Hamlet

Rating:
Summary: Hamlet's Christian Themes
Review: Hamlet: Tragedy Seen in terms of Christianity Samuel T. Goldberg, M.D., psychoanalyst, Columbia, Maryland [e-mail]

As illuminating as it may be, the psychoanalytic is only one specific perspective among many from which one can examine Shakespeare's tragedy, Hamlet, Prince of Denmark . Equally important and valid would be to view Hamlet's entire struggle as between belief in spiritual life after death vs. a materialistic scientific belief that the disintegration of the body is the final end; or, as vacillation between the poles of Christian faith vs. skeptical doubt. One could interpret the greed, ambitions, fears, actions, and foibles of those defending or seeking political power as representing their ongoing choice between the "Kingdom on Earth" and the "Kingdom of Heaven"; clearly, this is how Claudius is poised when he attempts to pray. Yet again, one could explicate Shakespeare's commentary on how these choices affect not only the souls and lives of the individuals, but also the health or illness of the state as a whole.

Even before learning from his father's ghost of Claudius's crimes, Hamlet is undoubtedly depressed. By his own descriptions, he wears black, sighs, gives forth "fruitful river of the eye", and is dejected in mood and behavior, showing "all forms, moods, and shapes of grief."(1.2.77-82) All the uses of this world to him seem "weary, stale, flat, and unprofitable." (1.2.133-134) He depicts himself as weak, as distant from Hercules as Claudius is from his father. (1.2.152-153). He's lost all his mirth, and given up his habits of exercise.(2.2.297) His heart breaks (1.2.159). He wishes for suicide, if only God had not forbidden it (1.2.132). He values his life no more than he does a pin(1.4.65) The encounter with his father's spirit hardly lifts his own spirits. Soon after, he tells Polonius he will walk into his grave (2.2.207), and that Polonius can take his life, with which he would part willingly . (2.2.217) He calls himself a rogue, a peasant slave, a coward, an ass, and a whore. (2.2.549-585)

What is the cause of Hamlet's depression? Obviously, he has lost his father. Hamlet has not completed mourning for his father; he has not let father go. He repeatedly is confused about how long father has actually been dead, a duration he always underestimates. Moreover, his mother's behavior has disillusioned, tormented, and infuriated him. Gertrude had made great show of her love for his father while he was alive, and of her grief for his death. Yet, her tears in truth were "most unrighteous" (1.2.154). She is like Niobe(149), whose behavior led to the death of all her children; so also, Hamlet seems to predict, Gertrude's behavior will lead to his own death. She has permitted herself with indecent haste to be seduced by and to marry Claudius, her brother in law, incestuously. Hamlet at times seems even to suspect her of complicity in the murder(3.4.30).^ Flesh itself is sullied, defiled and debased. All frailty can be seen in woman.

( It is at times ambiguous whether or not Gertrude may have participated in the plot to kill Hamlet's father. In the Glenn Close film version, at the senior Hamlet's coffin, Gertrude and Claudius exchange a lengthy eye contact full of significance, noticed by Hamlet, though perhaps indicating only an attraction till then suppressed. The ghost not only fails to include Gertrude as a murderer, but orders Hamlet to contrive no revenge against her. Hamlet, however, seems at first to hold her equally as guilty of the murder. Though it's not clear that these were among the lines inserted into the Marriage of Gonzago by Hamlet, the player Queen says, "In second husband let me be accursed! None wed the second but who killed the first." (3.2.177-178) In his mother's bedroom, Hamlet accuses her of killing a king, but her response indicates astonishment (3.4.30-31), and their making peace by the end of the scene again seems to dispel that accusation against her.)

This painful disorder and disappointment in his family has caused Hamlet to lose faith more generally. Pulled into his disillusionment are not only the key people about him, but also the state of Denmark, majesty, men generally, women, beauty, love, words, the value of action, his self-worth, and the worth even of life itself. Despondent, betrayed, and aggrieved, Hamlet observes things rank and gross in nature possessing all the world. It is an unweeded garden grown to seed (1.2.135-136), as if he could now see what has become of the Garden of Eden because of the original sin, Adam's and Eve's sensual transgression. Claudius is the serpent who has tempted "Eve" and stung Hamlet's father's life. (1.5.40). Moreover, with regard to the deaths of fathers, the new King of Denmark refers nonchalantly to the first murder, telling Hamlet that "from the first corpse (ie, Abel's) till he that died today, 'this must be so.'" (1.1.101-106) Claudius later refers to his crime as having "the primal eldest curse upon't," ie, the curse of Caine. (3.3.36-37; cf.5.1.77) His rank offense and its effects rot in Denmark (1.4.90) and "smell to Heaven."(3.3.36)

Hamlet is appalled: everywhere he sees mere seeming. All appearance is deceptive. Only one man in ten thousand is honest, (2.2.178) and the world will be honest only when doomsday is near (2.2.237-238), ie, never, or but very briefly. One may smile, smile, and be a villain. Consider how Claudius first appears, addressing the full court. About his grief and his marriage, his public statement is crafted for public purpose; he allows no candor. (1.2.1-13) Though just having achieved a new wife and kingdom, he shows not full joy, but must pretend it is "defeated." Discretion, he says, makes sorrow "wise", limiting grief and advising also to remember oneself, but it also makes joy wise, ie, curtailed so as not to offend. "In equal scale weighing delight and dole," Claudius at nearly every moment can be seen to be calculating, measured, his self-interest never forgotten.

Claudius advises Hamlet no longer to continue those "mourning duties" to his father(1.2.89), which he sees as issuing from mere "obligation" (1.2.91). He does not permit himself to recognize true or unadulterated grief within himself, nor to empathize with that suffered by Hamlet. Though he has just given the other youth, Laertes, leave to return to Paris, Claudius bids Hamlet to "remain here in the cheer and comfort of our eye," and opposes his returning to Wittenberg . (1.2.115-116) Perhaps suspecting already that Hamlet could become a threat, Claudius wants to keep an eye on him. In reality, Claudius subjects Hamlet to "the oppressor's wrong... the insolence of office." (3.1.72-74) Though he courts the prince with expressions of fatherly love,^ Claudius is manifestly the bad father, who fears, suspects, needs to watch and to control Hamlet, and who is ready to turn against him murderously. Hamlet suspects his villainy even before meeting the ghost: ("O, my prophetic soul!"1.5.42).

Likewise, Polonius, the king's most trusted adviser, also lives by scheming. He dissembles constantly, and even advises his son Laertes against being direct, telling him to keep his true self internally hidden, in reserve: "Give thy thoughts no tongue."(1.3.59). The outward show is what is important: "The apparel oft proclaims the man." (72). So also does he hide himself externally, in order to observe others in secret. He is willing to contrive even to sully his own son's reputation in order to spy on him. (2.1.22-63) In his loyal service to the King, he will^ sacrifice even his daughter, using her as bait. He admits, "With devotion's visage and pious action we do sugar o'er the devil himself." (3.1.47-49)

Like his son, Laertes, Polonius at first mistakes Hamlet's character and

Rating:
Summary: .
Review: It's odd. As I read through some of the negative reviews of this version of Hamlet, I can almost agree with some of the points that are made. But it doesn't change the fact that this is far superior to Branagh's version. I know how much it bothers Branagh fans and many Shakespeare purists to hear that, but that just makes it that much more fun to say. The basic reason for this is that Zefferelli, although he is a bit too carefree with his cuts and shuffling, has far better aesthetic sensibilities than Branagh. The emotions of the characters in this version are far more compelling, engaging, and distinct than the lukewarm indifference that comprised the tonality of Branagh's adaptation. And though I'm no Mel Gibson fanatic, he does an *exceptional* job in his role, and keeps the film compelling through all of its hacks and alterations. Though far from a perfect adaptation, this is an engaging and rewarding movie. I've always thought it was far better than most people seem to give it credit for.

Rating:
Summary: This is by far the best version of Hamlet on VHS
Review: I am a Shakespeare scholar and I have seen numerous versions of Hamlet and this by far the best. The director catches the sexuality between Gertrude and King Claudius perfectly. Also the oedipul relationship between Hamlet and his mother is portrayed perfectly. When Brano directed Hamlet he changed too many things and made the movie too long. When Olivier directed Hamlet he played Hamlet himself and he was older then the actress who played his mother. This version of Hamlet seems to be the best so far.

Rating:
Summary: By Far the best Film production of Hamlet.
Review: I can't believe tons of money were wasted on Branaugh's production of Hamlet,when the best of them all has already been done. The script is excellent: it cuts out the verbosity of the original and preserves the most memorable and profound dialogue. Mel Gibson proved himself to be probably the best, yet least acclaimed actor, in Hollywood. Gibson's immense talent was once hidden under pretty-boy stardom and bad scripts, but no longer.

Rating:
Summary: Gorblimey, it's 'orrible!
Review: Somebody should be assigned to guard Franco Zefirrelli. That's right, guard him. Whenever Zefirrelli says, "Hey, I'm gonna make a movie out of Shakespeare!", he should be slapped in the head. Repeatedly. Maybe that'll dissuade him. From his ridiculous ROMEO AND JULIET to his terrible TAMING OF THE SHREW, and now with this nightmare, Zefirrelli's plan has been simple and threefold.

A) Hire the worst actors you can find. The Ophelia in this production is good, and the Polonius isn't bad, but the rest of them should not be allowed anywhere near Shakespeare.

B) Simplify. Cut out the heart of the story. Pare to the bare bones and then pare some more. If a nuance remains, keep choppin'.

C) Make it ludicrous. What do you want? Hamlet chopping about with his sword in 1.5? Threatening Rosencrantz and Guildenstern? Falling in love with his mother, perhaps? It's all here.

Avoid at all costs.

Rating:
Summary: Outstanding, my favorite Mel Gibson film
Review: I really enjoyed watching this movie. I had just finished reading the novel and decided to watch the movie, it was wonderful, There where some problems with the movie in my eyes, but the truth that it plays out different in everybody's mind makes up for it, I can't expect them to have a movie exactly how I imagined it. They did well,

this above all to thy own self be true.

Rating:
Summary: Mad Max Does Denmark
Review: Appalling. I cheered when Hamlet died and wished more people were dead. Here is a play that has survived 400 years and Zeffirelli tries to butcher it into obscurity. The adaptation was done without regard to character development or motivation. The cuts were obvious and the shuffling of dialog was painful. Who wouldn't flinch hearing "Get thee to a nunnery" during The Mousetrap? The characters were flat (and we know Shakespeare didn't write them that way) and the action questionable (at best). The Ghost was weepy (and we know Paul Scofield has range enough for better) and Polonius lacked his political weaseliness (and we know Ian Holm is an actor of incredible subtlety). Ophelia had no real motive for going mad since the only emotions she showed towards Hamlet or her father were annoyance and fear. Claudius was eminently forgettable. There is nothing in the original text to indicate Oedipal behaviour on Hamlet's part, yet here it is again, added (I suspect) purely for shock value. Also, why does Zeffirelli think it better to show you scenes that Shakespeare wrote as described by a character? Would it not have been more powerful to hear Ophelia describe, through her shaking fear, how Hamlet came to her room rather than show him doing so? Zeffirelli doesn't understand that the strength and elegance of the play is in the language. Rent Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet. It is vastly superior and true to the play. Branagh's Hamlet was the result of passion for the Bard's work and it shows. Zeffirelli's Hamlet was the result of his own arrogance - and it shows.

Rating:
Summary: A very wonderable suprise!
Review: I must admit that when I first thought of Mel Gibson is a serious rendition of one of Shakespeare's most complex roles, I almost laughed. But he holds his own very well, and although the material is trimmed down quite a bit, it still maintains the spirit of the play. Helena Bonham-Carter is excellent as Ophelia, and Glenn Close is wonderful as well. This movie is well worth taking a serious look at.

Rating:
Summary: The finest current edition of the play now available.
Review: Mel Gibson's Hamlet was controversial from the start with many arguing that "Mad Max" had no business portraying the melancholy Dane. Gibson's portrayal, however, is remarkable, and the support he receives from numerous outstanding performances by other cast members makes this a thrilling and fast paced film. The sets and panoramic beauty are brilliantly rendered. While Olivier's Hamlet is certainly riveting and powerful, modern audiences may find it somewhat dated. Gibson breathes life into the role and the play. As a college English teacher, I have shown this film to hundreds of students over the past few years, and they share my enthusiasm. Purists may find fault in Gibson's portrayal, but the bard himself understood better than anyone that theatre must entertain. This version does that and so much more. It remains a pleasure to watch, even for someone who has seen it innumerable times.

Rating:
Summary: The greatest Shakspearean film work I have ever seen!
Review: The feat of portraying a man driven by vengance and torn by love is outstandingly accomplished by Mel Gibson. He draws the viewer into the movie and shares the anguish that his soul is being put through. The supporting cast is also excellent and does a wonderful job of portraying their Shakspearean parts. Director Franco Zeffirelli did a great job of displaying a castle ravaged by turmoil, grief, and lies.