82 Hamlet
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 8:53 pm
- Location: all up in thurr
82 Hamlet
Hamlet
Winner of four Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Actor, Sir Laurence Olivier's Hamlet continues to be the most compelling version of Shakespeare's beloved tragedy. Olivier is at his most inspired—both as director and as the melancholy Dane himself—as he breathes new life into the words of one of the world's greatest dramatists. Criterion is proud to present Hamlet in a luminous black-and-white digital transfer.
Available individually or as part of the Olivier's Shakespeare collector's set!
Special Features
• Beautiful digital transfer, with restored image and sound
• English subtitles for the deaf and hearing impaired
• Optimal image quality: RSDL dual-layer edition
Criterionforum.org user rating averages
Feature currently disabled
Winner of four Academy Awards, including Best Picture and Best Actor, Sir Laurence Olivier's Hamlet continues to be the most compelling version of Shakespeare's beloved tragedy. Olivier is at his most inspired—both as director and as the melancholy Dane himself—as he breathes new life into the words of one of the world's greatest dramatists. Criterion is proud to present Hamlet in a luminous black-and-white digital transfer.
Available individually or as part of the Olivier's Shakespeare collector's set!
Special Features
• Beautiful digital transfer, with restored image and sound
• English subtitles for the deaf and hearing impaired
• Optimal image quality: RSDL dual-layer edition
Criterionforum.org user rating averages
Feature currently disabled
Last edited by Martha on Mon Aug 22, 2005 2:37 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Godot
- Cri me a Tearion
- Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2004 12:13 am
- Location: Phoenix
Watched this last night, as illustration for my niece, who is struggling with reading the play for high school English. I love Olivier's staging of the scenes, emphasizing the theatricality of the "acting" by various characters as they deceive and query each other (such as Hamlet's deluding Polonius as he "reads", and the way Hamlet distractedly gazes in the direction of Polonius and his uncle hiding behind the curtains while Ophelia is "performing" her ruse at their behest); I was particularly amused by his having Hamlet enter under a proscenium at stage left once Ophelia takes her place at the center of the barren "stage", with curtains behind. (This reminded me of some of Russell Lees' comments on the awesome Richard III disc.) Of course, this just emphasizes Bill S's theme of "to thine own self be true" vs. the referential "acting/performance" that all the characters exhibit. And the expressionistic shots of the battlements and staircases on which Hamlet chases his father's ghost were impressive, even eliciting a faint "freaky" from my teen niece (high praise? should that quote be on the DVD slipsheet?).
Has anyone else noticed a problem with the English subtitles? For 20-30 minutes (up through "The play's the thing/ to catch the conscience of the king!") the text was one line off from the video/audio, such that the last line spoken would only appear in text when the next line was uttered, even if it had a gap of 30 seconds or more.
Has anyone else noticed a problem with the English subtitles? For 20-30 minutes (up through "The play's the thing/ to catch the conscience of the king!") the text was one line off from the video/audio, such that the last line spoken would only appear in text when the next line was uttered, even if it had a gap of 30 seconds or more.
- Gordon
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:03 am
Hamlet:
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. To die, to sleep
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
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,
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,
Th' oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despis'd love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would these fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
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?
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 pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action. Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins rememb'red.
Arthur Schopenhauer, (1788-1860) German philosopher and profound commentator on aesthetics:
The essential purport of the world-famous monologue in Hamlet is, in condensed form, that our state is so wretched that complete non-existence would be decidedly preferable to it. Now if suicide actually offered us this, so that the alternative "to be or not to be" lay before us in the full sense of the words, it could be chosen unconditionally as a highly desirable termination ("a consummation devoutly to be wish'd" [Act III, Sc. I.]). There is something in us, however, which tells us that this is not so, that this is not the end of things, that death is not an absolute annihilation.
[The World as Will and Representation, Volume I, translated by E.F.J. Payne, Dover, 1958§59, p.324]
Hamlet's soliloquy is an awesomely profound piece of existential literature and Olivier's delivery here is probably my most favourite reading on film. For me, Olivier's film is the best cinematic adaptation, as it captures the dilema of existence very well, with its moody black and white cinematography by Desmond Dickinson striking the appropriate visual tone. I have difficulty watching most color versions of Hamlet.
I have held off buying the Criterion edition of Hamlet, as it is pricey and I have read that the picture and sound are merely adequete, and there are no extras. But I really must order Richard III soon.
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. To die, to sleep
No more; and by a sleep to say we end
The heartache, and the thousand natural shocks
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,
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,
Th' oppressor's wrong, the proud man's contumely,
The pangs of despis'd love, the law's delay,
The insolence of office, and the spurns
That patient merit of th' unworthy takes,
When he himself might his quietus make
With a bare bodkin? Who would these fardels bear,
To grunt and sweat under a weary life,
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?
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 pith and moment
With this regard their currents turn awry
And lose the name of action. Soft you now!
The fair Ophelia! Nymph, in thy orisons
Be all my sins rememb'red.
Arthur Schopenhauer, (1788-1860) German philosopher and profound commentator on aesthetics:
The essential purport of the world-famous monologue in Hamlet is, in condensed form, that our state is so wretched that complete non-existence would be decidedly preferable to it. Now if suicide actually offered us this, so that the alternative "to be or not to be" lay before us in the full sense of the words, it could be chosen unconditionally as a highly desirable termination ("a consummation devoutly to be wish'd" [Act III, Sc. I.]). There is something in us, however, which tells us that this is not so, that this is not the end of things, that death is not an absolute annihilation.
[The World as Will and Representation, Volume I, translated by E.F.J. Payne, Dover, 1958§59, p.324]
Hamlet's soliloquy is an awesomely profound piece of existential literature and Olivier's delivery here is probably my most favourite reading on film. For me, Olivier's film is the best cinematic adaptation, as it captures the dilema of existence very well, with its moody black and white cinematography by Desmond Dickinson striking the appropriate visual tone. I have difficulty watching most color versions of Hamlet.
I have held off buying the Criterion edition of Hamlet, as it is pricey and I have read that the picture and sound are merely adequete, and there are no extras. But I really must order Richard III soon.
Last edited by Gordon on Tue Aug 23, 2005 10:17 am, edited 1 time in total.
- ando
- Bringing Out El Duende
- Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
- Location: New York City
I agree with Matt that this is probably the most compelling Hamlet on film, though the film is far from compelling (also, I've yet to see Grigori Kozintsev's Gamlet, which I've read to be cinematic in a way that Olivier's version isn't). The cheif problem I have with Olivier is the problem I always have with most of his cinematic Shakespeare: his performance is too theatrical and his direction too lumberous. Hamlet is downright lugubrious. He overplays the Oedipal theme and does little to give Shakespeare's poetry any real dynamism (I'm not talking about his whirling dervishes between lines) - the epitome of which is the To be or not to be soliloguy that is quoted above.
Nothing could be more deadly in cinematic terms than a dreamy Hamlet atop a cloud capped hill mumbling the initial few lines of the famous speech. In plain terms, here is a character considering suicide or at the very least, ending the trouble inherent in living a human life. As written, Hamlet is looking for an end to the suffering. As played by Olivier, he is already halfway in the grave (and would seemingly complete the act if he would only fall off the damned cliff)!
If, indeed, as Hamlet later prostelizes to the players, one must suit the action to the word (and vice-versa), Olivier would have fared better by trusting William Shakespeare a bit more and Sigmund Freud at lot less.
Nothing could be more deadly in cinematic terms than a dreamy Hamlet atop a cloud capped hill mumbling the initial few lines of the famous speech. In plain terms, here is a character considering suicide or at the very least, ending the trouble inherent in living a human life. As written, Hamlet is looking for an end to the suffering. As played by Olivier, he is already halfway in the grave (and would seemingly complete the act if he would only fall off the damned cliff)!
If, indeed, as Hamlet later prostelizes to the players, one must suit the action to the word (and vice-versa), Olivier would have fared better by trusting William Shakespeare a bit more and Sigmund Freud at lot less.
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
Kozintsev's Hamlet and Lear are both highly cinematic.ando wrote:I've yet to see Grigori Kozintsev's Gamlet, which I've read to be cinematic in a way that Olivier's version isn't)..
Alas www.russiandvd.com does not currently seem to carry subbed versions of either. Oh well, www.ruscico.com offers both NTSC and PAL versions of them.
Last edited by Michael Kerpan on Fri Aug 26, 2005 8:36 am, edited 1 time in total.
- tryavna
- Joined: Wed Mar 30, 2005 4:38 pm
- Location: North Carolina
Oh, dear God! That one was incredibly hard to sit through -- even when it was on MST3000. But it's worth it just for the final skit: A Hamlet doll with a string. You pull the string out by about 50 yards and it recites the whole "To be or not to be" soliloquy!skuhn8 wrote:And then there's the German made for TV Hamlet with Max Schell (or was it Hardy Kruger)....available on MST3000.
And it was Schell....
-
- Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 3:09 pm
- Location: here and there
The copy of Hamlet I got from them is the typical Ruscico subtitled in 13 languages or so, English included. I don't know why the cover is different on the web site, so I don't know what the deal is. Ditto King LearMichael Kerpan wrote:Kozintsev's Hamlet and Lear are both highly cinematic.ando wrote:I've yet to see Grigori Kozintsev's Gamlet, which I've read to be cinematic in a way that Olivier's version isn't)..
Alas www.russiandvd.com does not currently seem to carry subbed versions of either. Oh well, www.ruscico.com offers both NTSC and PAL versions of them.
- Michael Kerpan
- Spelling Bee Champeen
- Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
- Location: New England
- Contact:
I got MY copies of the Kozintsev Shakespeare films from www.russiandvd.com also. But now all I find listed are "Krupnyj Plan" releases. I have bought one of these KP releases (of Babusya) and it was a barebones Russian only release. Also, a while back, russiandvd had both the Ruscico release (which mentioned subs) and the KP one (which didn't).
I wouldn't recommend ordering the current KP releases without explicitly verifying the existence of subs (by calling or e-mailing) -- unless one understands Russian, of course.
I wouldn't recommend ordering the current KP releases without explicitly verifying the existence of subs (by calling or e-mailing) -- unless one understands Russian, of course.
- Gordon
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:03 am
The quality of the King Lear DVD isn't that good: DVD Beaver. What's with the 2.58:1 ratio? Must be cropped; it looks like it. It looks like the NTSC transfer has been badly DVNR'd.
But this will probably be the best we'll ever get. Unless Art Eye release their own edition with a new transfer.
But this will probably be the best we'll ever get. Unless Art Eye release their own edition with a new transfer.
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Yeah, I usually hear complaints about 3 things: 1) Olivier's too old, 2) the performance is too mannered and brooding, 3) the Oedipal interpretation.ando wrote:...his performance is too theatrical and his direction too lumberous....He overplays the Oedipal theme and does little to give Shakespeare's poetry any real dynamism - the epitome of which is the To be or not to be soliloguy that is quoted above.
Nothing could be more deadly in cinematic terms than a dreamy Hamlet atop a cloud capped hill mumbling the initial few lines of the famous speech. In plain terms, here is a character considering suicide or at the very least, ending the trouble inherent in living a human life. As written, Hamlet is looking for an end to the suffering. As played by Olivier, he is already halfway in the grave...
It's interesting for a second, but in the end, the Oedipal interpretation doesn't do wonders for this picture. Fortunately, it doesn't seem to overwhelm the picture, even if you're reminded of it throughout the story.
The thrashing Olivier gets, I dunno...yeah, it would've been more 'appropriate' if he was younger, but nothing's gonna change that and I'm already watching the movie, so that's something I try to get over quickly. It's occasionally too theatrical - the worst may be Ophelia's flashback, when she explains her suspicions of madness...seriously, having the audience see Olivier act out every word Ophelia reads/writes was a tactical error.
Still, I actually like what he's done with his performance as a whole. I've had minimal exposure to Hamlet on stage or film, but I recall Olivier's interpretation bringing out Hamlet's sense of humor a bit more - he may be teetering on despair or bitterly angry, but he isn't completely given to doom and gloom...his scene with Polonius is wonderfully sarcastic, as is the way his face lights up during the graveyard scene when he clutches Yorick.
Some of the matinee idol moments were a bit much. The brief glimpse of his dealing with the pirates (as read in a letter to Horatio) which seemed lifted out of a Douglas Fairbanks picture or someone like that, killing his uncle/stepfather with such élan, etc. I'll concede that it does work during the duel, that was exciting stuff...
I hesitate to call it brilliant, but changing between voice-over and spoken dialogue was an admirable experiment, and it mostly works.
Also, the set design may be a little much, but it works very well with what he's trying to accomplish - the way halls and bridges seems to wind endlessly, with so much is placed in the distance through corridors.
Not one of my favorites, as a whole, the picture is still flawed and doesn't approach Kurosawa or Welles's interpretations, but there's plenty to like, especially in Olivier's performance (even if I do have reservations about it).
- ando
- Bringing Out El Duende
- Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
- Location: New York City
Enjoyed your reply, hearthsilence.
Welles did a version of Hamlet on film? News to me (unless you're referring to his Macbeth, which remains my favorite version of The Scottish Play on film, including Polansky's). With all the weaknesses of Olivier's version (if you can call them that), it's still the best film version, imo (the worst being the version with Ethan Hawke as Hamlet - did Zeffirelli do that?).
Yes, the flashback with Ophelia describing Hamlet's mad trance is simply bad, cheifly because the audience can see Olivier perform exactly what (Jean) Simmons is describing. (Bresson was a master of this "doubling" effect; for instance, during the frequent voiceovers in Diary of A Country Priest that occur as the main charcater writes the very words we're hearing in his journal. It conveys a kind of realism (God, that word!) that compels the viewer to follow the narrative.) This doubling, in the Olivier film, has quite the opposite effect! One realizes the stiff artificiality of the approach.
Welles did a version of Hamlet on film? News to me (unless you're referring to his Macbeth, which remains my favorite version of The Scottish Play on film, including Polansky's). With all the weaknesses of Olivier's version (if you can call them that), it's still the best film version, imo (the worst being the version with Ethan Hawke as Hamlet - did Zeffirelli do that?).
Yes, the flashback with Ophelia describing Hamlet's mad trance is simply bad, cheifly because the audience can see Olivier perform exactly what (Jean) Simmons is describing. (Bresson was a master of this "doubling" effect; for instance, during the frequent voiceovers in Diary of A Country Priest that occur as the main charcater writes the very words we're hearing in his journal. It conveys a kind of realism (God, that word!) that compels the viewer to follow the narrative.) This doubling, in the Olivier film, has quite the opposite effect! One realizes the stiff artificiality of the approach.
- hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 4:22 am
- Location: NYC
Yeah, it was called The Magnificent Ambersons. (lame joke...seriously, check out Robert Carringer's The Magnificent Ambersons: A Reconstruction, there were some allusions to Hamlet that were excised from that picture. I don't think Welles ever did Hamlet on stage, but I have a vague recollection of Welles in his later years, bitterly claiming he should've left Hollywood after Kane, returned to Broadway and put on Hamlet. Anyone else ever hear of this?)ando wrote:Enjoyed your reply, hearthsilence.
Welles did a version of Hamlet on film? News to me (unless you're referring to his Macbeth, which remains my favorite version of The Scottish Play on film, including Polansky's). With all the weaknesses of Olivier's version (if you can call them that), it's still the best film version, imo (the worst being the version with Ethan Hawke as Hamlet - did Zeffirelli do that?).
Yes, I meant Macbeth (and film adaptations of Shakespeare in general), no, Zeffirelli did the one with Mel Gibson.
- ando
- Bringing Out El Duende
- Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 6:53 pm
- Location: New York City
Michael Almereyda directed the Hamlet (2000) with Hawke. Didn't like Bill Murray as Polonius, either. Normally his comic timing is excellent. Flat as a board here.
Back to Ophelia: One of the best cinematic (as opposed to moments of great cinematography - the distinction of which derives from my latest obsession with Bresson terminology - pardon me) moments in the film occurs during the description of Ophelia's death. As Gertrude begins her description of Ophelia's last moments we see the "poor wretch" floating in stream strewn with flowers. The stream, apparently, runs in a loop for when we see the flower bed return Ophelia has disappeared. It's a great example of showing by not showing - and a far better example of the doubling (action and description) that I referred to above.
Back to Ophelia: One of the best cinematic (as opposed to moments of great cinematography - the distinction of which derives from my latest obsession with Bresson terminology - pardon me) moments in the film occurs during the description of Ophelia's death. As Gertrude begins her description of Ophelia's last moments we see the "poor wretch" floating in stream strewn with flowers. The stream, apparently, runs in a loop for when we see the flower bed return Ophelia has disappeared. It's a great example of showing by not showing - and a far better example of the doubling (action and description) that I referred to above.
- Gordon
- Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 8:03 am
Has anyone here seen the Philip Saville (1964, BBC TV) version with Christopher Plummer? It is the only sound version to be shot on location at Kronborg Slot, Helsingør (Elsinore) in Denmark. August Blom's 1910 version was shot there, also.
I saw clips over at christopher-plummer.com and I was very impressed - Plummer's performance seems absolutely superb; the soliloquy is delivered quietly and seriously but with great depth. Sadly, this version hasn't been shown on British or USA/Candian TV for years now and no DVD is in sight. I greatly admire Plummer. I find it absurd that he has never even been nominated for an Academy Award. The Silent Partner is also sorely needed on DVD.
I saw clips over at christopher-plummer.com and I was very impressed - Plummer's performance seems absolutely superb; the soliloquy is delivered quietly and seriously but with great depth. Sadly, this version hasn't been shown on British or USA/Candian TV for years now and no DVD is in sight. I greatly admire Plummer. I find it absurd that he has never even been nominated for an Academy Award. The Silent Partner is also sorely needed on DVD.
- sevenarts
- Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 7:22 pm
- Contact:
coming in July, a packaging of the three Olivier Shakespeare films. looks like a lot of reissues & repackagings coming up this year.
- colinr0380
- Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
- Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK
The Criterion Contraption essay. I like the way they point out Christopher Lee - so Corridors of Blood was not his first Criterion appearance!
- Murdoch
- Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2008 11:59 pm
- Location: Upstate NY
Re: 82 Hamlet
For those in region B land or that are region-free, a region B blu-ray has been released.
Here's the beaver review
Here's the beaver review