Lionsgate | Release Date: June 7, 2013
7.7
USER SCORE
Generally favorable reviews based on 58 Ratings
USER RATING DISTRIBUTION
Positive:
46
Mixed:
8
Negative:
4
WATCH NOW
Stream On
Stream On
Review this movie
VOTE NOW
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Check box if your review contains spoilers 0 characters (5000 max)
4
gypsy1022Oct 4, 2013
Unless you are a Shakespeare lover this movie is not for you. For me, combining a Shakesperian theme in today's world (even if it was meant to be a comedy) just didn't work. Also didn't care that it was in black and white but that's justUnless you are a Shakespeare lover this movie is not for you. For me, combining a Shakesperian theme in today's world (even if it was meant to be a comedy) just didn't work. Also didn't care that it was in black and white but that's just me. It didn't provide any authenticity. I don give it points for the quality of actors in the movie. Expand
0 of 1 users found this helpful01
All this user's reviews
5
Zack2981Jun 17, 2013
Short review: If you like Joss Whedon, you'll like this movie.

Long review: First off, I know this isn't my cup of tea, but do we really need another Shakespeare adaptation? I was intrigued by the use of the original text but there just
Short review: If you like Joss Whedon, you'll like this movie.

Long review: First off, I know this isn't my cup of tea, but do we really need another Shakespeare adaptation? I was intrigued by the use of the original text but there just wasn't much here for me that made it worth watching. I mean, for the Whedon-istas out there, it's got all the things you expect of a Whedon movie. The same type of humor, the dramatic moments, and Nathan Fillion. If you notice, the reviews giving this movie a 9 or 10 are mega Whedon fans and that's totally fine! But if you are going to watch this movie without being into everything Whedon does, then you can pretty much skip this one. There were some funny moment, sure, but even at only an hour and a half, I just wanted this thing to be over.

I realize this is one of Whedon's "cheap" movies but it really came off like a well-shot and decently-acted Cinemax movie without the sex scenes. Fancy house in the valley, everyone in suits and dresses for no reason, and a group of people getting together for no real purpose other than to make a story possible. And it's Shakespeare, so you're not getting anything new on the script front. Just the Whedon gang getting together to work on a project. For my taste, the comedy was so-so and the drama was sappy. Just so-so for me.
Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews
6
RevRonOct 8, 2013
Saying anything bad about Shakespeare or an adaptation of one of his works is a quick and easy way for people to jerk their knees and call you an uncultured heathen. Doing one of his works is the fast track to get great reviews becauseSaying anything bad about Shakespeare or an adaptation of one of his works is a quick and easy way for people to jerk their knees and call you an uncultured heathen. Doing one of his works is the fast track to get great reviews because syndicated snob critics really, REALLY don't want to look uncultured. Joss Whedon's adaptation of "Much Ado About Nothing" doesn't do much wrong but it isn't doing much to stand out either. Most of the acting is decent and the heart of the play is there, so it's funny. But it doesn't change the fact that it looked cheap to me. Modern day retellings always come off cheap to me because it looks like a film student's last minute project. It's like they forgot the movie was due so they just filmed their friends reading the lines, excused the modern day attire by saying it's a "modern retelling" and put it in black and white so it looks, "you know, deep and stuff." This movie looks less like it was done by Joss Whedon and more like it was done by a student who's semester got away from him and decided to make this the Sunday afternoon before the Monday it was due. Expand
0 of 0 users found this helpful00
All this user's reviews