Discuss the differences between the movie we watched this week and the previous one we watched. Which one seemed more effective? Give specific details when comparing each movie, maybe compare and contrast the same scene in each movie.
The movies we watched today I did not like very much. I really enjoyed the movie with Christin Bale and the other well known actors but because I saw that movie first the setting and characters seemed to fit the parts really well. Now when we watched a different version it looked weird and not right. The scene I remember is at the beginning and the guys are fighting over who should marry Hermia. Personally I don't really care for this scene but in the first movie, it was interesting at least and not boring unlike the movie clips we watched today. I'm excited to see the story as an opera and in a different setting. It will be different to see it live and acted out instead of as a movie where everything is edited and done perfectly.
The movie we watched today, the older one, is a lot different then the movie we watched a while back. I really liked both and thought they were both thought out very well. I liked the previous one better just because it was more straight forward and easier to follow. I thought that it was more modern especially to us high schoolers who appreciate the older works, but follow the newer ones better. I also thought that the previous one we watched portrayed the book we read better. It followed the book more and I felt that I could put a picture to the words we read from the book. I thought the fairies in the Older version of this movie was really odd. I liked the way it was portrayed but definitely didn't like how they seemed so outrageous and it all seems over the top. When the lovers come into the forest i thought that the First movie we watched was more accurate with telling the story. Lysander and Hermia didn't sleep next to each other and the first movie we watched described that better then the second movie we watched.
My favorite movie was the first one we watch, that was from 1999. I liked it probably because it was the first one I saw so I usually only like that one because I think it's the right way of doing it. In the movie we just saw, the fairy scene was a lot more elaborate, and pretty good for the time period it was made. The first fairy scene was barely even a scene they just kind of appeared, so I like the second one better. I do like he mechanicals a lot, especially Flute. He's really funny and I think he plays that part very well. I like Puck as the older guy better though, the young one is kind of creepy. I like Lysander, Hermia, Helena and Demetris better in the first one. I think they are better actors in the first one and fit what I think they would look like. I also liked the setting and time period the first one is in even though there isn't that much of a difference. Overall I liked the first one better.
The movie we watched this movie seemed much more "mystical" than the other. One way in which this effect was achieved was the inclusion of a long scene portraying the calling of the fairies. With the use of music and special effects to make the forest creatures appear magical, the director of the elder movie gave A Midsummer Night's Dream a greater feeling of being "apart," or a more dreamlike, fantastic emotion. I didn't see this scene in the newer movie because I was at the Opera House Tour, but the movie as a whole was devoid of the dreaminess of the 1935 version.
The 1930's version of a Midsummer Night's Dream was....in some ways..interesting. The thing that bugged me about this video is that Puck was extremely..scary. The character almost seemed like he was on drugs! However, even though the movie was created that long ago, I enjoyed some of the effects that were use. For example, when the fairies come out in this version, they are blurred and kind of see-through. I thought that was a smart thing to do because it gives you a feeling that they are magical in some way. However, I believe that the 1999 version was more effective, just because we can relate to it much better. I do not believe that the fight scene was shown in the 1930's version, but the fight scene in the 1999 version was very easy to understand. Also, Bottom did not seem very realistic in the 1930 version. In the 1999 version however, he improved very much. The actor in the 1930 version for Titanya was very good as well.
I think the movie we watched previously was better. I say this becuase the one we watched today kind of freaked me out. I didn't really like how Puck acted in the movie. Not becuase he was young but he just seemed a little out of control and crazy. Maybe it was beucase of the color but the one we watched today seemed a little more boring beucase it was black and white. In addition, the newer version had a modern theme to the movie and to me it was more interesting. So in conclusion, the one we watched today was not that bad but i liked the modern version better becuase of its qualaty and theme.
I Thought that 1999 Film version of "A Midsummer Nights Dream" was more effective than the black and white version we watched today. The 1999 version felt more authentic with the camera angles and voice acting, as well as not trying to be over dramtical. The black and white version was great for its time and isnt a bad movie either but its felt a bit over dramatic and I didnt connect as much with there visions of the characters.
The 1999 movie was more effective for me. It was easier to follow along with, and the special effects with the fairs were better. In the older movie that we watched today, Puck was really weird, and i didnt really think it fit to what i was expecting. He was crazy,a nd just laughed which weirded me out. Also the fairy scenes with the trolls was weird and creepy, it was very dreamy like. I thought that scene did a better job though with the fairies than the 1999 movie.Overall though i feel the 1999 was more effective because it was newer and i tend to like newer versions of movies better becasue of all the new technology and other stuff they are able to do.
To me the more recent one was the most effective for me. The scene in the movie where the fairies are more introduced and they put the spell of love on the people that we watched had a lot of differences that changed my opinions. Puck to me was very annoying in the movie we watched this week and I could hardly stand to listen to his voice while in the other movie he seemed more quiet and mysterious and played his part better I thought. Also I thought the fairy thing was a little over done in the older movie while in the movie we watched a while ago there were a few fairies that were important and that was enough. When all the fairies in the old movie were flying around and living in their own world with a whole bunch of them it just felt weird to me. I didn't feel like that many were needed to make the effect that they wanted.
I actually like the older version of the movie as a representation of A Midsummer Night's Dream. The newer version was more entertaining, but I thought that the old one fit the play better. Although a lot of people seem to have a problem with their Puck, I thought that other than him being too young, he was actually a good representation. If you really look at the story, Puck is a bit cruel, and certainly careless with the mortal affairs. And definitely prideful and boastful. And I liked their Oberon better, although the actor for him sucked. The dark, malevolent figure suits Oberon better than a young handsome male. Oberon is actually quite a jerk, who spells his wife to fall in love with an ass, all to steal a child of no consequence to him from her. He screws up the entire play, brings the love potion thing into the plot all for the purpose of getting back at his wife for loving a small child more than she appeared to love him. Who cheated on her. I just don't see him as a lazy, nude, handsome youthful figure.
I felt that the one we watched previously was more entertaining, probably because it was made in 1999 and had more modern looks, characters, and it was in color. The only thing I thought was better in the old movie we just watched this week was all the fairies. The newer movie didn't go too all-out in the fairy category. I thought Puck in the old version, the kid, was very annoying to tell you the truth, and I didn't like the use of all the kids. I could actually pay attention to the newer movie.
I didnt like either. But i think thats just based on the fact that i dont really like Shakespeare and its just hard for me to listen to, becuase people go into monolouges just to say that their day sucked. But the color version was ok because it was color and you could depict more clearly what was going on. But the Older black and white one wasnt so bad. that one i prefered the most, like if it was color, of course it would be even better, but i liked it more because they brought more fairies in it and it gave it more of a dream state of mind. How like everything was all shimmery and the kids that played the faries just gave it more of like an innocence that the color one just lacked. happens.
As most of my class mates feel, I like the newer version of the movie of Midsummer's Nights Dream. Most of my preference comes not from its effectiveness of telling the story but the fact that it is in color and there are actors that I recognize and like. This made it more enjoyable for me. However, I feel that both movies were effective. The older movie showed more of the fairies as you brought out and the special effects were great for the time period. However I don't like the more mysterious Oberon. I like him better in the 1999 version. The bats he had with him were menacing. Also I feel that almost too much time was spent on the fairies and not enough on the other characters. I think if you combined both of these movies you would have enough time spent on each part. I do really like Puck as a child who is a brat. He was very funny and it made his actions seem more reasonable since he was a bratty child. Overall, I did enjoy both of these movies.
Its interesting how there is such a big difference between the old movie we watched, which was from 1935, and the movie we watched from 1999, even though they are both A Midsummer's Night Dream. In the old movie, they used a boy to play Puck, rather than an older man. I really didn't like how they made him laugh all the time, it was disturbing and weird. But other than that, I found it interesting how they had a whole dance using all the fairies. It was sort of like a little ballet within a movie. The fairies differed greatly between the two movies also. In the older version, they looked more mystical, with silver hanging all over them. In the newer version, they seemed more like fairies from a fairytale. They also sang in the old movie. Obviously, the newer movie had better special effects too. Over all, I think the movie from 1999 was more effective. I think the acting was much better, which pretty much made the movie better overall, and Puck wasn't so annoying. It also helps that it was in color. However, I think I liked Bottom and his little troop better in the old movie because they were funnier.
I like the 1999 version of mid summer night's dream, because the story of mid summer nights dreams are mysterious and dream-like. So I think the color is really important but the old version was black and white (I know it is because they did not have colored movie before but just opinion) and I don't know it is because of color, the character in old version seemed awkward than the 1999 version. I only watched end of the scene of the 1999 version because I went to the Seattle Opera House but I can say this. But I like the scene that a lot of kids (which is elf)are dancing and singing in old version.
I thought the first movie we watched was more successful in portraying the play. I think the second was not successful at all in portraying the play. The characters in the second film were either annoying or too dramatic. Puck in the second film was absolutely ridiculous and in my opinion did not portray the Puck that Shakespeare created. Also, in the second, some of the lines were covered up in arguments which i don't think Shakespeare would have liked. The first film did not do this and depicted Shakespeare's 'Mid Summer Nights Dream'.
I definetley think that the first movie we watched was better than the second one because i liked the new characters better. They fit more of the character idea i had in my head and in the second movie i just thought puck was annoying and that the fairies seemed very young. I think i also liked the first one better because i knew the actors more. But i just thought that the puck who was young was very annoying and loud. He laughed all the time and was just too much for me. I did like however the Tatania in the second one because she seemed very queen or royal like and she actually had the little boy more where in the first one he wasn't really in it at all. I think also the fact that the first one was in color helped more because it gave me a better picture of the fairy world. So overall i liked the first one better. The characters were more mystical and the way the oberon talked kind've drew you in.
I found the newer movie we watched previously to be most effective. The black and white movie was too full of irritating and unnecessary special effects to be enjoyable (Ex. the sparkles randomly on the screen during the early fairy scenes) and I couldn’t stand Puck’s young representation. The overall acting and special effects in the newer movie were more effective and added to my enjoyment of the movie. I think that even though the story line was the same for both movies that the part about Titania's little boy was more developed in the newer movie we watched. I didn’t understand or connect when Oberon stole the boy in the older movie to any specific moment in the play reading. Also I felt like Titania's character was too innocent and sweet in the older movie and she didn't seem to deserve Oberon's punishment of falling in love with the donkey, whereas in the newer movie she had an arrogant air about her and was a more complex character with a darker side rather than simply being a pleasant fairy queen.
regan mccomb p.6 Out of the two versions of a Midsummer Night's Dream I liked the first version the best because it was more modern and it was easier to pay attention to. I thought puck was psycho in the second movie also. It was also easier to watch because it was in color and I was able to recognize a few of the characters which i thought fit the parts better. It was really interesting to see the two different takes of the play from the two producers prospectives. I also didn't picture Oberon like he was in the older version.
The 1930 version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream had its obvious differences from the new version. The old version concentrated the story a lot more on the fairies than it did the humans, demonized Puck, and was more magical. An important, but less obvious difference in the films however, I found in the mechanicals/ working class people. In the older version I felt that Bottom realized he was an ass much faster than in the new version where I felt that when he went to be with Tittania and the other fairies we wasn’t very aware the fact. Maybe I am just forgetting specifics of the new movie. Also I felt that the working class people were portrayed very differently in general and seemed less funny than they did in the new version. Also the inclusion of the fairy band in the old movie was an interesting touch because the new movie diffidently did not have any musicians on the stage.
I thought the 1930's version of Midsummer was a much more interesting interpretation of the play and especially for it's time was a great film (I actually watched it in it's entirety online). I thought that there were certain characters that each of the films chose to actually interpret, it seemed to me that the characters that lacked value in the 1930's version were the lovers (Hermia, Helena, Lysander, and Demetrius) when I thought in the 1999 version they were developed so you could see a stark contrast between at least the two women. But I thought in the 1930's version Oberon and Titania were more developed and had stronger character interpretations. I am somewhat ashamed to say that I enjoyed the 1999 version better, which solidifies my standing as a modern teenager who only seeks entertainment value and not quality.
The first movie we watched was more enjoyable although the second movie seemed more play-like. The fairy part of the second movie was more effective than the first one except for the small child playing puck who was very distracting and annoying. The first movie represented the humans better in my opinion. Overall I liked the first movie better, but the second one was more effective.
Personally i like the newer one better. I think it is because we know most of the characters in the movie, that it makes it more exciting and fun to watch. not to mention that the visual effects are WAY better. For the scene between Helena and Demetrius in the woods, where she has been following him, the old one was too short, and actually cut out a few lines about how it was dangerous for a woman to be out with a man in the middle of the forest late at night. In the new version it made the audience aware of every move they made and the effectivness that it had on Helena.
I didn't really like the other versions we watched; they seemed dull compared to the first one. The one scene I remember the most is when the movie is introducing the fairies. The first one we watched had a group of people like creatures gathered together in what I thought was a bar. Comparing this to when there was an extravagant entrance where fairies had a whole dance scene. For this particular scene I liked the second movie more. One thing I did like in the first movie more was how they portrayed puck. I really didn't care for having a child play puck. The role to me seems like it should be played by a teenager or someone in his twenties who hasn't quite matured yet. It worked with the older man because he wasn't to the point of really annoying he just liked playing tricks on people.
The two movies we watched in class were very different even though they had the same story. The 1999 version of the film was different because of the coloring, actors, camera angles, and the fact that Puck was actually played by an adult rather than a child. I liked the 1999 version better than the other by far. The other version was black and white so I didnt like that as much and Puck was played by a child instead of an adult. The acting was different and the fairies were special effects at the beggining which was kindve cool but i didnt like as much as the 1999 version.
I thought that the first of the two movies was more interesting and appealing to watch. Since this was a more modern interpretation of the story I thought it was easier to follow and appreciate for a high school aged audience. The rehearsal scene with the theater group also seemed more realistic and plausible than it did in the older movie. Although the fairy scene in the older movie was entertaining, every other scene was comparatively more appealing in the modern movie.
Because I was absent, I did not get to see any of the previous movie except for the clip that Jonathon showed us during his presentation. In the scene Jonathon showed us, where the juice was being put into the fairy woman's eyes, the newer movie seemed to portray Oberon as very manly and sexy, and almost seemed to be seducing her in a way. In the older version, Oberon is portrayed as just kind of a dark, typical bad guy who is following through with his evil scheme. In this case, I believe the older version was more effective because it showed Oberon was trying to get back at her, instead of implying sexual attraction towards her, which is misguiding.
Personally I found the more recent movie we watched more effective and entertaining simply because it is modern and the filming techniques and quality has become a lot more advanced and interesting. I really liked the ballet scene in the older movie because dance and art is not usually given as much time and appreciation in more modern movies. I especially liked some of the effects in the older movie like when the fairies were seen running up and around the tree. Puck seemed very obnoxious in the older movie and his annoying laugh and weird personality almost made it unbearable to watch. Oberon seemed to have a much different aura to him in the older movie because he was accompanied by bats and was dark and shadowy making him appear frightening while he seemed much more gentle in the recent movie. I believe both movies have great entertainment value and their own worth but if I had to choose to watch one I would likely choose the more recent one.
The first movie, which apparently most enjoyed better I was absent for the first day. So I only got to see the last little bit. The second movie that we saw though really gave another view on how people perceive the play. The second one was more creepy and mystical magical like. Puck was a little crazy but I loved the fairies. I felt they were an important part and they weren't really in the other movie was far as I know. I was kind of surprised that you could take Mid-Summer and make it creepy by what we had read because it was more light and funny. But, it was interesting and I was impressed with some effects in the second movie considering how long ago it was done.
I missed the first movie, and I didn't really enjoy the second movie. I didn't like how crazy Puck was I found it to be too much overbearing. I didn't think it was very funny, and I thought it was supposed to be more of a comedy. I think I would have liked the more recent movie better by what other people have said about it. I did though like the interpretation of the magical fairies, and evilness in oberon I felt like it fit in perfect. Especially for how old it is. I also felt the lines were well read, its a difficult piece of Shakespeare and it was clear and easy to understand with their expressions the actors used along with the dialogue.
The thing that struck me most about the different movies was the way Titania was portrayed. The actress in the more modern version that we watched interpreted the character very differently than the actress from the 30's. When reading the play, I always pictured Titania as a more headstrong, powerful woman. This is how the character was displayed in the modern version. However, in the 30's version Titania seemed more delicate and kind of ditzy. She was constantly smiling and laughing- which is really different from how I pictured the scene and how it was played in the newer version, since at that point in the play Oberon and Titania are supposed to be arguing. It's kind of a clash between two powerful figures, instead of just faries flitting about laughing and smiling. So I just thought the 30s interpretation of Titania's character was kind of strange.
I liked the first movie we watched better for many reasons. The first was because it was more modern and i could relate to it more than a black and white movie. Also because we watched the colorful version first the set seemed to fit very well and was easy to understand, while watching it the second time i found myself getting lost at some times. A scene that i really related to from the 1999 version was when the two men were fighting about the girls. in the more modern version, it tended to be more 'sexual' with the mud and i think more people now-a-days could relate and understand what was going on more. in the older version, the fight seen was more boring to follow and to understand.
I prefer the older verision of Midsummer Night's Dream to the 1990's for many reason. Mostly because Puck is one of my favorite characters. In the older version Puck is portrayed as a mischeivious kid who is always laughing. My imagination of Puck's character makes me think of an evil child and this is what Puck was portrayed to be. The 1990's movie was somewhat dumbed down and Puck just did not match the role. The older rendering was mopre effective in my mind not only because of Puck because I felt the characters were chosen more effectively. I prefered the voices in the older verision which is a main contributor to my choice. The older movie did not focus on the distinguishment of the characters but rather the idea that two men were fueding over the same woman at one point and the women were both in the choas of Puck's mistakes. I also thought that the older movie was more effective because it took advantage of choral songs where all the different voice types sang at once. I think this was a much more effective way of portraying anger, frustration, and confusion than each person individualy singing.
I actually like the older version of this. I think it showed the more magical side of A midsummer night's dream. Even though the quality was not as good i loved it and the graphics wenrt as good i thought they did a much better job. And when Bottom got the donkey head in the newer version of it i couldnt really tell he looked like one, he looked more like a rabbit than a donkey but in the older version it was prettty obvious that his head had been turned into a donkeys.
The 1999 movie was more effective for me. It was easier to follow along with, and the special effects with the fairs were better. In the older movie that we watched today, Puck was really weird, and i didnt really think it fit to what i was expecting. He was crazy,a nd just laughed which weirded me out. Also the fairy scenes with the trolls was weird and creepy, it was very dreamy like. I thought that scene did a better job though with the fairies than the 1999 movie.Overall though i feel the 1999 was more effective because it was newer and i tend to like newer versions of movies better becasue of all the new technology and other stuff they are able to do.
I found that the movies we watched of A Midsummer Night's Dream were completley different. The way that Oberon was played especially was very different between the two, in the older version he was sinister and very overacted for a movie, while the newer movie had Oberon as much more subtle. Puck was also different in both, while the older version had the young boy as Puck the newer one had an older man play Puck, however they both still had horns. The older movie used actors who had done the play live many times and did not know how to act on film and that it's different than performing live. The newer film relied on subtlety in acting and also relied more on special effects, especially for the fairies and Bottom. The way the older movie chose to have goblins and things was also different from the newer version that tended to stick more with only the creatures described in the text. Both movies were extremely different and in some ways seem like completely different scripts to be based off of.
I really enjoyed the first movie we watched. Everything made a lot of scene and you could see character dynamics and personalities. All of the actors in the newer version did a great job of (in a way) translating the script and speaking in a more modern tone so the words would make sense for those who didn't know the play. The latest movie that we saw, the one made in the 1930s, was really cool. I particularly enjoyed the Puck, he was very different. I loved that he was portrayed as a child because Puck has some childish characteristics. His voice was very shrill and childlike, it was different and interesting. I also found the special effects to be very cool, though the acting wasn't so great. Overall I enjoyed both for very different reasons. Mostly the 1999 Midsummer though because if you cannot act the show then it doesn't make sense.
I found the more contemporary production to be more effective, both in conveying its intent and being entertaining. The older black-and-white movie felt a little too theatrical, as if it was trying to be impressive and powerful. It made the show feel over-the-top and unrealistic. The modern color version came at a much more realistic angle. I could relate to the characters’ performances, actually understanding what they were thinking and feeling when they spoke in their Shakespearean pentameter. Having a better connection and understanding of the characters made the film much more engaging. The newer movie felt as if it was more conscious of how to effectively use the medium of film. The older one seemed to be performing as if it were on a live stage, and acting in a more exaggerated manner because of it. It also helped that the newer movie had no noticeable technical errors or shoddy special effects. I would notice a character’s facial expression change completely between shots in the older version, like when Puck was being given orders from Oberon; or see entirely through the simplistic flying effects, which were clearly no more than strings and pulleys. The newer film simply felt like a much more crisp and engaging production of the play.
I thought the first movie we watched was more successful in portraying the play. I think the second was not successful at all in portraying the play. The characters in the second film were either annoying or too dramatic. Puck in the second film was absolutely ridiculous and in my opinion did not portray the Puck that Shakespeare created. Also, in the second, some of the lines were covered up in arguments which i don't think Shakespeare would have liked. It was really interesting to see the two different takes of the play from the two producers prospectives. I also didn't picture Oberon like he was in the older version.
The movie about "Midsummer Nights Dream" that I liked more was the 1999 version, mostly because I cant stand black and white films. But I did think that the older film was easier to follow. The part where the two couples get lost in the forest is a lot harder to follow in the new version but where that guy gets turned into a donkey is a lot easier to follow in the 1999 version. It would be good if they could mix those two films together and make one really good movie.
I thought that the movie we watch more recently, was a lot more centered around the fairies and how they are portrayed. The second movie we watched had a full blown long scene with them all dancing around in the forest in an orgonized ballet manner while in the first movie their was nothing like that at all. The fairies were just blah. By having the fairies and the forest all crazy like that with lots of coriographed moves and whatnot, I thought that the second movie did a much better job putting everything in the bigger picture.
When comparing the two movies, one of the bigger differences that pops out to me is the type of feeling behind them. In the older movie, the feeling is more magical and fantasy focused. whereas the newer version was more of an old English or European style. Those are mainly just different interpretations, but i have a feeling that the older version's director was a more superstitious person than the more recent one.
In my opinion the movie we watched first was much better. One of the main reasons was that I am not huge on black and white television. Also I wasn’t fond of the way Puck acted, I thought he was out of control and crazy. As well I thought the newer version had a modern age theme which made it come off as much more interesting.
I definitely enjoyed the new version of the movie better! It was way easier to follow along with. I could actually understand the story. But also the acting was way better. It’s crazy how different they are. The older versions characters were completely different though the special effects do help the newer version a bit. But the older version the fairies were just dressed in white cloths while the newer version actually looked like fairies. Then the guy with the horns was completely different. The new one was older rather than being a little boy that giggled a lot.
I think the first movie we watched in class was more effective. It was more up to date than the other one, plus the effects were so much better it was easy to follow and keep up with the story. The fairies in the black and white movie flew clearly with wires, and that kind of ruined it for me, plus I have never really been a fan of the black and white TV because I don't like not being able to see shades and colors and such. The story and the actors portraying the characters were also better in the most recent movie because I liked their interpretation and presentation of a Midsummer Nights Dream, it was closer to the one I had in my mind when we were reading it in class. The way the color movie presented Puck was very different from the other movie, but I liked it better because frankly I thought the younger Puck was extremely annoying. Anyway so that's about it Schindler, see you tomorrow morning, hey how creepy would it be if you were grading my blog as I am sitting in your class tomorrow?
The main difference between the two movies was obivously the interpretations of what is magical about the fairies. In the first movie the fairies are shown in a very feminine and sexual with the use of naked girls and young girl fairies. While in the movie we saw later the fairies were seen as both the ugly and unwanted like the trolls but also as the childs. I liked how this movie made the young fairies fly around and you cant see any strings while the movie was made when special effects were hard to do. I really liked both of the movies but they were very different.
I didn't really get the first movie because it was in weird english. The actors were set in what looked like a real world. In the second movie where Puck was a little boy they seemed to be in a fairy world. Also I didn't like the second movie as much because it was hard to tell what was going on. Puck was really really annoying and I couldn't concentrate on anything other than his frustrating giggle and voice.
Overall I think the first one was more effective. It was more like something that we would see today. The set and people seemed more common.
Out of the two versions of Mid Summers night dream we watched I would have to say i liked the first one better. It was more modern and advanced, and for me easier to pay attention to, I also thought the characters fit the roles much better in the 1999 version. I didn't like Puck in the second movie, he was extremely odd and annoying. However in the 1930 version I thought Titanias character was much stronger and easier to interpret. It was interesting to see the producers different prospectives for the play and they were both very well portrayed but overall I like the more recent version better.
Out of the two movies we watched in class, my favorite was the newest version. Not only did it have more advanced techniques, it had a much better cast, but the actors in the 1999 version were much less overdramatic, making them more believable. I did, however, think that the old version of the movie did a better job with telling the story. Even though the old version was a lot more over-dramatic and not as fun to watch, I found myself being more confused by the 1999 movie. I think the makers of the newest version were better at choosing the right actors for the different roles, which made me take it more seriously than in the 1930s movie, where Puck was played by a little boy.
Out of the two movies we watch in class i enjoyed to older version of a midsummer nights dream. i thought it was better because of the time period it was in. For that day in age it seems as if the people who made it made it very well for that time period. the costumes were excellent i thought. and as for the newer version it seemed just like a normal movie these days. the only effect the newer movie had on me was the fact that i could recognize the characters but that is it. overall the older movie was great, except for the high pitch scream the little boy would give off every now and then
I really enjoyed the first Midsummer better than the second older version we watched. The first was more well done. One thing that stood out to me the most was the acting. The first was more like television today, where it seems real. The 1930s version was too theatrical and "hi I’m performing Shakespeare" for me, overacting. In addition to the acting the costumes and effects were very sad and fake. I also did not like Puck’s character. He just giggled the whole time and seemed like he was high or something. I also did not feel that the mechanicals were as funny in the 1930s black and white version then in the other movie.
The two movies we watched were very different. I had mixed feelings about both of them but i liked the second one better. I believe that the second one showed the characters and who they were much better. One of the things that i didn't like about either of them was the donkey. The thing i liked about the newer movie was i liked how the did pucks characterization. His character was more vibrant and moving then the old movie. All in all they were both good movies but i liked the second one better even know it was in black and white.
I'm having a hard time not defaulting to a more modern piece as my personal favorite. Although the 1999 version has all the new technologies to make special effects and the set more realistic, I can see how the 1930's version portrays the story equally well. The 1930's version had much more character development which i think made the difference. I think people who don't think that Puck fits the character description are crazy. His character messes with people's emotions carelessly, and even changes Bottom's head into one of a donkey's. I think Shakespeare set that up perfectly to have his character represented by a thoughtless, mischievous child in the 1930's version. I also thought it was interesting how the older version showed a great difference between Oberon and Titania. Titania and the fairies had all the white drapery as clothing that flowed in the wind creating a more magical feeling. Oberon was wearing dark black clothing and was surrounded by his troll-like helpers, giving off a more evil feeling. In the newer version the two weren't given as much contrast. I also liked Flute's character in the older version better. His innocence was more womanly and likable :).
the thing that i found the most different was how they portrayed puck. in one movie he was portayed as a young boy that is very mischevious and in the other an equally mischevious but older man. i liked the older version of puck because in my mind puck was mischevious but intellegent at the same time. in the older version of the film with the younger puck it seemed he was just there to cause trouble and wasnt really oberons right hand man. i liked the older version becasue he seemed to have an agenda and was more intellegent and made more sense in the end.
The movie we watched second was definetly more effective, than the first movie. The special affects in the more recent version does make an impact, but the orignal has better acting and the actors fit the characters much more. In the orignal movie, the character of Puck is much more appealing than the Puck in the newer version. Also, the props in the older version almost make it seem like you are watching it like it was taped in a theater rather than a movie.
There were many striking differences between the two versions of A Midsummer Nights Dream. The first most noticeable is obviously that one is in black and white and that the recent version is in color. This deference despite seeming insignificant does change the feel of the story. This fact makes the 1930s version seem much more mysterious. Another difference between the two is that Puck's personality is much more flamboyant and obnoxious. This contributes to the mystical qualities of the 1930s version as well. By far my favorite version of this story though has been the opera version we just saw today. I thought it was very interesting towards the end.
I was impressed with the filming techniques in the older version of a midnightsummer's dream, it didn't do enough to make it a good movie. The best part was the scene with the fairies dancing up the tree because it used their version of special effects. The second one was great either but it was bearable because it was newer and more interesting.
58 comments:
Heather Thomas
Period 2
The movies we watched today I did not like very much. I really enjoyed the movie with Christin Bale and the other well known actors but because I saw that movie first the setting and characters seemed to fit the parts really well. Now when we watched a different version it looked weird and not right. The scene I remember is at the beginning and the guys are fighting over who should marry Hermia. Personally I don't really care for this scene but in the first movie, it was interesting at least and not boring unlike the movie clips we watched today. I'm excited to see the story as an opera and in a different setting. It will be different to see it live and acted out instead of as a movie where everything is edited and done perfectly.
Kristina Thorson
Per 2
The movie we watched today, the older one, is a lot different then the movie we watched a while back. I really liked both and thought they were both thought out very well. I liked the previous one better just because it was more straight forward and easier to follow. I thought that it was more modern especially to us high schoolers who appreciate the older works, but follow the newer ones better. I also thought that the previous one we watched portrayed the book we read better. It followed the book more and I felt that I could put a picture to the words we read from the book. I thought the fairies in the Older version of this movie was really odd. I liked the way it was portrayed but definitely didn't like how they seemed so outrageous and it all seems over the top. When the lovers come into the forest i thought that the First movie we watched was more accurate with telling the story. Lysander and Hermia didn't sleep next to each other and the first movie we watched described that better then the second movie we watched.
Cristina Rice
Period 2
My favorite movie was the first one we watch, that was from 1999. I liked it probably because it was the first one I saw so I usually only like that one because I think it's the right way of doing it. In the movie we just saw, the fairy scene was a lot more elaborate, and pretty good for the time period it was made. The first fairy scene was barely even a scene they just kind of appeared, so I like the second one better. I do like he mechanicals a lot, especially Flute. He's really funny and I think he plays that part very well. I like Puck as the older guy better though, the young one is kind of creepy. I like Lysander, Hermia, Helena and Demetris better in the first one. I think they are better actors in the first one and fit what I think they would look like. I also liked the setting and time period the first one is in even though there isn't that much of a difference. Overall I liked the first one better.
Tess Opincarne
Period 6
The movie we watched this movie seemed much more "mystical" than the other. One way in which this effect was achieved was the inclusion of a long scene portraying the calling of the fairies. With the use of music and special effects to make the forest creatures appear magical, the director of the elder movie gave A Midsummer Night's Dream a greater feeling of being "apart," or a more dreamlike, fantastic emotion. I didn't see this scene in the newer movie because I was at the Opera House Tour, but the movie as a whole was devoid of the dreaminess of the 1935 version.
Mandi DeLavergne
Period 6
The 1930's version of a Midsummer Night's Dream was....in some ways..interesting. The thing that bugged me about this video is that Puck was extremely..scary. The character almost seemed like he was on drugs! However, even though the movie was created that long ago, I enjoyed some of the effects that were use. For example, when the fairies come out in this version, they are blurred and kind of see-through. I thought that was a smart thing to do because it gives you a feeling that they are magical in some way.
However, I believe that the 1999 version was more effective, just because we can relate to it much better. I do not believe that the fight scene was shown in the 1930's version, but the fight scene in the 1999 version was very easy to understand.
Also, Bottom did not seem very realistic in the 1930 version. In the 1999 version however, he improved very much. The actor in the 1930 version for Titanya was very good as well.
Chris Hong period 6
I think the movie we watched previously was better. I say this becuase the one we watched today kind of freaked me out. I didn't really like how Puck acted in the movie. Not becuase he was young but he just seemed a little out of control and crazy. Maybe it was beucase of the color but the one we watched today seemed a little more boring beucase it was black and white. In addition, the newer version had a modern theme to the movie and to me it was more interesting. So in conclusion, the one we watched today was not that bad but i liked the modern version better becuase of its qualaty and theme.
I Thought that 1999 Film version of "A Midsummer Nights Dream" was more effective than the black and white version we watched today. The 1999 version felt more authentic with the camera angles and voice acting, as well as not trying to be over dramtical. The black and white version was great for its time and isnt a bad movie either but its felt a bit over dramatic and I didnt connect as much with there visions of the characters.
Trisha Hancock
Period 2
The 1999 movie was more effective for me. It was easier to follow along with, and the special effects with the fairs were better. In the older movie that we watched today, Puck was really weird, and i didnt really think it fit to what i was expecting. He was crazy,a nd just laughed which weirded me out. Also the fairy scenes with the trolls was weird and creepy, it was very dreamy like. I thought that scene did a better job though with the fairies than the 1999 movie.Overall though i feel the 1999 was more effective because it was newer and i tend to like newer versions of movies better becasue of all the new technology and other stuff they are able to do.
Kenna Campbell
Period 6
To me the more recent one was the most effective for me. The scene in the movie where the fairies are more introduced and they put the spell of love on the people that we watched had a lot of differences that changed my opinions. Puck to me was very annoying in the movie we watched this week and I could hardly stand to listen to his voice while in the other movie he seemed more quiet and mysterious and played his part better I thought. Also I thought the fairy thing was a little over done in the older movie while in the movie we watched a while ago there were a few fairies that were important and that was enough. When all the fairies in the old movie were flying around and living in their own world with a whole bunch of them it just felt weird to me. I didn't feel like that many were needed to make the effect that they wanted.
Rebecca Taicz
Period 6
I actually like the older version of the movie as a representation of A Midsummer Night's Dream. The newer version was more entertaining, but I thought that the old one fit the play better. Although a lot of people seem to have a problem with their Puck, I thought that other than him being too young, he was actually a good representation. If you really look at the story, Puck is a bit cruel, and certainly careless with the mortal affairs. And definitely prideful and boastful. And I liked their Oberon better, although the actor for him sucked. The dark, malevolent figure suits Oberon better than a young handsome male. Oberon is actually quite a jerk, who spells his wife to fall in love with an ass, all to steal a child of no consequence to him from her. He screws up the entire play, brings the love potion thing into the plot all for the purpose of getting back at his wife for loving a small child more than she appeared to love him. Who cheated on her. I just don't see him as a lazy, nude, handsome youthful figure.
Preston Longoni Period 4
I felt that the one we watched previously was more entertaining, probably because it was made in 1999 and had more modern looks, characters, and it was in color. The only thing I thought was better in the old movie we just watched this week was all the fairies. The newer movie didn't go too all-out in the fairy category. I thought Puck in the old version, the kid, was very annoying to tell you the truth, and I didn't like the use of all the kids. I could actually pay attention to the newer movie.
Leticia Lopez period 4
I didnt like either. But i think thats just based on the fact that i dont really like Shakespeare and its just hard for me to listen to, becuase people go into monolouges just to say that their day sucked. But the color version was ok because it was color and you could depict more clearly what was going on. But the Older black and white one wasnt so bad. that one i prefered the most, like if it was color, of course it would be even better, but i liked it more because they brought more fairies in it and it gave it more of a dream state of mind. How like everything was all shimmery and the kids that played the faries just gave it more of like an innocence that the color one just lacked. happens.
Bergen Anderson per. 2
As most of my class mates feel, I like the newer version of the movie of Midsummer's Nights Dream. Most of my preference comes not from its effectiveness of telling the story but the fact that it is in color and there are actors that I recognize and like. This made it more enjoyable for me. However, I feel that both movies were effective. The older movie showed more of the fairies as you brought out and the special effects were great for the time period. However I don't like the more mysterious Oberon. I like him better in the 1999 version. The bats he had with him were menacing. Also I feel that almost too much time was spent on the fairies and not enough on the other characters. I think if you combined both of these movies you would have enough time spent on each part. I do really like Puck as a child who is a brat. He was very funny and it made his actions seem more reasonable since he was a bratty child. Overall, I did enjoy both of these movies.
Michelle Le
period 2
Its interesting how there is such a big difference between the old movie we watched, which was from 1935, and the movie we watched from 1999, even though they are both A Midsummer's Night Dream. In the old movie, they used a boy to play Puck, rather than an older man. I really didn't like how they made him laugh all the time, it was disturbing and weird. But other than that, I found it interesting how they had a whole dance using all the fairies. It was sort of like a little ballet within a movie. The fairies differed greatly between the two movies also. In the older version, they looked more mystical, with silver hanging all over them. In the newer version, they seemed more like fairies from a fairytale. They also sang in the old movie. Obviously, the newer movie had better special effects too. Over all, I think the movie from 1999 was more effective. I think the acting was much better, which pretty much made the movie better overall, and Puck wasn't so annoying. It also helps that it was in color. However, I think I liked Bottom and his little troop better in the old movie because they were funnier.
Jinny Kim p.4
I like the 1999 version of mid summer night's dream, because the story of mid summer nights dreams are mysterious and dream-like. So I think the color is really important but the old version was black and white (I know it is because they did not have colored movie before but just opinion) and I don't know it is because of color, the character in old version seemed awkward than the 1999 version. I only watched end of the scene of the 1999 version because I went to the Seattle Opera House but I can say this. But I like the scene that a lot of kids (which is elf)are dancing and singing in old version.
Bryttany Enge, Period 6
I thought the first movie we watched was more successful in portraying the play. I think the second was not successful at all in portraying the play. The characters in the second film were either annoying or too dramatic. Puck in the second film was absolutely ridiculous and in my opinion did not portray the Puck that Shakespeare created. Also, in the second, some of the lines were covered up in arguments which i don't think Shakespeare would have liked. The first film did not do this and depicted Shakespeare's 'Mid Summer Nights Dream'.
I definetley think that the first movie we watched was better than the second one because i liked the new characters better. They fit more of the character idea i had in my head and in the second movie i just thought puck was annoying and that the fairies seemed very young. I think i also liked the first one better because i knew the actors more. But i just thought that the puck who was young was very annoying and loud. He laughed all the time and was just too much for me. I did like however the Tatania in the second one because she seemed very queen or royal like and she actually had the little boy more where in the first one he wasn't really in it at all. I think also the fact that the first one was in color helped more because it gave me a better picture of the fairy world. So overall i liked the first one better. The characters were more mystical and the way the oberon talked kind've drew you in.
Mackenzie Engel
Period 6
I found the newer movie we watched previously to be most effective. The black and white movie was too full of irritating and unnecessary special effects to be enjoyable (Ex. the sparkles randomly on the screen during the early fairy scenes) and I couldn’t stand Puck’s young representation. The overall acting and special effects in the newer movie were more effective and added to my enjoyment of the movie. I think that even though the story line was the same for both movies that the part about Titania's little boy was more developed in the newer movie we watched. I didn’t understand or connect when Oberon stole the boy in the older movie to any specific moment in the play reading. Also I felt like Titania's character was too innocent and sweet in the older movie and she didn't seem to deserve Oberon's punishment of falling in love with the donkey, whereas in the newer movie she had an arrogant air about her and was a more complex character with a darker side rather than simply being a pleasant fairy queen.
regan mccomb p.6
Out of the two versions of a Midsummer Night's Dream I liked the first version the best because it was more modern and it was easier to pay attention to. I thought puck was psycho in the second movie also. It was also easier to watch because it was in color and I was able to recognize a few of the characters which i thought fit the parts better. It was really interesting to see the two different takes of the play from the two producers prospectives. I also didn't picture Oberon like he was in the older version.
Shae Hurst
Period 6
The 1930 version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream had its obvious differences from the new version. The old version concentrated the story a lot more on the fairies than it did the humans, demonized Puck, and was more magical. An important, but less obvious difference in the films however, I found in the mechanicals/ working class people. In the older version I felt that Bottom realized he was an ass much faster than in the new version where I felt that when he went to be with Tittania and the other fairies we wasn’t very aware the fact. Maybe I am just forgetting specifics of the new movie. Also I felt that the working class people were portrayed very differently in general and seemed less funny than they did in the new version. Also the inclusion of the fairy band in the old movie was an interesting touch because the new movie diffidently did not have any musicians on the stage.
I thought the 1930's version of Midsummer was a much more interesting interpretation of the play and especially for it's time was a great film (I actually watched it in it's entirety online). I thought that there were certain characters that each of the films chose to actually interpret, it seemed to me that the characters that lacked value in the 1930's version were the lovers (Hermia, Helena, Lysander, and Demetrius) when I thought in the 1999 version they were developed so you could see a stark contrast between at least the two women. But I thought in the 1930's version Oberon and Titania were more developed and had stronger character interpretations. I am somewhat ashamed to say that I enjoyed the 1999 version better, which solidifies my standing as a modern teenager who only seeks entertainment value and not quality.
Megan Pinzon
Period 4
The first movie we watched was more enjoyable although the second movie seemed more play-like. The fairy part of the second movie was more effective than the first one except for the small child playing puck who was very distracting and annoying. The first movie represented the humans better in my opinion. Overall I liked the first movie better, but the second one was more effective.
Tia Bailey P.4
Personally i like the newer one better. I think it is because we know most of the characters in the movie, that it makes it more exciting and fun to watch. not to mention that the visual effects are WAY better. For the scene between Helena and Demetrius in the woods, where she has been following him, the old one was too short, and actually cut out a few lines about how it was dangerous for a woman to be out with a man in the middle of the forest late at night. In the new version it made the audience aware of every move they made and the effectivness that it had on Helena.
Jessica Taylor per 2
I didn't really like the other versions we watched; they seemed dull compared to the first one. The one scene I remember the most is when the movie is introducing the fairies. The first one we watched had a group of people like creatures gathered together in what I thought was a bar. Comparing this to when there was an extravagant entrance where fairies had a whole dance scene. For this particular scene I liked the second movie more. One thing I did like in the first movie more was how they portrayed puck. I really didn't care for having a child play puck. The role to me seems like it should be played by a teenager or someone in his twenties who hasn't quite matured yet. It worked with the older man because he wasn't to the point of really annoying he just liked playing tricks on people.
Brendan Cox
Period 2
The two movies we watched in class were very different even though they had the same story. The 1999 version of the film was different because of the coloring, actors, camera angles, and the fact that Puck was actually played by an adult rather than a child. I liked the 1999 version better than the other by far. The other version was black and white so I didnt like that as much and Puck was played by a child instead of an adult. The acting was different and the fairies were special effects at the beggining which was kindve cool but i didnt like as much as the 1999 version.
Gabe Gonzalez Period 2
I thought that the first of the two movies was more interesting and appealing to watch. Since this was a more modern interpretation of the story I thought it was easier to follow and appreciate for a high school aged audience. The rehearsal scene with the theater group also seemed more realistic and plausible than it did in the older movie. Although the fairy scene in the older movie was entertaining, every other scene was comparatively more appealing in the modern movie.
Jessica Karr, p.4
Because I was absent, I did not get to see any of the previous movie except for the clip that Jonathon showed us during his presentation. In the scene Jonathon showed us, where the juice was being put into the fairy woman's eyes, the newer movie seemed to portray Oberon as very manly and sexy, and almost seemed to be seducing her in a way. In the older version, Oberon is portrayed as just kind of a dark, typical bad guy who is following through with his evil scheme. In this case, I believe the older version was more effective because it showed Oberon was trying to get back at her, instead of implying sexual attraction towards her, which is misguiding.
Alex Garcia
Period 6
Personally I found the more recent movie we watched more effective and entertaining simply because it is modern and the filming techniques and quality has become a lot more advanced and interesting. I really liked the ballet scene in the older movie because dance and art is not usually given as much time and appreciation in more modern movies. I especially liked some of the effects in the older movie like when the fairies were seen running up and around the tree. Puck seemed very obnoxious in the older movie and his annoying laugh and weird personality almost made it unbearable to watch. Oberon seemed to have a much different aura to him in the older movie because he was accompanied by bats and was dark and shadowy making him appear frightening while he seemed much more gentle in the recent movie. I believe both movies have great entertainment value and their own worth but if I had to choose to watch one I would likely choose the more recent one.
Stephanie Bateman period 2
The first movie, which apparently most enjoyed better I was absent for the first day. So I only got to see the last little bit. The second movie that we saw though really gave another view on how people perceive the play. The second one was more creepy and mystical magical like. Puck was a little crazy but I loved the fairies. I felt they were an important part and they weren't really in the other movie was far as I know. I was kind of surprised that you could take Mid-Summer and make it creepy by what we had read because it was more light and funny. But, it was interesting and I was impressed with some effects in the second movie considering how long ago it was done.
Tanner Low period 4
I missed the first movie, and I didn't really enjoy the second movie. I didn't like how crazy Puck was I found it to be too much overbearing. I didn't think it was very funny, and I thought it was supposed to be more of a comedy. I think I would have liked the more recent movie better by what other people have said about it. I did though like the interpretation of the magical fairies, and evilness in oberon I felt like it fit in perfect. Especially for how old it is. I also felt the lines were well read, its a difficult piece of Shakespeare and it was clear and easy to understand with their expressions the actors used along with the dialogue.
Megan Lowry Per 2
The thing that struck me most about the different movies was the way Titania was portrayed. The actress in the more modern version that we watched interpreted the character very differently than the actress from the 30's. When reading the play, I always pictured Titania as a more headstrong, powerful woman. This is how the character was displayed in the modern version. However, in the 30's version Titania seemed more delicate and kind of ditzy. She was constantly smiling and laughing- which is really different from how I pictured the scene and how it was played in the newer version, since at that point in the play Oberon and Titania are supposed to be arguing. It's kind of a clash between two powerful figures, instead of just faries flitting about laughing and smiling. So I just thought the 30s interpretation of Titania's character was kind of strange.
Sam Bellefeuille
Period 6
I liked the first movie we watched better for many reasons. The first was because it was more modern and i could relate to it more than a black and white movie. Also because we watched the colorful version first the set seemed to fit very well and was easy to understand, while watching it the second time i found myself getting lost at some times. A scene that i really related to from the 1999 version was when the two men were fighting about the girls. in the more modern version, it tended to be more 'sexual' with the mud and i think more people now-a-days could relate and understand what was going on more. in the older version, the fight seen was more boring to follow and to understand.
Andrew Kemis Period 6
I prefer the older verision of Midsummer Night's Dream to the 1990's for many reason. Mostly because Puck is one of my favorite characters. In the older version Puck is portrayed as a mischeivious kid who is always laughing. My imagination of Puck's character makes me think of an evil child and this is what Puck was portrayed to be. The 1990's movie was somewhat dumbed down and Puck just did not match the role. The older rendering was mopre effective in my mind not only because of Puck because I felt the characters were chosen more effectively. I prefered the voices in the older verision which is a main contributor to my choice. The older movie did not focus on the distinguishment of the characters but rather the idea that two men were fueding over the same woman at one point and the women were both in the choas of Puck's mistakes. I also thought that the older movie was more effective because it took advantage of choral songs where all the different voice types sang at once. I think this was a much more effective way of portraying anger, frustration, and confusion than each person individualy singing.
Katie Hodgson
Per 2
I actually like the older version of this. I think it showed the more magical side of A midsummer night's dream. Even though the quality was not as good i loved it and the graphics wenrt as good i thought they did a much better job. And when Bottom got the donkey head in the newer version of it i couldnt really tell he looked like one, he looked more like a rabbit than a donkey but in the older version it was prettty obvious that his head had been turned into a donkeys.
Matt MacDougall
per 4
The 1999 movie was more effective for me. It was easier to follow along with, and the special effects with the fairs were better. In the older movie that we watched today, Puck was really weird, and i didnt really think it fit to what i was expecting. He was crazy,a nd just laughed which weirded me out. Also the fairy scenes with the trolls was weird and creepy, it was very dreamy like. I thought that scene did a better job though with the fairies than the 1999 movie.Overall though i feel the 1999 was more effective because it was newer and i tend to like newer versions of movies better becasue of all the new technology and other stuff they are able to do.
Andrew Pilgrim Period 4
I found that the movies we watched of A Midsummer Night's Dream were completley different. The way that Oberon was played especially was very different between the two, in the older version he was sinister and very overacted for a movie, while the newer movie had Oberon as much more subtle. Puck was also different in both, while the older version had the young boy as Puck the newer one had an older man play Puck, however they both still had horns. The older movie used actors who had done the play live many times and did not know how to act on film and that it's different than performing live. The newer film relied on subtlety in acting and also relied more on special effects, especially for the fairies and Bottom. The way the older movie chose to have goblins and things was also different from the newer version that tended to stick more with only the creatures described in the text. Both movies were extremely different and in some ways seem like completely different scripts to be based off of.
Sarah Jane Elliott
Period 2
I really enjoyed the first movie we watched. Everything made a lot of scene and you could see character dynamics and personalities. All of the actors in the newer version did a great job of (in a way) translating the script and speaking in a more modern tone so the words would make sense for those who didn't know the play. The latest movie that we saw, the one made in the 1930s, was really cool. I particularly enjoyed the Puck, he was very different. I loved that he was portrayed as a child because Puck has some childish characteristics. His voice was very shrill and childlike, it was different and interesting. I also found the special effects to be very cool, though the acting wasn't so great. Overall I enjoyed both for very different reasons. Mostly the 1999 Midsummer though because if you cannot act the show then it doesn't make sense.
Jordan Adam Per. 4
I found the more contemporary production to be more effective, both in conveying its intent and being entertaining. The older black-and-white movie felt a little too theatrical, as if it was trying to be impressive and powerful. It made the show feel over-the-top and unrealistic. The modern color version came at a much more realistic angle. I could relate to the characters’ performances, actually understanding what they were thinking and feeling when they spoke in their Shakespearean pentameter. Having a better connection and understanding of the characters made the film much more engaging. The newer movie felt as if it was more conscious of how to effectively use the medium of film. The older one seemed to be performing as if it were on a live stage, and acting in a more exaggerated manner because of it. It also helped that the newer movie had no noticeable technical errors or shoddy special effects. I would notice a character’s facial expression change completely between shots in the older version, like when Puck was being given orders from Oberon; or see entirely through the simplistic flying effects, which were clearly no more than strings and pulleys. The newer film simply felt like a much more crisp and engaging production of the play.
Kaiti Staup Period 4
I thought the first movie we watched was more successful in portraying the play. I think the second was not successful at all in portraying the play. The characters in the second film were either annoying or too dramatic. Puck in the second film was absolutely ridiculous and in my opinion did not portray the Puck that Shakespeare created. Also, in the second, some of the lines were covered up in arguments which i don't think Shakespeare would have liked. It was really interesting to see the two different takes of the play from the two producers prospectives. I also didn't picture Oberon like he was in the older version.
Stuart Dransfield
Period 4
The movie about "Midsummer Nights Dream" that I liked more was the 1999 version, mostly because I cant stand black and white films. But I did think that the older film was easier to follow. The part where the two couples get lost in the forest is a lot harder to follow in the new version but where that guy gets turned into a donkey is a lot easier to follow in the 1999 version. It would be good if they could mix those two films together and make one really good movie.
Mike Smolkowski
Per 4
I thought that the movie we watch more recently, was a lot more centered around the fairies and how they are portrayed. The second movie we watched had a full blown long scene with them all dancing around in the forest in an orgonized ballet manner while in the first movie their was nothing like that at all. The fairies were just blah. By having the fairies and the forest all crazy like that with lots of coriographed moves and whatnot, I thought that the second movie did a much better job putting everything in the bigger picture.
Talia Cowan per 6
When comparing the two movies, one of the bigger differences that pops out to me is the type of feeling behind them. In the older movie, the feeling is more magical and fantasy focused. whereas the newer version was more of an old English or European style. Those are mainly just different interpretations, but i have a feeling that the older version's director was a more superstitious person than the more recent one.
Jacob Carpenter
Period 4
In my opinion the movie we watched first was much better. One of the main reasons was that I am not huge on black and white television. Also I wasn’t fond of the way Puck acted, I thought he was out of control and crazy. As well I thought the newer version had a modern age theme which made it come off as much more interesting.
Karin Ochsner
Period 4
I definitely enjoyed the new version of the movie better! It was way easier to follow along with. I could actually understand the story. But also the acting was way better. It’s crazy how different they are. The older versions characters were completely different though the special effects do help the newer version a bit. But the older version the fairies were just dressed in white cloths while the newer version actually looked like fairies. Then the guy with the horns was completely different. The new one was older rather than being a little boy that giggled a lot.
Kenny Exelby
Period 4
I think the first movie we watched in class was more effective. It was more up to date than the other one, plus the effects were so much better it was easy to follow and keep up with the story. The fairies in the black and white movie flew clearly with wires, and that kind of ruined it for me, plus I have never really been a fan of the black and white TV because I don't like not being able to see shades and colors and such. The story and the actors portraying the characters were also better in the most recent movie because I liked their interpretation and presentation of a Midsummer Nights Dream, it was closer to the one I had in my mind when we were reading it in class. The way the color movie presented Puck was very different from the other movie, but I liked it better because frankly I thought the younger Puck was extremely annoying. Anyway so that's about it Schindler, see you tomorrow morning, hey how creepy would it be if you were grading my blog as I am sitting in your class tomorrow?
Kyle Glaser
Period 2
The main difference between the two movies was obivously the interpretations of what is magical about the fairies. In the first movie the fairies are shown in a very feminine and sexual with the use of naked girls and young girl fairies. While in the movie we saw later the fairies were seen as both the ugly and unwanted like the trolls but also as the childs. I liked how this movie made the young fairies fly around and you cant see any strings while the movie was made when special effects were hard to do. I really liked both of the movies but they were very different.
Lacey Helmuth per 4
I didn't really get the first movie because it was in weird english. The actors were set in what looked like a real world. In the second movie where Puck was a little boy they seemed to be in a fairy world. Also I didn't like the second movie as much because it was hard to tell what was going on. Puck was really really annoying and I couldn't concentrate on anything other than his frustrating giggle and voice.
Overall I think the first one was more effective. It was more like something that we would see today. The set and people seemed more common.
Kayla Aldridge
Period 6
Out of the two versions of Mid Summers night dream we watched I would have to say i liked the first one better. It was more modern and advanced, and for me easier to pay attention to, I also thought the characters fit the roles much better in the 1999 version. I didn't like Puck in the second movie, he was extremely odd and annoying. However in the 1930 version I thought Titanias character was much stronger and easier to interpret. It was interesting to see the producers different prospectives for the play and they were both very well portrayed but overall I like the more recent version better.
Christin Thrane
Period 4
Out of the two movies we watched in class, my favorite was the newest version. Not only did it have more advanced techniques, it had a much better cast, but the actors in the 1999 version were much less overdramatic, making them more believable. I did, however, think that the old version of the movie did a better job with telling the story. Even though the old version was a lot more over-dramatic and not as fun to watch, I found myself being more confused by the 1999 movie. I think the makers of the newest version were better at choosing the right actors for the different roles, which made me take it more seriously than in the 1930s movie, where Puck was played by a little boy.
Spencer Asavadejkajorn
Period 4
Out of the two movies we watch in class i enjoyed to older version of a midsummer nights dream. i thought it was better because of the time period it was in. For that day in age it seems as if the people who made it made it very well for that time period. the costumes were excellent i thought. and as for the newer version it seemed just like a normal movie these days. the only effect the newer movie had on me was the fact that i could recognize the characters but that is it. overall the older movie was great, except for the high pitch scream the little boy would give off every now and then
Alyssa De Hoop
Period 4
I really enjoyed the first Midsummer better than the second older version we watched. The first was more well done. One thing that stood out to me the most was the acting. The first was more like television today, where it seems real. The 1930s version was too theatrical and "hi I’m performing Shakespeare" for me, overacting. In addition to the acting the costumes and effects were very sad and fake. I also did not like Puck’s character. He just giggled the whole time and seemed like he was high or something. I also did not feel that the mechanicals were as funny in the 1930s black and white version then in the other movie.
Phillip Foshee
period 6
The two movies we watched were very different. I had mixed feelings about both of them but i liked the second one better. I believe that the second one showed the characters and who they were much better. One of the things that i didn't like about either of them was the donkey. The thing i liked about the newer movie was i liked how the did pucks characterization. His character was more vibrant and moving then the old movie. All in all they were both good movies but i liked the second one better even know it was in black and white.
Selena Swaim, per. 2
I'm having a hard time not defaulting to a more modern piece as my personal favorite. Although the 1999 version has all the new technologies to make special effects and the set more realistic, I can see how the 1930's version portrays the story equally well. The 1930's version had much more character development which i think made the difference. I think people who don't think that Puck fits the character description are crazy. His character messes with people's emotions carelessly, and even changes Bottom's head into one of a donkey's. I think Shakespeare set that up perfectly to have his character represented by a thoughtless, mischievous child in the 1930's version. I also thought it was interesting how the older version showed a great difference between Oberon and Titania. Titania and the fairies had all the white drapery as clothing that flowed in the wind creating a more magical feeling. Oberon was wearing dark black clothing and was surrounded by his troll-like helpers, giving off a more evil feeling. In the newer version the two weren't given as much contrast.
I also liked Flute's character in the older version better. His innocence was more womanly and likable :).
michael haines
period 4
the thing that i found the most different was how they portrayed puck. in one movie he was portayed as a young boy that is very mischevious and in the other an equally mischevious but older man. i liked the older version of puck because in my mind puck was mischevious but intellegent at the same time. in the older version of the film with the younger puck it seemed he was just there to cause trouble and wasnt really oberons right hand man. i liked the older version becasue he seemed to have an agenda and was more intellegent and made more sense in the end.
Joel maltos
Period 4
The movie we watched second was definetly more effective, than the first movie. The special affects in the more recent version does make an impact, but the orignal has better acting and the actors fit the characters much more. In the orignal movie, the character of Puck is much more appealing than the Puck in the newer version. Also, the props in the older version almost make it seem like you are watching it like it was taped in a theater rather than a movie.
Nathan Zimmerman, Per. 6
There were many striking differences between the two versions of A Midsummer Nights Dream. The first most noticeable is obviously that one is in black and white and that the recent version is in color. This deference despite seeming insignificant does change the feel of the story. This fact makes the 1930s version seem much more mysterious. Another difference between the two is that Puck's personality is much more flamboyant and obnoxious. This contributes to the mystical qualities of the 1930s version as well. By far my favorite version of this story though has been the opera version we just saw today. I thought it was very interesting towards the end.
Evan Norris
Period 2
I was impressed with the filming techniques in the older version of a midnightsummer's dream, it didn't do enough to make it a good movie. The best part was the scene with the fairies dancing up the tree because it used their version of special effects. The second one was great either but it was bearable because it was newer and more interesting.
Post a Comment