Hamlet: Mel Gibson vs Kenneth Branagh Essay

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.

Hamlet is an acknowledging Shakespearean play that was later filmed in 1990 by Franco Zeffirelli and in 1996 by Kenneth Branagh. Both these directors interpret the play differently adding unique twists and turns of their own to help focus on one thing than the other. In their contrasting films, these two directors depict the character of Ophelia very differently. Through Zeffirelli’s film, Ophelia, played by Helena Bonham Carter is portrayed as a dreamy, naive, childish character, however in Branagh 's version; Kate Winslet portrays Ophelia as a more mature, sensible and strong willed character. These different portrayals of Ophelia can be further analyzed through cinematography, set and costume designs and through the actor themselves.

Hamlet by William Shakespeare is a story about a king that was murdered by his brother and the prince has been asked by his father?s ghost to avenge his murder. The original story line has been altered a few times since it has been written. The original Hamlet the play and the altered Hamlet the movie are shown differently in many different ways. Hamlet the movie with Mel Gibson shows different things than the play, but there are three major differences between the two. The three major differences are in the way both of the productions start out, differences in the scene that the players put on a play, and differences in the way the productions end.

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.

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 play Hamlet by William Shakespeare is about a king that was murdered by his brother and the main character Hamlet, who is the prince and also the king’s son was told by the ghost of his father to avenge his murder. In the play Hamlet, there are many differences compared to the movie “Hamlet 2000” directed by Michael Almereyda. The reason to these differences is to show a modern setting in the movie “Hamlet 2000”, to show the audience a better understanding of the characters, and the difference in the way the movie ends compared to the original play by Shakespeare.

In comparing the David Tennant version of Hamlet to other movie adaptations, it is clear that each one has it’s own unique way of presenting the story. The Mel Gibson version of hamlet takes place in a more traditional and medieval time. In adapting the play, this take on

Hamlet is a very well-known play across the world. Many students have been required to read the play in school. Although the poem has been read by many students, student usually don’t further their experience with Hamlet by watching the movie. There are many remakes of the play in movie form, new movies have been evolved since the play was originally made. There are movies that follow the play and the time period of the play and then there are newer or more modern versions of the play. The comparison being made in this paper is, the originally play versus the 2009 movie version of Hamlet.

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.

The setting of these two texts that demonstrates the idea of the challenges and triumphs that lie ahead. The audience is presented with different environments, Shakespeare's Hamlet starts off in a closed and dark environment, this shows that there is something bad is going to happened during the novel,

Franco Zeffirelli's 1990 filmic translation of William Shakespeare's Hamlet is a dramatic telling of the classic story which is as well acted as it is entertaining. Aside from these points, Zeffirelli's (and co-scripter Christopher Devore's) screenplay is an edited, and re-mixed version of the original which has many lines cut, as well as the entire sub plot concerning Fortenbras, completely removed. Franco Zefirelli's private interpretation of Hamlet, although divergent in some ways from Shakespeare's version, still remains a superior rendering, due to the continuity of the screenplay.