• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
Download
 
To play Hamlet well is to succeed on the stage or on the screen. It is one of the mostcomplex of the Shakespearian roles that many actors have aspired to master or atleast, bring something distinctive and fresh to the pivotal character. There is no doubtthat Hamlet “brazenly solicits interpretation”, demonstrated by modern day actorsincluding Mel Gibson, Ethan Hawke and Kenneth Branagh, in the medium of film.Throughout the 20
th
Century, film adaptations have finely developed both thecharacter of Hamlet and have nurtured a performance of the play, in some verycreative and exciting ways. Film directors
Franco Zeffirelli,
Michael AlmereydaandKenneth Branagh have brought “
 Hamlet”
to varying levels of success on the screenwhile achieving this through stark differences in interpretation and through realisingvery different creative ideas.Zeffirelli’s 1990
“Hamlet”
is an interpretation designed for the mainstreamHollywood audience, who by now were thoroughly interested in Mel Gibson – one of the rising stars of the early nineties. Gibson does well to externalize the flurry of emotions tormenting Hamlet and this allows the mainstream audience to follow quiteeasily, his complex and changing mindsets. The famous Act Three, Scene One “To beor not to be…” soliloquy is done especially well, with Gibson maintaining an aura of strength, even as Hamlet revels in his own misery and contemplates suicide. Zeffirelliand Gibson have combined their ideas to create an interpretation of Hamlet that issensitive but never weak, very active and external in the portrayal of emotion – butnot over the top.
 
Perhaps the most controversial scene in any screen adaptation of Hamlet is containedin the Zeffirelli production, in which Hamlet confronts Gertrude in her bedroom.Interestingly, this confrontation is one of the most successful scenes of the movie as itis finely acted and very intense! At the same time, it leaves itself most open tocriticism. Hamlet’s fury at Gertrude (played by Meryl Streep) is demonstrated whenHamlet taunts his mother and then jumps on her to mock her sexual exploits withClaudius. Hamlet’s violent anger over his mother’s apparent betrayal fits very muchinside an Oedipal interpretation of the play. Zeffirelli’s makes his opinion quite clear on the theory of “Hamlet’s Oedipus Complex”. Zeffirelli is of the school that Hamletcannot kill Claudius;“because of his relationship with [Hamlet’s] mother. A classical OedipusComplex: he is incapable of killing the man who sleeps with his mother because thatwould mean that he would have to admit to himself his own feelings about her,something which overwhelms him and disgusts him… Hamlet can kill Claudius onlyafter he knows that his mother is dead and that he is going to die” (Johnston, online).Zeffirelli’s very Oedipal
“Hamlet”
while a logical interpretation, is not an idea that Ican fully agree with as it disturbs my own interpretation of the play. However, his useof cold castle sets and authentic middle age costumes are very agreeable to my imagesof a production of 
“Hamlet”
and my interpretation of the play.Ethan Hawke’s Hamlet in Almereyda’s 2000 film, is as far removed from Gibson’sinterpretation as a modern New York setting is from Zeffirelli’s traditional approach.Hawke is a much more arrogant Hamlet with a pretentious New Yorker film student persona. Unfortunately, while the idea of Hamlet as a snobby film student is not a badone, Hawke does not fulfil its potential in a number of ways. Firstly, in true “SeanPenn” method actor style, he mumbles his lines. While this could be a valid
 
interpretation of Hamlet’s grief and frustration, the zest of Shakespeare’s language islost in Hawke’s dull monotone and tired, depressed voice. Secondly, unlike theGibson Hamlet, Hawke transforms into an annoying wimp during the same Act Three,Scene One soliloquy. Amusingly, this scene takes place in an isle of a video store!While Gibson’s performance better realises the character of Hamlet, the differences between the two renditions of this soliloquy is a testament to the validity of CedricWatts’ opinion: the Hamlet encourages actors to find new ways to perform the role.The Almereyda adaptation of 
“Hamlet”
is very interesting because it adapts the playinto a modern setting and takes some very creative liberties with the original text – tomixed success. Firstly, Almereyda’s 2000 adaptation of 
“Hamlet”
shows a creativeflair by completely changing Shakespeare’s original setting, favouring a modern day New York location, complete with skyscrapers, yuppies and taxi-cabs. Denmark isnow “Denmark Corp” and Claudius is the new CEO. This new setting is very cold – keeping the same tone as Zeffirelli’s film – except that the sets are now very sterileand very modern. Almereyda also uses modern technology to its fullest storytelling potential, however some may see these new methods of advancing the story asgimmicky – the ghost of Hamlet’s father is seen through a security system, faxmachines transmit vital messages and Hamlet delivers his asides to his film studentvideo camera. For the most part, Almereyda generally succeeds in his modern-dayinterpretation, however it is not a production that reflects my ideas of how
“Hamlet”
should be performed.
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...