What do you think?
Rate this book
Kill Shakespeare #1
Kill Shakespeare, Vol. 1: A Sea of Troubles
What Fables does for fairy tales, Kill Shakespeare does with the greatest writer of all time. This dark take on the Bard pits his greatest heroes (Hamlet, Juliet, Othello, Falstaff) against his most menacing villains (Richard III, Lady Macbeth, Iago) in an epic adventure to find and kill a reclusive wizard named William Shakespeare.
148 pages, Paperback
First published November 9, 2010
34 people are currently reading
1207 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 343 reviews
January 24, 2020
But soft,
What comic through yonder bookshelf breaks?
It is this one,
And I like a hot dog on a bun.
Okay, so my iambic pentameter is a little rusty, and perhaps I’m only 98% as eloquent as the Bard. But, whatever—you groundlings can just keep your comments to yourself. You get what you pay for.
This is a solid start to what I hope is a good series. I’m giving this it four stars based as much on my hope that subsequent volumes are as entertaining as the premise as the content of volume 1 itself (which is solid, but didn't tighten my girdle strings quite as much as I'd hoped). When you have blurbs that draw comps to Fables and The Unwritten, you’re putting yourself in lofty company (Fables is my favorite comic series of all time, and The Unwritten is a worthwhile if occasionally frustrating read). I don’t think this series will quite live up to that billing, but if it can approximate those series in the way that my own poetic endeavors approximate Shakespeare’s, well, that’ll be 98% as good.
Lay on, Macduff, to volume 2.
What comic through yonder bookshelf breaks?
It is this one,
And I like a hot dog on a bun.
Okay, so my iambic pentameter is a little rusty, and perhaps I’m only 98% as eloquent as the Bard. But, whatever—you groundlings can just keep your comments to yourself. You get what you pay for.
This is a solid start to what I hope is a good series. I’m giving this it four stars based as much on my hope that subsequent volumes are as entertaining as the premise as the content of volume 1 itself (which is solid, but didn't tighten my girdle strings quite as much as I'd hoped). When you have blurbs that draw comps to Fables and The Unwritten, you’re putting yourself in lofty company (Fables is my favorite comic series of all time, and The Unwritten is a worthwhile if occasionally frustrating read). I don’t think this series will quite live up to that billing, but if it can approximate those series in the way that my own poetic endeavors approximate Shakespeare’s, well, that’ll be 98% as good.
Lay on, Macduff, to volume 2.
August 4, 2025
Really cool conceit, I was confused sometimes with the panelling, as to what was going on, but as the book went on it got more and more fully developed, and the characters got more and more interesting. Definitely want to keep up and see where it goes!
December 5, 2018
I came here to watch Shakespeare be hunted down and killed by his own characters and I honestly feel so betrayed.
September 8, 2011
This is such an amazing concept, and when I first heard about it, I was taken aback by how unbelievably awesome it might be. Some of Shakespeare’s most memorable characters face off against each other in a desperate race to find a wizard named William Shakespeare. Othello, Juliet, Falstaff, and others believe that “Will” will deliver them from the tyranny of King Richard III. Richard, along with the Macbeths and Iago, plot to kill Shakespeare and obtain his quill—and with it, his magic. Thrust into the middle of this conflict is Hamlet, initially rescued by Richard and dubbed “the Shadow King”, prophesied, according to Richard, to kill Shakespeare and free England from the wizard’s tyranny. Later, Hamlet escapes from Richard’s grasp and learns that not all is what it seems with the King of England. But the question remains: whose side is he on, and who is this elusive Shakespeare?
Would that I could give this book the rating it deserves for its concept alone! Alas, in execution Kill Shakespeare leaves me feeling somewhat unsatisfied. There’s plenty to like about this book: witty dialogue, crafty villains, humorous situations, and allusions to many of Shakespeare’s plays. Yet beneath all these myriad elements of farce, the central element of story suffers.
Hamlet’s indecision is probably the most compelling conflict in this first volume. Exiled from Denmark for the murder of Polonius, Hamlet ends up in England, essentially a “guest” of Richard III. To both Hamlet and us (except, if you know who Richard III is, you know better), Richard seems like the good guy: a philosopher-king desperate to save his kingdom from the oppressive magic of this mysterious wizard. Only Hamlet, the shadow king, can save them by killing Shakespeare! Hamlet, still understandably traumatized, is not enamoured with the idea of becoming a contract killer. Still, he begins to form a friendship with Iago as they ride across the countryside in the company of Richard’s men.
Once Hamlet hears the other side of the story from Falstaff and Juliet, he—surprise, surprise—becomes indecisive! He’s a stranger to this land; he has no quarrel with either side, or with William Shakespeare. That being said, I feel like my background knowledge of these characters (and it’s rather obvious even if you aren’t familiar with Shakespeare’s plays) upset the dynamic in this moral ambiguity. It seems so obvious that Juliet and the Protagonists (as they are called, hah) are the “good guys” and that Richard and Lady Macbeth are Evil. In fact, when I think about it, there’s nothing all that original or unique about the overall plot here—one might as well have used some different, generic characters and still arrived at the same ending. What do the Shakespearean characters add to this story?
Not much. However, the opposite is true. I quite liked seeing Othello having to confront Iago, Juliet giving a speech about how much she has lost and how she needs to believe in this “Will”, Hamlet struggling with his guilt over the death of Polonius and his father’s death and in general being quite useless. Kill Shakespeare gives these characters a brand new environment in which they can continue to explore their motivations and grow from their experiences in their respective plays. (Of course, since most of Shakespeare’s tragic figures end up driving a dagger betwixt their breasts, they need a miracle exemption.) Not every character fares so well in this type of adaptation: I’m not a fan of Lady Macbeth’s recasting as some kind of evil sorceress. Yeah, in the Scottish Play she coveted power—perhaps more so even than her husband—but her role in Kill Shakespeare seems rather forced. The same might be said for Juliet: exactly how she went from weeping maiden to warrior maiden (TVTropes) isn’t clear. I’m willing to cut the authors some slack here, because Shakespeare is much like The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: versatile and mutable, changing to fit its medium and its audience.
I’m completing my final year of my undergraduate degree, at the end of which I’ll be certified to teach high school math and English. So while I read Kill Shakespeare, I evaluated it not only as a book but with the eye of possibly using it to engage students with the world of Shakespeare. Let’s face it: the Bard is difficult, because he’s writing in a language (and meter) 400 years removed from us, for a style and form that has evolved well beyond the Elizabethan playhouse. So reimaginings, adaptations, and mashups of Shakespearean works are valuable tools for conveying Shakespeare’s plays to modern day audiences. I’m not certain Kill Shakespeare retains enough of the flavour and content of Shakespeare’s plays to be worth teaching on its own, but it would definitely make an interesting supplementary aid.
I suspect that ultimately my feelings about this story will be swayed by the final volume. Do they actually kill Shakespeare? (Probably not.) Will we get to see characters from some of his other works, such as King Lear or The Tempest? (A short comic included at the end implies that the dagger Richard gives to Hamlet to use on Shakespeare is the same dagger that Brutus used to stab Caesar.) I’m sure that half the fun the writers had was trying to come up with ways to include various characters—and there are so many of them—so I’m looking forward to seeing more of that in Volume 2. Kill Shakespeare didn’t blow my mind like I was hoping it would, but it this first volume is still a decent enough example of how, 400 years on, William Shakespeare is still rocking my world.
Would that I could give this book the rating it deserves for its concept alone! Alas, in execution Kill Shakespeare leaves me feeling somewhat unsatisfied. There’s plenty to like about this book: witty dialogue, crafty villains, humorous situations, and allusions to many of Shakespeare’s plays. Yet beneath all these myriad elements of farce, the central element of story suffers.
Hamlet’s indecision is probably the most compelling conflict in this first volume. Exiled from Denmark for the murder of Polonius, Hamlet ends up in England, essentially a “guest” of Richard III. To both Hamlet and us (except, if you know who Richard III is, you know better), Richard seems like the good guy: a philosopher-king desperate to save his kingdom from the oppressive magic of this mysterious wizard. Only Hamlet, the shadow king, can save them by killing Shakespeare! Hamlet, still understandably traumatized, is not enamoured with the idea of becoming a contract killer. Still, he begins to form a friendship with Iago as they ride across the countryside in the company of Richard’s men.
Once Hamlet hears the other side of the story from Falstaff and Juliet, he—surprise, surprise—becomes indecisive! He’s a stranger to this land; he has no quarrel with either side, or with William Shakespeare. That being said, I feel like my background knowledge of these characters (and it’s rather obvious even if you aren’t familiar with Shakespeare’s plays) upset the dynamic in this moral ambiguity. It seems so obvious that Juliet and the Protagonists (as they are called, hah) are the “good guys” and that Richard and Lady Macbeth are Evil. In fact, when I think about it, there’s nothing all that original or unique about the overall plot here—one might as well have used some different, generic characters and still arrived at the same ending. What do the Shakespearean characters add to this story?
Not much. However, the opposite is true. I quite liked seeing Othello having to confront Iago, Juliet giving a speech about how much she has lost and how she needs to believe in this “Will”, Hamlet struggling with his guilt over the death of Polonius and his father’s death and in general being quite useless. Kill Shakespeare gives these characters a brand new environment in which they can continue to explore their motivations and grow from their experiences in their respective plays. (Of course, since most of Shakespeare’s tragic figures end up driving a dagger betwixt their breasts, they need a miracle exemption.) Not every character fares so well in this type of adaptation: I’m not a fan of Lady Macbeth’s recasting as some kind of evil sorceress. Yeah, in the Scottish Play she coveted power—perhaps more so even than her husband—but her role in Kill Shakespeare seems rather forced. The same might be said for Juliet: exactly how she went from weeping maiden to warrior maiden (TVTropes) isn’t clear. I’m willing to cut the authors some slack here, because Shakespeare is much like The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy: versatile and mutable, changing to fit its medium and its audience.
I’m completing my final year of my undergraduate degree, at the end of which I’ll be certified to teach high school math and English. So while I read Kill Shakespeare, I evaluated it not only as a book but with the eye of possibly using it to engage students with the world of Shakespeare. Let’s face it: the Bard is difficult, because he’s writing in a language (and meter) 400 years removed from us, for a style and form that has evolved well beyond the Elizabethan playhouse. So reimaginings, adaptations, and mashups of Shakespearean works are valuable tools for conveying Shakespeare’s plays to modern day audiences. I’m not certain Kill Shakespeare retains enough of the flavour and content of Shakespeare’s plays to be worth teaching on its own, but it would definitely make an interesting supplementary aid.
I suspect that ultimately my feelings about this story will be swayed by the final volume. Do they actually kill Shakespeare? (Probably not.) Will we get to see characters from some of his other works, such as King Lear or The Tempest? (A short comic included at the end implies that the dagger Richard gives to Hamlet to use on Shakespeare is the same dagger that Brutus used to stab Caesar.) I’m sure that half the fun the writers had was trying to come up with ways to include various characters—and there are so many of them—so I’m looking forward to seeing more of that in Volume 2. Kill Shakespeare didn’t blow my mind like I was hoping it would, but it this first volume is still a decent enough example of how, 400 years on, William Shakespeare is still rocking my world.
April 12, 2013
Fun mashup of various Shakespeare characters fighting each other. Clever, original, fun conception, just okay artistic work. I liked it and wanted to love it.
September 11, 2012
“What Fables does for fairy tales, Kill Shakespeare does with the greatest writer of all time,” proclaimed the back cover of the graphic novel, and that was enough for me, although perhaps I should have heeded the ironic warning implicit in those words (one attempts to improve on the “greatest writer” – how?). The setup is certainly Fables-esque: Hamlet is shipwrecked on his way to England and washes up on the shore of some distant land ruled by the tyrant Richard III (in a sinister alliance with Lady Macbeth), against whom a rebellion is fomenting, led by the likes of Juliet, Othello, and Falstaff. These disparate characters are tied together by the mysterious and as-yes-unseen figure of Will Shakespeare – wizard, charlatan, or myth though he may be. An intriguing premise, but unfortunately the execution leaves much to be desired.
The pacing is a bit hectic, as new characters keep bumping into each other, and the various subplots are laid down. Perhaps, as plot progression allows space to breathe, this won’t be an issue, but here it stands out. The erratic nature of the plot is magnified, however, by the fact that it has no serviceable vehicles to carry it forward. To a man, each of the characters bears only a superficial resemblance to their original, and each comes off as completely stilted and lifeless. Shakespeare possessed the ability to imbue his creations with the contradictory nuance of the human consciousness, and the wit to impart that nuance in a single line; the knockoffs here are mere caricatures by comparison. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is wracked by indecision and self-doubt and given to misguided bursts of passion that lead to his undoing; in this version he’s a scared, whiny kid until roused to action and manhood upon witnessing cruel injustice. Which of these is actually true of human nature, and which a well-worn cliché? And so it goes with the entire cast: the villains are callous and violent simply because they’re the villains, and even Falstaff’s bumbling attempts at comic relief fall flat. The artwork, for its part, is bold and striking, but as one-dimensional as the characters it portrays.
In sum, the only compelling thing about the book is its premise, and it’s a shame that it’s wasted so thoroughly. It may well be that, once established in their world, the creators will find their feet and turn this series into something worthy of their muse, but I won’t be sticking around to find out.
The pacing is a bit hectic, as new characters keep bumping into each other, and the various subplots are laid down. Perhaps, as plot progression allows space to breathe, this won’t be an issue, but here it stands out. The erratic nature of the plot is magnified, however, by the fact that it has no serviceable vehicles to carry it forward. To a man, each of the characters bears only a superficial resemblance to their original, and each comes off as completely stilted and lifeless. Shakespeare possessed the ability to imbue his creations with the contradictory nuance of the human consciousness, and the wit to impart that nuance in a single line; the knockoffs here are mere caricatures by comparison. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is wracked by indecision and self-doubt and given to misguided bursts of passion that lead to his undoing; in this version he’s a scared, whiny kid until roused to action and manhood upon witnessing cruel injustice. Which of these is actually true of human nature, and which a well-worn cliché? And so it goes with the entire cast: the villains are callous and violent simply because they’re the villains, and even Falstaff’s bumbling attempts at comic relief fall flat. The artwork, for its part, is bold and striking, but as one-dimensional as the characters it portrays.
In sum, the only compelling thing about the book is its premise, and it’s a shame that it’s wasted so thoroughly. It may well be that, once established in their world, the creators will find their feet and turn this series into something worthy of their muse, but I won’t be sticking around to find out.
August 19, 2021
Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are not quite dead yet… I expected this to be a ploy about killing Shakespeare. Instead, we delve into Hamlet…
And then—surprise!—we switch to a different play. And several others after that.
And that ploy materialized after all. However, at the end of Chapter One I was not terribly interested in the story. I put it aside and felt no urge to pick it up again, then read a bit more and skimmed myself through most of Chapter Two. Nope. Not for me. Boring. DNF at 40%.
The artwork is nothing special, just ok. I was not enamored with the way many of the female characters were drawn.
And then—surprise!—we switch to a different play. And several others after that.
And that ploy materialized after all. However, at the end of Chapter One I was not terribly interested in the story. I put it aside and felt no urge to pick it up again, then read a bit more and skimmed myself through most of Chapter Two. Nope. Not for me. Boring. DNF at 40%.
The artwork is nothing special, just ok. I was not enamored with the way many of the female characters were drawn.
July 11, 2015
I've not thought of myself as a reading snob or snooty English teacher. I may have to rethink that after this graphic novel. In an attempt to find Shakespeare related books and broaden my graphic novel experience (only memoirs so far--both good), I picked this up. The premise seemed fun--a bunch of Shakespeare's characters live in a world where he is God and different factions are trying to kill or worship him. Maybe this would be a fun way to put newfound Shakespearean knowledge to work for students and a fun diversion for me. Not so much. In fact, not at all.
The story is hard to follow, even the pictures are hard to follow (yes, I've read my share of comic books, so I'm not illiterate). Isn't that Comics 101? Don't even get me started on the inconsistent use of thee, thou and you--sometimes even in the same dialogue bubble. Couple that with steroidal men (Othello-okay, Iago and Hamlet-give me a break!) and an impossibly buxom Lady Macbeth (with dress fabric that would do the Space Age proud, woven on some incredible Middle Age loom!). I am not a purist, but come on, sprinkling a few famous quotes and naming your characters Capulet, Falstaff, and the like, not only doesn't raise you to literature; in fact, it doesn't even make you a good comic book.
The story is hard to follow, even the pictures are hard to follow (yes, I've read my share of comic books, so I'm not illiterate). Isn't that Comics 101? Don't even get me started on the inconsistent use of thee, thou and you--sometimes even in the same dialogue bubble. Couple that with steroidal men (Othello-okay, Iago and Hamlet-give me a break!) and an impossibly buxom Lady Macbeth (with dress fabric that would do the Space Age proud, woven on some incredible Middle Age loom!). I am not a purist, but come on, sprinkling a few famous quotes and naming your characters Capulet, Falstaff, and the like, not only doesn't raise you to literature; in fact, it doesn't even make you a good comic book.
May 14, 2017
What would happen if Hamlet, Lady Macbeth and Richard III walked into a pub?
They would sympathise immediately, ally themselves to form the Great Unholy Trinity of Evilest Evil in the Universe, and start scheming how to murder William Shakespeare, the genius Elizabethan playwright.
Now, what has good old Will done to these three lunatics? Written them like lunatics, obviously, and that's reason enough to kill him, murder him, assassinate him. Why not? Who's not wanted the head of an author when he's produced a work where you're not flattered to your heart's content?
All sounds well and interesting enough. But then the art isn't the best it could be, and the storyline is confusing, sketchy and doesn't do a good job of explaining what's happening nor the motivations of the characters.
They would sympathise immediately, ally themselves to form the Great Unholy Trinity of Evilest Evil in the Universe, and start scheming how to murder William Shakespeare, the genius Elizabethan playwright.
Now, what has good old Will done to these three lunatics? Written them like lunatics, obviously, and that's reason enough to kill him, murder him, assassinate him. Why not? Who's not wanted the head of an author when he's produced a work where you're not flattered to your heart's content?
All sounds well and interesting enough. But then the art isn't the best it could be, and the storyline is confusing, sketchy and doesn't do a good job of explaining what's happening nor the motivations of the characters.
March 21, 2013
An interesting story, but one that felt a little... off? I'm not sure what to make of this, yet.
I did enjoy the bonus story at the end, though.
The treatment of women (particularly Lady Macbeth) was somewhat oogy. Also, there are really only two women - Lady Macbeth (harlot, adulteress, power-hungry madwoman, goes around with her cleavage all over the place) and Juliet (young, dresses like a boy, virginal if not virgin) - classic madonna/whore dichotomy.
Really, people? Really?
I did enjoy the bonus story at the end, though.
The treatment of women (particularly Lady Macbeth) was somewhat oogy. Also, there are really only two women - Lady Macbeth (harlot, adulteress, power-hungry madwoman, goes around with her cleavage all over the place) and Juliet (young, dresses like a boy, virginal if not virgin) - classic madonna/whore dichotomy.
Really, people? Really?
March 7, 2011
This was fun. It's a book that would make some professors I know who specialize in Shakespeare cringe and decry BLASPHEMY! And others professors I know snicker with delight. I'm a Shakespeare fan and I thought this was really clever and fun. The art was excellent, too. My only quibble is that I wanted more variety in the female characters. Otherwise, good good fun.
September 23, 2020
Last night's review didn't do my disappointment justice. This one's better.
I was promisedSix A Pantheon of Characters in Search of an Author to Murder, and yet here I am, vastly disappointed. The premise is cool if you stick to it, okay? This could've been so cool.
I think I must be spoiled by other comics' artwork, because this was Not It.
And while I can totally gel with wanting to write this specifically because you're one of those I Hated Shakespeare in High School sorts of people, that doesn't mean the dialogue can be all willy-nilly. If you're gonna write pseudo-Shakespeare, at least get your thee's and thou's in order, and canst vs dost etc etc. Because when you screw up the menial stuff like that, it loses your (supposed? assumed? aimed-for?) demographic of Shakespeare lovers. *waves*
I did get to see Othello and Juliet though, so that was neat. Cross-dressing Hamlet and Falstaff were not what I was expecting, nor was Lady M, but the inclusion of so many characters in this first volume really was cool.
Same thing only better, pls.
I was promised
I think I must be spoiled by other comics' artwork, because this was Not It.
And while I can totally gel with wanting to write this specifically because you're one of those I Hated Shakespeare in High School sorts of people, that doesn't mean the dialogue can be all willy-nilly. If you're gonna write pseudo-Shakespeare, at least get your thee's and thou's in order, and canst vs dost etc etc. Because when you screw up the menial stuff like that, it loses your (supposed? assumed? aimed-for?) demographic of Shakespeare lovers. *waves*
I did get to see Othello and Juliet though, so that was neat. Cross-dressing Hamlet and Falstaff were not what I was expecting, nor was Lady M, but the inclusion of so many characters in this first volume really was cool.
Same thing only better, pls.
April 16, 2011
This was a pretty good graphic novel. Definitely reminded me of the Fables series. They took stories we all know and love (ok ok, at least know and tolerated in high school) and transformed them into an interconnected, intense, and twisted tale with murder, madness, and intrigue.
At first my memory of some of Shakespeare's characters was a bit lacking but even without recognizing all of them my lack of knowledge did not detract from the story or their parts in it.
The art is perhaps my favorite part of this graphic novel - although I will admit to being confused a couple of times. It wasn't until I read the entire left page that I realized the art continued across both pages and I was skipping parts. Despite that the pacing was very good and didn't really lag like I expected it too. I also loved the coloring. Everything was jewel toned, deep, uber saturated. Kept my eyes peeled to the paper.
I think I can honestly say that I am hooked and will be reading all the upcoming volumes in this series.
At first my memory of some of Shakespeare's characters was a bit lacking but even without recognizing all of them my lack of knowledge did not detract from the story or their parts in it.
The art is perhaps my favorite part of this graphic novel - although I will admit to being confused a couple of times. It wasn't until I read the entire left page that I realized the art continued across both pages and I was skipping parts. Despite that the pacing was very good and didn't really lag like I expected it too. I also loved the coloring. Everything was jewel toned, deep, uber saturated. Kept my eyes peeled to the paper.
I think I can honestly say that I am hooked and will be reading all the upcoming volumes in this series.
March 29, 2015
The synopsis behind this is really awesome: Shakespeare's most famous characters are out on a quest to find him, either to help him or to kill him. The idea is that Shakespeare is a sort of god with divine right; the "bad guys" (Richard III, Iago, Lady Macbeth) are out to steal his quill and take back their free will.
However, this left me pretty disappointed. The plot was fun and engaging, but I expected a lot more from something called "Kill Shakespeare". I expected a good amount of research into the characters, and I just didn't feel that. For the most part, the characters stopped at the trope level: Hamlet the unlikely hero, Lady Macbeth the evil temptress, Richard III the ruler out for blood. Even weirder, Juliet was a mature, revenge-driven heroine, despite the fact that she's only 13 during the play.
I might continue with these eventually, just because it ended with a cliffhanger and the plot was still pretty engaging. But I don't think I would recommend this to any Shakespeare scholars or fans.
However, this left me pretty disappointed. The plot was fun and engaging, but I expected a lot more from something called "Kill Shakespeare". I expected a good amount of research into the characters, and I just didn't feel that. For the most part, the characters stopped at the trope level: Hamlet the unlikely hero, Lady Macbeth the evil temptress, Richard III the ruler out for blood. Even weirder, Juliet was a mature, revenge-driven heroine, despite the fact that she's only 13 during the play.
I might continue with these eventually, just because it ended with a cliffhanger and the plot was still pretty engaging. But I don't think I would recommend this to any Shakespeare scholars or fans.
September 9, 2022
A decent start to what promises to be an interesting graphic novel series. Hamlet and a cast of assorted characters off on a quest to kill the wizard Shakespeare and steal his quill. This is definitely one where it pays to know your Shakespeare: there are a few jokes I wouldn't have caught otherwise, but it also pays off when faced with such a large cast of characters. Being a Shakespeare snob, I might take issue with the useage of a few characters in particular ways (Macbeth *sob*) but there are plenty which are spot-on - Iago's use in particular made me very happy. Intrigued to see where this goes!
April 26, 2022
So I actually didn't finish this, it just got to a point where it annoyed me too much to keep going. It's a cool concept and I liked the author's interview on Shakespeare Unlimited, but the execution left me decidedly cold. Perhaps I should have taken more seriously the red flag that went up when the foreword noted that the author doesn't actually like Shakespeare... The final straw was the incredibly poor use of thee/thou grammar -- either get it right, or don't do it at all.
May 14, 2015
Bad. This is not what Barthes meant when he said the author was dead.
March 3, 2023
Picked up from a charity shop. Very silly premise - Shakespeare seen as a god in a world peopled by the characters in his plays, the villains (Richard III, a wicked Lady Macbeth untroubled by guilt, a treacherous Iago) are opposed by an alliance of heroes (with Falstaff as comic relief). Hamlet has a destiny - will he be the one to kill Will?
A bit “Game of Thrones” - graphic violence and bawdy house scenes and all. Has many throw-away Shakespearean lines out of context, and nods to play locations and titles (a pub called Midsummer Night's Dram?). The characters are drawn broadly, and some are more Shakespearean than others - Othello, Richard and Iago seem to have more of the original about them to me than Lady Macbeth and Juliet, for example.
I’m not sure I’ll be seeking out the next volumes, so I won't see whether this remains a novelty-themed romp or explores the metafictional world and relationship between writer and characters in more depth - but it was a fun commuter read.
A bit “Game of Thrones” - graphic violence and bawdy house scenes and all. Has many throw-away Shakespearean lines out of context, and nods to play locations and titles (a pub called Midsummer Night's Dram?). The characters are drawn broadly, and some are more Shakespearean than others - Othello, Richard and Iago seem to have more of the original about them to me than Lady Macbeth and Juliet, for example.
I’m not sure I’ll be seeking out the next volumes, so I won't see whether this remains a novelty-themed romp or explores the metafictional world and relationship between writer and characters in more depth - but it was a fun commuter read.
April 23, 2020
I would have liked this a lot better had it not butchered Shakespeare
The plot is decent, the writing hardly worthy of the name to which it claims. The attempt at archaic English farcical, frequently lapsing between some stilted attempt at modern formal and a weird approach of middle English grammar and the occasional thee and thou, not always used correctly. I feel that anyone attempting to do the Bard justice could have at least attempted lyrical verse but no.
If one disregards the attempt at Shakespear, the comic itself is decent, it flows well, the art is mostly good with spots of ??? what happened, (e.g. volume 8????)
Some bits of very, very dubious and periodically and thematically inaccurate lines:
"You turn a lot of dirt for a woman"
What?
The sole value here for me is the theme, which is to question the merit of the artist's choices for the world's he creates, to question his control over those worlds, and to question whether a person's actions and choices define them forever. Unfortunately, these questions are not fully answered nor answered with any sort of consistency. Richard is bound to be has he was written, or so he and Shakespeare believe, Hamlet can grow to become a man of action not debilitating thought, and Romeo can let go of the love for which he once died, while Iago? He remains bound to his betrayal, but rather than the masterful villain, master of his own motive, he is but a dog lapping at the heels of his betters. The moral questions raised by the premise could have been better answered by far, so I remain, disappointed.
Mostly, this is not terribly worth a read, but probably more so if you aren't actually familiar with Shakespeare's writing style or if you could, perchance, view this as an independent work
The plot is decent, the writing hardly worthy of the name to which it claims. The attempt at archaic English farcical, frequently lapsing between some stilted attempt at modern formal and a weird approach of middle English grammar and the occasional thee and thou, not always used correctly. I feel that anyone attempting to do the Bard justice could have at least attempted lyrical verse but no.
If one disregards the attempt at Shakespear, the comic itself is decent, it flows well, the art is mostly good with spots of ??? what happened, (e.g. volume 8????)
Some bits of very, very dubious and periodically and thematically inaccurate lines:
"You turn a lot of dirt for a woman"
What?
The sole value here for me is the theme, which is to question the merit of the artist's choices for the world's he creates, to question his control over those worlds, and to question whether a person's actions and choices define them forever. Unfortunately, these questions are not fully answered nor answered with any sort of consistency. Richard is bound to be has he was written, or so he and Shakespeare believe, Hamlet can grow to become a man of action not debilitating thought, and Romeo can let go of the love for which he once died, while Iago? He remains bound to his betrayal, but rather than the masterful villain, master of his own motive, he is but a dog lapping at the heels of his betters. The moral questions raised by the premise could have been better answered by far, so I remain, disappointed.
Mostly, this is not terribly worth a read, but probably more so if you aren't actually familiar with Shakespeare's writing style or if you could, perchance, view this as an independent work
January 24, 2019
Hokey and corny throughout, the book turned me off right away. In this book, Shakespeare is a God and his characters are recast in a fictional fantasy world. There are good guys and bad guys, and they align appropriately and fight each other. For example, Juliet Capulet leads a rebellion with Othello against Richard III and Lady Macbeth. But after a few chapters, it grew on me. It's a fun twist on Shakespeare, and I'm curious to see where it goes. Anyone passingly familiar with his work will recognize the actors. You do not need deep knowledge as much can be deduced from context.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 27, 2023
Heads up: I did not read the graphic novel, but listened to the German Audible production. (Great cast btw...) So in a different medium it might work better.
Still it is a terrible story. Nothing shakespearian but in name. The characters are 1-dimensional at most and there is no way you can relate to any of them. It feels like a very, very bad fanfiction.
Still it is a terrible story. Nothing shakespearian but in name. The characters are 1-dimensional at most and there is no way you can relate to any of them. It feels like a very, very bad fanfiction.
February 17, 2024
4.5 stars so I rounded up.
This would be a total five star if not for the way Juliet is portrayed. The og Juliet is an airhead and the furthest thing from a strong woman. I feel like there could have been a lot of humor with her character that was missed due to the authors taking her in a really anti-Shakespeare direction, which isn't the case with all the other characters. Great comic, though. Must read for all Fables fans.
This would be a total five star if not for the way Juliet is portrayed. The og Juliet is an airhead and the furthest thing from a strong woman. I feel like there could have been a lot of humor with her character that was missed due to the authors taking her in a really anti-Shakespeare direction, which isn't the case with all the other characters. Great comic, though. Must read for all Fables fans.
July 26, 2020
3.5 stars. I disliked some aspects, I loved others. The premise and the conflicts are very interesting. Name-dropping here and there, I wonder if we'll have a glimpse of all the characters mentioned.
I like that both protagonists are flawed and that we have such a varied array of characters.
I like that both protagonists are flawed and that we have such a varied array of characters.
June 28, 2024
It's a little messy, but the art is pretty, plus there's Shakespeare, so I will stick with it for now.
July 3, 2017
So picture Fables but with Shakespeare characters but also the characters never meet their fates from the plays and Shakespeare is also some kind of benevolent wizard whose power the evil characters want somehow. The art is good and the premise would make for a good ABC prime time show. I got the first three volumes super cheap at a comic store sale but I'm not really hyped to read the next two.
June 16, 2011
I heard about this graphic novel on NPR, which made my responsible adult side feel better about reading graphic novels, and my inner child feel better about listening to NPR. Being what I’d call a casual fan of Shakespeare, it sounded like something that would be right up my alley. After reading through the first volume, I can say that I like it, but it’s not as good as I was hoping it would be.
The story picks up somewhere around the third act of Hamlet, with the Danish prince sailing off into exile rather than being sung to his rest by flights of angels. After being haunted by some familiar witches, he is cast overboard and finds himself on a strange, faraway shore, where he is greeted by everyone’s favorite gruff king with a withered hand. Richard III proclaims Hamlet to be the “Shadow King,” a figure spoken of in legend that is destined to kill a mysterious demigod known as “Shakespeare” and claim the power of his magical quill. Richard promises to bring Hamlet’s father back to him if he fulfills his destiny, but Hamlet eventually finds himself lost and alone in the countryside. A loose band of commoners opposed to Richard’s tyranny (including Falstaff, Othello, and Juliet) try to persuade Hamlet to join them, as Richard conspires with the seductive Lady Macbeth to bring the Shadow King back into his grasp.
So, the riot of Shakespeare characters assuming new personas and taking sides is enough by itself to make this volume worth checking out. I suppose that you could find yourself annoyed by the liberties taken with the Bard’s stories if you were a diehard Shakespeare nut, but I thought the reimagined relationships and alliances were deliciously fun to read. Furthermore, the proper Shakespearean tone has been set; gratuitous violence, sexual innuendo, and bad puns are all firmly in evidence.
Once the initial awesome factor wore off, though, a few things began to bother me. The story moves so quickly that there isn’t a whole lot of time to take anything in. There is a lot of reliance on the numerous cameos to move the story along (I'm not even sure why the scene with Puck was even remotely necessary), and so the plot feels a little clunky and contrived. Not to the point of being bad, but there’s definitely a “serial” feel to the volume.
The biggest problem I had, though, is with the artwork. I don’t usually get hung up on art, being the forgiving guy that I am. But honestly, I had trouble trying to puzzle out exactly what was going on at some points. The flow of the panels will often change unexpectedly, without any particular narrative reason or clearly defined map of the proceedings, forcing me to occasionally reread a few panels after getting lost. Also, abrupt shifts in setting are frequent in each chapter (especially after Hamlet takes up with the Prodigals and the narrative splits off into two branches), making it occasionally hard to figure out what’s happening even when the panel flow stays consistent. Finally, and maybe this is just me: there’s something off about the faces. The expressions are not quite real. The characters are gorgeous, and standard dialogue looks just fine, but every single reaction shot looks waaaaay overdone. As in, giant eyes, gaping mouth, parody-of-an-actual-facial-expression overdone. I feel like I’m being a touch unfair, here, because the art is very good from a technical standpoint; Belanger is no slouch. But something about the expressions just didn’t resonate for me. The characters came off as a little cartoonish, somehow. That normally wouldn’t bother me, but in this instance it just contrasted too much with the Shakespearean motif.
So, chalk this one up as a solid "acceptable," for me. Maybe not fantastic, but still pretty good.
The story picks up somewhere around the third act of Hamlet, with the Danish prince sailing off into exile rather than being sung to his rest by flights of angels. After being haunted by some familiar witches, he is cast overboard and finds himself on a strange, faraway shore, where he is greeted by everyone’s favorite gruff king with a withered hand. Richard III proclaims Hamlet to be the “Shadow King,” a figure spoken of in legend that is destined to kill a mysterious demigod known as “Shakespeare” and claim the power of his magical quill. Richard promises to bring Hamlet’s father back to him if he fulfills his destiny, but Hamlet eventually finds himself lost and alone in the countryside. A loose band of commoners opposed to Richard’s tyranny (including Falstaff, Othello, and Juliet) try to persuade Hamlet to join them, as Richard conspires with the seductive Lady Macbeth to bring the Shadow King back into his grasp.
So, the riot of Shakespeare characters assuming new personas and taking sides is enough by itself to make this volume worth checking out. I suppose that you could find yourself annoyed by the liberties taken with the Bard’s stories if you were a diehard Shakespeare nut, but I thought the reimagined relationships and alliances were deliciously fun to read. Furthermore, the proper Shakespearean tone has been set; gratuitous violence, sexual innuendo, and bad puns are all firmly in evidence.
Once the initial awesome factor wore off, though, a few things began to bother me. The story moves so quickly that there isn’t a whole lot of time to take anything in. There is a lot of reliance on the numerous cameos to move the story along (I'm not even sure why the scene with Puck was even remotely necessary), and so the plot feels a little clunky and contrived. Not to the point of being bad, but there’s definitely a “serial” feel to the volume.
The biggest problem I had, though, is with the artwork. I don’t usually get hung up on art, being the forgiving guy that I am. But honestly, I had trouble trying to puzzle out exactly what was going on at some points. The flow of the panels will often change unexpectedly, without any particular narrative reason or clearly defined map of the proceedings, forcing me to occasionally reread a few panels after getting lost. Also, abrupt shifts in setting are frequent in each chapter (especially after Hamlet takes up with the Prodigals and the narrative splits off into two branches), making it occasionally hard to figure out what’s happening even when the panel flow stays consistent. Finally, and maybe this is just me: there’s something off about the faces. The expressions are not quite real. The characters are gorgeous, and standard dialogue looks just fine, but every single reaction shot looks waaaaay overdone. As in, giant eyes, gaping mouth, parody-of-an-actual-facial-expression overdone. I feel like I’m being a touch unfair, here, because the art is very good from a technical standpoint; Belanger is no slouch. But something about the expressions just didn’t resonate for me. The characters came off as a little cartoonish, somehow. That normally wouldn’t bother me, but in this instance it just contrasted too much with the Shakespearean motif.
So, chalk this one up as a solid "acceptable," for me. Maybe not fantastic, but still pretty good.
April 25, 2012
Originally reviewed here.
Hamlet is exiled to England after his father’s untimely death. On the journey, his ship is attacked, and he washes up on shore at the feet and mercy of Richard III. Richard claims that Hamlet has been sent to fulfill prophecy as the Shadow King. He is the only one who can find the wizard, William Shakespeare and kill him. Others, however, have different ideas about this prophecy. They believe the Shadow King is to find Shakespeare, but return him to them and deliver them from the evil Richard. Richard desires to obtain Shakespeare’s quill, which holds vast amounts of power; the people wish to overthrow his tyrannical rule.
So. I can pretty easily say that this is the worst graphic novel I have ever read. My boyfriend informs me that I’ve been spoiled. I only started reading graphic novels about 3 years ago, and in that time I’ve had nothing but the greats to consume--Sandman, Watchmen, Fables, Transmetropolitan, etc. I only recently started branching out and selecting my own graphic reads beyond what’s been recommended to me. My first selection was American Vampire, which was very decent if not the love of my life; the second was A Flight of Angels. I loved it, it was visually the most beautiful graphic novel I’ve read to date, and the story was there to back it up. To me, Kill Shakespeare failed on both accounts.
What did I expect from Kill Shakespeare? Well, every little blurb kept screaming at me “THIS IS LIKE FABLES BUT WITH SHAKESPEARE INSTEAD OF FAIRY TALES”. And I suppose it would be. If Fables had half-hearted art, no character development, and rushed plot lines. So needless to say, I had expectations that were a fair bit higher than what was delivered to me.
Maybe I just don’t know my Shakespeare well enough to appreciate this (though I feel like I know it fairly well), but I found the plot jerked instead of flowed, and didn’t really make a whole lot of sense when it came right down to the details...Hamlet, supposedly the prophesied savior of both sides of a fledgling battle, is more-or-less led around by the nose by the villains, ignoring mounting evidence against them and refusing to throw in with those rebelling against their evil overlord without first being slapped over the head with a frying pan full of ‘you’re batting for the wrong team’ omelets. I guess this would have been fine if I cared about the story, but I didn’t. The wizard, William Shakespeare, was mentioned only as slightly more than a legend, and unfortunately there was no real build to back up the evil deeds of Richard III and the unrest of the people rising to rebel.
If Kill Shakespeare could have been stretched out as a longer series, maybe it would have been stronger. As is, I feel like they were really pushing to get every major character into six issues of story. But without some history given, or time to build up to the conflict, it’s hard to illicit any interest.
Hamlet is exiled to England after his father’s untimely death. On the journey, his ship is attacked, and he washes up on shore at the feet and mercy of Richard III. Richard claims that Hamlet has been sent to fulfill prophecy as the Shadow King. He is the only one who can find the wizard, William Shakespeare and kill him. Others, however, have different ideas about this prophecy. They believe the Shadow King is to find Shakespeare, but return him to them and deliver them from the evil Richard. Richard desires to obtain Shakespeare’s quill, which holds vast amounts of power; the people wish to overthrow his tyrannical rule.
So. I can pretty easily say that this is the worst graphic novel I have ever read. My boyfriend informs me that I’ve been spoiled. I only started reading graphic novels about 3 years ago, and in that time I’ve had nothing but the greats to consume--Sandman, Watchmen, Fables, Transmetropolitan, etc. I only recently started branching out and selecting my own graphic reads beyond what’s been recommended to me. My first selection was American Vampire, which was very decent if not the love of my life; the second was A Flight of Angels. I loved it, it was visually the most beautiful graphic novel I’ve read to date, and the story was there to back it up. To me, Kill Shakespeare failed on both accounts.
What did I expect from Kill Shakespeare? Well, every little blurb kept screaming at me “THIS IS LIKE FABLES BUT WITH SHAKESPEARE INSTEAD OF FAIRY TALES”. And I suppose it would be. If Fables had half-hearted art, no character development, and rushed plot lines. So needless to say, I had expectations that were a fair bit higher than what was delivered to me.
Maybe I just don’t know my Shakespeare well enough to appreciate this (though I feel like I know it fairly well), but I found the plot jerked instead of flowed, and didn’t really make a whole lot of sense when it came right down to the details...Hamlet, supposedly the prophesied savior of both sides of a fledgling battle, is more-or-less led around by the nose by the villains, ignoring mounting evidence against them and refusing to throw in with those rebelling against their evil overlord without first being slapped over the head with a frying pan full of ‘you’re batting for the wrong team’ omelets. I guess this would have been fine if I cared about the story, but I didn’t. The wizard, William Shakespeare, was mentioned only as slightly more than a legend, and unfortunately there was no real build to back up the evil deeds of Richard III and the unrest of the people rising to rebel.
If Kill Shakespeare could have been stretched out as a longer series, maybe it would have been stronger. As is, I feel like they were really pushing to get every major character into six issues of story. But without some history given, or time to build up to the conflict, it’s hard to illicit any interest.
May 5, 2020
*3.5
There is so much going on in this first volume. You don't need to know the plays to understand what is happening, but it does help inform the interactions between certain characters, and to understand the ongoing call backs to specific plays.
This story begins with Hamlet, who is clearly going to be a main character throughout. He's an absolute disaster, which is true to the play as well. His father was murdered by his uncle, and he has been banished from the city after accidentally killing a nobleman. After he gets tossed off his ship during a battle with pirates, he washes ashore a strange land.
He wakes as a guest of King Richard who proclaims that Hamlet is clearly the "Shadow King" of a prophecy, someone able to kill the "wizard" Shakespeare, and gain control of his magic quill. King Richard wants this quill, wants to rule the neighbouring kingdoms, and wants Hamlet dead as soon as the quill is recovered. This is where things get complicated.
Richard is in an "alliance" with Macbeth, which becomes an alliance with Lady Macbeth after she murders her husband. Titus and Lear are both mentioned as neighbouring kingdoms. The land is full of rebels called "prodigals" who believe that Shakespeare is a god, and that the Shadow King will bring him back to the land to set things right. They are also hoping to dethrone King Richard, who they see as a tyrant.
Juliet Capulet and Othello are leading this rebellion. Iago, who has proclaimed he is Richard's man, but says he has turned his back on him to follow Hamlet, but is in reality working with Lady Macbeth, is playing absolutely every possible field and is not to be trusted.
The next issues will fill in more of the backstory here I imagine. Hamlet is completely confused and semi-useless but honestly props to him for just flat out saying, several times, that pulling someone off a beach and proclaiming them the key to your prophecy is INSANE. This land - and the Shakespeare religion - are completely new to him so he'll be the source of exposition as we follow him along to figure out exactly what his destiny is. Besides a bloody one.
There is so much going on in this first volume. You don't need to know the plays to understand what is happening, but it does help inform the interactions between certain characters, and to understand the ongoing call backs to specific plays.
This story begins with Hamlet, who is clearly going to be a main character throughout. He's an absolute disaster, which is true to the play as well. His father was murdered by his uncle, and he has been banished from the city after accidentally killing a nobleman. After he gets tossed off his ship during a battle with pirates, he washes ashore a strange land.
He wakes as a guest of King Richard who proclaims that Hamlet is clearly the "Shadow King" of a prophecy, someone able to kill the "wizard" Shakespeare, and gain control of his magic quill. King Richard wants this quill, wants to rule the neighbouring kingdoms, and wants Hamlet dead as soon as the quill is recovered. This is where things get complicated.
Richard is in an "alliance" with Macbeth, which becomes an alliance with Lady Macbeth after she murders her husband. Titus and Lear are both mentioned as neighbouring kingdoms. The land is full of rebels called "prodigals" who believe that Shakespeare is a god, and that the Shadow King will bring him back to the land to set things right. They are also hoping to dethrone King Richard, who they see as a tyrant.
Juliet Capulet and Othello are leading this rebellion. Iago, who has proclaimed he is Richard's man, but says he has turned his back on him to follow Hamlet, but is in reality working with Lady Macbeth, is playing absolutely every possible field and is not to be trusted.
The next issues will fill in more of the backstory here I imagine. Hamlet is completely confused and semi-useless but honestly props to him for just flat out saying, several times, that pulling someone off a beach and proclaiming them the key to your prophecy is INSANE. This land - and the Shakespeare religion - are completely new to him so he'll be the source of exposition as we follow him along to figure out exactly what his destiny is. Besides a bloody one.
March 21, 2011
Kill Shakespeare is a work of vaulting ambition. Sent away to England after accidentally killing Polonius Prince Hamlet is attacked by pirates. He awakens to find himself in the court of none other than the villain Richard III. Richard feigns goodness and offers Hamlet a deal: he’ll resurrect the prince’s father in exchange for Hamlet killing the wizard Shakespeare and bringing back his magical quill. While Hamlet accepts the commission, he quickly realizes that all is not what it at first seems; A group of Richard’s subjects, known as Prodigals, are in open rebellion, led by Juliet, Othello, and Falstaff. \
The premise will no doubt bring Bill Willingham’s “Fables” to mind for many readers. Kill Shakespeare likewise takes well known characters and tries to combine and grown them in ways both entertaining and unexpected. Just as I won’t be the first person to make this comparison, I suspect I won’t be the only one to conclude that, despite many strengths, Kill Shakespeare proves wanting.
Series creators Conor McCreery and Anthony Del Col have a demonstrable affection for this material, but will irk many readers with short comings in both textual understanding and language. Most crucially of all, the writers rarely make the creative leap into taking these well known characters in directions that are both novel and engaging (Iago and Lady Macbeth being two delightful exceptions). More often than not, the writers move these iconic characters in the opposite direction, reducing their depth in the service a rather convoluted narrative.
These criticisms may be made harsher by a combination of my love of Shakespeare and my high expectations of this book. This series grasps at such a high concept that success was almost certain to prove elusive. On occasion, the action and dialogue proves amusing. I enjoyed the appearance of characters from the cast of some of the less widely read plays (and was more than a little disappointed to find them remain in minor roles). On the whole, however, this work’s faults lie not in its stars but in itself.
The premise will no doubt bring Bill Willingham’s “Fables” to mind for many readers. Kill Shakespeare likewise takes well known characters and tries to combine and grown them in ways both entertaining and unexpected. Just as I won’t be the first person to make this comparison, I suspect I won’t be the only one to conclude that, despite many strengths, Kill Shakespeare proves wanting.
Series creators Conor McCreery and Anthony Del Col have a demonstrable affection for this material, but will irk many readers with short comings in both textual understanding and language. Most crucially of all, the writers rarely make the creative leap into taking these well known characters in directions that are both novel and engaging (Iago and Lady Macbeth being two delightful exceptions). More often than not, the writers move these iconic characters in the opposite direction, reducing their depth in the service a rather convoluted narrative.
These criticisms may be made harsher by a combination of my love of Shakespeare and my high expectations of this book. This series grasps at such a high concept that success was almost certain to prove elusive. On occasion, the action and dialogue proves amusing. I enjoyed the appearance of characters from the cast of some of the less widely read plays (and was more than a little disappointed to find them remain in minor roles). On the whole, however, this work’s faults lie not in its stars but in itself.
May 22, 2012
Here's a teaser of my review for it:
“Kill Shakespeare is an intense, thrilling, and a highly exciting narrative that is full of crazy puns and references galore to Shakespeare’s various plays, all of which combine to deliver one of the best reading experiences ever!” ~The Founding Fields
Where to start really. As someone who has only read the play versions of Macbeth and Twelfth Night and heavily abridged versions of some of Shakespeare’s other plays, Kill Shakespeare is a beautifully-imagined world that has something for everyone. We have the endless scheming of Richard and Lady Macbeth, the heroisms of Othello and Romeo, the villainy of Iago, the good-natured foolishness of Falstaff, the faith of Romeo, the courage of Juliet, and amongst all of them, Hamlet’s drive for vindication. There are twists and turns in every issue as the writers move the reader ever closer to that inevitable meeting between Hamlet and Shakespeare himself. There is love and romance, betrayal and friendship.
Its not something that is easy to describe for me. I burned through the two volumes in less than two days and every single moment of the reading experience was, in its own way, unique. For myself, I think being largely unfamiliar with Shakespeare’s plays really worked to draw me in because while the overarching narrative is very, very different from the plays themselves, certain character arcs are quite surprising. You never really can predict what is going to happen next. Will Iago betray Othello, Juliet and Hamlet? Will Lady Macbeth and King Richard succeed in their nefarious scheming? Is Hamlet really the prophecied Shadow King who is going to bring the god-magician Will Shakespeare back?
You can find the full review on The Founding Fields at:
http://thefoundingfields.com/2012/05/...
“Kill Shakespeare is an intense, thrilling, and a highly exciting narrative that is full of crazy puns and references galore to Shakespeare’s various plays, all of which combine to deliver one of the best reading experiences ever!” ~The Founding Fields
Where to start really. As someone who has only read the play versions of Macbeth and Twelfth Night and heavily abridged versions of some of Shakespeare’s other plays, Kill Shakespeare is a beautifully-imagined world that has something for everyone. We have the endless scheming of Richard and Lady Macbeth, the heroisms of Othello and Romeo, the villainy of Iago, the good-natured foolishness of Falstaff, the faith of Romeo, the courage of Juliet, and amongst all of them, Hamlet’s drive for vindication. There are twists and turns in every issue as the writers move the reader ever closer to that inevitable meeting between Hamlet and Shakespeare himself. There is love and romance, betrayal and friendship.
Its not something that is easy to describe for me. I burned through the two volumes in less than two days and every single moment of the reading experience was, in its own way, unique. For myself, I think being largely unfamiliar with Shakespeare’s plays really worked to draw me in because while the overarching narrative is very, very different from the plays themselves, certain character arcs are quite surprising. You never really can predict what is going to happen next. Will Iago betray Othello, Juliet and Hamlet? Will Lady Macbeth and King Richard succeed in their nefarious scheming? Is Hamlet really the prophecied Shadow King who is going to bring the god-magician Will Shakespeare back?
You can find the full review on The Founding Fields at:
http://thefoundingfields.com/2012/05/...
Displaying 1 - 30 of 343 reviews