Bors
Jan. 2001 ist beigetreten
Willkommen auf neuen Profil
Unsere Aktualisierungen befinden sich noch in der Entwicklung. Die vorherige Version Profils ist zwar nicht mehr zugänglich, aber wir arbeiten aktiv an Verbesserungen und einige der fehlenden Funktionen werden bald wieder verfügbar sein! Bleibe dran, bis sie wieder verfügbar sind. In der Zwischenzeit ist Bewertungsanalyse weiterhin in unseren iOS- und Android-Apps verfügbar, die auf deiner Profilseite findest. Damit deine Bewertungsverteilung nach Jahr und Genre angezeigt wird, beziehe dich bitte auf unsere neue Hilfeleitfaden.
Abzeichen4
Wie du dir Kennzeichnungen verdienen kannst, erfährst du unter Hilfeseite für Kennzeichnungen.
Rezensionen6
Bewertung von Bors
Hamlet is one of my favorite plays, and, as I was buying the ticket for "Hamlet 2000," I felt simultaneously the expectation of seeing the movie and a strange reservation about the alterations, which, as I watched the movie, blossomed into full-fledged despair.
Entire scenes from the play; in my opinion some of the best in the entire work (e.g. I,i, the most Polonian parts of II, i, many of the major monologues have been clipped---and the GRAVEDIGGER scene!), were cut out, ostensibly for purposes of streamlining, but the cuts did the WORST things to the work as a whole. Instead of being a transcendent, symbolic unfolding of events validating a worldview, it becomes, instead, merely the groanings of a moody, spoiled adolescent. The focus is so rarely taken off of Hamlet that I got sick of looking at Ethan Hawke. His character is transformed from a student into a slacker, from an intellectual into a pretentious cinemaphile. (Perhaps so many of Hamlet's self-referential lines are cut because they don't refer to the debased character portrayed.)The film takes itself, plot-wise, much too seriously to be enjoyed.
As another reviewer noted, the New York corporate setting has SO MUCH potential! But the director goes in for flashy visuals over meaning; the surveillance aspect of Claudius (which could have been so brilliantly updated by the more-obvious use of security cameras) is used only once as an excuse for Polonius to make an aside. Claudius is transformed from a totalitarian, lecherous tyrant into something akin to "Wall Street"'s Gordon Gecko, which simply isn't enough for this film.
Acting-wise, this film suffers from a schizophrenia. Ethan Hawke's Hamlet appears to be on some sort of medication, drowsily murmuring all his lines (with the exception of the scene before "The Mousetrap," where his merriment is strange indeed---and totally forced). Gone is the passion with which one expects a number of the soliliquoys to be delivered, making Hamlet the central weakness of the film. Claudius and Gertrude were both adequate, but in my opinion not entirely convincing. They shouted when they had to, whispered when they had to, but were not at all impressive. Julia Styles had her moments as Ophelia, but her scenes at the Guggenheim (esp. the first) really turned me off from her. I much prefer Kate Blanchett's quiet, tearful turns in Branagh's cinematic "Hamlet."
The two stand-outs in the film are Sam Shepard as Old Denmark, whose startlingly aggressive portrayal of the Ghost breathes a fresh wind into the usual "doomed spirit" portrayal of the character. My only real nit about Shepard is that the scene where he first reveals himself to Hamlet is supposed to take place just before the dawn ("But soft! Methinks I scent the morning air!"), but the film oddly portrays it around twilight, the night coming on fully after his visitation.
The other stand-out performance comes from Liev Schreiber as Laertes. His mellifluous voice and unpretentious character are a refreshing change from the flash of the rest of the movie, and his more standard delivery puts the weakness of Horatio and Hamlet to shame. (It's ironic that, around the time this movie was being made, Schreiber portrayed Hamlet on-stage at the Public Theater in New York)
One last remark about this travesty---did the director not notice the NUMEROUS times the boom comes into view???? Look at the reflections in the chrome at Polonius' house, the scene in the Guggenheim when Laertes confronts Claudius, and later, when Laertes and Claudius speak of revenge at the King's house.
All in all, this film is a mess of nonsensical cuts changes, lifeless acting and botched intentions. If you're in a masochistic mood, rent it some time next year.
Entire scenes from the play; in my opinion some of the best in the entire work (e.g. I,i, the most Polonian parts of II, i, many of the major monologues have been clipped---and the GRAVEDIGGER scene!), were cut out, ostensibly for purposes of streamlining, but the cuts did the WORST things to the work as a whole. Instead of being a transcendent, symbolic unfolding of events validating a worldview, it becomes, instead, merely the groanings of a moody, spoiled adolescent. The focus is so rarely taken off of Hamlet that I got sick of looking at Ethan Hawke. His character is transformed from a student into a slacker, from an intellectual into a pretentious cinemaphile. (Perhaps so many of Hamlet's self-referential lines are cut because they don't refer to the debased character portrayed.)The film takes itself, plot-wise, much too seriously to be enjoyed.
As another reviewer noted, the New York corporate setting has SO MUCH potential! But the director goes in for flashy visuals over meaning; the surveillance aspect of Claudius (which could have been so brilliantly updated by the more-obvious use of security cameras) is used only once as an excuse for Polonius to make an aside. Claudius is transformed from a totalitarian, lecherous tyrant into something akin to "Wall Street"'s Gordon Gecko, which simply isn't enough for this film.
Acting-wise, this film suffers from a schizophrenia. Ethan Hawke's Hamlet appears to be on some sort of medication, drowsily murmuring all his lines (with the exception of the scene before "The Mousetrap," where his merriment is strange indeed---and totally forced). Gone is the passion with which one expects a number of the soliliquoys to be delivered, making Hamlet the central weakness of the film. Claudius and Gertrude were both adequate, but in my opinion not entirely convincing. They shouted when they had to, whispered when they had to, but were not at all impressive. Julia Styles had her moments as Ophelia, but her scenes at the Guggenheim (esp. the first) really turned me off from her. I much prefer Kate Blanchett's quiet, tearful turns in Branagh's cinematic "Hamlet."
The two stand-outs in the film are Sam Shepard as Old Denmark, whose startlingly aggressive portrayal of the Ghost breathes a fresh wind into the usual "doomed spirit" portrayal of the character. My only real nit about Shepard is that the scene where he first reveals himself to Hamlet is supposed to take place just before the dawn ("But soft! Methinks I scent the morning air!"), but the film oddly portrays it around twilight, the night coming on fully after his visitation.
The other stand-out performance comes from Liev Schreiber as Laertes. His mellifluous voice and unpretentious character are a refreshing change from the flash of the rest of the movie, and his more standard delivery puts the weakness of Horatio and Hamlet to shame. (It's ironic that, around the time this movie was being made, Schreiber portrayed Hamlet on-stage at the Public Theater in New York)
One last remark about this travesty---did the director not notice the NUMEROUS times the boom comes into view???? Look at the reflections in the chrome at Polonius' house, the scene in the Guggenheim when Laertes confronts Claudius, and later, when Laertes and Claudius speak of revenge at the King's house.
All in all, this film is a mess of nonsensical cuts changes, lifeless acting and botched intentions. If you're in a masochistic mood, rent it some time next year.
When, this summer, I saw "Saving Private Ryan", I was immediately reminded of this film. Using the same kind of camera angles that got Spielberg praise in "Ryan", we see the hollowness of the war-torn psyche and the brutality that emerges in people during warfare. We see hideous indoctrination that the German youth were subjected to, giving them depth beyond a few simple lines. Most of all, however, we see the absurdity inherent in such a large scale, world-shattering conflict. The film communicates its message with a clarity that makes one almost uneasy. As good as "Ryan" was, this is better.