Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Hamlet movie 2000 vs play
Compare contrast film and written version of hamlet
Compare contrast film and written version of hamlet
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Hamlet movie 2000 vs play
Hamlet by William Shakespeare is one play that has intrigued people for over four hundred years. There have been as many productions as there have been days since the original play 1596-1603. Each production has been different from the next one, no matter where performed or by whom. One film reproduction of Hamlet released in the year 2000, was directed by and stared Etahan Hawke as Hamlet and Julia Styles as Ophelia. This essay will refer to this film as Hamlet 2000 and the original play as Hamlet or text. To compare the text to the film Hamlet 2000 will be divided into three groups, language, setting / plot line and lastly the characters. All though the speech is taken only from the text, the film Hamlet 2000 is vastly different, because the change of the setting, brings the characters into the modern day, allows todays technology to help interpret Hamlet and bring to a new generation. Text is what the original author wanted the reader to get from the story, but how it is presented is up to the reader. Where and when the story takes place, sets the imagery for the reader or audience and, the rest is up to the individual. What they obtain when reading the text is what they pull from their imagination. This is not the same in the film adaptations, because we see what the screenwriter and director want us to see and leave out what they do not want to be seen. As Almereyda director of Hamlet 2000 points out, “watching the movie requires a certain suspension of disbelief, people don't really talk like that. But the language has a tone, and its own life and its own logic” and it does. Almereyda is correct, people do not talk like that anymore. That is why it seems a little unnatural to place the language of Shakespeare into mod... ... middle of paper ... ...truggle and Laertes is shot fatally as well. After Laertes and Gertrude are both dead Halmet shots and sills Claudius as if the director was in a hurry to wrap the film up. Overall Hamnlet 2000 is an enjoyable adaptation of the original text that has been modernized by technology. Being able to take the language of over four hundred years ago and make it adaptable to the youth of today is not something that everyone would be able to do. If you had never read Hamlet the film might be more entertaining as there would not be anything to compare it to. Works Cited Goldberg, Matt. 'Ethan Hawke And HAMLET Writer-Director Michael Almereyda To Adapt Shakespeare's CYMBELINE'. N. p., 2013. Web. 20 Mar. 2014. Hamlet. Michael Almereyda, 2000. video. Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy Of Hamlet, Prince Of Denmark. 1st ed. Champaign, Ill.: Project Gutenberg. Print.
There are many topics deeply hidden in the works of William Shakespeare. One of his greatest pieces of works is the story of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Not only are the words of Shakespeare meaningful, but there are also many follow up pieces of literature that contain important interpretations of the events in this play. These works about Hamlet are extremely beneficial to the reader. I have found four of these works and will use them as sources throughout this essay. The first source is “The Case of Hamlet’s Conscience,” by Catherine Belsey, and it focuses on the topic of Hamlet’s revenge in the play. The second source is “’Never Doubt I Love’: Misreading Hamlet,” by Imtiaz Habib, and it explains a lot of information about Hamlet’s “love” for Ophelia. The third source is “Shakespeare’s Hamlet, III.i.56—88,” by Horst Breuer, and it talks in depth about the issue of suicide in Hamlet. The fourth and final source is “Shakespeare’s Hamlet 1.2.35-38,” by Kathryn Walls, and it describes the significance of the role the Ghost plays throughout Hamlet. There are many different confusing parts in Hamlet and the best way to fully understand the play is to understand all of these parts. By understanding every miniscule detail in the play, it creates a different outlook on the play for the reader. In this essay, I will explain these confusing topics, as well as explain why the sources are helpful and what insight they can bring. At the end is this essay, the reader will have a complete understanding and appreciation of the play Hamlet, Prince of Denmark.
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Massachusetts Institute of Technology. 1995. http://www.chemicool.com/Shakespeare/hamlet/full.html No line nos.
...e text, there are several differences between them that are based on interpretation. These differences are notably evident in the character of Laertes during the last scene. While his dislike of Hamlet is obvious in the text version of the play, Laertes demonstrates much stronger feelings towards Hamlet in the movie through his actions. Other aspects of Laertes's character, such as his cowardice and deviousness, are manifest through his actions and are thus more obvious in the movie. The rearranging of lines and events also portray Laertes in a much more negative light in the film version. In all, the film version of Hamlet allows the character of Laertes to be more complete, and he is developed as more of a villain in the movie than he appears to be in the text. This development occurs mainly through his actions, since the words were the same that Shakespeare wrote.
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” Literature: An Introduction to Reading and Writing. Ed. Edgar V. Roberts. 9th Ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009. Print
There have been numerous remarks of William Shakespeare’s most celebrated drama Hamlet. Almereyda managed to make Hamlet a theoretical play, into an intense, action-driven movie without losing much of the initial tragic atmosphere of the original play. The play Hamlet focuses strictly on the state of Denmark on the original Elsinore castle, however Michael Almereyda was able to modernize the movie to New York City. In many ways I think that the modernized version of Hamlet is easier to appreciate but in review that diminishes the play’s “greatness,” in my personal opinion.
Today we can see remnants of Hamlet throughout modern literature and TV. Before kids even know who Shakespeare is they are learning the underlying theme of Hamlet while watching “The Lion King.” When sitting down for the Monday night drama Heroes, millions throughout the world are watching revenge stories based off of Hamlet, come to life.
Different adaptations of William Shakespeare’s works have taken various forms. Through the creative license that artists, directors, and actors take, diverse incarnations of his classic works continue to arise. Gregory Doran’s Hamlet and Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet bring William Shakespeare’s work by the same title to the screen. These two film adaptations take different approaches in presenting the turmoil of Hamlet. From the diverging takes on atmosphere to the characterization of the characters themselves, the many possible readings of Hamlet create the ability for the modification of the presentation and the meaning of the play itself. Doran presents David Tenant as Hamlet in a dark, eerie, and minimal setting; his direction highlighting the
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. The Riverside Shakespeare. ED. G. Blakemore Evans. Boston: Haughton Mifflin Company, 1974.
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. New York: Washington Square Press, 1958. Print
Shakespeare, William. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Ed. Barbara A. Mowat and Paul Werstine. New York: Simon & Schuster Paperbacks, 2012. Print.
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” Literature: An Introduction to Reading and Writing. Ed. Edgar V. Roberts. 9th Ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009. Print
Zeffirelli’s filmic Hamlet evidently interprets the original play especially considering Mel Gibson’s performance making it easy for the audience to understand Shakespearean dialect. Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a man with friends who proves to be much more reserved, and manipulative than someone might imagine today. His hamlet is considerate in his plans, but with no tact interpersonally. Zeffirelli’s audience is required to focus on the troubles, and character of Hamlet, who is nonstop, and unfriendly, but a sensitive loner when the time is right. Zeffirelli accomplishes this mixture while staying faithful to his starting place my maintaining solid screenplay with a constant flow supporting his own take on the story. Concisely, Zeffirelli’s Hamlet is both a free and a loyal understanding of its source, which is, for today’s viewers, a Hamlet in its own right.
This play is ranked by many as the very greatest ever written. Cumberland Clark in “The Supernatural in Hamlet” gives the consensus regarding Hamlet that exists among literary critics of today:
Shakespeare, William, Barbara A. Mowat, and Paul Werstine. The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark. Washington Square Press new Folger ed. New York: Washington Square, 2002. Print.
Shakespeare, William. “The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark” Literature: An Introduction to Reading and Writing. Ed. Edgar V. Roberts. 9th Ed. New York: Pearson Longman, 2009. Print