With
murder,
ghosts,
sword-fights, and generally
morbid themes, Hamlet seemed like ideal viewing for
Halloween. So, armed with four
video tapes, a copy of
Shakespeare's script, and plenty of popcorn and chips, I prepared to take on three film versions of
Hamlet in one day. The experience of seeing three different film interpretations of
Hamlet in short successive order was certainly unique. I must admit that it gave me a different perspective on the well-known play.
I watched the films in
chronological order, with
Laurence Olivier's version coming first, followed by
Franco Zeffirelli's version (starring
Mel Gibson), and concluding with
Kenneth Branagh's interpretation. Although I had seen the Zeffirelli film before, the other two were new to me. With Branagh's film clocking in at about four hours long, and the Zeffirelli and Olivier versions at approximately three hours and two hours respectively,
this made for quite a full day.
The way in which the directors handled
the Bard's material is quite different for each production. Olivier and Zeffirelli both opted for cutting the script quite extensively, most likely to accommodate film-going audiences, who would tire of the constant
soliloquies for which Shakespeare is known. Branagh, on the other hand, decided to film the entire play for the most part unchanged. Although a few of the scenes are switched, the entire script is used. Olivier, in his editing, removes the minor characters
Rozencrantz and Guildenstern, and also removes the sub-plot involving
Fortinbras. Several of the scenes are rearranged, and, except for the most famous ones, many of the
soliloquies are shortened or eliminated. In it's flow of action, and arrangement of scenes, it seems that Zeffirelli took quite a bit of inspiration from Olivier's classic. The scenes that were removed mirror the classic film almost exactly, as does the order of the remaining scenes. Zeffirelli also omits
Fortinbras, but retains
Rozencrantz and
Guildenstern.
I actually enjoyed Olivier's performance much more than I had expected. His reserved
morose Hamlet is really quite powerful. I was especially impressed with his interpretation of the famous "
To be, or not to be..." speech. Olivier has Hamlet sitting on some ocean overlook, holding a
dagger and contemplating
suicide. He almost does it, until he begins to think about life after death. "Thus
conscience doth make
cowards of us all." Although the
speech is obviously about
death, I had never before thought of
Hamlet actually attempting
suicide, though now I can't see how
Shakepeare could have meant it any other way. It was quite impressive.
In Zeffirelli's version,
Mel Gibson's interpretation of
Hamlet was quite different. Gibson was much more dynamic and active as
Hamlet. He spoke
Hamlet's lines the way I had always
imagined them to be spoken. He was loud, dramatic, and given to outbursts. Quite a contrast to Olivier's
silent morbidity. In fact, I believe this is one of the reasons I liked Olivier's
Hamlet so much. Although Gibson's
Hamlet was who I had imagined him to be, Olivier's Hamlet was a
real person who, though he didn't fit my preconception, yet was so real I couldn't help but accept him.
Branagh's
Hamlet, on the other hand, was a bit difficult for me to relate to. He was, in fact, so
void of personality that I had a difficult time even remembering what he was like. One thing that Branagh did, however, was to examine the aspect of Hamlet's
cowardliness, or at least self assessment of cowardliness. Branagh's Hamlet is quite upset with his inability to go through with his wish for
vengeance. This is definitely in keeping with Shakespeare's original idea, as the script has
Hamlet deriding himself several times about this very issue. All in all, I found Branagh's version rather unmemorable.
The one shining star in Branagh's dull interpretation comes, surprisingly, in the form of a very minor character.
Charlton Heston plays a brief cameo as the Lead
Tragedian, and he does so with a power and presence that only
he could give. His part was small, but his presence was lasting. I found myself getting upset at
Polonius for interrupting Heston in his speech.
The other very unique thing about Branagh's interpretation is the setting. Whereas Olivier opted for a very
traditional Shakespearian time period, and Zeffirelli followed suit with a slightly older late
medieval setting, Branagh chose to perform
Hamlet against the background of
Denmark in the late
19th century. Although the language seems a bit out of place in such a setting, the effect is interesting. Even so, the one thing that upset me about this setting was the fight at the end. Being an amateur
fencer, I noticed that the duel at the end of the
movie is not fought at all by the rules of
fencing, in spite of
Osric's (
Robin Williams) supposed
expertise.