Peereddi I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

AutCuddly Great movie! If you want to be entertained and have a few good laughs, see this movie. The music is also very good,

Neive Bellamy Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

Stephanie There is, somehow, an interesting story here, as well as some good acting. There are also some good scenes

Red-125 Love's Labour's Lost (1985) (TV) (The BBC version) is one of Shakespeare's early comedies, given a respectful interpretation by the BBC. The film was directed by Elijah Moshinsky.Here's what I copied and pasted from my review of the movie from The Globe Theatre production of LLL:Love's Labour's Lost (Globe Theatre Version) (2010) (V) isn't one of Shakespeare's great comedies. There are four intertwined subplots. One involves the King of Navarre and three of his young courtiers/companions, and the Princess of France and three of her ladies-in-waiting/companions. Another involves a stereotypical Spanish nobleman and his love for a country lass. A third involves the same country lass, who may or may not be in love with a country lad (The lad, Costard, wanders in and out of all the plots.) The fourth plot involves three bourgeois officials--the preacher, the teacher, and the constable. There's also a major role for Moth, the witty servant to Don Armado, the Spaniard. To add to this there are men disguised as "Muscovites," mistaken identities, and a pageant performed by the three bourgeois men.Surprisingly, Love's Labour's Lost is loaded with wordplay. There are endless puns, endless poems, and endless commentary about puns, poems, and words. Shakespeare was warming up. Knowing what we know now, we can sense the genius flexing his mental and verbal muscles—getting ready to give us Much Ado About Nothing and Midsummer Night's Dream.Anyone putting on this play has to deal with a weak premise and an intricate—and not very funny—plot. The BBC series played it straight. "This is Shakespeare's play, and we're going to perform it as he wrote it. If it's not a great play, that's not our fault."As is usual in the BBC productions, the acting was highly professional. The costumes were wonderful, and the sets were excellent. (The BBC sometimes doesn't do much with sets, but this time they did.)The two leads--Jonathan Kent as Ferdinand, King of Navarre and Maureen Lipman as The Princess of France--are excellent actors. However, they were both in their late 30's when the movie was produced. The play is really about young love, and so in that sense they were miscast. However, suspension of disbelief goes a long way, and after a while you just admired them as they demonstrated their acting skills. The Globe Theatre production of LLL was more of a slapstick version, which worked on its own terms. However, if you want to see LLL as you would see it on the stage--as we did, in Stratford, Ontario--this is the version for you.The BBC's Shakespeare productions were made for TV, so, naturally, they work well on the small screen.

GusF One of Shakespeare's earliest plays, it has always been one of his less popular comedies as it has a reputation for being inaccessible due to the complexity of its language, even by his standards. This BBC adaptation was my first exposure to the play and I have to say that its reputation is well deserved. I found its "civil war of wits" to be demanding and exhausting and, quite frankly, very difficult to understand. During the scene in which the Princess of France and her entourage laughed hysterically at Don Armado's letter, I had absolutely no idea in the wide earthly world what was supposed to be funny. I admit that I did not immediately understand every turn of phrase in every other Shakespeare play but I really struggled to follow the wordplay for a good 80% of it, if not more. More than once after or during long speeches I thought, "I don't understand a word of this!" My favourite element was the light satire of the behaviour of the intellectuals and aristocrats but it was still an extremely difficult watch. I had to take a break after an hour whereas I had to practically drag myself away from Kenneth Branagh's four hour version of Hamlet, my 13th favourite film of all time, to go to the toilet! This was one of the last plays adapted as part of the BBC Television Shakespeare strand and I don't think that that was an accident.David Warner, the only cast member whom I had seen in a previous Shakespearean adaptation, is excellent as Don Armado and I certainly enjoyed his scenes the most while Maureen Lipman and Jenny Agutter are very good as the Princess of France and Rosaline. Jonathan Kent (not Clark's adoptive dad, sadly), Christopher Blake and Mike Gwilym are rather forgettable as the Prince of Navarre, Berowne and Longaville respectively. However, in one of his last roles before his very early death in 1987, Geoffrey Burridge is without a doubt the best of the four main actors as Dumaine. None of the other actors really made an impression on me one way or the other.Overall, I'm sorry to say that I found this rather incomprehensible. It is without the doubt my least favourite Shakespearean play or adaptation so far. It was a labour but sadly not one of love. To be perfectly honest, I only watched this as I am planning to watch Branagh's film version, which cut most of the play, and I like the first adaptation that I see of any of the Bard's plays, whether I am familiar with it or not, to be as faithful to the original as possible.

didi-5 Neither the most fascinating or the most accessible of Shakespeare's plays, 'Love's Labour's Lost' is the first part of a new lost pair of plays centering on the King of Navarre and his Lords as they vow to foresake all female company for three years to concentrate on their studies. All, that is, but the Princess of France who just happens to be due on a state visit ... well attended by her ladies! As the King, Jonathan Kent (now a respected theatre director) is pleasing enough, and his young courtiers (Berowne is a peach of a part seized on with relish by Mike Gwilym; Longaville and Dumain are a couple of dreamers played by Christopher Blake and Geoffrey Burridge, two fine actors sadly now lost to us) are strong enough characterisations to move proceedings along.Maureen Lipman is a mischievous Princess, all smiles and jests, while her ladies (Petra Markham, Jenny Agutter, and Katy Behean) make good foils for the lovestruck swains. The supporting cast are no less watchable - David Warner excellent as Armado, with John Kane as faithful servant, Paul Jesson fun as the dumb Costard, and Frank Williams (the vicar from 'Dad's Army') is well-cast as Dull.Set in a limbo time and place and dressed accordingly, this production of 'Love's Labour's Lost' does much to bring in the viewer, and when the lines are most impenetrable, it doesn't matter.A short adaptation at just two hours, this is a quiet production from the BBC set which sits nicely alongside showier pieces such as 'Hamlet' and 'Othello'.

tonstant viewer This is a chamber play, with a lot of elaborate verbal humor and a little action but not much.There are reasons this particular Shakespeare play is not put on much in the theater, but make it more suitable for television than usual. We are close in, the faces of engaging personalities fill the screen, the comedy of broken vows, misdirected courtships and thwarted desire works well in TV scale.That we forgive these characters for occasionally going into fits of laughter over puns and paradoxes that we will not ever understand is made possible by the director, Elijah Moshinsky. He has played fast and loose with the BBC/Time-Life ground rules of "either Shakespeare's time or the story's" by setting the action in an 18th Century Never-Neverland decorated delightfully by Watteau. with a touch of the Sir John Soane Museum for flavor. The result is well-paced, inventively staged and balm to the soul.Acting honors go to David Warner as Don Armado. His character is endearingly off-center, without ever attempting a Spanish accent to match his name. There's certainly nothing here in this sweet loony at all like the sinister drip that Warner usually played in films - altogether a wonderful surprise.Berowne is the best-written part, and Mike Gwilym's adenoids make happy sport with the Mercutio/Benedick-style dialog. Maureen Lipman appears more surprised than we are to find her as the Princess of France, but she acquits herself well. Jenny Agutter is delectable as Rosaline, even though her hair and makeup seem at least as appropriate for a small role in "The King and I." Amidst the warm comedy, there is a pang with the sudden shift of tone near the end of the play at Marcade's announcement of a death. The extra resonance is caused by the appearance of the ever-sepulchral Valentine Dyall, age 77, in his farewell to the screen. He represents a link to the past, as his Duke of Burgundy in the Olivier "Henry V" forty years earlier is, and will continue to be, quite memorable."Love's Labour's Lost" is stronger in its influence than its performance history. Mozart's "Cosi fan tutte" picks up the device of lovers in Slavic disguise wooing the wrong women. G&S's "Princess Ida" may play around with the genders, but love trumps monastic scholarship in the same way.In fact, all we usually know about this play is a lot of people aren't sure how to punctuate the title. Now it's possible to make friends with some splendid Shakespeare you are not likely to see on stage. Highly recommended.