The Plays of William Shakespeare, Vol. 9 - The Tempest (1992)

Tempest review

Extremely disappointing. I was hoping to share some scenes with my students to help them understand the play. I'm afraid I would turn them off Shakespeare entirely if I showed them even a touch of this version. February 10, 2007

There are better films of this play

Firstly I'd just like to point out that on the box it says: "Staged as seen in the 16th century". In fact 'The Tempest' wasn't even written until around 1610/11, the 17th century, and thus it's highly unlikely that it was seen in the 16th.

This is a brilliant play, which has been adapted more successfully to film in the following versions:

- The Tempest, director: Derek Jarman, 1979

- Prospero's Books, director: Peter Greenaway, 1991

I wouldn't reccommend viewing Greenaway's version unless you have know the play quite well as it's a very artistic interpretation, and doesn't lend itself to storytelling, it's more preoccupied with the specifics of Prospero's 'art' (i.e. magic). May 27, 2004

Authentic production of The Tempest

This was a very entertaining production of Shakespeare's play. I particularly found Ariel's character very true to the qualities of 'airy spirits.' The costumes of all the characters were well-done. I was not as keen on the parts with the jester and drunken butler as I was with the other characters, but overall, the scenes were played well. For anyone who has never had a chance to see a stage production of The Tempest in a style close to the original play, this would be a good introduction. Though some people may find Woodman's production of The Tempest banal, it could be very appealing to fans of Shakespeare's time and history, not just his plays. If you only like lavish sets and modern ideals of stage productions, this edition may not be appropriate, but it need not be for the masses; only for select fans. October 3, 2003

More reviews at Amazon.com ...