SunnyHello Nice effects though.

SoTrumpBelieve Must See Movie...

StyleSk8r At first rather annoying in its heavy emphasis on reenactments, this movie ultimately proves fascinating, simply because the complicated, highly dramatic tale it tells still almost defies belief.

Guillelmina The film's masterful storytelling did its job. The message was clear. No need to overdo.

Fletcher Conner This is the best received adaptation of the famous Shakespeare play, and it certainly has its merits. Olivier gives an excellent performance as Hamlet as does Jean Simmons as Ophelia. Peter Cushing also excels as the scene-stealing Osric, albeit in very small doses. That being said, it still progresses at a slow pace, particularly early. That is understandable given the challenge of adapting a four hour play into a 2.5 hour film and determining what cuts to make and where.The direction, also by Olivier, has room for improvement. While the shots are generally well constructed, many of the interior scenes are poorly lit, especially notable given how critical lighting is to a black and white production. The interplay between Hamlet and the Queen is very well done, playing aggressively on the oedipal aspects of their relationship.

SnoopyStyle Sir Laurence Olivier takes a stab at the brooding Danish prince in William Shakespeare's Hamlet. He's really too old to play the prince realistically. At most, he looks like the same age as his mother Gertrude. Even that is a great feat since Eileen Herlie is in actual life 11 years younger than Olivier. Olivier makes his version concentrate more on Hamlet's self doubt. "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind." He also plays up the Oedipus complex aspect of Hamlet. This may not be the definitive theatrical version of Hamlet. It is an interesting one made by a master. He has obviously thought it through and made the necessary cuts in his own ways. Olivier is obviously comfortable with the material. It is classically made with enough cinematic flourishes to keep it interesting.

GusF Of the three Shakespearean plays adapted for the screen by Laurence Olivier, this is the one with which I am the most familiar. It's been quite some time since I've read it or seen it performed but I would guess that Olivier cut a good third, if not more, of the play for this film version. Most significantly, he entirely cut out the major characters of Rosencrantz, Guildenstern and Fortinbras as well as quite a few minor ones. In spite of this, however, the story retains its general thrust - if not all the specifics - and the film is still magnificent as Olivier once again utterly excels as both an actor and a director. This was the first British or non-American film to win the Best Picture Actor and Olivier became the first actor to win the Best Actor Oscar for a film that he directed himself. The only other person to accomplish this feat was Roberto Benigni in "La vita è bella" 49 years later. Although Olivier was nominated for twelve Oscars (nine for Best Actor, one for Best Supporting Actor and two for Best Picture), this film was the only one for which he won any Academy Award.As the melancholy Dane, Olivier is absolutely wonderful. While the cuts to "Henry V" meant that the title character was shown in a very positive light, he did not hesitate - as either actor or director - here to emphasise his character's less desirable qualities such as his egotistical behaviour and his utter callousness when it comes to unintentionally killing Polonius. And yet Olivier's performance also draws attention to the character's psychological vulnerability after the murder of his father, thus eliciting sympathy. His lust for revenge has cut him off from his emotions, something which is also seen in his brutal rejection of Ophelia. Olivier also plays the ghost of Hamlet's father in the film and does a fantastic job in that role too.Speaking of Ophelia, the 18-year-old Jean Simmons is excellent, playing the role with a remarkable level of subtlety for someone of her age and comparatively limited acting experience. In spite of playing Hamlet's mother Gertrude, Eileen Herlie was almost eleven years younger than Olivier. While she unsurprisingly looks much younger than him, her very strong performance and great voice meant that I forgot this rather odd age gap existed almost as soon as she opened her mouth. Felix Aylmer, who played the Archbishop of Canterbury in "Henry V", has a far larger role in this film as Polonius and was certainly up to the task. He's just fantastic. Basil Sydney isn't as strong as I would have liked as Claudius but he is still very good. However, I don't think that there is anyone in the film who gives a bad performance. Olivier had such a great eye for casting that it's a shame that he directed a mere five films. I wish that an artist - not usually a word that I use when referring to actors - of his calibre had been more prolific behind the camera. Aside from those actors that I have already mentioned, I would like to single out Esmond Knight (who unfortunately has a far smaller role than in "Henry V"), John Laurie, Terence Morgan, Anthony Quayle and Stanley Holloway. In his first British film, Peter Cushing - one of my favourite actors who, like Olivier, played Van Helsing years later - is good in the small supporting role of the foppish Osric but his performance isn't on the same level as most of his later ones. I have to say that I have never paid so much attention to the extras in a film as in this one! This is because three actors who became very well known in later years made uncredited appearances in the film: Christopher Lee, Desmond Llewelyn and Patrick Macnee. In only his third film, Lee makes two "blink and you'll miss them" appearances just before the duel between Hamlet and Laertes. In the first instance, he appears behind his future best friend and frequent on screen nemesis Peter Cushing in what was their first of 24 films together. Llewelyn was far easier to spot as he appears quite prominently in the background of several scenes. He actually has slightly more screen time than the credited Patrick Troughton, who portrays the small but pivotal role of the Player King but doesn't have any lines. While I was on a constant lookout for Lee and Macnee (the film's only two surviving cast members), I didn't manage to spot the future John Steed. Acting aside, the film looks fantastic. In contrast to the vibrant Technicolor of "Henry V", the film was shot in black and white. Apparently, this was done more for financial than artistic reasons but the black and white cinematography adds to the sense of foreboding. The use of deep focus - probably inspired by "Citizen Kane" - is superlative. As with Orson Welles, Olivier demonstrated that he was a master of not one but two crafts in a single film. Incidentally, Olivier had hoped to make "Macbeth" after "Henry V" but the fact that Welles was working on his own version put paid to that idea. "Macbeth" has always been my favourite Shakespearean play so the fact that Olivier never got to make his version of it for the big screen is hugely disappointing, particularly since it was considered one of his best roles - and that's really saying something - and it would have starred his then wife Vivien Leigh as Lady Macbeth.Overall, the film is a masterpiece in spite of the fact that it cuts significant portions of the play. One of my Top 30 to 35 films of all time.

sme_no_densetsu Laurence Olivier's "Hamlet" is an adaptation of William Shakespeare's legendary play of the same name. It won the Best Picture Oscar for 1948, becoming the first foreign production to do so.Olivier handled both the title role and the film's directorial duties. His acting performance garnered an Oscar while his direction was rewarded with a nomination. Sure, he might have been a bit old for the role of Hamlet but it's difficult to complain given the strength of his performance.In addition to Olivier, the cast was well-stocked with talented individuals. Jean Simmons (then only 18 years old) was the only other actor to secure an Oscar nomination but Felix Aylmer's entertaining Polonius deserves singling out as well.Olivier's direction wasn't quite on the level of his acting but it's not far off. The film is full of interesting camera movement and visual trickery. The deep focus photography of Desmond Dickinson certainly contributes to the unique visual style while the film's Oscars for its set design and costumes didn't hurt, either. The moody, Oscar-nominated score by William Walton deserves praise as well.Purists may take issue with the film's omissions made for the sake of brevity but I found that even reduced to 155 minutes the story is already vast enough. On its own terms, Olivier's "Hamlet" is a satisfying film and a deserving Best Picture Oscar winner.