> In article <47899e1e$0$13936$fa0fcedb@news.zen.co.uk>, "Jaxtraw"
> knickersjaxtrawstudios.com> wrote:
>

>> Kweeg wrote:

>>> "Anybody" anywhere-anytime.com> wrote in message
>>> news:130120081441081685%%anybody@anywhere-anytime.com...

>>>> "GeneK" genek_hates_spammers.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:LEaij.278$GS1.95@newsfe11.phx...

>>>>> "Steven L." earthlink.net> wrote...

>>>>>> You didn't like "Forbidden Planet" either?

>>>>>
>>>>> I like FP, but I'm not sure whether that really qualifies
>>>>> as "moving" Shakespeare, as it uses even less of "The
>>>>> Tempest" than "West Side Story" uses of "Romeo and
>>>>> Juliet." I suppose where I would draw the line is between adapting
>>>>> the basic elements from the plot and trying to actually redo the
>>>>> original in a modern setting. For example, "Romeo+Juliet," where
>>>>> modern leather-jacket gang members wander the streets of
>>>>> LA reciting the original Shakespeare lines.

>>>>
>>>> I believe that has happened, and worse. Here in New Zealand we have
>>>> even had Maori-ised versions of Shakespeare's plays. :-\
>>>>
>>>> Despite often being held up as the be-all-and-end-all of litery
>>>> achievement, I personally find Shakespeare hidiously boring, mostly
>>>> unintelligible and a complete waste of time being studied in schools
>>>> today.

>>>
>>> LMFAO!
>>> but Anybody will tell you he knows good writing when he sees it....
>>> probably too much "soft core porn" and innuendo in it for him.

>>
>> Indeed. How can some baldy Elizabethan "bard" possibly hold a candle to

>> works of the great Glen A. Larson?

>
> Whatever you say. :-\