Shakespeare’s comedy Much Ado About Nothing is a witty play that is interpreted in many different ways for many different audiences. Branaugh’s movie rendition, compared to the Shenandoah Shakespeare Company’s play, have many separately emphasized points. If we look at elements such as use of space, costuming, and love relationships we find that Kenneth Branaugh emphasizes the separation of the military from the domestic which eventually heads down to the separation of men and women, while in the stage production, the director emphasizes the relationship and friendship between Claudio, Benedict, and Don Pedro.
In Branaugh’s movie version of Much Ado About Nothing there is much emphasis placed visually upon the military and the domestic atmosphere. From the beginning of Branaugh’s interpretation the clear distinction between the two groups is visually portrayed. The movie begins with Emma Thompson, Beatrice, reading aloud to her friends and family in a relaxed laid back setting. The first domestic scenes lay out the tranquility of Leonato’s home compared to the rough and public military scenes. The first military scene shows Don Pedro and his comrades riding up to Leonato’s house.
The scene is visually pleasing with the soldiers striding up to the house on horses with their arms raised in the air in slow motion. A strong sense of military valor is established through the soldier’s actions, and the movie has already established a sense of military and domestic space, which the play did not capture. The Shenandoah Shakespeare Company’s version of the play began very differently. There was no domestic or military atmosphere at all and the way the company chose to interpret the characters was extremely interesting.
Leonato and his brother were dressed in business suits and the women were all in either colored dresses or skirts. The military men were still dressed in their suits but did not seem as out of place as they did in the movie. The distinction between the domestic and military space was not emphasized as it was in the movie and having all of the characters sitting on the stage at one time made the two groups mingle together as a whole. The company chose to act the play in this manner, but I felt that having the two separate groups made the plot more realistic.
The movie emphasized the two separate groups well when both meet after the first scene for dinner. The two groups come in from different sides of the courtyard and meet in the middle. The soldiers enter in a perfectly shaped ‘V’ with their uniforms on while the domestic people enter in an awkwardly shaped ‘V’ almost impersonating the military. The sense of form and power is established at this point in the movie. The domestic group enters the masquerade before the soldiers in an intermingling line of men and women with no established order.
The military enters the masquerade in a perfectly shaped form allowing the audience to see the sense of order and conduct within the soldiers. The military are also wearing identical face masks so that they cannot be distinguished from one another, but can be distinguished as a group. The play does not emphasize either the meeting for dinner or the masquerade as well as the movie. It allows the two groups blend in as a whole resulting in the soldiers having a lesser feeling of authority and power.
The masquerade begins in the play with the characters about to dance and the wonderful sense of space is lost due to the lack of distinction between the two groups. Beginning the scene without the characters entering in separate groups takes away the sense of distinction between the groups and allows the soldiers to begin to blend in with the domestic atmosphere. The opening scene of the movie showed the masculinity of the soldiers right away where as the play did not.
This was easier to show because the movie allowed for the use of more space and props, which the play could not. Showing the masculinity of the military right away in the movie established a sense of power and authority that the play did not quite capture, which makes the humiliation of Hero more real later in the play. The way the soldiers enter a room in the movie make them looked up to and praised where as the play did not have a feeling of awe but of equality. The two director’s choices of costuming also made the two groups differ from one version to another.
Branaugh did not emphasize Hero as much in his directing as the company director chose to in the play. Hero was dressed in brighter colors and had more lines in the play whereas in the movie she wore the same outfit as the rest of the ladies and blended in as just another handmaid. Beatrice was dressed in a bright red dress in the play where as in the movie she was dressed the same as Hero. The company director may have chose to dress the characters differently to show the individuals rather than the groups.
Branaugh, however, concentrated on the group distinctions rather than the characters as individuals. The interpretation of the shaming of Hero is very different in the play than in the movie. Claudio and Hero’s relationship is romanced, which makes the audience believe that he really does love Hero rather than her money. I think that this is a good decision because it allows the audience to feel for Hero more when she is disgraced. When Claudio accuses Hero in the play she is placed in the middle of him, Don Pedro and Don John.
Benedict is strategically placed behind Don John making him fade into part of the domestic sphere. I think that the director chose to place Hero in the middle for a reason. Although the actions are based around her, the way the men are placed on stage makes the scene into the relationship among Claudio, Benedict, and Don Pedro. Don John seems to take the space of Benedict and one can see the relationship between the three falls apart on stage. Branaugh interpreted the shaming of Hero in a much different way. After Claudio accuses her she is thrown to the ground.
The distinction between the military and the domestic is very clear both are on different sides of the camera, and the soldiers tower above Hero and Beatrice making them feel inferior. The strong sense of power and authority was not as strong in the play. Benedict fades into the domestic group as he did also in the play. He does not stand with Claudio and Don Pedro while they are accusing Hero, but back behind Beatrice. The two groups are still completely separate, however, Benedict has now become part of the domestic sphere.
The final scene of the movie shows the military merge with the domestic group. After Claudio finds out that Hero in innocent he plans to marry her and leaves the military group to become part of Leonato’s house. Benedict also becomes part of the domestic group when Hero is shamed and in the final scene where he plans to marry Beatrice. Don Pedro and Don John fade out completely in the final scene. Don John is in jail and the camera shot in the movie cuts Don Pedro out and one does not see him again.
This clearly shows that the military has merged in with the domestic and has become one union, with the exception of Don Pedro and Don John. The play also has Claudio and Benedict join the domestic group, but Don Pedro and Don John are not as faded out. Don Pedro is present in the end, however, he is not a main part of the action. All of the characters were present most of the time either sitting on stage or standing which made the two groups seem not as separate as in Branaugh’s movie.
Branaugh and the company director both made many choices, which influenced their performances. I enjoyed the movie more the play because it was not only full of funny lines and puns, but the actors and the setting were amazing. They movie seemed to flow more for me and I enjoyed being able to see the characters in a serene setting without having to visualize it all. Shakespeare’s play Much Ado About Nothing can be interpreted, acted, read, and visualized in different ways, but I thought that Kenneth Branaugh brought together an amazing cast and performance.
