as the play did not. This was easier to show because the movie allowed for the use of more space and props, which the play could not. Showing the masculinity of the military right away in the movie established a sense of power and authority that the play did not quite capture, which makes the humiliation of Hero more real later in the play. The way the soldiers enter a room in the movie make them looked up to and praised where as the play did not have a feeling of awe but of equality. The two director’s choices of costuming also made the two groups differ from one version to another.Branaugh did not emphasize Hero as much in his directing as the company director chose to in the play. Hero was dressed in brighter colors and had more lines in the play whereas in the movie she wore the same outfit as the rest of the ladies and blended in as just another handmaid. Beatrice was dressed in a bright red dress in the play where as in the movie she was dressed the same as Hero. The company director may have chose to dress the characters differently to show the individuals rather than the groups. Branaugh, however, concentrated on the group distinctions rather than the characters as individuals.The interpretation of the shaming of Hero is very different in the play than in the movie. Claudio and Hero’s relationship is romanced, which makes the audience believe that he really does love Hero rather than her money. I think that this is a good decision because it allows the audience to feel for Hero more when she is disgraced. When Claudio accuses Hero in the play she is placed in the middle of him, Don Pedro and Don John. Benedict is strategically placed behind Don John making him fade into part of the domestic sphere. I think that the director chose to place Hero in the middle for a reason. Although the actions are based around her, the way the men are placed on stage makes the scene into the relationship among Claudio, Benedict, and Do...
