Differing Versions of William Shakespeare's Hamlet

948 Words2 Pages

Differing Versions of William Shakespeare's Hamlet

TNT Britain’s Theatrical version and Ethan Hawke’s movie version of

the play ‘Hamlet’ were vastly different in virtually all aspects. From

the portrayal of characters in performances, the sets, paraphernalia

and especially the fact that one is based in our modern world, (New

York, 2000) both differ to large extents. Hamlet in the TNT’s version

does not dwell on about his Father’s death in contrast to the Hamlet

played by Ethan Hawke, who is constantly watching videos to reminisce

about times he had with his Father.

The two actors portray Hamlet, the main character, in a different way.

In the play version, he is very vocal and blunt. Hamlet’s interaction

with the ghost however, is more dramatic in the theater version, with

ear-splitting shrieks and squeals. This reflected the influence of the

supernatural and unworldly during Shakespeare’s time in the

Renaissance Period. The movie version had a very different influence

on me compared to TNT’s play version. For example, in TNT’s version,

Hamlet is a Prince with zero influence; however, he illustrated as a

photographer who instantaneously shows his peripheral nature towards

the King.

A great deal of the sound effects used was very apt and imaginative in

TNT’s play. The ghost in TNT’s play was interesting and original. I

feel, in general, that TNT’s version was easier to relate to, rather

than the movie version. TNT’s version also had an abundance of emotion

in its scenes (e.g. dialogue), along with humor, had a large amount of

vigor and enthusiasm, compared to the movie version, where Hamlet is

quiet and shows few real emotions...

... middle of paper ...

...on

depicted today’s world, the use of Shakespearean tongue did not made

it easier to relate to but made it feel out of place.

In conclusion, I felt to a large extent the TNT’s version was better

then the movie version. It was exciting and original and the

characters were profound. Furthermore, for a person who has never read

even an abridged version of ‘Hamlet’ it gave me sufficient

understanding. The absence of creativity in the movie version could be

because of the director’s reluctance to stray to far from the actual

script, (but Shakespeare in the year 2000?) For example, all we saw

about Ophelia was a crying woman with a depressed countenance the

entire length of the movie. It was also very disappointing as I

anticipated relating better to the movie version, as it was closer to

us as it had a modern setting.

More about Differing Versions of William Shakespeare's Hamlet

Open Document