The only Shakespearean film directed by Kenneth Branagh in which he does not have a starring role, this is a wonderful, enormously enjoyable adaptation of the Bard's classic comedy. I wasn't familiar with the play before watching the 1936 version last week and I wish to high Heavens that I had watched this version first as it is an improvement in almost every imaginable way. The presence of the director Paul Czinner's incredibly untalented wife Elisabeth Bergner, one of the sorriest excuses for an actor that I have ever come across in any film or TV series whatsoever, in the earlier film distracted me from how good the play is.In Branagh's (near) absence, the strongest cast member in the film is without a doubt Kevin Kline as Jacques. His performance is just sublime in both the comedic and the suitably melancholy scenes. His delivery of the famous "All the world's a stage" scene is beautiful and I found his description of the "second childishness" in the seven ages of man incredibly moving. Bryce Dallas Howard, whom I had only previously seen in the horrendous "Terminator Salvation", is perfect casting as the resourceful, fiercely intelligent and quick witted Rosalind, one of the strongest female characters that I have come across in Shakespeare. In stark contrast to the earlier film, I actually missed Rosalind when she was not on the screen rather than dreading her return. Crucially, Howard has great chemistry with David Oyelowo, who is extremely good as Orlando.The film has a great cast overall. Brian Blessed, conspicuous by his absence in "Love's Labour's Lost", excels in the dual roles of Duke Senior and his younger brother Duke Frederick. In the former role, he is able to display his seldom called upon skill at playing quieter, more contemplative characters, something which is also seen to a lesser extent in his performance as the usurper. In his final appearance in one of Branagh's films before his death in 2013, Richard Briers is excellent as the de Boys' unwavering, loyal servant Adam. Adrian Lester, who previously played Rosalind in a 1991 stage version, gives an engrossing performance as Orlando's "tyrant brother" Oliver. As Rosalind's cousin Celia, Romola Garai is incredibly natural and has some extremely funny moments. She and Howard, who look as if they could be related, are great together. Alfred Molina and Janet McTeer are a laugh riot as Touchstone and, uh, "gentle" Audrey. It has also features great performances in smaller roles from Richard Clifford as Le Beau, Jimmy Yuill as Corin, Alex Wyndham as Sylvius and Jade Jefferies as Phebe. This is an incredibly well cast film.Branagh's direction is excellent and this is particularly seen in his trademark use of uninterrupted shots. The best illustrations of this are the aforementioned "All the world's a stage" scene and the fourth wall breaking epilogue in which Howard walks through the location shoot and makes her way to her trailer. Branagh has a brief, uncredited cameo as himself in this scene and can be heard saying, "And...cut!" in the film's final line. It is reminiscent of the first scene of his version of "Henry V" which features Derek Jacobi as Chorus on a film set. About three-quarters of the film were shot in the beautiful gardens of Wakehurst Place. As such, I imagine that the film had a comparatively low budget but this is certainly no sign of this on screen. However, one creative decision which I was a bit puzzled by was the action of the play being relocated to Japan in the late 19th Century. Other than the fact that it allowed for the use of some nice sets and costumes, I can't really see the point since none of the major characters are played by actors of Japanese descent. It may not have added anything to the film but I don't think that it detracted anything either so I have no strong feelings about it.Overall, this is an excellent Shakespearean adaptation which again shows that Branagh is better able to handle the transition of Shakespeare from the stage to screen than any other filmmaker working today. After "Hamlet" and "Henry V", this is my third favourite of his Shakespearean films.

To score this play 10 out of 10 is an insult. It was so sublimely executed. Utterly flawless in its presentation of the flawed fabric of our natures. If Lucifer were to seek my council and ask how he might elevate his gaze from his pismire prognostications about the human condition I'd recommend he watch this and then try to grow up some. Many of us see the worm in the weave but we tend to imagine it lends it character rather than destroying it. Paradise is not paradise without imperfection for love requires weakness to grow in compensation. Humility is hard learned and best achieved in degrees of defeat. A man defined by victories is a shallow and fickle thing. I stand here amid all my defeats prouder than I could have been if I had won the world. Shakespeare rocks and Brannagh brought that out with a vastly accomplished collective of actors and support crew. The Japanese theme in an English wood worked so well one wondered whether Britain might not be better suited to becoming part Japanese.

Until seeing this recent Branagh adaptation of Shakespeare's As You Like It, I thought that I and my 8th-grade classmates years ago at a private girls' school had butchered this play as badly as possible. However, apparently, I was wrong. There is a lot that is seriously wrong with this film, despite some strong individual contributions from David Oyelowo, Adrien Lester, Richard Briers, and a couple others. However, overall, not only does this film border on incomprehensibility, but it also discourages one from ever wishing to read or see this play again. The worst aspect of this film by far is the patronizing, stereotypical "orientalisms" of the setting in Japan. Not for one moment is the story at all credible within this environment. Branagh does not seem to have spent any time at all understanding the time period into which he sets the play. What are English dukes doing setting up their fiefdoms in late 19th century Japan, let alone having private armies of ancient Japanese costume-clad soldiers? Every cliché that the least educated Westerner has about Japan is thrown into this shoddy blender. Why has Branagh set this story in Japan? I optimistically thought, at the outset, perhaps he's reverse-engineering the concept Kurosawa so brilliantly and successfully used in Ran, and Throne of Blood. And a truly imaginative and profound director could have made a good case for doing this. But Branagh does not attempt to place us in a setting which makes sense, so there is no explanation for why we are in Japan, other than that Branagh is desperate to call attention to himself, or that he wants an excuse to dress up all the lovers in kimonos at the end. The character of Touchstone looks clearly ridiculous, as if he had been air-lifted into the forest from some other planet. The character of Rosalind is seriously miscast, and appears to be less of a personage than Celia, also probably miscast in the overacting Romola Garai. In the play, Rosalind dazzles us with a driving intelligence wholly lacking here. And what are we to make of the casting choices of Oliver and Orlando? Although both parts are finely acted, in fact their contributions were the best parts of this film in my opinion, to imagine two black British lovers courting 19th century white women in the Japanese countryside, while everyone else there seems to be white, just seems totally anachronistic and jarring. Had the cast been totally mixed, it would have seemed less out of place, or had the setting not been filled with quaint Japanisms, it could have worked. Obviously, nothing needs to make sense in Branagh's brain. I'm not sure I would have been surprised had a couple of the characters shown up dressed as 9th century Vikings, or as Russian boyars. I also found the music annoying. Britain is full of divine singers: couldn't KB have found some better voices to do the singing? Couldn't he have found some less whiny music? And the music at the end sounds like an American musical comedy from the 1930s. Watching the red-haired Rosalind dressed up as a geisha in the ending scenes was just silly.In short, Mr. Branagh seems to have no real appreciation or understanding for the characters and the themes of the play, and stoops to the level of the comic-book in this film. If he has so little confidence in the merits of the play as it is written, why bother making a movie of it at all?

Here's one of the most intriguing challenges in all the lands of imagination.Shakespeare invented much of what it means to be a modern human. But he did so in a very constrained way of communicating. The plays were all about language and geometry on how the come to us, and within that vessel he grew images. That sparseness was what allowed him to shape the language so finely, thus creating the poetic spins that find valence in us.Okay. If you have seen Shakespeare done as it originally was, you'll know what I mean. The plays work well when read silently or aloud as well. But how to translate to cinema? How to take something that is not visual until it enters us, and make it visual before it enters us and make the same magic?I love how people have tried. Most modern stage productions follow this cinematic challenge as well because now we are a visual society. Jarman, Greenaway, Luhrman and Taymor have done marvelous things with this challenge. Branaugh is from a different stripe, a sideways approach to this problem. He sometimes moves into pure cinema (Kate's mirrored Ophelia rant, the horses in "Much Ado") but he's primarily worried about stagecraft as theatrically defined. Here he does something different, something so ambitious I'm trilled to be alive for it. Its so clever.I did not see this at an appointed time, but stumbled on it after a discouraging day. In a sense, it saved my life. It really did. I watched the whole thing with one of those openmouthed grins.Here's what he did. He transported the setting to Japan and adjusted everything accordingly. Simple idea. No, its not just Shakespeare with different clothes. Its not just the plot fleshed out with some other setting. Its a translation to a visual expression. Japan has spent a few hundred years building, refining and constraining a visual grammar in much the same way that Northern Europeans did with language. We lose much of what we associate with the plays, that verbal poetry. What we get in its stead is something similar but visually rooted. To establish this of course you have to "show strong" in the beginning, and he does with a completely wordless intrusion, an invasion of guess what? A play!This Rosalind is exquisite, someone who knows how to shape the space around her the way British actors carefully shape their words. She anchors the whole thing, including an amazing epilogue. Really, you should save this for when you need your life saved, when you need to stroke down melancholy burrs. Though Branaugh ends with his familiar happydance, by then you will be ready for it, ready to fall in love all over again.Ted's Evaluation -- 3 of 3: Worth watching.