Hamlet Critical Analysis Of Hamlet

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.

Kenneth Branagh’s interpretation of Hamlet emphasized different importance's of the play. His version differs from that of Zeffirelli’s because; he makes use of the entire text from Shakespeare’s original work. Branagh also does not hold the time period authentic. Although his version of the play was not altered as much as Zeffirelli’s, he is still able to hold the attention of modern critics and viewers. However, by transfiguring the play into a Victorian background, Branagh’s film completely alters the mindset and feel of a true Shakespearean 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.

Throughout the play, Hamlet’s character is characterized both by periods of extreme caution and moments of impulsivity. One of the best examples of Hamlet’s heed can be found in Act 2, Scene 2 where he decides to have his theatre troupe perform his play, The Mousetrap. With this, Hamlet hopes that he will be able to “catch the conscience of the King,” by monitoring Claudius during the performance, that heavily mimics his murder of his brother, for signs of stress and guilt. While Hamlet was fully capable of bypassing this step by simply adhering to what he believes is the ghost of his father, Hamlet’s decision to unearth some sort of evidence that supports his father’s accusations is just one example of his cautious ways and need for certainty before action. However, such displays of caution find themselves juxtaposed with Hamlet’s bouts of impulsivity. One of the most telling illustrations of Hamlet’s rashness can be found in Act One, Scene Five, where he first conversing with the ghost of his father. Here, when the Ghost asks Hamlet to “revenge his foul and most unnatural murder,” Hamlet immediately agrees. In fact, within the next few lines Hamlet pledges he will “sweep to my revenge” with “wings as swift as meditation or the thoughts of love”. The fact that Hamlet coins this commitment to avenge his father’s murder without making much of any consideration of the possible repercussions of such an undertaking is one of the best representations of Hamlet’s impulsivity. This rash action, marked by a lack of extended over-analysis and internal debate, contrasts with the excessive caution Hamlet exhibits at many other points throughout the play. Ultimately, the interplay between Hamlet’s caution and impulsivity is one of the most notable juxtapositions of the play and serves to strongly steer the development, not only of

Kenneth Branagh made it seem like Hamlet was following his father’s orders even though in the play he wasn’t. This made the audience feel better about Hamlet because he was actually taking action. Although Kenneth’s version of Hamlet’s character took action it is not as tragic as Hamlet’s character in the play because by Hamlet not taking action it shows how sensitive and hurt he was.

Shakespeare's drama Hamlet has become a central piece of literature of Western culture. It is the story of a prince named Hamlet, who lost his father. Soon after that he has to confront multiple obstacles and devises a series of situations to defend the new king's royalty. Furthermore, he had to prove that King Claudius, who was the prince's uncle, had killed Hamlet's father. This story has remained among the most popular and the most controversial plays around the world. It generates controversy for all the doubts that this play leaves with the readers. One of the most questioning situations in the play is the delay of Hamlet in avenging Claudius' for his father's death. As a reader this

I first want to dissect the 1996 movie in which Kenneth Branagh plays Hamlet. The “To be or not to be” scene is clearly one of the most important scenes of the entire movie, so the directors

The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark has been performed thousands of times since it was “written in 1599–1601 and published in a quarto edition in 1603” (Britannica.com). It’s popularity stems from its themes that translate across time. These themes, are seen to be relatable even to this day with the ever growing audience. Readers and viewers are able to find similarities between the current state and or even relate to one of the characters or events taking place over the course of Shakespeare’s five act masterpiece. Shakespeare's, The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark remains a viable text for contemporary readers in that it functions as a mirror.

The use of security cameras throughout the film really helps to capture a sense of corruption, and also foreshadows the fact that something bad will happen within the kingdom. The Tennant version also alters the time period in which the story takes place by having it set in modern day times. This can be seen through costume choice, scenery, armory, and dialog between characters. Using this helps viewers to better connect and understand the storyline, since characters are in a setting that is more current. Tennant portrays Hamlet as truly mad, angry, and vengeful. His timing and delivery of lines gives watchers an excellent insight into the manic characterization of Hamlet, that shakespeare intended on. Hamlet’s insanity can be seen through his many outburst, body language, and pauses. The emotional state of Hamlet is delivered with the use of mirrors and cinematic zooming. This provides dramatic and emotional effect, since it seems as though Hamlet is speaking directly to the audience while also looking into himself for answers. Shakespeare's vision for Hamlet is truly captured in this film through cinematic angling and intense acting.

Everyone knows the story of Hamlet: Hamlet’s father is killed, Hamlet’s mother marries the evil Uncle, everyone thinks Hamlet has gone mad, and almost everyone dies at the end. In David Tennant’s version of Hamlet, the use of the characters’ physical antics, interactions with each other, the stark similarities between the characters, and the way they dress, changes how the audience interprets each character’s actions and contribution to the play as a whole, which then determines how successful this version of Hamlet is.

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.

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.

Almereyda’s film adaptation of Hamlet shows the struggle Hamlet is having with the death of his father, but also focuses on the internal pain he is experiencing, supporting the country of Denmark. This portrayal of Hamlet can be seen through the interpretation of Hamlet’s mental pain and Physical appearance. Almereyda’s Hamlet shows a new way of viewing Hamlet's character, and a deeper understanding of the moral changes he is facing during Act 3 scene 1, by being more relatable to a 21st-century audience. Shakespeare writes few stage directions, which gives freedom to the director to show what Hamlet is doing during the act 3 scene 1 soliloquy.

Hamlet by William Shakespeare is one play that has intrigued people for over four hundred years. There have been as many productions as there have been days since the original play 1596-1603. Each production has been different from the next one, no matter where performed or by whom. One film reproduction of Hamlet released in the year 2000, was directed by and stared Etahan Hawke as Hamlet and Julia Styles as Ophelia. This essay will refer to this film as Hamlet 2000 and the original play as Hamlet or text. To compare the text to the film Hamlet 2000 will be divided into three groups, language, setting / plot line and lastly the characters. All though the speech is taken only from the text, the film Hamlet 2000 is vastly different,