Plenty to Like, Plenty to Dislike

I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

An absolute waste of money

The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

On a hot midsummer night, what could be more appropriate than this great Max Rinhardt's Warner Brother's classic? The movie is an American classic for "doing" Shakespeare with sound. The effects are wonderful for their time, the music is just right, and American audiences of that era would have recognized many of the cast members. The characters from this version of this well-known Shakespearian play give us lots of fun and joy. They argue; they sing, they dance; they fly through the air. They could be young lovers forced to obey orders of the Duke; they could be jealous woodland fairies; they could be a group of excited simple townsmen who want to win a prize from the Duke; or they could be Athenian royalty. OK, This movie is higher on special effects like--- gossamer images and Mendelssohn's incidental music-- than it is Shakespeare's actual script. Yet, everyone who loves Shakespeare should see this version just because you might want to see Olivia de Havilland (as Hermia), Dick Powell (as Lysander), James Cagney (as Bottom the Weaver), Joe E. Brown (as Flute the Bellows-Mender), and Frank McHugh (as Quince the Carpenter). In the Fairlyland cast, Victor Jory is Oberland , Anita Louise is Titania, and a 14-year-old Mickey Rooney is Puck. The movie won an Oscar for Best Cinematography (Hal Mohr)—as the first and only write-in nominee to actually win, and Best Film Editing (Ralph Dawson). It was nominated Best Picture but lost out to Mutiny on the Bounty and a host of other great choices.

I saw this today on TCM after not having seen it for decades. I then read the reviews and message boards. I don't know what others saw, but I found the production to be stunning.Its black and white, yet the difference between "real" and "faerie" was made obvious. Several stories within a story. Names known in the 1930's may not match names known today. Costuming may not be historically correct, but it does enable the audience to recognize each person's status.I personally did not check biographhies for anyone's prior experience with Shakespeare on stage, but I do not feel that anyone embarrassed themselves in their performance. I know the language can be hard to follow, but if you listen without concentrating, the words reveal the content. I've read complaints about Puck's portrayal as over the top, but modern images of fairies are not the way they were portrayed in the past. Fairies were not human, and their qualities beyond being ethereal could include capriciousness, arbitrariness and spite.If you watch and listen with an open mind, this doesn't have to be perfect to be perfectly entertaining and a more than fair performance of the Bard's work and words.

I bought this movie because I want to see as many Joe E. Brown movies as possible. Joe, and other Warner Brother's actors/actresses, didn't want to make this movie because they were not getting paid to act in it. Instead of cash, Joe was allowed to take the afternoon off any time he wanted to go to the races. That was his payment for his participation in the movie. Joe played the flute player. In the version of the video I saw, there was no scene in which he played the flute. Joe also was forced to dress like a woman and play a female part in the play. He did it reluctantly but it horrified him when a critic implied that he was a female impersonator. Joe said "I was shocked, horrified, and embarrassed when I was taken for a female impersonator."

You have to view this 1935 Hollywood version of Midsummer Night's Dream in the same laid-back spirit that the Athenian court watches the mechanicals perform "Pyramus and Thisbe." Let yourself be tolerant of the errors (most glaring, Mickey Rooney's Puck), let yourself be amused by designers, performers and directors all trying too hard to be antic and magical, let yourself be interested in the inventive but no longer believable special effects, the cobwebs and fairy dust and the rest -- and you may find this "Dream" not only charming but heart-warming. The performers, especially Cagney, are likable in their roles, and even Rooney has some funny moments of mimicry. And you can experience something no contemporary production of "Dream" would offer: Mendelssohn's glorious, polished music in the background.