What‟s in a Setting: Scenic Revelations of HamletHamlet- the Existentialist and the Action Hero
One of the primary visual ways that a director can weave rich layers of themes into his or her story is through the use of setting. Through close readin gs of three Hamlet adaptations, the setting becomes reflective of the differences in the character of Hamlet. We are not onl y confronted with a binary set of Hamlets, one that is the “action hero” and one that is introspectively existential in Franco Zeffirelli and Michael Almereyda‟s films, but also a Hamlet which meshes these two traits into one in the Kenneth Branagh version. In Franco Zefferelli‟s 1990 Hamlet 1990 Hamlet , Mel Gibson plays a Hamlet that is all action and little talk. This version, shortened to just under two hours, cuts out much of the text of the actual play. pla y. Zefferelli also chooses to break up longer portions of text spoken one character into several different scenes. His Hamlet is shown to be a Hamlet of action. This Hamlet holds a sword in an attack position and pursues the ghost in a war-like stance. As Daniel Quigley observed this Hamlet “does not ponder the best way to act in a situation; he simply reacts, usually in a physical manner” (qtd. in Keyishian 77). He also yells out to his mother in anger with the line “frailty thy name is woman” creating a feeling of accusation instead of introspection (Keyishian 78). In another instance, this Hamlet is seen tearing out the pages of his book during the “words, words, words” words” scenescene- he is reacting, showing how ho w completely engulfed he is in this state of doing, instead of merely being. Keyishian states, “Gibson‟s Hamlet snarls; low-angle low-angle shots and vibrant close-ups close-ups make him dominate each moment on screen” (78). Simply Simply put, this is a physical Hamlet- he is fully man, revengeful and driven d riven by the sword. Zefferelli underscores his characterization of Hamlet with scenery that is impregnated with reality. We are confronted with “a substantial world of real ph ysical presence, fleshed out by an
unusual number of extras” resulting in us “feeling that this throne rules over real subjects” (Ebert). The battlements on the castle along with being surrounded by the sea bring this notion of “action” to the forefrontforefront- this is a castle ready to defend itself at any cost. This place is real, as Hamlet is real. The weight of this reality falls on us like the weight of the armor Hamlet and Laertes wear for the final fight scene seems to fall on their shoulders. Furthermore, Zefferelli removes all mention of Fortinbras from his film, making Gibson the sole revengeful son and therefore leaving out the only character that could be perceived as taking more action than Hamlet. Without this foil, we are left with merely one reading of this Hamlet, though the ending becomes more ambiguous. In contrast, Michael Almereyda‟s Hamlet, brought to screen in the year 2000, presents an existential young man. This Hamlet, as played pla yed by Ethan Hawke, is not only o nly introspective, but also moody and lacking in intense physical or emotional moments. As such, we are given a modern art student, fulfilling the clichéd role of “slacker” wh o cannot come outside of o f himself enough to face the situation he is in. His moodiness drives him to despair and to the intent to “out” Claudius. Claudius. His art form, through the use of film, investigates this notion of introspectiveness even farther as Hamlet becomes the director, the man behind the camera, constantly “rewinding and fast-forwarding” fast-forwarding” and never able to simply exist in the moment (qtd. (qtd. in Khoury 124). The setting of Almereyda‟s film explores these existential notions as we are given a “kingdom” within the “walls” of skyscraper -laden -laden New York City. The feelings of insignificance and imprisonment are emphasized through the use of low angle shots that juxtapose the characters with tall buildings. We are also reminded of how passive Hawke‟s Hamlet is within the ironic setting of the Blockbuster aisle for the famous “to be or not to be” monologue. Hawke is thoughtfully considering whether or not “to b e” while
glancing over films in the “action” aisle at Blockbuster, revealing that this Hamlet is incapable of being the action hero (Fedderson and Richardson 156). He is “standing awkwardly… contemplating whether to go forward toward the section with familiar film genre or to go back toward uncharted territories of action- packed packed movies” (Khoury 124). This image of Hamlet and his setting further emphasizes his inability to be outside of himself. He can not be in the present moment, he must either rewind or fast-forward as he do es with his films. In 1996, Kenneth Branagh produced his impressively colossal Hamlet colossal Hamlet . This time, Kenneth Branagh directs and stars for a hefty four hour film that leaves little, if any, of the play pla y to the imagination. This Hamlet is a mesh of the binar y, combining introspect with action. We see that “from a grieving son lurking in the shadows at the start, Branagh moves to an explosive “man of action” in the later scene, a knowing impersonator of madness and theatrically dynamic presence” presence” (Burnett 78). We see Branagh‟s careful inclusion of forever threatening Fortinbras, the all-action militant revengeful son, as a contrast to Hamlet, yet as the threat of Fortinbras grows, the less-introspective and more reactionary Hamlet becomes. They are s een, then, as two sides s ides to the same revenge-driven coin, one working from without and the other within. Branagh‟s setting grants us much insight to the way he perceives Hamlet. By shooting in 70 mm film, he creates a visually stunning film which empha sizes an “epic” feel feel to the whole thing. He uses a cold, wintry Denmark for the outside- snowy lands and gray gra y skies emphasize the stark barrenness and rough wilderness that is outside the palace. The inside of the palace, by contrast, is bright, open, elegant and opulent. These two settings are reflective of the two revengeful sons, the harsh Fortinbras and the more subtle and elegant Hamlet. Branagh uses many man y mirrors to emphasize this “presentation of a court, which, as it contemplates its own self image, faces only an inevitable inevitable decline” (Burnett 79). 79). This becomes, then, a story of the corruption within.
Branagh‟s Hamlet delivers his famous “to be or not to be” monologue looking at his reflection in the mirror , further driving home this notion of “looking within. within.” This Hamlet is confronted with his inner person as he is attempting to combat the inner workings of the court. It is only when he is able to overcome his own inner battles that he is able to become revengeful in action instead of merely thoughts. thoughts. Though he begins slowly, and never becomes quite the “action hero” as Mel Gibson portrays, Branagh‟s Hamlet fulfills his purpose to restore a balance to the throne by ridding the world of the evil residing within. As such, he also becomes a more balanced version of the Gibson Hamlet and Almereyda Hamlet. These three adaptations of Shakespeare‟s Hamlet Shakespeare‟s Hamlet , explore different settings to further enlighten their audiences on the types of Hamlets they decide to portray. po rtray. Whether we are seeing a Hamlet that reacts with powerful physical motions, a Hamlet that remains stuck outside of the “action” genre, or a combination of both, the directors choose to make us hyper -aware of these characteristics through their choice of the characters‟ surroundings. The story becomes more enriching and engaging when we find similarities like this between two elements within films. The true power in a film lies in combinations like this. If a film can stand o n its own as a “text” worthy of analysis, holding the promise of many layers waiting to be discovered, then it becomes a Shakespearean film at its finest.
Word Count: 1303
Works Cited
Burnett, Mark Thornton. “The “Very Cunning of the Scene”: Kenneth Branagh‟s Hamlet Branagh‟s Hamlet .” .” Literature Film Quarterly. 25.2 (1997): 78-82. Academic 78-82. Academic Search Complete. Complete. EBSCO. Web. 4 May 2011. Fedderson, Kim and J. Michael Richardson. “Hamlet 9/11: Sound, Noise, and Fury in Almereyda‟s „Hamlet.‟” College Literature. Literature. 31.4 (2004): 150-170. JSTOR 150-170. JSTOR.. Web. 4 May 2011. Keyishian, Keyishian, Harry. “Shakespeare and movie genre: the case of Hamlet Hamlet .” .” Shakespeare on Film. Film. Ed. Russell Jackson. England: Cambridge University Press, 2007. 72 -84. Print. Khoury, Yvette K. “To be or not to be” in “The Belly of the Whale;” a Reading of Joseph Campbell‟s “Modern Hero” Hypothesis in Hamlet on Film.” Literature Film.” Literature Film Quarterly. 34.2 (2006): 120-129. Academic 120-129. Academic Search Complete. EBSCO. Web. 4 May 2011.
