William Shakespeare's Hamlet (Two-Disc Special Edition) Reviews

• Not to be missed

  
  By ABN5K7K1TM1QA on 2003-02-26
  Part of the genius of Branagh's interpretation of Hamlet is in the use of the techniques of the cinema to enhance the production. Branagh has not condensed the acts like some mass market soup, as was done in Olivier's 1948 Oscar-winning production, or in, say, Zeffirelli's 1989 Hamlet lite starring Mel Gibson (both excellent, though, within their scope), but has kept every word while directing our understanding so that even those only casually familiar with the play might follow the intent and purpose with discernment. Recall that for Shakespeare--the ultimate actor's playwright who wrote with precious few stage directions--interpretation was left to the direction and the actors, an open invitation that Branagh rightly accepts.
  
  The use of flashback scenes of things implied, such as the amorous union of Ophelia and her Lord Hamlet abed, or of a vast expanse of snow darkened with distant soldiers to represent the threat of Fortinbras' army from without, and especially the vivid remembrance in the mind's eye of the new king's dastardly deed of murder most foul, helps us all to more keenly appreciate just what it is that torments Hamlet's soul. I also liked the intense closeups. How they would have bemused and delighted an Elizabethan audience.
  
  Branagh's ambitious Hamlet is also one of the most accessible and entertaining, yet without the faintest hint of any dumbing down or abbreviation. A play is to divert, to entertain, to allow us to identify with others whose trials and tribulations are so like our own. And so first the playwright seeks to engage his audience, and only then, by happenstance and indirection, to inspire and to inform. Shakespeare did this unconsciously, we might say. He wrote for the popular audience of his time, a broad audience, it should be noted, that included kings and queens as well as knaves and beggars, and he reached them, one and all. We are much removed from those times, and yet, this play, this singular achievement in theatre, still has the power to transcend mere entertainment, to fuse poetry and story, as well as the high and the low, and speak once again to a new audience twenty generations removed.
  
  Branagh himself is a wonderful Hamlet, perhaps a bit of a ham at times (as I think was Shakespeare's intent), a prince who is the friend of itinerant players. He also lacks somewhat in statute (as we conceive our great heroes); nonetheless his interpretation of the great prince's torment and his singular obsession to avenge his father's murder speaks strongly to us all. Branagh, more than any other Hamlet, makes us understand the distracted, anguished and tortured prince, and guides us to not only an appreciation of his actions, wild and crazy as they sometimes are, but to an identification and an understanding of why (the eternal query) Hamlet is so long in assuming the name of action. In Branagh's production, this old quibble with Hamlet's character dissolves itself into a dew, and we realize that he was acting strongly, purposely all the while. He had to know the truth without doubt so that he might act in concert with it.
  
  I was also very much impressed with Derek Jacobi's Claudius. One recalls that Jacobi played Hamlet in the only other full cinematic production of the play that I know of, produced in 1980 by the BBC with Claire Bloom as Gertrude; and he was an excellent Hamlet, although perhaps like Branagh something less than a massive presence. His Claudius combines second son ambition with a Machiavellian heart, whose words go up but whose thoughts remind below, as is the way of villains everywhere.
  
  Kate Winslet is a remarkable Ophelia, lending an unusual strength to the role (strength of character is part of what Kate Winslet brings to any role), but with the poor, sweet girl's vulnerability intact. She does the mad scene with Claudius as well as I have seen it done, and of course her personal charisma and beauty embellishes the production.
  
  Richard Briers as Polonius, proves that that officious fool is indeed that, and yet something more so that we can see why he was a counselor to the king. The famous speech he gives to Laertes as his son departs for France, is really ancient wisdom even though it comes from a fool.
  
  Julie Christie was a delight as the besmirched and wretched queen. In the bedroom scene with Hamlet she becomes transparent to not only her son, but to us all, and we feel that the camera is reaching into her soul. She is outstanding.
  
  The bit players had their time upon the stage and did middling well to very good. I liked Charlton Heston's player king (although I think he and John Gielgud might have switched roles to good effect) and Billy Crystal's gravedigger was finely etched. Only Jack Lemon's Marcellus really disappointed, but I think that was mainly because he was so poorly cast in such a role. Not once was he able to flash the Jack Lemon grin that we have come to know so well.
  
  The idea of doing a Shakespearean play with nineteenth century dress in the late twentieth century worked wonderfully well, but I know not why. Perhaps the place and dress are just enough removed from our lives that they are somewhat strange but recognizable in a pleasing way. And perhaps it is just another tribute to the timeless nature of Shakespeare's play. The mirrors in the great hall added to the effect of a vast and indifferent castle environment, and in the scene with Ophelia and Laertes returned tended to magnify the focus.
  
  There is so much more to say about this wonderful cinematic production. It is, all things considered, one of the best Hamlets ever done. Perhaps it is the best. See it, by all means, see it for yourself.
  
  

• Baring Hamlet's Soul

  
  By A1XNXHTPQRACRO on 2004-10-12
  There is a moment at the start of this film when Hamlet, until then holding himself rigidly erect through sheer force of will, seizes a moment of privacy and literally deflates with exhaustion and despair. In itself, this perfect gesture would mark Branagh's portrayal a masterful work. But what follows raises his performance to the sublime: He embarks on the "O that this too too sullied flesh would melt, /Thaw, and resolve itself into a dew..." soliloquy not with Burton's anger, Olivier's melancholy or Gibson's bitterness, but with an exhalation that embodies the emotion most genuine given the circumstances: overwhelming grief. This is a perfect note, and what follows shows an understanding of the play's mental and emotional landscape that puts other portrayals to shame.
  
  I have seen many performances of Hamlet, but I have never seen one as perfectly pitched as this. Branagh's Hamlet is strong, resourceful, thoughtful and restrained. Branagh purposely rejects the psychological poses that other actors find so hard to resist. After all, Hamlet and Richard III are the two Shakespearean plays that afford actors the most range. It's hard playing the Dane on a leash when one can go wild with existential abandon and not only dodge the charge of overacting, but actually attribute such excess to the character. There are few meatier roles in the repertoire that simultaneously offer the actor such depth on the one hand and such leeway on the other.
  
  For me, such moderation exemplifies Branagh's devotion to Shakespeare. It must have been tempting for a man of his talents to show off. But to forego such gestures, to offer in its stead restraint, is to put service before self.
  
  For, of course, Hamlet is restrained. His very life depends on it. His whole course of action is based on it. His safety revolves around it. Hold off the will to strike, restrain the impulse for vengeance, apportion each action in only the most miserly measure. The walls have ears, conspiracies abound and death lurks around every corner. In such an environment, is it plausible that a man of Hamlet's intelligence would show his hand by indulging in excess? A restrained performance feels right because a restrained course of action is the only course possible for our hero.
  
  This does not stop Hamlet from making bold gestures. But such gestures must always be made under cover, and here again, Branagh shows his creative mettle. The Player King scene provides a counterpoint. Branagh lets go here and shows his excitement when the occasion demands it. Likewise, his graveyard response to Ophelia's death: the cover of madness conflates with reality because Hamlet's act cannot be sustained forever. Branagh knows exactly when to allow the cracks to show.
  
  Those used to earlier works may find Branagh's version overly long and laboured. Many directors have cut out scenes and soliloquies in a misguided attempt to "tighten up" the production. Branagh makes what I believe is the right decision: to leave them all in because every scene, every soliloquy adds texture and is indispensable to the whole.
  
  The best Hamlet I have seen.
  
  

• The Absolute Best Version of Shakespeare ever Recorded

  
  By A1NPNGWBVD9AK3 on 2000-06-27
  This is one monumental piece of filmmaking. To the dectractors, for whom it was probably too long for their MTV attention spans, I can only say, go back to Britney Spears and save your comments for something you know something about. I'm sorry, but these responses really get me ticked in this instance. This is the "full" text, as written. Every word is a gem. Every scene is necessary for a full apprecition and understanding of Shakespeare's scope and genius. I didn't detect a dull moment or a lapse in directorial love and care for the duration of the film. Even Robin Williams, who I find annoying of late, was perfectly cast. The cameos, supporting roles, and stars all shone equally. This film is a triumph on Branagh's part, even better than his masterful Henry V. He's followed in Olivier's footsteps and even superseded him in many respects. I didn't for a moment doubt any of his choices, either as actor or director. For me, this is the definitive Shakespeare recording of the modern era. Enough said.
  
  

• DO NOT DOWNLOAD UNBOX!!!

  
  By A17LSEN4UY4XZQ on 2006-09-27
  The download is bad, very bad. The quality is VHS on a hi-def 17 in monitor, and you CANNOT BURN IT TO A DVD AND WATCH ON YOUR TELEVISION!!! They say you can watch on large screen TV, NO! I have a direct monitor output to my Sony 42" HDTV and it looks no better than my VHS cassette, and you cannot burn to DVD to play in DVD player, it will only work on the computer! You cannot use Power DVD or Nero Showtime, it only plays on Windows Media Player.
  
  It's a rip-off! It's worthless. Protest. Don't buy!!!
  
  

• Well Worth It

  
  By A2FD9XWM2KQ5RJ on 1999-12-29
  Phenominal acting by Kenneth Branagh makes this film both entertaining and a fine addition to anyone's library, be they a Shakespeare afficionado or simply looking to enjoy a good film. This is a refreshing switch from the stereotypically stale rap such a wonderful playwright is encumbered with. While it does take some time to watch, this is not necessarily a bad thing. As a result, there are always new things to discover with susequent viewings. Admittedly, the language itself is a barrier at first. For me, it is much more difficult to comprehend without the text before me. But, once realization dawns, I would say it is well worth the wait. Currently, my favorite part is when Hamlet tells his uncle to go to hell on the first tape. The delivery is subtle enough to elude most on the first pass, myself included. While this is not a line unique to this film, as the text exists in others, it is a high point for me. Kenneth Branagh makes the film, though. Accolades are also due equally noteworthy actor Charleton Heston for a brief but inspiring appearance. I am eagerly awaiting this title to emerge on DVD, as I hope many others are too. Perhaps a public outcry would prompt the distributor to arrange its (hopefully forthcoming) release.
  
  
• Superior to all other versions.
  By A3KVTGACBTXL74 on 2001-11-08
  Kenneth Branagh's version of Hamlet combines lush and breathtaking visuals with the complete, unabridged text of Shakespeare's masterpiece. In other versions of Hamlet, such as the ill-cast Mel Gibson film, the play is mistakenly cut down to a "more reasonable" two-hours-or-less atrocity. The unexpurgated method allows for the inclusion of important scenes that, if removed, take away from the overall effect of the drama. Despite its length of more than four hours, the film keeps the viewer entertained until the startling last scene. The stunning visuals can be attributed to the rarely used 70mm film on which the play was captured and the exceptional set design involved. The play is actually done in a 19th century motif, a unique departure from other versions of Hamlet. Impressive costume design add to the remarkable images in the film. The star-studded cast includes Derek Jacobi as Claudius, Kate Winslet as Ophelia, and Branagh, himself, as Hamlet, all parts delivered with brilliant authenticity. Other well known actors such as Robin Williams, Charlton Heston, and Billy Crystal also appear in small, but equally well-implemented roles. Some argue that Branagh's execution of the part was overdone, but it fits perfectly within the film and is, therefore, quite believable. The acting is overall a big plus to the end effect of the film. Beautifully executed in an outstandingly well-calculated manner, Branagh's film made Hamlet more accessible to modern viewers and will certainly remain popular for a long time to come.
  
  
• DVD Release in 2006, confirmed by Warner Bros.
  By A91OD0Z82WYAS on 2005-03-06
  Yes, finally Warner Bros. has confirmed that this film will be issued on DVD sometime in 2006 for its tenth anniversary. Rumors of legal problems delaying the release (some stated even by WB themselves) were apparently just that -- rumors. [Or, whatever it may have been, they can't talk about.]
  
  The DVD is expected to have Branagh's "full cooperation".
  
  Check here for more details:
  
  http://www.kenbranagh.com/news.htm
  
  
  
  
• Great Moments With Mr. Hamlet
  By A1QJM67B7NF26Z on 2002-04-23
  This ludicrous and inept film is certainly the most misguided version of "Hamlet" to ever reach the screen. Branagh's approach to the material can only be described as vulgar; going to such lengths as depicting Ophelia in a straightjacket, having Fortinbras' army appear suddenly on the horizon (looking very much like the climax of "Monty Python and the Holy Grail") when the palace is apparently guarded only by Francisco (who shouts the very un-Shakespearean cry of "ataaaaaaaaaaaaaaaack" before being gunned down), and multitudes of star cameos that harken back to the days of Jimmy Cagney's Bottom and Mary Pickford's Kate.

  Branagh chose to set his film in an Edwardian setting but at the same time decided to employ an almost uncut text, so that frequently the dialogue that is firmly rooted in Elizabethan mentality makes no sense in the context that it is being performed. And Branagh does not concern himself with such textural subtleties of the ambiguous nature of Hamlet and Olphelia's relationship, treating the audience to a vulgar nude sex scene between the couple that tosses any ambiguity right out the stained glass window.

  The uncut text does allow Branagh to indulge in his favorite cinematic pastime: more footage of Kenneth Branagh. This is never so apparent as in the "How All Occasions Inform Against Me" speech that ends the first half of the nineteen hour film (at least that's how it feels), which attempts to play to a dramatic crescendo along the lines of Gone With The Wind's "I'll never be hungry again." This may serve Branagh's ego, but it does not serve Shakespeare or the speech: when I saw the film in the theater, I leaned over to my companion and snickered "Great Moments With Mr. Hamlet."

  Branagh saves the funniest and most tasteless moment for last, when he attempts to out-do the Olivier film and it's justly celebrated death of Claudius by having Hamlet jump from off a high tower onto the monarch, impaling him with a sword. Branaugh's Dane does in the king by heroically throwing an apparently magic rapier from across the palace to run through Claudius' heart with a super hero's bulls eye. The only thing that saved the moment from being unbearably maddening was that it was so off-the-wall funnyy.

  While this film has been praised in some quarters as a serious depiction of the tragedy, it is in fact nothing but a star-studded display of a once-talented filmmaker being overtaken by his own narcissism. The Emperor has no clothes, and this Hamlet has nothing to offer but a few unintended laughs and the appalling sight of one man's ego out of control.
  
  

• Where Are The Grace Notes?
  By ACDP0VLNNILVM on 2007-05-23
  I know I'm going to catch hell for this review, but I've tried to watch Branagh's Hamlet twice and quit half way through both times. This is not meant pejoratively, but Branagh's Hamlet is an assault on the senses. He brays and he mews and he mugs for the camera. Where are the grace notes? How can the Dane be such an unsympathetic character? Winslet's Ophelia is a raving hysteric, Polonius a caricature of a hypocrite, Lemmon woefully miscast, his line readings leaden. The soundtrack, always intrusive, at time overwhelms the dialogue. Bigger is not necessarily better. Give me Olivier, even Gibson, any day.
  
  
• Garrish and Laughable
  By A3EOHYIHQM3KK on 2000-11-08
  I loved Kenneth Brannagh in his "Henry V." I also loved his audio version of "Hamlet." I am sad to say that this is by far the worst production I have ever seen. Taking "Hamlet" out of it's time was a mistake. Instead of the dark backgrounds, the castles, and the beautiful scenery of Mel Gibson's version, we have garrish backgrounds. Instead of Hamlet's father portraying human sorrow, he appears as something out of a freak show. While Jacobi did well on the audio version, he makes Claudius somewhat of a drunk coward instead of the careful, shrewd, courageous, ambitious, and yet honestly remorseful character. Ophelia's insanity turns from tragedy to laughter when they use the inappropriate straight jacket. Instead of a sorrowful Fortinbras who stumbles onto fortune and feels remorse over Hamlet's death, Fortinbras comes off as a dishonest and hypocritical self server. (This is not the parallel character that Shakespeare intened!) Even the background music does not fit. But don't let my opinion of this stop you from watching Brannagh's wonderful "Henry V." Get the Laurence Olivier or Mel Gibson version of "Hamlet" instead.
  
  
• Shakespeare, forgive him, for he's only just an ego!
  By A2VMS83X8EJYBD on 2006-01-25
  Where does one begin in reviewing this travesty? Here is perhaps the greatest stage work in the English language on one hand; and on the other hand here is a highly overrated and overblown ego in charge of producing it on film. The result is an unmittigated disaster that would turn Shakespeare's stomach were he unfortunate enough to have survived the watching of it.
  
  Let me make just a few basic points to explain. Although Branagh claims that he has filmed an "uncut" version of the play, he never really explains what he means. There are at least three important early editions of the play (1st quarto, 2nd quarto, and 1st Folio), no two of which are identical. What Branagh has done was to pick and choose bits and pieces from each, seemingly at whatever whim hit him, and patch together his own "uncut" edition. In reality, the play NEEDS cutting; in the First Folio, supposedly created from promptbooks removed from the Globe theatre when it burned down in 1613, it seems clear that Shakespeare had made several cuts and emendations from the 2nd quarto (the longest of the three major editions). Branagh might have benefited from considering Shakespeare's motives for these changes. He might also have acknowledged the cut of the one sentence that is clearly missing its completion, probably due to a copyist's error.
  
  In casting this film, Branagh follows his usual practice of asking, "How many stars can I put in cameo roles." There is little logic behind many of his choices. The most unfortunate is that he uses the great Jack Lemmon in a role that is so far from removed from even a hint of typecasting as to be ludicrous: Would you hire a 75 year old as a palace guard? Other absurdities include Gerard Depardieu as Reynaldo (Reynaldo!?!?!?) and Robin Williams as Osric. How embarrasing for such great talents to be wasted and (incidently) mis-directed in these roles.
  
  I also think that Branagh's decision to show that Hamlet and Ophelia were intimate is a serious mistake. If it were at least an intelligent, thoughtful interpretive concept, I might be able to live with it -- although I doubt that it makes sense that they were actually lovers in a physical sense -- but here it is clearly extra-textual (so much for "uncut") and typically self-indulgent; is Branagh such a sex symbol that he must add a lovemaking scene to Hamlet?
  
  I have to make one additional (though it's hardly the last or least) complaint. What was Branagh thinking when he set this in the 19th century? The only logic that seems apparent is that he thought it would look interesting and colorful. Certainly there is nothing peculiar to the era that supports the choice. I am certainly not opposed to playing with time and place when staging Shakespeare, but there needs to be some reasonable logic (or better, some compelling reason) for the choice. There is nothing like that here.
  
  If the reader wishes to find a good version of Hamlet, there are better options: Laurence Olivier's 1948 film, though cut and now dated, is far more intersting and more meaningful. The 1964 videotaped stage production with Richard Burton, though flawed and not nearly as vibrant as actually experiencing it in the theatre was, is excessively superior. The Nicol Williamson version, also flawed, is also more interesting and far more intelligent. Finally, the overpriced BBC version (Ambrose Video) with Derek Jacobi and Patrick Stewart is a far better, more accurate and traditional (and almost uncut) production. Try one of these and skip Branagh's excercise in self-aggrandizement.
  
  If I could give this film zero stars, I would; Amazon insists that I give it one or more.
  
  
• Is there a better screen adaptation?
  By A13UFZZWOMZA6B on 2003-09-29
  I've seen several different screen adaptations of Shakespeare's Hamlet, and I can unequivocally state that Branagh's is my favorite. From start to finish, this four hour film stunned me with incredible acting, beautiful sets, and creative cinematography. However, the film didn't exactly match my original interpretation of the play.

  Probably the greatest thing that disappointed me in the film was the play within the play. No matter how much I enjoyed the acting, I didn't like the interpretation that Branagh chose. After several readings of Hamlet, I still can't understand why Branagh chose to have Hamlet yell so much during the play. I suppose on one hand it reinforces the idea of Hamlet going mad, but it also seems to degrade the cunning that went into planning the play and the trap for Claudius. I always imagined that scene to be a little more subtle, working its way into the mind of Claudius and creating doubt...not screaming "bloody murder" the way Branagh seems to portray it. If I was directing this film, I would probably have Hamlet talk under his breath a little more and possibly brood in his seat, watching every move that Claudius makes. Luckily, this is probably the most major thing that confused and disappointed me about this film version (besides Rosencrantz and Guildenstern riding in on the little train).

  Other than the play within the play, I think I agree with almost everything Branagh does, but a few of his choices stand out more than others for me. The thing that I liked the most about Branagh's version is Ophelia's falling into madness. I thought the way Ophelia carried on in the large, mirrored room was fantastic. The flowers being a construct of a deranged mind and her method of getting right into the face of Claudius was great! I thought Kate Winslet's acting was amazing. That certainly isn't the only thing I liked about it, but it is probably the thing that stood out the most to me.

  I've seen this production several times, and I even own a copy on VHS, and the thing that I remember most about the movie is the indeterminate era in which it is set. From the sets and the costumes, it is very difficult to pin-point an exact date on this production. There are many seemingly modern devices in the palace, from Hamlet's fencing garb to the amazing mirrored rooms, but there isn't any electricity or computers. Branagh seems to be making the point that Hamlet is a timeless masterpiece and choosing a specific timeframe for the play puts it in a box, which is a point that I can't agree with more and is probably the most memorable part of the movie.

  Overall, I enjoyed the Branagh production a lot. In fact, I've noticed that other movies often attempt to mimic this production! One recent example is the remarkable similarities of the sword fight in the most recent James Bond film: "Die Another Day" to Branagh's Hamlet. The fact that large film franchises are trying to mimic Branagh's work proves to me that his production is nothing short of spectacular and worth every minute of the four hours.
  
  

• To suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune
  By A1R4KBNMNN550Q on 2000-02-11
  Kenneth Branagh's best work yet! He has proved once again that he knows the mind of Shakespeare. This is an excellent recreation of the complete play. Not a line has been cut. This is the way Hamlet was originally meant to be seen. The Director's cut, if you will. A great cast including Charlton Heston, Kate Winslet, Billy Crystal, and Jack Lemmon. Charlton Heston reminds us all of just how great of a presence he is, even in a small part. Derek Jacobi, whom Branagh has used in another Shakespearean film of his, is also a great and passionate performer. Amazing cinematography and great costumes also flood this film. The main thing that has changed is the setting, which, in my opinion, only enhances the play and gives it a modern touch. Branagh has done a magnificent job in the role of Hamlet. I believe he has caught the spirit of Shakespeare's character like no one else. Take it from an ardent lover of Shakespeare. I know how to spell the character's names. I hope you find this useful. It's not always easy to find a Shakespeare play to go to. I love anytime I'm able to watch a film that does William justice. Othello, Much Ado About Nothing, and Henry V are all great examples of the skill and craft of present day Shakespeare. Branagh continues to amaze me. I anxiously await his next Shakespearean work. He is truly a "genius, absolute genius," [as quoted by Lawrence Fishburne(Inside the Actors Studio)].
  
  
• the best recent Hamlet
  By A1HGK6UMTGX10D on 2000-12-18
  Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is the best since Lawrence Olivier's. The film is beautifully shot, and some of the set is stunningly effective--a hall of mirrors in particular is used to great effect. Branagh does a great job as Hamlet, and Kate Winslet (this shocked me) is the best Ophelia I have ever seen. Remarkably well-cast and with skillful camerawork, this is a Hamlet well worth seeing. It's refreshing to be able to watch a version of any Shakesperean film which hasn't cut some wonderful scenes purely to bring the length down, and this movie lets us view Hamlet "uncut." There is only one scene in the entire 4-hour movie which is irritating from a cinematic perspective--a scene where Hamlet's character on his way to Norway delivers an impassionated soliloquy against a very obviously artificial background, causing the viewer to have a frame break ("Hey! That's not sky! That looks like a blue screen!")--and only one tiresome scene in four hours means a pretty fantastic movie.
  
  
• Get it out on DVD!
  By A1V3JAAONJ70S6 on 2005-01-10
  I can't believe that after nine years since its release, "Hamlet" isn't yet on DVD. This is an amazing adaptation of the Shakespeare play with great performances by Kate Winslet, Robin Williams, and Mr. Branagh himself. Warner bros, please hear my plea: get this out on DVD now!
  
  
• Prepare thyself
  By A1OOEV1MEJKLRK on 2007-06-25
  OK...let me get my complaints outta the way, the things that make this film loose a star, first and foremost. After all, it's only my opinion.
  
  I hate the way the Ghost is handled. Too literal...too much is shown. I prefer Zeff's take on the ghost to anyone's. Now that was creepy. This isn't. Also, Branagh has the WORST taste in music in all of Europe. It's embarrassing.
  
  But this is a Hamlet to be seen. It's like no other. Yes, yes...the actors are fantastic, and it is beautiful to behold, like other Hamlets. Branagh's special device... and self challenge for which I applaud him, is to do the entire play. Every word. The whole shebang. In a world where even ABT is editing down their great works of 19th century entertainment, so it won't last longer than your average film I guess, this film is refreshing.
  
  One must prepare for it. It's like going to see Wagner's "Ring" or a Eugene O'Neill play.... you know it's going to be long and intricate. You may become bored at times, but you must know you won't be for long before things pick up again, and paying attention has great rewards. Resolve yourself to meet it halfway. Also, like a Wagner opera, you must accept it for what it is, warts and all. Like a Bach Passion, or a Beethoven string quartet, it is a universe of its own. It is full of nooks and crannies. It is a complete world.
  
  This is the great thing about this version of Hamlet. It's not tidied up for modern sensibilities of theatre. It's sprawling and expansive. The threat from Fortinbras and the entire "players" scene and the scenes on the ship to England....these tentacles from the main plot only add to the complete world of "Hamlet". It's wonderful! It puts it on par with "Lear" [which I've always though better]. It is epic. Art! With a capital "A".
  
  
  
  
• Stuff & Nonsense
  By A2BIGFD7TMX7LG on 2002-07-03
  Ill-assorted actors costumed for Chekhov, in a setting passable for Sheridan, sound insane by mouthing the language of Shakespeare, and wander in a chaos of acting styles through mechanical scenes lacking pace or structural purpose. No detail of the play is allowed to be natural or genuine: Hamlet's father, for instance, is a flying statue obviously errant from `Don Giovanni' until he turns into huge talking head reminiscent of Miss Piggy (which at least justifies the guards who announce him with techniques ranging from `Beyond the Fringe' to `Murder She Wrote'), before disappearing into silly special effects lifted from `Ghost Busters.' It sad to see so many talented people wasting their time, and sadder still to have spent more than twenty-five cents to watch them doing so.
  
  
• We need a DVD!
  By A1LVZOK9F7K4CN on 2003-05-01
  It is a crime that this version of Hamlet is not available on DVD. It is made for the medium. It is shot in 70mm and deserves to be shown letterboxed with high definition. On 2 videocassettes, and pan-and-scan, the film is unwieldy.

  As for the actual movie, it will always prove indispensable to the Shakespearean tradition. Whatever problems you may have with the film, it is the only cinematic telling of the ENTIRE text. Sure, Olivier's version was great, but it was about half the text (he cuts out Rosencranz & Gidenstern!). I am also fond of the Mel Gibson version (Hamlet as action hero) but the text is SEVERELY edited in that film. The television versions are, by nature, very limited.

  Seeing the whole text is an experience unlike any other (although I don't recommend it at one sitting). Plots and subplots that are lost in other versions are retained here. Branagh does a great job of directing, although he is over fond of a circling camera. He populates the film with moviestars, which is a hit-and-miss affair. Charlton Heston is perfect as the Player King. Robin Williams is able to convey the comedy of the fop Osric. On the down side, Billy Crystal is cast in the only other witty part of the film - the Gravedigger.

  As for the principal performances, Derek Jacobi may be the definitive screen Claudius. Ironically, the performance people may have trouble with is Branagh's. Branagh's virtue is that he correctly sees Shakespeare primarily as entertainment. Hamlet the movie is an ambitious project that he intends to be enjoyed the same way people enjoy The Godfather. As a side-effect of this, sometimes he overdoes it. When Hamlet is being sardonic, he affects an obvious tone to make sure we GET the joke, where some subtlety might have been better. However, that is but a trifle here. When Hamlet goes into his soliloquies, I still get chills down my spine. In the main, his Hamlet is about as good a one we could hope for in this day and age.
  
  

• One of the Best Movies Ever
  By on 2000-04-06
  Shakespeare was meant to be performed, not read, but modern attention spans are so brief his plays have to be hacked to bits in contemporary performance. Shakespeare's plays are also not particularly cinematic, except to an imaginative director. Branagh, who is wonderful at bringing Shakespeare to cinematic life, tackles the best play ever written and walks a tight-rope. The lead characters -- Branagh, Jacobi (especially), Christie, etc. are all wonderful. The "star turns" are extremely variable (Heston is superb and should do more Shakespeare; Lemmon should stick to light modern roles). The movie should be seen in widescreen, though even when it's formatted for the tv screen many nuances are lost (such as the army of Fortinbras far in the distance behind Branagh in his final speech before the intermission). In that way, it's like "Lawrence of Arabia", losing so much on the conversion to a small screen. But this "Hamlet" captures the excitement, romance, and thrills of the play better than any filmed version, though it's probably only for those who love Shakespeare
  
  
• Suspend your dislike of Branagh....
  By A1EY1F49B3Q3HM on 2005-06-25
  ..In this adaptation of Hamlet he is indeed a magnificant bugger. I was fortunate enough to catch this movie first-run on a 70mm print on a large screen - and was simply stunned by the vision. Full-text Shakespeare, with a bevy of characters portrayed by a bevy of characters (some to critical boo-hooing) in an equally turbulant if not literally correct era, 1996's Hamlet is surprising, and refreshing. Although some purists debate the usefulness of Mel Gibson's Hamlet, he made Shakespeare accessable to the masses who fled in memory of high school literature class - Branagh's Hamlet is for those who moved on from Gibson's, and even for those who loved Shakespeare long before The Road Warrior took on The Bard.
  
  With glee I read of Warner Brothers FINALLY releasing a remastered DVD in time for the 10th Anniversary of the movie's film debut, on January 10 2006. Never able to afford the LaserDisc copy of the full-text version, and too much a snob to stoop to VHS, I look forward to owning Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet once and for all.
  
  Read the saga of an ambitious fan-movement to have this movie released to dvd at:
  (...)
  
  
• NO DVD?!
  By A2UU6VWL6H18A1 on 2006-02-12
  What is arguably the definitive movie version "Hamlet" since Olivier's hasn't yet been released on DVD? What? Am I missing something? This lack is inexcusable, especially for teachers of British Literature, who for the past decade have only been able to refer absently to this breathtaking movie.
  
  Update: the DVD is alleged to be in the works for a 10th
  anniversary release this year (2006). TEN years to DVD. Well, hopefully "Walker, Texas Ranger" is on a tighter schedule.
  
  
• 5-star flick but zero-star digi-download service
  By A14HX238Y5BNLE on 2006-12-27
  I'm thankful Kenneth Branagh's Hamlet is available in digital format, given all the years it's been stalled out available only in VHS format. But geez, what a hokey way of making it available. As another reviewer points out, the Amazon "Unbox" video player required to access the movie on the PC demands that it be able to scan your system for whatever, and it likes to take it's own sweet time to be able to do it. Just what we all want, another service dominating our system resources for it's own exclusive purposes. If you're running with portable devices, add Amazon "Unbox" to the list of services that want to get sync'd up to your device. And, unfortunately, despite the sys-requirements indicating compatibility with Windows Media Center, my hopes that the XBox 360 could access the video through the Media Connect back end did not pan out (despite the XBox 360 recognizing the video, it was locked out by Amazon's protection of the video). Despite all this exclusive lock down of the content, they do make it possible to obtain one copy on your portable device. So, I did the download (took a day!) got it running with Amazon Unbox on the PC, and sync'd up with a Zen Vision M, and then uninstalled all the Amazon Unbox stuff and now am able to only play it on the Vision M (and connected video devices). Not optimal, but a somewhat improved over VHS copy playable until a high-def release comes out and we hopefully get sorted out on all the DRM quandry.
  
  
• This film was horrible.
  By on 1999-04-12
  There is a difference between *being* Hamlet, and *doing* Hamlet. Kenneth was clearly doing the latter. Although abridged, I think Mel Gibson did a far better job of fleshing-out the melancholy dane. I think Kenneth did much better with "Much Ado About Nothing." He was much less pretentious in that outing.
  
  
• A Nice Big Gob of Hamlet
  By A2NWWA3YPJHMR4 on 2000-08-27
  You may not like all of this film, but it's impossible not to find parts of it brilliant. Never, in any other stage or film version have I seen the truth of the ending: Fortinbras doesn't suddenly arrive because he's taking a stroll through Denmark, he's there to gobble it up. He seems almost disappointed that on his arrival everyone's already dead. I liked, too, Hamlet's sudden change from inaction to action as he does an Errol Flynn and swings from the chandelier, thus killing Claudius with dagger, poison, and lighting fixture.

  The setting too is brilliant: the mirrored labyrinths of the castle reflect a labyrinthine world, while the chessboard flooring of the throne room reminds us of the endless and ongoing political game.

  As for the cast, well, Derek Jacobi steals the show as far as I'm concerned (Branagh spends just a little too much time out-Oliviering Olivier and checking his look in the mirrors). Kate Winslet frightens as the mad Ophelia. Julie Christie convinces as the queen (what along way from *Shampoo* she's come). Horatio had a depth I've never seen. And Jack Lemmon turns in a once-in-a-lifetime performance: he is so bad, so truly terrible, so out of tune with the world of Hamlet, so unable to speak his lines in any kind of convincing way, that he is not to be missed.

  This is a great film, well worth owning. It takes chances and (except for poor Mr. Lemmon) gets away with them; it is not afraid to be brilliant.
  
  

• Absolutely Superb
  By A2LJKDPRVR907S on 2002-01-03
  For those who are not very familiar with Shakespere, or do not fully understand the dialogue, this version of HAMLET will be very helpful and educational and VERY enjoyable! Kenneth Branagh's performance in this film is beyond excellent. He gives the character Hamlet life. He makes the character so incredibly believable that you think you are in the movie along side him. The other actors include Julie Christie (Gertrude), Derek Jacobi (Claudius), Richard Briers (Polonias), and Kate Winslet (Ophelia) just to name a few, are all excellent as well. The most humorous parts in the movie are between the characters of Hamlet (Branagh) and Polonias). Their scenes together make you laugh out loud. The ending is incredible. It is extremely emotional and draws the viewer in. I was in tears when the movie ended. It was that stirring.
  Patrick Doyle's haunting music is magnificent. The fanfare at the beginning of the movie is just to die for. The background music is simply superb. I highly recommend that you buy not only the movie, but the CD as well. All in all, this is a must see movie. Never before have any of Shakespere plays been brought to the screen so beautifully.
  
  
• A great way to make four hours fly by
  By A2UCOSEHTW6I0H on 2005-05-11
  Kenneth Branagh's "Hamlet" hits all the marks. The acting is magnificent, the 70mm cinematography is gorgeous, the Oscar-nominated costumes and sets are stunning, and Patrick Doyle's score (also Oscar-nominated) is sensitive and moving. Oh yeah - the screenplay, by some guy named Will S., isn't too bad either. Film critics ribbed Branagh for receiving the films' fourth Oscar nod for "adapting" the screenplay, but his decision to use the full text was a gutsy one. I can't think of many better ways to make four hours fly by.
  
  Unfortunately, we'll have to wait until 2006 for a DVD release of Branagh's "Hamlet," arguably the greatest Shakespearean adaptation ever filmed. Hyperbole, you say? Perhaps, but the superlatives are warranted. Nearly every decision Branagh makes works brilliantly: the use of England's Blenheim Palace for exteriors, the Edwardian dress, and the staging of "To be or not to be" in a hall of mirrors, to name a few. This is a bold, ambitious, and successful attempt to match the grandeur and poetry of Shakespeare's language with equally eloquent imagery.
  
  The casting of Hollywood luminaries such as Robin Williams, Billy Crystal and Jack Lemmon in minor parts can be distracting, but that's nitpicking. The principal cast excels: Derek Jacobi captures the conflicted nature of Claudius; Kate Winslet acutely depicts Ophelia's descent into madness; Julie Christie brings passion to her portrayal of Gertrude; Richard Briers is pitch-perfect as the conniving Polonius; and Nicholas Farrell elevates the potentially thankless role of Horatio to the apotheosis of true friendship. Every speech, every line, every word is delivered with passion and conviction; there isn't a wasted moment in the entire film. The final scenes magnify the extent of Shakespeare's tragedy in a way not possible with theatrical adaptations.
  
  If you can't wait for the DVD and are trying to decide which version of the VHS tape to buy, I strongly recommend the widescreen edition. With a film of this ambition and scope, the differences between widescreen and full-frame are magnified. For example, when Player King (Charlton Heston) is reciting his speech, there is a brilliant repartee between Hamlet and Polonius that is undermined in the reformatted version. Instead of both actors sparring verbally within the frame, we get distracting cuts between Hamlet and Polonius, which disrupt the comic timing of the dialogue. The widescreen version preserves the actors' reaction shots and thus the comedy.
  
  In either version, "Hamlet" shines, but the widescreen version presents Branagh's masterpiece in its proper dimensions. The DVD version won't arrive a moment too soon, and will hopefully restore this "Hamlet" to its full glory.
  
  
• To DVD or not to DVD ?
  By A2ICYJYE8K2UTV on 2006-04-12
  Simply put, Kenneth Branagh's rendition of Hamlet has been the best on record. For the powers that be to not release this gem to DVD is an outrage to all envolved with the film and also to those who are fans of this masterpiece. To DVD or not to DVD? That's an absurd question. Release this title now!
  
  
• Download....
  By AY8WH3CMYEG0Z on 2007-01-17
  I love this movie (see rating), but what's the point of making a movie available for download in 4:3 that was shot in 65mm panavision? What a waste. I'd rather wait a few months...
  
  
• FINALLY!!!
  By A2FZXYK42HEZY3 on 2007-05-10
  I was introduced to this version of my favourite Shakespeare play in senior year of high school english class (2004) on double-VHS and have been waiting for a decent release on DVD ever since! This is by far the best version i have seen of Hamlet with superb acting, great sets and most of all - the complete play! This is probably one of the few DVDs i would be willing to pay full price for when it first comes out. Ironically, i was just telling someone a 3 days ago that i can't wait for this to come out on DVD because it's been so long waiting for no good reason. A must see!
  
  
• VISUALLY STUNNING! SUPERBLY ACTED! MASTERLY DIRECTED!
  By A3VQSFORKH8B7O on 2000-10-01
  Never before has a Shakespeare play been brought to the big screen like HAMLET in its entirety. And for a film based on a Shakespeare play, it is pretty fast paced. Kenneth Branagh gives an out-of-this-world performance as the Prince of Denmark. And moving it to the latter half of the nineteenth century did not ruin the play at all. The supporting actors (Derek Jacobi, Kate Winslet, Julie Christie, Billy Crystal, Gerard Depardieu, Brian Blessed, Robin Williams, and Charlton Heston) give some of their best performances to date. The sets are stunning, absolutely stunning. It is a movie that proves that Kenneth Branagh is one of the greatest directors of our time. He can take something like Shakespeare, and mold it into something that everybody can enjoy, while not ruining the work that was originally done upon the story. I recommend this film to all Shakespeare lovers! It will surely make you laugh, cry, and cheer! Grade: A+
  
  

• Henry V
• As You Like It
• Hamlet
• Twelfth Night
• Much Ado About Nothing