Reptileenbu Did you people see the same film I saw?

Beystiman It's fun, it's light, [but] it has a hard time when its tries to get heavy.

Fatma Suarez The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

mhk11 This is one of the best of the BBC's productions, with fine performances all around. The production succeeds in conveying the melancholy aspects of the play as well as its many comic elements. (Although Trevor Peacock has only a moderately good singing voice, its plangency is perfectly suited to the rather dark songs that Feste intones.) I'll register only two minor complaints. First, Robert Lindsay inappositely utters an exclamation as a question in III.iv.133. Second, quite a few of Feste's lines have been excised. Some of the deletions are well-judged, but most of them (especially in III.i and V.i) are regrettable. Still, these two small points of dissatisfaction detract very little from my enjoyment of an excellent rendering of this play.

david-sarkies I have never really been that impressed with the BBC Shakespeare and it is not so much because of the low budget but because the characterisations generally have not been all that good. Take for instance the Nunn production in 1996, the way the characters acted, and the expressions on their faces, added so much more life to the production than did the actors in this rather tired rendition. It seems as if the whole purpose was that they were simply acting out a Shakespearian play, and simply tried to let the fact that it was Shakespearian carry the day rather than the actors carrying the play. In a way, for all of Shakespeare's brilliance, the play will not carry itself, and even the best play will fall flat on its face if the actors do not actually give life to the play.One of the things that stood out was that it was quite clear that Viola was a female, however I suspect that the reason that she was able to get away with having long hair was because the rest of the cast had long hair as well (with the exception of Olivia's drunken family members). What differentiated the sexes was not so much their hair but rather their dress, and by dressing as a male, Viola was able to pass herself off as a male, though it was quite clear that when she attempted to speak in a low voice she was putting it on. Fortunately her brother, Sebastian, also had long blonde hair, since one of the things that really does carry the play is when Olivia confuses Sebastian for Viola, but one again, the way Nunn did the play made it so much better.Another thing that I noticed about the play (and not so much the film) was not only how Shakespeare is the master of the double entendre, or how Shakespeare can be incredibly dirty when he wants to be (and sometimes I wonder if the more sophisticated audiences actually get some of his cruder jokes) but how the saying 'being well hung', generally referring to the size of one's member, has been around as long as Shakespeare. Then again, there has been a bit of research done on the history of crude jokes, and I even have a book called 'Dirty Shakespeare' which goes through all of Shakespeare's dirty jokes.As for a film, I probably would not recommend it. The Trevor Nunn version is actually available free on You Tube, so if you really have a hankering to watch Twelfth Night, then I would refer you to that play. This version can pretty much remain sitting on the dusty shelves of a forgotten corner of the video stores (though this one is on Youtube as well).

Alain English One of Shakespeare's best known romantic comedies (how modern romcoms could do these days with more mix-ups and mistaken identities), this one nevertheless fails to deliver.It's studio-bound setting severely constricts the action, it's sheer obviousness hampering the suspension of disbelief. Micheal Thomas and Felicity Kendal play the separated twins Sebastian and Viola, but they look too dissimilar to really convince in their roles, Thomas being at least two inches taller than Kendal - it is stretching the plot too much to believe that somebody could mistake one for the other.Alec McCowen plays humiliated manservant Malvolio. He speaks nicely enough but his entire performance is far too restrained. The scene where he is dressed in cross-gartered yellow stockings in a failed bid to impress Olivia (Sinead Cusack) lacks the punch it needs to make it truly hilarious. The other comic characters such as Robert Hardy's Toby Belch cannot compensate. Trevor Peacock has been excellent in other roles in this series but his Feste here is completely ineffective.A worthy effort as ever, but a modern setting and better casting would have much improved things.

Joannah Hansen This movie was absolutely delightful. It was a lovely introduction to Shakespeare, for ( if I remember correctly at a distance of 20-something years ) the 12-or-13 year old that I was back then. ( I stayed up way past midnight so that I could see the end of it - it was lucky that I was on holiday at the time! )The casting was excellent, especially the actors chosen to play Viola and Sebastian ( they looked like they were related! ), and Malvolio. The sets were well done, and the costuming ( again from the distance of too many years ) was good. The entire production was just charming.I would dearly like to see this movie again, if anyone knows where to get a copy of it. ( Video or DVD )