The questions I've been pondering aren't about the specifics of the two stories we just read/saw, but about the difference between plays & movies as vehicles for conveying a story. I've been thinking about this because Shakespeare is made to be seen & heard, not read, and that kept coming to mind while I was reading Taming of the Shrew. I found 10 Things more absorbing, but I kept wondering how I would compare them if I'd seen them both acted out, instead of reading one & watching the other?
A play has many more restrictions in how it can tell the story, but I think it also has some strengths. When I see a play I sometimes respond more strongly than to a movie, because I react more intensely to the real live human beings than I do to pictures on a screen. (I wonder if pheromones play a part in this?) I like the pomp of plays. But movies, perhaps because they are larger than life, and perhaps because they can be cut to show just the most essential moments, also can have a profound impact on me.
But this is a tangent to the two stories, and I'll get back on track. So tell me - how well did Taming translate into modern terms? What did you like best about Taming, and what did you like best about 10 Things? What, if anything, would you have changed if you were in charge of producing the modern version of Taming? Or would you produce a modern version?