Beatrice, in Much Ado About Nothing. Or Katherine in Henry V. I seem to have a fondness for Emma Thompson.
Henry V. Power, throne, and maturity, mmmmmmm.
(Although I’ve seen some damn good-looking Festes that I would haul offstage midscene in an instant).
Thanks for the props. Considering the source, I’ll consider it a high compliment indeed.
But it sounds like a matter of taste to me. A big part of attraction for me is personality. I can’t jump into bed with a woman I don’t like, or whom I’ve just met. (Lord knows, I’ve tried. I’ve passed up some sure things because I knew I’d feel icky afterward.) I went back and re-read T&C, and Helen may be the most beautiful mortal on the planet, but character-wise, she’s just so, I don’t know, colorless.
So I guess this is all about individual taste. If my preference ran toward dimwitted, milk-fed country girls, why of course I’d have named Audrey from As You Like It. (Random memory from my Shakespeare resume: When I played Touchstone, we had a gag where I was required to, um, interact with the Audrey actress’s, er, substantial endowments. :D) But since my attraction to women forms over time, I find myself most drawn to Portia for her intelligence, wit, and vivaciousness. Not to knock Helen, but she’s not my personal Dream Gal.
Where was it that Shakespeare said, “Different strokes for different folks?” 
Sorry, Dry, but I have to go with Portia as well. I’m not particularly attracted by…er…classically beautiful women. Clever and cute goes farther with me, even just for a romp.
I was going to say Mercutio too, but since he was everyone kept saying him, I’m going to have to go with Tybalt. You know, evil can be sexy sometimes (especially when it is John Leguizamo). Demetrius from A Midsummer Night’s Dream. The Romeo character does have a great depth of “love”, but would he be good in bed?
Fair enough. For my part, I was influenced not only by the idea that the OP was asking about sex as opposed to dating/companionship/marriage, but by the very wording (F*** vs. make love/woo/seduce, etc). I’d have been more likely to name Cleopatra, Portia, Kathry…Kate, etc, if the OP was worded “make love to” and not “f***”
See, if I want to make love, it would indeed be to a kind, spirited lady–the very flower of womanhood, as it were. Someone like (insert name from my sig here). One who is the epitome of all that is good and pure and decent in the human female. And when I lovingly persuade her to part with that jewel that is dearer than life, I’ll do so gently, tenderly. With all the reverence that is due a divine lady, nay, angel, such as herself. (wistful sigh)
On the other hand, when I want to fuck, I want a bitch with big tits and legs that on forever and ever and mouth that can suck a golf ball through a garden hose.
Know what I mean?
[sub]Sorry if that’s TMI[/sub]
Heh…
You said you mentioned me in here DRY…and I can’t tell if I’m supposed to be the flower of womanhood or the bitch with big tits…
Rosalind, surely the most romantic and fully-realized of WS’s female characters. And Portia’s a Jew-baiting bitch.
Mel Gibson’s Hamlet. 
As for straight Shakes characters:
Mercutio - That bad boy trait
Bottom (post-donkey) - he’d be playful in bed!
There really aren’t many appealing male Shakes characters. At least, none that poop into my head at this second.
Kate, from …Shrew ; I like a feisty wench.
But, ladies, you’ve all got Mercutio figured wrong (the character, not the Doper… although…). He’s not a bad boy. He’s a wanker, a clown with low self-esteem.
Every group of cool guys I ever knew always had one clown who wasn’t cool, but who’d be allowed to hang with them because he was funny. That’s Mercutio. The tragedy in his death was that he was an innocent, lovable goofball who got in over his head.
The Zeffereli and the Luhrman Romeo and Juliet both get Act I Scene IV wrong, in particular Mercutio’s “Queen Mab” soliloquy. He’s portrayed as getting angry and going a little psycho by the end of it, but it just doesn’t make sense. Finally, Romeo tries to calm him down. In Zeffereli, Mercutio even looks confused at the end… he should be! That’s not how the scene’s supposed to play.
He’s not getting angry; he’s getting goofy. This is supposed to be a great joke of Mercutio’s, except he can’t come up with a punch line, so he keeps going. He’s trying desperately to be funny. Everybody’s getting bored with it, until finally Romeo’s had enough and tells him to shut up: “Peace, peace, Mercutio, peace! Thou talk’st of nothing.” He’s not saying, “be at peace, Mercutio.” He’s saying “give me some peace, Mercutio.”
Well, that’s my theory. All you ladies are in love with a wanker.
Have at me, DRY. ::awaits skewering::
*Originally posted by Melpomene *
Gawd, felching again. And with post-donkey Bottoms. I thought this was going to be a high-brow thread.
Not to mention he was in love with Romeo. Um…hello? There’s a reason Luhrman put him in DRAG. Mise en scene is NEVER unintentional. I had a professor who interpreted the Queen Mab speech as homosuggestive/erotic.
I, myself, would jump Benedick in a second. A SECOND. Any time, anywhere. Don Pedro (lonely AND romantic! My cup o’tea) , and Tybalt (ooooh, so bad…) also make honerable mentions.
And I can’t believe no one said Puck. Or Marc Antony. Mmmmm… I’m a sucker for iambic pentameter.
I would have to say either Demetrius from Midsummer Night’s Dream or Benvolio just because he was always the friend on the side and he seems like the sweet guy that no one notices.
Kitty
Well if YOU can’t tell which one you are, how the hell am I supposed to?? 
Why do you expect me to skewer you? Do I have a reputation for intolerance with people having differing opinions of Shakespeare? Seriously, I hope not. I wouldn’t have skewered you if your interpretation was 180 degrees different than mine.
Offhand, I more or less agree with you. I’d describe Mercutio as more of a “wanker” than a “bad boy”. Actually, a better description would be the guy in high school/college that did a damned good job of seeming asexual–he didn’t have the hots for anyone, male or female, and he amused himself making snide comments when his colleagues would do dumbass stuff mooning over their loved ones/crushes.
One thing he wasn’t a goofball about was fencing. He was supposed to win that fight with Tybalt, until Romeo messed things up.
SwimmingRiddles–I, too am surprised no one mentioned Puck or Marc Antony. Marc Antony gave away his half of the world for love. While that wouldn’t appeal to a hard headed, practical lady, it should go over BIG with the dreamily idealistic girls.
*Originally posted by DRY *
Actually, I didn’t mean for you to take that personally. I wouldn’t call myself a Shakespearian scholar by any stretch of the imagination, and having come up with this all by my wee self based on little more than the one soliloquy, I figured it was pretty indefensible.
I was expecting a skewering, and I figured you’d be the best qualified to deliver it. Imagine my pleasant surprise… 
St. Attila–didn’t take it personally. Wasn’t seriously suffering from hurt feelings. I just hoped I don’t have a reputation as a “know it all” about Shakespeare. I’m not.
I quote Shakespeare quite a bit. I never, ever claimed to know everything about him, or his plays (I haven’t read all of his plays–not even close!). If I seem pedantic about Shakespeare to you or anyone else, I’ve (unintentionally) given the wrong impression.
Besides, anyone who thinks that there’s only one interpretation of Shakespeare is dead wrong, in my humble opinion.
And yeah, I thought your interpretation of Mercutio was pretty dead on.
Preview Post Before Replying
Preview Post Before Replying
Preview Post Before Replying
Preview Post Before Replying
Preview Post Before Replying
Stupid Stupid Stupid!!
Well, I’m glad to see that at least I was etnertaining to someone.
I think I’d really like to tame a shrew.