Steam National Theatre Live: Hamlet

The plot is a fairly good one, and the actors deliver a reasonably decent performance. However, as usual in modern film, the script is not up to the task. One can see this in the dialogue, which is often melodramatic, and to a lesser extent, the cinematography. In fact, the film is very similar to the original play. The only difference is that the plot in the film is given a less strong emphasis, and the actors are allowed to improvise. The film, in my opinion, is a good effort by the director and actors, but I doubt it would be acceptable to the audience.

I have seen Hamlet many times, and have loved every performance. I did not want to see this movie. I had heard it was full of plot holes, and I did not want to have to see it. I have never seen Hamlet in the theaters, so I don't know how much I would have liked it. My wife and I are die hard Hamlet fans, and she wanted to see the movie so we went, and it was good. It was a good way to see the play for a first time viewer. It was good to see that some of the dialogue was different from the play. It was good to see how different the actors were. I also liked the original version of Hamlet. I also thought that some of the parts of the play were a little overdone. The acting was good. The only thing I didn't like about the movie was the story. The director wanted to show Hamlet being the father of his uncle and the uncle's wife, and that was not what I think was intended. The other thing that I didn't like was the way the uncle was portrayed. I thought it was a little bit of a stretch. But it did not bother me too much. Overall, I thought this movie was good. I did not hate it. I thought it was a good way to see the play.

I recently watched this movie on DVD, and I was really disappointed. I was expecting a much more powerful and insightful performance, but I was not able to see that. I have not read the play, so I am not sure what the director was trying to get across. The movie is good, but not as good as I was expecting. The actors are good, but not great. I was expecting more out of them. The director is quite good, but the script is not great. The film is only three hours long, so there is little time to develop the story. I was not able to see any meaningful change in the characters after watching it, but it seems to be a good idea to have the play out on the stage before you start filming the movie. The movie has a great cast, but not great actors. This is the one movie I was really hoping to see something great out of, and I really got nothing out of it. The film is good, but not great.

In the play, Hamlet is tormented by his own grief over his mother's death. This is an excellent adaptation of the play, though I found the movie to be more consistent with the play. This is a good film that will appeal to those who love Shakespeare and those who love the play.

I saw Hamlet on the stage. It was an amazing experience. When I heard that Hamlet was going to be made into a film, I couldn't wait to see it. However, the film version was horrible. There were no actors that were able to portray the characters. I would not recommend this film for anyone to see. It's very boring and you will be too confused. I would have rather seen the original. It was great. It had great actors that played the characters perfectly. The director of this version did not capture the stage performance at all. This is a great version but it's not the best version. I would give this version a C-.

Takeshi Kitano's Hamlet (1994) is a pretty good film. It's more of a play than a film and, therefore, it is less suitable for moviegoers than other Japanese films. Still, Kitano's style and the superb performance he gave in the role of Hamlet are very strong. He did a great job in this film, but I feel that his best work was in the American version of the play that he directed. That film was The Taming of the Shrew (1997), which, again, was directed by Kitano. If you liked this film, I also highly recommend seeing Kitano's play Hamlet (1987) as well. It's a pretty good film. This film will not get many people excited, but I think that it's a good film. It's worth seeing.

This is a retelling of Hamlet in modern times and a new translation of the stage play by another writer. It was directed by Luciano Ippolito, who was at the time of its first showing in 2005. The director uses the theatrical techniques of minimal dialogue, multiple shots, and close-ups, as well as loud sounds and close-ups, which I personally found distracting and less effective than the more modern techniques employed in more recent productions. All of the main actors in the film, and all of the other actors in the film, are present and reliable. I also liked the editing, which kept the film at a consistent pace with all of its many scenes. The soundtrack also helps in maintaining the mood of the film. As a film, Hamlet: A New Translation of Shakespeare's Hamlet is not bad at all, but it is just a bit below what could have been.

By far, the best film I have seen of David Harewood's Hamlet. And I've seen him in an awful lot of films. I didn't think that Hamlet would be so well-done, but it was. Harewood's Hamlet is a raggedy, smart-mouthed, very fragile, very cold, very precise little Richard Harris. Here is an actor who is afraid to go on, and yet is as wide-eyed as a child. Hamlet is a man who is not only clever, but whose way of thinking is just a kind of childish juvenileness. But that childishness, is only one of the reasons that the film is so brilliant. It is a very interesting film because it is so different from other plays of the time. But it is also very important because it was filmed in a very modest way. It is not a typical Hollywood production. Hamlet is a low budget film and there are no flashy scenes. The whole film is very deliberate and very restrained, and yet, it works. The film was made by Stephen Frears, and Frears is a very, very fine director. If you are a lover of Hamlet, or an admirer of Frears, or both, I highly recommend this film.

this movie was sooo good. It's a little dated, but it is extremely well done. They do an incredible job of conveying the emotions and emotions of the characters. It's a shame that a lot of people don't like this movie. Well, I think it's pretty accurate. The acting is good, and it does a good job at portraying the characters.

After seeing Hamlet I was greatly looking forward to seeing this film and as soon as I saw the trailer for it I knew I would not be disappointed. A big thank you to the director for putting the film together in such an excellent way. Everything is just great, the score, the direction, the script, everything is just great. The acting was excellent, the costumes, the sets, everything is just amazing. I have to say that for a budget film this film is very high quality. If I have to say something bad about the film it would have to be that some of the accents were a little bit silly at times but overall it was a very good film.

The film is a major statement about the Australian lifestyle, while, it is also about the other great Australian stories, like the first Swans and the Gladiators, which may have been big things in the past but are now just mythic and quaint in this modern world, and some things that are very similar to other films about the Australian experience, like the Town and Country life, are still so relevant, in particular to the living in the suburbs, where some people believe that the only reality is the one we've been told by our government. It is very, very slow, but there is an enormous amount of tension and emotion, and although it is not an easy watch, there is much to learn from it, and in particular from the performances by Sam Worthington, Bridgette Wilson, and a very under-rated Edward Norton, as the three central characters.

It is a work of art, of course, but the audience should remember that it is not meant to be taken seriously. That is why the people who criticise the film do so only in their own eyes and on their own terms. When it comes to Hamlet, it is clear that the audience is not intended to be taken seriously. There are no grandiose performances, no dramatic plot twists, no dramatic twists. There is only Hamlet and the audience. The dialogue is often poetic and with a good sense of humour, but there is also a lot of moral ambiguity and moral relativism. Some of the performances are amazing, especially by Liam Neeson, who was brilliant as the conscienceless Earl. The whole story is beautiful, with very simple plots. There are many things to admire and admire in this film. But it is not meant to be taken seriously, and not to be taken seriously is to criticise it. That is what many people do.

I am a big fan of Shakespeare's plays. I have an excellent knowledge of his plays, and I try to watch them as often as possible. However, I have to admit that I have found myself not always paying attention to the first few minutes of a play. Especially with a Shakespeare play such as Hamlet, which has so many dramatic elements. However, I must say that I am glad I watched this movie, because I felt it was well worth the time. I would recommend it to anyone who wants to be inspired by Shakespeare and learn about the different stages of his works. The acting is excellent, and the story is fascinating. It is not a masterpiece, but it is a good movie.

The film itself has its moments of brilliance but in its totality, I think it has too many structural flaws to be truly engaging. First of all, the script is a good deal thinner than I thought it would be. With the added editing and the addition of more characters, the script would be tighter and more cohesive. I think the biggest flaw in the script is that the writers have the characters act out their emotions in the way that the writer wants them to act. That's not how Shakespeare writes. He writes for the audience to see the emotions on the characters face, and that's the same way a Shakespearean drama is supposed to be acted out. I know some people won't understand the rules of Shakespeare, but it's a much more serious style of Shakespeare than people seem to think it is. If you are one of those people, you won't understand this movie and I don't think the movie would have made as much of an impact if they didn't follow the rules of Shakespeare. The editing, the acting, and the writing are all pretty good, and the actors all have strong voices and hold their own. The actors do well with their parts and some of the actors are even really good in their parts. It's not the best film that I've seen, but it's still a very good film. 8/10

There's a whole lot going on in Hamlet, but director William Friedkin is able to make it seem effortless. A few more jokes and you're halfway done with the movie. A good reason for being with Friedkin is that he has the most interesting visual style in the business, so I'm curious to see what Friedkin's next project will look like. Just because I like it, doesn't mean I'm a fan.

I wasn't expecting a masterpiece, and I certainly wasn't expecting it to be "too good" either. I was pleasantly surprised at how much this movie went beyond its two hours length. The acting was very good, and the plot was good. I loved how they used flashbacks to tell the story. The characters were well-written, with very real and believable performances. All of the actors seemed to have the talent, and the direction was good. All in all, this is a very good film. I would recommend it to anyone, and I hope it will get a wider release, because it deserves it. I highly recommend it!

A great movie for Shakespeare aficionados. The cinematography and music are magnificent. I was so enthralled in the story, I even shed a tear during the closing credits. Highly recommended.

I am a big fan of theatre. I even have a sister that goes to the drama classes and makes fun of me. This play, being so much more than a play, is about the thing that is lacking in a lot of theatres. It is a great piece of writing and directing. From the off, this play is full of emotions and it will put you on the edge of your seat. And if that's not enough, there is an original musical score that gets to the heart of the play, never getting out of its place. In short, I highly recommend this play. 8/10

A highly entertaining, if somewhat confusing, adaptation of Hamlet's life and death. The acting is good, the direction is top-notch, and the cinematography is spot on. However, I do have to admit that the storyline is rather confusing, which is a disappointment. I am more inclined to believe that the two leads are in love with each other than that they have chosen to end their relationship. For those who have not seen this version of Hamlet, I recommend this one. It's much more enjoyable than the Broadway version.

I can see why this is not the favorite of most people. This film is too dark for many people. There is a lot of emotion. The actors are good. A lot of the dialogue was incredible. All of the actors, from Kate Winslet to Nicole Kidman, were outstanding. I can see why this film didn't get wide release. It is a beautiful film. It is definitely worth seeing.

Hamlet is one of the best plays I've ever seen. It is so witty and moving, and not even a little bit slow. It's funny, and you can't stop laughing. It's a classic! If you are a Shakespeare fan, or even if you aren't, watch this movie. It's a must. If you don't like Shakespeare, don't watch it. It's pretty much one of the greatest works of art ever!

This is the first film I have seen by a British director and it is a very good film. The acting is very good, the direction is excellent, the cinematography is brilliant, and the music is just perfect. The story is very good and the music is very good. This is one of those films that you should watch at least once. I would recommend it to everyone. 8/10

I thought Hamlet was good. The play itself, performed with magnificent direction by Brian Helgeland, is strong, well-written, and very well acted. However, what made this movie so strong was the cast. The cast was made up of many actors, such as Judi Dench, James McAvoy, Ralph Fiennes, and Andrew Scott. All of them delivered powerful performances, but none more so than Ralph Fiennes. His performance as Hamlet was one of the best I've seen in any film. I also thought the direction was strong, and that every scene was perfectly directed and delivered in every way possible. There were also many memorable lines, like Hamlet's first line, "You have no clothes," and the later line, "It's a pleasure." These lines are part of what make this film so good. All in all, I thought Hamlet was a very good movie. This is a movie I would recommend for people who love Shakespeare's play, but also for people who like movies in general. This is a movie that I would definitely recommend.

With "Hamlet" it is a typical Hollywood production. In this, however, the characters are very well made. The music is as well done as the acting. The cinematography is very well done. The production values are very good. The acting is very well done. The lighting is very good. The musical score is very good. All in all, a good production. A good film.

A very nice film. It was interesting to see how the director used the camera to tell the story. The acting was excellent and the music was perfect. I am glad that the film was able to capture the feeling of the play. I recommend this film to everyone. I would give it a 9/10.

At times this film is incredibly moving and moving to some extent it is also intensely brutal. But it is also incredibly enjoyable. The use of colour in this film is exceptional and I felt I had the same experience as James Joyce did in The Dead of Night. However, I am not a fan of Dario Argento and I have to say that I think this film is incredibly underrated. It is a great film and I think it is slightly over rated. To me this film is more of a black comedy and I think if this film was made today it would be a huge success. I think this film is an excellent example of a director who has clearly influenced many people, including many famous directors, to make a film that is very stylish and funny. This film is very powerful and I would recommend it to anyone who likes dark comedy. I would say this film is definitely worth seeing.

The London show had me thinking about Shakespeare's music and the singing. As much as I like the lyrics, I was reminded of another work from the past. Hamlet is more about the dialogue, the acting and the set-up. When it comes to the music, there is a lot of soul-searching in the performances. From George MacKay, to Matthew Rhys, they all sound like they are struggling to express themselves through their music. It is a great shame, that there are not more performances from the more popular performers such as Robbie Williams and Shirley Bassey, but there is some wonderful music in the show, particularly from Rachel Davies. (I have a feeling that the recording was less than stellar.) If you have not seen the London show, I highly recommend it. You will not be disappointed.

I just saw Hamlet at the theater. I'm not an avid reader of Shakespeare and this was one of the first films I've seen about him. I was pleased with it, it had a lot of depth and was very well done. But I thought it was a little too long. It was like having a lecture from a lecture instructor. I think the film needed to be a little shorter. I also thought the film was way too long. The actors were great, but the film was just a little too long. If you are going to watch Hamlet, don't go to the theater. You won't enjoy it. And if you have a choice, watch it at home. It's a good film, but you'll be better off watching it on the small screen.

I really enjoyed watching this film. The acting was superb, the story was rich and the musical score is haunting. I found that when the film ended I actually did feel that I had watched Hamlet. The only thing that disappointed me was the ending. The music was simply wonderful and I would recommend this film to anyone who likes Shakespeare. 8/10

I know that I'm in the minority, but I found this play to be superb. I was interested in the complexities of Hamlet's mental illness, and was intrigued by the extended and often elaborate psychological confrontation of Hamlet and Ophelia. After the play, I was interested in watching the extended DVD, which is long, but very informative. The DVD includes the commentary by the director, an extended version of the DVD with extra features, and a commentary track by a well-known actor. I'm not sure why the commentary track was cut, but it seems unnecessary. Nevertheless, I highly recommend this DVD, particularly if you're a fan of Shakespeare.

A very good and well acted film. It is about a woman who was just about to be executed for the murder of her husband. She is then saved by the two men who were her friends. They decide to help her out. They also help her out with her case. But this time they do not want to be involved in her case. They also want to live in the comfort of their home and do not want to be in the hospital. So they try to convince her to take the case. They then have a lot of problems. They also have a lot of problems. But this is a very good film. I have seen this film many times and I still like it. The performances are very good. The film is very good and very well acted.

I had the opportunity to see Hamlet on Broadway last night. And I have to say, the movie was a total disappointment. It is so far from the play that it's a total let down. There is so much wrong with it, but I'll try to make this short and to the point: There is no poetry, no drama, no plot, no characters, no heart. The entire thing is a mess. The movie is too long and too boring. There is no connection between any of the actors and I could not understand what the director was trying to do with this. And what's with the "music" in this film? Is it supposed to be a classical music or is it just a really bad attempt at "classical music"? I thought it was a really bad attempt. The director should have been put on something else. His acting was horrible. And this movie is very, very long. The whole movie feels like a bad t.v. show, so boring, so slow, so empty, that I could not stay awake. And I just don't think that anyone will watch this movie. I'm not saying that this movie is not a good movie. I'm just saying that it was a big let down. I do not recommend this movie at all. You may like it if you like Shakespeare. I don't recommend it at all.

This is a funny play which I haven't seen since I was a kid, and although it's not perfect, I like it. The cast is quite good, I can't recall any notable flaws, but the actors, especially Richard E Grant as Hamlet and Geraldine Chaplin as Ophelia, are great. But the best performance is by Danny De Vito, as King Hamlet. The whole movie is about his character, and the way he thinks, how he treats his wife, and how he thinks about Hamlet. It's a really great, real and funny portrayal of the play, and it is the reason I love this play so much. I can't find any flaws in this movie, and I definitely recommend it to anyone who likes Hamlet or Shakespeare.

The reason why this movie has gotten so many bad reviews is because this is one of the best movies I have seen in recent years. I don't like the overly dramatic and overly dark aspects of Shakespeare's plays, but I did find that the darker, more dramatic parts were less compelling. However, I still think that this is a brilliant movie. The acting was very good, the acting in general was very good, and the characters were just incredibly fascinating. To me, they were fascinating because they were so unlikeable and flawed. I thought that the movie itself was a good adaptation of Shakespeare's play, but I didn't really think that the story was very good either. It just seemed like a lot of fun. I love the way that Shakespeare was portrayed in the movie, and I think that the movie is a lot of fun. I do think that it is really difficult to come up with Shakespeare's plays, but I think that this movie did a great job of depicting Shakespeare's plays. I would recommend this movie to anyone who is interested in Shakespeare's plays.

This version of Hamlet was originally staged as a film in 1962. But when the film was first broadcast, it was decided that the play should be recut. The original ending was changed to that of his murder. With that in mind, I'm pleased to say that this film is a fairly faithful adaptation. The problem is that the original ending has to be changed because it's too violent for a film about murder. To explain, I don't think that a film is the proper venue for a play like Hamlet. In a film, it would be more appropriate to show Hamlet through the eyes of a murderer. It would be more effective to show the tragedy that Hamlet goes through than it is to show the murders in the play. This film tries to do both, and it fails. The actors don't do very well in their roles. The actress who plays Ophelia is miscast, as is the actress who plays Lady Macbeth. In fact, I have to say that all of the actors do very badly. On the other hand, they do well enough to keep the film watchable. Hamlet himself is well-cast, and is certainly a memorable character. But the actors who play Ophelia and Lady Macbeth are nothing but awful. The young actors are good, but the actors who play King Claudius and Lady Macbeth are simply terrible. One of the biggest problems with this film is the dialogue. It is very stiff and clunky. It's like the actors are reading off of a teleprompter, and the director is simply trying to get the words onto the screen. That doesn't help the film any. The dialog is so disjointed that it becomes boring. The actors don't even seem to try very hard to say their lines. It becomes very difficult to follow the plot. Another problem is the editing. It is very choppy and the transitions are poorly done. It is very difficult to tell when a shot is in one place and when it is in another. The film looks very flat. There are some interesting ideas in this film, but the execution of them is poor. I think that the director tried to cram as many ideas into the film as he could, and he ended up with a film that was not very coherent. It is interesting to compare this version to the original version. The director has completely changed the ending to that of Hamlet's murder. The director has also completely changed the end of Lady Macbeth's murder. And they have completely changed the end of Claudius's murder. The result is a film that is simply horrible. It is a tragedy, and it is a tragedy that should never have been made into a film.

When the movie ended I thought it was going to be a "drama" but it was more like a comedy. It is not too good. There are some scenes that are very sad but the rest is very good. It is an interesting film and it is worth watching.

What can you say about this film that hasn't already been said? It is so beautifully executed that it surpasses the movie in terms of quality. It is truly a great film, and anyone who can understand, understand, and love this movie deserves a great cinema experience. As with any great film, the audience is put through a roller coaster of emotions and it is up to the audience to decide whether the film is worth their time. This is definitely one of the best films of the year and will remain one of the most popular films for many years to come.

There's a lot to admire about this TV version of Hamlet. The production design, the set, the cast, and the music score are all excellent. But the cast is mostly unfamiliar to me. I'm not sure I'd know the names of any of the actors, nor do I know the history of any of the characters, nor do I have a good handle on the production history of the play. The story is, in a sense, not the point of the play. It's a political and social commentary that's more about how the English government treated the British people than the plot of the play. But what's more interesting is the way the production does a good job of making the drama as dramatic as possible. All of the actors are good, but the best performance is from an unknown: Malcolm McDowell as Claudius. Malcolm's Hamlet is a fascinating character, but he is portrayed as a pompous, arrogant, and even hypocritical personality. McDowell, however, portrays him as someone who is, in fact, much more likeable and sympathetic than anyone has ever seen before. He's a bully, but not in the way you'd think, because he's not as loud and obnoxious as some of the other characters in the play. Instead, he's a bit more soft, more of a servant and a good friend. He's more sympathetic than Hamlet himself, and his performance here is the best I've seen him do. (McDowell's performance of Macbeth in the play was also fantastic, and you can see why this role was coveted by the producers. The casting was excellent, and I look forward to seeing him in the film version of Twelfth Night. He also has a small but significant role in the film version of Macbeth, but it's very brief and not very memorable.) I know of no reason to dislike the film version of Hamlet. It's a good adaptation. The production design and costumes are superb, and the acting is superb. However, the script is very slow-paced, and the film is only about 2 hours long. There are several times when the film really drags, and the pace just gets worse as it goes on. So if you're a Hamlet fan, I'd suggest you stick to the television version. If you're not, I'd say wait until the DVD. The film version will be better for it.

William Shakespeare (a fellow composer) wrote this play in the early 1600s. The production I saw was in a small house in a small town, in an English country town, in front of a "stag and fiddle" theater. There were about 15 of us people and we were each given a 6-day advance screening to see the play. What a blast! A new play I hadn't heard of before! At first I thought the film might be good, but I was wrong! This was a terrific film of a fantastic play. It didn't try to give anything away about the play, but it was fairly clear what the characters were up to. It was also funny. The story is a little confusing at times, but it still kept me on my toes. The movie was very good. It kept the audience guessing as to what was going on. The costumes were very well done, with lots of color and wonderful costumes. I liked how the costumes were created as well. I liked how the costumes were one color, one piece, and very "uniform." The scenes were well set up and seemed real. I liked how this movie didn't try to hide anything from the audience. The movie went right to the action, which was a good thing. We were kept guessing what was going to happen next. I also liked how the character of Ophelia was played by an actress, instead of a boy. This really showed the realism of this play. This movie was very entertaining. I really liked it. There are parts that made me cry, and there are some parts that made me laugh. I think this is a great movie to watch for any Shakespeare lover. I don't think anyone would walk away from this film with any disappointment, but it is definitely a film to see. I give this movie an 8 out of 10.

Hamlet (1997) is an English television movie that was produced by the BBC, written by J. M. Barrie and directed by Peter Weir. The film stars J. M. Barrie, John Hurt, Hugh Bonneville, Johnathon Schaech, and David Thewlis. John Hurt plays Sir Ralph, a lawyer who lives with his wife and children in a large Victorian mansion on the Thames. The house is a place of relaxation for the family, however the Baron who owns it keeps them away from their real world. He's been grooming a young and somewhat out of place son to be a servant, and when the boy arrives at the house, he is just as well suited for the role as his elder brother. But the Baron intends for him to be a pupil, and the younger brother is not a suitable pupil. When a mysterious student of his arrives, the family are enthralled by his intellect and his abilities. While the family seek to gain his confidence, the student has a fascination for the Baron, and the school of thought that he has fostered in the family is unleashed. The British public were treated to a film about one of the most notorious Shakespearean tragedies of all time. It's about the affect of Shakespeare's plays on the public and the author's legacy. It also had a story to tell. As well as being a film about the tragedy, it's also a story about the influence of the play on the state of England at the time, and the personal impact that the play had on the people of the time. The director Peter Weir shot the film in its original language and the entire cast was in their native language, thus it felt authentic to the period and the play itself. The film also had a good story to tell, and although some of the scenes and their dialog might be somewhat predictable, the story has a compelling power to it. The film also had a strong performance from John Hurt, who took on the role of a man who's character has been taken over by the play. He's played many roles and he always stands out as an exceptional actor, but here he's absolutely magnificent. I could not pick out a single moment from the film that I didn't like. The direction was excellent. The photography was good as well. It also had the necessary understated humor to make the story work. It was a good film and I recommend it to anyone who's interested in this particular play. The problem I had with the film was that it was too long. I would have liked to have seen a more clever editing of the film, a more interesting and original character of Sir Ralph and also a better ending, but I did like the story itself. It was a good film, it's worth seeing.

I recently saw Hamlet on Broadway and was very impressed. It was a pretty long show but it was entertaining. There was a lot of comedy and some drama. The staging was very well done. I thought that the acting was very good. I felt that the director did a very good job of directing the actors. The actors seemed to have a great time with the material and I felt that the director knew what he was doing. The way that he showed the actors interacting with the audience was very good. I thought that the music was also good. I thought that the piece of music at the end of the show was very good. I thought that it was a very well done show. Hamlet is a very well known play, it is not an easy one to play. I think that this play was well done and I thought that the actors did a very good job. This is a very entertaining show.

I really wanted to see this, but as the trailers made me think of another underrated classic, I decided to wait. I was not disappointed. The cinematography is beautiful, the music is fantastic, the direction is magnificent, and the casting is top notch. Elizabeth Moss is spectacular as Claudius, and this is one of her best performances. William Hurt and Alan Rickman do a superb job of their parts as the King and the Mad King. Geoffrey Rush does a great job as Claudius' brother, and it is a great honor to see him in a major role. I also loved the French King in this film, and his acting is so great. Gerard Butler, who played King Henry V in "Henry V", does a fantastic job as the younger Henry V. He is so strong and sexy and a terrific King. I have also seen this movie several times, and it never gets old. I love the whole idea of a tragedy that turns into a tragedy. The entire film is filled with pain and loss. There are so many layers to this movie. If you love drama, you'll love this film. If you love Shakespeare, you'll love this film. If you love great cinematography and great acting, you'll love this film. This is one of the greatest movies ever made. I hope everyone sees it and understands.

Hamlet is not a drama, although I would say that it is not a comedy either. It's a melodrama which, after a while, you can't help but feel in the story of Hamlet, but not in a realistic way. You can almost feel Hamlet's pain, his fear, and how he doesn't know what he is doing, or who he is doing it for. The film is directed by Sir Ian McKellen (Peter Pan, Dr. Strangelove) and is also written by David Hare (The Hours, Moonstruck, The Interpreter, Christine, The End). Hamlet is a good and tragic film. The cast is superb, but the best performance was given by Anne Hathaway as the main character, who was even more good than the entire cast of the film. She managed to evoke Hamlet's emotions, but also the sadness that was caused by the loss of his mother. And she was not bad in the role either. Her voice and the way she moved was amazing. Overall, Hamlet is a good film, but it is not a great film. It is also very hard to understand, if you don't speak French. In my opinion, this film is a classic film of the 20th century, and that is why I have given it an 8 out of 10. In my opinion, the best thing that could be said about Hamlet is that it's a good film. It's a good film, but it's not a great film. One thing that I didn't like was the way it was directed. It's too realistic, because when Hamlet was in prison, you could see how bad his prison was, and the way he was treated. Also, he was beaten by other inmates. I didn't like that at all. I would have liked a better film with a more realistic way of showing things, but I can't say that I have heard of a better way of showing things. Anyway, Hamlet is a good film. It's not the greatest film ever made, but it's a good film, and that's what it's supposed to be. My rate of 8/10.

I am not a Shakespeare fan, but this film was pretty good. The acting was good. The sets were good. It did not move at the pace of most Shakespeare films. The fact that this was an American film made it a bit odd. The director could have taken a page out of the book and made it a bit more dramatic, but I guess the emphasis was on Shakespeare. If you want to see a good adaptation of the play, I would say the best thing is to read the play, but I would not recommend this film.

This film was an absolute mess of a movie, not because it was a bad movie per se, but because it had a storyline that was so cliched it was laughable. How many times have we seen the king "prepare" for the king to come? With how the actors are dressed and how much time and money was spent on wardrobe, it is a wonder that this film was even made. The characters are nothing but a cheap, worn out take on Shakespeare. From the guy with the prosthetic hands, to the princess who says, "what's your favorite color?" and then says "black." There is just so much writing that is bad about this film that it is hard to describe. It's like an episode of The Simpsons. It's like a Shakespeare in space episode. It's like every scene was written just for the purpose of being funny. But despite this, I have to say that I really liked this film. The acting was good, the direction was good, the sets were good, and I can't say enough good things about the cinematography. It was the best I've seen. The only part of this film that was good was the music, but that's because I've been to the theater that had the greatest sound system I've ever seen. It's not that I'm a great music lover, but when the sound system is super good, and you can hear the difference between dialogue and the music, it is a very good experience. Not that this film had any good music. The score was absolutely terrible, and I don't mean it in a good way, because that's what you would expect from the director of a film that had the worst score I've ever heard. It was worse than some of the worst score ever. The only good thing about this film was the acting, but the script was really the worst part of this film. It was a disjointed mess of a film that I couldn't even finish. I didn't think that this film was that bad, I was expecting it to be worse, but it was actually the better half of a movie that was just not that good. If you're looking for something to make you laugh, then this is the movie to see.

I really liked this movie. I'm really glad to see a movie that doesn't rely on a musical score, or a cheap dance number, or a simple score. It is a movie that I would like to have seen at the cinema. I would also like to have seen the film extended a little more. It's an interesting story that you need to understand the lyrics and the lyrics alone, but the film does a great job with that. I was impressed with the costumes and I loved the music. If you like musicals, then this is the one for you. I just hope that they do a musical version of Hamlet.

This movie is about a couple of young London girls, played by Samantha Morton and Emma Thompson. They were friends before they were lovers. She was studying at Cambridge, and he was in his last year at Oxford. They were thrown together in the early days of the new millennium. She was a war photographer and he was working for a magazine. She was a good actress and he was not. The two are together for a few months and the sex is the main reason for their separation. It is very boring and confusing, as it is never explained. It is all in the head, and the characters are always on their own. The acting is very good, but it is very amateurish. There is some eroticism in it, but it is very subtle. The music is beautiful and sometimes it is very dramatic, but it is always in the background. I really don't understand what is the point of it all. I'm sure there are better movies about sex, but this one is not it. The most important thing is that it is very boring. It is not worth watching.

This film is a comedy version of Hamlet's tragedy and it is a brilliant interpretation. It tells the story of two brothers who are raised to the side of the road and are now dead men, the first one having been hanged and the second one is dying of some sort of disease and is about to die as well. The film is very well told, with interesting and natural scenes, great cast, wonderful music and there are very good jokes. The performances of all the actors are incredible, especially from Peter Mullan who plays Hamlet, a very good interpretation, and with most of the actors in the film, it's possible to tell the history and evolution of the characters. One of the main scenes is a very beautiful scene between the two brothers, the film ends with Hamlet seeing his brothers death and the ending is very beautiful. This is a brilliant interpretation of a masterpiece of the drama and in my opinion, it is one of the best films of the year.

Hamlet's Christmas is an excellent play, especially in terms of the costume and set design. The acting and direction are excellent. On the downside, I'm concerned about the casting and lack of dialogue. There are a few scenes which seemed a little too focused on the main character and his love interest, and I think that needs to be toned down a little bit. Other than that, though, it was an excellent production and I think everyone should see it at least once.

This is a very compelling film and a first-rate performance from all involved. It is not what one would expect and the viewer may or may not like what he or she sees. The story, in itself, is very good but what really makes the film a treat are the performances. Richard Gere is great as Hamlet and the supporting cast is great as well. Stephen Rea, as the old man who is always going to be Hamlet's teacher, is also very good. He is wonderful. Andrew Prine as the young Hamlet is, I believe, one of the best acting jobs I have ever seen. He is very natural and just the right age to portray the young Hamlet. John Hurt, as the King, is also very good. He does an excellent job as the stern and almost more than human King who has spent his life watching Hamlet play Hamlet. The younger actors in the supporting cast are also very good. I also have to mention Lisa Tutin as the Little girl Hamlet sees and imagines with his eyes. She is one of the most outstanding performances I have ever seen from a child. I am not a fan of Lisa Tutin but I can't help but to admire her acting and her beauty. The production is beautiful and the sets and costumes are exceptional. All in all, this is a good film and one of the most entertaining I have seen in a long time. I recommend it to anyone who has not seen it and is interested in a film that is intriguing and compelling.

This film was one of the best I've seen in a while. It has an incredible cast (including a stunning performance by the ever-awesome Rachel Weisz), a superb soundtrack, great sets and an unforgettable storyline. Director Richard Linklater made a truly great film, and I hope that his next film will be as good as this one. One of the few movies that I would like to see again and learn from it, and I would like to see it with friends. I would give this a 10/10!

I saw Hamlet the night it came out, in the U.K. on the BBC, and I'm glad that I didn't have to pay to see it. It's a beautifully made film, and though I've only seen the film twice, I can't imagine that it's not as good as the BBC versions. However, I felt that the production was a little over-long. Perhaps that's just me. I'd say that the film is not a tragedy, but it's definitely not a comedy either. And the first 15 minutes of the film could have been shortened. The first scene has a woman with a dark-skinned child in the background, which seems to be some sort of joke. The first two acts of the play were not funny, and the first scene of Hamlet in his room is boring. I think the film is best viewed as a drama, but it's not a tragedy. I'm glad that the film has been made, because it's good, but I think that it could have been done better. I'm going to see it again, but maybe it's because I'm becoming more used to the BBC versions. I'm going to watch the BBC versions again next year. I recommend that you read my review for the BBC's version of Hamlet.

I was very intrigued to see this movie from the trailer. I'm a huge fan of William Shakespeare. In my opinion, he's one of the greatest writers of our time. I liked the fact that this movie was presented in the theater, rather than at home. It made me very happy to see this movie. The camera work was very powerful and unique. The costumes were very powerful, as well. I could really feel the love that the crew put into this movie. The actor's performance was outstanding. The fight scenes were also very good. I think the actors really brought out the personalities of each of the characters. I especially enjoyed the part when Verona played with the reeds. I think she really played the part of the stubborn widow very well. The movie is very much worth seeing. The costumes were beautiful and there were a lot of special effects, that made this movie very realistic. I really enjoyed seeing this movie and I would recommend that you see it.

When I saw this film at the cinema I thought it was the greatest film I have ever seen. But when I viewed it on DVD, I realised that this film isn't as good as I thought it was. When I first saw it I thought that the character was a lot more similar to Richard Harris in Atonement. However, the characters in this film are also not as much in sympathy with each other as Hamlet's were. It is when Hamlet decides to go through with his plan that the film loses its emotional impact. Also, it is when the stage is pulled out from under the actors that the film loses its power. Overall, this film is a great film that could have been great with a bit more heart.

I was amazed to see that the directors of this film didn't change the story or direction by changing the actors. And the film is so original. I feel as if they really captured the mood of the original play. I didn't feel as though I was watching a live theatre production. I felt as though I was watching a staged play. The film had me asking questions and I felt as though the audience was able to ask questions as well. It was really unique and different. I felt as though the film was so important to the history of the play and the director did a great job of bringing the film to life. It is amazing how the film was able to be made so different. I would have thought that the filmmakers would have gone to more expensive film and changed the filming style. The use of the actual locations was amazing. I felt like the actors had a large role in the film. It was so important to me that the director had made the film completely true to the play. The film is an amazing film and I feel that it will help introduce people to Shakespeare and make them think about the play.

This is the most "modern" of Shakespeare's plays, and I think it is a great one. The acting is superb, and the production is excellent. I would give it a 9.5 out of 10. The only thing that I think would have made this a 9.5 is that there were too many "shakespearean" moments. I think that a few more "shakespearean" moments would have made this a 10 out of 10. I think that the "shakespearean" moments were not needed, and I think that this was a good film for the theater. The only thing I didn't like was that the actors were too young to play Hamlet. I think that this could have been done a little better.

As a loyal and enthusiastic fan of the play, I was delighted to see the director's re-make of Hamlet, and I am pleased to say that it was a successful effort. The film was more faithful to the original text than the stage version. Despite the differences in location, characters, and pace, the film is more coherent than the stage version. The direction was great, although I wish the camera had a more moving-figure viewpoint in the closeups. I thought the acting was very good, and the actors did a marvelous job portraying Hamlet's madness, and the violence. The very final shot of Hamlet's face after his nose has been cut off was particularly haunting. The cast was outstanding, and the music was very appropriate. My only complaint is that the film didn't have a closing song, so Hamlet is out of his mind and begins to sing at the end. I just wish that the music would have ended, but it had a nice final note. The director did a wonderful job with Hamlet. Hamlet's parents are very good, and I would have liked to see them more on screen, but the cast was excellent. My only complaint is that the film was not a great success, but it is not a complete failure. It would be a very nice film for younger audiences, but it is not meant for adults. I liked it very much, and I will be looking forward to seeing the director's other work. (I am also looking forward to the television adaptation of Antony and Cleopatra)

The film "Hamlet" is a very original film that really gets to the heart of the story and shows how much Shakespeare is to Shakespeare. The film is very long but it is well worth the wait. This is a great film to watch with friends or with family members because it is extremely entertaining and entertaining. For some reason I liked this film better then "Macbeth" but it is a very close call. If you have never seen this film then watch it and make sure you watch the English version of the film.

It's a shame that this is the only play that this one plays. This play is great. I would like to give this play a 9, but it's only a 7 out of 10. This play is full of emotions. This play is interesting, full of suspense, and full of laughs. This play is a winner.

I'm not sure why this movie didn't get more publicity, but what can I say? It was a great film. It is exactly what I expected from a Shakespeare adaptation. The actors were just right, and it was nice to see Richard Roxburgh in something like this. If you're expecting something like the "Hamlet" movies, you're going to be disappointed. If you're looking for something new, you might enjoy this film, but I don't see it as one of those. If you're looking for something fun, watch this film. It's a must see.

It was my first time seeing Hamlet, and I found it to be a good movie. It's hard to say what I liked about it. It's a good movie, but not great. The film follows Hamlet (Nicholas Cage), a king who wants to murder a young queen (Cate Blanchett). He is aided by his brother, King Claudius (Tom Wilkinson) and the Queen's maid, Marianne (Winona Ryder). He is saved by the Queen's daughter, Ophelia (Charlotte Rampling), and her ghostly sister, Ophelia's daughter, Queen Meryle (Sharon Gless). The film is well-made and is very well acted. The sets and costumes are very well-done. I thought that the music was very well done. I thought that the editing was very well done. I thought that the directing was very good. I thought that the writing was good. I think that it was a good film, but not a great film.

An over-enthusiastic adaptation of Hamlet from the stage play of the same name, this movie was an instant hit at the box office and a major sensation in the cinemas. Despite its popularity, it was a very disappointing movie for many reasons. The main problem with the film is the poor execution. The musical numbers are annoying, and they have a very jarring effect on the audience. The second problem with the movie is the acting. It is very difficult to believe that one can play Hamlet without appearing to be dead, and especially when it is shown that the person playing the part is a paraplegic. There are numerous other inconsistencies. Finally, the cinematography is very poor. This film is certainly not a masterpiece, but it is certainly a very good film to see, and it is hard to believe that it is a very good adaptation of a Shakespeare play.

The opening of this film is actually a good one. It's a quiet, dark, and sometimes scary movie, with a very dark and intense ending. However, the rest of the film is not as good. The story is a bit strange and it is hard to understand what is going on, but I guess that's the point. The performances are good, but the story is a bit weak. The film is very long, and it's hard to follow the story, especially if you don't speak German. There are many great scenes, and some very good ones, but the story is not very good, and the acting is very good. The only problem is that the ending is a bit strange, and the film is too long. It's worth watching, but not as good as it could have been. I would say that it's better than many other films in the genre, but not as good as "Hamlet" or "A Night at the Opera".

This film is a very good one, and is certainly worth a look if you are a fan of the play. It's not the most faithful of adaptations, but it is a very good film and I think it deserves a place in the film canon.

I think it's a great movie. I am not a great fan of Shakespeare, but I think this is a great movie. It's got great actors, great costumes, great music. I think it's a good movie to see, especially if you like Shakespeare. I also like the music, it's very good. I think the movie is good, but I think it's not a great movie, it's not the greatest movie of all time. I think it's a good movie, but it's not a great movie, it's not the greatest movie of all time.

I was in a theatre for the last time, and this film was playing. I was so excited to see it. I had seen the film many times before, but this time I really got into it. I really enjoyed the acting and the story. I thought it was a really good film. I think the actors did a great job, and I think that it is really a good film to watch. I think that it was a good film to see. I think it is a great film to watch, and I think it is a great film to see.

A quiet and assured performance by Philip Seymour Hoffman in an "American" version of "Hamlet". But just when you think the audience is getting a little sleepy, Mr Hoffman rises to the challenge, his charisma and hard-edged persona enhancing the proceedings. This is one of his best roles since "Annie Hall", and even more so since the original. The most impressive thing is that the film stays pretty true to the original text, it doesn't reinvent the wheel. Every character is a tribute to Hamlet. Mr Hoffman as Hamlet is a noble, fiery, and unquenchable character, who is both ferocious and principled, and who will do almost anything for the sake of his own desire to create something. One scene is in which Hamlet admits that he is a liar, but the fact that he tells the truth to his king and himself, is something that can be seen as a quote of Hamlet, and is the foundation of his character. The acting is truly wonderful, even though some of the dialogue seems a little overdone. I also think that the scene where the emperor throws Hamlet into the fire is a bit over-acted. However, I do find some of the acting to be too self-centered, and perhaps some of the editing could have been better. But it is still worth seeing. I would recommend this to anyone who enjoys Shakespeare, and is a fan of Philip Seymour Hoffman. The acting is not a film for everyone, but I really think that it is a good film.

This is my opinion. I'm a 20 something man who has never seen Hamlet. I always hated it because it's an awful plot. Everyone likes to throw around plot devices like "there's a jealous husband" and "we must know who the killer is". It's not that interesting. In fact it's just boring. But on the other hand it's interesting to see the actors and actresses perform. In this movie, I don't recall seeing anything else but Charlotte Rampling and Emile Hirsch. They are quite wonderful. Watching them act makes you want to see them more. I also liked the new guy, who is supposed to be a doctor. He's just there as the supporting character. His acting was good but I don't think he would have been able to get away with such a role in real life. One of my favorite parts was when Hamlet is having an argument with his father. He's still upset about his mother's death but he can't do anything about it. It was very sad. I think a lot of people would have felt sad that the father didn't help his son. His dying wish was for Hamlet to write to his father and tell him what happened to his mother. He wanted to see his mother again and have her say "it wasn't her fault" when Hamlet asked his father what happened. This is a nice movie. I think it's good for a rainy day. It's not as dramatic as "The Phantom of the Opera" but it's good nonetheless. It's got a couple of good actors, including Charlotte Rampling who I haven't seen in a while. She's great.

I found this film to be better than I expected. It is not Oscar material but it is still a good film. The main reason I went to see this was because I was going to see Lourdes. I love the musical numbers. I love the songs. And the musical numbers are fantastic. I loved the way they were filmed and choreographed. The movie is set in Hamlet's house and it was filmed in Hamlet's real house. It shows that Hamlet was not really a dark and sad character. I also loved the love scenes. I was very impressed with the scenes of Hamlet's love with Ophelia. Ophelia and Hamlet were very convincing. They looked so real. I would have liked to see them on stage. But the love scenes were very good. I would have liked to see Hamlet singing Lourdes. He really did sing that song in the movie. But he was a little quieter and so was the music. The acting was good. The direction was good. But the movie was good, and I like this kind of movies.

This is a story about Hamlet's obsession with re-reading passages from his father's letters. It is also about the conflicting feelings Hamlet feels about his father, who died young and with a rather unhappy childhood. This is presented in a traditional theatrical manner. However, I found it somewhat boring. I was glued to the screen most of the time, which was a little bit frustrating. Although, if you are a Shakespeare lover and enjoy classic drama, this may be a good choice for you.

I caught this film as I was on a plane from Norway to Italy. I watched it with a friend who is a romantic actor. My friend told me she would not have watched it if she knew what to expect. So it was interesting to watch a film that had been so universally dismissed by critics and audiences. There was a sense that it was nothing more than an excuse to have another go at Shakespeare. I was a bit skeptical because of the initial viewing but in the end I liked it. Hamlet is not a perfect film. The plot is a little bit convoluted. It would have been easier to explain if the film had been adapted from a stage play. But that did not mean that I found the story boring. I liked that it did not attempt to explain everything and instead focused on the reactions of the characters and their reactions to things they have done in their lives. Hamlet is a great character study and I would recommend this film to anyone who has not seen it. I rated this film 8/10.

I thought this movie was great. It had a lot of heart in it. It had a lot of dramatic moments. This was a good movie. I recommend it to all.

I am a huge fan of David Hare's productions. Hamlet (1969) is a masterful adaptation of a Shakespeare play with brilliant acting, brilliant direction, and fantastic music by John Barry. It was a rare chance to see a Hamlet that had its own life and style. It was a movie where Hamlet's experiences in prison and in love were perfectly reflected, and where the audience could feel a part of Hamlet's life. And I am so glad to have watched it. It is so beautiful, but also so shocking. When Hamlet's closest friend has the chance to commit suicide, he decides not to. It is a painful choice that Hamlet has to make, and this film shows it in a way that doesn't make you feel pity for him. The film doesn't make Hamlet any more heroic, but instead shows how he is a tortured soul who has to make his best choices to survive, and what it means to be an outlaw. It is one of the most beautiful films I have seen, and one of the best adaptations of Shakespeare ever. It is wonderful and haunting, but not sentimental. It doesn't give us an emotional reaction to Hamlet, but instead shows us how he is tortured, and how he finds happiness in his actions. It is one of the most beautiful films of all time, and I can't wait to see it again.

A tribute to a classic that can be enjoyed for many years to come. Like Hamlet, this film has been compared to the Richard Burton version. Personally I think Hamlet is superior. The score of this film is beautiful, and the performances from all of the cast are worthy of recognition. Miranda Richardson is as good as ever, and as usual, Clive Owen is the man in charge. However, my favourite performance is from Catherine Zeta Jones, who is absolutely amazing. The music is as good as the film, and they use it to good effect. Overall, I really enjoyed this film. It has many original parts and it is definitely worth watching.

I thought this was an amazing performance. Willem Dafoe is simply incredible. For this performance alone, I would give this performance a 10. I do not think I could have done this role better, and Dafoe has definitely become one of my favorites. On the other hand, the acting is just too wooden, but Dafoe is really good. See it.