Hamlet film Essay Final PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Hamlet film Essay Final PDF

Description

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 1

The Tragedy of Hamlet film by Peter Brook and Hamlet the film by Michael Almereyda displays very different as well as similar attributes to the original written play by the great William Shakespeare. Peter Brook’s film fails to match the original play in terms of quality of the ghost scene and Michael Almereyda version does a great job with the ghost scene. One of the more significant scenes in the great play by William Shakespeare is the ghost scene. Both films provide very unique qualities in their ghost scenes. Peter Brook’s ghost scene draws more differences than similarities compared to the actual play’s ghost scene. Michael Almereyda’s ghost scene draws unique style compared to Peter Brooks’s but also very different compared to the actual play. Both directors draw stylistic ghost scenes for the ages Peter Brook’s Hamlet is a very interesting. Visually it gives the audience something to speak about because the Hamlet in this film is a black man. In addition to Hamlet being black, Claudius is also played by a black man. The ghost is also played by the same black man who plays Claudius. While Hamlet is black his mom Gertrude is white. What makes this film so great is the diversity in the film. This film displays a level of acceptance of many cultures. The ghost scene in this film enhances these cultural differences. However the fact the actor who portrays claudius also portrays the ghost. The ghost scene in Brook’s film starts in the earlier part of the film. In this scene the ghost appears in all black and tells Hamlet about his tragic murder and tells him that his Uncle Claudius committed the crime. The quality of this scene is poor. First off there isn't an actual ghost. Whenever a viewer is watching Hamlet this should able to tell who

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 2

the ghost is. The fact that the ghost is played by the same actor who plays Claudius may confused the viewer. Viewers may consider claudius is a positive and negative character because he is the murderer and the person who was murdered. That confusion not only ruins the both characters stories but it ruins one of the most significant scenes in the play. Peter Brook uses shot reverse shot to display the relationship between Hamlet and the ghost. The shot reverse shot technique displays Hamlet's emotions quite well along with the ghost. Peter Brooks uses this film technique also to show the audience how Hamlet’s shift in emotions. In the early part of the film Hamlet seems very melancholy about his father's death. During the shot reverse shot sequence we can see how Hamlet is now on the verge of getting revenge on his uncle. The quality of this ghost scene was very poor. The lighting in this scene is very poor. When ever I think of the ghost scene in Hamlet the lighting should be focused on this ghost. In this ghost scene the lighting was focused on Hamlet. In the original play one would believe the lighting should be focused on the ghost because this is the scene in which the ghost is providing Hamlet with the power to to seek revenge. The main focus should be on the ghost not Hamlet as much. Alos the lighting in this scene is very dark. This scene is a scene of empowerment. The lighting is this scene was similar to a murder scene. If you want to perfect the ghost scene the lighting should be brighter to enhance the significance of the scene. Peter Brook also makes close shots very visible in his ghost scene. He gives us close ups specifically on Hamlet. The close ups represent Hamlet's emotional shift as

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 3

portrayed in the written play. One specific close up uses is a close up on Hamlet's face as he cries as soon as his ghost father fades away. Peter Brook uses his close up to display emotion once again. He does a great job of using shot techniques to display emotion. The ghost scene is a very significant scene, however the quality of the shots are poor. Although the Peter Brook does a great job of displaying emotion through his shots the shots are low quality shots. Overall Peter Brook’s ghost scene is a good ghost scene. The only issue with his ghost scene is that is doesn't quite match in terms of quality compared to the original play. Also the fact that the ghost is played by the same actor who plays Claudius is rather confusing. Michael Almereyda's Hamlet film is one of the best films to portray the original play. His ghost scene in particular is very impressive. This ghost scene occurs well into the film which is unusual. In this ghost scene we see Hamlet look dismantled because of the death of his father. The ghost walks into Hamlets room and reveals that he is killed by his brother. This ghost scene is successful because it is similar to what the play’s ghost scene would resemble. In this scene the ghost and Hamlet have the same amount of lighting. The lighting is significant because it shows the viewer who has the main focus. Also the lighting is bright enough to which you can see that the ghost has as much significance in this scene as Hamlet. Also, another reason why this ghost scene is effective is because the ghost touches Hamlet several times. In the written play the ghost and Hamlet seem to be very intimate because of the moment these two characters share. In Almereyda’s film Hamlet and the ghost are just as intimate as the play portrays the two characters.

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 4

Michael Almereyda uses particular shot techniques to display what both characters are experiencing in this epic ghost scene. Almereyda uses two shots throughout the ghost scene. The reason why he uses the two shots in this scene because he wants the audience to know that both characters together in a shot provides a better clarity of what is going on in the scene. If Almereyda had used shot reverse shot for this scene it wouldn't have been as effective as the two shot. The reason being is that the two shot gives the audience the impression that these characters are dealing with an intimate situation together. Shot reverse shot gives two individual stories because it goes back and forth. The two shot tells one story and includes two characters. Next, Almereyda uses the medium close up technique as well. He gives us a medium close up on the ghost. This medium close up is very powerful. The reason being is the ghost is telling his son Hamlet about his murder and how to respond to it. I would imagine the play being the same way because in order to understand the significance of the ghosts words you must give him a medium close up shot. The shot was so great that it also displays some of the emotion that the ghost had on his face as he was speaking to Hamlet. One last technique that Almereyda uses in this scene is the element of sound. We can only imagine the elements of sound in the ghost scene in the written play but the elements of sound portrayed in this film gives us an idea of how it would be. The tone in the ghost’s voice is very angry and revengeful. The reason why Almereyda makes the ghost voice this way is very obvious. The ghost’s intention in this scene is to tell his son about his brutal and sudden death. Almereyda uses the ghost voice to enhance the mood of the scene.

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 5

Both directors Almereyda and Brook films are both display good films that resemble the original Hamlet. Brook’s film is decent but his ghost scene wasn't the best quality. It lacked so key components that the written play provides. Almereyda’s a Hamlet does a better job with the ghost scene. It was very original and intimate and compares well to the original play. Although Almereyda’s Hamlet is very original so is Peter Brook’s version. Peter

Brooks has shifted the cultural dynamics of the historic play and portrayed Hamlet as a black man as opposed to a white man. Almereyda’s Hamlet differs from others in a huge way because of the lofty setting of New York City. Almereyda’s Hamlet provides unique setting and Brook’s version provides cultural uproar and controversy. New York City is known as the city of dreams and the center of the world. Hamlet is a play that originally takes place in the nation of Denmark. There are huge differences in these two settings. New York is more of a flashy explicit city with bright lights and big buildings. Denmark is not as glamorous as New York City however it gives us the european style of language that Shakespeare originally entails. In Almereyda’s film he provides the viewers with an urban setting because he wants to modernise the great play by William Shakespeare. This film was introduced to the world in the year 2000 the first year if a new millennium. During a new millennium there is a substantial difference in they way people spoke and behaved. Almereyda’s film was so brilliant because he was able to incorporate the same language and mannerisms that the original play uses into a modernize setting. This idea that Almereyda explores with the setting gives the viewers excellent way of connecting to the film if you are a person who lives in the

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 6

modern era. The film gives you a very modern feel and it provides a different way of connecting to a Shakespearean play. Brooks’s Hamlet provides a very original way of portraying the great Shakespearean play. Brook’s film is very intriguing because the actor who portrays Hamlet is a black man. Historically Hamlet is played by a man who is white or fairly light skinned. This Hamlet film breaks a huge barrier in the Shakespearean world. In the original play Hamlet was never portrayed to be a black man. Shakespeare’s intention was not to appeal to black people, but only white people. The reason being is because back in the 1500’s black people were enslaved by white people so blacks never exerted any influence on the world or art and literature. This is the reason why Brook’s portraying Hamlet as a black man is so controversial. In terms of cultural uproar, a black Hamlet changes the way viewers my view the great play. First off the Hamlet that appears in the Brook’s film has small dreadlocks. Dreadlocks is a hairstyle that is original for black people. I’m certain that the original play did not have a black Hamlet with dreadlocks in mind for the lead character. The original play probably pictured a white male with blonde hair and blue eyes to portray Hamlet. This adds to the uproar because appealing to black people was not shakespeare’s intention with this play, but this was maybe the intention of Peter Brook. While Brook’s play does create uproar from a white audience and creates controversy, that’s what makes this film so original. Overall, the film that portrayed the original play the best was probably be Almereyda’s version. The reasons being is it that it appeals to white people more and the overall quality of the film is greater than Brook’s version. Almereyada’s film first off

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 7

has a white man who portrays Hamlet. All of the character in the film fit the description of the parts that they portray because they are white. In terms of quality of the film the film has excellent camera work. The camera provides shots and angles that are very modern and clear. Also the lighting in the film is wonderful because it is bright for most of the movie. Bright lighting is crucial for a good film for the simple fact that bright lighting presents a very upbeat feel for the film. Bright lighting in addition to providing an upbeat feel for the movie stresses the significance of certain scenes in a picture. Overall Almereyda’s film is probably the better Hamlet film compared to Brook’s film. Brooks’s Hamlet film is a decent film but it doesn't measure up to the expectations of portraying the original play. First off as I mentioned before having a black man portraying Hamlet does not match the original play what so ever. Shakespeare plays were written to appeal to white people. Lastly the quality if the film was not great. First off the film was presented to the world in the year 2002. That is two years after the Almereyda version which was great quality so there is no excuse to not have the same or similar quality. The lighting in this film was very dark which is not effective for a film. The dark lighting does not help the film with portraying its significance. For example in the ghost scene in Brook’s film the lighting was very dark and banal. The epic ghost scene is one of the most crucial scenes in the play because it was the turning point for Hamlet. After the ghost scene Hamlet goes on his revenge streak which empowers his character. With dark lighting that diminishes the importance of the scene and makes it less effective. Brook’s film was not the worst Hamlet film ever made but the quality is poor and thus makes the film less effective than most.

Ray Norman English 305V Professor Yalkut 19th May 2017 8

In our final analysis of these two films, Almereyda’s film provides awesome comparison to the original play. The film also incorporates excellent setting dynamics by filming it in New York City. Brook’s film doesn't fit the ideal Hamlet standards that match the ideal play but it does in fact challenge the norm by having a black man portray Hamlet....