While Hamlet is one of the most celebrated plays of the literary stalwart, William Shakespeare, it has been adapted in films all over the world owing to it aesthetic quintessence and relevance. One such adaptation of this play is the 1990 film, Hamlet, which stars Mel Gibson. However, there are several differences between the original play and the cinematic adaptation. Delving deep into the two works of art makes the deviations crystal clear to one and all.
The director of the film, Franco Zeffirelli, opts to make certain changes in the film. This is done in an endeavor to bring more effect on the minds of the audience. One major scene which depicts this difference is that of the funeral of King Hamlet. There is no such scene there in the original work by Shakespeare. But, the director chooses to depict this scene in the film to accentuate the effect. The director emphasizes on this scene as the characters of King Hamlet is one of the pivotal factors of this story. In stark contrast, the play starts with the ghost of King Hamlet that comes in front of the guards who are on duty. This scene is excluded in the film.
The play starts showing the guards and Horatio who are waiting for King Hamlet’s ghost to come in front of the castle. The playwright writes that the ghost comes twice, but it never speaks to these men. The scene ends showing that the guards and Horatio, Hamlet’s friend, are discussing among themselves that they should endeavor to make Hamlet speak to the ghost. In the film, the funeral is shown at the inception. Gertrude is seen standing beside Hamlet’s coffin. Hamlet sprinkles dust over the deceased body. The people cover the coffin as Claudius, King Hamlet’s brother, puts his sword over this coffin. Gertrude is seen crying over the death.
Another difference is seen in the depiction of the scene where the player’s play is portrayed. While in the original work of art by Shakespeare King Claudius is seen standing up and walking toward the stage and bursting out in laughter, the film takes a different route. In the film, Hamlet is not seen dancing around and singing as the King leaves. The director opts to show that King Claudius stands up and yells the word “lights”, just at the time when Hamlet tells that the assassin gains the love of the player king.
There is another contrast between the two works of art. The difference is in the depiction of Fortinbras. There is a scene in the play where he takes a letter from Hamlet when he is dying, which validates him to be the new king. He takes this letter, and then makes a long speech of thankfulness and acceptance of the honor given to him by Hamlet. However, the film does not incorporate this scene at all, where Fortinbras is seen giving the speech.
Humor is one factor that can be found in the film, something that is absent in the original play. In the second scene of Act 2, Polonius confronts Hamlet inside the castle. Shakespeare pens the words of Hamlet. He writes, “Let her not walk i' th' sun. Conception is a blessing, but as your daughter may conceive, friend, look to 't.” (Shakespeare 2.2.185-187)
In the cinematic version, Gibson is found playing upon the word “sun” that means the king, also the word “conception” that means both pregnancy and understanding. Here, the protagonist is implying that the king might make unsuspecting ladies (his mother to be specific) pregnant, just like he himself could make Ophelia pregnant. The cinematic version adds dramatics in the enactment, and tries to bring out the effect.
One of the biggest differences that are found in the two works of art is the version regarding Hamlet’s madness. The readers can find Shakespeare’s expressions talking about the madness. In the first scene of the second act of the play, Ophelia says, “Lord Hamlet, with his doublet all unbraced; / No hat upon his head; his stockings foul'd, / Ungarter'd, and down-gyved to his ancle; / Pale as his shirt; his knees knocking each other; / And with a look so piteous in purport / As if he had been loosed out of hell / To speak of horrors,--he comes before me.” (Shakespeare 2.1.77-83)
This interaction is also known as the “silent interview” between the characters of Ophelia and Hamlet. Hamlet never speaks anything at this point of time, but gives her a note later. However, he still comes across as mad to the audience or the readers.
In the film, the director shows that Polonius is spying on Hamlet during the time of this silent interview. This episode is also shown in a different time sequence, and not as retrospection on the part of Ophelia. Thus, the audience and Polonius get to see Hamlet’s madness first-hand, instead of knowing about it from a secondary source later.
The director wishes to portray Polonius as a voyeur to the conversation right from the start of the scene. The director shows Hamlet’s feigned craziness to both Polonius and the audience alike, and thus adds his own version to the portraiture of the story of the play.
Also, while hamlet kills Claudius by making him drink the poison, in the film he is seen using a gun to kill the King. The film shows a visual montage that represents his reminiscence of his life passing in front of his eyes before he dies.
Thus, the film chooses to deviate from the original depiction, and makes things more direct for the convenience of the audience, or for the sake of less complication in portraiture. Whatever is the case, this simplification or change makes one miss the subtleties of the characteristic traits of the people portrayed in the original work by Shakespeare. Nevertheless, it is a good cinematic adaptation of the famous play, and appeals to the senses of the audience owing to the story and the plot of the original art-work. However, the cinematic portraiture strays from the playwright’s version, thus changing the characterization of the leading characters of the play by Shakespeare.
Works Cited
“Comparison of Hamlet the Play and Movie.” Studymode. n.p., n.d. Web. 11 October 2014.
Hamlet. Dir. Franco Zeffirelli. Perf. Mel Gibson, Glenn Close, Alan Bates. Warner Bros., 1990.
Film.
Shakespeare, William. Hamlet. London: J.R, 1604. Print.
