Would've been a 3 but given that the rating is so high on GR I'm dropping it a little lower. Honestly, it's not a great adaptation. It has none of the hallmarks of good Shakespeare-to-graphic-novel adaptations-- transitions and panel layouts are confusing, the art style (even proportions and faces of characters) was not consistent, and rather than feeling like a graphic novel it feels as though the original text has been dropped on top of art and just... left there. There is no connection between the speech bubbles and the art. They don't blend like I am so used to with Manga Shakespeare adaptations-- though, yes, I skipped this one from them because it was overtly racist.
But 'not being overtly racist' is a low bar. The costume designs were alright, but when you get to adapt Shakespeare why not shoot for the stars? After reading a furry cyberpunk interpretation of Othello, I'm a little let down by just color-coding characters and putting Edmund in a Pied Piper of Hamelin cosplay. Goneril had great design, in my opinion, but everyone else was quite lacking in terms of thought and recognizability (not helped by the inconsistency of proportions.)
I had to skim the text because it was written in a horrifically unreadable font, which does not help Shakespearean English one bit. I definitely was not understanding anything-- and that's not something that has to be the case. I've been introduced to multiple plays through Manga Shakespeare, like I said, so I'm not going to give 5 stars because 'well this one is the best of the three existing graphic novel adaptations.' That does not a good book make.
Augh. Can you tell I'm frustrated? I find it very difficult to read Shakespeare, so I WANTED to like this, trust me; I love manga and graphic novel Shakespeare because it gives you the visual aids of the play (gesture, body language, facial expression) without needing to break from books entirely. It's my favorite way to experience the plays, actually. And that's why my review is so harsh-- because I know things can be better.
That said, the art was often beautiful; it just wasn't consistent. I really wish more time and drafts had been spent on this, because it's a lovely idea. A professional graphic novelist (not someone who does adaptations) might also have been helpful, or an editor more familiar with conventions-- I don't claim to be an expert, but the paneling was really off sometimes. Oh my God I started this paragraph being so positive and I spiraled again.
I struggle to say a lot of positive things because, well, Hinds didn't write the story; he only committed it to this format, and I don't think he did a wonderful job. A lot of important lines were missing, and I needed the help of a friend to understand the play. Hinds has a complimentary "plain english" script available on his site, but I'm not on his site; I'm reading a book!
So I will say that I gave him two stars for his art. It's wonderful in a larger sense; I'm sure his finished pieces are great. Many panels would have been nice on their own, outside of this. It's just not really something I'd look for in a graphic novel-- more in standalone finished pieces.
I'd still read another book by Gareth Hinds, and I'm not tragically disappointed in my loss of ~$4 at a used book site. Just not the best thing I've ever read; I was glad to be done. I do have faith other books from him will be better.