Annotated bibliography/Movie analysis of Hamlet
Almereyda, Michael. dir. Hamlet. Perf. Ethan Hawke. Miramax Films, 2000. Film.
The Hamlet movie starring Ethan Hawke attempts to bring the Elizabethan era to modern terms by bringing it to the city of New York in the late 1990s. Almereyda’s attempts do not give proper credit to how artistic the play was meant to be since the atmosphere and theme of the original play are lost. The known “To be or not to be” soliloquy said by Hamlet echos a very miserable tone to the audience as it speaks of the dark idea of suicide. In the modern version this atmosphere is not demonstrated since it takes place in a local Blockbuster. This scenery allows for great distraction of the audience. People who
…show more content…
Unfortunately, much effort goes to waste since a failure of remaining focused is noticed within the audience of this film. The way in which the camera is placed throughout the scene of the soliloquy “To be or not to be” takes away from the dramatic purpose of this soliloquy. There were points in this scene where I felt dizzy because the director did not focus on one prospect at a time. He went from showing the audience the sky, to the rocky ocean down below, close up to Hamlet’s face and then far away from Hamlet. He did not remain focused on one angle and this created much distraction. It was hard for me to focus on what was being said since my eyes were so distraught attempting to gain focus on what was going on. This distraction did not only occur visually but auditory distractions occurred as well. Throughout this scene unnecessary music was added, in attempts to create dramatic effect, but this did not impress me at all. I would try to focus on Hamlet’s voice, then all of a sudden a blast of flutes would begin to play and I would find myself lost in the scene yet again. All these distractions took away greatly from the meaning of this important soliloquy said by Hamlet. In due course Olivier did a poor job at demonstrating Shakespeare’s play due to the amount of distractions which
Kenneth Branagh’s version of the ‘to be or not to be’ soliloquy, although slightly overdramatic, was superior in delivery and setting. First, Hamlet’s tone held a faint aggressiveness, which helped emphasize his growing dissatisfaction with his current disposition. The other films’ depictions of the scene were dull and lacked the proper emotion required to give life to Hamlet’s internal debate. In addition, the mirror Hamlet faces as he speaks alludes to the derivative and folly of his, and his father’s, vengeful pursuits. Hamlet’s obligation to fulfill his father's demands causes him to self loathe, which leads him to question his existence. As Hamlet approached the mirror with his sword drawn, both Polonius and Claudius flinched in fear,
People all around the world are familiar with the “To be or not to be” speech. Although some might not realize it is a speech by Hamlet, they do realize how powerful those lines are. Those lines show the mark of a great philosopher, and this is precisely what Hamlet is. Because Hamlet is such a fantastic philosopher at the start of the play, it leads him to what some believe is his downfall. The fact that perhaps he thinks too much on the people and incidents surrounding him is really what pulls him down. He spends an excessive amount of his day thinking about every aspect of every event.
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.
Despite not being the newest film version of Hamlet, Kenneth Branagh’s take on Hamlet’s over famous soliloquy “To be or not to be” (Shakespeare 3.1.57-90) is the most bold and contemporary version. Branagh’s interpretation of this scene brings suspense, maintains a steady pace and adds drama to the soliloquy. The use of gestures, music and camera shots effectively improve the scene. In Zeffirelli take on this scene, Hamlet is roaming around a tomb-like building.
William Shakespeare was a very famous English poet, playwright, and actor. One of the famous plays that he wrote was “Hamlet”. Hamlet is a very famous play and many play writers or directors interpret Shakespeare’s play differently. A Great scene to compares is Act5 scene 2. The two films that will be compared are “Hamlet” from 1996 directed by Kenneth Branagh and “Hamlet” from 2009 directed by Gregory Doran. The two different directors took the same play and made it reflect their own interpretation. The films are very different, but similar in many ways. “Hamlet” from 1996 directed by Kenneth Branagh and “Hamlet” from 2009 directed by Gregory Doran both use the theme guilt. The theme of guilt will be explain through the comparison of how Gertrude
Gibson is well supported by noteworthy members such as Glenn Close (Gertrude), who featured in the psychological thriller Fatal Attraction, and Ian Holm (Polonius) who partnered with a succeeding Hamlet, Kenneth Branagh, in the 1989 epic, Henry V. In summary, With Gibson’s physical, risqué Hamlet, well supported by a host of glittering names, Zeffirelli's “Hamlet of the 90’s”
Of the three productions of Hamlet viewed- starring Ethan Hawke, Benedict Cumberbatch and Kenneth Branagh- the one featuring Kenneth Branagh best captures the essence of Hamlet’s soliloquy through his effortless delivery, use of props and use of setting to convey his message, revealing Shakespeare’s intent, which is to provoke the question, “is there a greater purpose in life?”. Throughout the soliloquies starring Ethan Hawke and Benedict Cumberbatch, there is a continuing thread of forced and awkward speech. However, Kenneth Branagh flows through his speech smoothly as though he is saying the words to bring across his own purpose- which is to deceive Claudius and Polonius.
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.
Hamlet the Play and the Movie Hamlet by William Shakespeare is a story about a king that was murdered by his brother and the prince has been asked by his father?s ghost to avenge his murder. The original story line has been altered a few times since it has been written. The original Hamlet the play and the altered Hamlet the movie are shown differently in many different ways. Hamlet the movie with Mel Gibson shows different things than the play, but there are three major differences between the two. The three major differences are in the way both of the productions start out, differences in the scene that the players put on a play, and differences in the way the productions end.
The two film versions include Michael Almereyda’s Hamlet from 2000 starring Ethan Hawke and Bruce Ramsay’s Hamlet from 2011 also starring Bruce Ramsay. The first topic to be discussed will be the setting
“To be, or not to be, that is the question…” In William Shakespeare’s play Hamlet, this is the question the protagonist, Hamlet, faces. The idea regarding whether to act or not act derives the entirety of the story. Hamlet portrays the theme action v. inaction, through Laertes, Fortinbras, and Hamlet’s inability/ ability to handle conflicts that arise following their father’s deaths.
In this soliloquy, Shakespeare strikes a chord with a fundamental human concern: the validity and worthiness of life. Would it not be easier for us to simply enter a never-ending sleep when we find ourselves facing the daunting problems of life than to "suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune"? However, it is perhaps because we do not know what this endless sleep entails that humans usually opt against suicide. "For in that sleep of death what dreams may come / When we have shuffled off this mortal coil / Must give us pause. " Shakespeare seems to understand this dilemma through his character Hamlet, and thus the phrase "To be, or not to be" has been immortalized; indeed, it has pervaded our culture to such a remarkable extent that it has been referenced countless times in movies, television, and the media.
The perfection of Hamlet’s character has been called in question - perhaps by those who do not understand it. The character of Hamlet stands by itself. It is not a character marked by strength of will or even of passion, but by refinement of thought and sentiment. Hamlet is as little of the hero as a man can be. He is a young and princely novice, full of high enthusiasm and quick sensibility - the sport of circumstances, questioning with fortune and refining on his own feelings, and forced from his natural disposition by the strangeness of his situation.
William Shakespeare's Hamlet is, at heart, a play about suicide. Though it is surrounded by a fairly standard revenge plot, the play's core is an intense psychodrama about a prince gone mad from the pressures of his station and his unrequited love for Ophelia. He longs for the ultimate release of killing himself - but why? In this respect, Hamlet is equivocal - he gives several different motives depending on the situation. But we learn to trust his soliloquies - his thoughts - more than his actions. In Hamlet's own speeches lie the indications for the methods we should use for its interpretation.
Robert B. Heilman in “The Role We Give Shakespeare” explores some of the psychological aspects of the play and concludes that it is psychologically “whole”: