Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Hamlet movie comparison
Compare and contrast kenneth branagh and mel gibsons version of hamlet
Hamlet movie comparisons
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Hamlet movie comparison
Comparison of Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh's Versions of Hamlet
Modern day directors use a variety of methods to hold ones interest. Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh’s created versions of Hamlet that shared some similarities, but ultimately had many differences in respects to an audience’s appeal. An appealing movie is one that has an alluring ambiance and an intellectual stimulus. With these two movie versions, a setting and a mood forced an audience to acquire specific emotions, but Ethan Hawke’s version generated emotions more strongly and effectively. Also, these movies had extremely different uses of music and visuals, but both movie versions incorporated them well for the ambiance it tried to obtain. Finally, both movie versions drew characters to captivate the audience; however in Ethan Hawke’s version, the characters were used so effectively that it was easy to feel involved with them. While both these versions of Hamlet had a captivating ambiance, Ethan Hawke’s version was more appealing due to the intellectual incentive that it offered.
Setting and mood are methods of direction that can change a film’s ambiance and bring on an adundance of intelligent thoughts. Hawke and Branagh both reproduced Hamlet with a setting and mood that were both appealing for an audience. For instance, Hawke created a film much unlike Shakespeare’s play with a modern day setting. At the start of the film, the mood was set using modern visuals and melodies. Then a soliloquy of Hamlet was seen stating his troubling inner emotions. These scenes created a mood of youth and despair which eventually would become very effective in the plot of the film and the development of Hamlet’s character. Branagh’s version created a setting and a mood similar to Shakespeare’s original play. The beginning of the play opened with two guards waiting for the appearance of a ghost. Traditional music and dark visuals like a statue of Hamlet’s father created a mood of darkness and anxiety. This gave the film suspense which was much needed for the story. Clearly, both directors used the setting and the mood to play with particular emotions of the audience. However, Hawke was more creative in his methods and he created a non-traditional setting and mood that related more to a modern day audience. For example, Hawke focused on the mood by choosing camera shots during Hamlet’s soliloquy that...
... middle of paper ...
...ter development was sophisticated and artisitic. In this version, the audience was absorbed with Hamlet’s character. This introduced a variety of thought and reflection making the film more appealing to a widespread audience.
Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh recreated Shakespeare’s Hamlet with an alluring ambiance, however Ethan Hawke’s version was more appealing to an audience due to the stimulation of intelligent reflection. The setting and the mood in each of these versions played with the audience’s emotions, but Ethan Hawke’s version brought on stronger ones. Secondly, Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh used different choices of music and visuals that were equally effective in creating the ambiance the directors wished to obtain. As well, both movie versions created characters that tried to influence an audience; but, Ethan Hawke’s version introduced its main character so effectively that an audience was captivated by him. These two movie versions had some similarities, but Ethan Hawke’s different style produced a more appealing film. In the end, it was interesting to view the ways in which a director can try to make an old story more appealing to a modern day audience.
Filmmaking and cinematography are art forms completely open to interpretation in a myriad ways: frame composition, lighting, casting, camera angles, shot length, etc. The truly talented filmmaker employs every tool available to make a film communicate to the viewer on different levels, including social and emotional. When a filmmaker chooses to undertake an adaptation of a literary classic, the choices become somewhat more limited. In order to be true to the integrity of the piece of literature, the artistic team making the adaptation must be careful to communicate what is believed was intended by the writer. When the literature being adapted is a play originally intended for the stage, the task is perhaps simplified. Playwrights, unlike novelists, include some stage direction and other instructions regarding the visual aspect of the story. In this sense, the filmmaker has a strong basis for adapting a play to the big screen.
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.
Baz Lurhmann’s creation of the film Romeo and Juliet has shown that today’s audience can still understand and appreciate William Shakespeare. Typically, when a modern audience think of Shakespeare, they immediately think it will be boring, yet Lurhmann successfully rejuvenates Romeo and Juliet. In his film production he uses a number of different cinematic techniques, costumes and a formidably enjoyable soundtrack; yet changes not one word from Shakespeare’s original play, thus making it appeal to a modern audience.
...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.
It is said that Shakespeare wrote plays, not scripts. His work was meant to be read aloud and not just read. This became apparent while I watching the BBC 's 2009 version of Hamlet. I choose this version because the director Gregory Doran put a modern twist on the classic tale. The director’s display of contemporary technology, dress, and presentation of relationships enhanced the idea that Hamlet’s madness was simply a dramatic act.
However, though Branagh’s vision is nothing short of cinematic genius, it neglects some of the deeper meaning that is illustrated within the original written play. Shakespeare’s subtle nuances and elaborate dialogue shape each character as the plot of the story unfolds. Branagh neglects the situational relevance of certain dialogue within scenes of the written play; relying more on visual effect rather than verbiage. Branagh’s use of editing creates a wistfully light-hearted adaptation of the play, and hastens the pace of the drama. While Branagh succeeds in creating many parallels between his movie and Shakespeare's written play, his use of visual imagery, characterization, and setting deliver an interpretation that stands alone as one of joyful camaraderie and humor.
... the mother-son relationship, Hamlet’s reaction to the ghost and Gertrude’s guilt is closer to the original text in which Shakespeare leaves room for audience interpretation. Had Shakespeare not penned a true reflection of human behaviour in all its subtleties, the Dovan and Scott versions of Hamlet might not have been questioned for their legitimacy.
...amining the masterpiece that is Hamlet, it becomes clear that Shakespeare was a successful playwright because he understood his audience and knew how to connect with them through his work. Even four hundred years after Shakespeare, this is still undeniably a crucial quality in anyone who is required to interact with an audience. Hence, much can be learned from Hamlet and from Shakespeare’s other works of art; the context of his plays may no longer resonate in today’s world, but the methods he used to engage and target the audience are timeless guidelines.
...sign, lighting, casting, and costumes in the to be or not to be scene and Ophelia’s madness scene. His specific use of having the setting of the to be or not to be scene in the family mortuary made the atmosphere dark, and suspenseful which added intensity to Hamlet’s soliloquy. The lighting used in that scene also allowed the audience to see the blunt contrast between good and evil, making the scene more dramatic. Additionally, casting Helena Bonham Carter as Ophelia made Ophelia’s insanity more believable because of her innocent features in her madness scene. Moreover, the costumes worn by the characters in the movie were more historically accurate for that time period and allowed the audience to see why each character behaved the way they did. All these different components of the film added to create a very effective interpretation of the famous play, Hamlet.
William Shakespeare’s Hamlet is one of the most produced plays of all time. Written during the height of Shakespeare’s fame—1600—Hamlet has been read, produced, and researched by more individuals now than during Shakespeare’s own lifetime. It is has very few stage directions, because Shakespeare served as the director, even though no such official position existed at the time. Throughout its over 400 years of production history, Hamlet has seen several changes. Several textual cuts have been made, in addition to the liberties taken through each production. In recent years, Hamlet has seen character changes, plot changes, gender role reversals, alternate endings, time period shifts, and thematic alternations, to name only a few creative liberties modern productions of Hamlet have taken.
“I like the movie but it was not as good as the book” is a saying that is said by most people. In most cases, a movie changes drastically from the book it is based on. Hamlet is one of those cases. Although it does not change completely, there are some big differences and similarities within the book and movie. Reading the play and then watching the movie makes it easier to pick out the differences and similarities. Being able to compare and contrast the movie and play of Hamlet might make it easier to decide which one is better or which one gives a better story. The movie and play of Hamlet are different because of the chronological order, parts being left out and parts being added. They are the same in ways through dialogue, characters,
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
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
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.
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,