Performance Analysis of Shakespeare s The Tragedy of Hamlet, Prince of Denmark My pe rformance analysis is based on Shakespeare s The Tragedy of Hamlet,

Prince of Denmark . This production was direc ted by Franco Zeffirelli and starred Mel Gibson, Glenn Close, Alan Bates, and Paul Scofield. In this prod uction of Hamlet, the original old English is used. However, I noticed that any dialog that was too difficult to comprehend or too wordy was deleted from the scenes. Some of the scenes had also been altered. For example, In Act 2, Scene 1, the director has Polonius spy on Ophelia and Hamlet, and this is how he learns of Hamlet s str ange visit with his daughter and Hamlet s madness. In the original text of Act 2, scene 1, Ophelia informs Pol onius of Hamlet s visit and his apparent madness. I believe the director chose to have Polonius spy on them to obtain this information, because the audience would observe for themselves just how mad Hamlet appears. It was also probably done to save time so that the movie wouldn t drag. In Kenneth Branaugh s version the mov ie is contained on two tapes, and his version was a little too slow moving for my taste. The lines 207-0 213 in Act 2, scene2, where Poloni us has a lengthy monologue, also appears to have been cut from the script. In that same act the lines where Guildenstern and Rosencranz enter the scene have been moved to Act 3, Scene 1, a point directly after Hamlet s Mousetrap play. There were also several other modifications to the placement of scenes in this play, i ncluding Shakespeare s famous speech, To be or not to be [ ], which had been moved to Act 1, scene 2. I believe al l of these changes were made due to the advantageous nature of the film media. It was possible for the director to show several shots of different actors and events, shifting back and forth between scenes. This ga ve the effect of the scenes occurring simultaneously. Since these scenes appeared to have occurred at the s ame time in the movie, it probably made sense or seemed more effective to the director to move the scenes or acts around to what seemed the most logical point in the film. As a result of these modifications, I felt t his version of Hamlet was more fast-paced and engaging. It did not drag. I appreciated this production over th e other Hamlet films I have seen, because it was made more interesting through director s shifting camera technique . The setting and costumes of this play were also historically accurate for that time period. And the lightin g was well done -not too dark. As far as the actors go, Mel Gibson gave an energetic interpretation of the mela ncholy Hamlet; and Glenn Close was so intense and very believable as Gertrude, Hamlet s mother. The other actors also performed their parts very well. In summary, I enjoyed this performance more than Kenneth Branaugh s pro

duction, because I felt it was faster paced and more dynamic. I feel this effect was achieved through the director s technique of shifting the camera between the actors and scenes to give the impression that events wer e occurring simultaneously. I also feel Mel Gibson s energetic performance and Glenn Close s intense and realist ic performance added a dynamic quality, which I have not seen in any other production of this play. I realize this question has been written about much, but no one has seemed to me ntion the absense of the character Fortinbras. The film eliminates the first scene of Hamlet Act 1, which is when we see the ghost for the first time and learn that Denmark is arming itself for war. Rumor has i t that Young Fortinbras from Norway is raising an army to battle Denmark. Young Fortinbras' father died in a battle with Hamlet's father and lost a good chunk-o-land. Young Fortinbras is vowing to reclaim the land. In Act 1, scene 2, Claudius dispatches Votimand with a letter to Young Fortinbra s' uncle, the king of Norway (referred to as "Norway"). Because Norway is old and bed-ridden, he does not kno w about his nephews plans; he thinks Fortinbras is preparing for war against Poland instead. In Act 2, sce ne 2, Votimand returns with Norway's response: he has forbidden his nephew from warring against Denmark. For tinbras relents, and as a reward for his obedience, his uncle allows his to go to war with Poland. Norway asks Claudius for permission to allow Fortinbras' army to march safely through Denmark to get to Poland. I re alize the Norwegians could have easily sailed to Poland, but sailing with a great army is a dangerous gambl e, and Denmark is much closer and land a much safer means of traveling. Before Hamlet is sent to England, he passes by Fortinbras' army enroute to Polan d. He can't believe the Norwegians are going to waste men to fight for a worthless piece of ground. The n at the end, as Hamlet is about to die, since he is the king of Denmark for a brief moment, he voices h is vote for Fortinbras to be the new king. Fortinbras' army arrives at Elsinore, having won in Poland, app arently returning home. Fortinbras enters the chamber, sees Laertes, Claudius, Gertrude, and Hamlet dea d and asks what has happened. Horatio promises to tell him everything. Fortinbras then acknowledges that he ha s some claim to the throne (land) and orders Hamlet's body to be carried in soldier-fashion to the stage. I believe his part was cut from the film because it is not very necessary to und erstand the whole of the play. But in the play, the ghost of Hamlet's father appears bedecked in armor, as if r eady for battle, and Horatio says it must be a forboding sign about their preparation for war. Eliminate Fort inbras and you eliminate the war element. However, not having anyone to take up the kingship after everyone dies is more tragic, as the movie portrays the situation of things

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

kenneth brannag It's a while since I saw it, but here are some thoughts. Historic period: HAMLET was written about 1600, the late Renaissance and in Engl and, the last years of Quenn Elizabeth I's reign. Branagh set it in the 1880's, which in England was th e later years of Queen Victoria's reign. (Interesting: both queens, both long reigns, both periods of prosperity for England.) You could look up these periods in a history of England. The HAMLET story, thoug h, comes from a 12th Century Danish source which in turn was based on earlier traditions. Shakespeare altere d it a lot, and made it very un-medieval, except for the bit about England being a tributary of Denmark. From what I can make out so far, that was the case around the year 1000, certainly not later. Creative changes: well the obvious one here is the free interpretation of Hamlet and Ophelia's relationship. The fencing match: in 1600, swordplay was still basic training for war and surv ival but in 1880 guns were making it obsolete except as a sport. Branagh seems emphasise the sporting nature with the costumes and the fencing strip (the red carpet on which they're supposed to fight). The Douglas Fairbank s Jnr. style finale was pretty creative with its chandelier stunt. Also important: it is definitely not in the text that Fortinbras attacks Elsinore. On the contrary, he is coming to see "his Majesty" and "express [his] duty in his eye" (IV.vii.5-6) . At the end he's giving a "warLIKE volley" of gunshot "To the ambassadors of Engl and" (ie a military salute) not firing an actual volley of war on Denmark. Also, of course, because it's film, Branagh can show so much more than Shakespea re could have dreamed of on his stages. Eg. Claudius watching Hamlet in III.i, the drowned Ophelia, Ophelia in h er padded cell, the chase after "Hide fox and all after", the pre-text family shots and killing of Old Hamlet, e tc. All little touches which add so much to the basic text. Ghost: I though it interesting that the ghost of the beloved father grabbed his son by the throat and hurled him against a tree. Again, because it's film, Branagh can do a lot of the Hamlet-Gho st scene with only the ghost's voice rather than person as well, without putting too much of a burden on the H amlet actor. The earth-splitting stuff is thoroughly creative, too. Interesting that in the beginning Branagh ties the ghost (and therefore, I figur e, the person / memory of Old

Hamlet) to the statue, and then has Fortinbras' men smash the statue at the end , as though destroying Old Hamlet himself, and his ghost. It's so finite. I personally do not like the ghost. What loving, caring father would put his son through that?