Hamlet Prince Of Denmark Analysis
3 December 2014
Hollywood’s Interpretation of a Classic.
Hamlet Prince of Denmark is one of the few plays that writer William Shakespeare sold. It is a timeless classic that was written in the seventeenth century that has been remade over and over again throughout centuries with numerous directors’ personal touch on each one. No current living writer or director has ever seen the original Hamlet Prince of Denmark Shakespeare play. A book and a movie are never the same and since that is the case, Shakespeare has left Hollywood with so much play room to interpret this classic drama. A perfect example of freedom of is imagination is in both the Kenneth Branagh and Franco Zeffirelli’s versions of Hamlet …show more content…
The Hamlet in Branagh’s version seems to be too old to be playing any college kid. He looks older than his mother Queen Gertrude, despite the amount of make-up he is wearing to try and make him look younger. His hair is dyed and people didn’t dye their hair during that time period. His clothes are too modern for the time Hamlet is set in, he has buttons on his shirt and that had not been invented in those times. He just does not seem to fit the part. The Queen is very homely looking; and in my opinion no way does she represent royalty. Her hair is a mess and her attire is not that of a Queen. The ghost in Branagh’s version to me was on point. He seemed very powerful as a King would. He looked huge as the perception of a ghost King should. In Zeffirelli’s version Hamlet is believable and fitting for the part, and he did not have to wear much make up to obtain a youthful look. The age that Hamlet is supposed to be is more believable in looks. His attire is appropriate as well; his shirt that is tie front instead of buttons, and he wore a large gold chain representing his status. The Queen looked old enough to be Hamlet’s mother and she was put together very well. She had on a sleek black dress and a gold chain; she looked the part of royalty. The ghost in Zeffirelli’s version was very small and not King like at all. His appearance was not as powerful as the ghost in Branagh’s version. …show more content…
It is appears as if Branagh was going for a more bright version of Hamlet, and Zeffirelli was more dark. The perception I have is as if their casts reflected their setting choices. Branagh’s acting was very robust and annoying at the same time. As he did stick one hundred percent to the script, he spoke really fast, almost as if he had just memorized his script and was regurgitating words on queue. He also spits a lot, but I guess that would come with rushing words out. His movements were very fast and abrupt. The way he handles his mother in Act III and Scene IV was as if he was the parent and she was the child. Queen Gertrude seemed to act the way she looked in the move, weak and homely. She in no way stands up for herself as a Queen or as a mother. It almost appears as if she is scared of him and cowers as he is scolding her. Polonius was very comical in Branagh’s version, as his last line “O, I am slain!” (3. 4. 25) while his eyes are left wide open, almost as if he knew he was going to die and he wanted to leave on a not so serious note. The Hamlet in Zeffirelli’s version was much darker in nature. Although he didn’t stick to the scrip verbatim as Branagh’s did; he spoke at a normal pace making it easier to understand what he was saying. He moved at a normal pace not as if he was rushing to get all his words out at once, and there was no spit projecting out of his mouth with every sentence. Although he did let out