Film 1: I think the first film we viewed was overall the best representation of Hamlet. The characters, setting, lighting, and camera effects contributed to the success of the scene. The scene was very dark with limited lighting, this kept the ghost of Hamlet's father in the dark and harder to see. I think this element helped portray the ghost as a creepier figure. Setting wise, it was the most accurate as it was set in a dungeon in Elsinore castle. The scene opened with different views of the castle which help set it up. More of the castle is seen towards the end of the scene was Hamlet is going on a rant about the things his father reveals to him. In this version, Hamlet's reaction to everything that was going on was the most believable and was very compelling. When he repeatedly hits his sword against the stones on the roof after watching his mother through the window, it expresses how angry Hamlet really is with the news he now has to bear. The actor playing Hamlet expresses true disgust and rage towards his mother. Hamlet's reply to his father's actions and words proved that his father has a strong influence on him and that Hamlet's love, trust, and respect for his father is intense. Also, the scene ended well when Hamlet closed his eyes and the ghost exited before touching his face. This scene showed how strong the connection is between Hamlet and his father. The setting, along with the character's acting made the first film the most accurate, and the best in my opinion.
Film 2: Although the setting and elements of the second film differed from the first, it still brought a lot to the table. The music is the second film was a huge factor in setting the mood for the scene. The scene opens with loud music that crescendos as the scene progresses. The booming music compliments all the outrageous things that are taking place in the woods, which is where it is set. There are explosions of fire, rocks being thrown and moved around, and large gusts of wind all taking place as Hamlet runs through the forest demanding he see his father. In this version, Hamlet went looking for the ghost instead of being approached by him. He seemed angry when he was first requesting to see his father's ghost. When the ghost finally appeared, he had exceptionally blue eyes, a hood, and a voice that was so demonic and ghostly that is made him seem scary and intimidating. The director of this scene used these elements to emphasize that King Hamlet was talking to his son from the dead. As the ghost describes his death to Hamlet, the scene is cut to a flashback which reenacts the murder. This enables the audience to know what happened, even if they cannot understand the dialogue. I found this to be extremely helpful and smart. The flashback emphasized the importance and grief of the King's death. The ghost vanishes from Hamlet's sight without touching him. After the ghost is gone, Hamlet replies to everything that he has just encountered by giving a powerful speech where he focuses on getting revenge and avenging his father's death rather than grieving over it with immense sadness and anger.
Film 3: The last film we saw was obviously the most modern and had the setting that differed the most. The first 2 films had similar elements where this one was completely different. For example, instead of being the heir to the country of Denmark, Hamlet is the heir to a large company named Denmark. Both characters are dressed as modern men in every day life. Hamlet does not recognize his father's ghost at first. I found it funny that Hamlet let his father into the apartment he was in by opening the door. A part of the setting that contributed this version was the television that was on in the background. By showing chaos on the screen during their conversation, it is a perfect representation of what is happening. This was the only version where ghost actually touched Hamlet. He hugged him before exiting the scene. Hamlet's reaction to everything that he had just experienced was the most controlled. While tearing up, he expressed some of his reactions to what his father had told him, including some feelings towards his mother's and uncle's actions.
Overall this was really good. If someone didn't see these parts of the films, or read them in the book, they could easily get a clear image as to how they occurred while understanding them completely. The descriptions were full of detail and compared thoroughly throughout the post. I liked how the camera angles, effects and sounds were acknowledged for adding to and molding the scenes. While being incredibly comprehensible, each paragraph summarized the three versions greatly as well. There were little word errors and one sentence construction error in the first paragraph.
ReplyDeleteNora this was very well written. The descriptions were very detailed and easy to understand. You also compared the three different films very well and made sure you mentioned only the important stuff. Good job for your first blog!
ReplyDeleteNora, great job. You organize your analyses clearly and use evidence to support your analysis. I especially agree with your point about how Branagh conveys Hamlet's grief. Well done!
ReplyDelete