Hamlet

Rating:
Summary: DVD
Review: This movie is great. It really made hamlet come alive for me! One thing I would like to see is this movie on DVD

Rating:
Summary: A Gutsy Hamlet
Review: This has been called by one movie critic "a visceral Hamlet" with Mel Gibson giving a gutsy or macho performance. Other versions by other actors I have seen play the character as tame and weak, not at all the powerful obsessed character I imagined in Shakespeare's play. Even Lawrence Olivier's Hamlet is meek - compared to Mel Gibson's, with Olivier giving little hint as to the torment of a man intent on avenging his father's death. The scenes with Ophelia, Gertrude, Polonius,and Claudius all require projection and expression of sincerely felt emotions to make the play work. The very talented cast that has Helen Bonham-Carter, Glenn Close, Ian Holm, and Alan Bates respectively in these roles compliment Gibson's performance admirably. Mel Gibson is a great actor who makes his roles believable and sincere. He would have made a great Captain Ahab in the re-make of Moby Dick.

Well directed with a beautiful landscape by Franco Zeffirelli, this version makes the play understanable to anyone who watches it. Franco Zeffirelli has a great talent for taking two dimensional characters and difficult stories and turning them into three dimensional real people and events one can relate to. This he did superbly in JESUS OF NAZARETH, ROMEO AND JULIETTE, and the TAMING OF THE SHREW. Those who complain that he took too much (erring) poetic license should know that many actors and directors do the same thing. For example, Lawrence Olivier who is Jewish and played Hamlet, had the execution trick with Rosencranz and Guildenstern (Jewish names) removed and replaced with a pirate ship attack. In Zeffirelli's version, much of the wordy and unneeded material such as Hamlet's instruction to the players are removed, making what had been a 3 hour play into a two hour movie. All in all this is the best version I have ever seen.

Rating:
Summary: This is a Hamlet for today's audience.
Review: This version of Hamlet is short and fast paced. It has plenty of energy and Mel Gibson is a convincing Hamlet. The balances of the cast are top-notch actors and are in excellent form. There is enough of the story to give cohesion. There are no stories or plays that could not stand a little reinterpreting. But some times this leave out the feel. Mel actually put more feel back in to the original intent. So do not compare while watching. And watch it a gain. I know you are in a hurry so I won't go through part the story line here.

Rating:
Summary: A Re-Telling of the Famous Shakespeare Play - Hamlet
Review: I own this movie and seen it dozen's of times. I'ts simply - in one word - WONDERFUL. Unlike a lot of other people, I saw this movie first and am in the process of reading the actual play now. Some reviews I have read were judging the movie by the play but seeing that I've seen the movie first our opinions differ. I've noticed that some had complaints about the acting while others liked the acting. I for one have to say that the acting is quite good. In fact, I've seen "The Lord of the Rings"(GREAT MOVIE-read the books to find out what happens in the second and third movie)and just now discovered that Ian Holm who acts as Bilbo in "The Lord of the Rings" is Polonius in "Hamlet". I know thats probably old news but it's new to me and I would have never guessed to be honest! Anyways to get back on the subject,both my sister and brother (he has read the play before seeing the movie I believe) have seen and also enjoyed this movie. Although like other reviewers have mentioned and were a bit disappointed they did leave a couple of parts out from the play. For example they left out the conversation between the clowns concerning Ophelia's burial and the part where Laertes and Hamlet leaped into Ophelia's grave. But I still hold onto my opinion and say that this movie is very entertaining. My only complaint is that this is not out on DVD.

Rating:
Summary: hamlet
Review: The movie Hamlet directed by Franco Zefferelli is a historical drama, based on the popular Shakespearean Tragedy. Zefferelli decided to retain the name Hamlet, which I think could be modified to be more effective. Theoretically, a title is a microcosm of the theme, which 'Hamlet' doesn't really accomplish; a title that can foreshadow the theme of the play will be more formidable. Perhaps the director could have excerpted one of the dominant quotes out of the play, the most famous being "To be or not to be". This would have at least given a foreshadowing to the indecision seen by the tragic hero throughout the plot. Generally speaking, the movie was well done and I comment the director for his concise but accurate representation of Shakespeare's 'Hamlet'.
On the whole the actors depicted the roles of their characters quite well. Hamlet played by the Australian, Mel Gibson took command of his part, and captivated the viewers with his emotional conversations, as well as addition of humor and a masculine vigor to Hamlet. He portrayed his part with a great deal enthusiasm, bringing the play to life. The royal couple played by Alan Bates and Glenn Close, as king Claudius and queen Gertrude respectfully, were able to capture the conduct of a monarchial leadership, of the middle ages with little difficulty. Claudius displayed an exceptional representation of a lusty, murderous king. The minor characters such as Ian Holm as Polonius, Nathaniel Parker as Laertes, and Helena Bonham Carter as Ophelia gave considerable support to the leading characters, as they were subtly but effectively able to dictate the plot.
Hamlet is noted as one of Franco Zeffirelli's best productions as he recreated yet another Shakespeare masterpiece. He took a conventional approach to this production of Hamlet as he kept with the mindset most people would have to character and setting, in other words he tried not to give any surprises. Zeffirelli's main goal was to create a lighthearted enjoyable movie that would appeal to the general public who don't have the time and stamina for Branagh's four-hour version. In keeping with typical Shakespearean movies the director chose a soundtrack consisting of classical pieces, which is suitable for what he was trying to achieve. Little special effects were used, which may be a major flaw when trying to grasp the attention of modern day viewers, perhaps he could have included some more dynamic effects, especially with the ghost who appeared almost as though he was a living character.
This movie is a concise version of the original text and has left out and/or shortened many scenes keeping only the ones necessary to tell the story. I really liked the way he incorporated old Hamlet's funeral in the beginning and the voyage to England. However, there were a few scenes like the fight between Laertes and Hamlet in the graveyard, which could have been further accented. The major flaw I observed in the movie when compared to the book was the exclusion of the sub-plot with Fortinbras and the Norwegian influence. This led to the ambiguity the viewers were left in once the movie ended, as there was no hint to the outcome of Denmark.

Rating:
Summary: Probably the BEST Hamlet
Review: This is one of the best versions of Hamlet I've seen. As a teacher of English, this film has great costumes, shows medieval castle life extremely well and even with Shakespeare's old English, still easy to follow for novice teen students. Glenn Close is a really good Gertrude! I don't understand why this movie is so hard to find in rental stores, nor why it is not on DVD. This is a GREAT movie that just so happens to have a hot guy like Mel Gibson in it too. What a combo!

Rating:
Summary: For Look, Where My Abridgement Has Come!
Review: If Olivier's version is too stodgy and stagy for you, and Kenneth Branagh's version either too "Hollywood" or just too blamed long, then you may want to try Franco Zeffirelli's version, which is a pleasant surprise in just about every way.

Zeffirelli has a history with Shakespeare, having directed gems like Romeo and Juliet, and a somewhat overheated (but very funny) version of The Taming of the Shrew -- in which we are treated to a pickled Richard Burton trading barbs with an overripe Liz Taylor. Zeffirelli and Shakespeare go hand-in-hand with one another; the director seems to know just how to adapt the Bard's plays for film. So when I heard he was filming Hamlet, I was overjoyed -- until I found out who was being cast in the lead:

"Mel GIBSON?! Is he NUTS!?!"

I figured it was a vanity thing for Gibson, one of those "PLEASE take me seriously!" ventures that would fall flat, and that Zeffirelli was sullying his own reputation by involving himself with it. I'm pleased to say I was wrong. This verson, while not the best I've seen, acquits itself honorably -- and Gibson is equal to the task of this very challenging role.

It helps that he's surrounded with a stellar supporting cast, such as Paul Scofield, Ian Holm, and Glenn Close (more on whom in a minute), but even on his own, Gibson makes for an impressive Prince. He's done his homework, and makes some intelligent decisions. Hamlet in this film is not brooding/depressed so much as he is ticked off, a cauldron of boiling rage (as in the moment when Gibson attacks Elsinore itself with his sword); physical actor that he is, Gibson wouldn't have played it any other way, and so doing brought a human element to the role absent in other interpretations, including, sorry to say, Olivier's -- who looks, for all his ability, like an actor playing a role. Not so Gibson; his Hamlet is torn between royal obligations and those to his father, and looks as if he's been driven more than a little mad in his attempt to reconcile them. One feels that his antic dispotition is something far more than put-on -- Gibson looks quite literally like he's about to go nuts, especially during his cathartic scene with Gertrude -- and as long as I'm on that subject ...

There are several ways to approach the role of Gerturde: unknowing dupe, dotty but loving mother, and willing conspirator are just a few. Not many actresses would choose Close's daring, electrifyingly Oedipal/Freudian route, if only because it's A)the hardest to play accurately, and B)probably closest to the psychological truth, and the one actresses with less chutzpah than Close would shy away from. Close said she saw Gertrude as a "trophy wife," who married Hamlet Sr. and bore his son when she was little more than a teenager. This accounts for her, ah, physical affection towards her son (I'm being euphemistic here), and is a big reason Hamlet's so messed up to begin with. In this context Denmark's royals can be seen as just another dysfunctional family; small wonder things turn out as they do. Shakespeare knew the human condition intimately; this becomes more obvious as centuries pass, and he remains as relevant today as he was in his own time, if not moreso.

Zeffirelli's direction is as impressive as the acting (Ian Holm as Polonius is another delight!); he imbues the setting with the brooding qualities Gibson chooses to leave out of his acting. (Several different castles were used in bringing Elsinore to life; it's a testament to Zeffirelli that he's able to make a seamless whole of them.) Elsinore here becomes a grim, oppressive place; it's no wonder the people there are going mad or power-mad. Zeffirelli uses few tricks to tell his story -- a few crossfades here and there, and a Scorceseish tracking shot during Hamlet's confrontation with Ophelia, are it. This speaks of a director confident in his abilities to tell a story without having to dazzle the viewer.

And speaking of Ophelia, I think this would be an opportune moment to address the issue of "cuts" -- the process of making a four-hour play into something platable to filmgoers. Many have tried to cut Hamlet and made a conditional success of it, or botched the process entirely. For a primer, I refer you to the film adaptation of Tom Stoppard's brilliant The Fifteen-Minute Hamlet, which'll tell you everything you want to know. Cutting Hamlet can leave actors with little to say or do and unfortunately, this is what has been done to poor Ophelia. While some of her scenes remain (such as the abovementioned confrontation), others are lost to the fabled red pen, and Carter is reduced to making her role (perhaps the most tragic in the play, as she's the only real victim) into a series of mannerisms. She does well by what's left of the part -- but she doesn't have much to work with.

Still, that's my only complaint about this lovely abridgement. I think it's a great movie, better than it had any right to be -- and for that I'm glad.

Rating:
Summary: Road Warrior gives Hamlet a Radical Edge
Review: Who would have ever thought that the former Mad Max star would be able to transition to something as serious and allegedly cultured as Shakespeare? Yet he has done so and done so marvelously well that he earned himself a rank amoung "real actors."
In an excellent scene where Hamlet is saying, "You would not play apon this pipe (or flute), but you would play me ..." Mel Gibson pins the man to whom he is speaking against a nearby brick wall with the musical instrument. Mel adds fire and sincerity to the struggles Hamlet is facing in trying to determine the morally correct path in which to respond to his father's untimely death.
Mel Gibson, during an televised interview before the movie was released, even voiced his own concerns about being able to follow in the footsteps of the world's greatest actors who have previously played Hamlet either on stage or on film. Nonetheless, this is a suprisingly excellent portrayal.

Rating:
Summary: relax and just enjoy the film already!
Review: This film is not for purists. There is no Fortinbras, which changes some of the issues the play had touched upon, including the one of succession. The parallels between the characters are by necessity there, but they are not played up. The sectarian dig of Protestant versus Catholic is subtly reinforced. And ah, what a joy to see that rare animal, a vital Dane! Since when has Hamlet been just a moody layabout? Do not his people's love and the three part duel with Laertes suggest that Hamlet is the very flower of manhood for the time (compare him to Henry V)?

Too many people stress over sticking to the text. Yes, Shakespeare wrote some gorgeous stuff. But it doesn't necessarily play well to film. The pacing is different, the special effects he could use were different. His audiences were willing to accept less explanation for more difficult to believe things. For heaven's sake, his women were all played by men! Should we return to that so that his women in drag would be funnier? I don't think so.

Sticking to a manageable length for a story of Hamlet's complexity means sacrificing complexity. Rather than eliminate a little bit of everything, everything of a little bit was removed. An interesting and effective choice. This version is one of betrayal and revenge and forgiveness and doesn't detour into issues of state. It is a "personal" Hamlet of claustrophobic family tensions played out in gorgeous and downright Wagnerian wide open spaces.

Who can say what Shakespeare would have wanted? Not one of us. Is this Hamlet very different from the pure potential read from a page. Yes. Is it good? Yes it is. The focus is different, and the impact is different, but frankly, the director has merely done what any reader does to a work. He has reinterpreted it for his own needs. And what are our criticisms based on but that we have interpreted the text differently and don't like the alternate reading?

My only disappointment was at the "Nymph, in thy orisons be all my sins remembered" line. It is a small regret in a moving and well acted interpretation of a classic.

Rating:
Summary: THE BEST HAMLET EVER!
Review: This is by far the best Hamlet ever done. Mel Gibson and the rest of the cast are superb. The other versions of hamlet are a waste of your time.

Wacth this for a true masterpeice.