Polonius. O, I am slain.
Jan. 31st, 2006 02:57 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
pauraque_bkI finally got a chance to see the Kenneth Branagh Hamlet recently. I spread it out over several days since, you know, it's five hours long.
Overall, I enjoyed it, but I think it might be very tiring if you watched it all at one go, or if you weren't familiar with the play. I understand there's some controversy over whether this "full" version ever actually held the Elizabethan stage, or whether it was more like the version preserved by the first quarto, which is supposed to have been a reconstruction from memory by an actor who was in it. You do have to ask yourself why Shakespeare would have written a play that is basically too long to perform, since he certainly didn't always have that problem.
But I can see why Branagh wanted to film all of it, since you're only of the right age to play Hamlet for a certain window of time, and (as we get a chance to see here) there is dramatic merit in almost every scene.
And we really do get a chance to see it, because there are some really terrific performances here, some of which made me appreciate scenes I never "got" before. I was always annoyed by the "I have been so affrighted" scene, which seemed like a very unhappily placed piece of exposition that existed only because the way the play is written makes it hard for us to directly observe moments of wordless significance, but when I saw Kate Winslet do it, I liked it. I felt the impact of Hamlet saying goodbye to love, and to her. Another good example is Gertrude's exposition of Ophelia's drowning; the meaning of who is giving us this news came through.
Oh, best example. Although the celebrity cameos got to be a bit much by the end, Charlton Heston as the Player was the Best Casting Ever. The "too long" Hecuba speech did not seem too long coming from him. It was also interesting to hear the whole text of the inset play (though its language is so elevated that it really is difficult to understand).
I also liked the Ghost very much (creepy eyes that actor has!), not to mention Horatio, whose affection for Hamlet was palpable but not overplayed.
Polonius also did a good job, though with all his dialogue intact the character becomes a bit tiresome. His advice to Laertes is extremely long, as is his dialogue with -- well, in this case, with Gerard Depardieu, which I admit made it more amusing at least -- and it does get to be too much. We get the idea, already!
I wasn't especially fond of Laertes, who seemed rather too old for the part. He needs to be the impetuous youth, all too ready to be led into corruption by Claudius when the moment comes. The loss of that detracted.
I do love Kenneth Branagh, but he wasn't really one of my favorite parts of the movie. He didn't do a bad job, it just wasn't quite to my taste. Too excitable, maybe. By contrast, I really liked Ethan Hawke as Hamlet -- morose!Hamlet is the way to go, IMO. I remember especially liking Hawke's "to be or not to be", which is amazingly hard to pull off without seeming immensely cliche and self-conscious. You have to somehow make it feel like you're just coming up with the words for the first time, and Ethan Hawke managed to do that -- slumped in the back seat of a limousine sliding through the Manhattan night, mumbling film-student existentialism to himself. Branagh did his soliloquy standing in front of a mirror, which could hardly have seemed more self-conscious. Maybe that was the intention, but it left me cold. I did like him at other times, though, especially when toying with Polonius and R&G.
Maybe Branagh's acting lacked a little because he was so busy directing. The movie is beautiful; no complaints there. I generally appreciated the frequent cuts away to wordless scenes demonstrating whatever was being exposited at the moment, especially when following Fortinbras, whose significance and parallels to the developing main plot were very well illuminated. Fortinbras isn't really a character, more like an incarnation of the plot. He reflects whatever is happening and becomes whatever the story requires of him; now a hot-headed young firebrand defying his uncle, now a wise man fit to rule Denmark.
I had to smile at the Hamlet/Ophelia scenes, because I'd just recently been reading Harold Jenkins's commentary on how stupid he finds the idea that Hamlet had previously seduced Ophelia. I tend to agree with Jenkins -- the whole idea of Ophelia is that she is innocent, and if she let him seduce her it makes her one of the punished, not one of the victims -- but it's pretty difficult to even convey that interpretation on the stage. It's easier in a movie, of course, but it still isn't a very good idea.
I also noticed that Jenkins hates the idea of "Let be" being played as an answer to "to be or not to be", seeing it as nothing more than a segue to the next bit ("Well, anyway"). He might be right about the original intention, but when Branagh did play it as significant, I liked it. If it works, it works.
One choice I really didn't care for was having Hamlet's running commentary on the play be loud and obnoxious, directed as much to the rest of the audience as to Ophelia and the king and queen. It makes it look like he's trying to incite a general insurrection, which I really think is off the point. Hamlet is very personal, and about an inability to take direct action. Drawing the whole Danish court into what's going on at this point directs it much more outwardly than is appropriate, I think.
I also found myself thinking about the Gertrude's closet scene more than I had before, maybe because I'd never seen it played so well. What does it mean that she can't see the ghost? Is it her guilt that won't permit it, or just her fear/denial? (It's also possible to read that she does see the ghost but doesn't want to say so, though the movie doesn't take that view.)
Overall, the movie was enjoyable and thought-provoking, but not OMG FANTASTIC. Worth a look if you're interested in Shakespeare and interpretations thereof, but not a good first introduction to the play.
I also recently re-read Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, and I've just started John Updike's Gertrude and Claudius, which I bought for one dolla. I should do a post about Hamletfic. Any recs? Can be published or in fandom.
Overall, I enjoyed it, but I think it might be very tiring if you watched it all at one go, or if you weren't familiar with the play. I understand there's some controversy over whether this "full" version ever actually held the Elizabethan stage, or whether it was more like the version preserved by the first quarto, which is supposed to have been a reconstruction from memory by an actor who was in it. You do have to ask yourself why Shakespeare would have written a play that is basically too long to perform, since he certainly didn't always have that problem.
But I can see why Branagh wanted to film all of it, since you're only of the right age to play Hamlet for a certain window of time, and (as we get a chance to see here) there is dramatic merit in almost every scene.
And we really do get a chance to see it, because there are some really terrific performances here, some of which made me appreciate scenes I never "got" before. I was always annoyed by the "I have been so affrighted" scene, which seemed like a very unhappily placed piece of exposition that existed only because the way the play is written makes it hard for us to directly observe moments of wordless significance, but when I saw Kate Winslet do it, I liked it. I felt the impact of Hamlet saying goodbye to love, and to her. Another good example is Gertrude's exposition of Ophelia's drowning; the meaning of who is giving us this news came through.
Oh, best example. Although the celebrity cameos got to be a bit much by the end, Charlton Heston as the Player was the Best Casting Ever. The "too long" Hecuba speech did not seem too long coming from him. It was also interesting to hear the whole text of the inset play (though its language is so elevated that it really is difficult to understand).
I also liked the Ghost very much (creepy eyes that actor has!), not to mention Horatio, whose affection for Hamlet was palpable but not overplayed.
Polonius also did a good job, though with all his dialogue intact the character becomes a bit tiresome. His advice to Laertes is extremely long, as is his dialogue with -- well, in this case, with Gerard Depardieu, which I admit made it more amusing at least -- and it does get to be too much. We get the idea, already!
I wasn't especially fond of Laertes, who seemed rather too old for the part. He needs to be the impetuous youth, all too ready to be led into corruption by Claudius when the moment comes. The loss of that detracted.
I do love Kenneth Branagh, but he wasn't really one of my favorite parts of the movie. He didn't do a bad job, it just wasn't quite to my taste. Too excitable, maybe. By contrast, I really liked Ethan Hawke as Hamlet -- morose!Hamlet is the way to go, IMO. I remember especially liking Hawke's "to be or not to be", which is amazingly hard to pull off without seeming immensely cliche and self-conscious. You have to somehow make it feel like you're just coming up with the words for the first time, and Ethan Hawke managed to do that -- slumped in the back seat of a limousine sliding through the Manhattan night, mumbling film-student existentialism to himself. Branagh did his soliloquy standing in front of a mirror, which could hardly have seemed more self-conscious. Maybe that was the intention, but it left me cold. I did like him at other times, though, especially when toying with Polonius and R&G.
Maybe Branagh's acting lacked a little because he was so busy directing. The movie is beautiful; no complaints there. I generally appreciated the frequent cuts away to wordless scenes demonstrating whatever was being exposited at the moment, especially when following Fortinbras, whose significance and parallels to the developing main plot were very well illuminated. Fortinbras isn't really a character, more like an incarnation of the plot. He reflects whatever is happening and becomes whatever the story requires of him; now a hot-headed young firebrand defying his uncle, now a wise man fit to rule Denmark.
I had to smile at the Hamlet/Ophelia scenes, because I'd just recently been reading Harold Jenkins's commentary on how stupid he finds the idea that Hamlet had previously seduced Ophelia. I tend to agree with Jenkins -- the whole idea of Ophelia is that she is innocent, and if she let him seduce her it makes her one of the punished, not one of the victims -- but it's pretty difficult to even convey that interpretation on the stage. It's easier in a movie, of course, but it still isn't a very good idea.
I also noticed that Jenkins hates the idea of "Let be" being played as an answer to "to be or not to be", seeing it as nothing more than a segue to the next bit ("Well, anyway"). He might be right about the original intention, but when Branagh did play it as significant, I liked it. If it works, it works.
One choice I really didn't care for was having Hamlet's running commentary on the play be loud and obnoxious, directed as much to the rest of the audience as to Ophelia and the king and queen. It makes it look like he's trying to incite a general insurrection, which I really think is off the point. Hamlet is very personal, and about an inability to take direct action. Drawing the whole Danish court into what's going on at this point directs it much more outwardly than is appropriate, I think.
I also found myself thinking about the Gertrude's closet scene more than I had before, maybe because I'd never seen it played so well. What does it mean that she can't see the ghost? Is it her guilt that won't permit it, or just her fear/denial? (It's also possible to read that she does see the ghost but doesn't want to say so, though the movie doesn't take that view.)
Overall, the movie was enjoyable and thought-provoking, but not OMG FANTASTIC. Worth a look if you're interested in Shakespeare and interpretations thereof, but not a good first introduction to the play.
I also recently re-read Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead, and I've just started John Updike's Gertrude and Claudius, which I bought for one dolla. I should do a post about Hamletfic. Any recs? Can be published or in fandom.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-01-31 11:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-02 07:45 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-01 02:39 am (UTC)Kenneth Branaugh - well, he's an excellent comedian..... And yeah. Props to Cheston. I don't remember much from that movie, but Cheston and Rufus Sewell were fantabulous.
Now I almost want to see the Ethan Hawke one. I'm not generally an Ethan Hawke fan... But I'm not generally a fan of Hamlet (the character), either, so I can see how it would work out. Oh, it has Julia Stiles in it; that's why. XP
Come to think of it, I've also never seen the Mel Gibson one. Hmmmmm...
no subject
Date: 2006-02-02 07:47 am (UTC)He can do drama sometimes, though. Did you see Rabbit-Proof Fence?
no subject
Date: 2006-02-01 03:24 am (UTC)Good on them for trying to film all of it, I say. The length didn't bother me - I spread it out over several days as well, of course, but I also didn't mind the long waffling speeches between minor characters and things. (I guess maybe opera has given me increased resistance to large amounts of non-plot-advancing waffling? :P) But I can see how if you hadn't read the play just beforehand or hadn't read the play at all, you might get comatose'd pretty quickly. :|
I think I might agree with you that morose!Hamlet is more the way to go, and Branagh definitely does seem really self-conscious. (I liked him more...near the end, I think.) Laertes didn't really do anything for me either. I liked a lot of the minor characters, though, and it was cool how they had the constant ominous presence of Fortinbras. Didn't like Hamlet's boisterousness at the play scene either, iirc.
Overall, the movie was enjoyable and thought-provoking, but not OMG FANTASTIC
I agree! I do want to see more Hamlets though. I've only seen bits of the Mel Gibson one long ago. Hamletfic recs would also be cool.
Yay for themed fiction experiences!
no subject
Date: 2006-02-01 11:05 am (UTC)Campbell Scott! Campbell Scott! Seriously, you won't regret it.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-01 11:50 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-01 04:47 am (UTC)I wrote a review of the movie that my English professor at the time really liked. I remember it involving the phrase "Shut up, Branagh" repeated several times. (Re-reading it just now, I see that it also includes the phrase "It's the Hogwarts Express!" at one point. I have no idea what I was talking about there.)
I do remember really liking the way they handled Fortinbras, though.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-02 07:48 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-02 04:54 am (UTC)It must have made an impression because I was nodding along at everything you were saying. Having Hamlet seduce Ophelia in this movie basically showed just why it doesn't work at all. But it's still interesting.
It was also interesting that you brought up the Ethan Hawke version because I find myself comparing them too, I guess because they're such opposite extremes. I really liked the Ethan Hawke one too.
no subject
Date: 2006-02-09 05:30 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-02-09 08:34 am (UTC)