I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Classics Illustrated

The Original
As previously stated, the wedding banquet does not appear in the original Comics Illustrated adaptation whose focus is on "adventures for boys". A wedding would seem to go against that. The adaptation leaves Laertes' introduction to Scene 3, which admittedly, covers his leaving for France as a plot point.

The Berkley versionTom Mandrake's adaptation cuts very little from this section of the play, keeping the rant about Fortinbras' ambitions, though predictably cutting the appearance of Voltimand and Cornelius. Introducing characters requires panels, and the comic's relatively low page count often requires it to do entire speeches in one panel, as above. The problem with this is that the artist cannot change a character's emotion mid-speech, and things play out all the more flatly in static shots. For example, in this panel, though Claudius says of Fortinbras "So much for him," there is no accompanying action. It's like the character is just dismissing Fortinbras out of hand (which I suppose he does), but not even with the proper physical punctuation to get the crowd's response. Also cut is Claudius' thanks to the Court for going along with the royal wedding.
Mandrake's Laertes is timid when begging to Claudius, in line with performances that play on the line "dread lord". Comics tend to physically caricature the characters, so Claudius is something of a rough sort and Laertes wise to be afraid of him. By contrast, Polonius is drawn as a kindly old man, creating an unshakable sympathy for the character that makes his death seem undeserved. I prefer my Polonius with a dark streak (as mandated by the full text). The overall effect here is that Claudius is a bully and that despite his honey-laden words, he is just using both Polonius and Gertrude for political gain.

I'm afraid the images lack the subtlety to really carry the play's truths, and the contrast between words and action is a harsh one.

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Slings & Arrows

Slings and Arrows is rather playful with the banquet scene, using our knowledge of the actors' stories to give each scene an extra level, one that actually manages to comment on the play. The Claudius of this play is only known as "Alan" and is not really a character in the series. Once he gets going, we cut to Cyril and Frank watching the performance on closed circuit and saying how he's got a good voice tonight. Cyril notes that it's really "all he's got". A perfect moment for these guys who regularly act as a comic chorus, as if on a balcony at The Muppet Show, but also a poke at Claudius as a character. He is an arrogant blowhard full of hot air and no substance, contrasting with the quiet and sensitive Hamlet. Note how Hamlet is right at the front of the stage in the staging.While we don't see most of the scene (the editing basically cuts from the first speech to Claudius' exit), we can imagine Claudius going through the motions and addressing everyone in turn, very much ignoring the elephant in the room. When you reveal that Hamlet was there and draw him out, then Claudius was perhaps forgetting him. When he's in full view like this, Claudius is actively ignoring him and prioritizing other characters over him.

During the initial speech, there is a nice bit of double-acting from Gertrude as played by Ellen Fanshaw played by Martha Burns. Jack Crew (Luke Kirby) is deathly afraid of being shown a fool (he's the action movie/teen heartthrob cast as Hamlet) and is just keeping from throwing up. Ellen/Gertrude looks down at him with a look of sudden concern.
The actress wonders if this will turn out to be the disaster she predicted, but the character seems to register something amiss with her son, motivating the interrogation/comforting to come. Works perfectly in the series, where "use it" is often used in response to something that should distract the actor (just as Jack is "using" his nausea in the scene).

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Fodor (2007)

Fodor intercuts various parts of Scene 2 and Scene 3 as if occurring more or less simultaneously at the banquet (here a cocktail party or reception). Claudius is making his speech in one part of the room, while Horatio is telling Hamlet about seeing the Ghost in another, and Ophilia and Polonia (the female Polonius) give their goodbyes to Laertes near the window. I'll still deal with each part individually in its own article. The scene (or the film, really) opens with the title card: I say "No more but so", which is a line from Scene 3 (intercut with Claudius' speech). The line has Ophelia acquiesce to her domineering brother's wishes. There's a fatalism about it that doesn't always register, but by placing it at the top of the play (even if it wasn't after a prologue that shows Ophelia's death), it takes on the greater fatalism of the entire play. "This and nothing else," a line that underscores a pervading sense of doom, a sense that there's no changing destiny. Notable since Claudius has just usurped a brother's destiny... I spoke last time of Fodor's myriad devices in the credits sequence, which included line readings, outtakes and dramatis personae. Add to this a stylish, but ultimately irrelevant device to introduce the characters in the extended banquet sequence. Each time we meet a character, there is a freeze frame and an overlay such as this:(I'll present each one in whatever bit of scene it actually appears in.) Characters are divided into two colors, White (the Hamlet family) and Red (the Polonius family) and into chess pieces (King, Queen, Knight and Pawn). Why? There is no chess motif in the rest of the film, nor does Fodor keep up this visual style (which reminds me of Snatch and the like). The effect is to oppose the two sides of the board, with the Reds being against the Whites, which isn't normally true. I think it interesting to see Polonius as moving against or manipulating Claudius for his/her own personal gain (quite believable from the utterly corrupt Polonia of the film), using other family members in various ways against Hamlet and in some sense, Claudius (moving against Hamlet pushes him ever closer to killing Claudius and gives the king impetus to trust Polonius ever more). However, it falls apart when you examine the White side, since Hamlet and Horatio are NOT on the side of Claudius. Which piece is assigned to which character is also of note, but again, I'll talk about each when it comes up in their scene. Claudius and Gertrude are, of course, King and Queen. Weaving in and out of various scenes within the same party reduces Claudius' initial power considerably. There is a lot of noise in the room, both from the driving electric guitar music and various groups of people enjoying themselves (and not). Claudius doesn't address the entire "Court", just a couple of people he's mingling with. From a speech designed to manipulate public opinion, his lines become anecdotes - how he came to marry Gertrude, how he got a message from Fortinbras - and the sound drops in and out and we move about the room. It's like it's just an overheard conversation (because we hear it through Ophelia's or Hamlet's ears?). Claudius doesn't thank an assembly, politics seem less important. Probably appropriate since this dreamlike Denmark never quite seems like a country. Cuts Completely cut from this part of Scene 2 is Laertes asking leave of Claudius. More expectedly, Voltimand and Cornelius don't make the cut, nor does the vast majority of the speech about Fortinbras. Again, Claudius' royal power is undercut. In this version, Denmark may just be two intertwined important families (Red and White), of which Claudius is the main patriarch (it was perhaps important then to change Polonius' gender so as to remove the Red patriarch). Fodor eliminates the political and regal elements, bringing the play down to its basic familial drama. The father and mother are the king and queen of a family and Fodor's experiment here may show the State is not required to make Hamlet work, though it does reduce the overall feeling from epic to banal (courtly pageantry to tacky cocktail party).

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Hamlet 2000

In this modern retelling of Hamlet, the banquet is a press conference, which makes perfect sense in the point of view of the adaptation. The new CEO/King announced publicly to the world (via the press, not the court) how he has stabilized the company (Denmark) and how he's not afraid of a hostile takeover by Fortinbras. In this way, the company is a "warlike state". Makes perfect sense, as do most modern transpositions in the film.

Claudius is played by Kyle MacLachlan, who is convincing as a charismatic but tough corporate maneuverer. He and Diane Venora as Gertrude appear as a younger-than-expected power couple. Their apparent youth and sexiness is a sign of the times. In the 2000s, people tend to look younger than they are, or at least strive to. This is important, because it really puts the lie to Hamlet's later contention that "at your age, the blood is tame". Difficult to agree with that sentiment when the two are still quite attractive and openly lustful with each other.

One bit of re-attributed dialogue: The line "For all, our thanks" is divided down the middle, the latter part given to Gertrude. This is clearly staged by the characters (it's an organized event, after all), but it's a clear symbol of their joining ("man and wife are one flesh") drawing her into Claudius' culpability through that association.

On Fortinbras
Claudius holds up a newspaper with Fortinbras' picture on it. In this modern world, "pestering with message" is done a lot more publicly, which can be said to have an effect on the scene. In a traditional staging, Claudius chooses to tell the world about Fortinbras' message, whereas here he is forced to by the media. In both cases, he uses it as an opportunity to show off, with more bluster than substance. The difference is that this Claudius is perhaps not as calculated as the Medieval one. Better at improvising? Dangerous when cornered?

While the scene is replete with extra stage directions for the non-speaking characters (which I'll get to in a moment), Claudius at least manages the ripping of paper he traditionally has to do in almost every staging (the newspaper). No Voltimand and Cornelius to send another message. They are scarcely needed since the corporate adversaries are speaking through the press.

A look around the room
Hamlet is visible in the scene even before Claudius and Gertrude. He's filming the event for use in his videos/soliloquies (this will pay off later). He appears bored and disconnected from the proceedings, with dark glasses hiding his eyes. Possibly all part of "holding his tongue" in deference to his mother.

We also get a good look at the Polonius family:
From left to right then: Bill Murray provides one of my favorite takes on Polonius, here already noticing shenanigans between Ophelia and Hamlet (setting up the next scene). Ophelia is played by the omnipresent (at the time) Julia Stiles, who keeps looking over to Hamlet, trying to get his attention. Liev Schreiber as Laertes is either aloof (he can't wait to get back to France - this may be one of those Laertes who doesn't care for the new king) or simply distracted as he too notices what passes between his sister and Hamlet. This is a problem very much on the family collective mind. Also note the ghost of Hamlet Sr. hovering above them in the background as a painting.

Juxtapositions
Through the use of extra stage directions for Ophelia, the film manages to juxtapose certain characters in a new and meaningful way. For example, on "With an auspicious and a dropping eye", we see Ophelia's own hopeful eyes drop down as Hamlet ignores her. A clever subtext to the line, but also one that links Ophelia/Hamlet to Getrude/Claudius who speak (as one, remember) the actual line. If there is a relation standing in the way of Ophelia being with the man she loves, the same could be true of Gertrude if indeed she was having an affair with Claudius (with Laertes as Hamlet Sr.). Hamlet Sr. is also a character that is said to be away for much of the time AND good at warlike matters. We're used to Hamlet Jr.-Laertes correspondences, but Senior as well? Intriguing. Laertes as a young Hamlet Sr. (a Jr. in spirit) further accentuates the brotherly link between Laertes and Hamlet Jr. and his treatment at the hands of Claudius (the faux-Hamlet Sr.) as an alternative son to Hamlet Jr.

As Claudius talks about being "pestered by message", we see Ophilia frenetically trying to arrange a meeting with Hamlet by drawing (not really writing - she's an artist) a note.
It is intercepted by Laertes, not that Hamlet reaches out for it. Though Ophelia is the messenger here, we're reminded that Hamlet also used to write her (she has a lot of correspondence [pun not intended] to redeliver later). The correspondence created here is then between Hamlet and Fortinbras, two sides of the same coin (heirs apparent with opposite methods).

The sequence made me realize there is a theme of messages falling on deaf ears or being intercepted in the play. Polonius intercepts a letter from Hamlet and later Ophelia returns his letters. Fortinbras' message is ripped up, and later his answer to Claudius' emissaries turns out to be a lie or tactic. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's message to England is subverted. Claudius' payers do not rise up to Heaven. Should we also see here the Ghost's message not getting through to Hamlet?

Laertes' suit
After the high of the press conference, we have a separate scene with just the immediate families. There's dancing and kissing between the newlyweds and Claudius overlooks Hamlet completely in favor of Laertes. Laertes is surprised, but unlike the BBC version, in which he seems to think Claudius is countering the natural order, this Laertes is distracted by whatever is going on between Hamlet and his sister, finding his way to her side and bringing her back and away from the prince in between lines. There can only be two reasons for this in a modern context: Either he loves his sister unnaturally and is therefore jealous, or he dislikes Hamlet for some reason, motivating his later telling his sister not to see again. Or it could be both. We'll see as the film progresses. Ophelia, for her part, is showing rebellious tendencies usually not afforded her in more traditional stagings, but that make complete sense in a modern context. It's something that will color her lines throughout the play.

The scene ends oddly with Claudius pushing Hamlet away (something edited out?) and he'll not address his nephew until they're later out in the street after the event.

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Kline 90

The Kevin Kline version jumps right into the thick of things with a lustful kiss between Claudius and Gertrude (and they kiss again in the middle of the scene), catering to the baser animal qualities of the new king.

The staging is interesting here as the courtiers seem to orbit Claudius, almost moving about the room in a circle as he shakes hands with them.
Brian Murray's Claudius is gracious in his tactility, bridging the gulf between king and courtier, but though he is jovial, he's still a blowhard. There's one particular line delivery that I found strange. "Together with remembrance of ourselves" is played as clever word play that is immediately met with delighted applause from the crowd. There is no grief here.

Even Dana Ivey's Gertrude is unnaturally happy, apparently charmed by everything Claudius has to say, with a look of "oh he's so clever!" always on her face.
Either Claudius is a powerful charismatic or his courtiers are currying favor with their simpering flattery. Gertrude, however, seems completely taken in by his charms, heightening the emotional resonance of Hamlet's outrage and setting her up for a greater fall.

In contrast to Zeffirelli's private audience between Claudius and Laertes, their exchange is very public here as Claudius almost speaks more to the crowd than to Laertes (played by the soapy Michael Cumpsty).
Again we have a Claudius who is a social animal, living his life on a stage and relishing in it. Life as theater is the most potent theme of the play, and while we often look to Hamlet for its presentation, this Claudius is also an actor (as politicians often are). Hamlet Sr., the man of action (the warrior) is replaced by a man of acting who plays out grand conflict in public and with words. Consequently, though Cornelius and Voltimand are cut from the play, the message from Fortinbras isn't (tying off the segment at "so much for him"). Where Hamlet Sr. might have led men into the field of battle, Claudius gets applause for throwing a piece of paper away and undermining an opponent's threat level. It's a false military victory, all played in oratory.

But I digress. Laertes' suit is of course granted after a very stagy exchange (and I mean that to mean it was staged by Claudius, not as a directorial weakness). Claudius makes it plain that he is gracious and warm, and lets it be known that Polonius (veteran character actor Josef Sommer) is his right hand man.
If you have access to this version, check for the courtiers in the background during the "The head is not more native to the heart" speech for some almost parliamentary eyebrow acting. "Oh really!" they seem to imply. Where other stagings of the play have implied that this was common knowledge, here it isn't, and so the entire scene takes on that air of being a practiced spectacle for the Court.

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Zeffirelli 90

Zeffirelli likes to play fast and loose with the play's scene structure, upending certain lines, changing the sequence of scenes around, and turning single scenes into multiple ones. Act I Scene 2, which I have split into three, Zeffirelli splits into five, not to mention one of its lines thrown to the prologue/de facto Scene 1. The overall effect is to stretch the timeline of events. They don't all occur at the same time, but spaced over a vague period of time. At the same time, Zeffirelli reduces many lines to their barest essentials, which of course changes our reading of the play.The first sequence is, as traditional, the wedding banquet before the Court. The throne room is huge, a real seat of power, and the royals rather far from the Court. Though Claudius speaks, it is Gertrude we watch for signs of affection. Glenn Close plays her as a little nervous, but definitely content.
Again, this version of the play intimates that the two have had an affair prior to Hamlet Sr.'s death, or that she at least knows she jumped beds rather quickly after his passing. She is nervous to see if the Court will agree or afraid of the gossip.

Ian Holm's Polonius is rather austere here and doesn't get a line, but his demeanor nonetheless reveals something about him and the situation.
He's the one who stands in front of the Court and moves them to rise when the speech is over. He is very much the one pulling the political strings and because he controls the Court, there's the inference that the Court needs to be controlled. Are the courtiers easy to manipulate (or eager to be manipulated), explaining why there is no dissension in the ranks? Or is there something sinister in Polonius' look that speaks to some threat made on the king's behalf?

Notable cuts: The Norway subplot is absent from the film, so there is no need for Cornelius and Voltimand. That was expected. There is a missing line, however. In this version, Claudius does not thank the Court for having freely gone with the affair. This might indicate that the Court WAS threatened in some way and it has not FREELY sided with Claudius. This makes him one of the more villainous Claudiuses.

Change of Venue: Laertes
Zeffirelli has Laertes' wish to leave Denmark take place in a whole other scene. Time has obviously passed, drawing out how long Hamlet remains in his melancholy state, but also making Laertes a bit less eager to go. In the play as written, Laertes witnesses the wedding and immediately wants to return to France, speaking to the ambiguous relationship with the king revealed in the BBC staging. Note that the encounter also happens behind closed doors, not in public. It no longer occurs before the Court (so nothing is modified for "appearances"), and no longer before Hamlet (so not a slap in the face, either public or private).

And here, villainy is far from Alan Bates' performance. I'll admit to not liking his Claudius which, in large part due to the cuts, is rather two-dimensional. But if there's a scene that redeems him for me, it's this one. Claudius is affable, warm and full of good humor. If it were not for the creepy stare and delivery in the movie's first scene, we would not understand Hamlet's reaction. Perhaps Claudius is simply good humored because he is basking in his victory. "Ask me anything, for I can DO anything." But as discussed previously, it is totally correct to portray Claudius as being more familial with Polonius' family than he is with his own.

Nathaniel Parker's Laertes, for his part, is a fresh-faced, almost naive youth, awed by power and reverent. We do not feel any fear in his demeanor, and his character is generally lighter than some other performances.
Notable cuts: "You cannot speak of reason to the Dane and lose your voice." This line has several functions. First, it reveals Claudius' pragmatism (or the image he has of himself as a pragmatist), the clockwork logic that led to his fratricide and will inform his ploys at the end of the play. Second, it has an ironic undertone. What is reasonable in this disjointed state? These nuances are lost, but they don't affect our understanding of the play. Claudius also fails to say that "The head is not more native to the heart...t than is the throne of Denmark to thy father", downplaying his connection with Polonius, and Polonius' role in his political rise to power. Finally, Laertes does not consider Claudius a "dread lord", but more importantly, omits the words "that duty done". As mentioned above, this Laertes is not afraid of the king and even has warm feelings towards his "kindly uncle" (we can again look at Laertes and Hamlet as brothers).

The overall effect of Laertes' demeanor in this scene is to hide Claudius' villainy. Is Zeffirelli trying to play it as a reveal for audiences that do not know the story? Possible, since this was a high profile Mel Gibson project possibly meant to be larger audiences' "first Hamlet".

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - BBC 80

In which we find that there are no small roles in Hamlet...

The BBC's version of Claudius is famously played by Patrick Stewart, clearly having fun in his bouffant toupee.It's a performance that initially disappointed me, though I'm ready to revisit and reevaluate it now. This Claudius is not on as solid a footing politically as some others, which I now realize is straight from the text. This revelation comes from the performances of Cornelius and Voltimand, the envoys to Norway, who are very serious about their duty, so much so, they appear to be driven ONLY by duty. Granted, they have very few lines in this scene, and duty is all they have to play, but their joylessness borders on resentment, fear or resignation. Claudius may have Polonius in his corner, but surely he hasn't replaced everyone in Court. Can he trust the men who were loyal to his brother?
Suddenly, there's a warning in the words "To business with the king, more than the scope of these delated articles allow", and defensiveness in "We doubt it nothing". Claudius is just a little bit paranoid, still cajoling the enemies that surround him. He's guilty of SOMEthing.

Laertes' attitude follows this too. When he is called to appear, he seems puzzled and afraid (thus the "dread lord" line). He looks to his father, unsure of what to do.
What is going through his mind here? Like everyone else in this Court, he doesn't know if she can trust the situation. Maybe he was even loyal to the old king. Is he in a hurry to return to France because he doesn't like this new regime? Certainly, he was a friend of Hamlet's, and has certain loyalties to him. It probably isn't proper for Claudius to give Laertes an audience before he gives one to Hamlet, switching sons as we've previously discussed, so Laertes is caught unawares. He's visibly embarrassed by the event, visibly so as he leaves the Court and gives Hamlet a friendly and apologetic nod.

He has reason to be. Not only is he given audience first, but Claudius is unusually tactile with him.
Once he's done with Laertes (David Robb), he returns to the throne and AWAY from Hamlet as he addresses him, underscoring the distance between them after his unbearably inappropriate closeness with Laertes.

In this version, Hamlet is clearly visible on stage throughout the wedding banquet, rather than revealed, as he often is, on his first line. And he's active too. Standing behind his mother, he seems to be giving her away (that's right, he also went "freely with this affair along").
He also applauds sarcastically. Jacobi's Hamlet is openly disrespectful and scornful of his uncle from the first, which helps sell the idea that Claudius' reign holds by a thread. With Claudius and Claire Bloom's Gertrude standing so far apart, the wedding appears to be a stately affair, and more than ever, a political move. Perhaps Claudius loves her, but he's certainly not showing his weaknesses in this public arena.

Of Gertrude and Eric Porter's Polonius (interestingly younger and stouter than most actors cast in the role), I shall have cause to speak of later, when they get more lines.

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Olivier 48

Olivier's most intriguing contribution to the wedding banquet is actually the transition leading into it. The camera, which you'll remember is roving through Elsinore (is it God? the Ghost? 3rd person omniscient?), is looking for the wedding party and lands on an empty bed.This lends credence to the theory that the camera is actually the Ghost's point of view as, driven by jealousy, it takes a peek into the adulterous bedchamber.

The banquet itself is a much more stately affair, with everyone pretty much sitting around and talking. Claudius is a particular disappointment for me, Basil Sydney stiff in both posture and delivery.
Some of the blame should go to the costumes (gaudy, rather than rich), and Claudius' wide shoulders-tight tights combo is particularly ludicrous. The Court certainly contrasts with Hamlet's simple black attire in this, perhaps symbolic of Denmark's complicity in Claudius' corruption (audible in this version as they mutter in agreement a number of times through the speech). Everyone's getting rich in this new regime.

Unfortunately, Syndey doesn't play Claudius sympathetically (not uncommon, actually) which makes him more transparent as the villain. He's smug and self-satisfied. A glimmer of hope exists in his relationship to Gertrude. Does he actually love her?
His sighs denote lust for sure. He's helped along by a rather young Gertrude. Though I think she just barely pulls it off, Eileen Herlie is 11 years younger than Olivier who plays her son! Bizarre casting, but useful in establishing one of those Freudian through lines I dislike so much. The younger the Gertrude, the more sexual tension can be drawn from their Oedipal relationship. Herlie would return to the role more mature (one would think) in Richard Burton's version.

The other characters we meet here are Terence Morgan's young and enthusiastic Laertes, who should seem much changed when he returns from France with revenge in his heart.
One would hardly believe this fresh, naive face would be credible talking about cutting Hamlet's throat in a church! The success of the character will hinge on his ability to sell the character's moral downfall. His father Polonius is played as a typical "kindly old man" by Felix Aylmer.

The Cuts Continued
Just as in Scene 1, all mention of Fortinbras, Norway and the world at large has been expunged. This takes a chance to show off away from Claudius (I'll unkindly say "mercifully" here) and reduces this Courtly meeting to the essential family affairs of the day.

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet - Branagh 96

Branagh sets the banquet in the most important set of the film, the Hall of Mirrors. This long ballroom is bright where Elsinore is often dank and each of its mirrors is a door, lending a reflective quality to spying scenes, as we'll eventually see. Claudius, played by the always excellent Derek Jacobi, fits into this world seamlessly. His bright red military uniform and bristly bleached hair allow him to revel in this kind of opulence. Not only is his red the color of blood, the blood that is on his hands, but it also identifies him as a preening peacock, full of self-love. His red contrasts Hamlet's black. He is most definitely not in mourning, but rather celebrating his brother's death.

An important bit of staging here: Claudius' opening speech is made in front of a large audience. This is his first speech as King, having taken the previous king's queen as his own. A political move that requires a certain measure of justification. Claudius excels at what today we would call "spin", as he is a creature of appearances. A false king, in power under false pretenses. Everything looks gorgeous although we know Denmark to be diseased. That is how he uses his charisma, and Jacobi's performance is a sympathetic one. The villain does not reveal himself for quite some time and you want to believe him in this early scene. Jacobi has also chosen to make his Claudius truly be in love with Gertrude, which the full text supports.
Pretty easy, you might say, since Gertrude is played by Julie Christie, a still striking woman (she certainly doesn't look 55) whose blood may not be as tame as Hamlet would have it.

Of course, he makes it plain that this would never have happened if the Court had not "freely gone with this affair along". So the whole State is complicit in this usurped throne/incestuous bond, and so it is doomed along with Claudius himself (cue Fortinbras later).

Speaking of Fortinbras, in an often cut bit, Claudius deals with him in his particular idiom, i.e. with dramatic flair and arrogance.
The Court eats it up. Claudius is media savvy, but as everyone else's unease has taught us, he may not actually be up to the challenge of defending Denmark. Here, he dismisses the threat posed by Fortinbras, misjudging the entire situation. I've noted Claudius' military dress, but all the men in the Court also wear military uniforms. In this version of the play, war is very much on everyone's minds. Denmark is a military state, and Fortinbras' movements are part of the larger campaign Hamlet Sr. took part in.

Then comes Laertes (remember, Hamlet is last and least on Claudius' agenda) played by Branagh regular, Michael Maloney.
Maloney always gives a competent performance, though I've always thought of his Laertes as a bit wishy-washy. Maybe it's the haircut. In any case, we don't get a great sense of his character here, nor of Richard Briers' Polonius or Kate Winslet's Ophelia, except that they seem to be very nice people.
If we didn't know any better, this Denmark would seem to be a nice enough place. The new King has well judged the mood of the country and appears both sympathetic to their loss and aware of what needs to be done for political stability. The presence of civilians on the balcony and way everything is handled publicly speaks to an open government, not a tyranny. How will people react when Hamlet starts acting up? This sets up a Denmark decidedly on the side of Claudius. Does it contribute to Hamlet's doubts and delays?

I.ii. The Wedding Banquet

One of the challenges of doing a project like this is that some scenes are incredibly long. So I've decided to cut of them into pieces for both theme and manageability. Act I Scene 2 will be split into three: The Wedding Banquet (everything before Hamlet is named), Enter: Hamlet (through the end of his speech), and Ghost Stories (from Horatio's entrance to the end of the scene). The next batch of essays will only look at the first of these sections, holding off Hamlet's first lines until the next part. Versions of the play that have done away with Scene 1 will usually start with the banquet. How does that affect our understanding of the play?

This is also the introduction of a number of important characters - Claudius, Gertrude, Polonius and Laertes - so I expect to spend quite some time discussing casting. It should also be our introduction to the interior of Elsinore, which of course affects staging. But let's look at the text before doing anything else (Shakespeare's in italics, as usual).

SCENE II. A room of state in the castle.

Enter KING CLAUDIUS, QUEEN GERTRUDE, HAMLET, POLONIUS, LAERTES, VOLTIMAND, CORNELIUS, Lords, and Attendants
KING CLAUDIUS: Though yet of Hamlet our dear brother's death
The memory be green, and that it us befitted
To bear our hearts in grief and our whole kingdom
To be contracted in one brow of woe,
Yet so far hath discretion fought with nature
That we with wisest sorrow think on him,
Together with remembrance of ourselves.
Therefore our sometime sister, now our queen,
The imperial jointress to this warlike state,
Have we, as 'twere with a defeated joy,--
With an auspicious and a dropping eye,
With mirth in funeral and with dirge in marriage,
In equal scale weighing delight and dole,--
Taken to wife: nor have we herein barr'd
Your better wisdoms, which have freely gone
With this affair along. For all, our thanks.

Claudius is a practical man who presents himself as someone who gets on with things. This is an important point to make about the character not only because he uses his pragmatism to convince the court of his ascendence to the throne (and one could imagine a pre-Hamlet scene in which he used his brand of logic to explain why he'd make a better King than Hamlet Jr.), but because it may well be how he could follow through on a fratricide. It also makes him the perfect nemesis for Hamlet, with an attitude that stands in stark opposition to the lead's excessively intellectual ambivalence. Claudius is King because he acts. Hamlet isn't because he doesn't.

Now follows, that you know, young Fortinbras,
Holding a weak supposal of our worth,
Or thinking by our late dear brother's death
Our state to be disjoint and out of frame,
Colleagued with the dream of his advantage,
He hath not fail'd to pester us with message,
Importing the surrender of those lands
Lost by his father, with all bonds of law,
To our most valiant brother. So much for him.
Now for ourself and for this time of meeting:
Thus much the business is: we have here writ
To Norway, uncle of young Fortinbras,--
Who, impotent and bed-rid, scarcely hears
Of this his nephew's purpose,--to suppress
His further gait herein; in that the levies,
The lists and full proportions, are all made
Out of his subject: and we here dispatch
You, good Cornelius, and you, Voltimand,
For bearers of this greeting to old Norway;
Giving to you no further personal power
To business with the king, more than the scope
Of these delated articles allow.
Farewell, and let your haste commend your duty.
CORNELIUS VOLTIMAND: In that and all things will we show our duty.
KING CLAUDIUS: We doubt it nothing: heartily farewell.
Exeunt VOLTIMAND and CORNELIUS

If Scene 1 was slashed in any great measure, then so will this speech which pertains to the outside world. I may still work to set up Fortinbras for the end, but seems completely useless without the Norwegian sublot. In the full play, it sets up Claudius' arrogance and the eventual loss of what his brother had won.

And now, Laertes, what's the news with you?
You told us of some suit; what is't, Laertes?
You cannot speak of reason to the Dane,
And loose your voice: what wouldst thou beg, Laertes,
That shall not be my offer, not thy asking?
The head is not more native to the heart,
The hand more instrumental to the mouth,
Than is the throne of Denmark to thy father.
What wouldst thou have, Laertes?
LAERTES: My dread lord,
Your leave and favour to return to France;
From whence though willingly I came to Denmark,
To show my duty in your coronation,
Yet now, I must confess, that duty done,
My thoughts and wishes bend again toward France
And bow them to your gracious leave and pardon.
KING CLAUDIUS: Have you your father's leave? What says Polonius?
LORD POLONIUS: He hath, my lord, wrung from me my slow leave
By laboursome petition, and at last
Upon his will I seal'd my hard consent:
I do beseech you, give him leave to go.
KING CLAUDIUS: Take thy fair hour, Laertes; time be thine,
And thy best graces spend it at thy will!

It is noteworthy that Claudius should address Laertes' wishes before those of Hamlet. Hamlet may be next in line, but Claudius plainly puts Laertes first. This opposes Laertes and Hamlet from their first shared scene, and this will obviously carry through to the end, with Claudius acting as adoptive father to Laertes. In effect, Hamlet and Laertes are brothers, both related to the King, one by blood and the other by politics. Polonius (and thus his family) were apparently better connected to Claudius than to Hamlet Sr. (who being gone to the wars, may not have been so well attended), and has been promoted to a place of influence in this new regime. By giving Laertes favor here, Claudius shows his true colors as a political animal first. The irony, of course, is that had Polonius been more patient and thrown his support with filial rights, his daughter might well have become queen.

Another point I'd like to make about the Hamlet-Laertes rivalry is that while Hamlet studies in nearby Wittenberg, Laertes spends his time in France. That Claudius shows preference to a "son" that has been corrupted by another country, in effect prefers the Frenchman to the Dane, speaks to the weakened state he is now the head of. The country has been usurped by a pretender who does not even love it, but would corrupt it just as a debauched country has corrupted Laertes. (This is not my opinion of France, but it is Polonius', if we go by later scenes where he treats his son's soul as being in mortal danger over there.)

I'm making points here that I don't feel were particularly made by any of the film versions, though we'll see how they play out with the "filter" in place. Perhaps I never noticed because I hadn't really thought of it before. These are relatively recent realizations, once again showing how this play opens up to me in new ways every time I read or see it.

Act I Scene 1 - French Rock Opera

In 1976, some would say at the height of his popularity, France's "Elvis Presley", Johnny Hallyday produced a studio double-album based on Hamlet. Though he had hopes of turning this 6-years-in-the-making project into a full blown rock opera for the stage, its commercial failure sealed its fate. With time, it's gotten more respect, but is still an oddity, both in Hallyday's discography and in the world of Hamlet adaptations. You can listen to clips of each track on the French Amazon to get a sense of how it sounded.

For Act 1 Scene 1, we're principally concerned with the first two tracks. The first is a musical Ouverture, just to get you in the mood. Then comes a Prologue, basically an introduction to the project. I will translate it for you here:

"I liked Hamlet's story. I'm not sure why exactly. There are certainly reasons, profound reasons. But... it's not important. I will try to tell you this story... as I felt it. Me. And you will feel the way you want to. You."

A personal vision, but not an expert one. Hallyday doesn't make himself out to be something he's not. And yet, he could be a little more committal about that vision. But since Hamlet is often anything you want it/him to be, it's not necessarily the wrong attitude.

There is no Scene 1. The story starts with Hamlet's first speech which explains the context of the story anyway. So no dancing soldiers with Horatio intoning "Speak to Me" (or some similar song). We'll return to the rock opera then. (And now on to Scene 2!)

Act I Scene 1 - Classics Illustrated

Hamlet wasn't just adapted for the screen. It was also became the focus of two issues of Classics Illustrated. The original Classics Illustrated was a comic book series designed to go into school libraries and, to be frank, was aimed at boys. The focus on the more adventurous aspects of the literary tales adapted through its long run bear this out. Hamlet appeared in #99 and was illustrated by Alex A. Blum. Though it was first published in 1952, Classics Illustrated often went through multiple editions to keep them in print and in the hands of young readers. As an example of how the original series focused on a boy's sensibilities, the soldiers and ghosts of the opening scene are spared 5 pages, but there is no following wedding banquet.

In 1990, Berkley Publishing and First Comics resurrected Classics Illustrated for a shorter, but much more mature run. These prestige format books had glossy paper and painted artwork, and featured some of the best artists of the time, from Bill Sienkiewicz to Kyle Baker to Peter Kuper. Hamlet was book #5 and was adapted by writer Steven Grant and artist Tom Mandrake, the latter whose work on the Spectre made him no stranger to ghostly revenge stories.

The Original
Meant to introduce kids to great works, Classics Illustrated oftens started with a "splash page" introduction before getting into the story. Hamlet thus begins with a quick presentation of the premise - the father's death, the hasty marriage and Hamlet's melancholy. Then on with the play. The dialogue, though a lot of it is cut, is Shakespeare's. The narration and footnotes help the young reader understand the action better.

It's a stiff adaptation, sticking to the facts of the action. Obviously, Horatio's historical context is cut, combining the Ghost scenes in a way that makes its appearances and disappearances more frenetic. The Ghost is larger than life and intangible, like he's rain or steam or being beamed up.
The adaptation is only really intriguing for its focus on heroics. What is Hamlet like if action and the supernatural are emphasized?

The Berkley Version
The first caption reads "Ancient Denmark", setting the play in a no-man's-land that is more Beowulf than it is the Middle Ages.
Bernardo's furs and the characters' oddly shaped word balloons create an atmospheric Denmark out of time. And of course, there's no one like Tom Mandrake to put fear in a character's eyes.
So as far as mood goes, it is achieved by page one. The Ghost is a steaming warrior with glowing eyes, one that tends to blend in with Mandrake's water colors quite efficiently.
What we have in the Berkley series is a Classics Illustrated for fans of literature, rather than fans of comics (although, ultimately, its audience is probably both). The focus is not on the facts of the story (this is CORRECT, since plot is not Shakespeare's focus either), but on mood and rendering of themes. Though Hamlet is not as abstract as say, Sienkiewicz's adaptation of Moby Dick, it is still highly expressionistic, marrying visuals to the emotion of the scene.

Act I Scene 1 - A Midwinter's Tale

Kenneth Branagh's A Midwinter's Tale (or A Bleak Midwinter, for UK audiences) is our second "play within a play", and as with Slings & Arrows, I'll try to focus only on the performance of the play within the movie, and not on the rehearsal scenes (which are mostly played for laughs anyway). Not to say that the performance doesn't have its own whimsy. Apologies in advance for the quality of the screencaps - the film isn't on DVD yet and I'm resorting to taking pictures directly off my cathode tube television.

Midwinter shows us very short snippets of the scenes, but enough to make a point with the staging, and uses its black and white film stock to good, moody effect. The church where the play is acted acts as a natural stage and Gothic setting, though in the first scene, it is filled with a thick fog that then tends to linger in the closed space. One thing this staging of the play isn't is easy on the audience (a reasonable effect to want to achieve, actually). Despite the medieval feel of the church, the costumes are world war era, and so Bernardo walks onstage with a machine gun.A machine gun he fires over the audience's heads as they all crouch in fear. Shakespeare has a knack for waking up his audience with the play's opening words, but "Who's there?" has never been so shocking. This is a Denmark so unstable, it might shoot you first and ask its questions later.

Played for comedy, sure, but still offers a potable staging if you were to do it yourself.

Act I Scene 1 - Slings & Arrows

So we come to our first play within a play - Hamlet as done on the brilliant Slings & Arrows. Because the show is about the behind the scenes aspect of a theater festival, we don't usually see complete scenes. And yet what we see of the plays is very sensitive to the text and even insightful. Note that while I'm not above talking about scenes only shown in rehearsal, I've tried to use Season 1 Episode 6's performance as the standard. I wasn't really expecting Act I Scene 1 to make it, but as the play begins, we do get a handful of lines. Onward!

A Minimalist HamletAn early decision of the show's artistic director was to let the text do the work of setting the scene. Black drapes and minimal sets, and costumes taken off the rack by the actors, with no concern for period. Speaks to both the power of the text and its universality.

The play opens on the character of Cyril (Graham Harley) playing the shivering Francisco, relieved by Frank (Michael Polley, father of Sarah) as Bernardo. Now, these two guys are a classic double act, often acting as a chorus on the show, and in the Hamlet parallels of the first season, standing in less for Rozencrantz and Guildenstern than the gravediggers. In the company at New Burbage, they are career thespians who play all those bit parts, often more than one per play. It's very fitting that they would open this version of Hamlet, because they also open Slings and Arrows itself, with juicy tune played at a wrap party.

And yet, for clowns, they give an excellent performance in their Scene 1 snippet. When Francisco confirms that the noise he heard is Bernardo, he is quite obviously relieved.
No enemy from Norway. No Ghost*. Phew. Which brings up one of those puns Shakespeare is notorious for. For some reason I'd never read "For this relief much thanks" as a pun, but there it is in Cyril's performance.

Shame about Frank's Asterix the Gaul costume.

*We're backstage during the Ghost's appearance, so I can't comment on it.

Act I Scene 1 - Fodor (2007)

Alexander Fodor's Hamlet is billed as "Shakespeare in the extreme!", which basically means it's highly experimental, made on the cheap, and at times doesn't work at all. And yet, there's a lot of interesting stuff in here. Act I Scene 1 isn't used, leaving a gender-swapped Horatio to tell the tale at the wedding banquet, but we do get a Ghost scene as prologue.It's a scene that reappears later and that I will explore more fully in its proper context: Ophelia's death. In this modernization, she drowns not in a river, but in her own euphoria, as what appears to be a heroin overdose. The Ghost appears to us, if not to her, as soon as she's injected herself with the potent opiate.
This is part of the film's use of horror, taking the "ghost story" to its next obvious level, with horror, lighting and mood to match. Simple effects that are nonetheless unnerving. What is the Ghost doing there? Well, if she dies, seeing a native of the after-life isn't too surprising, but because he appears earlier, it may be at he is a hallucination. Is the entire play then a hallucination at death's door? Is everything in Hamlet to be filtered through Ophelia's dementia? This interpretation makes everything before her madness suspect, and everything after it a dream. Ophelia as narrator has potential, but she is less reliable than Horatio. The scene makes us plunge into the surreal universe of the film and in a sense, may excuse any of its "extremes".

Whether Ophelia is meant to be the narrative filter or not, this is a Hamlet where the Ghost is a lot more prominent. He is often seen lurking, observing his family as it descends into its own decadent hell.

Though the scene is pulled from later in the play, Fodor still gives us a ghostly appearance to start off the story. Ophelia replaces Horatio and the soldiers, and doesn't live to tell of what she saw, but the feeling is much the same for the audience.

Elsinore
As with Hamlet 2000, Elsinore seems to be a hotel or estate, one that is grubby and in a state of decay. Using what looks like disused buildings works as much to the play's advantage as it does the film's budget. Outside, we can hear seagulls and the sea, though these sometimes seem illusory. If it's daylight, the bright light bleaches everything (as in this scene). This creates a dream-like Denmark as much as fog would.

Opening Credits
Indicative of the rest of the film, Fodor uses a number of different ideas in his opening montage, not a single concept. First, there are scenes from later in the story which serve to introduce the cast. On a gender-swapped Polonia, Hamlet's "rash intruding fool" line, and on Ophelia "I shall obey, my sister" are simple, revelatory lines about those characters. However, no one else gets this treatment. The credits also use outtakes where you can sort of hear the director speaking to the actors, and footage of actors diving off the pier. Breaking the fourth wall is allowed, since Hamlet is very much about being an actor in the world, but it tends to hurt the very thing Fodor was trying to do by throwing us in the deep end with that first scene (the Green Fairy moment, if you will). And there are also dramatis personae shots, again not given to everyone.
The cumulative effect of these is still one of apprehension. The last two shots show a murder and a scare, leaving the viewer in the right frame of mind, I think, to be disturbed both by form and content.

The Song
The song playing over the opening credits is You Love Me to Death by Hooverphonic. Lyrics here. The song starts with "Face your fate" and the refrain goes "You love me to death, but death may love you more", which supports the idea that this is Ophelia's take on the story (or since she just died, that this is "her song"). It speaks both to Hamlet's tragic doom and to Ophelia dying because of love. It has a haunting quality and isn't too much on the nose.

As you can see, there's probably too much going on and pulling in different directions even in a single sequence. Extreme!