The existence of art demands the existence of criticism. Wherever one creates, another is there to examine what has been made. While the artist may chafe at this reality, healthy criticism has pruned the art world for generations, helping to produce the harvest of creation that benefits us today. Shakespeare, if not the most, is certainly one of the most evaluated playwrights of all time. In the following essay, this role of critic will be expressed by comparing three different topics between two film versions of Shakespeare’s classic Hamlet. 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 …show more content…
However, a viewer would be hard pressed to know this from the film itself, needing to consult outside sources to confirm this. Outside of the occasional aesthetic nod to the era, information is scarce concerning the exact time and place of the movie’s setting. As will be discussed later in this essay, Ramsay cut Hamlet’s script generously. In the vacuum created by his edits, Ramsay neglected to give the novel environment any real significance. The setting of this version of Hamlet is little more than window dressing for Ramsay’s interpretation of the classic play. Compare this then to Almereyda’s version of the Bard’s longest play which was set in the era contemporary to the year of its release. Almereyda does a chilling job at presenting a bleak, modern environment, capturing the sense of melancholy present in the text. His transformation of the kingdom of Denmark into a business corporation allows for the element of competition and warfare to stay relevant in the plot. This contrasts with Ramsay’s interpretation which almost completely removed the political element instead of adapting it to the setting chosen for the …show more content…
As previously mentioned, Ramsay’s interpretation leaves much of the original plot out from his film. Ramsay trimmed almost everything regarding politics from the story, making the focus solely on the drama unfolding between the families. This does make some things confusing, like Laertes’ return at the end of the play. As in the original play Laertes, with the help of his father Polonius, asks the permission of the king to return to France since the coronation is finished. This makes his return at the end of the movie, which takes place entirely over the course of one evening, seem forced. While Laertes fury at the death of his father is understood, how he arrived with the event having occurred so quickly before is not. The setting is pre-mobile phone and pre-internet; Laertes knowledge of the event seemed to be predicated on Ramsay’s need to end 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.
Throughout the play, Laertes is as an extremely caring member of his family. His strong emotions for family have an opposing side to it, a shadow that has repressed feelings of anger which cause him to add to the disaster in Denmark. An example that depicts this is when Laertes attempts to request more rites for Ophelia’s funeral. After he is denied, he starts a commotion by calling the priest “churlish”, explaining that Ophelia will be “A ministering angel” while the priest will “liest howling”(5.1.217-218). His compliments to Ophelia shows how much he loved her, while his nasty insults to the priest show his repressed rage. While this is occuring, Hamlet hears Laertes’s mention of Ophelia during the commotion and throws himself into a brawl with Laertes. It is the conflict built up from there that causes Claudius to target Laertes as his next weapon to kill Hamlet with. Laertes’s deep anger for Hamlet makes himself the best candidate for Claudius’s manipulation. Once Laertes’s sides with Claudius, he shows his dark intent by requesting Claudius to not “o'errule me to a peace”(4.7.58). On the day of the duel, Laertes undergoes a confrontation of his shadow while he clashes with Hamlet. His realization of his shadow comes too late into the duel when both Hamlet and Laertes are struck by poison, as this happens he declares that he is “ justly killed with mine own treachery (5.2.337).” In the moments that he is still alive, he dismisses his shadow and ends the circle of murder by announcing the true nature of Claudius. Laertes’s repressed anger guides the play into the duel where many deaths occur including Hamlet’s.
Hamlet, a tragedy by William Shakespeare shows a lot of adaptations to movies. Hamlet by Mel Gibson (1990) and Kenneth Branagh (1996) interpret and portray the play by Shakespeare in different ways. The two film versions of Act IV of Hamlet have many differences and similarities. Kenneth Branagh’s version of Hamlet is seen covering most of the original text of Shakespeare’s play of Hamlet unlike the Mel Gibson version which omits many scenes and dialogues. The film version of Hamlet featuring Kenneth Branagh is a more successful production of Shakespeare’s play of Act IV according to its setting, editing choices and character portrayal.
As presented in the movie, Laertes is a sore loser. The text version of the play has Laertes simply say "No" after Hamlet scores his first hit. In the movie, Laertes shows much more emotion. His anger at Hamlet is obvious, and his frustration at being hit is evident, as he screams in protest to the mediator's call. Then, to show what a poor sport he is, he lunges at Hamlet when Hamlet turns his back to Laertes. Laertes didn't have enough courage or faith in his own fighting ability to take a fair shot at Hamlet and succeed. After the second hit, Laertes demonstrates much the same emotions, screaming in frustration and anger. In the text of the play, Laertes agrees with Claudius to fight Hamlet and use poison on his blade to kill him. As presented in the text, Laertes killing Hamlet will be enough for his revenge. However, in the movie, it is obvious through his actions and mannerisms that it is not enough for Laertes to merely kill Hamlet, but he has to make Hamlet look like a fool while he is doing it. That is why Laertes becomes so upset in the movie when Hamlet gains a hit; Laertes wanted to discredit Hamlet before he killed him.
Both Hamlet’s and Laertes’ fathers were killed. When Laertes discovered that his father’s been murdered he immediately assumes that Claudius is the killer. As a result of his speculation he moves to avenge Polonius’ death. Laertes lines in Act IV Scene 5 provide insight into his mind displaying his desire for revenge at any cost. “To hell, allegiance!
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.
The setting of Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is winter and all is blue and carries a feel of eer...
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
Hamlet, one of the most intricate and influential plays by Shakespeare, debatably of all time. It has inspired not only appreciative readers and writing critiques but continuous generations of people. The inspiration led to the fabrication of many great movies, which wasn’t achievable until the 20th century. Before cinema was the prevalent method of sharing appreciation and spilling emotion for a specific subject, art portrayed what would fly through our minds such as the many interpretations of Ophelia’s death. With the imagery put into motion we can try and pick apart how certain people might view the play being portrayed and choose what best suits our expectation of this tragedy. Other things that only film has been able to present to us is the various camera angles, a setting that isn’t restricted to a stage and an audience that can be reached anywhere in the world. Also who is casted and how they will be dressed is crucial to the success of the movie although sometimes overlooked during the production process. Some movies represent these elements of mise-en-scene in an excellent matter such as the Kenneth Branagh version of Hamlet, while others would seem to disappoint my expectations for a great re-visualization of our suicidal hero like Micheal Almereyda’s Hamlet staring Ethan Hawke. Admirably though every Hamlet film to date has its own unique style, something that will please all audiences, with its unique pros and cons.
Laertes is looking to seek revenge on Hamlet for killing his father and eventually his sister later in the play. "I dare damnation. To this point I stand, that both the worlds I give to negligence, let come what comes, only I 'll be reveng 'd Most throughly for my father." (4.5.132-135). Laertes is very different in the way he is going about seeking revenge, he is willing to kill any and everybody with no hesitation to revenge his father’s death unlike Hamlet, who is contemplating throughout the play on if he should or shouldn’t kill the necessary people in order to seek revenge.
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
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
Instead of a grand tragedy of a royal house, the modern Hamlet is a detective story about a dead rich guy and his son the beginner detective. Yet, the acting of the actors and the special effects more or less manage to make up for the flaw. Bill Murray who plays Polonious is harsh and tight. Ethan Hawke is illustrated as a weak and normal prince. Julia Stiles does not do Ophelia any justice. Ther...
As described earlier, Hamlet is slow to act. Laertes, on the other hand, acts quickly and with precision, wasting no time in acquiring his target and formulating a plan. Robert Palfrey Utter, Jr., puts it best, Hamlet and Laertes both come to the same conclusion that murder must be carried out, but Hamlet reaches that conclusion only “after he has had a few minutes to think it over.” (140) Once Laertes finds out that the man who killed his father was Hamlet, he is ready to charge in and kill him as soon as possible. He is only stopped by Claudius, who advises him on a more subtle approach.
... middle of paper ... ... Through Hamlets obsession of revenge, he mistakenly murders the father of Ophelia and Laertes, thus creating another imbalance within the family. This proclamation of revenge is seen when Laertes states, And so I have a noble father lost,/A sister driven into desperate terms,/Whose worth, if praises may go back again, stood challenger on mount of all the age/