I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Released in 1987 and therefore a fairly early effort by Aki Kaurismäki, HAMLET LIIKEMAAILMASSA ("Hamlet Goes Business") is the Finnish auteur's idiosyncratic adaptation of Shakespeare's classic play. Kaurismäki sets the drama in the corporate world of 20th-century Finland: a business magnate (Pentti Auer) is murdered by his wife Gertrud (Elina Salo) and brother Klaus (Esko Salminen) so that they can marry and take over the group of companies. The deceased's son Hamlet (Pirkka-Pekka Petelius), depicted here as something of a dim-witted manchild, discovers the dark secret of his murder and moves towards revenge. At the same time, he maintains a curious love affair with Ofelia (Kati Outinen), daughter of a high-ranking employee, and also scrapes with other characters drawn ultimately from Shakespeare's play.All of the main scenes from Shakespeare's play are present here, though sometimes (like the murder of Polonius) they don't make much sense in the context of the adaptation and are shown briefly to simply telegraph them. The dialogue is mainly original, though at times it switches into the traditional Finnish translation of Shakespeare's Elizabethan English to deliberately bizarre effect. There is however a laugh-out-loud twist ending going beyond the Shakespearean source material, which turns the film into a commentary on Finnish politics and labor relations.All of Kaurismäki's films are dark comedies, though with humor so deadpan it is sometimes easy for an audience to miss it entirely. Riffing on the image of the Finnish people as taciturn and emotionless, Kaurismäki's actors are directed to state their lines in a very dry, robotic fashion. The death of Ophelia, a tragedy for the ages, is depicted here in a humorous way entirely due to Kati Outinen's deft facial expression and an unusual prop I won't spoil here. Kaurismäki's love of early rock 'n' roll and blues is present in all of his movies, and you can also expect to see a jukebox kicked into life here and a band performing on stage at some point.While I am a fan of Kaurismäki and have seen nearly all of his many films, I don't think this is one of his major efforts. The black and white photography is a weak point. Kaurismäki loves utterly drab scenery and it is a big part of his aesthetic, but paradoxically color is necessary to bring this drabness across. It also feels like this is just one more adaptation of Hamlet, even if it's an unusual one, and none of the characters are as readily likable as in Kaurismäki's own original work. Most audiences will find his preceding effort VARJOJA PARATIISISSA (Shadows in Paradise) or his following film ARIEL to be more charming and visually seductive.

Hamlet Goes Business (1987) is a number of things. On the one hand, it's a piercing satire on industry and the corporate world of the 1980's dressed up as a spiralling melodrama; while on the other hand, it's an appropriation of the colourless, academic world of Shakespeare slapped around and recast as a lurid film-noir pastiche. For me, it's perhaps the first true masterpiece from Finish auteur Aki Kaurismäki; the one in which his typically unique style of deadpan humour, dry characterisations and idiosyncratic reference-points finally came together to create a unique and distinctive whole. Obviously, that isn't to say that his first three films, Crime and Punishment (1983), Calamari Union (1985) and Shadows in Paradise (1986) don't warrant serious critical attention, because they do; but rather, the subtle shades of character, drama, humour and self-reference that had been slowly developing over the course of those particular three films is finally refined and further developed with this delightful, absurdist joy.The basic story of the film retains the set-up and characters familiar from Shakespeare's adaptation, though with a number of separate abstractions beyond those presented by the general updating of the characters and text. For example, rather than being the noble prince, Kaurismäki's Hamlet is a spoilt, oafish brat; more likely to be getting a hankering for a midnight feast and failing to score with his girlfriend Ofelia than prospering in the cut-throat world of business. In our introduction to the character, a nonplussed Hamlet literally stumbles across the body of his murdered father whilst precociously munching on a large slice of ham. Later in the film, as his step-father and mother conspire to take control of the business, a childlike Hamlet is placated in the boardroom by the addition of his own table with colouring books and felt-tip pens. As a work of satire, both on the idea of industry and on the nuts-and-bolts of Shakespeare's text, Kaurismäki is merciless. However, the film also impresses on a purely stylistic level; with the director adapting certain visual quirks and techniques familiar from post war B-cinema alongside his usual stylistic preoccupations to create one of the greatest pop-cinema pastiches since Godard's Pierrot le fou (1965).As ever with the films of Kaurismäki, Hamlet works as a result of the perfect casting, with a fantastic performance from lead actor Pirkka-Pekka Petelius complimenting Kaurismäki's regular troop of supporting actors, here including Esko Salminen, Kati Outinen, Esko Nikkari, Turo Pajala and Matti Pellonpää. Petelius's Hamlet maintains that typically straight-faced approach shared by many of Kaurismäki's iconic characters, whilst also possessing something of a childlike innocence to set-up the mechanics for that blistering final act. I can certainly see why some viewers would find the more freely adapted elements of the film offensive on a historical level - with Hamlet here recast as a sulky teen bumbling into a conspiracy that he doesn't quite comprehend - but I think it's important to look beyond the presentation of the character found in the more recognisable elements of the Shakespearean piece to see the bold and imaginative use of satire and stark sense of humour that Kaurismäki brings to the project.The final act of the film is incredibly funny and filled with imaginative and inventive elements that demonstrate what a fantastic and highly original filmmaker Kaurismäki is; with a film like Hamlet Goes Business, not to mention subsequent highlights like Ariel (1988), I Hired a Contract Killer (1991) and The Man Without a Past (2002) showing the range and talent of a sadly underrated artist very much the equal to the more widely acclaimed likes of Tarantino and the Coen Brothers. Here, Kaurismäki's film takes the pop references and retrogressive elements of the former and mixes it with the intelligence and humour of the latter to produce an exceptional film that is unique to his particular style and approach. Although the humour might prove to be a little too dry, or the style too eccentric to appeal to those with a broader cinematic taste, Hamlet Goes Business is really an absolute joy that is worth experiencing. A bold, irreverent, imaginative and impeccably acted satire, with great black and white cinematography, a jarring style and a great central performance from Petelius.

I'm always willing to give an off-beat take on Shakespeare a go. This version starts out well enough, perhaps a bit bland, but the black and white works well, and the differences from the original play kept me on my toes, wondering what they would do different; what take on the story they would offer.I was extremely disappointed by the end. What we have here is a work which is tantamount to totally dismissing Shakespeare. All the original characters are corrupt and evil, and the director opts to let two characters of his own invention be the only survivors and heroes. Why, then, do Shakespeare at all? This demonstrates a profound lack of Shakespeare comprehension. The director has the most intelligent play ever written at his fingertips, and all he can think to do with it is dismiss it as an exercise of futile, meaningless corruption? I say again: A huge disappointment.3 out of 10.

It's not that easy to make a Shakespeare adaptation set in our time. There have been successful attempts, such as Baz Luhrmann's Romeo & Juliet, but most modern-day versions of the bard's plays are doomed to oblivion. That's not the case of Hamlet Goes Business, Aki Kaurismäki's film noir take on the classic.Actually, it's more of a black comedy, similarly to Calamari Union (coincidentally, or maybe not, both films were shot in black and white), Kaurismäki's satire on Finnish lowlife. This time, the target is the big industry, within which Hamlet (Pirkka-Pekka Petelius, who also played one of the Franks in Calamari Union) is raised a spoiled brat, spending his days doing mostly nothing, bar flirt with Ofelia (Kati Outinen), whose father (Esko Nikkari) is an important business associate of Hamlet's dad. Then suddenly the situation changes, as the old man is found dead and his brother, Klaus (Esko Salminen) takes over everything, including the marital duties with Hamlet's mother (Elina Salo). Our grief-struck hero is subsequently forced into action after discovering Klaus isn't that innocent: he poisoned his own brother. Hence the inevitable questions: what should Hamlet do? Leave the murderer alone or avenge his father's assassination? In short, to be or not to be?Ironically, we never hear the protagonist say those words, or the rest of the soliloquy, for that matter. Kaurismäki cut the entire speech because according to him it was ridiculous, useless and distracting, a waste of time: Hamlet would be too busy to start reflecting on life's meaning.Apart from that (and a few tweaks at the end), Hamlet Goes Business follows Shakespeare's text very closely, albeit with the satirical tone. In fact, the movie's sole weakness is the fact that it gets a little too overblown and surreal come the conclusion, with set-pieces that are funny, yes, but slightly inappropriate in this kind of film.That said, the film is worth a viewing, if you're open-minded enough. If not, stick with Laurence Olivier or Kenneth Branagh: at least you'll get to hear the famous soliloquy.