Rating: 
Summary: Olivier shines among questionable support
Review: Olivier, one of the great actors of his time, shines as Hamlet. Particularly in the soliloquies, he delivers the lines with true subtlety and understanding of their depth. Unlike Branagh, Olivier "o'ersteps not the modesty of nature" while playing, and portrays Hamlet as the complex, profoundly intellectual, and deeply perceptive and sensitive character that he is.Olivier's direction is equally impressive. Camera movement is tasteful, and segues between scenes beautifully incorporate William Walton's lovely orchestral soundtrack. My two major complaints are: First, the liberal cuts in the text (Olivier himself referred to his film as "an essay in Hamlet" rather than an actual rendering of the piece), and what I think is a lackluster average supporting cast. Laertes in particular is so stiff and wimpy that you cannot detect even a trace of anger in him, even after his father has been murdered by Hamlet. Claudius too, while at once both graciously regal and yet conniving and depraved, is way too stiff and stale in his delivery in many scenes to seem like the "incestuous, adulterate beast" he is purported to be. The Queen and Ophelia I find to be average, each having some highlights and lowlights. (The confrontation scene between Hamlet and Gertrude after Claudius' soliloquy is a highlight for both actors) Polonius is the "foolish, prating knave" he should be, but again is one-dimensional and lacks any type of depth or subtlety. Horatio is fairly good on most counts here; his physical performance is at times arresting in its restrained intensity, although he comes across as rather dim-witted at times. Many of these criticisms can probably be chalked up to the changes in acting style through the years... we're used nowadays to seeing more emotion in a character, and this production is extremely formalistic and restrained. I regard this film as a classic and have watched it many times. And while I used to adore it, it was the first Hamlet I ever saw, and after studying several other versions (Mel Gibson, Nicol Williamson, Branagh, Derek Jacobi) I feel more comfortable analyzing its strengths and weaknesses more objectively in comparison to the other versions. None of these versions is in my opinion without a few serious problems, but my favorite now is probably Jacobi's (BBC). It is almost complete in the text, and features fine acting across the board. BTW there is an incredible audio version of the complete text featuring Anton Lesser as Hamlet.
Rating: 
Summary: The classic Hamlet
Review: I would have to say that this is one of the two best Hamlet's on film. This is known as the "traditional" Hamlet, and the other great is the recent modern take on the play with Ethan Hawke and Julia Stiles. Laurence Olivier plays a melancholy, intelligent, and loving Hamlet, well suited to the gloomy castle settings of Elsinore. Olivier was forty when he made this, but makes himself look twenty years younger. His Hamlet is never boring or overwrought, it is simply perfect. Eileen Herlie was 25 when cast as Gertrude. She graciously allowed herself to be made up to look older. Her performance is satisfactory, conveying the dueling emotions that she has for her son and Claudius well. There is a strong overtone of incest here, which is fine since I believe that to be a valid interpretation. Herlie's Gertrude is also strong-willed at times, knowingly drinking the poisoned cup to save her son. Basil Sydney as Claudius is excellent, although his is played as an overweight drunk. He has some fine moments and deserves credit for playing such a difficult role well. I like Felix Aylmer's performance as Polonius. He is played not as comic relief or as a doddering old man, but as an intelligent fool who is full of himself and enjoys throwing his weight around. Jean Simmon's interpretation of the tragic Ophelia is that she is a virginial woman who is somewhat dim-witted. Ophelia is not dim-witted, her destruction is caused by herself being used and stamped on by men, and not being allowed to fight back. At the end of the nunnery scene Ophelia is seen weeping on the stairts. Polonius comforts her a little, and then leaves her in desperation while he exits with Claudius. Her madness scenes and suicide are good and affecting. The overall atmosphere of this Hamlet is right. It is faithful to the play, and evokes an engrossing mood. My only large complaint is that Terence Morgan as Laertes looks too much like a football player than a courtier.
Rating:
Summary: Not a masterpiece, but close!
Review: My only real complaint about this is that the director does not show Claudius' finest moment well. (4.5 when he quells Laertes' raid with pure courage and intelligence.) But aside from that, the movie is excellent. The scenery and effects are well done. Olivier is wonderful as usual. He portrays Hamlet's multiple dimensions very well. Claudius could have been done better, but it probably is not fair to compare this actor to the eventual Alan Bates' phenomenal and unsurpassed portrayal of Claudius. Laertes could have been more animated, but he does fairly well. Considering the limited resources back then, the ghost of Hamlet's father is done very well. (Sorrow as opposed to horror is emphasized.) Horatio is excellent in his secondary, but important role. Even the background noises and sound effects are done well. (The background of water in Hamlet's famous 'To be or not to be' soliloquy is a real artistic touch.) Even though my favorite version was Mel Gibson's, I think it is wrong to ignore this version.
Rating:
Summary: Great film by one of the greatest actors!
Review: This is, no doubt, the greatest adaptation of Hamlet! Olivier was a master in bringing Shakespeare's works to the screen and his acting is unsurpassed! Watch Henry V and Richard III to see what a genius Olivier was when it came to Shakespeare!
Rating:
Summary: This review is for a different film, Criterion collection
Review: Wow! I must say this is a pretty incredible grouping of films. Olivier was "the" great actor of his generation, and these three films, along with Wuthering Heights, probably were his greatest screen performances (That Hamilton Woman wasn't too shabby either. The Entertainer is probably the least known of the bunch, but was one of his best efforts. "Archie" is a British Vaudevillian, a fast-talking second-rater with gap-teeth and a check-suit, whose sole interest is in bringing in the crowds and maintaining his struggling career. The scene in which he recalls sitting in the audience and listening to a black blues-singer is a highpoint in theatre history, in the film, as it was on stage. Osborne, the "Peck's bad boy" of the West End, is operating at full capacity here. This is a script that surpasses "Look Back in Anger," in my opinion. At least it hit home more directly to me. Think of Willie Loman as a Vaudevillian and you'll get an inkling of what it's about. Olivier's Hamlet I hope needs no introduction. It was the definitive film version before Branagh. Olivier even dyed his hair to get into the role. This 1939 version remains the most "atmospheric" treatment on celluloid. You get the feeling you really have been transported back to 15th century Denmark. The acting is uniformly excellent. Henry V, I hope needs no hyping on my part. From the innovative introduction, when we see the actors assembling in the Globe, preparing for the afternoon's production, to the battle of Agincourt and the full, colorful panoply of the English and French forces, this is one imaginative tour-de-force that you will never forget. This collection is worth every penny and I will be ordering it immediately. I would suggest you do the same.
Rating:
Summary: Review of Hamlet: Olivier's Lavor Of Love!
Review: Nobody does Shakespeare like Laurence Olivier. Probably the greatest version of Hamlet to ever grace the screen. A labor of love for Olivier, who directs and plays the tormented Prince of Denmark, his Hamlet is more passionate and cerebral than other screen productions. Olivier is among the greatest actors who ever lived and this is proof of it. Lavish sets and costumes, also with a great supporting cast, of which Jean Simmons stands out. Beautiful recreation of The Bard's most popular play. From a scale of 1-10 I give this film an 8!
Rating:
Summary: This film defies augury. But the play¿s the thing (Hamlet)
Review: (Hamlet) Shakespeare's adaptation of a fable about an indecisive young Scandinavian with a thing for his mum has a better claim than anything else to be the greatest literary work of all time. But what about Olivier's vain interpretation of the same? One scholar wrote of it: "this is a movie about which the reviewer cannot make up her mind", referencing Olivier's spoken introduction. Like most stage productions, it abandons large chunks of text - most notably the whole Rosencrantz and Guildenstern plot. (For more on this, see Gary Oldman and Tim Roth in Tom Stoppard's indispensable Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead.) Also dropped is my own favourite soliloquy - "How all occasions do inform against me", which is one of the set-pieces of Branagh's recent venture. That said, the story which so compelled Mel Gibson, Ethan Hawkes (recently), Richard Burton and countless others is one that bears endless retellings. And Olivier is known as one of the century's great actors with good reason. Despite the cuts and occasional ham performances, it is one of the ultimate works of art interpreted by one of the greatest actors we have a record of. A sometime paradox. Watch it. The rest, of course, is silence.
Rating:
Summary: Olivier is the only Hamlet!
Review: This version by and with Olivier is the only one I will use in my literature classes. It is excellent--not matter that it was filmed in 1948--and the students love it!! Unfortunately, the vcr destroyed my tape.
Rating:
Summary: The Best hamlet ever!!!
Review: I have seen this once, and will not buy any of these smaller examples of Hamlet until the BEST one is available. What could be holding this up?
Rating:
Summary: Best Hamlet I've Seen on Film
Review: The first time I saw this version of Hamlet, I had not read or seen the play before. I found it boring and hard to understand. Over time, however, I read the play and saw several versions of it, and it's become one of my favorite stories. It really grows on you, like "Citizen Kane" and Joyce's "Ulysses". Sure, Olivier's version is missing many scenes (try the Branaugh version if you want the closest to the text), but the music, cinematography, and acting (I consider the sword fight scene to be one of the most dramatic pieces in any film) make this Hamlet my favorite. This is a movie that utilizes its format to create a very sophisticated and theatrical effect. Bravo.
|
