Hamlet liikemaailmassa

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.

i saw this about a year after it first came out.

It has become notorious for being somewhat flippant about it's source material (Shakespeare's Hamlet).

Actually, I don't remember finding this very humorous at all. In fact, a darker version of the Hamlet narrative could hardly be imagined.

This film represents an important historical turning point; although theatrical directors had been toying with the notion of "updating" Shakespeare, ever since Orson Welles produced a Broadway version of Macbeth with African Americans in the cast back in the late 1930s (When he made his own film version of MacBeth, he chickened out on this, unfortunately). But if the reader has seen the updated version of Romeo and Juliet out of Australia, or the Ethan Hawke Hamlet of 2000, or the recent "O" version of Othello (at last with black actors playing black roles, after all these centuries, for heaven's sake!), it all starts here.

Unfortunately, as I say, this film is so incredibly dark, you'll want to know why Hamlet didn't just cut his throat - "To be, or not to be - oh, the hell with it!" Not for every taste, to say the least.

Theater spectators have a good chance of being much more familiar with what they see on screen in the 1987 film by Finnish director Aki Kaurismäki 'Hamlet Goes Business' (the original Finnish title is 'Hamlet liikemaailmassa'). Shakespeare's text is processed and reinterpreted, the historical context and the props that define it (sets, costumes) are changed, and the result reflects much more the view about the world and art of the director than of the Bard. It is precisely the art of film that has been more 'faithful' and more conventional in approaching Shakespeare's text, and especially 'Hamlet', perhaps his most famous play. Kaurismäki's version has nothing to do with those in which Laurence Olivier, Innokentiy Smoktunovskiy, or Kenneth Branagh appeared. Although much of the dialogue is taken quite faithfully from Shakespeare, 'Hamlet Goes Business' is something else entirely - a 'film noir' with hints of absurd comedy, set in Finland in the second half of the 20th century.

In Aki Kaurismäki's version, the Kingdom of Denmark is a big Finnish factory (today we would call it a corporation, but the film was made before the Nokia era) that is run by the Hamlet dynasty, and is in danger of being taken over by a Swedish concern interested in in producing there ... rubber ducklings. The dramatic structure of the play is preserved, the hero's father is assassinated, his uncle and mother get married after a short time and plan to take over the kingdom ... sorry, the factory. The ghost appears, and the young heir Hamlet, until then more concerned with bringing the attractive Ophelia to bed, begins to plan revenge. Spectators will recognize many of the plays' lines, a theatrical performance will also appear, although the famous 'To be or not to be' is missing. This Hamlet has no philosophical pretensions but retains some of the ambiguity of the character.

The cinematography gives this film a special quality. Kaurismäki and cinematographer Timo Salminen use black and white but also specific 'film noir' angles as well as cinematic props from Orson Welles and Alfred Hitchcock's sets of tools. The actor who playes Hamlet, Pirkka-Pekka Petelius reminds the young Welles, while Kati Outinen's Ophelia seems to be borrowed from Ingmar Bergman's films. Music and other elements of pop culture combined with the style of gangster story present an original combination, which predates by almost a decade the first films of this genre made by Tarantino and the Coen brothers. With this 1987 film, Kaurismäki started to conquer the position of first-rate director of his generation, and created a version of 'Hamlet' that is like no other.

The plot of "Hamlet" transferred to contemporary Finland then filmed in the style of a forties film noir with its tongue lodged firmly in its cheek. Aki Kaurismaki's "Hamlet Goes Business" is yet another of his many multifaceted treats exploring in large part the bizarre relationships between men and women only this time fleshing it out with yet another cod-thriller plot. So what if it steals from Shakespeare, (I can think of no better man), and at least this one clocks in at under ninety minutes rather than four hours. Good fun even if it lacks the emotional density we associate with the very best of its director.

What are you left with if you take most of the psychological motivations away from characters, and turn a story into a social tract? Shakespeare lovers and those who persist on "character development" better beware, as Kaurismaki (in my fourth incursion into his cinema) transforms the Danish prince into a horny, ruthless and spoiled rich heir, who writes bad poetry, is worried about his weight and has a terrible secret. I admit I don't like William Shakespeare much --I believe he's overrated-- so I rather enjoyed Kaurismaki's "irreverence". It is a hint that he does not even give credit to Shakespeare: this story has been told since late 12th century and apparently Thomas Kyd wrote a "Hamlet", before Shakespeare. Kaurismaki is more interested in speculating what may happen to a family like Hamlet's in contemporary settings that seem peculiarly outdated. The first 70 minutes tell the story we know, with a few licenses that in most cases are funny, or simply reveal how the rich and powerful take ruthless decisions without considering their effects on the people they rule. Kaurismaki builds scenes and sequences using resolute ellipsis, a fixed camera, and alienating and ironic music commentaries. Scenes are often resolved in a single take, and to the point (for example, the only time he sees the ghost of his father, Hamlet asks him to talk fast because he does not want to miss dinner, and Kaurismaki cuts to another scene; also there is no famous soliloquy), which made my somewhat uneasy viewing a fast experience. In an aftermath we have never heard of before, Kaurismaki grabbed my full attention, up to his sarcastic end credits against a montage of a factory while a trite tune of hope fills the soundtrack. I found it far more interesting than Brannagh's and Zeffirelli's films.