There are many film adaptations of Hamlet. Wikipedia estimates that since 1900, over 50 different film and tv adapations of the play have been produced. In fact, you have all likely seen one particular version.
In 1948, Sir Laurence Olivier directed and starred in a big screen adaptation of the play. It won best picture, despite the fact that Olivier, who himself portrayed Hamlet, was 40 years of age during the production. Olivier's approach at the time was groundbreaking: this was a film adaptation; not simply a recording of a stage production. Olivier uses narration to imply that Hamlet's soliloquies are internal monologue. Check out his version of the famous "To be, or not to be" speech, and just listen to that dramatic score.
In 1990, Franco Zeffirelli, an Italian film director, released his version of Hamlet. His 1968 film version of Romeo and Juliet is an English class staple. You may well remember it as the version where you briefly caught a glimpse of Romeo's bare backside.
 |
| Isn't he dreamy? |
But I digress. Zeffirelli's version of Hamlet features my favorite Hamlet: Mel Gibson. Here is his take on the "To be, or not to be" speech. Check out how smoothly Gibson delivers the lines in an emotional but conversational manner.
And here is yet another take on the speech. This one is from The Royal Shakespeare Company's 2009 TV adaptation starring David Tennant.
 |
| Yes, Kerwin. Dr. Who is also Hamlet. I know, mind blown. |
Your response is due by midnight, October 3rd. That is this Thursday.
I think Sir Laurence Olivier’s rendition of Hamlet’s soliloquy was the one that best captured the meaning of the speech.
ReplyDeleteSir Olivier takes advantage of the opportunities that a film version of Hamlet provides, and creates a setting that effectively conveys the speech, which I really like. The idea of Hamlet literally standing over a cliff-like place or at the top of a tower (perhaps a tower on the side of a cliff?), near the edge and close to the ravaging waters, between the throes of life and death – that’s kind of awesome. I love that he also uses props – the knife – to help emphasize the idea of “to be, or not to be”, and nearly kills himself with it, but doesn’t, which creates a smooth transition into what the catch is as to why many people don’t commit suicide (although I don’t think it was done in an entirely smooth manner, I really like the concept). The tension that is built up by the music is great, and the atmospheric sounds of the environment are nicely done, as they seem to be representative of living, whereas in the other two clips, there is dead silence (which is good in its own right, as it reminds the audience of death), barring the sound effects of Mel Gibson’s movement. There are certain parts that seem to visually represent the soliloquy as it is being done, like the aforementioned knife sequence (which is done in tandem with Hamlet’s reflection on whether to die or not), or the part where Sir Olivier’s Hamlet looks over the cliff, over the roaring waves, and mentions “the currents running awry”, which I feel helps to capture to meaning of the oration. Plus, I like the idea that the sequence is done through both Hamlet’s internal and external monologue – another advantage of having Hamlet in a film format. Sir Olivier’s depiction of Hamlet was alright – I like the transition he made not only with the knife during the early part of the speech, but with the actual speech itself (when he says “perchance to dream” in a way that seemed like he was saying, “however!”). Sir Olivier doesn’t make Hamlet the most expressive character, but he does a good job. Overall, the scene in general is pretty cool.
Though I enjoyed Mel Gibson’s performance as Hamlet, which I think is very expressive and, like you said, Mr. Clark, conversational, it lacks as much visual representation of the soliloquy at large; however, it does a really great job of conveying emotion and feeling (more than both The Royal Shakespeare Company – RSC - version and Sir Olivier’s version). And although I loved David Tenant as the Tenth Doctor (he did a “fantastic” job – “Molto bene”), I’m just not feeling his performance as Hamlet in the RSC production. Like Franco Zeffirelli’s version, there just aren’t enough visual elements to accompany and help represent the speech. Also, in the TRSC version of the monologue, there isn’t much camera movement, and there are only one or two transitions in the scene. The TRSC’s depiction of the oration relies mostly on David Tenant’s facial movements (it does look like he is reflecting, but it is a bit lacking in feeling compared to Mel Gibson’s) and his voice; it isn’t bad, but it isn’t amazing, either.
In short, Sir Olivier best encapsulates the soliloquy not only through his own recital thereof, but also through the visuals of the film.
I would make the argument that Zeffirelli's depiction of the speech also uses some fairly effective visual imagery. Hamlet delivers the speech in the catacombs, the literal home of the dead. And at one point, Hamlet even lies atop a sarcophagus. For a brief moment, it is almost as though Hamlet journeys to the land of the dead, the "country" from which "no traveller returns." I also find that I like that the scene features no background music, as I associate death with the cessation of earthly pleasures such as music.
ReplyDeleteAlso, your bit about the "currents running awry"--insightful, my friend.
I have to agree with Mr. Clark on this one. Mel Gibson's version was a lot more emotional than the other two. I liked how he was pacing around and looking at objects that resembled death because it clearly showed his train of thought. The other two were similar in that they were very dry. They got the point across, but not as well as Mel. (For more of Gabe's thoughts, follow him on twitter @GC_for_three)
ReplyDeleteShameless self-promotion!
DeleteI believe David Tenant's performance as Hamlet in the RSC production was the one that best captured the true meaning of the speech. Maintaining the close up shot as he recites the soliloguy gives you a better look at what Hamlet is feeling. We get to see what a toll it is taking on him, we get to put ourselves in Hamlets shoes, and we get to feel what he is feeling. Although Sir Olivier's take on Hamlets "To Be or Not to Be" was very well done as well, I'll have to agree with Mr. Clarks point on background music. I felt as if the added music in the scenes did not allow me to take the speech entirely seriously. As for Mel Gibsons version, I felt he didn't quite fit the part. I picture Hamlet as a weak pretty boy while Mel Gibson and his facial hair depict a man strong and in charge.
ReplyDeleteRemember, I am not actually Hamlet.
DeleteI like Zeffirelli's version because Gibson delievers the lines in a smooth and clear way that I can understand what he is saying
ReplyDeleteFirst off, way to be an overachiever Kerwin. Remind me to bring in cookies to reward you for your magnificent response (jk sarcasm). But on a more serious note, I think Mel Gibson's version truly captures the meaning of this speech. At this point in the story, Hamlet is contemplating suicide, so by having him give this speech in a burial crypt surrounded by the dead is a brilliant way to get the message across to viewers.
ReplyDeleteI disliked David Tennant's version because he just kind of stood in one spot talking and it lacked the emotion I felt when I watched the Mel Gibson version. Also it seemed like the whole time he was talking he was staring into my soul and it made me feel uncomfortable.
I watched the first minute of the other one and it bored me to tears so I stopped and ate some tastykakes because I have a tendency to get distracted easily. Ooh look, a squirrel...
Tennant has one unsettling stare, that's for sure.
DeleteOops did I say Kerwin? I meant to say Kenny H. All those "K" names seem the same to me
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion as said by Gabe and even Mr. Clark, Mel Gibson's version of "Hamlet" was the best in the sense of pure emotion and his overall thats judged as craziness. He rambles on to his mother with such a strong gaze that it puts fear into you and you feel as if he is looking through you. Even his look onto objects that look of death is disturbing and he seems of pure insanity. Hamlet played by Mel Gibson has to be by far the best showing of the scene where he interacts with his mother.
ReplyDeleteIn my opinion, Mel Gibson's performance was the better of the three. You can tell that Gibson put feeling and emotion into this speech and I felt it more with him than anyone else. Also, I liked Gibson as Hamlet more than anyone else;I pictured Hamlet more like him. I also really liked the different camera angles they used. David Tenant's performance was also realistic and deep. However, they close up on him didn't really entertain me and made it harder for me to watch. Although Sir Olivier's speech on Hamlets "To Be or Not to Be" was done very well, I didn't like the background music. The music did not make the speech realistic or serious. They all did very well with getting the point across, but Mel Gibson's was the better of the three.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mel Gibson was the better of the three. Gibson had the best performance with the most emotion and feeling put into this speech and I felt it more with him. Also, I pictured Hamlet more like Gibson than anyone else; he fit the part the best. I also liked all the different camera angles they used in this scene. David Tenant's performance was realistic and deep. However, I did not like the close up angles they used in this scene. It was hard me for me to concentrate and watch this video. Although Sir Olivier's speech on Hamlets "To Be or Not to Be" was very well done, I did not like the background music. It was hard for me to watch and take it serious; it wasn't realistic. All three actors got the point across very well, but Gibson had the best performance.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mel Gibson was the better of the three. Gibson had the best performance with the most emotion and feeling put into this speech and I felt it more with him. Also, I pictured Hamlet more like Gibson than anyone else; he fit the part the best. I also liked all the different camera angles they used in this scene. David Tenant's performance was realistic and deep. However, I did not like the close up angles they used in this scene. It was hard me for me to concentrate and watch this video. Although Sir Olivier's speech on Hamlets "To Be or Not to Be" was very well done, I did not like the background music. It was hard for me to watch and take it serious; it wasn't realistic. All three actors got the point across very well, but Gibson had the best performance.
ReplyDeleteI believe that Mel Gibson was the better of the three. Gibson had the best performance with the most emotion and feeling put into this speech and I felt it more with him. Also, I pictured Hamlet more like Gibson than anyone else; he fit the part the best. I also liked all the different camera angles they used in this scene. David Tenant's performance was realistic and deep. However, I did not like the close up angles they used in this scene. It was hard me for me to concentrate and watch this video. Although Sir Olivier's speech on Hamlets "To Be or Not to Be" was very well done, I did not like the background music. It was hard for me to watch and take it serious; it wasn't realistic. All three actors got the point across very well, but Gibson had the best performance.
ReplyDelete4 comments, Alex? I'm confused.
DeleteI enjoyed the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet, considering he had the most emotion out of the other videos. I really focused on the speech "To Be or Not To Be" in the Mel Gibson film because there were so many different shots and angles that it kept me focused on the soliloquy. If I stare at an object for too long I start to doze off and not pay attention.
ReplyDeleteSir Olivers soliloquy was intense, but after a minute I was honestly bored to death. And the video was in black in white. I'm not a huge fan of black and white. And he was awkwardly sitting on a rock and the set just looked really fake. To me this version came off as cheesy.
And the video with David Tenant was good but I felt way too claustrophobic because of the close up shots. I felt like I was going to throw up.
-Nydiana i like Mel Gibson video the best for the Hamlet played. when i watch the the other two videos i didnt feel it, for me i thought they were boring and dry. Mel Gibson good acting showing emotion and anger was good.
ReplyDeleteI want to start out with the fact that I am very partial to David Tennant, as I am to any actor who has been in a Harry Potter film. I did not like Sir Laurence Olivier's soliloquy. I thought the music was off-putting and to be honest, I didn't even make it through the whole thing. It was too theatrical. Mel Gibson's soliloquy was much easier to get down and I actually watched the whole thing. I liked the setting and the movement, because if I was contemplating suicide, I wouldn't stand against a wall or lay down on a rock, I'd probably be losing my mind and moving every which way. David Tennant's soliloquy was good but there just wasn't enough movement or emotional depth in the voice. His face, the focal point, captured the emotion but the voice did not and for someone like me, voice is the most important tool an actor can use.
ReplyDeleteMel Gibson's performance made the character come off the ancient text and alive into the present day. His style made the Hamlet seem realistic and dynamic. Instead of a man gone crazy, Hamlet seemed like someone I knew who was going through a difficult, contemplative time in his life where he thought no one could be trusted.
ReplyDeleteMel is the relatable Hamlet, I agree!
DeleteThe manner in which the infamous "To Be or Not to Be" soliloquy was depicted in the Mel Gibson version seems to just blow the other versions out of the water… if ya know what i mean ;)… The camera angle as he first starts to speak is ---- which, in this case, implies that oh perplexed Hamlet is talking to himself once again. He seems to get some type of enjoyment out of the way he says the word "sleep" as if it is some type of utopia for Mr. Hammey. The first film by Sir Laurence Oliver does a good job for that time period depicting that this conversation is going on in his head, it is just somewhat boring and drags on after the same The Little Mermaid scene of him laying across a rock by the ocean. i never realized how common and diverse the portrayal of this scene was.
ReplyDeleteI believe Mel Gibson’s version of the famous Hamlet soliloquy “To Be, Or Not To Be” best captures the meaning of the speech. In Gibson’s version he expresses emotion in his words and through his facial expressions, which allows viewers to see where the character is coming from during his internal struggle and watch the scene with more ease. Unlike David Tennant and Laurence Olivier in my opinion, who stay for the most part at a steady volume and hardly change their overall expression. I also really enjoy the scenery in the Mel Gibson version; it allows him to play with the props to showcase his emotion at certain times throughout the speech. While I also enjoyed Laurence Oliver’s scenery as well, I feel at some parts it takes away from his acting.
ReplyDeleteI have to disagree with most of the comments here, the part of Sir Olivier's rendition of the soliloquy that was most off putting was not the music, I didn't even notice it until I read the mentions of it in the comments, but the fact that it was so numb. It seemed so one note, just a sad contemplation, there was no complexity, no intrigue, it sounded like Olivier took a hit of Novocaine before the cameras started rolling.
ReplyDeleteGibson's rendition was pretty good, but no cigar, at least not in my eyes. He had more flavor to his, you could feel the sadness and then the passion in the ending, but it radiated too much of Gibson's natural rage, it wasn't delicate enough, the man is supposed to be contemplating suicide after all, he's supposed to be slightly off base,not halfway to home plate. Plus, I feel that Gibson is too robust of a person to be cast as Hamlet. In this roll Gibson looks more like a burly caveman than a delicate cunning prince of Danes. This factor too seems to throw me off when observing this version of the soliloquy.
To me, the best rendition was that of David Tennant. Tennant was able to bring the right emotions as well as the right AMOUNT of emotion to his version of the speech. He is quiet, he sounds and looks broken, he looks so fragile that he could break at any moment, like he's holding onto a thread which is how I imagined this soliloquy to be, he looks like a man being torn apart on the inside, a man who is contemplating suicide. Not only that but with the close ups to his face you can see these emotions,his vacant the glint in his eyes, the tinge of crazy swimming about in them. He emanates everything I feel the character should be for this speech- fragile, pensive, and slightly insane. Tennant finds balance in the emotion and the solemnity to convey this speech, something his fellow Hamlets could not seem to achieve, making him the best of the three in the area of this soliloquy.
This is the best defense of Tennant I have read thus far. Also, "Gibson's natural rage"--Ha!.
DeleteOlivier's Hamlet is quite subdued and creepily blank. He is almost ghost-like.
It was tough for me to choose between David Tenet and Mel Gibsons version. They both had deep and obvious emotion and felt what they were saying but took different approaches.Mel Gibson seemed a little more angry and upset. He began to speak louder and began to yell Where David was more mono tone. But his expression,and the look in his eyes portrayed pain and sadness deep within and beyond repair. They were both great in my opinion but if i had to give one and edge it'd be Mel Gibson. He had a way with his words and they stood out at you more.
ReplyDeleteId have to agree with ish about the first one......It was very boring and i did not watch the whole thing. I stopped about a min. and a half through. He just wasn't......Real.....He didn't show much emotion.
I believe David Tenet's version was the best rendition because the fact he fits the part of Hamlet the best out of the three. The way he makes every segment of the speech drastic and keeps the dramatic flow throughout the scene. In agreement to Ryan and Ish the first one was to unemotional and plain. Besides the guy playing Hamlet looks much too old. Hamlet is supposed to be younger and have a somewhat crazy personality. I did like Mel Gibson's version though, but again he looks just a little to old for me and David Tenet's speech was the best.
ReplyDeletethis is my favorite version:
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdTnlnJjSqE
Connor, Sandler gets it all wrong! The skull is from a later speech in which Hamlet holds the skull of Yorick, a court jester who entertained him as a child, a man whom he fondly remembers.
DeleteI would have to agree with most people about the Mel Gibson version. The way he invokes emotion into every word he said is amazing. He uses his facial expressions and body language to portray the soliloquy. The other ones were very good too. I liked the beginning of Sir Laurence Oliver one as well. However the music was distracting from the importance of the speech. The David tenant version also had a lot of emotion and great shots. But it lacked the sadness and craziness that I think Mel Gibson had in his performance. Over all the Mel Gibson take was the best. I liked the setting of this one. It expressed the meaning of the soliloquy in a very dynamic way.
ReplyDeletemel gibsons one was the best. Definitely more emotional and feels more real.
ReplyDeletedid my comment come up?
ReplyDeleteI know I’m siding with the majority here, but I have to say that Mel Gibson delivered the superior speech. Unlike the other two, Gibson speaks Hamlet’s lines in a way that feels truly natural. Oliver came across as over dramatic, and Tennant wasn’t dramatic enough. Gibson was spot on and delivered an excellent performance. Tennant and Oliver were also lacking a wide range of emotions. Hamlet has sporadic mood swings ranging from slumps of depression to absolute fits of rage. Tennant and Oliver kept themselves as depressed Hamlet for the entirety of the speech. Mel kept it moving, showing diverse emotions and delivering the speech in the same way that the true Hamlet would. It is without question that Mel Gibson conveyed the most accurate and entertaining speech of the three.
ReplyDeleteClark, believe me when I tell you that this comment will be completely objective. Objective as possible, anyway. But, huge shocker: Tennant's version was NOT my favorite. Here's why:
ReplyDeleteDavid Tennant is a beautiful actor. Truly, beautiful and stupendous in every project he's worked on, whether it be Doctor Who or Harry Potter or Broadchurch, or heck, even Hamlet! But, regardless of his brilliant interpretation of his "To be or not to be" soliloquy, alongside his brilliant interpretation of the character as a whole, the scene lacked the essence of drama and reflection that Mel Gibson's version had. The problem with this scene is, too much is invested in Tennant's ability to convey emotion through his facial movements. While he is more than capable of doing so, it fell through a bit too much in the scene. With no camera movement, or any movement at all, really, the physical gesticulation of emotion was too absent in this scene.
On the other hand, like mentioned earlier, Mel Gibson succeeded in areas where Tennant did not. Gibson had movement. He had pitch and tone, and while delivering the soliloquy smoothly and with pace, he also had the ruggedness in his voice to distinguish his different emotions during the verse. Not only did he have movement, but so did the camera. There were a few long shots in the scene, showing that Hamlet was in the catacombs, and symbolizing that he was ultimately surrounded by death. The shot showing his head lowered as he exited the catacombs show that not only is he torn, but that he is emotionally tired.
Finally, I didn't enjoy Sir Olivier's all too much. Nor do I have much to say about it at all. The mixing of both internal and external speech seemed unnecessary, and the music was generally off-putting. I appreciated his interpretation, but it's nowhere near to being my favorite.
All in all, I enjoyed Gibson's version the most. Forgive me, Tennant, but the Tenth Doctor suits you better.
Kerwin, may I applaud your objectivity?
DeleteYou may.
DeleteOut of the three soliloquy's, I'd have to say that the David Tennant delivery really struck me the most. Like Kerwin said, this version did lack Camera angles, bet lets not forget what Hamlet first was. If this was the good ol' days back in the Globe and I was standing in the Pit, I would sure hope that I was seeing Tennant deliver this speech(although he wasn't alive back then, but hey, neither was I). I felt as if his delivery of the speech seriously made it sound like this Hamlet wanted to die.
ReplyDeleteThe fun with Hamlet is it's so open to questions and opinions. When reading this, I feel as if Hamlet is really just acting crazy. When watching the Mel Gibson version, he just really seems flat out crazy. His emotions are like a roller-coaster and that actions that follow seem just about the same way. However, Tennant shows a more depressed and alone Hamlet and that just how I personally view him because I know if I were in his shoes that's how'd I'd be.
The problem I found with the Olivier version is I just couldn't take it seriously. Here, he just seems a bit too whinny for me. Also, the delivery of the speech was a bit robotic
After watching all of the scenes, I have to jump on the bandwagon and go with Mel Gibson's version of "To Be or Not To Be". He definitely showed a lot more emotion than the others and took advantage of his environment. By using the small props around him as symbols just made the scene so much better in my opinion, and the reason why Gibson beat Tennant. In addition, the setting just seemed to fit the way I would imagine it to have been in the play.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, David Tennant did a great job on his interpretation on the soliloquy too. However I did not like Sir Laurence Olivier take on the soliloquy at all. I do not like the idea of it being a narration for starters. It just seemed awkward and very out of place. Also it feels like it would be out of place to the rest of that version of Hamlet.
Sir Laurence Oliver's portrayal of Hamlet was difficult for me to appreciate. While it had the classic film feel to it, I found the film's age too piercing for me to look past. Between the over dramatic elevator music in the background and the way he lays on the rock (2:11 into the clip) like he wants to be painted like one of Jack Dawson's French girls, I found it unsettlingly cheesy. David Tennant's performance was thankfully simpler which in turn created a more realistic feel. This version used close ups the most effectively which I appreciated. However, his cold stare did not seem to match the Hamlet that is developing more and more questionable mentality and uncontrollable emotions of grief and anger.
ReplyDeleteSimilar to popular opinion I found Mr. Mel Gibson's rendition to be the best. As previously mentioned Hamlet, angry and mourning, deserved an actor who could adopt the pain of his character. His impressing voice modulations and incredible articulation amplified his accurate time shifts as we can only infer Shakespeare had imagined. Great tactics such as the way he leaned over the tomb, breathed and swallowed at emotional lines, and turned his back to the camera to show he was talking to himself convinced me Gibson was the best Hamlet.
In all honesty, I would have to go with the Mel Gibson version of "To be or not to be". Not only is the emotion present and effective but his body language speaks to a world of its own. I have never seen Mel Gibson act poorly in anything but this is purely riveting. In the other two versions, both the Olivier picture and the David Tennant adaptation, the emotion is present and you can see that Hamlet is in somewhat of a sticky situation, but the audience itself doesmt actually feel anything other than minor sympathy. Mel Gibson makes me want to argue, want to cry, want to respond and the other two just don't provoke that type of reaction from me.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite one was by far the Mel Gibson version. Sir Laurence Oliver's version just had too many odd effects and the music didn't seem to fit, which took away from the seriousness and thought behind the speech. It was hard to watch him and feel the emotion in what he was saying so I found it easy to get distracted and ignore what he was saying. Which is kind of why I didn't even watch the whole video, honestly. Mel Gibson's version and David Tennant's version did a much better job at capturing the emotion and drawing in the audience. The setting of both videos seemed more fitting to what was happening. The lack of music, effects, and colors left you to listen to Hamlet and watch the expressions on his face. Mel Gibson's version stood out to me more than David Tennant's just because I liked the movement and expressions better rather than just a simple close up shot.
ReplyDeleteBoth the Sir Laurence Olivier and David Tennant version of the "To be or not to be" soliloquy were too drawn out for me to catch any interest. Mel Gibson really captured my attention the best. Gibson put so much passion into his voice when reciting the soliloquy, and he also portrayed the character of Hamlet exactly how I imagined him to be. Gibson knew exactly how to show Hamlet's emotion which was often mistaken by insanity. Lastly, seeing Gibson pace around the room and looking around frantically at objects gave more of an idea of Hamlet's train of thought in that moment. Olivier and Tennant did an okay job, but they were not as interesting and realistic as Gibson.
ReplyDeleteCarly DiFabio
I believe the Mel Gibson version is the best version of "To be or not to be". The way he presents the speech is smooth and filled with emotion. But I think the best part is the sculptures that are around him. Some are of people that are at rest peacefully, while others are just piles of bones. This shows the different mind sets that he encounters while thinking about what happens after you die.
ReplyDeleteKenny Merlock
Upon examining the clips of the "To be or not to be" speech, I found that the Mel Gibson version posed as the better of them. In the Sir Laurence Oliver version, the actor seemed to have little to no emotion while giving the speech. He seemed very monotone to me. Also, the music served as a distraction that took away the integrity of the speech. In the Mel Gibson version, he paused for effect, the background was silent and changed his voice many times. He would go from talking to whispering and put real emotion into it. Plus I think Mel is a great actor so I would ultimately have to lean towards his version
ReplyDeleteBlake Biren
In my opinion, the Mel Gibson version was by far the best compared to
ReplyDeletethe other two versions. The way it was presented, gave the viewers a
clear understanding of what was going on and what message was being
delivered by Hamlet. It was a little more difficult trying to figure
out what was going on in the other versions.
Sam Liepe
In my opinion, the Mel Gibson version of Hamlet's "To be or not to be" soliloquy was the best because it was the more emotional presentation out of the three. He would pause at times, change the pitch of his voice, put his head down and look/move around the room the entire time. He almost appeared to be going a little mad, which progressed as he went on. Sir Laurence Oliver's version came off as insincere, monotone, and didn't really intrigue me at all. Tennant's version lacked the dramatic factor, which should have been the very foundation of his performance. There were no flashy camera angles or music in the background of Mel's performance, he gave the most accurate portrayal using pure skill and raw emotion: something the other two versions were missing.
ReplyDeleteKelsey Botbyl
Mel Gibson's "To Be or Not To Be" speech was the best. Mel Gibson is a great actor. I feel as if other Hamlet's were showing too much emotion or not enough emotion. Mel Gibson did it just right. Sir Laurence was very dull and didn't capture much of my attention. Mel Gibson made me feel as if I actually felt his pain. Like I was actually there. The rest of the Hamlet's were decent but not close to Mel Gibson.
ReplyDelete-Brandon Roberson
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI thought it was funny that it was Sir Laurence Olivier because i just saw My Week With Marilyn the other day (he's "in" that movie) but anyway… i couldn't even finish watching his version it was just lacking in everything and i just couldn't help thinking "kill me now" before i ended it. Mel Gibsons version was good and interesting to watch and is the better of the two but I'm going to have to go with David Tennants version. He actually looks like he's deep in thought and is just voicing them. I like the part when it gets to "…to sleep but chance to dream." Thats when he looks like he's considering the downfall of suicide and the horrors of the unknown. he conveys so much emotion you can't help but feel his fright. Plus… I Love HP
ReplyDelete