Essay On Hamlet Soliloquy

The purpose of this report is to compare and contrast two movies made about Hamlet. I will present and discuss different aspects of the version directed by Kenneth Branagh to that of Franco Zefirelli. During this paper you will be presented with my opinions in reference to determining which version of Hamlet best reflects the original text by Shakespeare. I will end this paper with my belief and explanation of which movie is true to the original play.

To play one of Shakespeare’s most complex roles successfully on stage or on screen has been the aspiration of many actors. William Shakespeare’s Hamlet has been the focus on various accounts throughout the 20th Century, each actor attempting to bring something unique and unmarked to the focal character. Franco Zeffirelli and Kenneth Branagh, both film directors, introduce varying levels of success on the screen through downright differences in ways of translation and original ideas. Zeffirelli’s much shorter interpretation of the film is able to convey the importance of Hamlet as a masterwork by using modern approaches to film but still capturing the traditional work behind Shakespeare’s well-known play.

The props and costumes the Kenneth Branagh version used are very modern and unique while the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet costumes are more old and traditional. In the Kenneth Branagh version the costumes are very elegant while the costumes worn in the Mel Gibson version is seen more as rags. For instance, Ophelia is seen wearing old rags covering her when she acts insane in Act 4 Scene 5. In the Kenneth Branagh’s film the director uses flashbacks as a way to illustrate scenes like the scene where Gertrude explains Ophelia drowning in the river. Camera techniques in the Kenneth Branagh version of Hamlet were creative as the camera slowly pulls back in Act 4 Scene 4 of Hamlet’s soliloquy. However in the Kenneth Branagh version the scenery and props adapt more to the Shakespeare’s play Hamlet.

The third difference is in the way that the play and the movie ends. In the movie, Hamlet, Claudius, Gertrude, and Laertes die from the poison, either by the sword or the wine. The movie ends with Horatio holding Hamlet while he dies. The play ends completely different. As Hamlet is dying, Horatio tries to drink from the poisoned cup but Hamlet stops him. Hamlet says that he needs Horatio to report all that he has witnessed. A shot is heard from far off and Hamlet asks what it is. He is told that it is Fortinbras, returning from his Polish adventures. Hamlet with his dying breath, names Fortinbras as his successor, then dies.

Many directors choose to make many different decisions when producing their version of Hamlet. Every actor portrays the character Hamlet in several ways making each version almost a new story. Mel Gibson's 1990 version and the 2009 David Tennant films are very different in style, scene omissions and several other aspects.

When comparing two different Hamlet movies I found that one scene in particular was obviously more different than the others. I compared Columbia pictures 1996 version with Kenneth Branagh playing the role of Hamlet versus BBC’s 2009 Hamlet in which David Tennant played the honorable role of Hamlet. When comparing both movies I found a lot of similarities but there was one major difference when I compared the “To be or not to be” scene. The scenes vary in multiple ways whether it is lighting, focus, camera movements, and even the actors that play Hamlet.

The first difference is the setting compared to the play and the movie. In the original play the setting takes place in Elsinore, Denmark in the royal palace in the late Middle Ages around the 14th and 15th century. The play starts off with the guards in the castle and Horatio who is one of the guards is the first to see the ghost.But as shown in the movie the setting starts off in New York City in the 2000’s. The director did this to make it different to the book and to other Hamlet movies. It made it more modern and interesting the director might have done this to make the audience understand the movie a little better.

By so doing it was believed that the sins of the dead person would be

Hamlet, one of Shakespeare’s tragic plays, portrays the story of a young man’s quest to avenge his murdered father and his quest to find his true identity. In his soliloquies, Prince Hamlet reveals to the readers his personal perceptions of the events that take place in his homeland, Denmark, and of which are either indirectly or directly tied to his father’s murder. Many critics and scholars agree that while Hamlet’s soliloquies reveal the search of his identity and true character, his soliloquies universally illustrate man’s search for his true identity.

This movie is a modern version of the play, you can tell this by the setting itself. The play was originally written around 1599, therefore the year gives you a sense of the time period and how the setting looked. When reading the plays originally text, you don’t get pictures or videos to watch so you make a vision in your head of what everything looks like. Knowing that the play was written in 1599, when reading the play you think of old settings, also we know that Hamlet was part of a royal

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

In William Shakespeare’s Hamlet there are many unanswered questions such as if Hamlet is really mad or if it is just an act. There are many film adaptations which use their movie elements in order to hint towards the answer of these questions. In Gregory Doran’s film interpretation Hamlet starring David Tennant, David Tennant truly shows the raw emotions of Hamlet. He shows how Hamlet feels through his movements and facial expressions. These little things allow the viewer to see the true meaning and intention behind Hamlet’s words.

Franco Zefferelli’s film, Hamlet, adapted from Shakespeare’s text, Mel Gibson’s Hamlet, struts and frets his life in Denmark, convincing almost everyone that he is “mad.” The film bases the question of whether or not Hamlet is actually insane almost solely on Gibson’s acting interpretations, but Zefferelli’s editing choices assist in making the point that Hamlet is not insane, but either in a fog of confusion and anger from his grief, or pretending to be mad to manipulate others.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet has countlessly been formatted into film depictions of the play. Each film seemed to be on one end of the spectrum of either being closely interpreted or completely remodeled a different idea of what Hamlet is. The film version of Hamlet released in 2000 seems to follow closely to the play in some aspects, yet at the same time having its own unique identity Despite there being many differences with the play Hamlet and the film adaptation of Hamlet (2000) by Michael Almereyda there are three categories that really stand out, those are the character portrayal, interrelationship between the characters, and some of the essential themes differ as well. Although there are many differences, one aspect that remains the same is the dialogue of the characters which stays true to the Shakespearean dialect.

When analyzing Shakespeare's Hamlet through the deconstructionist lens various elements of the play come into sharper focus. Hamlet's beliefs about himself and his crisis over indecision are expounded upon by the binary oppositions created in his soliloquies.