Why does hamlet procrastinate his revenge the entire play? If cladius and laertes had left him alone would he have procrastinated forever lol
>>24746956Because he's an intellectual, thoughtful boi
>>24746956Who would these fardels bear,To grunt and sweat under a weary life,But that the dread of something after death,The undiscover’d country, from whose bournNo traveller returns, puzzles the will,And makes us rather bear those ills we haveThan fly to others that we know not of?Thus conscience does make cowards of us all,And thus the native hue of resolutionIs sicklied o’er with the pale cast of thought,And enterprises of great pith and moment,With this regard their currents turn awryAnd lose the name of action.
>>24746956It's easier to critically judge the actions of others than to take risks, act, face the consequences, and acknowledge that you're not perfect either. Hamlet knew how to hold the world to high standards, but he hesitated when it came to his own actions. Maybe, on some subconscious level, he sensed that admitting his own moral ambiguity in a world without objective morality would be the final nail in the coffin of his disillusionment.
>>24746956>Act I—He learns about it>Act II—He is in doubt whether the ghost is really his father or a devil>Act III—He discovers Claudius did kill his father. However, he doesn't want to kill him while praying, either because he doesn't want him to go to heaven as he says, or he can't kill a defenseless man and his own uncle whom he's known since he was born (he's never killed anyone before, probably, and it's not exactly easy to will yourself to do). When he hears a noise behind the curtain, he assumes it's Claudius and springs to kill him, so he's not a procrastinator.>Act IV—He is sent to England before he gets another chance.>Act V—He kills ClaudiusYou forget that Claudius is probably surrounded by guards all the time, so Hamlet doesn't have any opportunity to kill him easily, Act III Scene 3 notwithstanding. And, even if he does kill him, he will probably be executed for treason, since "A ghost told me he killed my father" won't exactly fly with everyone else.
>>24748438While this is all true, the dramatic structure of Hamlet is nonetheless protracted and we can assume, also because of Hamlet's own comments on the matter, that his revenge is meant to seem unreasonably delayed.
>>24748438All true. Arguably there‘s meant to be a gap of about two months between the first two acts but I think it‘s overlooked that he feels the need to create distance between himself and Ophelia, Gertrude, and Horatio during this time so that they don‘t get 12th century Danish RICO‘d. Regicide is no joke. Most of the critique of delay comes from the character himself and should be understood as frustration more than actual reason.
>>24746956Hamlet is a brute. Think of when the ghost first appears and his friends try to stop him from going to it. His response is to draw his weapon and threaten to kill them. He doesn't pause at stabbing polonius through the curtain. He doesn't even know who it is, he just does it instinctually. He doesn't kill Claudius because of some made up freudian nonsense. But because Claudius is praying and Hamlet feels that if he kills him here in a moment of confession it'll give him an easy path to heaven. Which Hamlet doesn't want. Think of how insane that is. It is not enough to kill the man, but that you intend to damn him to eternal suffering. In that sense Hamlet wants to supplant God. If Claudius is destined to be forgiven and go to Heaven, that's God's choice. Hamlet doesn't seem to think so.Hamlet is also not keen to believe the ghost at face value because we are dealing with Protestant theology, which states outright that purgatory and ghosts are all papist heresies. There is a heaven and hell, you go to one or the other and you don't come back to give your son pointers about your killer. The flaw of Hamlet is that he is a brutal thug who has no qualms about sacrificing others, or using those he loves as pawns in his plots (Ophelia and Gertrude). The beauty of Hamlet is that he is just as hard on himself as he is on the world, if not harder.
>>24748564>His response is to draw his weapon and threaten to kill them.That's just bants
>>24748564Retarded interpretation. A thug or a brute is not harder on himself than he is on others, Hamlet does not use Ophelia and Gertrude as pawns in his plots, his threat to the ghost is a courageous challenge not something to be taken literally, and Hamlet killing Claudius is animated by his madness, and he obviously is mad, despite interpretations to the contrary.
>take melodramatic over the top acting to a level never imagined>kills the musicality of Shakespeare to do it>ruined Shakespeare for millions>tin ear illiterate retards still wetting their panties over him
>>24748786This is true. Olivier is one of the worst Shakespearian actors.
I think he makes it quite clear that he finds the idea of participating in the world's ugliness unpleasant. The bigger query is why he changes his mind.
>>24746956Hamlet is based on Almeth. A french translation introduces the melancholy aspect. A precursor play is written that introduces the ghost. Shakespeare copypastes this and makes “his” play. The play is then tightened up from a variety of sources and maybe rewritten in the First Folio. Which is to say Shakespeare didn’t make this up out of thin air and the extended drama/actual pacing issues is as much down to his sources.
>>24746956existential angst for the solicitors in the crowd.For the illiterate yank: injokes for laywers.
>>24746956he's just like me for real
>>24748438NTA, but additionally, if Hamlet kills Claudius he kicks off a succession crisis for the throne of Denmark. Denmark is already being threatened by outside forces like Fortinbras. So if Hamlet kills Claudius and takes the throne, he's possibly opening up Denmark to a civil war and/or a foreign invasion. Given the fact that Shakespeare wrote multiple historical plays about regime changes, it's reasonable to think that both Hamlet and Shakespeare are aware of the risks that Hamlet runs by trying to kill Claudius and take the throne.
>>24748793>>24748786I can't not think of this when thinking of hamlet>>24746956Why does mustafa wait so long to talk to simba by comparison?
Reading this now for the first time. Have to stop and read an interpretation of 75% of lines. It’s gonna be great whenever I reread it.
>>24746956So Shakespeare could cram in scenes unnaturally
>>24746956Watch this video about it:https://youtu.be/4dDlUR41CsQ?si=BuygQgbMOu4Lc9Xb
>>24748525In the Spanish Tragedy, Hieronimo only kills his victims in the last scene too. In fact, where but the last scene is suitable for the revenge kill?
>>24750580Kenneth Branagh's hamlet is even worse. At least Laurence Olivier shaves
>>24750675I don't think you understand what dramatic structure is. Some dramas are very tightly wound, where each scene processes essentially from the previous, where it seems to be clearly going towards something, and ulterior elements may be minimised, and Hamlet is not that. The protracted nature of the play has nothing to do with the king being killed in the last scene.
>>24750692Funnily enough, the best hamlet on screen to date is Mel Gibson of all people kek
>>24751202I would expect Burton or Plummer to have done well? Gibson is a very capable actor but he loves terrible movies. Burton and Plummer generally seem to do well but certainly made films meant for mass appeal and not quality. No idea where their Hamlet's fall, 99% of plays fail miserably on the screen.
>>24751217Actually, now that I think about it, Plummer did not really get good until he got old, solid and decent when young but not great. Burton has always been good, his biggest failing probably being that he never really got film and treated it like the stage.
>>24751202The best Hamlet's on film are Forbes-Robertson in a silent film and the very brief segments of Gielgud from a random war movie. But the best complete film performance with sound would have to be Burton.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nOMnQ63R7zghttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ho09w6NPzUYhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vABGEzB7T9M
>>24751230Giving Burton a look and he does look to nail it, but kind of a cheat since it is just a filmed theater production. Of the proper film adaptions of Shakespeare that I have seen, only Titus really stands out for me, the first scene and the end of the last scene are unfortunately 90s in the worst way but the rest works quite well. Really not caring for Gertrude and Ophelia in this Burton production.
>>24751247>Of the proper film adaptions of Shakespeare that I have seen, only Titus really stands out for meHaven't seen that one yet, but from what I have seen Zeffirelli's The Taming of the Shrew and Peter Brook's King Lear have some of the best performances. Zeffirelli's Romeo and Juliet suffers because the leads are teenagers. There's also Kozintzev's Soviet Hamlet and King Lear which are probably the best adaptations from a directorial standpoint.>Really not caring for Gertrude and Ophelia in this Burton production.I just meant for Burton himself. The only other actor to give a halfway decent performance in it is Hume Cronyn as Polonius.
>>24751263>Zeffirelli>BrookThey don't use the medium to any real effect and it ends up being no better than a decent stage performance. Titus is the only one I have seen that really used the medium well and did not make me wish I was watching it on the stage instead, it is not just a thinly veiled stage performance. Anthony Hopkins is amazing as Titus.
>>24751263Titus is on youtube it seemshttps://youtu.be/Ks9JeoL2z9kGuess it is only the first part of the first scene I don't like. It is an odd production with a few anachronisms thrown in, mail a few scenes with cars which is used amazingly well to match the movement of scene with the movement of the language. The one scene with Aaron speeding about is especially good, the effortless speed of the car combined with the effortless speed of the monologue is amazing, it works far better than just Aaron standing on the stage. Guess I am going to rewatch this now.
>>24751295>mailMainly. Wish I could blame autocorrect on that one, have no idea what happened there.
>>24751278I named Zeffirelli's because it was visually beautiful and has an almost perfect casting all around. And it's not like he didn't replace parts of the text with purely film sequences, like the big rooftop scene, which of course wouldn't be possible on the stage. As for Brook's, it's really nothing like a play. Think of the scene where Gloucester attempts suicide, thinking he's falling off a cliff onto the beach, but is really just falling to the ground in a field, which in the latter part of the scene Brook actually sets on a beach. A setting and transition of course not possible in a play. Then there's the avant-garde editing which is used to express Lear's mental breakdown, and the fact that the direction is not chained to the speed of the text, making it feel very film-like. I suppose what makes you assume it's like a filmed play, is that Brook gives an actor like Scofield ample room to just perform, because there's nothing he could add to make a performance like that better, and that's all that I want most directors to do. In fact, what I dislike most about these two films is where they depart from the text.
>>24751332>I suppose what makes you assumeYou are assuming that I assumed. Sure they go beyond the limits of the stage but they don't fully exploit and embrace what film has to offer, they try and keep one foot in each world. For me that always fails (at least so far), I never forget how amazing a really great stage production is so it is always less than. I also don't think they should depart from the text, not sure if Titus does, been far to long since I read it but as I am watching it now nothing is jumping out at me, it sticks to being creative in the production instead of tweaking the text. But don't hold me to that, like I said, long time since I last read it.
>>24750692Maybe, but I thought this scene was beautifully shot. Using a one way mirror and eavesdropping on a guy monologuing is a way to add urgency to what otherwise is a slow and brooding monologue.
>>24751352>You are assuming that I assumed.You did assume. Whether or not your assumption was correct is a different matter.>they go beyond the limits of the stage but they don't fully exploit and embrace what film has to offerI mean, the chief pleasure is always going to be in the actor's performance, so I don't really mind how much the director makes use of the possibilities of film, as long as it is filmed well. In the case of King Lear I don't even like Brook's direction but it's still one of the greatest Shakespeare films ever made just because Scofield's performance is so good.
>>24751422The 'slow and brooding monologue' that also happens to be one of the greatest monologues with some of the most beautiful poetry ever written? Yeah, I don't think it needs to a gimmick to add urgency to it.
>>24746956>wonders why he didn't just cum and get the messy sweaty businesses over with already
>>24751202No, the best Hamlet movie is the original Russianhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzN1isLYc_A
>>24751054>missing the point
>>24751939I think you missed the point.
>>24751816It's boring, Bill. The crowd hates it. Yawnsville!
>>24751948It's the only part the 'crowd' cares about. They wait the entire play just to hear it.
Why anything? Plot analysis is so useless just enjoy the play or don't.
>>24751946>no uno u
There is only one good shakespeare tragedy and it isn't Hamlet. Hamlet's got decent body count, but lacks methods.
