Diagonaldi Very well executed

Greenes Please don't spend money on this.

FeistyUpper If you don't like this, we can't be friends.

Listonixio Fresh and Exciting

mhk11 When I first saw this production many years ago, I was repelled by the sight of Ariel and some of the other male fairies in jock straps. My dismay at that feature of the production blinded me to the excellence of the acting. However, having watched this DVD (along with each of the other DVDs in the BBC Shakespeare series) several more times subsequently, I now can recommend this production enthusiastically. I still wish that the fairies had been better clothed, but I ignore their attire and concentrate on the quality of the acting and the overall staging.Michael Hordern is outstanding as Prospero. His peroration is deeply moving, and throughout he captures the nuances of the role superbly.Christopher Guard and Pippa Guard are fine as Ferdinand and Miranda. Some of the other reviewers on this site have criticized them for blandness, but any blandness lies in the roles rather than in the performances.Likewise, although I find the characters of Stephano and Trinculo tiresomely unfunny, the fault lies not with Nigel Hawthorne and Andrew Sachs but with Shakespeare's writing of the roles. At any rate, the magnificence of the line "Misery acquaints a man with strange bedfellows" is more than sufficient to offset the tedium of many of Trinculo's other lines.Derek Godfrey (who died only a few years after this production was staged) is entertainingly psychopathic as Antonio, and he is well paired with Alan Rowe as Sebastian.David Waller is a bit wooden as Alonzo in the first half of the play, but he raises his level of acting much higher in the final Act. John Nettleton is memorably poignant throughout the play as Gonzalo.Most of Shakespeare's beautiful wording is included in this production. The main excisions (reasonably well-judged excisions) are abridgments of the exchanges among Gonzalo and Antonio and Sebastian in Act II, and curtailments of the pageant in Act IV. The whole of the preliminary portion of the pageant has been removed.I'm glad that I waited for several years before writing a review of this production. Having now become attuned to the many merits of this rendering of Shakespeare's magical play, I can recommend it warmly.

Joseph_Gillis Second in my viewing of BBC Shakespeare adaptations: as with the previous 'Measure for Measure', I'd not previously seen any version of the play, and was only vaguely acquainted with the plot.Although the vengeful wizard, Prospero and to a lesser extent his sprite aide/conscience, Ariel, are the key characters, the title is an apt one in that it is the eponymous tempest, or storm - brought about by Prospero - which drives so much of the plot in that it causes to bring to Prospero's island those who had most wronged him. Not surprisingly, given that it is one of Shakespeare's later plays, I found it to be one of his most satisfying and intricately plotted, and although officially classed as a comedy, I'd probably also consider it a moral tale, in the choices and decisions it ultimately has Prospero make when he finally has his hated opponents at his mercy. Although I haven't done any further research or re-reading since my only viewing of this production, I was also interested with one of Prospero's speeches where he seemed to be suggesting that much of his situation might be entirely a dream, which would make the plot richer still (And, incidentally, the actual quote "We are such stuff As dreams are made on" was the source for Bogey's similarly memorable "that's the stuff that dreams are made of", from and about 'The Maltese Falcon')As regards the production itself, I'd absolutely no problem with any of the sets, which more than fulfilled their functions, and allowed for the intelligence of the viewers to flesh them out; the scene where Nigel Hawthorne and Andrew Sach's character first appeared reminded me of various sets for Beckett's 'Happy Days', which is no bad thing. Acting- wise, Hordern was supreme, and well-nigh faultless; I don't understand some reviewers problem with David Dixon's Ariel, as he seemed to me to fit all the requirements of the role. Similarly, Hawthorne and Andrew Sach's characters' interaction with Warren Clarke's hirsute and mildly scary Caliban provided the necessary comic relief, ably, as they did their roles. The remaining performances and characters I'd largely consider functional.Now I can't wait to compare and contrast with Julie Taymor's much- maligned adaptation; on the evidence of her enthralling and visually arresting adaptation of 'Titus Andronicus', I've no doubt that it will make for a worthwhile watch. On a side note, watching Andrew Sachs in this version, I was reminded of his recent very public 'spat' with Russell Brand and, given that they both played Trinculo, it should be interesting to see whose characterisation is the better one.

general-melchett Letting the class watch this in English was a bad idea. Films that are serious and more educational can have an effect, but it appears this one didn't have any effect whatsoever on the class - whenever the teacher left, conversations quickly started - and I didn't hear the words "Shakespeare" or "Tempest" being used at all. And when you look at this, it is easy to see why. The acting is nothing special - everyone seems bored to bits, just reading from the page without a care in the world. Shakespeare always did prefer expository dialogue to action and death, but I just couldn't understand a word anyone was saying. The costumes aren't too bad and neither are the special effects - the class may not have loved the film, but they weren't exactly taking the p*ss either. But it is hard to joke at a film that is devoid of any sort of inspiration or joy. The scenes on the ship at the start of the film weren't too badly done - though the rain looked a bit unrealistic, everything else was done well and good. But where were the severed heads and exploding masts? Where was the death? Where was the inspiration? The character of Ariel would have been taken a lot more seriously had he been wearing clothes - but as all was on show, he was just another excuse for a joke. This film is not in any way appealing to either sex. The women and girls won't have any romance or comedy to enjoy, and there is an abundance of naked men and lack of action or death that will put most men and boys off. The Tempest wasn't badly done, but this felt like something the producers HAD to make, not something they wanted to make. And the general boredom and lack of inspiration show. 3/10

Dan1863Sickles Shakespeare's TEMPEST is magical, romantic, and full of delight. But the center of the play is the dynamic between Prospero, the wise old wizard, and his innocent but adventurous daughter Miranda.Pippa Guard is PERFECT as Miranda. She captures all of Miranda's sweetness and gentleness while adding courage and spirit and passion and even daring to the surface obedience she always displays. Watch the famous scene where Prospero talks on and on about his past and his great gifts and his magical plans to bring them home. At the end of his long-winded speech, he prevents Miranda from asking any further questions by waving his magic wand and sending her to sleep! It's a scene that often makes modern audiences groan aloud. But Pippa Guard has the most extraordinary gift for putting a world of passion and deep feeling into her face as she opens her mouth to protest. Her magnificent spirit is fully displayed, even though she has no verbal comeback to Prospero's manipulative magic. Even the surprised, confused, and then suddenly very sleepy look on her face cannot conceal her growing strength and her rebellious desire to know more.Pippa Guard is the model Shakespearean actress -- rendering the language beautifully and adding a world of meaning with just a single look or a glance.Pippa Guard Rocks!