best movie i've ever seen.

A different way of telling a story

Good films always raise compelling questions, whether the format is fiction or documentary fact.

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Hamlet is a take on William Shakespeare's classic play that Sir Laurence Olivier directed and starred in. The film won Sir Laurence Olivier two Oscars- one for his acting and one for best picture due to his producing role in the production of the film. Olivier also appeared in an earlier best picture winner, 1940's Rebecca directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Hamlet was the second film that Olivier directed and his second Shakespearean adaptation. Olivier is considered one of the greatest actors of the 20th century and this version of Hamlet is considered his seminal work. Olivier was the first film actor to be elevated to peerage (knighted) for his work in film by the queen. While Olivier obtained four Oscars during his long and prolific career, Hamlet is the only film for which he won a best actor award. Olivier's other Oscars besides the two for Hamlet, came from a special award for his work on his first film, Henry V, and a lifetime achievement award given to the knighted actor in 1978. Hamlet is also the first film that we have reviewed where the director was also the leading actor in the film. While Olivier did not win the directing award, his achievement of directing a best picture where he also won best actor clearly solidifies his place in the annuls of Oscar history. While the previous two films we have viewed from the 1940's dealt with the post-war malaise in American culture and the despicable rise of anti-Semitism in America in the 1940's, Hamlet pivots away from reality and takes a stab at the escapist entertainment of the golden age of Hollywood. This import marked the first non-American film to win best picture and was the first film version of Hamlet to include sound. There have been seven post-war versions of Hamlet including this 1948 version, "Grigori Kozintsev's 1964 Russian adaptation; a film of the John Gielgud-directed 1964 Broadway production, Richard Burton's Hamlet, which played limited engagements that same year; Tony Richardson's 1969 version (the first in color), Franco Zeffirelli's 1990 version starring Mel Gibson; Kenneth Branagh's full-text 1996 version; and Michael Almereyda's 2000 modernization starring Ethan Hawke". While I had seen a few of the other aforementioned adaptations, this was my first time watching this 1948 version. While many of the shots in this depiction of Hamlet seem staged like the theatrical production, it takes the introduction of phantasmagoria to become more abstract. Using close-up angles and fog, Olivier symbolizes the arrival of Hamlet's father's ghost. The special effects in the film held up well to modern standards in most scenes, with only the shots of the entire castle suffering from a lack of CGI or expensive budget. On a somewhat related note, the voice of his father's ghost coming from the helmet of his armor reminded me of how George Lucas styled Darth Vader in Star Wars. Perhaps Lucas drew inspiration from this Olivier film.Without writing too much of a book report on Hamlet, whose plot and subject matter is some of the most well-known in the entire cannon of English literature, I will instead focus on the cinematic elements. This cerebral story, with many soliloquies and internal dialogue, has a tendency to drag a bit. With limited action for periods of time, the movie is largely saved by the peaks of action including flashes of violence and emotion. The acting is superb at parts, but does show flourishes of melodrama typical of earlier films. Additionally, the sometimes dragging moments are disrupted by the hits of the Shakespearean dialogue with a performance of the "To Be or Not to Be" Monologue delivered with Olivier's incredible acting chops. Besides Olivier, the real star of this film is the soundtrack. Between the brilliant score played by the orchestra, the sound effects in the form of heartbeats and gusty corridors add tremendously to moments of introspection and eeriness. Overall, I found Hamlet to be a very traditional yet innovative portrayal of Shakespeare's source material. While the play was cut down to deliver a film 2.5 hours long, it still captured the major action and dialogue for which Hamlet is known. In full honesty, Shakespearean English is not my favorite and watching this film was a little bit of a chore. Fortunately, there were sword fights and murder to break up the dense dialogue. Unfortunately, the film ceases to cross the line from cinema to entertainment for my particular tastes. Olivier's performance and direction breathed life into the already dramatic story and the themes of betrayal and loss are timeless motifs that will remain relevant for all time. With that said, in order to truly enjoy this film you really need to commit with both of your love of literature as well as the melodramatic style of 1940's cinema.

Shakespeare's classic drama, brought to the silver screen. Hamlet is prince of Denmark. His father, the King, died recently and, shortly after the event, his mother remarried, to the King's brother, Claudius. Hamlet is visited by a ghost who informs him that his father was murdered by Claudius for the crown. However, instead of immediately seeking revenge, Hamlet is beset by self- doubt. Machinations within the court also divide his attention.Directed by and starring the legendary Laurence Olivier, this movie is quite an achievement. Shakespeare can be quite dry and inaccessible at times and with this movie Olivier made Shakespeare mainstream. It did help that Olivier is the greatest interpreter and performer of Shakespeare the world has ever seen (sorry, Kenneth Branagh!).\Well made and well performed, Olivier certainly succeeds in making the movie accessible. Not perfect though - it does drag at times. Still, well worth watching, and more accessible than the book!

It can't get better than Hamlet. Maybe the most-quoted English piece of all time, Hamlet is a delicate piece that needs to be done right. In his 1948, black and white, Best Picture-winning Hamlet, Olivier delivered an adaptation that hung close to the letter and spirit of the original source, but didn't dare to fly free. It certainly grasped the mood Shakespeare wanted, but it doesn't take filming freedoms where the text allowed. Certainly, he achieved the most freedom from the stage through the cinematography, most noticeably the unique camera movements imitating the sound of a heartbeat that plays when the dead king's ghost is observed in anyway in the story.Hamlet feels more like a filmed version of the play rather than an adaptation. But at that, it is amazing. The dark presence and tragic undertones grow through Olivier's Oscar-winning lead performance and Jean Simmons's crazed Ophelia. As the narrator states in the beginning of film, "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind." In the play and film, Hamlet is visited by his father's (the former king of Denmark) ghost, stating that his uncle, now the king, had murdered him. However, Hamlet is unsure what action to follow, for if he murders his uncle, it would be repaying evil with evil. Unfortunately, a mistake causes Hamlet to be exiled to England, but he doesn't give up there, and the story builds up to a climatic ending.Like the play itself, Hamlet offers many questions but doesn't give any straightforward answers. The questions dive deep, and along with Shakespeare's old English, younger viewers might not understand. As with the play, an undercurrent topic of incest plays out, mostly through Hamlet's complaints against his uncle taking his father's widow as his wife. Furthermore, the ending is dramatic and sad – with a lot of dead people.Olivier, who has the skill to drop any obscure line of Shakespeare in a beat, manages to work a scarcely worthy adaptation of the play, despite having to cut many monologues and soliloquies in order to run under 160 minutes. One of the weak points of the film is Olivier's recitation of the famous soliloquy, "To be or not to be." To my disappointment, Olivier rushes through it with melancholy and something short of fake that it doesn't have much dramatic and emotional impact. The play did not have any rule or details that restricted it from emotional freedom, especially as a film. Olivier seems to restrict himself to rules that Shakespeare didn't put or intend. But otherwise, Olivier's Hamlet is extraordinary in its own right. He portrays it in the way Shakespeare might have imagined it – the non-extravagant set pieces, simply choreographed and bloodless duels, and few, select locations for different scenes. For the sources and educational material, Olivier's Hamlet is worth watching, but only for the artistic value of the spirit and letter of Shakespeare.

Reading Shakespeare is not an easy job. Not only do many readers get confused with the Old English, paranoid with the mythological references and cryptic metaphors and at times, tired with the flowery style, but also get bogged down by the lack of sympathy with the characters. I feel that Shakespeare is not one of my favorite writers, even though I do admire his Midsummer Night's Dream, Hamlet and The Tempest. I would rather read the Oedipus trilogy by Sophocles because there is an imminent tension in the play. Shakespeare relies more on grand and sometimes arcane soliloquies – there is so much he is telling but he deliberately wraps it so that interpretations may differ. I revere this quality, it makes him a genius and gives great pleasure to analyze his play but to read his plays for leisure is something I wouldn't really be interested.I read Hamlet first when I was 16; it was a magnum opus but I couldn't grasp its immense power. On viewing this film after almost 3 years, I noticed one thing about the play. The character of Hamlet is purposely given less characterization so that the reader/the actor may interpret him in his own way. In Oedipus the King, one can get a clear picture of Oedipus' torment not only by his dialogs but also by the singular focus of the play. Hamlet, however leaves up to the readers to decide how Hamlet really is or can be. Therefore, he is given such monologues and scenes that reveal the physical and part psychological element of the play but not in entirety. Even now, a writer/director can twist Hamlet's tale by putting in new conditions – that's one special virtue of the play.I still am puzzled about the ghost in the play. How is it that the guards, Horatio and Hamlet are able to see it while Gertrude cannot? This is the apparition of Hamlet's dead father, who wanders the castle at night and vanishes with the crowing of the cock. Hamlet, the Prince of Denmark mourns his father's untimely demise and scorns his mother's incestuous marriage with his uncle. After an encounter with the spirit who informs Hamlet about Claudio, his uncle's spineless deed, the prince feigns madness to extract vengeance.Acting wise, Laurence Olivier gives the most unaffected performance that works most of the times, except when Hamlet has to feign madness. Olivier seemed too calm to look or sound mad. Eileen Herlie is very convincing as Hamlet's mother, generating the right passion and perplexity for her character. Her scene with Hamlet in her room is very well acted by both the actors. Basil Sydney as Claudius was good but his character's motives remained unclear on a deeper level. Jean Simmons played her part well, but again, I didn't care much for her Ophelia. Here is where I am confused whether the actors are not truly reaching the depth of their characters or am I not yet floored by Shakespeare? Terence Morgan was the bad apple here.The film has a theatrical feel throughout; I could see many stage techniques applied, especially 'emphasis'. But Olivier brings a great camera technique during the ghost encounters where the sound of drum beat / heart beat is heard and the camera zooms in menacingly. But I was unimpressed with a few aspects in the film. For example, the somewhat forgettable 'Be not too tame but let your discretion….' soliloquy. The scene with the actors where Claudius guiltily storms off was rushed and should have been shot in an elaborate, more Hitchcockian style. And the "man who cannot make up his mind" is vague. On a positive note, the scenes between Hamlet and ghost, Hamlet and mother and Ophelia, and the final scenes are shot and acted very well. The best part is that the play is much easier to understand and the script has been well adapted here.Most people consider "To be or Not to be" to be the definitive quote. My personal favorite, the one which can be said for olden tragedies is "Divinity shapes our ends. Rough-hew them how we will" And Olivier says it marvelously.My Rating: 7 out of 10