Whats in a Setting: Scenic Revelations of Hamlet- the Existentialist and the Action Hero

One of the primary visual ways that a director can weave rich layers of themes into his or her story is through the use of setting. Through close readings of three Hamlet adaptations, the setting becomes reflective of the differences in the character of Hamlet. We are not only confronted with a binary set of Hamlets, one that is the action hero and one that is introspectively existential in Franco Zeffirelli and Michael Almereydas films, but also a Hamlet which meshes these two traits into one in the Kenneth Branagh version. In Franco Zefferellis 1990 Hamlet, Mel Gibson plays a Hamlet that is all action and little talk. This version, shortened to just under two hours, cuts out much of the text of the actual play. Zefferelli also chooses to break up longer portions of text spoken one character into several different scenes. His Hamlet is shown to be a Hamlet of action. This Hamlet holds a sword in an attack position and pursues the ghost in a war-like stance. As Daniel Quigley observed this Hamlet does not ponder the best way to act in a situation; he simply reacts, usually in a physical manner (qtd. in Keyishian 77). He also yells out to his mother in anger with the line frailty thy name is woman creating a feeling of accusation instead of introspection (Keyishian 78). In another instance, this Hamlet is seen tearing out the pages of his book during the words, words, words scene- he is reacting, showing how completely engulfed he is in this state of doing, instead of merely being. Keyishian states, Gibsons Hamlet snarls; low-angle shots and vibrant close-ups make him dominate each moment on screen (78). Simply put, this is a physical Hamlet- he is fully man, revengeful and driven by the sword. Zefferelli underscores his characterization of Hamlet with scenery that is impregnated with reality. We are confronted with a substantial world of real physical presence, fleshed out by an

unusual number of extras resulting in us feeling that this throne rules over real subjects (Ebert). The battlements on the castle along with being surrounded by the sea bring this notion of action to the forefront- this is a castle ready to defend itself at any cost. This place is real, as Hamlet is real. The weight of this reality falls on us like the weight of the armor Hamlet and Laertes wear for the final fight scene seems to fall on their shoulders. Furthermore, Zefferelli removes all mention of Fortinbras from his film, making Gibson the sole revengeful son and therefore leaving out the only character that could be perceived as taking more action than Hamlet. Without this foil, we are left with merely one reading of this Hamlet, though the ending becomes more ambiguous. In contrast, Michael Almereydas Hamlet, brought to screen in the year 2000, presents an existential young man. This Hamlet, as played by Ethan Hawke, is not only introspective, but also moody and lacking in intense physical or emotional moments. As such, we are given a modern art student, fulfilling the clichd role of slacker who cannot come outside of himself enough to face the situation he is in. His moodiness drives him to despair and to the intent to out Claudius. His art form, through the use of film, investigates this notion of introspectiveness even farther as Hamlet becomes the director, the man behind the camera, constantly rewinding and fast-forwarding and never able to simply exist in the moment (qtd. in Khoury 124). The setting of Almereydas film explores these existential notions as we are given a kingdom within the walls of skyscraper-laden New York City. The feelings of insignificance and imprisonment are emphasized through the use of low angle shots that juxtapose the characters with tall buildings. We are also reminded of how passive Hawkes Hamlet is within the ironic setting of the Blockbuster aisle for the famous to be or not to be monologue. Hawke is thoughtfully considering whether or not to be while

glancing over films in the action aisle at Blockbuster, revealing that this Hamlet is incapable of being the action hero (Fedderson and Richardson 156). He is standing awkwardly contemplating whether to go forward toward the section with familiar film genre or to go back toward uncharted territories of action-packed movies (Khoury 124). This image of Hamlet and his setting further emphasizes his inability to be outside of himself. He cannot be in the present moment, he must either rewind or fast-forward as he does with his films. In 1996, Kenneth Branagh produced his impressively colossal Hamlet. This time, Kenneth Branagh directs and stars for a hefty four hour film that leaves little, if any, of the play to the imagination. This Hamlet is a mesh of the binary, combining introspect with action. We see that from a grieving son lurking in the shadows at the start, Branagh moves to an explosive man of action in the later scene, a knowing impersonator of madness and theatrically dynamic presence (Burnett 78). We see Branaghs careful inclusion of forever threatening Fortinbras, the all-action militant revengeful son, as a contrast to Hamlet, yet as the threat of Fortinbras grows, the less-introspective and more reactionary Hamlet becomes. They are seen, then, as two sides to the same revenge-driven coin, one working from without and the other within. Branaghs setting grants us much insight to the way he perceives Hamlet. By shooting in 70 mm film, he creates a visually stunning film which emphasizes an epic feel to the whole thing. He uses a cold, wintry Denmark for the outside- snowy lands and gray skies emphasize the stark barrenness and rough wilderness that is outside the palace. The inside of the palace, by contrast, is bright, open, elegant and opulent. These two settings are reflective of the two revengeful sons, the harsh Fortinbras and the more subtle and elegant Hamlet. Branagh uses many mirrors to emphasize this presentation of a court, which, as it contemplates its own self image, faces only an inevitable decline (Burnett 79). This becomes, then, a story of the corruption within.

Branaghs Hamlet delivers his famous to be or not to be monologue looking at his reflection in the mirror, further driving home this notion of looking within. This Hamlet is confronted with his inner person as he is attempting to combat the inner workings of the court. It is only when he is able to overcome his own inner battles that he is able to become revengeful in action instead of merely thoughts. Though he begins slowly, and never becomes quite the action hero as Mel Gibson portrays, Branaghs Hamlet fulfills his purpose to restore a balance to the throne by ridding the world of the evil residing within. As such, he also becomes a more balanced version of the Gibson Hamlet and Almereyda Hamlet. These three adaptations of Shakespeares Hamlet, explore different settings to further enlighten their audiences on the types of Hamlets they decide to portray. Whether we are seeing a Hamlet that reacts with powerful physical motions, a Hamlet that remains stuck outside of the action genre, or a combination of both, the directors choose to make us hyper-aware of these characteristics through their choice of the characters surroundings. The story becomes more enriching and engaging when we find similarities like this between two elements within films. The true power in a film lies in combinations like this. If a film can stand on its own as a text worthy of analysis, holding the promise of many layers waiting to be discovered, then it becomes a Shakespearean film at its finest.

Word Count: 1303

Works Cited

Burnett, Mark Thornton. The Very Cunning of the Scene: Kenneth Branaghs Hamlet. Literature Film Quarterly. 25.2 (1997): 78-82. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 4 May 2011. Fedderson, Kim and J. Michael Richardson. Hamlet 9/11: Sound, Noise, and Fury in Almereydas Hamlet. College Literature. 31.4 (2004): 150-170. JSTOR. Web. 4 May 2011. Keyishian, Harry. Shakespeare and movie genre: the case of Hamlet. Shakespeare on Film. Ed. Russell Jackson. England: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 72-84. Print. Khoury, Yvette K. To be or not to be in The Belly of the Whale; a Reading of Joseph Campbells Modern Hero Hypothesis in Hamlet on Film. Literature Film Quarterly. 34.2 (2006): 120-129. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 4 May 2011.