William Shakespeare's Hamlet
 | Average Customer Rating: Recommend Studio: Castle Rock Hm Video Release Date: 08/14/2007 Run time: 242 minutes… Product details and pricing info |
|---|
328 Customer Reviews Posted
- Good, but not great Dane
- Branagh's Hamlet
Watching Kenneth Branagh's massive film of the complete text of Hamlet for about the fourth time, I realized that this film mirrors the talents and career of its talented actor/director. Ever since his highly successful film of Henry V, which ably competes with the classic version of Olivier, it seems that Branagh has been trying to film another great Shakespeare movie, but has not quite been able to repeat his early triumph. His long Hamlet has not been able to change that pattern. His use of certain unsuitable actors, his lack of real passion, and his inability to always keep things moving have made this a merely enjoyable movie rather than a great one.
I don't say that American actors can't do Shakespeare. There have been some great American actors, such as Orson Wells, who have done magnificent Shakespeare films, such as Wells' Othello, but most American can't do the great Englishman very well (or at least not as well as Wells). However, Kenneth Branagh seems to agree with Al Pachino, whose Looking for Richard starts off intending to show that Americans can do the Bard as well as any. Unfortunately, Pachino falls far short of proving his claim, and Branagh has used American actors with varying degrees of success in his Shakespeare films since Henry V, but it is in his Hamlet that his Anglo-American spirit of production shows its biggest failure, since the stakes here are the highest. I'm sure the main reason that American film actors are used here along with British stage and film actors is to broaden the appeal, but it doesn't always work.
The use of the wonderful American film actor Jack Lemmon is a good place to start, since he has some of the first words in the movie. It's not that he doesn't know what he's saying, which seems to be the case with many American film stars who try Shakespeare, but he just can't keep up with the flow of the language to make it sound natural. His British colleagues simply run rings around him, the poor old fellow, and this is part of the problem--he's just too old for this part of a soldier on watch outside at night in the cold. Any one of the Brits could have successfully taken the part, and it's not a very minor one; in the role of Marcellus, he enters with Horatio and presents Horatio's skeptical nature, while speaking to the other two soldiers who have also both seen the ghost, "this dreaded sight twice seen of us." Even though Lemmon tries manfully, he can't summon the same passion as Ian McElhinney as Barnardo. But, this is perhaps no great matter. Much worse is the presence of Gerard Depardieu as the spy Reynaldo. He completely misses the humor in his part--in fact, he misses nearly everything in his part, and so does the audience, wondering what he's doing there. He's there for the same reason as all the "name" stars are here: because they are draws, while Shakespeare is not, at least for the large targeted American audience. I don't know if Branagh had these stars thrust upon him, but he must take responsibility as director.
Some of the Americans do work well, such as a surprisingly good Robin Williams as Osric, and Billy Crystal as the grave digger, though Mork is the better of the two. Charlton Heston is also good as the Player King, though he's a bit too leaden.
Some of the best acting is done by Derek Jacobi, as King Claudius, and Richard Briers as Polonius; no old fool, he plays the part of Claudius's spymaster with reserve and cunning. Kate Winslet as Ophelia also comes in for special praise for her mad passion over the murder of her father by her lover. She also shows control, and doesn't tear it to tatters, either. Hers is real madness, and comes close to being frightening. Also good are Michael Maloney as Ophelia's brother Laertes, who plays with a fine ferocity, and Rufus Sewell as Fortinbras, Hamlet's foil, who plays with a subdued fire, waiting for his chance.
And how is Branagh's Hamlet? Good, but not great. Cool and reserved, a rational Dane, not a Romantic. Perhaps he's closer to Horatio's materialism than we thought? But, he does say there are more things than science (Aristotle's "Natural Philosophy") in heaven and earth. My favorite Hamlets are Olivier, Jacobi , and Burton. They all have more depth and sheer excitement than Branagh can bring to the part, though there are ingenious touches in Branagh's direction, such as his use of the mirrors in "To be, or not."
Perhaps the biggest problem with this movie is its sheer length. Since it attempts to present the complete play with no cuts, it runs the risk of bogging down in the fens, especially by the middle of the fourth act, when young Fortinbras goes through Denmark towards Poland over "an eggshell." Since this is a movie, and not a film of a staged performance, Branagh's Hamlet had the chance to move along briskly, but it slows down so much of the time that it all loses its impetus and force, as Hamlet himself is in danger of doing. Branagh the director should have heeded the ghost, who returns in Act 3 to tell Hamlet to push things along. By the end of this long tale, we wish we never heard about the ghost to begin with, and care no more about what happens to Hamlet or any of the others than about Hecuba, though, of course, we should. The director, and not the king's to blame for this, since ambition falls short of achievement. Perhaps it was just too much to take on the dual roles of actor and director, but Branagh is competing with the ghost of Olivier, as he did with Henry V.
The best Hamlets on film remain Olivier's on Criterion, Jacobi's on BBC, and Burton's on Image. Branagh's is a very valuable addition to this short list for many reasons, though it doesn't quite enter the list of the very best. P.S. I also like the movie with Mad Max Mel Gibson and with the direction of Franco Zefferelli with its beautiful cinematography and its use of two lovely Scottish castles for Elsinore. Not in the same company as the others, but lots of fun. - 2008-11-10, 0 of 0 people found this review helpful, Rated:
- Shakespeare the way it was meant to be exeperienced
- Before I go into the visual and interpretive masterpiece that is Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet, let me begin by asserting my firm belief that Shakespeare was meant to be experienced, not merely poured over. While the language is obviously crucial to understanding the play as a whole, simply watching the emotional interactions and contemplations of this play can be just as powerful. If you don't have the opportunity to see a live performance of Hamlet (which would be the real tragedy) Branagh's adaptation is probably the next best way to experience Shakespeare's masterpiece. The majesty of the Edwardian set blends perfectly with the mysterious plot and shrouded characters and the visuals add life that viewers would expect of any performance.
Branaugh's adaptation, the full text of the original play, is consistent with basic interpretations of the plays but plays down the idea of Hamlet as truly crazy. While Branagh certainly performs as a madman would, we clearly see it is little more than that, a performance-- something left to the interpretation of those who only read the text. While the play may be a little melodramatic at times (namely during all the soliloquies) and the final confrontation is overly dramatized (since when was a chandelier involved?), Branagh's Hamlet is definitely the best filmed adaptation of Shakespeare's memorable tragedy.
Viewers will enjoy this film even if they haven't read the play and it is certainly coupled well with the text for those who have! - 2008-10-30, 0 of 0 people found this review helpful, Rated:
- Know when to step aside.
- Yes, this is one of Kenneth Branagh's productions of Shakespeare; and he typically saves the most interresting role for himself. He is a good actor, but in my opinion, the multi-emotional role of Hamlet is beyond his ability. When Hamlet is instructing the actors he hires for the play within the play, he begins to act, but then stops himself in deference to the troupe of real actors, headed by none other than Charlton Heston. Branagh should have taken a cue from Hamlet.
- 2008-09-08, 0 of 1 people found this review helpful, Rated:
- Branagh
- Amazing version. Branagh makes Hamlet enjoyable for the Shakespeare buff or the reluctant viewer. Easy to follow, incredibly visual, epic performances from an all star cast. Highly, highly recommended.
- 2008-08-25, 1 of 1 people found this review helpful, Rated:
- Beautiful, Lavish, Magnficent: a Must See-- five stars
- This is one of the greatest productions of Shakespeare I've ever seen, and I heartily recommend it to any student of Hamlet. I think seeing this breathtaking and magnificent film will greatly help high school students and college students who are approaching the play for the first time. Branagh is a genius and once again here he delivers Shakespeare's glorious lines in a way that makes them clear, and brings them to life with incalculable power. I know of no Shakespeare film that equals this film. I dream of what Branagh will do next. We need him to give us more of the Bard. ---- There is much else that could be said about this film. Every performance is wonderful, including that of Charlton Heston, and the sensitivity with which the play is interpreted is breathtaking. The spectacle alone is worth seeing. This is one of those feasts for the eyes and ears like Amadeus or Immortal Beloved. Or the Red Shoes. It is grand in the finest sense. It will be enjoyed and treasured as long as film is enjoyed and treasured.
- 2008-08-23, 1 of 1 people found this review helpful, Rated:
