Shakespeare's Spanish Counterpart?

I am exploring Spanish translations of Shakespeare, and translation in general. I found a great clip from a documentary exploring the parallels between Spanish and English theater, and discovered a prolific Spanish playwright named Lope de Vega, who, according to shakespearetheater.org, is the "'father of Spanish national drama', reinventing (rather than reinterpreting) material taken from sources as varied as those of Shakespeare: history, legend, mythology, chronicles, ballads, Italian novellas, town life, country life, the lives of the saints and the Bible, while Shakespeare came forward after English theatre had already developed a variety of dramatic forms."

But you don't have to take my word for it . . . 12:18-12:46

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kBXWn00Cc-8

The Spanish Shakespeare?

This got me thinking, that if Shakespeare is translated everywhere, what about Vega? Why is it that Shakespeare's words are translated into 72 languages and Vega remains well-known only to the Spanish literary tradition? Perhaps because although Vega has his own unique storylines, for Shakespeare, “the language IS the storyline" as one SpanishDict chatroom user put it. That leads me to my thesis: 

Translating Shakespeare yields a different reading of each play in its’ respective language. Although the English text appears similar to the Spanish translation of Richard III, differences in punctuation and word choice give the Spanish text a more dramatic and ultimately bolder reader than its’ English counterpart. 

I feel that my thesis lacks a "so what?" element though. Should I argue Shakespeare can only truly be read in the English language it was written in?

I've also been pursuing another avenue with Richard III that has nothing to do with Spanish. Thesis: A psychoanalytic Freudian reading of Shakespeare’s Richard III reveals Shakespeare’s villain as a victim of Renaissance ignorance.

I've dug up some interesting things on this idea by looking at Thomas More's History of Richard III (in truth More was making up absurd, exaggerated facts about Richard) but I'm not sure if I should take this route. 

Votes?