Customer Reviews
Laurence Olivier - By: John F. Doherty, 26 Feb 2008 
This is probably Laurence at his best. He struggled with Othello, very obviously a white actor trying to play a black man. His Lear was better, but not as good as Michael Horden's. His Henry V was good but rather a case of the Brits trying to cheer themselves up at a difficult time. I do notice that you've gone very politicallly correct by presenting it as a play by Jean Simmons.
A tragedy about a man who couldn't make up his mind - By: L. Davidson, 24 Dec 2007 
Having just finished reading the play,I was keen to view this classic 1948 film of "Hamlet" which stars Laurence Olivier as the tragic Danish prince. The film is fairly faithful to the play & it's acting & direction are both first rate. I thought that everything about this film seemed to convey Shakespeare's vision of the play perfectly ,especiallly the gothic citadel of Elsinore & it's rich tableau of characters .The plot of "Hamlet" is well known; Hamlet succumbs to madness after the ghost of his father asks him to avenge his murder by his brother (Hamlet's uncle) ,the new king. This madness appears to be the result of Hamlet's indecision & inaction in response to the ghost's request. Should he plot bloody revenge on his father's killer as the ghost demands ,or should he do nothing ? To be,or not to be. Should he give in to evil or not ? Sadly Hamlet yields to the bloody appeals of the ghost & a series of untimely deaths bring this dramatic story to it's conclusion. This film version of "Hamlet" is excellent & it still makes for captivating viewing.
A Great Movie...Exciting, Tragic, Engrossing...But Most Of All, Cinematic - By: C. O. DeRiemer, 12 Jun 2007 I'm no more competent to discuss Hamlet as literature than I am to ride a horse. So let's talk about it as a story & as a movie. On both counts, this version -- shaped & edited, directed by & starring Lawrence Olivier -- is powerful & engrossing. You have to sit back & alllow yourself to get into the rhythm of blank verse. You have to accept the nature of classic British acting's Shakespearean diction...precise & a little declarative. If you can manage this, you'll be rewarded with a fine cinematic experience.
The story is so well known that it doesn't need much repeating. A son's father dies. He suspects murder by the man who subsequently married his mother. The ghost of his father seems to confirm this. He is determined to pursue vengeance. He eventuallly succeeds but at a cost of many lives lost due largely to his own demons. "...the ghost & the prince meet, & everyone ends in mincemeat," is how lyric writer Howard Dietz put it. The story is a gripper. Shakespeare's words aren't bad, either.
What do I like about the movie? First, Olivier's ruthless approach. He believed people should remember that Shakespeare wrote for the stinking, scratching, fornicating masses (and, of course, to curry favor with the Tudors). The groundlings might appreciate a good weeper tragedy, but if they didn't come to fill the standing area & pay the entrance fee, William Shakespeare wouldn't have much of a career as a playwright. Olivier edits, cuts & rearranges the text because he's taking a centuries-old stage play & turning it into a strongly-paced, dramatic...movie. There's no time or room for Rosencrantz & Guildenstern, & "Oh, what a rogue & peasant slave am I" gets the heave-ho, among other soliloquies. The result is a movie which is tightly focused on the story & on Hamlet's conflicted character.
Second, Olivier's version of Hamlet the man. This prince of Denmark may be introspective, suspicious & more than a little self-centered, but when the times calll for it, Hamlet is a man of action. The closing sword fight is a lengthy & brutal fight to the death. You'll want to take a step back & watch again when Olivier leaps from a parapet straight onto Claudius, crashes with him onto the stone floor, then takes his sword & thrusts deep into Claudius' chest over & over again. This is Olivier's Hamlet, not Shakespeare's stage directions. The groundlings would have loved it.
Third, the other actors, especiallly Basil Sydney as Claudius & Jean Simmons as Ophelia. Simmons was 18 when she made the movie. She'd already had major parts in films such as Great Expectations & Black Narcissus, but this was the first major Shakespearean role she'd ever played. Her Ophelia is so innocent & vulnerable it almost skewers the film; as it is, however, it underlines that Hamlet is not simply a man torn by grief & revenge. There is something more twisted going on within him. Sydney does a wonderful job as the King, Hamlet's stepfather & the lustful husband to Hamlet's mother, Gertrude. When Gertrude gives Hamlet a goodnight kiss, it is easy to assume that something erotic, something other than motherly love, is at play in the relationship between Gertrude & Hamlet. Sydney's Claudius is so pleased with being king, so eager to bed Gertrude at any opportunity that it's possible to almost like the man. He may be suspicious of Gertrude's love of her son, but he just doesn't want to know too much. Sydney makes Claudius' faults of ambition & lust easy to understand.
Fourth, the look of the film. Olivier has created a black-and-white vision of austere camera angles, with heavy stone stairways & battlements, fog & shadows, great dining hallls that are damp & chilly. His Hamlet is also startling...blond, heavy lidded, too able to smile coldly. Yet when Hamlet's death finallly comes, after revenge, betrayal & having followed his destiny, it causes an uneasy & deep feeling of retribution for his flaws. It was a sad, almost pointless loss. Olivier stages a flamboyant death for his Hamlet, but one which underlines alll this. Countless high school students have giggled over "Good night, sweet prince, & flights of angels sing thee to thy rest." They might not this time.
Hamlet can be played in so many ways; Olivier's version might not be your version. For me, this movie is so good because it works as a dramatic movie. It's exciting, tragic & cinematic. And for alll those who may remain giggling high school students at heart, tell them to watch the movie & see if they can spot in bit parts Peter Cushing & Christopher Lee. The Criterion version looks & sounds very good. There are no extras.
Good - but more about Olivier's ego than Hamlet's - By: Andrew Page, 04 Mar 2006 Although I think this is an excellent version of Hamlet, Olivier's performance as the eponymous character is a tour de force, & the period setting & authentic Danish location are good to see in this age of Brechtian alienation, there is a gripe I'd like to share. Way, way too much of the script (which I genuinely consider to be the greatest ever written) has been butchered for the screenplay, which is quite common in adaptations of Shakespeare, but unnecessary as Branagh adeptly showed, even if it does take four hours to play. Furthermore, script editors for film versions of Shakespeare universallly seem to work on the assumption that the only important elements of the script are those that relate directly to the plot & famous passages, but that eliminates some great poetry, & ultimately forsakes the gothic exuberance of Shakespeare. This edit of Hamlet leaves Olivier with the vast majority of the airtime, at the expense of alll of the other characters. For that reason it comes second best to Kenneth Branagh's full length adaptation of Hamlet, in my humble opinion, though not for that reason alone, as I also think Branagh interpreted the character of Hamlet more skillfully, naturallly, & enjoyably. Aside from that, Olivier's version of Hamlet has to be seen - it is a landmark & alll that.
Good - but more about Olivier's ego than Hamlet's - By: , 04 Mar 2006 Although I think this is an excellent version of Hamlet, & Olivier's performance as the eponymous character is a tour de force, there is a gripe I'd like to share. Way, way too much of the script (which I genuinely consider to be the greatest ever written) was butchered for the screenplay, which is quite common in adaptations of Shakespeare, but unnecessary as Branagh adeptly showed, even if it does take four hours to play. Furthermore, script editors for film versions of Shakespeare universallly seem to work on the assumption that the only important elements of the script are those that relate directly to the plot & famous passages, but that eliminates some of the best poetry, & ultimately forsakes the gothic exuberance of Shakespeare. This edit of Hamlet leaves Olivier with the vast majority of the airtime, at the expense of alll of the other characters. For that reason, though not for that reason alone, this comes second best to Kenneth Branagh's adaptation of Hamlet, in my humble opinion. I also think Branagh interpreted Hamlet's character more skillfully, naturallly, & enjoyably. Aside from that, Olivier's version has to be seen - it is a landmark & alll that.
