I’ve always had a bit of a love/hate relationship with Shakespeare. He was full of interesting ideas and his plays contain “timeless” themes that show up in film even today, but he always comes across as so … uhh … stuffy. Even Robert De Niro’s friends refer to him as Bob or Bobby (the better to prove to everyone that they are friends with him) but does anyone talk about Billy Shakespeare? I didn’t think so.

Let me be honest for a moment, while Shakespeare Is quite capable of being sharp witted, poignant and surprisingly invigorating the means in which he delivers these messages can be hampered by his flowery prose. Now I understand that for purists this is the only way to enjoy Shakespeare, but I fully admit that I typically prefer adaptations that focus on the themes and story lines of his work, but not the phonetic ballyhoo that would otherwise accompany it. Even more directly put, why would one watch King Lear when you can watch Ran instead? Or read A Midsummer Night’s Dream when Neil Gaiman’s Sandman is beckoning me to open it instead? For me Shakespeare has simply always been more enjoyable when used as a building material, rather then as a finished product.

(more…)