#i hate hamlet

[l1lmarshm3llow]

I would like to write a book about quite literally anything and with no real intention. Everything I wrote would be random and by chance and there is no reason for the stuff that happens happening.

Then I want this book to get famous and for literary critics to read and try analyse my book and the meanings/reasoning behind why I've made certain choices.

This would continue until I'm dead and in my will I will request that it was all a lie and there was no meaning behind my words thus causing anarchy, distress, and people wondering the meaning of life.

[rorygilmoreh4ter]

watching horatio, the sensible—NOT PASSION’S SLAVE—lose all sensibility as he picks up the cup of poison, knowing suicide will eternally condemn him to hell.

horatio would rather be banished to hell forever than live on earth after hamlet's death.

[lithium-poet]

tag yourself im raskolnikov 𐙚‧₊˚🪓⊹♡

𝓁𝑜𝓋𝑒, 𝒶𝓇𝒶𝒷𝑒𝓁𝓁𝒶

[royalmessofdenmark]

head in my hands people make claims about how if you switch the character's of a tragedy their stories would end differently but like i just. don't. think. they would. because people act like it would save them, when fundamentally they are tragic characters and so, tragedy follows them.

"But if you switched hamlet and romeo's pla--" if you switched hamlet and romeo's place romeo would have run off with Ophelia after his father's death, Gertrude would never stop missing him and Claudius would continue to rule. Ophelia would miss her family forever, and Romeo has romanticized dying for love so terribly much in his head, and Ophelia is willing to kill herself whenever all hope seems lost that there's no way they would make it into their twenties. something tragic happens, Ophelia drowns. Romeo stabs himself. It always. repeats. OR if Romeo and Ophelia don't run away, Claudius would kill Romeo anyway. And Ophelia may or may not kill herself in grief.

Hamlet would forsake Juliet-- if he would even fall in love with her-- and would not even try to reunite the families, probably seeing no point. he would instead seek revenge upon the other family if ever a member of his family was about to die. It would be bloody and brutal and if he lived through it, he'd still probably be sentence to death by the prince

you place any character in any other story and you'll find that they are still forever haunted by their flaws

sure, maybe orpheus is the only one who would turn around, but you place him in any other story, and he'd still find some way to have a moment where he forsakes common sense for love. Icarus's hubris would follow him forever, achilles would never let go of his ambition and his dreams for glory and that would find some way to destroy him to

tragedies are almost always people. not situations

[secret-sageent]

I would like to formally add Arthur Lester to my list of characters I love but want to drop kick into the sun, along with Hamlet and Frodo Baggins. Congratulations, gayboy, you made it

[hamletthedane]

I’m a big Hamlet fan and I am curious as to what your favorite movie/for screen rendition is? I’ve been working my way through a lot of them, gone through about 7, so far Hamlet at Elsinore with Christopher Plummer is my favorite. I was just curious what yours is !

What a great question!!

Hamlet at Elsinore is definitely my favorite filmed version of the play. I feel that Christopher Plummer does a fantastic - and frankly critically underappreciated - job of portraying the more nuanced and complicated aspects of Hamlet's character while still giving a straightforward performance that's highly accessible to any audience. Notably, he doesn't treat the performance as his ~*~epic, defining role of a lifetime~*~ or ~high artistic theater~ (*cough* Branagh and Jacobi), but instead focuses on telling a deeply compelling, very moving story about the complex nature of grief and revenge. I also like that this version embraces the more "postmodern" elements that exist in the written text of Hamlet: the complicity of the audience, the inevitability of the outcome, Hamlet's genre-awareness and genre-defiance, etc.

[Not to keep hating on Branagh, but in contrast: Branagh's Hamlet in particular seems to go out of its way to avoid including the more interesting proto-postmodern thematic elements of the play - at times not seeming to recognize that they're even there. He instead focuses his time and energy on inserting new cinematography-based visual themes that go nowhere and at times stand in OPPOSITION to the actual tone and themes of the original text. Because apparently Hamlet the play is too boring and instead of lame elements like "themes" and "compelling characterization," we need a swinging chandelier sword fight scenes and Freudian weirdness. Truly the Joel Schumacher Phantom of the Opera adaptation of Shakespeare films. But I DIGRESS-)

Plus it doesn't hurt that everybody aside from Plummer in Hamlet at Elsinore is also fabulous. Obviously, Michael Caine's Horatio is the single best and most definitive version of the character in film, but I also love Robert Shaw's Claudius and Muller's Ophelia.

If we're talking favorite filmed versions of the STORY of Hamlet though, that's Asta Nielsen's silent film from 1921. It's so beautifully filmed and wonderfully told. She's what I picture when I picture Hamlet.

Other than that....I like Tennant and Stewarts' RSC filmed version well enough. It has a number of very strange choices and I don't love the re-ordering of the scenes, but Tennant does a great job with the character and I think it's a very approachable performance. A few other filmed stage versions are also excellent, though with a few similarly weird elements - I'd put Maxine Peake's version on the same tier as the RSC version. I do NOT like Branagh's version at all (if you couldn't already tell...). Jacobi's and Gibson's are slightly better, but they're still too focused on the prestige of the performance rather than the actual story being told imo. I think they fall under the same criticism as Holden Caulfield's scathing review of Laurence Olivier: "more like a general than a sad, screwed-up type guy." (Yes I know this line is an in-text authorial critique of Holden himself but also: he's right and he should say it.)

If you haven't already, I do highly recommend listening to the BBC Radio 4 audiodrama version of Hamlet, starring Jamie Parker. Despite being a audio version of a stage play, it somehow blows every filmed version of Hamlet (except maybe HAE) out of the water. I listen to it at least once a year.

Finally, my actual favorite versions of Hamlet have ALWAYS been those I've seen live (or seen bootleg filmed stage performances of lmao). If it's ever playing live near you, definitely go and see it. The play was meant to be seen on a live stage in front of you, and many of the jokes and themes only make sense in that context. In my opinion, the medium of live theater elevates the play so far beyond what a movie could ever achieve.

...sorry this answer is so long 😅 Really, it doesn't matter what my opinions on Hamlet films are. If any version of the play really speaks to you - even if it's the accursed Branagh version - that is so awesome and makes me really happy people are engaging with the play in that way! (But since you're saying that HAE is your favorite so far, I will add that you have excellent, discerning taste ;))

[cloud-based-and-rainpilled]

May I propose: David Tennant and Michael Sheen in Rosencranz and Guildenstern are Dead

Their patter would be amazing and also Michael Sheen would find some way to make it gay

[l832]

sorry i just think that hamlet is really good as a horror story and the closer you look into the darker themes and the gruesome details and take it to the extremes the better the play becomes. personally

[hamletteprinceofdenmark]

If your Hamlet doesn’t die in Horatio’s arms you have fundamentally misunderstood the text and I no longer trust you.

[carnivalls]

still unwell thinking about guil scorning the player for his stage-dying, saying that real death is nowhere near as dramatic as the player is making it out to be, that real death is really only ever just "man failing to reappear"... and how his final lines of the play are "now you see me, now you-"

[handmemyshovel]

imagine: horatio, stuck in a never-ending play.

the first go around it’s normal. he doesn’t realize he is in a play, this is just life as it always is. he is coming from college to see his friend and his father’s funeral. but horatio notices the chaos that seems almost staged. but he doesn’t think too much of anything unusual, this is life as it always is! just… chaotic. sad. a friend in pain but what can he do about it? thinking of it… maybe he brought his own friend into this madness, into his death. and as fortinbras steps in and the stage goes dark, horatio is suddenly swept back in time. back to that night.

it’s the second play, but horatio doesn’t know it. he looks at bernardo and marcellus, wondering how he got here. notices how they repeat the exact words that happened nights ago, horatio responds with what seems natural. he says the same things too. and it all repeats. horatio is filled with fear and confusion as it all repeats itself. he tries to piece things together. if all this is happening does that mean hamlet will appear again too? back from the dead? he suggests letting hamlet speak to the ghost and marcellus and bernardo don’t mention anything of the prince’s death. he is still alive then? was it all just a horrible dream? but if it was, why are things going exactly like what happened in that nightmare? why is horatio’s one best friend lying dead in his arms again? why is no one doing anything to stop this? in his confusion he only plays along, unable to comprehend what is happening around him.

until he is taken to that night again. on the spot horatio almost breaks into tears. god, why is he here again? take him away from this nightmare. but there he stays. this time he decides to pay more attention to what’s happening. he makes sure that everything is as remembered, and it is.

he pieces things together in his mind. he realizes that between scenes he would be on stage he has an extremely fuzzy memory of what happened. he realizes that when he tries to say something different than what his head tells him to it doesn’t come out. he can only say what is written. sure, he can change the tone, he can delay the line, but he always says it. another thing he can do is change his actions — as long as it doesn’t mess with how the play is being acted out as it causes him quite literal pain to do so. he does those things as much as he can. he delays lines, tries to say certain lines as if he doesn’t mean them. (e.g. he suggests hamlet speaks to the ghost in a sarcastic or unconvincing manner, gets on his knees begging and clinging onto hamlet for him not to speak to the ghost/duel laertes) another thing horatio makes sure to do is take every word hamlet speaks in. he’s heard it all multiple times now, but it means something, it means something. the words hamlet says to him before his death. horatio knows what’s to come, so why not make the good parts better?

the fourth go around, horatio tries the hardest he can to change what is happening around him. he’s in the flow now and trying to get out of it. it’s his primary goal. but the more he tries, the more he seems to be going mad with hamlet, and ophelia, and about everyone else.

and nothing is changed, not the fourth, the fifth, the sixth go around. hours and hours of the same thing, horatio can’t take it. no one could possibly take it. as hamlet speaks of the longing of death, horatio now understands and agrees. but of course, he could never say that to hamlet, he must encourage him, even if nothing is changed in the effort.

but in the seventh play horatio gives up in trying to change things. he says each line emotionless. his energy in every action is drained. he can’t take it anymore, he simply can’t. whenever he sees hamlet, he is attached to him like a leech. he can’t let go of the man. every time hamlet talks of death he weeps onto him, every line horatio delivers filled with tears, and what does it matter? nothing is changed.

finally, finally, on the eighth play horatio gives up. entirely. he delays each line as much as possible, pursing his lips until his own body forces the words out breathlessly, denying an action until the overwhelming pain of doing so, too, forces him to do it. under his breath he will mumble the lines of others that he now has memorized from the endless times he has already heard them. every death brings him sobbing, collapsing on the floor. he’ll think: “it must be my fault, i always bring hamlet to the ghost, i always bring him in the picture. i make him mad, but i can’t do otherwise, i can’t. and all this harm… i cannot get away from it, i just want away from it. i just want happiness again. for hamlet, for me, for us all.” horatio knows at this point that no matter how hard he tries, nothing will change. and if he doesn’t take action, he’ll be stuck in this hell forever. so, when it comes to the last scene, he knows what he must do.

hamlet is begging in his arms for horatio to tell his story, but horatio can’t do that. he can’t. it’s a horrible way to go out, denying the dying wish of his love, but he can’t do otherwise. he has already tried to change things and he can’t take it anymore. he drinks the poison. and in doing so there is so much pain. the pain of rejecting the play’s reality. but he ignores the aching he has in every muscle, in his head, everything feeling like it’s about to explode. he ignores it. and he drinks the poison. he ends the play. he doesn’t tell the story. horatio finally gets his rest. and, god, he deserves it.

[stupitunclehal]

thinking about the way rufus talks to dimitri. becoming very sad. the absolute brutality that is inflicting this treatment on a twelve year old child for six years when you are the last living relative he has, when he’s not allowed to leave your line of sight, when you’re either actively supporting or turning a blind eye to attempts on his life, when he’s literally losing it and every paranoid and self-loathing impulse is being reinforced by worsening psychosis.

the fact that this is something dimitri internalizes and something that becomes a core facet of how he perceives himself. it’s reinforced in everything from how felix speaks to him (yes, ofc, I understand felix himself is processing some horrific things as well) to how he’s treated by bystanders even when he’s putting his best foot forward.

a few snippets in 3hopes show that, even when he’s generally popular and he’s a very good and proper young man, people are still afraid of him (largely bc of his brute strength and status). note that and then the way he behaves throughout the academy phase in 3houses and what you’ll see him say in side iterations (some of the quotes in heroes, for instance). he offers to help with manual labour, errands, anything that benefits from his strength that is not related to killing.

fuck you, rufus; he didn’t but dimitri should have torn your head from your shoulders in AM. fucking cocksucker.

[girlbloggerdotcom]

Hamletmachine, Heiner Müller.

[susandsnell]

Santiago for the character bingo!

Thanks for this Maggie! For our purposes, I'm doing show!Santiago as he's received the most characterization of any iteration, and the show is freshest in my mind:

Having been a Ben Daniels fan since 2017-2018 (Jesus Christ Superstar Live and The Paradise!!!), I was over the moon when the casting was annoucned, and BOY did they not disappoint with one of the most deliciously hammy love-to-hate divas I've seen in a while. He's completely irredeemable and loathsome and disgusting, and Mr. Daniels is chewing the scenery and serving every single minute and I'm HERE for it. Rest in piss Francis, may you never get to play Munkustrap in the deepest circles of hell <3

[hamletkin]

polonius: your son is insane, my son has chlamydia, we are not the same