the plot. I'm not accusing DT of ripping off the story, since they put their own spin on it and the characters in SFAM have different motives than the ones in DEAD AGAIN. Personally, I perfer SFAM because it's like a movie written in music which is more original, but this movie is still worth checking out.

Kenneth Branagh (who also directed the film) stars as Mike Church, a smooth L.A. investigator who knows how to talk to people and get secrets out of them. His next case, however, is much more difficult. He's assigned by a Catholic rehab center to take away one of their guests, an amnesiac woman (Emma Thompson) who doesn't talk much and keeps screaming in the middle of the night. The reason she screams is because she has nightmares of a man named Roman Strauss killing her with a pair of scissors. Mike decides to let her stay at his house, but even he doesn't know why he's suddenly drawn to her.

Out of nowhere comes a man named Franklin (Derek Jacobi) who turns out to be a hypnotherapist and is drawn to the woman's story. Franklin practices in hypnotic regression, meaning that he hypnotizes people that act like somebody else from a past life during the session. As it turns out, the woman (now called Grace by Mike) was actually Margaret Strauss, Roman's wife, in the 1940's. And in another strange twist, Mike turns out to be Roman reincarnated. Mike starts to fall hard for Grace, but when she starts to think that he might actually be Roman, that's where the tension begins to unravel.

The story is very interesting for the most part and the twists are pretty nifty, if not predictable. I like the fact that the scenes in the '40s were filmed in black and white and the scenes in 1991 were filmed in color. A perfect balance between past and present. Also, the acting is very good. There's even a hilarious supporting performance by Robin Williams as a former psychiatrist who now works at a supermarket ever since he was caught having an affair with a patient.

My only problem is that the ending is kind of disappointing. After the finale, you want more explanations. They gave enough throughout the movie, but at least one more to bring a forthright conclusion. Oh, well. That's more of a wish than a plot point. DEAD AGAIN is a solid, well-made mystery and makes for good viewing on a Friday night. Recommended.

not at Hitchcock's level.
This movie has a good cast but it is not up to the level like the Hitchcock's movies.I like Emma Thompson and the cast in other movies that were good,but I had a hard time getting into the story.If Alfred Hitchcock was to had seen this movie he may be very angry at the writers and director.

Film Noir as only Branagh can do it
This movie captures the world of Hitchcock and Bogart, in dramatic black and white (with color episodes) in a truly great presentation. Yes, the plot is threadbare, but no more so that those of Hitchcock's best, and irrelevant in any case, as the tension winds tighter and tighter, seeking a violent conclusion. Branagh is his usual self, so completely disappearing into his two roles, both with American accents, that he does not seem the same man who thrilled us in Henry V, delighted us in Much Ado, and took our breath away with Hamlet.

See it on a dark, winter night, with the lights low, and your arms around someone you adore. You will NOT be disappointed!

Mary F. Byrkit
20 January 2004

mfbyrkit@comcast.net

Hypnotic Thriller
The casting for this movie is great. Kenneth Branagh and Emma Thompson are wonderful as the detective and woman who has no memory. Derek Jacobi is excellent as the hypnotist/antique dealer. Even Robin Williams small part of the Grocer/Ex-Analyst is good. I don't want to give to much away. In a nutshell a lovely lady is being lodged at a church until they can determine her identity. Better that than sending her to a mental institution for her screams of panic and fright that has her propping a chair against her door each night.

When they can no longer take her disruptiveness, the church calls on a detective that will work for gratis. The detective puts out an article in the paper and a two mysterious strangers appear. One to help her recall her identity with hypnosis and another to take advantage of her. When her hypnosis reveals a previous life and a murder, things get very interesting and suspenseful. I have seen this twice on TV and am now planning to buy it. The love story that evolves along with the mystery is very romantic. I think this must be underrated as I am surprised it didn't get more exposure. ... Read more

Reviews (56)

Much Ado About a Musical
This film was not widely released, but being an avid Branagh fan I made a trip to go see it, hoping it would become a favorite like his earlier film, Much Ado About Nothing. Alas, this was not the case. Although very cute, I felt like I was watching a high school drama production -mind you, a very good one- but I didn't think it was as up to par as some of his earlier films. The movie definitely does have a feeling of a MGM musical (I think that's what they were going for) and the songs are old favorites by Cole Porter, the Gershwins, and Irving Berlin. Amazingly enough, the actors sing, and quite well. Adrian Lester (previously seen in Primary Colors) has a great voice and was the best dancer in the cast. At times I felt that Alicia Silverstone (The Princess) seemed a little too southern California for Shakespeare, but even she began to grow on me during the movie.

Love's Labour's Lost is one of the Bard's lesser known plays and is very easy to understand. Although I seemed to rip on the movie, I truly did enjoy it. It's a light comedy, and even though it's Shakespeare, it won't have you scambling for your Cliffs Notes. A must see for fans of the Bard and musical lovers alike!

It's fancy free and free for anything fancy
Folks, please, PLEASE don't compare Love's Labour's Lost to Branagh's Hamlet or Henry V. It's not a tragedy, it's not the Battle of Agincourt. It's a Shakespearian comedy. Shakespeare's comedies were light, flitty, and nothing like his tragedies.

That being said, the transfer of one of his lesser-known comedies (when you compare it to something like Taming of the Shrew or Twelfth Night) is most fitting considering Love's Labour's Lost has all the elements of a screwball musical comedy of the late 30s, early 40s. Nathan Lane's comedic candor is a welcome touch, and is sure to make you laugh. Branagh, as previously demonstrated in Much Ado About Nothing, plays comic roles as well as he does tragic. I was pleasantly surprised by the talents of Matthew Lillard, and let me say those boys CAN dance (check out the "I've Got a Crush On You" scene).

With numbers like the toe-tapping "There's No Business Like Show Business," hot, steamy "Let's Face the Music and Dance," and the over-the-top "I Get a Kick Out of You," Branagh's fusion between the Golden Age of musical theatre and the Bard is near-perfect, something I haven't seen since Kiss Me, Kate.

My one complaint, the bane of the film if you will, is Alicia Silverstone. She plays the Princess of France with the same personality she gave to her character in Clueless, and there is only so much of that voice of hers that I can take. True, visually, she fits into the film, but the moment she opens that mouth, watch out!

However, it is, all-in-all, an excellent film that evokes the romance of the pre-WWII era and the delightful wit of the Bard.

Why not?
I'm being generous with four stars, but Amazon won't let you rate with halves and I couldn't bear to give this delightful little bit of fluff three or less.

Let's take the elements here: 1)Shakespeare - YAY! Love 'im, he's great, and I don't much care how much is taken away in terms of volume of lines as long as the actors can put the necessary omph behind them. 2) 30s hits - HOOO BABY, yay! Cole Porter, Gerswhin, delightful music. Can't really go wrong. 3) Kenneth Branagh -- good. He likes to go over the top, push the envelope, whatever cliche you want to use to say that he is a daring filmmaker, and that sort of daring is necessary both for musicals and for Shaekspeare productions. Sure, he oversteps every now and then, but it doesn't detract from all that he gets right. Stupid things like having the Don kick his lackey in the crotch are easily overlooked in light of the hilarious fun Branagh ocassionaly has with adapting a modern setting to the original text.

Do you actually need to know the plot? Nope, not really, it's doesn't matter much. The film is a vehicle to get four attractive men paired up with four attractive women and have a lot of rollicking good times, singing and dancing in between. In short, though, the king of Nevarre and his three chums have agreed to devote themselves to study for the next three years, forgoing food, drink, sleep, and women. Then -whoops!- four women, headed by the princess of France, drop into town. Shakespeare's comedies actually are comparable to musicals -- there's a lot of beautiful verse, people fall in love at first sight, and reality is chucked right out the window, thank you very much.

One of my favorite bits was when the four goofy lovers all come into the library one by one to confess their love, seemingly to no one, and each man is overheard and found out. Dumaine is called out by Longaville, and the King jumps out of his hiding place to chastise them both. In the original text, Nevarre is hidden in a bush, but in the movie he hides in plain view, holding a potted plant in front of his face. His line, "I was shrouded in this bush," while holding aloft the little plant makes me laugh like the idiot I am.

I didn't really mind that the actors aren't phenomenal talents; they're clearly having fun. Alessandro Nivola as the King was a surprise for me; I'm generally dubious about most American's abilities with Shakespeare, but he was very capable and easily understood (that's really the mark of whether or not a person is good at Shakespeare. If you, without reading the text, can follow what a character is saying, then they're doing it right). He has a solid singing voice and is just plain fun to watch. Branagh is a good singer, a fair dancer, and his Shakespeare will always be phenomenal. Adrian Lester is FAN-damn-TASTIC, and Matthew Lillard kind of sucks, but he fortunately has a very small part. The four boys, in general, are extremely entertaining.

For the women; I can hardly abide Alicia Silverstone in this role. Her singing voice is very thin (the girls' "Fancy Free" just isn't that good. Silverstone's solo baffled me. I was like, "What are you trying to do? Be British? Sing? Cause you're not really doing either."), her dancing is probably the weakest of the women's, and her Shakespeare is wretched. She doesn't speak it like she gets it, more like she's trying to put emphasis on every single stupid word. The Princess, instead of being a wit, is just kind of annoying. Natasha McElhone is fantastic as Rosaline; she gives her character dignity where Silverstone's is a flighty teen. The other two girls are really interchangeable and neither have significant solos.

All in all, it was a very entertaining film. As a whole, it's a good time, even though it isn't first rate Shakespeare or musical. Whee!

the sublime and the ridiculous
Beautiful words, delightful music, great acting! What could ruin such a mix. The answer, the ego of Kenneth Branagh. He is much too old for the part of a young student. His direction is absurdly literal. For example: probably the best use of the song "Heaven, I'm in heaven..." is sung by Angel Islington in Neil Gaiman's Neverwhere. Here the song is ruined by literally yanking the singers up on wires to a ceiling painted to resemble heaven. If a song mentions a hat, the director shows us a hat, and so on. The camera is always doing things that are distracting and annoying. The choreography is nothing but a string of literal quotes, from Busby Berkley to Fred Astaire to Gene Kelly to Bob Fosse. It never flows, just jerks from quote to quote. And while the older actors are superb, there does not seem to be an actor under 25 who can do Shakespeare...they all sound as if they are mouthing words that are not a part of their vocabulary. And the slapstick -- 'taint funny Magee. After all this, I still recommend watching the film. It is much kinder to the clowns than most productions of LLL. Branagh's great speech in praise of love is worth the price of admission. He acts sincerity so well it is almost enough to make us forget what he did to Emma Thompson. And the music is ... heaven.

Branaugh Sucks
Branaugh is too old to play Berowne, Silverstone too poor an actress for the Princess, and Nathan Lane's Costard is not a large enough part to make this movie any better. ... Read more

Description

With Kenneth Branagh (WILD WILD WEST, CELEBRITY), Alicia Silverstone (BLAST FROM THE PAST), and Nathan Lane (AT FIRST SIGHT, MOUSE HUNT) leading a stellar ensemble cast, Stanley Donen and Martin Scorsese present a sexy, glamorous, and fun 1930's-style musical that's earned terrific critical acclaim! The King of Navare (Alessandro Nivola -- MANSFIELD PARK, FACE/OFF) and his three best friends think that they've sworn off love in the pursuit of intellectual enlightenment. But when the Princess of France (Silverstone) and her beautiful attendants arrive for a diplomatic visit, their high-minded plans are turned completely upside down! Then, as war rages and secret passions burn, loyalty and devotion are tested like never before! Also featuring hilarious Matthew Lillard (SHE'S ALL THAT, SCREAM) and the classic songs of Cole Porter, Irving Berlin, and more -- go back in time and allow yourself to be swept away by this wonderfully entertain