To play one of Shakespeare’s most complex roles successfully on stage or on screen has been the aspiration of many actors. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet has been the focus on various accounts throughout the 20th Century, each actor attempting to bring something unique and unmarked to the focal character. Franco Zeffirelli and Kenneth Branagh, both film directors, introduce varying levels of success on the screen through downright differences in ways of translation and original ideas. Zeffirelli’s much shorter interpretation of the film is able to convey the importance of Hamlet as a masterwork by using modern approaches to film but still capturing the traditional work behind Shakespeare’s well-known play.
Zeffirelli’s 1990 “Hamlet” production focuses on the greater dominant widespread audiences, who have high expectations and respect for actors like Mel Gibson. The film takes a typical action movie role, which is very robust and physical in all aspects. Zeffirelli evokes a new type of character for Hamlet who maintains the sensitive side that comes across within Shakespeare’s play, but adds variation to the character by never making him weak. Gibson’s very active display of emotion is seen throughout the entire production, but is never over the top. Noel Sloboda is intrigued by Zeffirelli’s focus on a younger more dominant audience, and because of this, she argues that actors such as Mel Gibson were the main focus of the remake. By adding new dialogue as well as variations to scenes, Zeffirelli’s version of Hamlet is modernized and differs much from that of Branagh’s longer rendition but maintains the importance of the original works.
The location of the film set up the entire mood of the storyline. This large castle, off the c...
... middle of paper ...
...ental to the storyline.
Although Branagh’s version of Hamlet parallelizes to Shakespeare’s masterwork, mainly by keeping the text very similar, it almost retrieves the importance of the original work by the shift in eras as well as the addition of modernized extras. Zifferelli is able to show his audience a whole new dynamic of interpreting a classic masterpiece. By focusing on casting popular actors and including extras that are appealing to viewers currently, but not overwhelming, he is able to reach out a larger array of fans and critics without taking attention away from the main focus; the storyline. The battle between staying true to the original work and altering a classic masterpiece to appeal to audiences today is a continuous dilemma which many filmmakers are destined to face when attempting to remake timeless work such as that of Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
Hamlet makes use of the idea of theatrical performance through characters presenting themselves falsely to others – from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern spying on Hamlet to gain favor with the King, to Hamlet himself playing the part of a madman – and through the play within the play, The Mousetrap. This essay will discuss the ways in which Hamlet explores the idea of theatrical performance, ‘acting’, through analysis of the characters and the ‘roles’ they adopt, specifically that of Hamlet and Claudius. The idea, or the theme of theatrical performance is not an uncommon literary element of Shakespearean works, the most famous of which to encompass this idea being As You Like It. This essay will also briefly explore the ways in which Hamlet reminds its audience of the stark difference between daily life and dramatization of life in the theatre.
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.
Kenneth Branagh creates his own individualistic adaptation of this classic through the use of visual imagery, characterization, and setting. Branagh cut many lines and speeches from the text to better support his interpretation of a more open and informal society of warm-hearted, affectionate characters. Though Shakespeare's mood is more formal, Branagh remains true to the essence of the play as all of the same characters and most of the dialogue are justly included in the film. Although distinct differences can be made between Branagh’s film and Shakespeare’s written work, they both share a common denominator of good old-fashioned entertainment; and in the world of theater, nothing else really matters.
Goldman, Michael. "Hamlet and Our Problems." Critical Essays on Shakespeare's Hamlet. Ed. David Scott Kaston. New York City: Prentice Hall International. 1995. 43-55
When a play is presented on film, the director takes the script, and with poetic license, interprets it. A film not only contains the actual words of the author (in this case Shakespeare), but it includes action, acting, and cinematographic techniques; the three are used to better portray the author’s story. Using these elements, the director’s interpretation of the plot is reinforced. The film provides symbolic images and a visual interpretation, hence Shakespeare’s play “Macbeth” is better understood by the viewers.
...ears or express emotions over her death or her madness. Therefore the Kenneth Branagh version of Hamlet was able to show a closer interpretation of the play Hamlet and the significance of the characters.
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
During class we have reviewed many versions of the play Hamlet. The two movie versions that I chose to compare on the play Hamlet are the David Tennant version and the Kenneth Branagh version. I chose these two versions because these were the two that most interested me. I believe that some scenes from each movie were better than the other, but overall I liked these two versions just as equally. The three main scenes that stood out to me that I will be comparing are ‘Ophelia’s Mad Scene’, the ‘Hamlet Kills Polonius’ scene, and Hamlet’s ‘To be or not to be’ scene.
One notable difference between William Shakespeare’s The Tempest and Julie Taymor’s film version of the play is the altered scenes that made quite a difference between the play and the movie version. This difference has the effects of creating a different point of view by altering the scenes affected the movie and how Taymor felt was necessary by either by keeping or deleting certain parts from the play. I use “Altered Scene” in the way of how Julia Taymor recreates her own point of view for the movie and the direction she took in order to make the audience can relate to the modern day film. I am analyzing the way that the altered scenes changes to make a strong impression on the audiences different from the play. This paper will demonstrate
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.
Rose, Mark. “Reforming the Role.” Modern Critical Interpretations: Hamlet. Ed. Harold Bloom. New York: Chelsea House Publishers, 1986. Rpt. from Homer to Brecht: The European Epic and Dramatic Traditions. Ed. Michael Seidel and Edward Mendelson. N.p.: Yale University Press, 1977.
Critics trashed Michael Almereyda’s Hamlet, due in part to the acting of Ethan Hawke, which many reviewers viewed as too weak for the role (). However, these reviewers fail to recognize that “[Hamlet’s] nature changes from scene to scene” (Crosman 148), and therefore requires development as the storyline progresses. Similarly, Ophelia’s character experiences rather drastic changes following the death of her father. But, as Hawke received criticism for his descent into madness, Stiles’ Ophelia received praise. This essay will examine the representation of mental illness in Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Michael Almereyda’s 2000-film adaptation of the play, in order to justify the acting of Ethan Hawke as Hamlet.
Shakespeare’s Hamlet is arguably one of the best plays known to English literature. It presents the protagonist, Hamlet, and his increasingly complex path through self discovery. His character is of an abnormally complex nature, the likes of which not often found in plays, and many different theses have been put forward about Hamlet's dynamic disposition. One such thesis is that Hamlet is a young man with an identity crisis living in a world of conflicting values.
Michael Almereyda’s movie adaptation of Shakespeare’s Hamlet brings about a new perspective through its performance. The movie adaptation, Hamlet (2000), retells the original play in a modernized setting, bringing out various different elements of characters, which highlights a new reading of these characters as individuals, and a newfangled reading of the play as well. Throughout the movie, Ophelia and Gertrude, the woman-leads, are advanced in a progressive manner compared to the original play. In particular, Gertrude from Hamlet (2000) is noticeably altered from Hamlet, the play. This new interpretation of Gertrude and the play created by the movie adaptation advances the position of Gertrude as a woman, as well as motifs of incest, misogyny,
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.