- Chose one or two of the film elements listed below and consider how Branagh’s version (1996) and Zeffirelli’s version (1990) compare and contrast
- Compare and contrast the adaptations by examining the portrayal of major characters or a character
- Respond to another student’s comments (NB: identify who you are responding to by using the tag “@” such as @Socrates if you are responding to me)
Please post your comments by Monday, January 24th.
- Sound effects, background noise in the scene
- Soundtrack, music, voiceovers and other sounds put on over the scene
Language Elements:
- What lines are emphasized?
- What lines (if any) are noticeably cut, included, or altered?
Performance and delivery:
- Facial expressions
- Gestures and mannerisms, body language
- Tone of voice and inflection
- Fluctuation, Pauses, and Volume of voice
- Where is the scene taking place physically?
- What do props and costumes tell us about the characters and about the time period?
- How are the props/setting used and what might they mean/signify?
- How long does the director stay with shots?
- How often are there cuts and transitions?
- When does the camera take the view of a character?
- Were there close ups, long shots? To what effect?
- What is the effect of each of these aspects on the scene?
- How does each director establish the tone of the scene?
In Branagh’s version of Hamlet the scene took place in a modernized castle, the costumes weren’t typical medieval dress instead they were very common wealthy outfits. Even the so called “maids,” like Ophelia were dressed nicely; this allows the audience to focus more on the obvious storyline rather than the different social classes. This was a very effective way of presenting ‘Hamlet’ because instead of looking at the controversy in Ophelia and Hamlets relationship I looked at the overall plot that was occurring. In Branagh’s version of Hamlet the props and costumes were used to symbolize certain properties in the scene, for instance in the introduction the Queen was wearing a white dress to represent her “pureness;” this enhances the atmosphere of the scene because it gives movie-watchers the impression that all is right in Denmark, or that’s what they want people to believe. Zeffirelli’s version, however, was much different. Set in a typical medieval castle, the guards were dressed in armour, the King and Queen dressed in embellished outfits, and Ophelia was dressed as a grungy maid. These costume varieties allowed the audience to actually understand the time period and how it effected how each character presented themselves. Unlike Branagh’s version, Zeffirelli focused on the different social classes and what role they played in ‘Hamlet.’ The costumes symbolized the dissimilar lifestyles that Hamlet and Ophelia have, this adds to the overall movie by allowing readers to understand why Laertes thinks it’s a bad idea that Ophelia pursues a relationship with such a powerful prince. While comparing the two films, I came to the conclusion that Mel Gibson’s facial expression, gestures and mannerism was more extreme and exaggerated in Zeffirelli’s film then in Branagh’s film. Mel Gibson definitely played the role of ‘insane’ Hamlet much more convincingly then Kenneth Branagh. In Branagh’s version, Hamlet was portrayed as more quiet and secretive while in Zeffirelli’s version he was portrayed as loud and, in a way, creepy. The volume of the voices fluctuate between Branagh and Gibson for only when he needs to Branagh raises his volume to add to the scene when Gibson consistently has the same tone throughout the whole movie. In the end, the Physical elements and Performance create different atmospheres to both plays which change the representations of the various Hamlets giving them different personalities and attitudes.
ReplyDeleteI missed most of the movie because of my oral defense, but from what I saw some differences in Zeffirelli’s version in comparison to Branagh’s would be:
ReplyDelete• Medieval setting
• Showed the funeral of the King
• The wedding room didn’t look pure like Branagh’s version, no white dress, no white walls
• Claudius doesn’t have the conversation with Laertes and Hamlet in front of the crowd
• No scene with the ghost and the guards
• Characters are more physical with each other: Claudius and the Queen make out in the open, the queen gives lots of kisses to Hamlet
• Women were not allowed to act in theatre during the medieval times, so there was a man playing the role of a woman in the performance for Hamlet
• After the scene of the uncle poisoning his brother, Claudius reacted much more dramatically and laughed loud and evilly
• Again the characters are much more physical: the Queen slaps Hamlet, Hamlet aims his knife at her, she tries to run away, he throws her on the bed, they are both much more emotional and remorseful than in Branagh’s version, and then things are taken too far when he dry humps her and makes out with her… EW.
• Shows Hamlet, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern on the boat, and Hamlet finding the letters and Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s decapitation
• More emotional response in the castle to Ophelia’s madness
• Shows Ophelia at the river contemplating suicide and later her body floating down the stream
The performance and delivery in both versions of Shakespeare's Hamlet are very different. One scene that stuck out was when Hamlet puts on the play to determine Claudius' culpability. I believe part of this difference in portrayal is because of the era the play was set in. In Branagh's adaptation, the actors where females and males respectively however in Zeffirelli's version, a man was acting a woman's part as well (very medieval). More importantly was Claudius' reaction in the films and his overall performance in both. In Branagh's version, Claudius' response to the play's message was more reserved and settle. Claudius stood but did not have an outburst of emotion like in Zeffirelli's adaptation. In Zeffirelli's rendition, the actor who played Claudius stood up and made a huge scene of his guilty conscience. Zeffirelli also added lines for Claudius to say when his guilty conscience was taking over that were not in Branagh's version. I also liked the performance by Helena Bonham Carter in Zeffirelli's Hamlet as Ophelia. Her delivery of 'crazy' Ophelia was very believable and showcased the actress' talents very well. Overall I did prefer Branagh's version over Zeffirelli's. I enjoyed the more modern take (relatively speaking) however I might be biased since we read the play while watching Branagh's movie; influencing my perception and vision of the characters in the play.
ReplyDelete@Brittany I also enjoyed the performance by Helena Bonham Carter. It was much more entertaining to watch her play the role of 'crazy' Ophelia than Kate Winslet in Branagh's version of Hamlet.
ReplyDeleteHamlet, by Kenneth Branagh and Frank Zeffirelli, present two different versions or interpretations of Shakespeare’s text. Although similar in plotline, both films portray dramatic differences. The most apparent are the film’s duration, setting, and character contrast. Branagh’s version runs just over four hours covering most of the original text, whereas Zeffirelli’s version is just over two hours. Zeffirelli’s shortened version has omissions that take away from the interpretation of Shakespeare’s masterwork. The setting of each film is obviously different. Branagh’s setting is sometime in the 19th century and portrays a more modern version which is best illustrated by the palace of Elsinore. The mirrored doors, white trim, elaborate staircase and lighting, all share a dramatic contrast to the palace in Zeffirelli’s film which portrays a medieval interpretation to this time period. The longer version by Branagh enables more character development. Branagh, having more screen time, stays closer to the text of Shakespeare further developing his character. Also, Branagh has been studying and directing Shakespeare for years allowing him to interpret his character of Hamlet more closely; he “lives and breathes” Hamlet. As a result, he makes his analysis clear and defined. Branagh can be characterized as being noble, commanding and very intellectual. Gibson, on the other hand, creates an energetic Hamlet, who works well on the screen, even if he is somewhat destructive. In the shortened version, Gibson recites fewer lines. His character does not interpret Hamlet with the same effect as Branagh and often his lines sound memorized. Zeffirelli’s attention to time period with scenery, props, and costumes make Gibson’s Hamlet more realistic in appearance but his verbal communication lacks credibility. In addition, Branagh and Gibson, both avenge the death of their fathers but the relationships between father and son are quite different. In Zeffirelli’s version, Hamlet’s love for his father is obvious whereas in Branagh’s version, the sight of his father’s ghost appears to be his motivation for revenge. Also, Hamlet genuinely loves Ophelia and even though he portrays to be mad, he would never truly hurt her. Gibson’s behaviour appears more patient and rational towards her than Branagh’s. Overall, I preferred Branagh’s version of Hamlet. My attention focused on the more modern style film rather than the traditional one.
ReplyDeleteAfter viewing both the Branagh and Zeffirelli versions of Hamlet, a lot of differences stood out to me. The aspect that caught my attention the most was the differences in the performance and delivery. I noticed that Ophelia was a lot more outwardly insane in the Zeffirelli version. This fit the actress who played her (Helena Bonham Carter) because she is in a lot of expressive roles. A lot of my classmates observed this as well, indicating to me that Bonham has made quite an impression through her various roles. In addition to this, Hamlet and his mother were a lot more physical in the kissing scene. I feel like this version was much more dramatic because it had a lot of well known actors/actresses in it, such as Glenn Close, Mel Gibson and Helena Bonham Carter. These were the main differences that I noticed, and while the similarities are much less obvious, I found the two Claudiuses to be quite similar, as well as the portrayal of Laertes.
ReplyDeleteThe physical differences in the setting, and props was the most noticeable between the films. Branagh’s version, was much more modern than Zeffirelli’s. The castle was a regal setting with marbled floors, and beautiful decorations mostly white in color. The overall whiteness of the setting and the props expressed the pureness and peace that Denmark is in (which only Hamelt knows is false).Nearly all of the characters were well groomed and well dressed. The neatness of the setting and the characters made it easy to assume that the story was taking place in a royal family dealing with royal matters.
ReplyDeleteZeffirelli's version of Hamlet had a much more rugged feel. The settings and costumes were all medieval and much darker than the Branagh's version. The walls of the castle were built with stony gray bricks and the props within were either wooden or made of metal. The characters were also dressed in dirtier clothing, especially Ophelia who wore worn garbs instead of a neat dress like in the Branagh's version. HIgh class characters wore fur coats and leather. The overall primitive look also portrayed the darker mood of the movie which was more exagerated and violent than Branagh's version.
In Zeffirelli's version, Mel Gibson portryed hamlet in a much more dramatic fashion than Kenneth Brannagh. This stood out the most in the scene where he murders Polonius. Gibson was much more violent and appeared quite insane, especially when he harasses his mother in distrubingly sexual manner. Brannagh's performance in this scene was dramatic as well but it wasn't nearly as discomforting as Mel Gibson's. Gibson portrayed Hamlet as more of a troubled maniac than the careful wordsmith he is in the play. He seemed to much less in shorter spurts, and the whole film seemed to go by much faster.
@Michael, you are quite sharp. I like how you noticed that Mel Gibson recites fewer lines and his energy works well with the film. I personally agree that his portrayal of Hamlet isn't as clear and well rounded as Branagh's despite using superior props and costumes. Nice little background research on Branagh, i didn't know he was primarily a Shakespearean filmaker/actor. That must have surely been a deciding factor on whose performance was more accurate.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading all of the comments made by the other classmates, I would have to say that basically Stephanie has covered everything that I have noticed regarding performance. I would say that there are more differences between the movies rather than similarities. I agree that Ophelia in Zefferelli's version is way more dramatic and expressive than the Ophelia from Branagh's version because it has to do with the actress and how she consider the role should be played and thats the way they played it. Hamlet in Zeffirelli's version is more subtle throughout the film rather than Hamlet from Branagh's version who is very expressive and passionate. The one time I noticed Hamlet, from Zefferelli's version, not being subtle was when he kissed his mother during the scene where Hamlet was confronting his mother in the bedroom. I also agree with the fact that the portrayal of Laertes and Claudius was very similar within the movies.
ReplyDeleteUpon viewing the two versions of the play, I noticed changes mostly in how the actors portray the characters. Zeffirelli's version of the play was filmed in a medieval castle which created a darker mood, and this allowed for the characters to take on a much more realistic role and wardrobe than Brenagh's version. Zeffirelli's time period and character wardrobe is directly contrasted by Brenagh's take on these aspects, where the time period the play was set many years later, the castle was full of vibrant colors, and the actors wore more modernized costumes. I believe that the modernization of the play in Brenagh's version caused his take on the play to not have the same effect of realism that the viewer experiences when watching Zeffirelli's version. However, Zeffirelli's take was a condensed version and not as true to the text as Brenagh's version was. I noticed that Brenagh used voice fluctuations and altered the volume of his voice to better convey the tone of his character to the audience, whereas Mel Gibson relied more on facial expression and body language. I think that Brenagh more effectively captured the intensity and emotion that the character Hamlet experienced when he was faced with conflict in the play, and for that reason I believe Brenagh portrayed the character of Hamlet better than Gibson did. I believe the roles of other characters such as Ophelia were better portrayed in Zeffireli's version because of the element of realism. I enjoyed watching Brenagh's version more than I did watching Zeffirelli's version because of its trueness to the text and the modernized style.
ReplyDelete@Kristine, I agree with your opinions on the costumes and how they effected the way people look at and understand the play. Just like you said, Brenagh's version allowed the viewer to concentrate more on the plot and storyline, and how the element of realism in Zeffirelli's version "...allowed the audience to actually understand the time period and how it effected how each character presented themselves.".
ReplyDeleteWhen comparing the two videos, the most obvious difference seen by any viewer is the portrayal of dialogue by characters. I found that Hamlet in Branagh’s version acted to the essence of Shakespeare’s play whereas Mel Gibson plays a role of emphasizing words rather than the complete dialogue. This can be compared more easily in Hamlet’s soliloquy, ‘To or not to be’ of both versions. Mel Gibson’s speech was either low or high pitched , however a transitional combination (not to mention pauses that absorbed more interest for the plot to the viewer ) between the two in Branagh’s version reflected the rise in climax of Hamlet’s attitude. Though both characters displayed a state of misery and confusion here, Branagh’s version, to me, was more effective to understand the literary thinking as words and phrases were directed to its proper meaning. It is therefore that Branagh’s version reflected good body language which aided the emphasis of language, whereas Mel Gibson’s facial features quite honestly depicted more of unwillingness to act as Hamlet as a whole.
ReplyDelete@britannydavies: I would also agree that my point of view maybe bias as we were analyzing Branagh more thoroughly and annotating his way of speech while Zeffireli's was taken more casually and in addition, I gave half of my attention as I worked on my Self-Evaluation.
ReplyDeleteMedia Studies:
ReplyDeleteWhile reviewing both films I was able to have an immediate reaction to the difference between films. Finally after watching both films I compared and contrasted between Branagh’s version (1996) and Zeffirelli’s version (1990). In point form these are my findings:
• Wardrobe: I found Zeffirelli’s version to be more elaborate. For example, Ophelia’s wardrobe had been more of gowns compared to the wardrobes in Baranagh’s version she was seen to be “maid” clothing.
• In Baranagh’s version I found more of the symbolic “white” throughout the film as in Zeffirelli’s even the wedding seemed to be pretty dim.
• I felt that overall Branagh's version is more modern than Zeffirelli's. Examples would include: setting: architecture, electricity, wardrobe and Branagh’s to be more traditional.
• There was also a funeral for King Hamlet as not seen in Branagh’s version.
• Concerning acting I felt as though both Ophelia’s were played very well, as for the character Hamlet I enjoyed Branagh’s version however, by the end I preferred Mel Gibson’s performance.
• Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are also visually different in both versions:
-Branagh’s version > one tall and one short
- Zeffirelli’s version> they look a lot alike almost like brothers
• I also noticed Hamlet spying a lot more in Zeffirelli’s version
• Length wise I noticed Branagh’s version is a lot longer than Zeffirelli’s version
• Zeffirelli’s version had short shots amd Branagh has longher but more widespread
• The ghost in both films are also very different
-Branagh’s version > the ghost is wearing armor as well as his eyes are very blue (Hamlet also seemed to be more afraid of him)
-Zeffirelli’s version> the ghost here is the king just a tad dimmed out (we also see Hamlet not that afraid of him)
• When the play was taking place Claudius in Zeffirelli’s version reacted more compared to Branagh’s version where Hamlet had reacted more during the play.