Cinema
Hamlet (`U', Odeon Haymarket)
Unmelancholy Dane
Gabriele Annan
At school we were made to read J. Dover Wilson's What Happens in Hamlet. It made us see that Hamlet is a thriller and the discovery cheered us up. Zeffirelli aims at the same kind of thing: his pre-release publicity and interviews proclaimed that his Hamlet is for young people who have never seen or read Shakespeare before. It would be unkind to call it educational: it is meant to turn them on with an exciting story, and perhaps it will.
His Hamlet is a fast-moving action film. It has to be, because it gets all the story except the Fortinbras episodes into a mere two hours and a quarter. Far more verse than prose has been cut, including most of the soliloquies: not more than four consec- utive lines of any speech seem to be left. But contrary to the dire prophecies of Shakespeare buffs, the whole cast speak the remains of the text in standard English accents and with understanding and an ear for rhythm.
The film is as conventional as can be: a good-looking costume drama with no funny modern business. The setting is early medi- aeval — the period of Hamlet's historical prototype, and more suitable, perhaps, to Zeffirelli's simpliste version of the work than a sophisticated Renaissance court would be. The costumes look well-worn (except the Queen's on big occasions), and an archaeologically correct sense of life in a mediaeval castle is established: huge stony halls, chain mail, embroidery for the women, roistering ea custom more hon- our'd in the breach than the observance') for the men, and no privacy: to be alone with anyone, you have to go for a barbecue picnic, which is what Hamlet does with Rosencrantz and Guildenstern. But Zef- firelli does not create the sinister atmo- sphere of intrigue and spying which gave an extra dimension to Rozintsev's famous Russian Hamlet film; in fact, atmosphere and extra dimensions of any kind are in short supply.
The casting, apart from Hamlet himself, is conventional too. Alan Bates, Ian Holm and Paul Scofield all have safe pairs of Shakespearean hands. They play Claudius, Polonius and the Ghost so predictably that sometimes one is quite grateful for a bit of cutting. To have Glenn Close play Gert- rude was a more interesting idea; she is an actress who knows how to combine author- ity with sexiness. Zeffirelli attributes the Queen's behaviour to a sexually unsatisfac- tory first marriage (only one child). When Claudius turns her on at last, her late awakening expresses itself in girlish romp- ing and ^ony-club larking about on horse- back, undignified but not unconvincing, and one sees how it could drive Hamlet mad. His incest-loaded love for his mother is, in Zeffirelli's view, the key to the play. So it is disappointing that the closet scene, though noisy and violent, is not sexy at all, and not even touching when Hamlet begs forgiveness at the end. In fact, the only character who is touching — and sexy too — is Helena Bonham-Carter's Ophelia. This is a miraculous performance, unsenti- mental, brusque even, but heart-rending, and able to sustain the longest close-ups. It makes one feel sorry for any actress who has to go mad on stage or screen fOr the next five years at least.
Zeffirelli wanted a modern prince who wasn't 'a wimp'. He has certainly got a modern Ophelia who isn't a drip. But what about Hamlet? Well, Mel Gibson is good as an extrovert prince, more Henry V than Richard II, with a short fuse, no decision- making problems in his nature and no melancholy disgust with the world in his heart. The absence of these qualities is not his fault: they have been deleted from the text he has to speak. He speaks it well, especially in conversation with the other young men. He makes you see Hamlet's charm as a friend and his enjoyment of repartee and his own quick wits. Gibson is not particularly impressive in snippets from `To be or not to be' delivered in the royal vault and busily intercut with shots of skeletons in case you miss the point; but in the prose speech about the fall of a spar- row he suddenly projects a noble, moving stoicism. This is the high point of his per- formance, the one moment where you care very much what happens to him. Unfortunately, by the end of the duel scene the feeling has begun to wear off again and given way to the less taxing excitement of simply wanting to know how the story will come out. There ought to be a bit more to Hamlet than that.
Previous page
