I like to fancy myself an ammature playman, who does writing and acting, when I get the chance. I've read plays before, and one thing usually strikes me. This would be an awesome play. The whole concept of a written play is that it is a guide for actors, so they can perform the play and make it more enjoyable. Reading the play is baffling. Would you rather read a book or a detailed outline for a book?
Even as an actor, I only read what I must know for my part. Especially Shakespeare, reading a play is baffling.
Not only is his writing too wordy and antiquated to be highly avaliable to the modern reader, and not only are his plays 10x more enjoyable and exicting and fun, when they are performed, but the writer himself wrote the plays purely as guides, and not to be read as books. He wrote only the amount that he would need to put on the show.
It's just that, plays, unless edited to books or the excepetion, where the dialouge is too static to be read, are meant to be performed, and usually they're way more awesome as plays than as books.