paul2001sw-1 Recently, I watched, and loved, the seven BBC adaptations of Shakespeare's plays about the Wars of the Roses. By contrast, this film of 'The Tempest' is poor fayre. Partly it's because of actors who seem ill-equipped for speaking Shakespearian lines: Russell Brand is the most obvious target, though the truth is that several cast members seems almost equally bad (Helen Mirren, though, and Alfred Mollina, are predictably good). Perhaps it's because of the film's arbitrary and inconsistent use of special effects and it's back-and-forwards transitioning between Tudor orthodoxy and a more modern staging: both approaches can work with Shakespeare, but this one just seems a mess. But maybe the bard too deserves some stick: there are some famous lines ("Oh brave new world, that has such people in it!") but the plot is pretty simple: Prospero (or, in this re-gendered version, Prospera) gets her revenge on her enemies through the deployment of supernatural devices: her hapless foes never stand a chance. Shakespeare's customary tendency to punch down with his humour is also on display: for all his literary brilliance, a lot of Shakespearian comedy takes the form of, in effect, chav jokes. Maybe there's something more in the script that got lost in adaptation. But this really isn't the bard at his best.

joeravioli In my mind, Shakespeare's Tempest is the least graceful of all his works that I have experienced. His genre-confused hodgepodge of plots and characters, while proving Shakespeare's genius to an audience which needs no such proof, serves only to render it atmospherically mutilated. It's as if Shakespeare had three, equally tedious slogs, and decided to combine them with the sentiment that the whole would be greater than the sum of its parts.But with The Tempest, Taymor does the impossible: She takes Shakespeare's debacle and makes it worse. Even as a non-aesthete, one who appreciates bad CGI when bad CGI is due, I found myself plunging through biting aesthetic pain whenever Taymor made the choice to use it. Taymor's failure to capture the already weak atmosphere of The Tempest is simply embarrassing. Each frame is drained of colour, bland as the characters and the story which fill them, and the CGI is curiously funny, although I highly doubt that was what Taymor was going for. Perhaps she sought to bring her own style into the film, but, as demonstrated by her directorial ineptitude in the making of this film, it would probably be better for her to keep a minimal personal influence, letting Shakespeare do the talking instead.Taymor seeks to win over her audience through a pointless gender swap, adopting the "I'm original" attitude of one whose only originality resides in turning celebrated literature into films. Instead of the magician Prospero, we instead get the magician Prospera, played by Helen Mirren. Wow. Every other character remains the same. Some idiot made the mistake of casting a black guy as Caliban. As makeup-encrusted as he is, that doesn't take away from the fact that the only black guy in this whole movie plays the slave.In accord with Shakespeare, The Tempest is narratively befuddled. Three separate plots are superficially explored in under two hours. And yet, as each plodding second passes, one could be forgiven for assuming that it is longer. Overall, Taymor's The Tempest was awful, buoyed only by a few performances and the occasional fancy shot. I found myself wanting to die, to sleep.Ay, there's the rub.

Steph Herr Evil monsters, witches, nature spirits, dashing princes, and damsels in distress: sounds like all the appropriate ingredients for every beloved fantastical tale we read as children. But a children's story, this is not. Julie Taymor's 2010 film adaptation of Shakespeare's The Tempest is chock full of those deep, dark questions we, as adults, struggle within the scope of our lives. In a new spin on an old classic, Taymor makes us question our personal family ties, loyalty, revenge, and forgiveness. This modern film stayed to Shakespeare's iconic tale of aristocratic parent and child exiled from their home by an ambitious relative. They are washed up on a mysterious magical island after enduring a cataclysmic storm. For nearly twelve years the pair must establish civilization, making both friend and foe along the way. Also, the language stayed very true to the original Shakespearean. While some may assume this would inhibit understanding the film, the storyline was very simple to follow because of the brilliant acting, camera work, costumes, and set design. I would be completely remiss if I did not note the most strikingly obvious deviation Taymor made from the original: Prospero becomes Prospera. That's right, instead of being shipwrecked with her father for her entire life; Miranda is accompanied by her mother. The mother-daughter dynamic puts an entirely different spin on all of the interactions these two characters share. A shrewd mother who tests a potential suitor for her daughter in hopes to find a good match for her daughter is much more believable to a modern audience. We come from a world where fathers are often depicted as extremely reluctant to release their hold of protection over their daughters to a potential male companion (very different in Shakespeare's time). Mothers are often the natural buffer to allow this transfer to occur. It was brilliant to see Helen Mirren fulfilling the strong emotional role as both father and mother to Miranda's character, another theme very accessible to viewers today. Another character that has always eluded readers is that of the indefinable Caliban. Every stage and film adaptation of this play chooses to depict our menacingly evil, or perhaps tragically misunderstood, antagonist. Usually Caliban bears some resemblance to a savage beast, as he is the offspring of a malevolent witch. Djimon Hounsou was an exceptional casting choice for Caliban, as he flawlessly portrayed the tortured soul of his character. The costuming choices were also brilliant, as Caliban's conflicted nature was captured by depicting him as multi-racial (covered in patches of every shade of skin tone), two differently colored eyes, and scantily clad in an indigenous looking loin cloth. The camera work and set design were also breath-taking, as the beauty of an exotic Mediterranean island was perfectly captured. Frequent use of wide camera angles to capture the sheer majesty of the island allowed the audience to believe that magic truly could exist in a place like this. And within an instant we saw this tropical dream paradise change into a raging, torrential nightmare as the tempest moved in. Overall, Taymor achieved an excellent balance of making tribute to a timeless Shakespearean classic, while still adapting certain aspects of the tale to appeal to modern audiences. And if at any point you may feel daunted by the deep philosophical questions or challenging Shakespearean language this film possesses, don't fret. At any moment, a hilariously intoxicated Russell Brand, as Trinculo, will be popping out from around the corner to provide some hysterical comic relief!

OttoVonB Julie Taymor (Frida, Titus) sets her sights on the Bard's final masterpiece, recasting Prospero as Prospera (Hellen Mirren) and letting the magic and romance loose in this very different take on The Tempest.First, what works? Hellen Mirren does, rather unsurprisingly, and the art direction of photography are consistent with the vision of the woman who gave us Titus back in 1999. Kudos as well to the ever-watchable David Strathairn and Djimon Hounsou.What annoys? Now we enter very subjective ground. This beautiful, deceptively simple play is turned into an amped up to the max, loud and frantic film. The electric guitar whines are painfully out of place, and Russell Brand, never guilty of subtlety on a good day, will make you claw your own eardrums out. It's almost as if Taymor had forgotten we were right there with her cast, right behind the camera, instead of sitting 50ft back in a packed theater.This has proved an incredibly divisive film, and I feel split right down the middle on it. I admire Titus, in my mind one of the best Shakespeare adaptations in history, but whereas Taymor's turbocharged visuals and loud, often trashy use of sound and effects served as a perfect illustration for Shakesepare's bonkers gore-fest, it diminishes the more mature, heartfelt qualities of this play. The Tempest is a great playwright's swan song, the work of an aging, mature artist. Why would you give us an overly loud, ADD-afflicted MTV version? Ultimately, this frustrating missed opportunity makes you wonder, did Taymor have her Shakespeare mixed up all along. Rather than give us "the stuff that dreams are made of", she serves us "a tale, told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing".