Comparing Bennett's Hamlet with Branagh's Hamlet Essay

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.

Tony Robbins said, “To effectively communicate, we must realize that we are all different in the way we perceive the world and use this understanding as a guide to our communication with others”. Shakespeare’s writing has had many different ways of being presented because people perceive it in different ways. Whether it is a literal representation or a spin, directors like to show viewers the way they perceive the text. In the movie version of Hamlet the director, Kenneth Branagh, wanted the viewers to find Shakespeare interesting and full of action and drama. Kenneth chose the right direction to go in to keep the audience’s attention but it

Over the course of the past fifty years there have been many cinematic productions of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, some of which remain true to the text while others take greater liberties with the original format. Director Kenneth Branagh’s 1996 production of Hamlet was true to Shakespeare’s work in that the film’s dialogue was delivered word or word as it is presented in the text. In contrast, Franco Zeffirelli conducted his 1990 production of Hamlet in a much more liberal direction in which lines, scenes and characters were omitted from the film. I argue that from the perspective of an individual with moderate knowledge in Shakespearian literature, that the best film versions of Hamlet are those that take the most liberties from the text. I

"I was raped," the girl said to me overtaken with tears. I was taken by surprise and was at a complete loss for words. She had just taken one of the darkest secrets of her life and brought it out to the splendid light for just me to gaze upon. A little apprehensive, I responded, "I'm sorry." What is one to say at the revelation of such a horrid thing? Anything else I thought of saying sounded stupid and insensitive, so I opted for silence and hugged her to comfort her to the best of my ability. A few months later the girl came to me and thanked me. She said that my gesture meant more to her than anything anyone else had said about the rape. I then realized that sometimes, if not most of the time, actions can speak louder than words. The

Shakespeare’s Hamlet, has had many renditions over the years. Olivier, Branagh, and Hawk’s renditions are very different. However, it is through the symbols and underlying messages that these three films are very much alike. “To be, or not to be: that is the question” (3.1.64). Hamlet questions his life in this soliloquy and it is through the symbols, emotion, and interpretations that affected the way I saw each rendition differently.

In his article “The Very Cunning of the Scene: Kenneth Branagh’s Hamlet” (1997) by Mark Thornton Burnett, the author discusses the film of actor Kenneth Branagh’s version of the play Hamlet. First, the author noted that Branagh’s version and its objective were achieved by utilizing special effects to highlight the portrayal of some characters’ cunningness. In addition, Burnett mentioned that the production involved has great effects to achieve the desired objective of the film. Moreover, Burnett observed that Branagh’s version successfully portrayed Hamlet’s character effectively. Wherein, Hamlet emerged from a grieving son to a somewhat cunning personality after learning the foul death of his father. Burnett, also remarked that Branagh’s version incorporated the political aspect of Hamlet by injecting Fortinbras and his army in the scenes, which are omitted in modern versions of Hamlet. Furthermore, Burnett illustrates in his article some of the scenes which pertains to cunningness and how it was achieved through the state of the art such as the camera works and lightings. Burnett, admitted that the film is slanted a bit from the original version, and there are scenes that are unnecessary, which may imply that an audience may not understand the message of the film. However, the author admitted as well that some scenes helped fill in to understand Hamlet story which may be unclear in text form. Burnett, also mentioned that Branagh collaborated with Shakespeare’s scholars to come up with a much-thought film. Lastly, the author mentioned that he

lives of the powerful and the famous make us far more interested in the personal and

In Shakespeare’s Hamlet, the work speaks volumes for itself in significant dialogue and the rhythm of Shakespeare’s diction. Without stage directions, a player must rely on the power of beats within the work to guide their actions and their emotions behind them. Gregory Doran and Laurence Olivier tackle the ambiguity of Hamlet, beyond the script, in their provided television film and film interpretations. The actors, within both, transform aspects of Act III, Scene I into questionable territory with their intonations. Doran’s Hamlet stages David Tennant in a panic and Mariah Gale into a woeful lost woman. Olivier’s is starkly different because Olivier is controlled and Jean Simmons is building her emotion within the scene. These decisions

The play Hamlet has been converted into many films, as the play acts like a script and stage directions help directors accurately portray the text. While the play provides indications of how the play will generally looks like, it is with different views from directors that allow Hamlet to be interpreted in many different ways. In Act Three Scene Two, we see evidence of how a director’s interpretation of the text can enhance mood of the scene and the intensity of the situation. As Hamlet begins to expose his uncle as the murderer of King Hamlet, it is with the director’s choice that shows the intensity between Hamlet and his uncle, and allows the audience to feel the same intensity as well. It is with the use of the positioning of

William Shakespeare’s Hamlet and Franco Zeffireli’s film version of the story are different in many ways, but the basic characters and basic plot remain the same. Franco Zeffirelli’s screenplay is an edited, re-vamped version of the original tragedy in which lines are cut and scenes are modified. Additionally, Zeffirelli modifies Shakespeare’s ghost scenes and uses narrative and film techniques to both create an overall suspenseful atmosphere and generate empathetic feelings towards Hamlet. The various changes made by Zeffirelli are interesting, and attempting to analyze the decisions made by the film director allowed for not only a deeper understanding of the film, but of the story Hamlet in general.

All in all, Shakespeare’s difficult-to-understand English is better understood through the performances of the characters in the film adaptation of Twelfth Night.

The 1990 film version of Hamlet by Franco Zeffireni and the 1996 version by Michael Almereyda are very different form on another as they both put the play into perspective in different lights with the time they are set in. The 1990 version is set in the 14th to 15th century whereas the 1996 version is set in 1990’s to 2000’s. The time the films are set in makes a huge difference to how different the versions are, as it changes almost everything about the film. From the props that are used to the way the characters interact with each other. The two film versions of Hamlet are drastically different from one another all due to the time they are set in.

It is important to remember that Shakespeare’s original plays took hours to perform in order to get the message being conveyed across. However we live in a society now where we want instant gratification and understanding and therefore plays of this length will not captivate an audience for very long. Many plays and novels are being adapted for film in order to try to achieve the same desired message while appeasing the audience’s need for instantaneous results that we will understand, but is this truly being accomplished. The changes in the timeline and dialogue that occur in the movie cause Hamlet to appear more courageous and aggressively driven. However, in the play, Hamlet is seen as a weakling and quite cowardly.

The film Hamlet by William Shakespeare was made by two directors in two different versions which one was Kenneth Branagh and the other Franco Zeffirelli. By watching the four scenes of the play of the two versions, the viewer has come up to the conclusion that Kenneth Branagh’s version best captures the essence of the play in terms of costume design, acting, directing, and cinematography. The directing and cinematography in Act IV, Scene V the Ophelia Madness Scene as well as the acting, costume design in Act V, Scene II the Final Scene showed that Branagh’s version of the film Hamlet is the most effective.

Hamlet is a play that has distinguishing attributes, but many people have different views on how it plays out. In the film industry, many directors have tried to bring this play alive through how they imagined it would be. This paper will be of Hamlet through the eyes of two different directors from films made in the 90’s and the components that make each one different from each other. I will start off writing about the difference in setting and appearance, then move to difference between each Hamlet from the films, and finally, go on to display differences between a few