Les joyeuses commères de Windsor

This production is not very good, but it's not quite as bad as I'd expected. Richard Griffiths holds up reasonably well in comparison to Anthony Quayle's portrayal in the BBC productions of Henry IV parts 1 & 2, though of course it's unfortunate that different actors portrayed the same characters in the different plays. Most of the other actors are reasonably competent, though not nearly as good as you'd expect from their work elsewhere. I agree that the direction is remarkably weak, with the denouement in particular being far too feeble to intimidate anyone, let alone Falstaff. But this was, after all, one of Shakespeare's weakest plays, allegedly written at royal command under severe deadline pressure.

I am not sure whether I'd go as far to say that this performance is a treasure, but I also don't think it is that bad either. It does have things that I think could have been done better, for example I do agree that the pacing was very slack at times and that as much as I like him Ben Kingsley was very neurotic and all over the place as Ford. The direction is inconsistent, the scenes with Mistress Page, with Mistress Ford and with Mistress Quickly are great and Falstaff also has some fine moments, but I found Ford's overdone and for some reason the denouncement doesn't quite come off. However, visually it is very sumptuous, with the sets and costumes lushly coloured and true to period. Shakespeare's dialogue still has sparkle and wit, and on the most part the performances are good with the women on a higher level of consistency than the men. Judy Davis is a dignified and humorous Mistress Ford, and Prunella Scales is the same as Mistress Page and even more so. Elizabeth Spriggs' Mistress Quickly is wonderfully conniving. Richard Griffiths acquits himself very well, witty and robust yet noble and vulnerable, while in support with the men while Tenniel Evans is likable it is Michael Bryant's very funny Dr Caius that stands out. In conclusion, a decent production that is well performed on the whole and sumptuous to look at, though the pacing and some of the staging could have been better. 7/10 Bethany Cox

Falstaff reminds me of a Civil Servant from the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries three weeks before his retirement date !

There is a British TV series called 'Pie in the Sky' staring Richard Griffiths. It's about a fat chef who does occasional detective work. He is very similar to the character Griffiths portrays in the Merry Wives of Windsor, Sir John Falstaff. He finally found his forte, eating all the pies. However he does have a rather impressive CV. Sir John Falstaff should be more like a Robert Newton of Treasure Island fame rather than a pastry cook.

If you have ever heard the audio version with Anthony Quale as Falstaff and Dennis Hordern as Master Ford you will understand what a facile, badly directed and totally incorrect version this is.

Just because it has the letters BBC behind it does not always mean there is quality.

What I found irritating was the Somerset accents for most of the Principle characters. Windsor is a short barge ride up the Thames from Richmond Palace. Windsor Castle can be seen from Heathrow Airport, so why the West Country "ooo--arr" lads ? Perhaps the director was from Bristol ?

The costumes look so new and clean, whilst the moneyed members of the cast might look like this the others remind me of a lucky tramp who has just had free apparel from Savile Row.

Where is Falstaff growling for his quart of Sack ? Where is the lust and roguery of the fat pudding ?

Master Ford/Brook should not be portrayed as the limp character he is. Where's the anger of the cuckold?

Where's the 'she mercury' of Mistress Quickly.

Nym and Pistol have credibility.Judy Davis and Prunella Scales play Mistresses Page and Ford well enough, even with some humour.

It's as if the director was directing the Merry Wives yet thinking the context of a completely different play.

No, humour, no direction, no acting and no good. This is supposed to be a comedy but the cast act as if someone has made an inappropriate joke at a wedding! Mis-cast,misdirected and occasionally over acted. Why does Ben Kingsley act as if he is playing the part of Master Slender ? Frank-ly not Master Ford.

And how sped you ?

Very ill favourably Master Director, Very ill favourably.

Bring me a quart of Sack to get over this dead fish lying on a wet fish shop's slab.

The comments of "Deadly Dull" from Chicago has it spot on !

David Hugh Jones directed one other play for this series, the protracted, dull betrayal of "Pericles: Prince of Tyre." One can only conclude he has no sense of pulse, for this performance too is endless. Comedies are like sharks. If they don't keep moving forward, they die.

Some actors maintain their footing anyway. The women are good across the board. Judy Davis is a surprise as Mistress Ford - she's not the first actress that comes to mind when it comes to soufflés. Prunella Scales and Elisabeth Spriggs are particularly strong.

Richard Griffiths keeps promising to break loose as Falstaff but never does. He's cut all the nonsense, but there's not enough left without it. You finally wonder if he's ambivalent about playing the part at all. Michael Bryant, murderously ice-cold as Ratchkovsky in "Fall of Eagles," is here brilliantly funny as Dr. Caius. Most of the rest of the male cast are good in their parts as well.

A special exception must be made for Ben Kingsley. As Ford, he is weak, thin-voiced and neurotic, and when Ford masquerades as Brook, it's "Katy Bar the Door." The actor descends into an orgy of squeaks, gurgles, twitches and eye-rolling that give us a solid idea of what Jerry Lewis would have looked like in Elizabethan times. Or perhaps Dennis Weaver's baroque turn in Orson Welles's "Touch of Evil" done in iambic pentameter. A stronger director would have stepped hard on Mr. Kingsley's shenanigans and guided this misguided missile to a safer landing.

A lovely set by Don Homfrey is a valentine to the lost art of TV studio design. There is ample opportunity here for the eye to roam happily over the scenery while waiting for something to happen with the actors.

On the whole, this production of "The Merry Wives of Windsor" is admirable. It contains nearly all of Shakespeare's lines (including a few insertions from the Quarto version); it includes some excellent performances; the staging is generally deft, and the atmosphere of the play is warmly engaging; and the sets are pleasing to the eye.

Prunella Scales and Judy Davis as Mistresses Page and Ford (respectively) are especially good, but nearly all the other members of the cast -- ranging from Richard Griffiths as Falstaff to Elizabeth Spriggs as Mistress Quickly -- are also highly commendable. The one exception, surprisingly, is Ben Kingsley as Ford. To be sure, anyone playing the role of Ford has to go over the top occasionally. However, Kingsley is annoyingly histrionic in the pejorative sense of the term; his high-strung mannerisms and his falsetto utterances become quite tiresome. His performance is not unalloyedly woeful, but it is well below the level of the other performances.

A few of the other reviewers on this site have criticized Richard Griffiths for his portrayal of Falstaff, but Griffiths aptly captures the nature of Falstaff in "Merry Wives" -- a play that presents Falstaff as a somewhat less shrewd character than the Falstaff of the Henry IV plays. Moreover, the girth of Griffiths made him more suitable for the role than was Anthony Quayle in the BBC's Henry IV productions (though Quayle's excellent acting compensated for his physical unsuitability).

Apart from Ben Kingsley's performance, the main objectionable feature of this otherwise admirable production is that a few scenes and smaller portions of the play are rearranged. The rearrangements aren't damaging, but they strike me as pointless. (Much the same can be said about the handful of small excisions of Shakespeare's lines.) All in all, I can recommend this production heartily to anyone who wants to experience the charms of Shakespeare's play.

ADDENDUM: Having now watched this production three more times, I feel that my remarks about Ben Kingsley's performance are too strongly negative. Most of his acting is in fact very good -- as one would expect from such a virtuoso Shakespearean thespian. Only at a few brief junctures does he become annoyingly histrionic with his high-pitched utterances or excessive gesticulations. I'll leave my original remarks unmodified, to indicate how someone might respond to Kingsley's performance after only a few viewings. However, my assessment of that performance is now significantly more favorable.