To be, or not to be: that is the question (3.1.64-98).
To be, or not to be: that is the question:
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer (65)
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks (70)
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, (75)
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, (80)
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life, (85)
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of? (90)
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry, (95)
And lose the name of action.-- Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember'd.
Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer (65)
The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,
Or to take arms against a sea of troubles,
And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep;
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks (70)
That flesh is heir to, 'tis a consummation
Devoutly to be wish'd. To die, to sleep;
To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub;
For in that sleep of death what dreams may come
When we have shuffled off this mortal coil, (75)
Must give us pause: there's the respect
That makes calamity of so long life;
For who would bear the whips and scorns of time,
The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, (80)
The insolence of office and the spurns
That patient merit of the unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? who would fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life, (85)
But that the dread of something after death,
The undiscover'd country from whose bourn
No traveller returns, puzzles the will
And makes us rather bear those ills we have
Than fly to others that we know not of? (90)
Thus conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution
Is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought,
And enterprises of great pitch and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry, (95)
And lose the name of action.-- Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins remember'd.
NOTES: [Source: http://shakespeare.about.com/od/studentresources/a/tobeornot.htm Amanda Mabillard, B.A. (Honors) is a
freelance writer specializing in Shakespeare, Renaissance political theory,
theatre history, comparative literary history, and linguistic topics in
Renaissance literature.]
slings ] Some argue that "slings" is a misprint of
the intended word, "stings". "The stings of fortune" was a
common saying in the Renaissance. But in the context of the soliloquy,
"slings" likely means "sling-shot" or "missile".
This seems in keeping with the reference to "arrows" - both can do
great harm.
outrageous fortune ] Fortune is "outrageous" in that
it is brazenly defiant.
And by opposing end them ] If you cannot suffer the
"slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" then you must end your
troubles with suicide. [Mr. Cook’s note: other critics read this phrase more
broadly.]
consummation ] Final settlement of all matters.
rub ] Impediment. The term comes from bowling, where the
"rub" is any obstacle the pushes the ball off course.
shuffled off this mortal coil ] To separate from one's body
(mortal coil = body).
respect ] Consideration.
of so long life ] So long-lived.
time ] Time = temporal life.
his quietus make ] Settle his own account.
bare bodkin ] A "mere dagger". Bodkin was a Renaissance
term used to describe many different sharp instruments, but it makes the most
sense here to assume Shakespeare means a dagger.
fardels ] Burdens.
No traveller returns ] Since Hamlet has already encountered his
father's ghost, and thus proof of the afterlife, this line has raised much
debate. There are four major current theories regarding this line: 1)
Shakespeare made an egregious error and simply failed to reconcile the
appearance of the ghost and Hamlet's belief that human beings do not return; 2)
Hamlet has earlier revealed that he doubts the authenticity of the ghost and,
therefore, he does not believe his father has truly returned; 3) Hamlet is
referring only to human beings returning in the flesh and not as mere shadows
of their former selves; 4) the entire soliloquy is misplaced and rightfully
belongs before Hamlet has met his father's ghost. In my estimation, theory #4
seems the most plausible.
bourn ] Limit or boundary.
native hue of resolution ] Natural. Here Hamlet refers to the
"natural color of courage".
pale cast of thought ] Sickly tinge of contemplation.
great pitch and moment ] Of momentous significance. The
"pitch" was the name given to the highest point in a falcon's flight
before it dives down to catch its prey.
With this regard their currents turn awry ] A reference to the
sea and its tides: "Because of their thoughts, their currents become
unstable".
Soft you now ] "But hush!". Hamlet hears Ophelia
begin to pray and he must cut short his private ponderances.
Nymph ] See commentary below.
orisons ] Prayers.
1.
Explication (Do this in the comment box.)
Write an explication of this soliloquy. Pay special
attention to Hamlet’s use of metaphorical imagery—“slings and arrows of
outrageous fortune,” “a sea of
troubles,” “this mortal coil,” “the whips and scorns of time,” “the undiscovered country from whose bourn /
No traveler returns,” “the native hue of
resolution / Is sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought,” “enterprises of
great pitch and moment / With this regard their currents turn awry, / And lose
the name of action,” etc.
2.
Pronouns (Read this and be prepare to discuss this in class.)
Hamlet uses “I” more than a dozen times in his “O, what a
rogue and peasant slave am I!” soliloquy, but no first person singular pronouns
are found in this soliloquy. Instead, he uses “we” three times and “us” once. Think
a bit about his pronoun use. How does the change of pronouns help explain the
change in tone between the two speeches? (Think about which speech is
angrier—both towards himself and others—and which speech is more thoughtful and
philosophical. Explain how the tone shift is related to the shift in pronouns.)
How might the change in pronouns also help explain why this soliloquy is the
most remembered of Hamlet’s speeches? (Think about which speech is more
particular to Hamlet’s circumstance. Think about which speech is more universal
and more applicable to others, including us.) The shift in pronouns helps
explain both the shift in tone between the two soliloquies and why the second soliloquy
is the more famous of the two. Explain.
3. Blank Verse (Read this and be prepared to ask questions and discuss this in class.)
Much of Hamlet is written in blank verse meaning most
lines do not rhyme but they do follow a particular meter (a pattern of
unstressed and stressed syllables). The meter is called iambic pentameter.
“Iambic” means unstressed syllables are followed by stressed syllables: “And makes us rather bear those ills we have”. Pentameter means there are five iambs.
a. Practice yourself. Use “/ ” to mark stressed syllables
and an elongated “u” to mark unstressed syllables
“…And
makes us rather bear those ills we have,
than
fly to others that we know not of?
Thus
conscience does make cowards of us all…”
***
But notice the meter can often be ambiguous. Actors have
delivered the first line of this famous soliloquy by with varying rhythms:
“To be, or not to be, that is the question” or “To be, or not to be, that is the question”
But it is also possible without doing any violence to English
language to read the line iambically:
“To be, or not to be, that is the question.”
Notice that the beginning of the line (before the caesura or
pause) follows the iambic pattern: unstressed syllable then stressed syllable.
Then many actors change the rhythm for emphasis.
b. Are slight differences in meaning conveyed by the
variations? Explain.
***
Further notes about rhythm.
·
A few more points: Notice that Hamlet’s
soliloquy ends with the line:
“Be all my sins remembered.”
Then notice that Ophelia’s first words are indented.
“Be all my sins remembered.
Good my lord.”
Her line is indented to indicate that her words complete the
iambic pentameter.
If you combine Hamlet’s last line and Ophelia’s first line
you’ll find a perfect iambic line:
“Be all my sins remembered. Good my lord.”
You’ll notice this throughout the play!
·
Finally flip back to act two scene two.
Notice that the writing changes from blank verse poetry to
prose (regular writing) and then back again. Not all of Hamlet is written as
blank verse poetry.
As you read on look for both prose and blank verse.
4.
Three Hamlets and three Hamlets (*Do this in the comment box.*)
After watching the interpretations of the 3.1 soliloquy in Hamlet below decide which film best
conveys the full meaning of the text.
Begin with the text: the meaning of the text and the language
in the text. Then, consider how the director’s and actor’s choices influence
the meaning and the effectiveness of the speech. Consider the actor’s portrayal
of Hamlet. Consider his movements and the delivery of the lines. Consider the
director’s choices of props, setting and images, lighting, editing, music and
other sounds.
(Think, for example, about Branagh’s hall of mirrors (which
creates double meanings and makes the speech not a soliloquy), Zeffirelli’s
catacombs (which seem to emphasize Hamlet’s meditations on death), Olivier's water imagery, Doran's emphasis on Hamlet's face, and
Almereyda’s Blockbuster video store (which emphasizes--or overemphasizes--Hamlet’s obsession with
action.). Which depictions are most effective? Be specific. Be thorough. Be thoughtful. I'm curious to discover what choices you notice and what you think about them.)
Make sure you provide support using both textual details and
visual details. Convince me and your peers that you are right.
Here are five versions of the 3.1 speech.
First clip: 3.1 monologue, directed by Kenneth Branagh, Hamlet played by Kenneth Branagh (1996)
[I know what you're going to ask. The answer is one-way mirror.]
Second clip: 3.1 soliloquy, directed by Franco Zeffirelli, Hamlet played by Mel Gibson (1990)
[Here the monologue is lifted out of its context in 3.1 and delivered on its own. Hamlet walks down into the catacombs where his father and others are buried.]
Third clip: 3.1 soliloquy, directed by Michael Almereyda, Hamlet played by Ethan Hawke (2000)
[Here again the soliloquy is lifted out of its context in 3.1 and delivered on its own, but this time Hamlet is in a Blockbuster video store. Why?, you ask. Because in this version Hamlet creates the Mousetrap by editing clips of film into a montage depicting something like the murder of his father. He's in Blockbuster looking for film clips to include in his montage.]
Fourth clip: 3.1 soliloquy, directed by Gregory Doran, Hamlet played by David Tennant (2009)
[In context again...]
Fifth clip: 2.2 soliloquy, directed by Laurence Olivier, Hamlet played by Laurence Olivier (1948)
[Out of the 3.1. again but with suggestive water imagery that plays off of lines in the speech and elsewhere in the play.]
**********************
The Murder of Gonzago a.k.a. The Mousetrap
Watch Act
III, Scene ii (The Mousetrap). You’ll watch, read along, and take notes on
three different film versions of the Mousetrap.
·
The first
version, which is unabridged, is directed by Kenneth Branagh. Branagh plays
Hamlet and Kate Winslet plays Ophelia. This version is set during the Victorian
period (19th century).
·
The second
version is directed by Franco Zeffirelli (who also directed the older version
of Romeo and Juliet that some of you
may have seen). Mel Gibson plays Hamlet and Helena Bonham Carter (who plays Elizabeth in Branagh’s Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein) plays
Ophelia. This abridged version is set during the late medieval or early
renaissance period.
·
The third
version, also abridged, is directed by Michael Almereyda. Ethan Hawke plays
Hamlet and Julia Stiles plays Ophelia. Almereyda sets his Hamlet in mid-1990s Manhattan.
·
Write a response to
the three versions of the Mousetrap. Choose (or create) your own analytical argument question then develop an answer. Here are some ideas. Which “Mousetrap” is most
powerful? Most effective? Which is most faithful to Shakespeare’s Hamlet? Explain.Which version do you
prefer? Which version do you abhor? Why? How do the different versions each suit the settings the directors have chosen? Be specific and insightful. Be opinionated. To develop your position you might need to show an awareness of
what lines are cut out of the abridged versions. (Is it okay to cut the lines? Is meaning adequately conveyed without the lines? If something is lost what?) You'll certainly need to show an awareness of the
different ways the three directors stage the “Mousetrap”. You might need to think about the ways
that each version is faithful to the time period in which it is set. Think
about the behavior and reactions of each character, especially the three
Claudiuses and the three Hamlets but differences in the Ophelias and the
Gertrudes are significant too.
***
Make sure you've written (1) an explication of the "to be or not to be" monologue, (2) a response to different stagings of the "to be or not to be", (3) a response to different stagings of the Murder of Gonzago (also called The Mousetrap).
Soliloquy:
ReplyDeleteHamlet's soliloquies are often famous, and for much reason. His third soliloquy is one of the most famous, and it is most often referred as his "To be, or not to be" soliloquy. In this soliloquy, Shakespeare is showing the reader just how upset Hamlet is, and how drastic his actions could be. In the beginning of the soliloquy, Hamlet is debating life. Hamlet starts off by saying, "To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer (65) The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles." It is here that Hamlet is asking if life is worth it. Is life worth fighting through all the hardships thrown your way, or if things get so out of hand is it better to just end it once and for all, (he is referencing suicide). Hamlet is a man of words. He often contemplates suicide, but one wonders if he could ever go through with it. He then answers our doubts when he says, "To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, (75) Must give us pause: there's the respect that makes calamity of so long life." Hamlet believes people do not commit suicide more often, and deal with their never ending pain because they are worried what lies on the other side. What is after death, and is Heaven or Hell so great to discourse those from entering its path sooner? It is almost as if Hamlet is giving himself an answer for why he has not yet tried suicide, because his life may be far less worse than what Hell could possibly bring. He does not believe he is the only one to think this way, but refers to all that are like him in this train of thought as cowards. He makes this point when he says, And makes us rather bear those ills we have Than fly to others that we know not of? (90)Thus conscience does make cowards of us all", for they are cowards to their own imagination and deny death in basis of their fears. This relates to the idea implanted by his father's ghost earlier on, when he refuses to tell Hamlet of the shames of Hell, and this clearly has left Hamlet scared, yet curious.
Hamlet is often seen talking about his hardships indirectly during this soliloquy. At one point he paints a vivid image of the injustices of the world when he says, "For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, (80) The insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes,when he himself might his quietus make with a bare bodkin?" Hamlet refers to these as every man's woes, and reason for self mutilation when in fact they re directly related to what he is going through. The oppressor's wrong could be seen as his relationship with the new-found king, his uncle, where as "the pangs of despised love" could refer to his denied love for Ophelia. The "laws delay" almost directly refers to the justice of his father's murder being unresolved, and " The insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes" is exactly what has happened when Claudius took the thrown, and Hamlet was reprimanded for grieving for his honorable father.
This soliloquy deals with depression, death, and deception like all of Hamlet's soliloquies, but this one is not in first person. Hamlet is contemplating his actions and fears as if their were the actions and fears of every man, which they very may well be. It is here that the reader gets a clear view into Hamlet's idea of suicide, and how he wishes to deal with the overbearing stresses of life.
Danielle P wrote the previous response and the one below:
ReplyDeleteTo be or not to be videos:
The soliloquy, "To be or not to be", is often seen as one of the important soliloquies of Hamlet. Because of this, I see no reason why any piece of this soliloquy should be cut out. I realize the need for shorter film length, but I believe the editor's cuts should be made elsewhere and not on this influential piece. The soliloquy does not offer the same demand for power and effect of pathos when it is mutilate, and not in full form. This is one reason I like Branagh's depiction, although I do not agree with his usage of mirrors. I would have never expected people to be eavesdroppping on Hamlet, especially through mirrors so this does not agree with my depiction of the text. Also, having people hear Hamlet contemplate on the pro's and con's of suicide must have an impact on the rest of the play, and I believe it is better I what he had to say was left unheard because it leaves his soliloquy in full, unedited form. I did enjoy how he played around with a dagger because it made the act of suicide more vivid, and the mood was more sharp and dark because of it.
I was impressed with Zefferrelli's version of "To be or not to be". I think the catacombs were a great advantage during his clip. This entire soliloquy deals with death, and the question of afterlife. For Hamlet to actually be questioning all of this in a catacomb relates wonderfully to the subject of the soliloquy, while it also adds an eerie touch. Also, Gibson shows a flare of anger when he says, "For who would bear the whips and scorns of time, The oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, The pangs of despised love, the law's delay, (80) The insolence of office and the spurns that patient merit of the unworthy takes,when he himself might his quietus make with a bare bodkin?" This is exactly how I'd expect Hamlet to be feeling when he is indirectly speaking of his own troubles that stress him so. This clip definitely matched my depiction fo Hamlet's third soliloquy.
Ameryda definitely took a different approach to this soliloquy. Blockbuster is an interesting place to hold this soliloquy, but I do not believe it fits the subject. To be contemplating life, death, and suicide while in Blockbuster is a little far fetched, although I understand what he was trying to do. He was trying to link the creation of the Mousetrap into the soliloquy scene, but I do not believe they fit. He should've solely focused on the soliloquy, but I did enjoy Hawke's sneer when he said, "the proud mans contumely." This means the arrogant man's remarks, and he impersonates an arrogant man's tone here. I think it was a creative touch to the monatone speech.
Gregory Doran's version shows facial imagery as essential to the soliloqyuy. In the beginning, Tennant closes his eyes, and it gives the depiction as if he is tired, just as Hamlet is tired with life. This is an interesting touch, as is how Tennant depicted Hamlet's anger towards the end of the clip. Olivier returned to the choice of taking the soliloquy out of it context, and he acts it out on a cliff overlooking the sea. The sea symbolizes a way out of life, a way to commit suicide, and I found it interesting he chose to act out the soliloquy here. It deffinitely related to Hamlet's train of thought, as did when he pulled out the dagger. What was even more interesting was when he dropped the dagger into the ocean as he talked of men being cowards of death and life after. By dropping the dagger, it is almost as if he is admitting his weakensses, and giving up on suicide...for now. All in all, I think Zeferelli's and Olivier's versions were the best depictions of Hamlet because of their accurate portrayals and interesting scenery choices.
Danielle P
ReplyDeleteMousetrap videos:
The "Mousetrap" is Hamlet's brilliant idea to see a flicker of guilt in his uncle's eyes. He will have players reenact his father's murder, and if Claudius reacts to it, he will know the ghost he has met tells the truth. Branagh's version of this play was the most powerful to me. Branagh portrayed Hamlet with a lot of emotion, and a lot of bottled-up anger. Hamlet occasionally lashes out when questioned what his play is about, and is viewing his uncle the entire time. I enjoyed how the audience was also continuously looking back at Claudius, as if they knew Hamlets scheme and also wanted to look for any signs of guilt in Claudius's face. Ophelia seemed worried by Hamlet's lunatic behavior, and it shows how out of himself Hamlet is.
Zefferelli also portrayed the "Mousetrap" as I would have seen it. Hi version fo Hamlet was calmer, and less angry, but often jittery. It is still evident that Hamlet wanted revenge, and was anxious to see his unlce's reaction. I preferred Claudius's reaction in this version because he seemed more guilty than Branagh's. Here, he seemed worried and looked like he was in pain, where as he simply rose in Branagh's version. Also, he felt his ear and looked shocked while the players were acting. In this version, Zefferelli had Hamlet make his speech to Ophelia during the play, not before. This is an interesting choice, and kills two birds with one stone as to speak.
As always, Almeryda takes a different approach. In his version, the "Mousetrap" is a film made up of several short clips from other films. Hawke's film portrays a poisoning, and new found love between a woman and a man. I was disappointed in this version because Hamlet rarely spoke. He was not filled with anger, but sat in his seat with calm anticipation. Claudius rushed out almost silently at the end of the clip, but overall I do not think this version was as effective because of how out of context it was, and how shortened it was. You lost most of the effects of which the other two version accurately displayed. All in all, I believe Branagh's version was the mot faithful to Shakespeare's original Hamlet.
In this one of Hamlet's soliloquies the contemplation of death seems even more serious and close to becoming a reality than any of the other soliloquies ever had. It is the most famous one of his soliloquies in this play and I believe that's because it is so easy for anyone to relate to. It is hard to think that these kinds of thoughts of what will become of us after death have not crosses nearly everyone's mind at some point. The question of whether life after death will be worse than what we are currently suffering through I conclude is the only thing holding Hamlet back from actually committing suicide and I believe he thinks it is the only thing that really holds anyone back, not just himself. When he states, "For who would bear the whips and scorns of time," I think he means who would want to deal with the many humiliations of life and extend so much effort just to make it through, why not just end it? The seriousness of this certain soliloquy and the fact that it is a much broader topic, rather than being focused on his own personal circumstances that most people can not really make a connection with, I believe is why it is one of the most famous and well known. Hamlet also states, "The undiscovered country from whose bourn, no traveler returns," which really looks into the severity that can result in ones actions if they do indeed choose to commit suicide and how there is absolutely no turning back. Whatever lies for us after death is so unknown and it is very possible that it could be worse than life itself, which I think is the main reason why Hamlet hasn't already done it, aside from the want to avenge his father. However, I believe his depression may indeed be stronger than the other concerns he has.
ReplyDeleteIn his soliloquy, Hamlet ruminates over the clear-cut conundrum owned by psyche that challenges him throughout. He does this in a way that conveys understanding through something more indirect than logical progression. Immediately he opens with mixed metaphors and war analogies as if the soliloquy is an onslaught upon the audience itself. Thus he repeats himself over and over and over and over and over again. And then he declares "Thus conscience does make cowards of us all". In this scholarly philosophizing, he too clearly is still articulating his new sentiments toward life in that he, in contemplating the murder he must commit, is also considering his and humanity's fragile mortality that is so vulnerable to the prospect of immortality. so that this soliloquy, as Katie had said, is so easily related to, but it is also acutely specific to Hamlet's own circumstance. he is at war with himself.
ReplyDeleteThe “To be, or not to be” soliloquy questions the righteousness of taking one’s life from a moral standpoint, as well as how we would benefit. This is a conflict that has been discussed throughout the play so far and clearly Hamlet has no idea what to do or what is right. In his first soliloquy he speaks of fixing “His canon ‘gainst self slaughter” and is clearly addressing the idea of suicide but less directly. This changed throughout the play and now Hamlet is making it clear that he no longer wants to be a part of this world but there is only one thing holding him back. He is worried what it would be like in the afterlife and is wondering; could it be worse than this? Hamlet says, “For in that sleep of death what dreams may come” proving that he is contemplating death but can never be certain of how he will be tormented in the afterlife. This is a theme that goes right along with Hamlet’s scholarly background, contemplating every single move that he makes when sometimes it is best to act. Hamlet also says, “Thus conscience does make cowards of us all” meaning that when you think about something you are less likely to act. This is a theme that we have all experienced and can all relate to. This is a theme commonly related to his decision not to kill Claudius yet but I think there is a separate meaning here. Hamlet is also thinking about killing himself but will not act because his logical thought about the risks. The fact that he uses metaphors of war in the opening of this soliloquy Hamlet is able to convey the great conflict that is tearing him apart inside. By comparing death to sleep hamlet shows that he would find comfort in death and wishes it but he also possesses a fear of death which forces people to keep respect and endure life. “For who would bear the whips and scorns of time” is basically saying, why endure terrible life unless the afterlife is worse. I believe this whole soliloquy is connecting to Hamlet’s scholarly background and how it affects his life. He wishes to be dead but his logical reasoning and thought forces him to remain with the living and endure. This was Shakespeare’s way of providing an insight to Hamlet’s thought process and showing how complicated everything is.
ReplyDeleteThe 3.1 soliloquy was very important of conveying Hamlet’s thought process and giving us an insight to Hamlet’s fragile mind. By starting out with a question Shakespeare is able to emphasize that Hamlet is questioning life and death, and has no clear thought process. This whole soliloquy shows contemplation and confusion about death. Hamlet clearly wants to die but is not sure how the afterlife will compare to life, so this confusion is the only thing keeping him alive. “But that the dread of something after death, The undiscover'd country from whose bourn” shows fear of what it will be like. Hamlet is also looking at himself in a different light and admitting confusion. The different depictions of the soliloquy all contain positives and some play certain aspects better than others.
ReplyDeleteWhen just evaluating acting I believe that Branagh played it best by using a certain tone and cleverly adding pauses and changing the way he spoke. I can almost feel the pain in his voice when he starts speaking. The confusion is clear and the emotion is portrayed beautifully. While he made excellent choices as the actor I feel that some decisions about this scene took away from the overall successfulness. One choice that I did like was the choice to have Hamlet looking in a mirror. This is kind of a play on two ideas, Hamlet is looking into his soul as well as looking at himself. I also think it was clever to have Hamlet holding a dagger and give the option of suicide in the scene. What I didn’t like about this scene was that the mirror was one way. I feel that this would be better if no one saw this speech because if Claudius saw this he would understand Hamlet and a theme throughout the play is Claudius trying to figure him out. Apart from this one choice of allowing Claudius to witness this speech this is the best scene.
I also found the Zeffirelli scene very powerful. The acting by Gibson was not as good as Branagh but the overall scene was very good due to choices by the director. By playing this scene in the catacombs it was very realistic because that would be an actual place that is believable to contemplate delicate matters such as this one. Being around this death would make a person think like Hamlet is thinking and this makes up for not having a dagger as two other scenes did.
The scene that I liked the least was directed by Almereyda. The scene was played in a blockbuster which is an unrealistic place to contemplate the deepest parts of your soul so this was a bad choice. But in every scene the two aspects that move me the most are the setting and the acting. As this scene used a voice over the actual actor there was no acting to counter the poor location choice.
The “Mousetrap” is Hamlets way of finding out Claudius’s guilt before Hamlet murders him to revenge his father. In my mind the Zefferelli scene was the most as I had imagined it and therefore the most powerful to me. The way he set up this scene it was more authentic compared to the Branagh scene. Hamlet kept his emotions in check and therefore was able to create a successful plan. Mel Gibson acted more normal when the attention was on him but then acted strange when it was just he and Ophelia. I believe this is more like Hamlet than Branagh portrayed. When Branagh was yelling in front of the whole audience and across the room it was obvious that something was up and this would have ruined the plan in real life. Also it was unrealistic when he was yelling at Ophelia for everyone to hear. When I read that scene I believed that that was private conversation between the two of them. One thing that I did like about the Branagh scene was the audience’s reaction when they started to look back at Claudius as if they had made the connection too. Throughout the whole play I have not enjoyed the modern day depiction of scenes and this was no exception. In this scene Hawke showed no emotion and didn’t say all of the lines. This is a scene that should not have been cut short because you can not include everything in 2:40.
ReplyDeleteIn Hamlet’s soliloquy, “To Be or Not to Be”, he goes mainly deeper into the idea of death. It’s one of his most famous soliloquies. During the scene, Hamlet is fiddling with a dagger. It hints more at the thought of death. Hamlet seems to be going deeper into depression and madness and the scene continues. He toys with the idea of suicide. You feel the complexity of Hamlets ideas. Like what Katie said, who really does think of death like that. Is it better to live in hell or die to get away from earth? Hamlet expresses this idea when he says “Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer (65) The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them? To die: to sleep.” It makes you really think about life. Is it really worth it to struggle through all the hardships of life if you hate it, or is it better to give it up and “sleep”? It’s quite scary how serious Hamlet is being. To me, it seems like Hamlet has spent a long time contemplating death and has some serious ideas about it. Hamlet is also a coward. He calls himself one when he says “Thus conscience does make cowards of us all”. The longer you think about something, the more reasons you come up with not to do it. This is easy for me to relate to because I have that issue all the time. You get angry with yourself because you know you need to do something and you just can’t. It’s very frustrating. I can see how Hamlet is angry with himself. He needs to avenge his father’s death and he has avoided it so far. He has come up with distractions, and things to put off the one thing he promised to do. Now I think he is realizing how weak he has been. It is time for him to act and really think about the one death that is necessary.
ReplyDeleteAll three versions of “The Mousetrap” were powerful, but I think that Branagh’s version fell a bit short in this case. Unlike the other clips where I think his version stands out above the rest because he does not cut scenes short, it seems he misinterpreted this version and over played Hamlet’s emotions in this scene. So that is why his version falls short and Ethan Hawke’s and Mel Gibson’s version stand out above Branagh’s. If I had to pick between Mel Gibson’s version and Hawke’s version, Gibson’s version wins in this case. He had the important dialogue of the play and also gave Hamlet the cheerfulness he seems to convey throughout the scene with important exceptions such as when he says that “woman’s love” is brief and when Claudius has to leave and shouts at him. Those exceptions are where he is angry, but throughout the rest of the scene, he seems to be all smiles, unlike Branagh’s version; where even when he is joking with Ophelia he seems incredibly angry.
ReplyDeleteIn Mel Gibson’s version, when Claudius questions Hamlet about the play, Hamlet is obviously sarcastic, but in a tone of voice that if someone really had to believe that there was only jest in the play, they could. Claudius does have to believe that there is only jest in the play because Claudius is probably paranoid that someone will find out about the murder. He knows that if the play is not in jest, he now has to take care of Hamlet. In Branagh’s version, it is painfully obvious to Claudius that Hamlet knows what has happened and that is not the impression the play gives to me.
Ethan Hawke’s version was surprisingly good, considering it took out a lot of the play’s original script and had to work with the fact that the play was now a movie. The movie, like Gibson’s version, gave only the impression that Hamlet knows Claudius’ secret. And it managed to get the message of “The Mousetrap” across much faster than the other two versions.
To Be or Not To Be Explication
ReplyDeleteIn his famous “to be or not to be” speech, Hamlet is basically contemplating whether it is better to be dead and not suffer the pain and hardships of life or to be alive, but to be forced to face those hardships. Because of this, Hamlet also contemplates the concept of suicide, if it would be moral and logical to commit suicide if it meant avoiding all of life’s hardships because “who would bear the whips and scorns of time, the oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely, the pangs of despised love, the law's delay”. Also, Hamlet often compares death to sleep since sleep also helps the person escape the troubles of life. In fact, Hamlet says that death is just “a sleep to say we end
the heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks.” This inquires a question. If death will end all the pain and suffering life has to offer, why doesn’t everyone consider it. Hamlet answers this by stating that “the dread of something after death, the undiscover'd country from whose bourn, no traveller returns, puzzles the will and makes us rather bear those ills we have than fly to others that we know not of?” meaning that most people are afraid of what happens after death; whether or not it was actually worth killing yourself to escape life. Also, Hamlet explains that since “conscience does make cowards of us all;
And thus the native hue of resolution is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of thought, and enterprises of great pitch and moment with this regard their currents turn awry, (95)
and lose the name of action…” This means that once people think it over, they become afraid again of the unknown consequences and “chicken out”, so to speak. Perhaps this is the most famous soliloquy in Hamlet because it gives us a philosophical contemplation of death and suicide. Also, it is Shakespeare’s way of developing Hamlet’s character as a scholarly, contemplative thinker.
Out of all the speech adaptations, Branagh and Olivier did the best job of conveying the text’s full meaning. I thought that the mirrors (more specifically, the reflections) helped convey the contemplation of the person’s worth in this world. Also, the fact that Branagh held a plays with the dagger in his hand and taps his reflection with it showed how simple it was to commit suicide and run from life’s hardships. Also, the way Branagh delivers the speech really conveys the thoughtful, melancholy tone of the speech. Olivier’s version also had the same tone as Branagh and the simplicity of suicide with the cliff and the dagger; however, he was really able to emphasize the simplicity when it seems that he’s about to stab himself with the dagger.
ReplyDeleteTennant’s version also delivers the speech well, showing how tired his character is of the hardships life is throwing at him. However, he slightly falls short on the suicide and death part (maybe because he’s not using a dagger). In Hawke’s version, although it also had the same tone, I felt that the speech seemed misplaced when it was performed in Blockbuster. In Gibson’s version, the setting in the catacombs adds emphasis to the suicide and death part of the speech, but his delivery is a little odd.
Personally, I felt that Gibson’s version of the Mousetrap was the worst out of the three. Although it was not that bad, I felt it lacked the important elements Branagh’s and Hawke’s version had. Along with the acting being poor and the delivery strange, the nunnery speech is randomly placed there, making it seem like a space-filler than an important part of the play. All in all, it did not stand out as much as the other two did. Branagh’s version shows Hamlet’s cleverness and wit towards the audience, yet, it also shows the bitterness towards Ophelia, Gertrude, and Claudius. However, it lacked the subtlety that I expected when we read the Mousetrap. Although Hawke’s version lacks the delivery Branagh’s version exhibits, it adequately shows the innocence and subtlety of the play I imagined Hamlet would show. Even with this innocence present, this version of the Mousetrap is able to convey Hamlet’s true feelings of bitterness towards Claudius and Gertrude.
ReplyDeleteIn the representations of Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” soliloquy, Branagh’s version shines once again above the others. Although it is not a soliloquy by definition, it is delivered by Hamlet in the attitude and expectation that he is not being watched, so it may as well be. And the fact that he is being watched not only makes this passage the defining moment of character development, it also has a stronger meaning within the plot, instead of just being Hamlet talking to himself and pondering the implications and consequences and even the rewards of suicide. Branagh delivers the speech better than the other versions, barring Tennant’s version. It does it much better that Olivier’s and Hawke’s version clearly. Olivier’s version was as dull as the other clips and I felt no sympathy for his Hamlet, mostly because his lack of earnestness gave me no reason to think he was actually depressed. Although he does draw out a dagger, (something that Tennant’s version lacked, even if he had pulled out a gun or something) I never once suspected that he was actually really considering suicide as an option and the other versions did give the idea that Hamlet was depressed and thinking that suicide could be a viable option. Ethan Hawke’s version was only slightly better. I don’t like the idea of taking a soliloquy like this out of context, and his version seemed to ramble and never gave any weight to the horror of what Hamlet is thinking about. Tennant’s version could have been the best of them, but the lack of weapon did give the whole suicide idea the feeling that he was not actually considering it that much, and that he always figured that he was going to continue on and kill his Uncle. If there was any inclination that Hamlet was actually prepared to kill himself, I would have put it at the top.
ReplyDeleteIn the “To be, or not to be” soliloquy, Hamlet begins debating his own life rather then Claudius’. Hamlet says, “To be, or not to be: that is the question: Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them?” Hamlet is contemplating whether his life is worth living. Hamlet views the world as a crazy, corrupt place and he doesn’t see any point to keep living in a place so foul. He doesn’t know if he should just tough it out and suffer through life’s obstacles, or just commit suicide and end it all. Hamlet often points fingers and is always blaming someone. He rotates between Claudius, Gertrude and himself. In this soliloquy he is blaming himself. He doesn’t know if it is morally right to murder Claudius. Although he promised the ghost he would get revenge, Hamlet would have a guilty conscious. So instead of planning Claudius’ murder, Hamlet begins fantasizing about his own death and how it would solve all of his problems. Although, Hamlet is indecisive about the idea of “self-slaughter.” He says, “To die, to sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil, must give us pause: there's the respect that makes calamity of so long life.” Hamlet is saying that the reason he hasn’t committed suicide yet is because he fears what happens in the afterlife. Nobody knows for sure, but from what Hamlet has seen, it can be a scary place. Hamlet has seen evidence that there is an afterlife from his father’s ghost who has been deemed to hell for not confessing his sins before he died. The afterlife seems to be a reoccurring theme throughout the play, which is also a sign that it troubles Hamlet because it is continuously mentioned. Hamlet seems to have a firm belief that there definitely is an afterlife because he held off on killing Claudius when he was praying because he knew that if he killed Claudius while he was confessing he would go to heaven; He must wait until he is sinning again. I think this soliloquy really ties up what Hamlet has been thinking and feeling throughout the whole play so far. It was obvious that his emotions were strong and deep down he has anger that needs to be let out. Hamlet has mentioned suicide once before in the play, but he never spoke of it solely about himself and how he thinks it would end his misery. It really shows the audience the emotional pain that Hamlet is going through; it brings his problems to life. This soliloquy sums up all the deception in the play into one powerful emotion (depression) that proves Hamlet really does view the world as corrupt. He’s not just acting crazy, the world in making him that way. His eccentric personality is real, it’s not an act.
ReplyDeleteBranagh: Hamlet is looking at himself in the mirror. It reflects his image literally, and figuratively as a symbol of murder. He is looking at himself in the mirror like it is another person he is about to kill. It creates an image for what he is feeling. He points his dagger at himself, which represents his suicidal thoughts. When he touches his sword to the mirror, it really shows his contemplation between living and dying.
ReplyDeleteZeffirelli: The catacombs were a good touch to the scene. The whole speech is about death, which is made very clear by the tombs that are surrounding him. Gibson leans against the tombs, physically putting himself in the position of death. I thought that was a very powerful way to show what Hamlet is feeling. He puts himself so close to death, yet is still contemplating taking his own life. It shows that he is not scared if dying, he is just scared of the afterlife. The scene was also dark, much like Hamlet’s thoughts and emotions.
Almereyda: This didn’t really do just for me. I feel like Hamlet wasn’t putting himself in the position of death like he was in the two previous clips. Death and blockbuster just don’t go together for me and I had a hard time connecting to the emotions Hamlet was referring to.
Doran: Emotions can be detected by someone’s facial expression and I think this is what Doran was trying to do by only filming close up on Hamlet’s face. It wasn’t my favorite just because it lacked a setting. The setting is really important and it can make the whole scene ten times more powerful.
Olivier: I was actually surprised that I like Olivier’s version of the soliloquy. I liked the setting choice. In the beginning when the camera was leading up the stairs then overlooking the ocean, I could connect with what Hamlet was feeling. The filming style of this scene almost gave a crazed feel, which is what Hamlet was feeling. He actually pulls out the dagger and points it inward at himself, it was very dramatic. I liked how it was dramatic because Hamlet himself is dramatic. He is an actor after all.
Shakespeare explores the ideas and implications of suicide in Hamlet’s “To be or not to be” soliloquy and he does so using Hamlet’s depression and general dissatisfaction with existence as a tool to develop Hamlet’s character and also makes sure that he ties up any lose ends of Hamlet’s psyche. After all, if Hamlet just suddenly stopped wondering if living is worthwhile after his first soliloquy where he talks at length about how worthless the world is and about “self-slaughter”, it is just bad writing not to resolve that character attribute. This soliloquy starts to resolve those thoughts of suicide and to bring them to a decision.
ReplyDeleteThis soliloquy is much more general and seems to be more concerned with the world as a whole then just Hamlet. Although the soliloquy is clearly about him and his troubles, he never once says “I” and it only alludes to his specific trials. This soliloquy really just has Hamlet trying to decide whether suicide is not just an acceptable option for himself, but for everyone. After all he often uses the word we, but it seems not to be the royal we that we have been told about. After all he talks about people who “grunt and sweat under a weary life”. Considering that Hamlet is a prince, it is highly unlikely that he has had to grunt and sweat, although he has had a weary life recently.
To talk about the “no travellers return” part of the soliloquy, I think it is most likely that Hamlet is referring to people physically returning in a reincarnation, or that Shakespeare just make a mistake in writing that bit. I don’t think the other two explanations are particularly reasonable because by now Hamlet is fairly confidant that the ghost is from his father and the idea that some actor could have so misplaced the most important soliloquy in the play is unlikely, especially is both folio’s agree on where the soliloquy takes place.
Branagh: In this version Claudius seemed uncomfortable the Gertrude seemed disapproving. The audience also clearly related the play to the situation between Claudius and Gertrude. Horatio spies with binoculars to exaggerate the point that he is watching Claudius closely. Claudius seemed bitter when he asked what the play is called and Hamlet seemed accusing. Claudius’ eyes widened when he realized the play depicts the murder of his brother. He rises out of his seat and exits the theater. I feel like Hamlet was very open about the whole plan to find Claudius guilty. He was screaming directly at Claudius the whole time and frantically screamed for Horatio once the king left. In the book I pictured it as more discreet. Yelling at Ophelia for everyone to hear was unrealistic. I felt that this version was a little far fetched.
ReplyDeleteZeffirelli: This version better depicts how I would have pictured Mousetrap. Hamlet was very sarcastic when talking to Ophelia but he didn’t yell it for everyone to hear. Although he directed a few comments towards Gertrude, the conversation was mainly between him and Ophelia. Hamlet was more discreet about his plan to reveal Claudius. It was also played by all men, which was realistic to me because that’s how it was at the time. Claudius’ reaction to the murder was pure fear. He rose from his seat with his eyes wide and Hamlet took note of this, thinking he got the reaction he wanted. The other thing that differed from what I pictured happening was Claudius walking towards the stage looking like he was ready to faint. I feel like that wouldn’t have happened because then everything would be too obvious. Shakespeare always has many layers of complexity; he never lets anything be revealed that easily.
Almereyda: As always, this version was much different from the others. It was a film rather than a play. Claudius stared at Hamlet like he knew what Hamlet was up to. I think this clip was too short to depict what was really happening. Although you could tell that Claudius was fearful, there wasn’t much complexity to it.
Out of the 5 versions of the “To Be or Not to Be” monologue, the Kenneth Branagh’s version is still my favorite. I enjoyed the way he was being so serious while talking to a mirror. The way he acted it all out showed how emotional Hamlet was being. He did a great job showing how death was the main idea. When he pulled out this dagger, me, as the audience finally understood what he was talking about. All the phrases and comparisons he was making finally made sense. Yet, I did not like the use of mirrors. It was odd to me how he had to look at himself to give the speech. Also, why were people eavesdropping on him? I did not picture the scene like that. I know the theme of the play is spying, but I thought the point of a monologue was that nobody else was able to hear or see him.
ReplyDeleteAgain, I also enjoyed the Zefferrelli version. Going down to the catacombs where his father is buried is a great idea in the play. It really gives off the idea of death. It was very dark, in both ways: the literature aspect of it, and the scene itself was almost too dark. The lighting made it hard to see Mel Gibson. He delivered the speech quite nicely though, pausing at the right moments and showing emotion where necessary. It was nice to see the entire soliloquy played out. Gibson did a nice job. It scares me when he gets really angry because it sends shivers down my spine. The anger of the speech is brought to life.
I did not enjoy the Almereyda version one bit. He was bouncing back and forth from speaking in his mind to talking out loud. It was confusing to me to be able to tell why that was happening. I get why he was in blockbuster though. I like the idea he was looking for clips to add to his “Mouse Trap” video. When you can hear his thoughts, I did enjoy the anger and sadness you could hear in his voice. That always seems to be a factor in whether I like a certain version or not. Otherwise, I didn’t enjoy this version. It was way off from what I think Hamlet is and should be like.
In the David Tennant version of Hamlets “To Be or Not to Be” speech, Hamlet just standing against a wall the entire time. Personally I am not a fan. I don’t believe it is a good way to show how serious the monologue is. It’s hard for me to pick out certain emotions; they are not displayed very well. The only thing that I think helped was the darkness of the scene. Once again, it did set the mood and tone. Death is one of the first things I think of when I see darkness. Death is cold and mean and dark. The setting showed just that. The Hamlet here is almost too quiet for my liking. Maybe that is how it should be. He is contemplating death, it’s a solemn thing, and scary. Now that I think about it, the quietness isn’t as bad as it looked at first. The subject of death is such a serious thing, Hamlet is showing how he isn’t mad, and he just honestly has thought often this a lot.
The Laurence Olivier version was…interesting. I like the scenery and how he was standing on a cliff near the ocean. To me that screams suicide, which made the whole soliloquy more intriguing. It made up for the bad acting. He just sat there and murmured to himself. I wanted to see more action in his words. I found It a cool detail that you could hear the waves crashing in the background. It was a bit distracting from Hamlet’s words. I interpreted it as his mind was already distracted and confused. He was toying back and forth with the idea of suicide and death. I think the ocean idea was brilliant. I just wish he moved around more and was a bit more enthusiastic with his lines.
The three different versions of “The Mousetrap” were all actually pretty good. Surprisingly, the Kenneth Branagh version isn’t my favorite. In this one, I felt like too many of the scenes were combined together. Hamlet was being way too aggressive with his words, and so loud. Yet, I did like how rude he was being to Ophelia. It was a good example of how I thought that part went. Hamlet was acting crazy towards his parents. I thought it was weird how Hamlet was screaming to the whole audience. I thought those parts were supposed to be said in a quieter and smaller place with less people listening. Overall, I don’t think the version was bad, it just wasn’t as great as all of the other parts of the play done by Branagh.
ReplyDeleteMy favorite of the three is definitely the Zeffirelli version. It was almost the perfect example of how I thought the play should have been acted out. By this point though, I had realized that the scene wasn’t going to go exactly as it was in the book for several reason. One, it was too long. Two, it made sense this way. Hamlet was being a jerk to Ophelia, this part was funny. I like how he actually laid on her lap, and then went on to make the pun about laying in-between a maiden’s legs. I like the Kings reaction afterwards. He looks scared and I think this is the best reaction because it makes Hamlet so happy. It was great how Hamlet ran over to his friends and began to dance and sing with them rejoicing. Even though the King hasn’t admitted to anything Hamlet still celebrates.
The Almereyda version is again, just weird. The only thing that I even possibly liked about this one was the ending and the Kings reaction. It was perfect. The rest of the Mousetrap though was not good. I found it confusing to follow. The main things I saw in the play were roses, the king crown, and then pictures of poison. It was so out of making sense I couldn’t really take the time to try and piece it together. Apparently it made the king very upset and worried because he had the best reaction out of all the other versions.
I believe that Olivier’s depiction and performance of the “to be or not to be” speech was the most effective in conveying the full meaning of the text. This was very unexpected because previous clips I had seen that were done by him I had not liked at all. When Hamlet states, “To take arm against a sea of troubles,” it makes an interesting connection because Olivier is set on an edge looking out into the sea and if Hamlet had, in fact, killed himself with the knife he pulled out as he sat and questioned his own life, he really would have been immersing himself into a sea of troubles as he fell into the ocean, then having to deal with whatever consequences came for him after death. However, when he drops his knife off the edge I believe it may symbolize the many problems suicide actually comes with and how they outweigh the benefits enough for him to not really commit suicide just yet. Although it was not in context, I think the emotion he portrayed and the anguish that could be felt were strong and sincere enough to make it a meaningful performance. Branagh’s depiction was also interesting and I thought the way it was set up was very inventive. Here a knife was also used but I do not believe it held as much significance for me as did in Olivier’s version. The deeper meaning in Gibson’s performance and where he was set was also interesting to examine but I did not think that him speaking possibly in front of his father was appropriate for the message I had gotten out of the speech and what I had said in my explication. I found that Tennant’s version had the least meaning for me because I could not really pick up on any deeper meaning rather than him just reciting the words in a dismal manor. Hawke’s version was very different by being set in a Blockbuster store and I also found this one interesting because of the various things the action movies and clips represented for him with Claudius and what he may have done. I truly thought that Olivier’s version had the deepest meaning and the most connection to the text which also made it the easiest to relate to.
ReplyDeleteHamlet discusses death a lot in this soliloquy, as well as suicide. However, I don’t really think he’s angry or depressed so much as curious. He questions if it’s smarter to deal with all the pain and misfortune people deal with to live their lives, or should we just end it all because that’s better for everyone. This is mentioned on lines 65 to 68 when Hamlet says, “Whether 'tis nobler in the mind to suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, or to take arms against a sea of troubles, and by opposing end them?” Hamlet also does in fact use an abundance of metaphors relating to the pain life causes, for example when he talks about how time “whips and scorns” us, continually putting us down. So in fact, I don’t think asking if he should be or not be really is a question. It seems like he already has made up his mind seeing as he continually adds to a list of reasons we shouldn’t live. And when he points to reasons we should stay alive, they aren’t really reasons. Whether we should “suffer the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune,” sounds just as bad as giving up, because no one truly wants to suffer through anything. Toward the end of the speech though, he says the reason people won’t just give up is because of the fear and even more painful fact that they don’t know what happens next. “That the dread of something after death, the undiscover'd country from whose bourn no traveller returns, puzzles the will and makes us rather bear those ills we have than fly to others that we know not of? Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,” appears to be a way of saying that humanity is foolish, but I think Hamlet still feels that that is what makes us human because he says right in the passage that being afraid of death is something everyone does. It’s a very insightful soliloquy, and although he is suppose to be mad at this point I feel that his reasoning, though disconnected from complex human reasons for continuing with life, is more sane than most other things he’s said.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the soliloquy was meant to be a conversation Hamlet had with himself rather than an actual question about whether or not people should live or not, because Hamlet has already decided that it’s better to not exist, it’s more of a rhetorical question. Therefore, I think that the Michael Almereyda version was the best. Ethan Hawke spoke almost arrogantly about life, and I think this was good because at this point in the story (if we are assuming that this speech is in the right part, even though there is evidence it isn’t) Hamlet is not only furious with his mother and uncle and ashamed that he’s not doing anything to get revenge, but he’s also going mad. And the way Hawke shuffled around the Blockbuster store mumbling to himself did give off the appearance of madness. I just didn’t feel like any of the other clips had the right tone consistently throughout the soliloquy to play a convincing Hamlet with the exception of Olivier’s and I still had some issues with other things in the performance. Surprisingly, the thing I had the biggest problem with in this version was Olivier lounging on the side of the cliff. I have no idea why this was the case; maybe in my head I had created an image of a frazzled Hamlet pacing around anxiously.
ReplyDeleteAlso, the Almereyda version made Hamlet look like he was on a mission. While in all the other clips Hamlet is staring off into space or at mirrors or into the water, Hamlet in this movie is actively searching for ways to find out if his uncle is indeed guilty by looking for pieces to put in the mousetrap. Hamlet looks like he wants revenge. It adds a whole new layer to the piece. The images of death too, and people dying in violent ways on the TV screens on the wall illustrated what Hamlet was saying. Then there was the part where he was wandering through the action section. I don’t think it overemphasized Hamlet’s obsession with action because that’s what it is: an obsession. Hinting at an obsession wouldn’t have helped. There was also the fact that even though he was in the store, he seemed to be alone, something I think was a good choice because it kept it a soliloquy and also to me depicted how alone he felt in reality. Finally, Hamlet’s coat and hat looked mismatched and his hat didn’t look like it was on right, another reflection of his insanity.
I enjoyed watching all three versions of the mousetrap, and while they all made me think about things I never though about while I was reading the scene, only one was as I had imagined it. The Zeffirelli was as Winslow said, the most realistic in my mind. While I was watching the Branagh version I just couldn’t believe that Hamlet would stand up and shout everything he said to the audience, and it made me feel embarrassed for him. Gibson carried out conversations at normal tones and only the people who I felt were meant to hear it did.
ReplyDeleteFor all three versions Claudius reacted similarly. They all stood up looking appalled at the stage, or screen in the case of the Almereyda version. Then they stormed out. In the case of Gertrude however, they all acted a bit differently. In the Branagh version she looked nervous from the start, but that was because Hamlet was yelling all his lines and many of them would make someone in her position nervous. In Zeffirelli’s she was unaware that anything was up until she began watching the play, something I again liked best out of the three. In the Almereyda version the queen looked more disgusted than surprised.
Ophelia too, reacted differently in the Zeffirelli version than she did in the Branagh version. She doesn’t talk much in the Almereyda clip. But in the Branagh clip she seems frightened and in Zeffirelli’s she acts more annoyed with Hamlet. Both, to me, seem plausible.
As far as the set was concerned, the Branagh version was by far the best. Everything was so bright and cheery and it contrasted sharply with the dark mood hanging over the whole crowd. Zeffirelli did something similar with his, except he used cheerful music rather than dark colors which made it more difficult to catch on to the atmosphere of the scene, but it still worked. It didn’t have me hanging on the edge of my seat like the Branagh version, but I liked it.
Since Almereyda’s movie is so different than any of the versions we’ve been studying, it’s hard to compare it to the rest. It’s definitely an interesting way to set up the whole play. This version did cut out a lot however, and even though it got the message across I still found myself missing all the dialogue that went on because of its use as character development. I still liked it a lot, just not as much.
Five Hamlets:
ReplyDeletenote: the key between 'e' and 't' is stuck, so it will be missing fom wheeve it would nomally have been.
when dedging the will fo any desie to live--when debating the existential pupose--when contemplating death and exploing its dimensions, the psyche could not easonably be as dull a egugitation o angy spew of wods as gibson and banagh made seem. Hamlet's suicidal and homicidal tendencies should not seiously be too geatly emphasized in a place whee contemplation is takes place of action, as it does hee so acutely painfully fo Hamlet's existential dilemma.
this foces Tennant and Hawke to duel fo most expessive. while most my classmates seem to find Blockbuste as an unfitting choice fo Hamlet to discuss action and inaction as summaized by suicide, this emphasizes the existential debate that Hamlet makes by suounding the acto with fantastical consummations of the human desie fo action which, by inetia of thought, of "conscience," is left unconsummate. besides, whee else is bette to debate man's means of life than on an e[]and in his catalog of d[]eams? Hawke's monotone is fixed in Tennant's vesion, which, again, comes out atop. no distactions fom the main focus a possible in the shadowed sceen focussed on Tennant's face, and the audience is made to follow Hamlet's contemplative pogession as seamlessly as Tennant enacts the inspiation of psyche.
Olivie was just too cheesy, in g[]ain with his time. besides, if i'd agued in favou of his endition without the ability to type even his name, that would have been disastous.
again, not the "my" key, but the "ou " key is stuck.
ReplyDeleteHamlet addesses the king and the coud eceives him. Bannagh captues the public's love of Hamlet hee, which would give Claudius so much touble tying to deal with Hamlet's made of Polonus, but Bannagh, with his tagicly lage head does not ealize that he can neihte diect Fankenstein, no Hamlet, no does he even undestand the lines he's egugitating as Hamlet. the wondeful mania of Hamlet depicted hee captues a complexity in the chaachte that i've only seen Bannagh attempt to develop th[]ough a epugnance and petulance almost as if the chaacte is sick of dealing with societal noms. espite all this, Bannagh's Hamlet's public display was a caeless addition, because something so dastic cannot occu without epecussions, no is it tue to Hamlet's appaent shewdness ead in the actual play, which Bannagh thows to the wind, as if Bannagh's Hamlet is actually insane, and not sly. this hamlets makes little of this king, that i can see hee, and gives little space fo any of the othe chaachtes to be developed.
Between Helena Bonham Cate's fantastic eactions and facial expession and Gibson's excited engagement, the play always in the backgound, Hamlet's and Ophelia's elationship could be developed significantly, as it was in the witten play. while Claudius []eaction was exaggeated and disjointed fom the Claudius that, in the witten play, kneels alone and debates his own ability to confess and []epent th[]ough his pedantry that beautifully concludes in his own dete[]mined damnation, all this done pivately, neve having []isked []evealing any hint of guilt to a single soul--the same humbled dignity that does this to the king's chaachte allows the queen's chaachte, though subdued and hadly diffeent fom Bannagh's, to be able to paint a believable elationship with the Gibson Hamlet, when both sit on the same level, unsepa[]ated by seating o petense. Gibson Hamlet's attention neve wanes and his excitement mounts, and he neve loses contol ove[] himself even though his excitement peaks when the king is caught.
as fa[] as almeeyda/Hawke, i wont even conside[] a "mousetap" that doesnot follow the specific, stuctued na[]ative that is so vital to be pa[]alled to Claudius' slaughte[].
Overall, I believed that Gibson’s portrayal of the mousetrap was the most powerful and held the most meaning. The way it was set up by having the King, Queen, and Ophelia all on the same level as the performance and sitting next to each other I thought worked best. When Hamlet spoke to someone he spoke calmly but with a strong sense of his distaste. This was very different from Branagh’s depiction because Hamlet was constantly yelling and filled with ferocity and anger that could be seen by the entire audience which I thought took away from the sincerity of what he was saying and what was occurring around him. One particular line that was only included in Gibson’s version was “get thee to a nunnery” which I thought was a very important part of conveying what he was feeling for Ophelia. Another interesting communication he has with Ophelia is when he kisses her but then responds by saying “oh well” and running away. This was much more sudden and powerful than any of the other reactions of Hamlet to Ophelia in the other versions and truly shows his disregard for her. In Branagh’s version there were not many words even spoken to Ophelia and the certain ones chosen I did not think were the most important ones that could have been used. The King’s reaction to the mousetrap was much more dramatic than any of the other versions which I thought was important because it gave you absolutely no doubt that he certainly did murder King Hamlet. In Branagh’s version seemed to be more shocked but there was not such a dramatic exit. In Hawke’s version the response from the King was also powerful but I still did not think it matched the emotion of Gibson’s. Hawke’s performance overall was very short and you only saw Hamlet keep turning around and waiting for a reaction from Claudius. It showed his mother having some nearly disgusted looks on her face which was different from the other who chose to have the Queen looking more worried and frantic with a more innocent sense to them rather than upset and disturbed. Gibson’s performance was truly the most powerful and held the most meaning.
ReplyDelete(1) Hamlet's, "To Be or Not to Be" soliloquy puts together Hamlet's overall thoughts and emotions, reflecting upon them. It is clear that Hamlet is thinking about whether or not life is worth living, "To be or not to be: that is the question:" He uses metaphors to describe the hardships of life: "The slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, Or to take arms against a sea of troubles, And by opposing end them?" asking himself if these hardships are worth fighting for in the end. Hamlet then compares dying to sleeping, "To die: to sleep; No more; and by a sleep to say we end The heart-ache and the thousand natural shocks," saying that dying is not waking up from sleeping and dying would end the pain. He then starts to over think of the action of actually killing himself and makes the excuse that "To die, to sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come when we have shuffled off this mortal coil." I agree with what Winslow said about how Hamlet's logical reasoning prevents him from killing Claudius and I believe it also prevents Hamlet from taking his own life. The second he was about to kill Claudius he thought he was confessing his sins and if he killed him Claudius, the King's murderer, would go to heaven while the King himself is in purgatory for not being able to confess his sins before his unexpected death. When he contemplates whether to kill himself or not, he says, "But the dread of something after death," meaning he's afraid of what his afterlife would be like.
ReplyDelete(2) First clip: 3.1 monologue, directed by Kenneth Branagh, Hamlet played by Kenneth Branagh (1996).
ReplyDeleteFor the most part, I did not like this staging of Hamlet's "To Be or Not to Be" soliloquy. The room where he is in while making the speech isn't the way I imagined it to be during that time. Branagh presents Hamlet to be calm while talking about killing himself and doesn't show any passion or emotion, it seemed more evil as if he would kill himself out of anger. What I liked about it was how he was facing the mirror and was looking/talking to himself the whole time as if there were two sides to him.
Second clip: 3.1 soliloquy, directed by Franco Zeffirelli, Hamlet played by Mel Gibson (1990).
What I like most about Zeffirelli's version is the setting in the catacombs. He's talking about death and he's surrounded by past loved ones and it leans the argument more over to the conclusion that Hamlet wanted to kill himself. The catacombs reminded me a lot of Romeo and Juliet when Romeo goes down into the catacombs as well and kills himself there. Gibson did a great job. I like how towards the end he starts raising his voice, becoming angry with himself. This version of Hamlet is a lot like Branagh's, to me they both showed little emotion because I imagine Hamlet talking in a more harsh tone and being more physically violent with himself, which doesn't show in this soliloquy or Branagh's.
Third clip: 3.1 soliloquy, directed by Michael Almereyda, Hamlet played by Ethan Hawke (2000).
I didn't like this version of the soliloquy at all. I found it interesting though how Hamlet was walking through the action movies and there was an action movie playing in the background.
Fourth clip: 3.1 soliloquy, directed by Gregory Doran, Hamlet played by David Tennant (2009).
Doran's version is the best so far. The setting matches the theme of the soliloquy because Hamlet's talking about death and its dark out, then in the soliloquy Hamlet compares sleeping to dying. I like that Tennant is looking out the window and the camera is focused on Hamlet the whole time. His tone presents Hamlet to be somewhat scared, his face expressions showed fear as well.
Fifth clip: 2.2 soliloquy, directed by Laurence Olivier, Hamlet played by Laurence Olivier (1948).
I never thought about Hamlet ever being on the top of a cliff. I really like this viewpoint. The music that plays in the beginning tells the audience that there is dramatic scene coming up and it gives the audience chills. I like how it showed the waves crash against the rocks and Hamlet is constantly looking down at them. The acting is over dramatic. Hamlet is in one pose the whole time. There is no particular tone that he uses in here.
3) Branagh's version of the "Mousetrap" is the most powerful and most effective. He brings out Hamlet's bottled up anger all at once and he shows Hamlet to be confident in his assumption that his uncle murdered his father. He had no intention of keeping the plan quiet at all. I liked how the audience constantly looked back at Claudius looking for the same guilt in his face that Hamlet is searching for. Claudius' reaction wasn't what I expected it to be. He just stood up and you could tell by his face that he was worried that everyone would find out rather than guilt and sorrow. Zeffirelli's version is the most faithful to Shakespeare's Hamlet and the version that I prefer. The setting takes place during the late medieval period, which is how I imagine, and Gibson presents Hamlet the same as it did throughout the book; calm, quiet, private and is laid back letting nature take its course. I enjoyed Claudius' reaction in this version, he stood up and proceeded to the stage, touched his ear, showing shock and guilt; which Branagh and Almereyda failed to do in their versions. I abhor Almereyda's version. Throughout this whole assignment I have not liked any of the modern versions, it is the complete opposite of how I visualize Hamlet. What I liked about this version is how she made a film within a film, showing different clips of the acts of poisoning. I did not like Claudius' reaction at all, he just stood up and left the scene.
ReplyDeleteZoe P
ReplyDeleteMOUSETRAP
The Branagh version caught my attention. The scenery chosen was bright and flashy, and the time period had more light. Hamlet was portrayed as very crazy, and very loud. He also comes off as extremely angry, which is quite different from the other two versions. Somehow, despite the yelling and the anger, this version of Hamlet came off (to me at least) at quite likeable. Branagh has very intense use of camera angles, switching quickly from person to person, building action and suspense. Zeffirelli's version has a very different Hamlet. Far quieter, his madness comes in a more child-like form, lacking a lot of the malice from the previous version. Ophelia has a lot more depth, using the same lines, but with facial expressions and pacing that say for more than Winslet's Ophelia.
The way the play within the play works is different, partially because of the abridged version of the players lines, the actual show "Mousetrap" loses a lot of depth. It is clear that Hamlet knows the show well, because he is shown in the audience mouthing the lines along with the actors. This version includes a far bigger reaction from Claudius. He gets up and stumbles, looking as though he had been struck physically. This version certainly builds up more to the end, instead of keeping consistency all the way through. The Almereyda version is short. Really short. It includes hardly any of the dialogue or words at all. It does fantastically well for three minutes, but doesn't compare to others. Its length leaves too much out, but the setting of a movie does create a fascinating visual the succeeds in conveying the events. I had a difficult time deciding between the Branagh and the Zeffirelli version, but when push comes to shove the Branagh version is more powerful. It includes all the lines, and creates a highly charged atmosphere around the events of the play within the play.
Explication
ReplyDeleteHamlet is sick at heart. He is hurt by what he sees as his mother's betrayal, he is filled with hatred for Claudius for killing his father, and he is frustrated, (and I think a little bit frightened) by the prospect of murdering his Uncle to avenge his father. All of these emotions are felt in his soliloquy "to be or not to be". Essentially, it questions whether it would be easier to just die, to sleep. Or would it be nobler, and braver to stand and fight against the troubles of life? As Maddie mentioned, every analogy and metaphor used is violent and warlike in some way. He is fighting with himself. He mentions the "whips and scorns of time" "to grunt and sweat under a weary life". He makes it clear that he is uncertain of what comes after death, speaking of "that dread of something after death." the "undiscovered country". Hamlet also reveals his struggle with loving Ophelia, despite his distrust of all women "The pangs of despised love" that he cannot control, but can hate all the same, similar perhaps, to how he feels about his mother. Hamlet asks the timeless question of whether it is worth it to live through the pains of life.
HAMLET
Branagh presents the soliloquy in the hall of mirrors, once again lending the setting of the Victorian era to create a bright light atmosphere was a quality of sharpness to it. There is a lot more anger in this version, possibly because he is so close to Claudius on the other side. One thing that struck me was the hinge on the mirror. This directors choice leaves me wondering whether Hamlet knew they were there. Mel Gibsons performance involves a lot more emotion, and of varying types. This makes sense, given the setting of the crypt where his father is buried. Of the five, I feel that Gibson does the best job conveying the muddled emtotions of the soliloquy, and the dark setting ties in well with the feeling of the piece. Hawke's performance bothers me again, for the same reasons as the last clip did: he is very inconsistent in when he speaks. Half the time its in his head, half the time out loud. The same goes for Oliver. Tennant once again uses his piercing eyes to make direct contact with the audience, and though his performance is fascinating, he doesn't tie with Gibson on portraying the sadness and vulnerability of the piece. I am not an Oliver fan. I liked that he was portrayed as literally "on the edge" setting wise, but other than that, I feel that the music was the best part of the clip.
Meryl G
ReplyDeleteTo be or not to be speech-
The "to be or not to be" speech shows that Hamlet is a thinker. With his background as a scholar, he has been taught to think things trough, but that is the factor that is holding Hamlet back from taking action. The more he thinks about how he wants to end his uncle/father's life, the more he comes to question the existence of his own life. The first thing that stood out to me when we first read this speech in class was the repetition and constant comparison between sleep and death. Lines 68-77 use the words sleep and death as two separate meanings, then goes on to show how similar they are with the lines "To die, to sleep; To sleep: perchance to dream: ay, there's the rub; For in that sleep of death what dreams may come". The first connection that I thought of was how Claudius killed King Hamlet. King Hamlet, asleep in his garden then suddenly sleep became death when Claudius poisoned him.
To be or not to be videos-
In the videos, I noticed that the Branagh and Olivier versions both did something similar, they took out their daggers when they were speaking. Overall the Branagh version, to me, showed confusion, pain, and anger, which created a strong scene.
The Branagh version was played out well and the one way mirror definitely added another dramatic layer to the speech. Within the room of mirrors it was impossible to pick the one mirror that concealed Claudius and Polonius, but he managed to directly threaten them by touching his dagger to the mirror that separated Hamlet from the two curious men, but at the same time, he's threatening himself. The mirror also shows Hamlet is looking at himself, and questioning himself as he points to his own reflection with the dagger, as if to question his very being in the world.
The second clip with Mel Gibson is powerful because it takes place in the catacombs where his father has been buried. This created more of a sadness to the speech rather than confusion, which is odd because the "To be or not to be" speech is famously know for its portrayal of confusion. Gibson's voice does rise with anger at certain points, but throughout most of it, he seems more in mourning of his fathers death, rather than confusion of his own life.
The Tennant clip is actually my least favorite. The emotions of this speech are complex and this scene doesn't do a good job in showing them. All the other clips provided a scene that added to the speech, but here Tennant simply speaks around a corner. This doesn't created any emotion towards the speech at all.
The Almereyda clip was not one of my favorites, but not my least favorite. Blockbuster was such an odd place to shoot this scene because I feel it had nothing to do with the speech. Although the one factor I did like about this was that he was walking through the "action" isle of the store. What we had talked about in class was hamlets fail to take action, and by being in the action section of the store, it's a constant reminder to Hamlet that action is what he needs to be doing, not thinking.
Olivier's clip showed Hamlets question of his own life the strongest. By being on top of a cliff, looking down into the rocky waves beneath, he is confronted with the confusion of should I end my life or not? Like Branagh, Olivier takes out his dagger and keeps it in his hand, as if to show he has to options for his death, but Olivier ends up throwing his dagger over the edge, as a symbol that he has decided that neither objects were going to kill him. Hamlet has decided to live.
Meryl G
ReplyDelete"Mousetrap" videos-
The Branagh version of the mousetrap struck me as odd because I didn't realize that Hamlet was speaking so loudly in the audience, and that he ran down to the players while the play was still being performed. The other thing that confused me was how could Hamlet not have seen Claudius's reaction? His reaction was seen by everyone in the audience. Someone in the crowd looked up to see the king stand, and they yelled, "the king rises!", which causes everyone to look toward the King. The thing that caused Claudius to rise was Hamlet yelling directly at him, and yet he still asks if he saw the kings reaction.
In the Gibson version, the players seemed to be more funny and uplifting compared to the Branagh play. I did think it was strange that Hamlet was hiding behind various members of the audience once the king stood up. Again the Kings reaction was not subtle, it was actually more dramatic than Branagh because in this version Claudius actually ran out of the building after the scene of the poisoning of the king.
The shortest and strangest video was the Almereyda version. I did not like this one because I didn't know what some of the symbols stood for. The symbols in question would be the budding rose and the spinning Earth. I could make a guess as to why each one was used but in sure both would be far from its real meaning.