The three best of the first quarter were (in reverse order) Richard III (would have been higher, but a bit too lengthy); The Two Gentlemen of Verona, a real discovery which I'm surprised is not better known; and best of all The Comedy of Errors, which I guess was the only one of this run that had made much impression on me before.
My least favourite was The Taming of the Shrew, where I just didn't like the basic concept. The basic concepts in Titus Andronicus are pretty unpleasant too, but it is not being marketed as a comedy. Love's Labour's Lost is half decent and half incomprehensible.
I'm taking a position on the three parts of Henry VI, which is that Part 2 was written first and then Part 1, with Part 3 last. Part 2 has too much sticking closely to the history books, and feels very much like a beginner's effort to extract drama from Holinshed. The other two parts feel more confident, and Part 3 clearly leads straight into Richard III. Indeed, Part 3 and Richard III are so much better that I rather feel Shakespeare must have been working on other stuff in between, perhaps some of the earlier comedies, or even his scene for Thomas More.
But basically, I have discovered that the reason these plays are classics is that they are (mostly) very good.
