KnotMissPriceless Why so much hype?

ThiefHott Too much of everything

Lovesusti The Worst Film Ever

Afouotos Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

sharky_55 RSC's Hamlet takes advantage of its medium in stepping off the stage and into the screen. Early on, in Claudius' first address of the court (or in this low budget case, no more than a dozen in the room), the camera looks pointedly at Hamlet, as if to speak to him, before an about turn has the crown prince and heir rebuffed for the lesser Laertes. Later, when Hamlet and Laertes are fighting over Ophelia's grave, Patrick Stewart in some fleeting shots has a sly smirk, as if he's egging on the two madmen to finish each other off and leave the throne for himself. Hamlet, in that play within a play scene, films the reaction of Claudius with a grainy hand-held camera. And maybe most telling of all, before one soliloquy, we have a mad Hamlet confront the surveillance camera, rip it off, and resume without any disturbance. These are the hints of subtext that aren't readily leaping of the page of Shakespeare's play, and this adaptation does well to visualise some of them. The black and white POV of the camera is also used regularly throughout in a voyeuristic fashion (which I thought was sometimes needless), and in the first appearance of the ghost. Here he materialises terrifyingly in colour, and then is absent in the camera vision. A nice touch.Maybe all the budget was allocated to Stewart and Tennant, because the production design certainly is limited, although not in the way a stage is. The court proceedings all take place in the one room and its few offshoots, but to be fair, it is a magnificent set, lavish marble beams of black and white, chandeliers and ornate mirrors, exquisite furniture. The reflective sheen of the black floor is reminiscent of a stage and it works. It's when we step outside and into natural light that it falters; the grave scene is garishly lit and seems to be from a different era altogether. The costuming is likewise; most of it is stylised like modern British royalty would dress, but then you have Tennant going mad and this is represented by this terrible red T-shirt and being barefoot in jeans. It was very jarring and far opposite to the beautiful costumes of the players. The script takes a few areas of the original out altogether, which I thought was economical in some instances and in others made the scene rather shallow. More distracting is the way that some events will jump ahead of others in the chronology. The biggest mistake was rushing the final act, which allows for even less contemplation when the arrival of Fortinbras is not even in the film, which sacrifices the political context and those final solemn words from him and Horatio. In terms of acting, the cast is mostly satisfying. Tennant can tend to over act but in this case it is perfectly suitable. He lends some sort of gravitas to the soliloquies and his over the top madness is believable, if not a little slapstick at times (the recorder). During his acts of insolence and aggression to those that plot against him, he shines. Downie (Gertrude) and Gale (Ophelia) play their parts to perfection as they slowly slip away into grief and madness respectively when viewing Hamlet. As for the veteran in Stewart, he is great as the diplomatic and imposing royalty figure, while showing remorse and guilt in that praying scene. It's a more mature and solemn performance than his Claudius of 1980, and is probably enough to make up for that silly little shrug before he commits suicide, which instantly took me out of the scene and turned the tragedy into a comedy for a sparse second. It's not as disappointing as the gravedigger, which turned a classic character with wit and humour into some British sitcom fill-in, and then takes the substance of "Alas, poor Yorick" and wastes it. Overall, a good Hamlet, but not a great one. I wish they didn't feel the need to resort to a shattered mirror every single time a character was monologuing or contemplating.

arlene bradley The best production of HAMLET, That I have seen. The sets were amazing, the acting especially by David Tennant and Sir Patrick Stewart was brilliant. David Tennant's performance was nothing less than extraordinary, and if you don't believe me, then believe Sir Patrick Stewart who stated in interviews that David was the finest and most talented young actor in England today. David brings the tortured soul of Hamlet to life. He runs the gambit of emotions from deep depression over his father's death to anger over the too quick marriage of his mother to his uncle - to revenge for his fathers murder by his uncle, to self pity and self doubt. David was very capable of the pretense of madness by Hamlet in front of the king, queen, and court while he plots his revenge.Other reviewers have not understood the use of the surveillance cameras, but this is to show how everyone was always under watch by the King or his men, using the cameras or hidden rooms to spy on all. At one point Tennant breaks a camera and states "Now I am alone". Plus the use of camera's and modern clothing, and the use of a helicopter by the Norwegian army against Poland give the audience of today a better understanding of Shakespeare and grounding in today's society. And what's the difference of what costume is worn as long as those beautiful words of the Bard are used, they are the important thing.I thought the supporting actors who played Laretes, Horatio, and Gertrude were great, but I thought the actors who portrayed Ophelia and Polonius were a little too one dimensional.Anyone thinking of buying this movie, will more that get their money's worth. And it's a great way to introduce your children to the beautiful prose of Shakespeare.

OutsideHollywoodLand For American audiences who love Shakespeare (an oxymoron at best!) and Harry Potter, the casting of David Tennant as Hamlet is an intriguing one. Tennant, who is wildly popular in the UK in the Doctor Who series, is also known to fans across the Isles as Barty Crouch Jr. from Harry Potter fantasy franchise.Pairing David Tennant with Patrick Stewart, who is a double foil as both the slain ghost king father and Hamlet's uncle Claudius is masterful casting in this version from the Royal Shakespearean Company. As a result, Stewart was nominated for an Emmy as Best Supporting Actor.Besides this quirky casting choice, director Gregory Doran propels this oft-told tale through the tone and inflection that each character brings to the all too familiar silted language of the Bard. One could easily close their eyes and simply bask in the joy of the rise and fall of phrases and words spun into this delightful audio experience.Yet another pleasure is watching Sir Patrick Stewart literally play against himself - mano y mano - as Hamlet's mournful ethereal specter and the greedy, selfish brother. Pennie Downie, Mariah Gale, and Oliver Ford Davies provide an excellent counter-point to the brash and bold Tennant/Steward duo.This is a fine minimalist production that should be added to any Hamlet FANatic's collection.

LeonardOsborneKael I'm all for new approaches to Hamlet - I truly LOVED Branagh's portrayal of Hamlet as "everyman". And I'd love to see a modern-day version that really works! (Sorry - not Ethan Hawke's). Mel Gibson's Hamlet was nicely filmed and might have gotten at least a B+ if not for his annoying habit of wagging his head from side to side on every line. Sadly, in the Royal Shakespeare Company's version, almost everything that can be done to ruin the play has been incorporated. Hamlet speaks the lines intended to be spoken introspectively to himself - to the camera! And likewise with the Sililoquoy - during which he keeps glancing just off-camera - as if looking at a cue card! And just whose idea was it to play Hamlet as a cross between Pee Wee Herman and Monty Python's "Upper Class Twit Of The Year" anyway? Hamlet comes off as an absolute jerk throughout - first as a goofy 12 year-old figuratively giving the finger to all the adults - later, as a vicious monster out for blood. Although it is clearly part of Mr. Shakespeare's intention that Hamlet be seen by the other characters in the play as very likely addled, I think it unwise to present him as definitely so to the audience. There's a little thing called "audience identification" at stake. The only people I can think of who might possibly identify with this asinine character would be Generation "Z"! Why not just play him as a good kid gone "Goth"? That would be fun! And why not write your own modern day script if you are going to ignore the poetry? This is truly a Hamlet for post-MTV generations - everyone runs or hustles almost ALL the time. Most of the actors rush through the dialogue, apparently to get to the action, with abject disregard for The Bard's poetic genius. Notable exceptions are Oliver Ford Davies (Polonius), Patrick Stewart (Claudius), and Mariah Gales (Ophelia), whose innate sensibilities for great language apparently immunize them from this all-pervasive plague. Every moment and every line of Davies' Polonius is superb - masterful. Stewart's Claudius is excellent, though oddly played as remarkably sympathetic, with measured civility and visceral remorse. In fact, though probably unintentional, it's far more likely that the audience identifies with him as protagonist as opposed to the obnoxious and self-absorbed Hamlet! Inexplicably, this rendition of Hamlet starts off pretty much as a filmed play, with mostly wide-angle master shots - then, somewhere around the midpoint, suddenly and joltingly discovers cinematography - with closeups, high angles, and stark lighting. The sets and wardrobe are a mish-mash of past, present, and future - oddly enough, more like a Doctor Who environment than anything else! The orange t-shirt with the musculature on the front is particularly witless. Sure, slash a few lines out of that damn Sililoquoy and play it squirrel-eyed and flatter than a dental hygiene film. Or is that actually "tongue-in-cheek"??? Hey, I know - let's give Gertrude a cigarette - why not! And, what do you know, Hamlet is recording a performance with a 1940s home movie camera. Yuk, yuk! Ugh. Not witty; not funny; not cute - just ... WHY? Even the blocking is distracting and forced. Your average television commercial is far more fluidly and intelligently blocked. "Critically acclaimed", huh? If he were still around, William Shakespeare would be suing to get his name off this monstrosity. Sorry, but for the benefit of posterity, all copies of this production should be destroyed.