This is all a matter of opinion obviously, but in general, the works of Shakespeare were meant to be acted out as plays in front of a live audience. The play is clearly the intent and it was designed to be performed live, not read nor watched on a screen. Obviously personal preference will play a factor here, but the play will be more amusing if you see it in person.
This is mainly because the humor is intended for some improvisation, and it is useful to see the audience reaction so that some pieces can be exaggerated or prolonged according to the response. Additionally, taking place in a large auditorium or theater, the motions and actions are typically intended to be aggrandized and exaggerated, which come out more humorous in its intended venue, but can seem silly and overdone on the screen.
This question raises some questions. First, Much...
Unlock This Answer Now
Start your 48-hour free trial and get ahead in class. Boost your grades with access to expert answers and top-tier study guides. Thousands of students are already mastering their assignments—don't miss out. Cancel anytime.
Already a member? Log in here.
Ado About Nothing is a play, not a "book." Second, which movie version is being referred to? At the very least, there is a 1913 silent film version, the 1993 Kenneth Branagh version, the 2013 Joss Whedon modern-dress version, and a 2015 adaptation called "Messina High."
Let's say for argument's sake that the 1993 movie is the one referred to. Although that film is beautifully filmed, and there are some standout performances (Branagh as Benedick, Denzel Washington as Don Pedro, and especially Emma Thompson as Beatrice), there are also some sub par (to be kind) performances as well. Keanu Reeves was not born to act in classical theatre—in my opinion.
Movies can be a gateway to Shakespeare for people just getting familiar with the plays. The text is inevitably cut, and usually adapted for modern ears. But there's no comparison with a good, live, staged version, which is how the text was meant to be heard and seen. (Note that I qualify this statement with "good." There is also little more dreadful than bad live Shakespeare.) Best of all, for most people, is reading the play beforehand, ideally in a group setting where clarifications can be made and discussed, and then seeing the play.
Having said that, I like both the 1993 and the 2013 film versions and would recommend them, especially to those leery of sitting through a live version without some background.