|
Post by moreno on Feb 7, 2014 3:41:27 GMT
Hi everyone!
I hope all of you are enjoying the snow! As instructed by Mr. Parris, please respond below to the three videos posted on Edline. Stay safe and have a great long (!!!!!!!!) weekend!
|
|
|
Post by rubyking on Feb 7, 2014 4:11:39 GMT
Hmmmmm. I didn't particularly favor either adaptation over the other. In general, I have really enjoyed Branagh's interpretation of Hamlet himself, but in many parts of this soliloquy, his speech almost felt too steady.And the moment in which he realizes his ways didn't seem that natural either (same goes for Tennant) But that transition can't be easy. I will say that Branagh did an excellent job appearing like he was talking to the furniture (this was delightfully twisted for me)and his delivery in his decision to put on a play was REALLY incredible in my opinion-- him looking down on the little player king in the little player theatre suggested this really controlled yet manipulative air about Hamlet (I'm just going to put it out there that I also really like Branagh's voice and inflection). Tennant's interpretation did seem a little more honest in pace, but for some reason the whole thing was more "meh" in my eyes. His ending lines were very different in tone than Branagh's, but it seemed forced. In general I have trouble picturing Tennant as a true Hamlet, but it would help to see more. (Although the part where he walks to the camera and poses "Am I a coward?" actually was spine-shivering worthy)
|
|
|
Post by moreno on Feb 7, 2014 4:12:42 GMT
Hamlet 1996 24 II ii
Of the scenes we have watched so far from this adaptation, I like this one best. Compared to the others, it is portrayed more similarly to what I imagined in my head. The room was as I envisioned it, and I was glad to see that there were no bright colors used in this scene. Although I liked the setting, two things about this adaptation still bother me. First, I struggle to see Hamlet through Kenneth Branagh. His age and blonde hair are nothing like what I see in my head and I find this distracting. Secondly, I felt like many of the lines were forced and unnatural. The entire text translates well on paper but does not come to life as well as it does in the anthology. This scene felt more stage theatre-y than movie.
Hamlet: David Tennant…
Woah. This was very different from the other two versions we have watched.
1. I’m assuming this is a more modern interpretation because what the heck is “Hamlet” wearing? 2. The actor seems too old for the role, although they styled him to look younger. It doesn’t work for me. 3. I love the setting from this adaptation. The room works well with the context of the scene, and it is large but not distracting. 4. Why does Hamlet keep staring down the camera? It makes me feel like im there with him, which is cool. At the same time, it creeps me out a little. 5. What’s on his shirt? 6. Don’t knock over a chair 7. Oh the shirt has abs on it 8. This music at the end is cheesy 9. I liked the room the best but everything else was weird to me and very unexpected.
|
|
|
Post by Lauren on Feb 7, 2014 19:30:31 GMT
I loved the modern twist on the play, while still keeping it classic castle style. His acting seemed very realistic for what I'd picked of Hamlet. Tennant's age and look are almost exactly what I had pictured in my mind (although a little younger, but actors always play younger characters). I agree with Morgan the "Am I a coward?" line was powerful, but I didn't understand why they suddenly broke the 4th wall when earlier Hamlet was freaked out by the idea of a camera... When Hamlet talked about his plan for the play was so good! He looked completely ludicrous which I think is really important considering how silly his plan is. The deep breathing distracts me, along with his age and blonde hair (although I realize people from Denmark probably should be blonde). When he slammed himself into the window I thought that took it a little too far and he was too crazy too early. I would have rather seen him more excited about his play plan and reach the peak of his insanity there instead of at the name calling. Between these two scene I preferred the David Tennant version by far. So I went and found the ghost scene from that production. Here's the link www.youtube.com/watch?v=dBznOZu7FQo I'd encourage you to watch it, I find it to be a mix of the two scenes we watched before. Happy Snow day!
|
|
|
Post by kevinle on Feb 8, 2014 0:31:48 GMT
Branagh's version of the soliloquy was awkward to watch. The speech in the beginning was too soft and slow-paced, and it was too fast and steady for the rest of the time. The words sound like they are being spoken more from memorization and less from spontaneity and insanity. Branagh's actions did not always seem realistic either. For example, at 2:00, his voice grows to a yell and he casually walks to the window, swings his fist like a hammer and slowing it down before it actually hits the window (to avoid breaking it??)... It would be a powerful performance if Branagh gave the soliloquy on a stage live, but it is not suited to a movie screen.
I enjoyed Tennant's version more, because the speech, the pacing, the inflection, the punctuation was all more realistic. The speech did not sound memorized; it sounded genuine and insane, fitting Hamlet's state of mind very well.
|
|
|
Post by stever on Feb 8, 2014 0:52:18 GMT
I enjoyed Branagh's interpretation of the soliloquy. When I initially watched the ghost scene, I was too distracted by the overdramatic directing choices to notice what a good Shakespearian actor he is. Branagh is definitely a very experienced Shakespearian actor with a very strong hold on the language. I love how he plays with alliteration (especially on the line "Hecuba to him or he to Hecuba.") The way he uses the language really brings out the beauty in it while also helping to express his frustration and insanity. While I loved his performance, I still cannot get over the feeling that he was miscast. He is, in my eyes, too old for Hamlet, and because of this some of the angst he conveys seems inappropriate for his age.
I much preferred the David Tenant version. I loved the modern approach -- I absolutely think that Hamlet is a T-shirt and jeans kind of guy. It added to the immaturity of Hamlet and removed some of the Shakespearian-actor-stuffiness, which I think Branagh conveyed. Branagh's performance, while good, seemed a bit too well-thought-out, so I really appreciated Tenant's spontaneity. I also loved that Tenant broke the fourth wall and spoke directly to the camera. Soliloquies are meant to be spoken to the audience, so it seemed natural for Tenant to talk to the camera. Branagh's performance, where he talked to the furniture and to himself, seemed unnatural as a result. Soliloquies occur because characters feel like the audience is the only thing to which they can confide. While it may add to Hamlet's "madness" to see him talk to the furniture, it seems like there would be a less pressing need to do so. I also loved the talking to the audience because in many stage-to-screen adaptations, the director often feels a need to "filmify" the play and make the viewer forget that it was ever performed on stage. I appreciated that the director of Tenant's Hamlet chose to leave in some of the theatrical elements, such as breaking the forth wall.
I also preferred the ending of Tenant's soliloquy, where he seemed so excited to "catch the conscience of the king" through putting on a play. He appeared as if he was truly thinking of this idea on the spot, whereas Branagh seemed to be overly focused on getting a good shot during the final lines (maybe his choice to direct and act in the play made the performance seem more calculated.) Branagh certainly gave an admirable performance, but overall, I enjoyed Tenant's performance much more.
|
|
|
Post by anaritter on Feb 8, 2014 5:47:21 GMT
I enjoyed Branagh's performance once he got past the awkward crying-whining-high-pitched-globe-touching part. When he finally got angry and lost it, it was more convincing than his acting has been in any other parts of the movie that we've seen so far. That being said, Branagh's performance lacked what I liked most about Tennant's; the element of insanity that he incorporated into his delivery of the soliloquy. Branagh's performance was too structured, too predictable to portray a man who is potentially going more insane as each minute passes. Tennant seemed to be angry or sad or calm at all the wrong parts, but collectively, this made for a very realistic representation.
My favorite thing about the Tennant version that the Branagh version lacked was the use of the camera itself as the imaginary recipient of Hamlet's speech. We don't usually see an actor looking directly into the camera, so it was unsettling, adding to the overall effect of Hamlet's mental instability.
|
|
|
Post by betsyrahe on Feb 8, 2014 17:38:52 GMT
The Branaugh performance was, like in the other scenes we watched, rather theatrical. His acting is very spot on to how I'd imagine in but I do feel for it. I really liked the ending. How his face was encapsulated by a small stage and he knocks down the little king when he finishes. I thought that was a really cool way to end the scene. The David Tennant version I just love. I should point out that I have a huge bias towards him as he is my favorite doctor from Doctor Who. Honestly, his performance feels much more real to me. His crazy is a more bottled up slow burning crazy that we get to see burst in this scene. Also, I like seeing how his thought process works. I can really see where he's going and I can see him thinking it through. Branagh's version is not awful. His crazy is the much more obvious blow-out crazy. The "I'm furious and mad and not afraid to show it" crazy. This definitely has it's advantages and in a play production is more necessary. In an intimate filming scenario; however, it feels a little overdone.
|
|
|
Post by jennyxu on Feb 9, 2014 0:03:46 GMT
For the previous scenes, I had found Branaugh's versions to be overly dramatic and distracting from the emotional depth of the play, but I think his soliloquy feels very genuine. The scene feels exactly like how a man would release his pent-up anger once he is in a room by himself. The staging of being trapped within one room helps too, the way he just walks in a circle around the room, with no flashy camera angles or scene changes. He expresses Hamlet's confusion very well. I like how he speeds up his speech as he reaches a crescendo of anger, then he physically breaks something to release the tension, and by the end, he speaks in a soft tone to express his doubt. David Tennant's version is much like the earlier Branaugh scenes, with him directly confronting the camera. In some ways, it detracts from the feeling of isolation that is required for this scene. It seems less like Hamlet is angry and muttering to himself, like I imagined it, and more like he is trying to play the victim to an audience. He does, however, show a vulnerability and a different confusion, especially in his line about Hecuba, that I like. And I prefer his look into the camera over Branaugh's, because his expressions really adds to the emotions of the soliloquy very well. I definitely prefer Branaugh's soliloquy though, for its isolation. When I read the soliloquy, I felt Hamlet to be rather sane, though self-deprecating and angry. Tennant plays more on the madness, which could work as a different interpretation of the scene.
|
|
|
Post by natalieskowlund on Feb 9, 2014 4:53:28 GMT
Branagh's "Hamlet" is certainly more dramatic, and also portrays Hamlet in a more nefarious light. I appreciated the juxtaposition between the soft, more thoughtful beginning to Hamlet's soliloquy and his darker rage towards the end. Branagh's Hamlet also seems more sure of himself throughout the soliloquy; he displays scant hesitancy when he speaks of perhaps being tricked by the devil at the end, unlike the Hamlet of the David Tennant version. Because of this, I felt Branagh's portrayal of Hamlet seemed a bit less realistic and a little bit more like Branagh had an underlying interpretation of Hamlet that he wanted desperately to shine through in the movie--Hamlet as a villain of sorts. One of my favorite aspects of this depiction of the soliloquy, though, was the use of the miniature theater house. At one point during Hamlet's rant, he opens the doors to the mini theater, and by the end of the soliloquy we see the miniature king fall off of the set, a powerful symbol of Hamlet's own intentions towards King Claudius. Definitely left me with chills.
David Tennant's "Hamlet" is refreshingly different and more realistic, but I'm not totally sold on this version over Branagh's. The modern setting makes it more obviously relateable to contemporary audiences than the other, but it also loses some of the romance and escape which the play's setting in the past allows for. Personally, I find there is something extremely comforting about reading/watching stories of the past because it reminds me that the challenges I face and the things I feel are not abnormal, but rather universal and timeless. I agree with some of the previous posters, however, that Tennant's interaction with the camera in this version of the soliloquy adds an interesting new depth to the scene. I also appreciated Hamlet's apparel--a t-shirt made to look like abs and rolled up jeans. His outfit helps give him the youthful aura most viewers expect in Hamlet, but I think his interesting t-shirt also subtly hints at Hamlet's longing to be powerful and strong, not the coward he suspects he may be. As for the acting specifically, David Tennant's portrayal of Hamlet made him seem more vulnerable and unsure of what he was doing, which also seemed more realistic to those of us who imagine Hamlet as a teenager trying to navigate the waters of newfound adulthood and increased responsibility. I especially enjoyed Tennant's interpretation of the line about being manipulated by the devil. In that instant, he seemed quite afraid and questioning, highlighting Hamlet's lack of true stability surrounding the matter of what to do about his father's death--or what to believe about it.
I cannot say I liked one version better than the other. I must say I have a soft spot for Branagh's more dressed-up, dramatic version of Hamlet, especially since it is set in the original context. Also, I just love his use of the miniature theater as a symbol. On the other hand, though, Tennant's version captures the Hamlet of my imagination better and seems more nuanced in its interpretation of Hamlet as a character. Plus, you've gotta love his abs t-shirt! I suppose my ideal version of the play would be one set in the original historical context of the play, yet with a Hamlet a bit younger and more innocently portrayed and an overall setting and cast less flashy than in Branagh's version. But, as they say, you can't have the best of both worlds.
|
|
|
Post by juliamoreland on Feb 9, 2014 16:47:51 GMT
I certainly agree with what Ana and Morgan said earlier about the camera in David Tennant version. Having him stare me down with that insane look in his eye was very much unsettling, but I think it really helped establish the paranoia in the scene. I felt as though I was inside his head, catching those moments when he realizes that he is insane, and then other times getting lost in the moment. This, I found lacking from Branagh’s interpretation. At the end Hamlet almost got to the totally crazy part, but the beginning felt so staged and dramatic that it was difficult to believe him. Although I lean clearly toward the David Tennant version, I am not completely sold on the modern twist. Hamlet looked so young, and the camera in the beginning threw me for a loop. It seemed that they could not decide on whether to go full modern or not. What is that shirt in this setting doing, and why is there a camera in an old building like that? Beside the struggling setting, I still greatly enjoyed the mix of insanity and pure emotions that were put forth in this version. I still think each version has its ups and downs, but the Tennant version is closest to how I envision the story. Really though, why is Hamlet wearing that shirt?
|
|
|
Post by racheladele on Feb 9, 2014 18:12:02 GMT
I like the way both men build up the scene in terms of emotion and voice. Branagh’s physical movements look strained, but intentional enough that I can see it as Hamlet’s character. I love the way he spits out “like a whore, unpack my heart with WORDS” because it brings a lot of feeling to that line that I don’t hear from reading it, or from watching the Tennant version. I also liked the very end of the scene in Branagh’s version with the little king, and I almost expected him to look straight up at the camera (although I’m glad he didn’t). The first time Tennant looked into the camera I was a bit taken aback, and I wish they had used that less. If I had seen the whole version it might make sense, because that works if they are portraying Hamlet as crazy. It makes him look like he’s talking to the voices or imaginary people rather than giving a soliloquy. But it made me a little more confused than engaged. I see this scene as having two parts. First, when Hamlet is angry at himself, and then when he is thinking about putting on a play to show Claudius’s guilt. I think Tennant did a better job communicating the transition between anger and planning the play, because it was too sudden in the other version. I want to see Hamlet have that idea, that realization, and Branagh seemed to just shift without prompting. Another thing that I didn’t quite follow was the sudden appearance of music at the end of both scenes. I like this more in the Tennant version because when the music appears it is edgier, building up emotion that matches Hamlet, whereas in Branagh’s it feels awkward. Overall, I had trouble connecting with Tennant’s version because of the set and costume combination (and also because I kept noticing actions reminiscent of his Doctor Who character, which was distracting as well). While trying to pay attention to his acting and words, I found myself preoccupied, trying to figure out why he was wearing jeans and attacking cameras in a castle-like building. All things considered, I like the Branagh version better because he doesn’t stare into the camera, his costume and set make sense, and as Steve mentioned, he has a way with the Shakespearean language.
|
|
|
Post by Lacey Doby on Feb 10, 2014 1:14:34 GMT
Looking at the camera! Tennant, that's brilliant! It's like watching an actual play except the audience gets to float around in space while the actors play to them. It makes the story seem more personal and intimate, and, as mentioned above, it establishes the paranoia in the scene and the frantic mindset Hamlet is forced into. I wasn't expecting it at all, since looking at the camera is such a taboo in the movie world, but I think it make for a unique take on a well established play. As for the acting, I like Tennant's inner rage building as he talks himself into a frenzy. At the top he seems the way I imagined him as I was reading it: sort of grumbling about how ridiculous the whole situation was and then building into fury the more he thought about it. Tennant also seems to think about the meaning behind every word before he says them. Branagh occasionally feels as though he is, like we discussed in class, just spitting the lines out because they are there and he is required to get through them. Branagh does, however, make very good use of the area around him. Tennant stayed stagnant in places, but Branagh never really stopped moving. It made it seem more like he was pacing, first in rage and then in more of a scheming way. Though, Branagh is a bit too theatrical for my taste. His acting strikes me as a bit silly really. I mean, he is literally throwing himself against walls and flinging his arms up in the air like a child throwing a tantrum. What a drama queen. Then again...Tennant is wearing a T-shirt with abs on it.
|
|
|
Post by elizabethmeyer on Feb 10, 2014 1:45:33 GMT
Like Betsy, I have a huge bias towards David Tennant because I love Doctor Who, but also because I've seen his version of Hamlet multiple times, and I haven't had the chance to watch the Kenneth Branagh version all the way through as of yet. However, in this particular scene, as others have said, I liked different things about the different interpretations. I liked the overall look and feel of the Branagh version - him shutting himself in the library to have a rant where no one will come and disturb him - but I didn't like the delivery. As many people have already said, his delivery of the lines does seem forced in certain areas. And I understand that he's essentially talking himself into a frenzy, but does he really need to talk to the furniture and throw himself against the window? I found all that rather unnecessary. He can rant, I'd just personally prefer it if he didn't rant so physically. On the other hand, I liked the delivery and mood of the Tennant version, but not the setting. The really important thing to remember about the Tennant version is that it's a filmed play. The cast did the play for real, on a stage (I believe in Stratford-upon-Avon, but possibly London) and when everyone realized how popular it was, it was filmed and made into a movie so everyone who hadn't gotten to come to the play, as well as those that had come, could see it. I don't know if they used the same sets - the sets for the stage must have been similar to the sets for the movie, if not the same ones - but for me they make the time period all confused, which distracts me from what's being said. Everyone starts out wearing suits and ties or nice dresses in Act I, with the guards in generic guard uniforms, which could make the setting any time from the 20th or 21st centuries. But when the characters start wearing more casual clothes, the regal and overly-reflective setting seems at odds with the costumes. Maybe it made more sense on stage. But aside from the weird reflective surfaces in the set, I like the delivery of Hamlet's soliloquy so much better in this one. I feel like he's really thinking things through as we watch. Rather than just reciting the lines and reacting to them, it's really happening - he's really talking himself into a frenzy about Hecuba and everyone, and then he's really formulating a plan to deal with Claudius. I think the camera-stare-down really helps with this. Since this was a play on stage, with a real audience, it makes perfect sense to, in the filmed adaptation, remember the presence of the audience. Also, it makes everything more intense because it's so uncomfortable. I think, overall, that it's really hard to compare and contrast this scene out of context like this. We're not watching the whole of each version, just this one scene, and even though we've read through what happens right before this soliloquy, we're missing out on the context that this scene (in either version) comes from.
|
|
|
Post by sheridanf on Feb 10, 2014 1:49:18 GMT
I can't say if I liked one version more than the other, but I think both have some really cool interpretations of the play.
Branagh's version is closer to the traditional idea of a theater production and to what most of us think of when we think of a Shakespearean play. It's complete with elegant costumes, beautiful scenery, British accents, and older, experienced actors. Not to mention the use of every single line. But, like a play, this version also brings along a certain feeling of fakeness. Does anyone else find Hamlet's hitting of the windows overly dramatic? Or the use of the little stage with a puppet king too obvious? Or his idea to use a play to catch his murderer of an uncle too sudden? I don't think these were necessarily bad things and I definitely think they add depth to this version of Hamlet, but they remind me that these kinds of things don't really happen in reality- ghost dads don't tell their sassy sons to kill their uncle who stole the throne. The melodramatic version of this version makes this more of a fairy tale, or a story to learn a moral from. And seeing how Hamlet is the story of a man who must struggle with morality and what is murder and is revenge good, this interpretation makes sense.
The David Tennant version is much different than the Branagh version. It has the same beautiful scenery and British accents, but instead of an elegant black coat to juxtapose Hamlet's blond hair and bright costumes of the rest of the kingdom, there is a t-shirt with abs printed on it, and instead of older actors who have spent their lives in Shakespearean plays, there is David Tennant. Tennant's clothes make this scene seem like a run-through of the future final product- like he was just practicing his lines on the set. So already this version is more "real" than the Branagh version. I found the emotions and the lines more convincing and real in the Tennant version. My favorite part of this version was the sudden head turn toward the camera and the line, "Am I a coward?" I think the audience acts as his conscience or his set of morals, and he is looking directly into himself to find the right answer. Unfortunately all of the audience combined wouldn't be able to give him the correct answer, making his position in this version that much more heartbreaking and confusing. But then I remember that this is just a run-through, and that David Tennant isn't actually Hamlet and that in this version it's all fake- but that sort of makes it that much more real. It's as if the actor is trying to figure things out for the character of Hamlet, and, caught in the moment of his acting, suddenly and genuinely feels just as confused as Hamlet. I thought that this version related better to the audience and highlighted all of Hamlet's inner turmoil very well, which is really the most important part of a good Hamlet adaptation.
|
|