A Midsummer Night's Dream Comparative Essay

The film adaptation of the classic Shakespearean comedy, A Midsummer Night’s Dream, Woody Allen’s A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy directed in 1982 was nothing less than a radical adaptation. The reasons for this is the change in time period and location, lack of any “real” magic, and the different storyline. As ancient Greece is to A Midsummer Night’s Dream, an early 1900’s countryside is to A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy. With a change this significant, it is bound to alter the way people speak, act, and dress. Morals are different in the film than in the play, and it is a direct example of how the time period changed the story. In the 1900’s, people were more concerned with fidelity than they were with pleasing the gods. It changed the way people acted, and therefore the story. This classic Woody Allen film is most definitely radical because of the change of time period. In addition to the
new time period, there isn’t any magic like there was in the play. In the play, nymphs, changelings and fairies run rampant whilst the only “magic” shown in the film is Andrew’s inventions, such as the flying bicycle and the mystical sphere that shows other “worlds”. Although one could consider this to be magic, the film simply makes it seem like science. In the play, the entire reason for the story to happen was because of real magic produced by herbs. Without this, the characters in the film were just lusting after one another, with no motivation. Because of the lack of magic, the story was changed.
For example, Andrew had relations with Ariel before the events of the film, Maxwell is horribly in love with her, while already have had sex with Adrian, and Adrian was dying to be able to rejuvenate her sex life with Andrew, and therefore save their marriage. This was only one half of the equation. As Maxwell was lusting after Ariel, Dulcy was being sought after by Leopold, Ariel’s fiancé. This lead to awkward encounters, broken relationships and near suicide attempts. It seemed less like a sex comedy, and more like a sex nightmare. In the play, however, all the characters were placed under spells, and because the wrong Athenian was placed under the wrong spell, that is what made the play so funny, not the love hexagon present in the film. This made the film a radical adaptation, for sure. Because of all of the changes from A Midsummer Night’s Dream by Shakespeare to A Midsummer Night’s Sex Comedy by Woody Allen, from the change of time period, to lack of magic, to change in storyline, it makes this film radical for
sure. Although I am more familiar with Woody Allen’s work, I found myself laughing out loud more at the Shakespeare play, which is something I definitely didn’t expect. Although the humor in both was subtle, the comedy in the Shakespeare play had more depth than just Andrew’s stuttery and awkward manner of speaking. All in all, I enjoyed both mediums, and I now know that I can go to Shakespeare for a good pink-me-up.