Branagh's Hamlet Comparative Essay

To begin, many parts of Kenneth Branagh’s depiction of Hamlet are effective, as they use cinematic elements to illustrate the depth of the play. First, Branagh’s version uses music throughout the scenes to emphasize emotions and conflict. During scene one, at the battlements of Elsinore Castle, the director incorporates trumpets and bells to signify the royal aspect of the setting, but then transitions into softer, more haunting music, creating an ominous atmosphere. Furthermore, the music is especially effective during transitions between scenes. When Hamlet discovers Horatio and Marcellus have seen the ghost, it produces suspense, as he predicts “foul deeds will rise” (1.2.256). This emphasizes the disorder caused by King Hamlet’s ghost roaming Elsinore, and

     Many of Shakespeare's works have been transposed from stage to screen, none so more than Hamlet. Two of the most unique film appropriations of the play are to be found in Rodney Bennett's 1980 film and Kenneth Branagh's 1996 blockbuster. The two films share many parallels between them in both interpretation and method, however they also have marked differences in their respective approaches to the text.

Kenneth Branagh’s interpretation of Hamlet emphasized different importance's of the play. His version differs from that of Zeffirelli’s because; he makes use of the entire text from Shakespeare’s original work. Branagh also does not hold the time period authentic. Although his version of the play was not altered as much as Zeffirelli’s, he is still able to hold the attention of modern critics and viewers. However, by transfiguring the play into a Victorian background, Branagh’s film completely alters the mindset and feel of a true Shakespearean play.

Directors Laurence Olivier, Franco Zeffirelli, and Kenneth Branagh all took on the role to create their own film versions of Hamlet. William Shakespeare’s play of Hamlet is interpreted and adapted in various ways, thus all three versions show several similarities and differences between the characters. For example, the portrayal of Hamlet in all three films displays resemblance through their representation of Hamlet’s eccentric behaviour. As portrayed in the original play, the Hamlets display signs of depression and suicidal tendencies. This can be seen through their somber and self-loathing soliloquies, such that they all contemplate suicide during their “to be or not to be” soliloquies, but are too much of a coward to do so. In addition,

Tony Robbins said, “To effectively communicate, we must realize that we are all different in the way we perceive the world and use this understanding as a guide to our communication with others”. Shakespeare’s writing has had many different ways of being presented because people perceive it in different ways. Whether it is a literal representation or a spin, directors like to show viewers the way they perceive the text. In the movie version of Hamlet the director, Kenneth Branagh, wanted the viewers to find Shakespeare interesting and full of action and drama. Kenneth chose the right direction to go in to keep the audience’s attention but it

Hamlet, a tragedy by William Shakespeare shows a lot of adaptations to movies. Hamlet by Mel Gibson (1990) and Kenneth Branagh (1996) interpret and portray the play by Shakespeare in different ways. The two film versions of Act IV of Hamlet have many differences and similarities. Kenneth Branagh’s version of Hamlet is seen covering most of the original text of Shakespeare’s play of Hamlet unlike the Mel Gibson version which omits many scenes and dialogues. The film version of Hamlet featuring Kenneth Branagh is a more successful production of Shakespeare’s play of Act IV according to its setting, editing choices and character portrayal.

Shakespeare’s Hamlet is a work of immense depth in character development, most notably the personal, moral and psychological battles

Over the course of the past fifty years there have been many cinematic productions of Shakespeare’s Hamlet, some of which remain true to the text while others take greater liberties with the original format. Director Kenneth Branagh’s 1996 production of Hamlet was true to Shakespeare’s work in that the film’s dialogue was delivered word or word as it is presented in the text. In contrast, Franco Zeffirelli conducted his 1990 production of Hamlet in a much more liberal direction in which lines, scenes and characters were omitted from the film. I argue that from the perspective of an individual with moderate knowledge in Shakespearian literature, that the best film versions of Hamlet are those that take the most liberties from the text. I

Many directors choose to make many different decisions when producing their version of Hamlet. Every actor portrays the character Hamlet in several ways making each version almost a new story. Mel Gibson's 1990 version and the 2009 David Tennant films are very different in style, scene omissions and several other aspects.

In the Mousetrap scene of Shakespeare’s “Hamlet,” Hamlet devises an elaborate scheme involving a play to determine whether King Claudius is guilty of killing his father. In the production of “Hamlet” in which Hamlet is portrayed by actor David Tennant, the plot is developed rather differently than one would imagine by simply reading the play. The acting company’s interpretation, along with the acting choices, compose an excellent rendition of the play.

Hamlet is a suspenseful play that introduces the topic of tragedy. Throughout the play, Hamlet displays anger, uncertainty, and obsession with death. Although Hamlet is unaware of it, these emotions cause the mishaps that occur throughout the play. These emotions combined with his unawareness are the leading basis for the tragic hero’s flaws. These flaws lead Hamlet not to be a bad man, but a regular form of imperfection that comes along with being human.

     Of all the characters in the play, Hamlet by William Shakespeare, the character of Hamlet is without a doubt the most complex. His emotions are never stable, his feelings are constantly changing, and his behavior is confusing and inconsistent. Hamlet is described as "a half a dozen characters rolled into one" (Shaw 344) and with as many adjectives in one sentence as "cruel, angry, tender, depressed, clownish, manic, and filled with loathing for women, humanity, life, and himself" (Epstein 329). When put into perspective, however, perhaps this harsh description of Hamlet is justified. With all he has had to deal with (apparitions, deaths, deceit, and interference in his personal life,) it would be very

The purpose of this report is to compare and contrast two movies made about Hamlet. I will present and discuss different aspects of the version directed by Kenneth Branagh to that of Franco Zefirelli. During this paper you will be presented with my opinions in reference to determining which version of Hamlet best reflects the original text by Shakespeare. I will end this paper with my belief and explanation of which movie is true to the original play.

Hamlet, a tragedy by William Shakespeare shows a lot of adaptations to movies. Hamlet by Mel Gibson (1990) and Kenneth Branagh (1996) interpret and portray the play by Shakespeare in different ways. The two film versions of Mel Gibson and Kenneth Branagh of Act IV of Hamlet have many differences and similarities. Kenneth Branagh version of Hamlet is seen covering most of the original text of Shakespeare’s play of Hamlet unlike the Mel Gibson version which omits many scenes and dialogues. The film version of Hamlet featuring Kenneth Branagh is a more successful production of Shakespeare’s play according to the setting and time period, cast and editing.

The character of Hamlet is found to be most complex and perplex for the critics to be on one line of judgment or theory. Hamlet is more like a philosopher and scholar, too much serious in talks and thoughts and sometimes having a good touch of humor as well. He is best in judging other characters’ psyche and mentality and purposes behind their meetings with Hamlet and he is kind to the kind and cruel to the cruel and diplomat to the diplomat. Thus, one cannot deny the words of Schucking that, “Hamlet appears . . . . . . . a man of great talents, almost a genius whose imagination, extreme sensitiveness, imitative gifts and aesthetic interests are those of an artist, but are combined with a great thirst for knowledge and a prediction for the establishment of general truths. He has, furthermore, the love of all that is genuine, an inner eye for what is shown or exaggerated, and a deep hatred for hypocrisy; his subtlety in