Whenever a play is successfully adapted to film, it's hard to tell who is responsible. It isn't like much content has been removed or altered for 1999's A Midsummer Night's Dream. Is it just the subject matter working its magic? Partially for sure but consider whether this retelling captures the original prose and structure. How does the movie look? Does it have re-watch value? Are the actors good in their roles?

Hermia (Anna Friel) is in love with Lysander (Dominic West). They want to marry but her father Egeus (Bernard Bill) wants to pair her with Demetrius (Christian Bale). Meanwhile, Helena (Calista Flockhart) is desperately in love with Demetrius but they broke up and he has no interest in trying again; he's after Hermia. She and Lysander decide to make a run for it, pursued by Demetrius, and Helena (who hopes to win him back in the process). Meanwhile, the king of the fairies, Lord Oberon (Rupert Everett), and his queen Titania (Michelle Pfeiffer) are in the middle of a lover’s quarrel. It's up to trickster Puck (Stanley Tucci) to mend their relationship. Finally, we also follow a group of would-be playwrights putting together a comedic/dramatic presentation of Pyramus and Thisbe. The stories are interwoven as the fairies’ magic interferes with the lovers and the actors.

A Midsummer Night’s Dream is an excellent play, even if you don’t understand Olde English completely. There are plenty of clever rhymes, and the comedic scenarios are timeless. The three stories are fairly simple, making them easy to follow. On DVD, you've got the option to turn on the subtitles, which makes it even easier. The camera's ability for closeups gives us a better look at the actors than you could ever get in an auditorium, which facilitates your understanding as well.

Rather than setting the story in ancient Greece, director Michael Hoffman has selected 19th Century Italy. While bicycles may be present and the only togas we see belong to the fairy-folk, it works. Any period with candlelight, lavish castles, old-timey attitudes, and green woods lovers could stroll through fits this material.

Performance-wise, everyone does well. The standouts are easily Kevin Kline as Bottom, one of the actors putting on the play-within-a-play, and Stanley Tucci as Puck. The performers have good chemistry, making this comedic romance unexpectedly sexy. The movie's got an infamous mud-wrestling scene and for me, it was one of the highlights. Throughout the film, everyone is fighting over who is going to get together with who and it gets even messier/funnier when Puck's enchantments get crossed. The ladies chase after the men and depending on what stage they're in, they run away from, run towards, or are completely bewildered by their affections. What better way to represent this messy sort of fun than by having them all get dirty for real? If that doesn't get you, some very selectively placed rose petals and bushes will.

If you’re looking at A Midsummer Night’s Dream and analyzing the feminist ideals within, or discussing how marriage and love relationships can make an individual's identity disappear, you’re looking too hard. It’s a movie that features a play within a play, some big laughs and magical enchantments being dropped left and right so that the audience can have a good time. It’s a light romantic comedy. It makes you laugh. It makes you happy to share it with someone. I’m not sure if I can pinpoint anything in it that “improves” the material, or would necessarily make it better than any other adaptations or live performances but that’s alright. The 1999 film version of A Midsummer Night’s Dream is exactly what it wants to be: fun. (On DVD, August 1, 2015)

The 1970′s were a time of experimentation on the big stage in American cinema.  Many of the directors that recently had found fame were fans of old Italian and French cinema, and their influences were being intertwined into the Hollywood system to great effect.  Neo-realism, knowingly or not, seemed to be the realm that John Sayles stepped in with his debut film, The Return of the Secaucus 7.  He would later go on to find huge fame in the 1980′s with The Big Chill, but his debut film, in my opinion, is the real work of art. 

Mike (Bruce MacDonald) and Katie (Maggie Renzi) have rented a cottage in New Hampshire in anticipation of a reunion with their college friends.  The group were formerly arrested in college for protesting, thus gaining them the nickname of the Secaucus 7 : Mike, Katie, J.T. (Adam LeFevre), Frances (Maggie Cousineau), Irene (Jean Passanante), Maura (Karen Trott) and Jeff (Mark Arnott).  Irene is bringing Chip (Gordon Clapp), her co-worker and current love interest; Maura and Jeff are bringing a fresh break-up; to top it all off, the entire group is bringing together years of memories, regrets, resentments and a whole batch of pent-up thoughts and feelings held for one another.  With local friends Ron (David Strathairn) and Howie (director John Sayles) thrown into the mix, there’s no telling who will couple up, what emotions will boil over, and where members of the group will stand with one another after the reunion is all said and done.

This film is a drama that plays out very much like a documentary.  We get a clear indication for who is who early on : Mike and Katie are the surrogate parents, J.T. is the free spirit, Irene and Chip are the pragmatists, Maura is the dramatic one, Jeff is the one who rocks the boat, and Frances is the outsider.  Ron is the wild card, and Howie is the representation of settling down.  With all of these elements thrown into a mix, and the palatable history between these fictional characters, what we are left with are very realistic and entertaining depictions of what could be mundane human interaction.  It’s that realism applied with a focus on entertainment remaining that allows us to feel like the silent friend in the group, watching all of the drama and fun unfold right in front of our eyes, and finding ourselves feeling a part of it all.

Truthful portrayals of love and friendship are what really help nail down that aforementioned realism that is so present in the film.  The actors and director (along with their small crew) were all friends in real life that had previously worked together in acting troupes, and none of them had any real expectations in regards to what would happen after the film’s release, and it allowed those real life connections to shine through.  There are no pretenses, as it is crystal clear everyone trusts one another and is comfortable around one another.  This level of comfort allows the actors to not only go for broke when they see a memorable opportunity, but it makes their intimate and emotionally revealing moments carry that much more impact.  You can see both sides emoting, listening, reacting and taking everything in, very similar to what we go through in vulnerable times connected to our lives.

Honest acting is the name of the game, and it’s a big part of how the realism is achieved.  The reactions and laughs are all genuine.  The dialogue, observations and jokes made at one another’s expense feel as if they are coming from a place of familiarity rather than originated in a writer’s mind.  The smiles are sincere, the worry feels real, and the electricity between certain cast members is present even with the film on mute.  Everything is in the eyes and the body language of the characters, and the camera does a fantastic job of capturing and framing all of the comfort and familiarity for our pleasure.

Bruce MacDonald and Maggie Renzi find ways to be compelling in their dual role of parental figures and tour guides, coming off as somewhat wiser and more settled than their friends despite being the same age.  Ada LeFevre brings tons of charisma and charm to his role of drifter and songwriter, making him by far the most magnetic of the group in terms of personality.  Jean Passanante and Gordon Clapp’s logical observations and straightforward humor play extremely well in relation to the company they keep in the film.  Maggie Cousineau comes off as the most mysterious in the group due to her guarded and reserved nature... she is comfortable around the group, especially the women, but not outwardly revealing in terms of dialogue.  Karen Trott and Mark Arnott play lovers at odds quite well, managing to show shades of why they made a good couple in tandem with showing a ferocity towards one another (subtly and directly) that implies years of intimacy and no secrets.  David Strathairn and his lighthearted nature were memorable, but definitely not an indication of his long and diverse career that was to follow.  John Sayles made the most of his acting moments, providing a contrast to the unburdened nature of the remaining characters.

No matter who you are, you'll relate to A League of Their Own. It's funny and dramatic, with great, quotable lines, and terrific performances. It's a crowd-pleaser, a movie you'll look back upon fondly right away.

In 1943, every young able-bodied men have left for Europe to fight the war. To keep the profits coming to the team owners and to give the people some entertainment, the All-American Girls Professional Baseball League (AAGPBL) is created. The film chronicles the rise of the Rockford Peaches. Nobody respects them, not the least bit their washout of a coach Jimmy Dugan (Tom Hanks). But their star player Dorothy "Dottie" Hinson (Geena Davis) has what it takes to take them to the top, and make this league something to be taken seriously.

Right away, you'll latch onto the characters. These women want to be taken seriously as athletes They play for real. Sliding, hitting, giving it their all every single time. But this movie is not a gender-swapped selection of cliches. They aren’t a collection of underdogs just waiting to get their big break so they can go out and change the world. They're real people, products of their time. As soon as their husbands come back from the war, they’re going to head right back into the kitchen, ready to cook and raise the kids as if their time on the field never happened. It mixes the exhilaration you feel as they rise through the ranks with melancholy. They don’t realize how big of an impact they are going to have and you wonder what if...

You don't expect to find great conversation-starters out of sports movie but A League of Their Own has plenty. The players are not taken seriously because of their gender. To get attention, they have to be feminine and sexy. To be seen as legitimate, they have to try twice as hard as their male counterparts and shatter away the expectations placed on them. There is a lot of emotion in this movie on the screen as these women have to confront big ideas. There's even more going on in YOUR head. You wonder what you would do, or how you would react if placed in their shoes.

That would be plenty to keep you entertained, but there’s more. This is also a great sports movie. It’s a case of the ultimate underdogs. The coach doesn’t even believe in them. They have to prove themselves to EVERYONE. Their families, their teammates, to the world that is hesitant to fill baseball stadium to watch a bunch of ladies play, even to themselves. Baseball may not necessarily be what I would call an interesting sport to watch but here, I was gnawing on my fingernails. The way Hans Zimmer’s score was pounding in my ears (or was that my heartbeat?) during the final game, the uncertainty of who was going to win (because the movie does a great job keeping you guessing). It felt as real as a live event. My only criticism if I had to find one is that some of the baseball game montages do run on a bit long. It's worth seeing just to get a look at Tom Hanks playing a jerk. He's great at it too!

Even if you don’t like baseball, catch A League of Their Own. You easily latch onto the characters, the casting is immaculate (particularly in the before/after scenes) and it chronicles a chapter in sports history that’s worth telling. The movie makes you feel good and makes you think too. It only gets better if you can watch it with a crowd and discuss it afterward. (On DVD, March 6, 2015)