To be or not to be that is the question. Both the Ethan Hawkes and Gibson version of this famous speech by Shakespeare are portrayed differently. The differences of the setting in both versions gives the viewer different emotions as they watch the speech. Ethan Hawkes version of To be or not to be has a modernist feel. Hamlet walks in a movie store, he is not alone but with other customers. He speaks softly as he walks up and down the action isle. In the background there is a sign saying “Come home happy”. As he is talking about having revenge on his uncle the camera flashes to the movie that is playing on the wall and it is ironically playing a revenge scene from another movie. The setting to this version of Hamlet is ironic because the
setting is uplifting, and bright while hamlet comes off as depressed and monotone. Furthermore in the Mel Gibson version is present in his father's tomb. He looks at his father's tomb almost as if he is envied of him for being dead. The setting corresponded with the content of the speech. The director concesly played with light to add effect while Hamlet is talking. There is a lot of symbolism in this version which reflects how Hamlet presence is while walking around. The Mel Gibson version was more successful in portraying this speech. The symbolism with the setting makes the watcher feel exactly what Hamlet is feeling in that moment. In the Ethan Hawke version the setting comes off as confusing to the viewer. The setting doesn't match the emotion. The Mel Gibson is how I would have envisioned Hamlet to be interpreted.The setting in also in medieval times which is when I would have imagined Hamlet would be occurring. Not in the modern era.
One of the most famous Shakespearean lines-"To be or not to be, that is the question” is found in Hamlet, spoken by the title character himself. While this is the most obvious reference that Hamlet makes to this own philosophy, Hamlet makes frequent proclamations about his stifled life throughout the play. Hamlet views his life in a negative manner, to the point where he finds himself contemplating whether or not to end his own life. Hamlet does not value his life, which causes him to become flustered with himself and his lack of action. Therefore, demonstrating that Hamlet does not value his life as one should.
In the play,”Hamlet, Act 3 scene 1” the target audiences between both plays were to a wide variety of people. Back when Hamlet was first written, it was made to be viewed by a wide variety of audiences. Typically during the renaissance era, plays were made more common to the lower part of society; this being why Hamlet was written. Although both plays are to the same audience, the first one is more distinct into who it wants viewed. It had elegance, and was more formal and professional. You could see in the audience people were wearing suits a formal attire. As to the second one, it was smaller scale, and the audience had people in shorts and sweats.
Hamlet's classsic "To be or not to be..."(Hamlet, prince of Denmark, 3.1.57) speech really shows who he is. Obviously Hamlet is horribly depressed. We have already seen several examples of this, but this speech gives us a clear picture of his sadness. More importantly however, his speech shows his weakness and indecisiveness. Hamlet is consistently melancholy, but he never really acts on it; he just kind of wallows around, full of self-pity and loathing. Finally, it gives us Hamlet's reason for not committing suicide. Throughout the play he seems to wish for death and here we find out why he doesn't bring it on himself. This also gives us a window into his personality. This speech provides us with a clear understanding of Hamlet and his motivations.
Franco Zeffirelli portrayed a more effective version of the famous to be or not be soliloquy by having it set below in the family mortuary. Having violently rejected Ophelia, Hamlet climbs down the stoned stairs of the medieval castle and into the cellar where all his ancestors’ burial tombs lie, including his father’s. Surrounding himself in tombs and skeletons, he intones the to be or not to be speech in isolation and darkness. Having this particular set design, Zeffirelli enhanced the scene by creating a cold, dark, and suspenseful atmosphere. The family mortuary set design was eerie and melancholic which added realism into the speech as it allowed the audience to really see the manifestation of death that Hamlet contemplated. It also added physical emotion into the soliloquy as the scene contrasted death and Hamlet so closely with all the dead royals in their tombs, showing how deep Hamlet’s thoughts on life and death were rooted in his mind. Therefore, Zeffirelli’s use of the set design helped to create a more intense scene that enriched the soliloquy.
It has been said that the “To be or not to be” soliloquy gives us a picture of Hamlet the scholar, the intellectual, pondering a problem of moral philosophy. Discuss.
Birenbaum, Harvey. “To Be or Not to Be” The Archetypal Form of Hamlet. N.p.: Penn State,
"To be or not to be – that is the question." It is one of the most famous lines in Western Literature and the hallmark of a critical thinker. It is no coincidence that Hamlet is one of the greatest critical thinkers of all time. In school, we are expected to think critically and it is seen as an intellectual virtue. Given the situation Hamlet is in though, Hamlet's intellectual virtue only leads to chaos and death. The story of Hamlet is a tragedy because Hamlet has a tragic virtue.
In the play Hamlet by William Shakespeare we look at two of his most famous soliloquies. On the one hand, Hamlet 's’ first soliloquy expresses dominated feelings of despair by saying how he had lost everything in his life and doesn 't want to live anymore. On the other hand, Hamlet’s third soliloquy expresses dominated feelings of inferiority. Hamlet is insecure about life or death by telling if he chooses either one of them both will lead to a negative place. These two soliloquies expresses Hamlet’s feelings at the beginning of the play and how it changes as the play goes.
William Shakespeare is a famous English playwright. His play Hamlet centers around Hamlet's decision on how to seek revenge for his father’s death. However, Hamlet is unsure of what course of action he wants to take to exact his revenge. He discusses the idea of suicide as a possible option in his “To be or not to be” soliloquy. In this soliloquy, Shakespeare uses metaphors, rhetorical questions, and repetition to express Hamlet’s indecision regarding what he should do.
In Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the importance of characters Laertes and Fortinbras have been an issue that's discussed and analyzed by many literary critics. Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras are parallel characters in the play. Laertes and Fortinbras are often use by Shakespeare to compare the actions and emotions of Hamlet throughout the play. "They are also important in Hamlet as they are imperative to the plot of the play and the final resolution" (Nardo, 88). Shakespeare placed these three men: Hamlet, Laertes and Fortinbras into similar circumstances, which is, to avenge for their fathers' deaths. The main difference between the three is the way that each of them comes to grief of their fathers' deaths and the way they planned their vengeance.
Shakespeare’s “To be or not to be” soliloquy is perhaps one of the most well known speeches in literature. It has been interpreted by countless actors who attempt to embody the emotions that Hamlet was trying to convey. The speech is extremely emotional and thought provoking and it is imperative to correctly portray Hamlet as he contemplates one of the biggest questions in the entire play: to die or not to die? Although many actors have played the role of Hamlet, there are a few who stood out to me. Mel Gibson, Derek Jacobi, and David Tennant. Through the use of undeniable emotion and passion, Mel Gibson and Derek Jacobi did a wonderful job at portraying Hamlet, while David Tennant’s performance left me extremely unsatisfied.
Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" soliloquy is arguably the most famous soliloquy in the history of the theatre. Even today, 400 years after it was written, most people are vaguely familiar with the soliloquy even though they may not know the play. What gives these 34 lines such universal appeal and recognition? What about Hamlet's introspection has prompted scholars and theatregoers alike to ask questions about their own existence over the centuries?
William Shakespeare’s “To be, or not to be” soliloquy delivered by our lead character Hamlet is arguably the most popular soliloquy in all of literature, but is it? The question isn’t if it is the most popular in all of literature, but is it even a true soliloquy? Is it even original thought by Shakespeare? We will examine these questions in greater detail by scrutinizing articles written about these very topics and see if there is any validity to the claims. We will even look to the playwright himself, within his own work, to determine how he viewed the idea of the soliloquy.
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,
Hamlet's "To be, or not to be" soliloquy is arguably the most famous soliloquy in the history of the theatre. Even today, 400 years after it was written, most people are vaguely familiar with the soliloquy even though they may not know the play. What gives these 34 lines such universal appeal and recognition? What about Hamlet's introspection has prompted scholars and theatregoers alike to ask questions about their own existence over the centuries?