II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - French Rock Opera

R&G's failed interrogation of Hamlet is best represented by the song Quel mal te bouffe? (What's Eating You?), a short ditty (excerpt via Amazon) sung by the choir (Hallyday only sings Hamlet's parts) which is inappropriately (or for R&G, quite appropriately) ridiculous-sounding. The French lyrics, followed by my quick and dirty translation:

Quel mal te bouffe?
Quel mal te bouffe?
Quel mal te ronge?
Quel mal te ronge?
Quel mal te bouffe?

Quel mal te bouffe?
Quel mal te ronge?
Dis-nous, dis-nous, dis-nous, dis-nous...
Des anges! Des anges! Des anges! Des anges!

(Répétez tout)

What's Eating You?
What's eating you?
What's gnawing at you?
What's gnawing at you?
What's eating you?

What's eating you?
What's gnawing at you?
Tell us, tell us, tell us, tell us...
Angels! Angels! Angels! Angels!

(Repeat all)

The familiar vocabulary used is in line with R&G's usual depiction as people who do not connect with Hamlet's deep emotions. "What's eating you?" reduces Hamlet's mal d'âme to a mild irritant. Hallyday glosses over the "What a piece of work is a man" speech in the last line when Hamlet reveals (ambiguously, because it's still not his voice) he is "bugged" by angels. A bizarre response in the context of the song, but those who know the play can see a connection between this answer and the line "How like an angel". As sung by R&G, it's almost like they're claiming some kind of innocence in all this, again tying into the irony of Hamlet's speech.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Classics Illustrated

The original
The original Classics Illustrated omits this entire sequence, though R&G ARE characters in the comic. They are introduced at the Scene's proper start and are not seen again until after the play within a play. This allows the comic to avoid the ribald pleasantries as well as the theatrical gossip which were no doubt considered either inappropriate or irrelevant to the target audience.

The Berkley version
While the sequence does appear in artist Tom Mandrake's vision, it is cut for brevity. The effect is akin to jump cuts, moving the exchange along almost too quickly. The foppish R&G are discovered almost right away, Hamlet moving from dropping his book in joy to accusations in the space of a single panel. He then heads into his speech, still without R&G reacting. Note the visual link to "I have an eye of you" in the following panel.Though not shown at that point, it underscores the point of the page/sequence: Hamlet's piercing gaze uncovering the duo's duplicity. R&G don't even get to snicker at "man delights not me" in this version, Hamlet volunteering "nor woman neither" without being prompted. The action is rather strangely staged:
What is Hamlet doing? With the interaction gone, he seems to have a violent fit motivated by self-loathing, but perhaps also hatred for his parents (man and woman). The line is turned into an attack of the unfaithful couple, into hatred that we know is at least partly transferred to his other relationships (Ophelia, R&G).

Hamlet once again changes his mood when he hears of the Players (a change that seems more extreme by virtue of the above panel's intensity) and though the gossip is cut, the admission of partial madness is retained. R&G's lines suffer so many cuts that Hamlet is almost in soliloquy mode through most of the sequence, and since he has an audience, the soliloquy might better be called a rant.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Tennant (2009)

Though some R&G pairings emphasize the betrayal, acting as somewhat sinister agents of the Royals, the 2009 R&G emphasize just how much they've grown apart from Hamlet. While he is an adult struggling with adult things, they are immature boys giggling at all the wrong bits and staring at their feet when things get serious. It's an extremely funny performance, even as the tension and discomfort mount. R&G are helped immensely by the editing, giving them reaction shots for many of Hamlet's lines. Instead of having the prince rattle on an uninterrupted speech, there's the sense that R&D do indeed have lines, albeit silent ones. Pauses, stares, the putting of hands in pockets, hard swallows... this is where they live - in between the lines (funny, then, that it's where Hamlet "reads" them).

And the discomfort is felt by Hamlet too. He's happy to see them, but before he can ever feel their betrayal, he visibly feels that they are no longer on the same page. Guildenstern's giggling during the Fortune banter makes Hamlet uncomfortably stammer through the next line, desperate to change the subject. He's humoring them, but doesn't share in their mirth. (It's also one of the few "Doctorish" bits in the film. Tennant reigns in a lot of his Doctor Who mannerisms in this performance, but they sometimes slip by. It happens again at the end of the sequence when he starts acting crazy again, adopting a cockney accent and making clicking noises when he delivers the "hawk from a handsaw" line, which you can easily compare to the "you've had some cowboys up in here" stuff of his Doctor.)
R&G are naturally dumbfounded at the "depression" speech, once again, reverses allowing the characters to be active witnesses. Tennant delivers the speech with obvious sarcasm. His voice breaking at the end makes R&G's giggles more inappropriate than ever. Rosencrantz actually lets out a little "a-ha!" there, indicating that he thinks he's understood a meaning (finally), perhaps that this was all a long joke about liking women, but he's of course wrong.

One problem with the problem play is figuring out when Hamlet concocted his plan to stage a play that would catch the King's conscience. The speech in which he reveals it comes at the end of the Act, but there are various point before then where Hamlet seems to be acting in accordance to this plan already. Tennant hits on this idea quite early. His expression when he hears about the Players makes it clear he's already thinking about it, motivating the line "He that plays the king shall be welcome". We'll see later if and how Tennant picks up the threads of this idea later. At that moment, it gives him a boost of mad energy and he starts acting the loon again. He strangely picks through Guildenstern's pockets, crosses his arms before shaking R&G's hands and takes on accents.

Trims and Cuts
There are few trims to the text in this section. The entire rhetoric of shadows' shadows, for example, is not delivered. Hamlet also doesn't reveal that he is "most dreadfully attended". None of these have any great effect on the play. The only outright cut is the usual decision to remove the theatrical gossip. Again, this is not a huge loss, though in this case it does make "It is not very strange; for mine uncle is king of Denmark..." something of a non-sequitur, albeit one of many R&G have to react to.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Fodor (2007)

A weak Hamlet
Fodor's Hamlet - not to say William Bedchambers' - is weaker than in any other version of the play, and this sequence shows how the director has undermined the character in a number of ways. First, of course, is in how R&G - the play's notoriously weak characters - interact with him. Instead of fearful sycophants, we instead have short-tempered, bored louts. Hamlet is suspicious of them and antagonistic (he just caught them talking to the conspirators), but gets no real reaction from them except even more disdain and ire. When accused, they meet outrage with outrage and shame Hamlet for being "poor in thanks". The overall effect is that R&G are stronger characters than Hamlet. They win this skirmish.
There's also the matter of Horatio, who is at Hamlet's side throughout this sequence. She not only has her emotions under more control than Hamlet, sizing up R&G with, by turns, a steady gaze and the same kind of dismissive boredom, but she also borrows some of Hamlet's lines ("Then is doomsday near" and later, the question as to why the Players are on the road). Hamlet is not a whole man in Fodor's vision, he needs to be completed by Horatio. Where R&G are usual the "two who are one" and still don't measure up to one Hamlet, here Hamlet must meet two with two, and still loses the argument.

Whether you agree with this idea or not, there are interesting things about the way Fodor stages the sequence. Until an accusation is actually made, each duo is never in the same shot as the other. They are separate and, in R&G's case, refuse to engage. Both groups look into camera, involving the audience in an unsettling way (very much what Fodor is going for throughout the film, which also justifies his emasculation of the lead) and playing with the mirror effects inherent in the text. Reference to Denmark being a prison shifts our point of view to the Ghost, listening and turning his head. An intriguing piece of editing, as it links the idea with that of Hamlet's father being trapped in a hellish state. Denmark is a prison to Hamlet, but it represents much worse to the Ghost. Hamlet is also haunted by his child-self, another ghostly character lurking about, though much happier, laughing behind potted plants - a counterpoint to the prince's depressing vision of Denmark.

The cut from confession directly into "What a piece of work is a man", omitting further description of Denmark's putrid skies, turns the line's irony to straight sarcasm and becomes the accusation that finally rouses R&G from their torpor. As often happens with cuts, it reveals an intent that is more ambiguous when lines are distanced from one another. It may thus be true to say that Hamlet always meant this speech to refer to R&D, two friends who have deeply disappointed him. Not that Fodor in any way paints them as friends.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Hamlet 2000

R&G board Hamlet in a club chronologically after the "To be or not to be" speech. They are played by Steve Zahn (as Rosencrantz) and Dechen Thurman (brother of Uma, as Guildenstern). Hamlet embraces these two wild and crazy friends, initiating a long booze-up. Their idiosyncratic performances soon reveal them to be two different kinds of creep. Rosencrantz is manic, spinning on stools, making karate moves and shouting through the music in a way that Hamlet simply does not. Meanwhile, Guildenstern is on the other end of the scale, listlessly resting his head on Hamlet's shoulder, his sexuality as relaxed as the rest of him. They come off as immature party lads, unable to grasp Hamlet's true nature.

The film retains the banter, spreading it across the night through time cuts, but cuts everything after it. Hamlet does not force these men to confess their allegiance to his parents. There is no "what a piece of work is a man" speech at this point, nor is there discussion of the Players. Indeed, the film does away with the Players and replaces them with actors on film. They are not characters in their own right. From this scene, we immediately move to R&D reporting to the Royals (by phone), a result of this sequence, brought forward editorially for comic effect. That sequence makes it clear he says some of the things he does in the play, if only off-screen. The other effect is to keep 2000's Hamlet a more internal character who might know R&G are spies, but does not tell them he knows.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Kline '90

In Kline's version, we likewise only meet R&G at this point. They are played by Philip Goodwin (a nerdy Rosencrantz) and Reg. E. Cathey (a cool Guildenstern). Though the latter's casting gives the part some pizazz (Cathey could never be anything but cool), and despite the obvious differences in the two characters, we find they are still twinned. I had not noticed before how often they use the pronoun "we", even when stating opinion. "We think not so," says one, instinctively knowing what the other thinks as well. It's an example of how the text innocuously supports the ideas of the play. Another is Hamlet's "To speak like an honest man," which prods us into questioning his words. Is he not honest the rest of the time? Even in that moment, he speaks LIKE an honest man, not AS an honest man. Should we trust him even here?

Sincere or not, Hamlet seems genuinely happy to see his friends here, at least, until he senses their betrayal. Kline is especially strong in this section, internalizing that betrayal before going into a manic state (for their benefit?). He clasps them to his breast in an awkward position, violence and love mixed. He lets out his anger at them in the guise of madcap love, in a sense ACTING like an honest, sincere man, but not AS an one. We might remember, at this point, how Hamlet questioned whether wearing the trappings of grief was in any way equivalent to feeling grief profoundly and truly. The same could be said of the trappings of friendship and love, and the play continually toys with the theme of "representation" both on stage in in our lives.
There's a nice bit of staging for the "What a piece of work is a man" speech, as Hamlet forces R&G to join him on the floor to look at the ceiling/sky. They are upside down, and indeed the speech itself is an inversion of the natural order.

At the end of the sequence, the Players are announced, but the gossip (as usual) excised. As Hamlet confesses his partial madness, he pickpockets his book back from Rosencrantz's jacket pocket, even though the viewer probably didn't notice him putting it there. It's an interesting symbol for Hamlet picking their brains, or even of having put words/thoughts in their mouths/minds (the reversed confession). Again we have acts of violence (theft is a form of outrage) cast as love and friendship. Teasing, but meaning to do more than tease.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Zeffirelli '90

Zefirelli, in addition to many cuts, disrupts the usual order of the play at this point. From the fishmonger scene, he moves to Hamlet's arranged meeting with Ophelia, then to "To be or not to be", before finally moving us outside Elsinore for our first encounter with Rosencrantz & Guildenstern. Hamlet takes a horse ride and lays down on a carpet of greenery, all very idyllic, perhaps as an ironic counterpoint to his contention that Denmark is a pestilent prison. The director is keen to keep things as visual as possible, making many cuts in the dialog, which I personally find annoying because the visuals definitely don't replace the nuances of the text, nor do they always bring anything to the film except a change of pace for the audience's eyes. For example, this sequence will move from this secluded spot to an open cabin facing the beach where the friends can have lunch. This does not perceptibly illuminate the nature of their relationship, and the way it is staged, even confuses it.
R&G are played by Michael Maloney (Laertes under Branagh, and Hamlet in Midwinter's Dream) and Sean Murray, respectively. They come upon Hamlet where he reclines, almost Christ-like, and in a change from the play, they are escorted by Horatio and (young) Marcellus. So what does this suggest? Have they been to Elsinore, had their meeting with the Royals, and have gone to look for Hamlet? Or does Horatio have a privileged relationship with R&G? The former seems more probable. Without any lines, Horatio is basically there to look at Hamlet with sadness as his friend either bares his soul or lies to common friends (again, ambiguous), or to receive pregnant looks from Hamlet (as in the "What a piece of work is a man" speech; where the prince either acknowledges his friend's compassion or means to pass on the message that he is putting on a show for R&G).

Hamlet's entire attitude towards R&G gets away from the usual idea of describing melancholy or depression. He is quickly angry at them for withholding their true intentions, something they admit to only after a show of violence when he kicks a stool from under Rosencrantz. His delivery of key speeches is rather more venal than other Hamlets', as if to say "I'm not happy and there's nothing you can do about it, gents". He doesn't put on any particular show of madness (and the line about being mad north-north-west is cut in any case), but states his point-of-view matter-of-factly. And since most of the speech is spoken to Horatio, back to the others, it can't even be said that he shows a moment of vulnerability to R&G. This follows an introduction in which Hamlet hardly seems to remember their names.

As I said, there are many cuts made to this sequence. Most of the playful banter between the friends is gone. Hamlet no longer welcomes them to Elsinore. He doesn't let slip any remark about his uncle. And of course, the theatrical gossip has been excised. Now the grubby players show up in a large wagon, and Rosencrantz points at them. Zeffirelli then gets back to his visuals, with a long sequence showing the troupe enter Elsinore.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - BBC '80

As is sometimes done to Horatio in Act I, Hamlet gives his greetings to R&G before he even recognizes them. When he does, Rosencrantz, the jokester of the two, lets out a little "pa-dum" that puts us in the frame of mind of a "beaten friendship". Hamlet immediately subverts that however by mistaking Rosencrantz for Guildenstern, spinning both names at the same character to fix his mistake and getting an annoyed smirk from him. The friendship presented here has apparently been misgauged by the Queen. Hamlet is dismissive and distrustful of his so-called friends, and often plays the scene as an attack. He is in complete control and foils them at every turn. He tries to get sympathy from them, but doesn't get it, such attempts feeling like tests R&G fail to pass.

Jacobi's Hamlet is mercurial as ever, moving through various emotions in order to give each line its own portent. There is a belly laugh at the Fortune joke, immediately followed by a quiet moment when he calls her a strumpet, allowing the viewer time to see a connection to Hamlet's mother. He is wholly sarcastic when he says he's "poor in thanks", giving no quarter to his false friends. "Nay speak", when he draws a confession out of them, is explicitly to prevent them from colluding. No asides for you, R&G! And the emphasis placed on "thinking makes it so" takes a more literal turn when he says there's a confession in their looks. There really isn't... UNTIL he says there is, and then they break down. He has imposed his will on them. His thought has become reality.

The emphasis on that line also makes it important for the whole of the play, which is, indeed, about a man trying to convince himself to exact revenge. Hamlet must first think of himself as an avenger/murderer before it can become a reality. That movement from thought to deed is what creates tension in the play. We'll note later how Hamlet accuses himself of violent thoughts, thoughts that only later are transposed into deeds. Hamlet is a true Shakespearean character: He overhears himself (as Bloom would put it) and is transformed by his own words. Thinking things make them so.

But back to the scene... Hamlet then goes on to anticipate their questions in the way Jacobi delivers "But wherefore I know not". He doesn't just know they were sent for, he knows WHY they were.
The "what a piece of work is a man" is read in his book (which is only a book of slanders if you believe Hamet was making up the earlier words to suit Polonius), a departure from most stagings. Here, they are not his words. He could never think of Man in those terms. While it robs Hamlet of a poetic élan, it makes sense in the framework of his depression. The decaying view of the world is all his, spoken in reaction to what he's just read. "Man delights not me", right at the end, has his holding back tears in earnest. Which of course is exactly where Rosencrantz gets the giggles, all part of R&G's inability to gauge Hamlet or a situation. It's a well done moment, and sends us careening into the theatrical gossip segment and back into R&G's comfort zone. The sequence ends with them believing they are welcome in Elsinore despite Hamlet's earlier attacks.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Olivier '48

Since Olivier has completely excised R&G, this sequence has gone with them. We lose many key lines and one of the best known speeches, and that certainly has an effect on the play. One might argue that Olivier plays clinical depression (i.e. melancholy) well enough that we hardly need the speech describing his mood, and indeed, Olivier's adaptation is more dour for losing the witty banter between Hamlet and his school chums. We are left with a single line, spoken to Polonius when he comes to announce the players: "He that plays the king shall be welcome." Olivier obviously thought it important, and it is. It ironically sends up Claudius by replacing him with a more welcome pretender.

But however little the effect on the particulars of the plot, one still misses the wit and poetry of Shakespeare's words.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern - Branagh '96

In Branagh's production, R&G arrive on a small steam train, evoking their childhood friendship with Hamlet. Almost immediately, they fall into the sort of clever banter they used to indulge in with the witty prince. The setting also seems important. Meeting them outside Elsinore reminds us that they are outsiders to the Court they desperately want to be a part of, but exteriors also give weight to Hamlet's line about being a king of infinite space, and in his black figure against the snow connects Hamlet to the shadowy dream (his unrealized revenge) and the outstretched echo of a hero or monarch who is but a beggar (as he refers to himself soon after). Another reason to place this scene outside is to reveal R&G's duplicity. We have already seen them inside Elsinore, so their surprise "arrival" is a con. When Hamlet tells them their news is not true, it seems at first that he means "the world's grown honest", but it may just as well refer to their entire arrival.

Branagh plays Hamlet as emotional here. As soon as he calls R&G on their untrue news, his eyes start to water, perhaps in anger. He realizes early on that he has been betrayed by childhood friends. This emotion pours out when he confronts them about it. And he does so head on. "I have an eye of you", scripted as an aside, is here a warning. Hamlet in fact uses his emotion to shame them into admitting their connivance with Claudius. He then seems to take them into his confidence, the lie out of the way so to speak, but he may be playing with them. Branagh plays him as sometimes vulnerable, sometimes mad, sometimes angry, giving them knowing, ironic looks. For example, he starts "What a piece of work is a man" while looking at Guildenstern, an edified man he will bring down in the course of the speech. He also looks at each of his friends in turn when he mentions the hawk and the handsaw, playing on the joke that the characters are nearly identical, but also saying that he knows friends from enemies.
For their part, they don't quite know what to make of him, and where Horatio seems to be on the same page as the prince, their interactions are often inappropriate. They are OLD friends in a very real sense (as opposed to LONG-TIME friends). They are only comfortable in nostalgia. They can handle banter and theatrical gossip, but they can't deal with Hamlet's depression or flights of poetry. This culminates in their turning one of the play's key speeches into a gay joke, their chuckling visibly insulting Hamlet. They revert to childhood when interacting with their childhood friend.
The theatrical gossip section is not often played, and Branagh wastes as little time as possible, making the rapid-fire discussion so quick it's hard to really get any meaning out of it. So why is it there (in the text)? It of course tells us something about R&G and Hamlet. Thematically, they're also talking about pretenders. Young actors coming on the scene and stealing the work of more established ones, their worthiness in question. Hamlet relates this to his uncle usurping the throne - and getting the two suck-ups to laugh along with his joke - and condemns "fashion" for elevating both. And then there are the pretenders that are R&G, ironically trying to elevate themselves like the "boys" did. So while Branagh does not necessarily convince us that this section needs to be in play, it does support many of the play's ideas.

II.ii. Rosencrantz & Guildenstern

In the next sequence, Rosencrantz & Guildenstern finally catch up to Hamlet. Though in the guise of old school chums, they are really there at the King's behest to spy on the prince. This does not mean they have to be sinister figures. They may, in fact, have Hamlet's best interest at heart (as does the Queen who first sent for them), but they do find themselves at cross-purposes with Hamlet. It is perhaps telling that their conversation is not in blank verse. Scenes with Horatio, who has a similar relationship with Hamlet on the surface (school friends), are still in verse. Do R&G not rate the heightened language of the Court? Where Hamlet treats Horatio as an equal (and at times, even a better), he talks down to R&G, bringing himself to their level and basically running circles around them. It may be interesting to note that when R&G do speak in verse (to the King and Queen, for example), they do so at their own peril, paranoid and halting in their delivery. This is a world they aspire to, but which is forever out of reach. Hamlet has outgrown them.

The sequence also contains the quotable "What a piece of work is a man" speech. As with the previous sequence, here's a link to a website that offers video comparison between more Hamlets than I'm doing. You can compare yourself. But first, lets look at the text itself, in italics to differentiate it from my own comments:

Enter ROSENCRANTZ and GUILDENSTERN

LORD POLONIUS: You go to seek the Lord Hamlet; there he is.
ROSENCRANTZ: [To POLONIUS] God save you, sir!
Exit POLONIUS

GUILDENSTERN: My honoured lord!
ROSENCRANTZ: My most dear lord!
HAMLET: My excellent good friends! How dost thou, Guildenstern? Ah, Rosencrantz! Good lads, how do ye both?
ROSENCRANTZ: As the indifferent children of the earth.
GUILDENSTERN: Happy, in that we are not over-happy;
On fortune's cap we are not the very button.
HAMLET: Nor the soles of her shoe?
ROSENCRANTZ: Neither, my lord.

This sums up the duo's place in Denmark. They have a tenuous connection to the Royal family, but have not yet managed to rise to inner Court which the aspire to. They'll go on to jealously wonder why Hamlet, who to them, is at the very top of the social scale, feels he is at its bottom.

HAMLET: Then you live about her waist, or in the middle of her favours?
GUILDENSTERN: 'Faith, her privates we.
HAMLET: In the secret parts of fortune? O, most true; she is a strumpet. What's the news?

It amuses me that this coarse joke has been removed from my pocket copy of the play, published for use in the school room. Beyond the joke itself, it is telling that Hamlet considers Fortune to be a whore who raised his murderous uncle to the loftiest position in the land, and in so doing, makes a statement about his own mother who let Claudius climb on top of her. It continues Hamlet's motif of linking adultery and sexual sin to the female principle.

ROSENCRANTZ: None, my lord, but that the world's grown honest.
HAMLET: Then is doomsday near: but your news is not true. Let me question more in particular: what have you, my good friends, deserved at the hands of fortune, that she sends you to prison hither?
GUILDENSTERN: Prison, my lord!
HAMLET: Denmark's a prison.
ROSENCRANTZ: Then is the world one.
HAMLET: A goodly one; in which there are many confines, wards and dungeons, Denmark being one o' the worst.

The reader may well find that this line foreshadows the final fate of R&G, so long as one imagines a short stay in a dungeon before their execution.

ROSENCRANTZ: We think not so, my lord.
HAMLET: Why, then, 'tis none to you; for there is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so: to me it is a prison.
ROSENCRANTZ: Why then, your ambition makes it one; 'tis too narrow for your mind.

I've often found that people ascribe their own motivations to others. Those who act in bad faith assume bad faith on the part of others, and so on. How R&G interpret Hamlet's words tells us more about their own thought process than Hamlet's. They are motivated by ambition; he is not. It does beggar the question as to whether they believe Hamlet should be on the throne by filial right. Are they fishing for answers and testing their own theory for Hamlet's distemper? And if that is their belief, the characters would be trapped between a rock and a hard place trying to please both the pretender King and the would-be King, so as to stay in both's good graces. Their death sentence is signed not by their choosing the wrong side (they don't know they're carrying orders to have Hamlet put to death), but for hedging their bets and not choosing a side at all (except their own).

HAMLET: O God, I could be bounded in a nut shell and count myself a king of infinite space, were it not that I have bad dreams.
GUILDENSTERN: Which dreams indeed are ambition, for the very substance of the ambitious is merely the shadow of a dream.
HAMLET: A dream itself is but a shadow.
ROSENCRANTZ: Truly, and I hold ambition of so airy and light a quality that it is but a shadow's shadow.
HAMLET: Then are our beggars bodies, and our monarchs and outstretched heroes the beggars' shadows. Shall we to the court? for, by my fay, I cannot reason.

One of two connections made between beggars and kings in the play. Hamlet is consistently deflating his own royalty and that of others. It's part of the fatalism of the play - we all return to the earth in the end - as well as a slight to the current King - if he can be king, then anyone can. This particular line mirrors R&G's own ambitions, the shadows/dreams being their own. Hamlet likens them to beggars, which they are. They beg for attention and power.

ROSENCRANTZ GUILDENSTERN: We'll wait upon you.
HAMLET: No such matter: I will not sort you with the rest of my servants, for, to speak to you like an honest man, I am most dreadfully attended. But, in the beaten way of friendship, what make you at Elsinore?
ROSENCRANTZ: To visit you, my lord; no other occasion.
HAMLET: Beggar that I am, I am even poor in thanks; but I thank you: and sure, dear friends, my thanks are too dear a halfpenny. Were you not sent for? Is it your own inclining? Is it a free visitation? Come, deal justly with me: come, come; nay, speak.

Again, Hamlet confuses a Royal for a beggar. In this case, himself. The theme of this sequence will eventually bloom in "What a piece of work is a man" in which Hamlet

GUILDENSTERN: What should we say, my lord?
HAMLET: Why, any thing, but to the purpose. You were sent for; and there is a kind of confession in your looks which your modesties have not craft enough to colour: I know the good king and queen have sent for you.
ROSENCRANTZ: To what end, my lord?
HAMLET: That you must teach me. But let me conjure you, by the rights of our fellowship, by the consonancy of our youth, by the obligation of our ever-preserved love, and by what more dear a better proposer could charge you withal, be even and direct with me, whether you were sent for, or no?
ROSENCRANTZ: [Aside to GUILDENSTERN] What say you?
HAMLET: [Aside] Nay, then, I have an eye of you.--If you love me, hold not off.
GUILDENSTERN: My lord, we were sent for.
HAMLET: I will tell you why; so shall my anticipation prevent your discovery, and your secrecy to the king and queen moult no feather. I have of late--but wherefore I know not--lost all my mirth, forgone all custom of exercises; and indeed it goes so heavily with my disposition that this goodly frame, the earth, seems to me a sterile promontory, this most excellent canopy, the air, look you, this brave o'erhanging firmament, this majestical roof fretted with golden fire, why, it appears no other thing to me than a foul and pestilent congregation of vapours. What a piece of work is a man! how noble in reason! how infinite in faculty! in form and moving how express and admirable! in action how like an angel! in apprehension how like a god! the beauty of the world! the paragon of animals! And yet, to me, what is this quintessence of dust? man delights not me: no, nor woman neither, though by your smiling you seem to say so.
ROSENCRANTZ: My lord, there was no such stuff in my thoughts.
HAMLET: Why did you laugh then, when I said 'man delights not me'?
ROSENCRANTZ: To think, my lord, if you delight not in man, what lenten entertainment the players shall receive from you: we coted them on the way; and hither are they coming, to offer you service.

As part of the various inversions in this section of Scene 2 is the change of tone taking us from Hamlet's sublime and fatalistic speech to R&G laughing at a gay joke. This is another sign that R&G are just on Hamlet's level, intellectually or poetically. It also acts as a bridge for a conversation about Elizabethan theater. Hamlet is very much about a man putting on a play, and from here to the play within a play, it also becomes about theater itself. This section (along with the later speech to the Players) gives us an idea of what Shakespeare's theater was like, but also tells us there was a lot of what he considers bad theater going on. The sequence starts with Hamlet making an ironic comment in the context of his uncle's usurpation of the throne:

HAMLET: He that plays the king shall be welcome; his majesty shall have tribute of me; the adventurous knight shall use his foil and target; the lover shall not sigh gratis; the humourous man shall end his part in peace; the clown shall make those laugh whose lungs are tickled o' the sere; and the lady shall say her mind freely, or the blank verse shall halt for't. What players are they?
ROSENCRANTZ: Even those you were wont to take delight in, the tragedians of the city.
HAMLET: How chances it they travel? their residence, both in reputation and profit, was better both ways.
ROSENCRANTZ`I think their inhibition comes by the means of the late innovation.
HAMLET: Do they hold the same estimation they did when I was in the city? are they so followed?
ROSENCRANTZ: No, indeed, are they not.
HAMLET: How comes it? do they grow rusty?
ROSENCRANTZ: Nay, their endeavour keeps in the wonted pace: but there is, sir, an aery of children, little eyases, that cry out on the top of question, and are most tyrannically clapped for't: these are now the fashion, and so berattle the common stages--so they call them--that many wearing rapiers are afraid of goose-quills and dare scarce come thither.
HAMLET: What, are they children? who maintains 'em? how are they escoted? Will they pursue the quality no longer than they can sing? will they not say afterwards, if they should grow themselves to common players--as it is most like, if their means are no better--their writers do them wrong, to make them exclaim against their own succession?
ROSENCRANTZ: 'Faith, there has been much to do on both sides; and the nation holds it no sin to tarre them to controversy: there was, for a while, no money bid for argument, unless the poet and the player went to cuffs in the question.
HAMLET: Is't possible?
GUILDENSTERN: O, there has been much throwing about of brains.
HAMLET: Do the boys carry it away?
ROSENCRANTZ: Ay, that they do, my lord; Hercules and his load too.
HAMLET: It is not very strange; for mine uncle is king of Denmark, and those that would make mows at him while my father lived, give twenty, forty, fifty, an hundred ducats a-piece for his picture in little. 'Sblood, there is something in this more than natural, if philosophy could find it out.

Are we to understand that Shakespeare, at this point in his career, felt the sting of competition? It's the same today: Things that are popular are not necessarily good art. It's what makes people hide behind the idea that quality is all subjective, when clearly, it is not. At the end of this oft deleted conversation, Hamlet brings things back to his situation, comparing Claudius to bad theater, popular but lacking in quality.

Flourish of trumpets within

GUILDENSTERN: There are the players.
HAMLET: Gentlemen, you are welcome to Elsinore. Your hands, come then: the appurtenance of welcome is fashion and ceremony: let me comply with you in this garb, lest my extent to the players, which, I tell you, must show fairly outward, should more appear like entertainment than yours. You are welcome: but my uncle-father and aunt-mother are deceived.
GUILDENSTERN: In what, my dear lord?
HAMLET: I am but mad north-north-west: when the wind is southerly I know a hawk from a handsaw.

At the very end, Hamlet lets slip something of the truth. It may not be right to say that he lets down his guard exactly, because the comment, at least to R&G's ears, is coded. It is not the only time that Hamlet sounds mad even as he tells us he isn't.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - French Rock Opera

Halliday's Fishmonger Scene does away with Polonius entirely and makes it about Hamlet's reading, and in so doing gives us a reflective, personal song that intersects with various ideas in the play. You can listen to it HERE, and I follow the text with a rough translation.

Je lis
Quand la vie est jolie, jolie, je lis
Quand il fait triste, et il fait gris, je lis
Quand je suis seul dans mon lit, je lis
Quand même les rêves me fuient, je lis
Quand je cherche un coin d’oubli, je lis
Quand j’ai besoin d’un alibi, je lis
Quand on me sonne l'hallali, je lis
Quand je perds le goût de la vie, je lis
Quand je lis, je lis, je lis quoi ?
Des mots…

I read
When life is pretty, pretty, I read
When it is sad, and it is gray, I read
When I'm alone in my bed, I read
When even my dreams desert me, I read
When I look for a forgotten corner, I read
When I need an alibi, I read
When they trumpet the kill, I read
When I lose the taste for life, I read
When I read, I read, I read what?
Words...

The short song has Hamlet reading, rain or shine, homogenizing his life which he will later compare to a prison. Most of the lines speak to his fatalism, undercutting the hopefulness of the first in which the near homonyms jolie (pretty) and je lis (I read) are playfully confused. The song could almost be sung with jolie (pretty) in place of je lis (I read) throughout, extending the irony. Is Ophelia on Hamlet's mind still? Is his loneliness (colored by his reading books, to use Polonius' words in a later scene) making his mind wander from the page to the love of his life? There may lie the contempt one might understand from the "punchline". I'm reminded of the phrase Jonathan Swift wrote on the envelope containing a lock of his dead wife's hair, "Only a woman's hair". The words Hamlet reads are meant to be a refuge, but in no way do they replace the relationships he has broken off. Without the comic context of the Hamlet-Polonius interplay, "words, words, words" takes on some of the meaning behind the "What a rogue and peasant slave am I" speech, in which Hamlet is outraged that he must "unpack his heart with words", or the earlier speech on how his grief cannot be properly contained in "actions that a man might play".

The song reveals a possible staging where "words, words, words" can be pronounced in an aside to take on more personal meaning.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Classics Illustrated

The original
It is difficult to convey the comedy of the scene, and the original Classics Illustrated doesn't even try, though perhaps it was removed to avoid getting into the fishmonger/pimp metaphor. So in this version, Polonius and Claudius conspire to send Ophelia to meet Hamlet, and though the "To be or not to be" speech immediately follows, their plan comes to fruition thereafter.

The Berkley versionTom Mandrake's adaptation retains the sequence, but makes deep cuts into it, ending it before Polonius asks Hamlet what he's reading. This removes much of Hamlet toying with Polonius - and all my favorite lines! This is a largely humorless adaptation, Mandrake's facial expressions and atmosphere better suited to anxiety and anguish. His Hamlet is deadly serious, and his Polonius a sad old man, bewildered and saddened by events. We lose nothing of the plot, of course, and has Rosencrantz & Guildenstern show up earlier, before Polonius can get even more insulted, which in this vision, sometimes seems unduly harsh.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Tennant (2009)

There's a major structural difference at this point in Gregory Doran's version of the play. The Fishmonger scene now occurs after "To be or not to be" and Hamlet's staged encounter with Ophelia. This means that he's already angry at Polonius and his meddling, but also that Claudius has already rejected Polonius' thesis about love-induced madness. It gives Hamlet more reason to toy with Polonius, and in the latter's case, either more reason to try and prove his point or simply a more obvious inability to analyze a situation. The way this is played, I'd say the latter. Placing the scene back to back with the Hamlet-Ophelia sequence also creates some staging opportunities. Claudius is still behind a two-way mirror, and Hamlet sticks his face on the glass, trying to see him there. It also gives Hamlet the opportunity to pick up the book Ophelia was reading, so that Hamlet is turning the staging back on Polonius. The older man, of course, doesn't understand this meeting is just as staged as the previous one.

The structure also asks a question regarding why Hamlet came back to the scene of the crime. He's just thrown Ophelia around and been very cruel to her, and done it in front of the cameras (he knows he's being watched, though not from so near). He leaves, then returns. Why? Is he coming back to comfort Ophelia, having calmed down? Or to take her into his secret? Or is he specifically returning to catch Polonius or even Claudius in the act of mopping up, and to further confuse the conspirators?

Hamlet has a good crazy act going in this sequence, while Polonius makes all his asides directly to camera. This trick can be off-putting, but somehow makes the man more senile. I'm not sure if it's an effect of our knowing actors shouldn't look directly into camera (and so a "mistake" in our minds), but it seems more unhinged than simply staring into the distance and speaking to oneself. The barefoot Hamlet is on his back and has the book sitting squarely on his face by the time Polonius asks him what he's reading. This is a doubly clueless question as 1) it's the book Polonius himself might have given Ophelia to read, and 2) Hamlet is merely covering his eyes with it, not reading. The answer is our first triple repetition, "Words". The first is a plain statement of fact, the second over enunciated (not unlike Branagh's third), and the last is asked as a question, a timid one like "is that the right term?" as if Polonius had shaken Hamlet's faith in his answer.

Good comic timing on the slanders too. With each line, Hamlet pauses to look up and check on their veracity as Polonius gets more and more visibly insulted. The exchange subverts many of the usual stagings by placing Hamlet in a lower physical position to Polonius', but this is ironic. Despite being in a prone position, Hamlet dominates here. He attacks Polonius who, in turn, cannot defend himself, only retreat. Hamlet finally stands up at the end, and has one of only a couple of "Doctorish" moments in the entire performance. When checking on Polonius' "lack of wit", he has an evaluating "well..." moment that is very Doctor Who. On the crab line, he grows distracted and walks away.

"Indeed that is out of the air" is made part of the "pregnant" aside here, which makes Polonius seem even more goofy as he attempts to show the audience how perceptive he is. Which leads us to the second repeated line, "Except my life".
The first is a tense, tragic warning, in earnest. The second shows contempt for that life. In the third, he starts shambling towards Polonius, distorting his face like a monster on a member of Monty Python's Flying Circus. It is a parody of his own feigned madness, taking his act to a ridiculous extreme. Again, Polonius fails to properly gauge the situation and runs off, taking the act for the truth. Hamlet almost screams his "These tedious old fools", exasperated. And yet, Polonius doesn't realize he's being played.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Fodor (2007)

As Polonia speaks to the Royals, Hamlet and Horatio walk in on them (as well as Rosencrantz & Guildenstern). Instead of an intimate conversation between Hamlet and Polonia, it happens in a tightly packed group. This certainly makes Hamlet seem crazier, though the fact that Horatio is also there belies this idea. Hamlet is mocking her (and them all) openly, and Horatio looks on amused. I'm not complaining about Horatio being included in many more scenes, turning her and Hamlet into a cruel double act, but I do wonder about their thinking. If Hamlet is trying to appear insane, then having his best friend as an open accomplice defeats the purpose. Of course, in Fodor's film, all the characters appear insane, so it's possible the distinction is that Hamlet is DANGEROUSLY insane. The Royals might still be able to believe that Horatio humors her friend, but does not realize he's dangerous. Fodor's choices do sometimes tend to create more problems than the problem play already has.

So Hamlet walks in and starts sniffing Polonia, making the fishmonger comment an even ruder proposition than usual (or perhaps restoring that rudeness, since contemporary audiences no longer register it). Fodor plays up the gender change here, for example making Hamlet slap Polonia's bottom on "Friend, look to it". His closeness and varied comments, turned on a woman rather than an old man, gives a threatening sexual charge to the sequence. The implication is that Hamlet threatens his lover's sister with sexual violence. As for the text, the gender is sometimes changed and sometimes isn't. Hamlet says "so honest a woman", but then calls her "sir" and says that "to be honest, as this world goes, is to be one MAN picked out of ten thousand". He even emphasizes it. This does connect to Hamlet's mistrust of the women in his life. He also questions Ophelia's honesty, and of course, feels betrayed by his mother. In other words, one man in 10,000 is honest, but no woman ever is.

Again, a modern staging does away with the book, with "Words, words, words" and with the slanders (which would have had to be completely rewritten since Polonia is not an old man). In this case, we also get only one "except my life", in a mock serious tone following a more clownish answer to Polonia asking to take her leave. Though the characters in the room may be able to dismiss it as mockery - everything else he says and does seems to fall in that category - the audience may infer he's serious because it's already seen the "To be or not to be" speech, recorded on a reel-to-reel in an earlier scene.

Then comes a transition to the next sequence, the child Hamlet dancing and singing in a yellowishly glowing flashback. This lyrical image may represent Hamlet's victory over Polonia in the preceding sequence and the sense of play that informed his behavior. Despite his grief and the revenge that is to come - and this is true in many stagings - Hamlet at this point seems to be having fun with his feigned madness.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Hamlet 2000

This sequence appears before Polonius' talk with the Royals, and so gives it a different spin. In this version of the play, Polonius checks on Hamlet before going to his parents and is the smarter for it, even getting the jump on a startled Hamlet in stark opposition to other portrayals that have Hamlet sneaking up on the older man, on eye over the edge of his book. And of course, there is no book here. Instead, Hamlet is viewing one of his video diaries, one that contains part of the speech that discusses Claudius taking part in the "King's rouse" ("...so oft it chances in particular men..."). Not only does Polonius surprise him, but he has also glimpsed something of Hamlet's true interior monologue. Hamlet is less mad here than angry with himself and trying to cover with feigned madness, throwing Polonius off-track by mentioning his daughter.

The use of the video diary also means we don't get "Words, words, words", sadly, which also means the slanders are absent.

Not for the first time, and a good nine years before the Tennant version, security cameras are used to cover the scene and give the sense of hyper-surveillance that, in Elizabethan drama, is the purview of arrases. Polonius speaks his asides to this camera. Who is watching? Not the King, certainly, because Polonius hasn't yet informed him of his suspicions. His own video diary then, using Elsinore's entire network. Or us, if you want to go postmodern with it.
When he catches up to Hamlet, the prince hides a gun, throwing a shadow over his next line about walking into his grave. Just before the sequence's final repetition, Hamlet pops his head out of the corridor and is himself repeated in the mirrored wall. An image of... a man with two sides to his personality? Or is it that Alice-like, he walks through the looking glass and into a fantasy of his revenge?
Though the first "except my life", as normal, is spoken to Polonius, the next shot has Hamlet repeating the line three times (one more than in the play) as voice-over even as he walks through his uncle's offices with his gun. Shades of the confessional scene that comes later, this time Hamlet cannot do the deed because Claudius isn't there (he's in the pool, upstairs). Hamlet 2000's protagonist appears at that moment quite capable of carrying off his revenge, or is it all fantasy (no one notices or reacts)? The idea is that the more the play progresses, the more time Hamlet has to reflect on his actions, the less he's able to commit murder. A crime of passion is possible for him, but he can't intellectually commit to such an act.

Though the text itself does not feature such a scene, this idea nonetheless runs through the play. Hamlet is, in a way, about morality being an artifact of reason. Where Claudius is able to kill his own brother for passion's sake (the Gertrude defense), Hamlet the university student cannot commit murder once he starts verbalizing his emotions and condition. At the end, he only kills once he's incensed by the sword fight and his mother's murder. Hamlet's killings are done in anger, and though he's intellectualized them a priori, they ARE crimes of passion when they finally occur.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Kline '90

In Kline's version, Polonius skulks around pillars, in and out of sight like a clownish spy. He smiles a lot, sometimes trying to lull Hamlet into a false sense of security, sometimes because he doesn't get the importance of what he's heard. How else to explain his smile when, in an aside, he talks about the "happiness" the prince's madness has hit on. Kline's Hamlet, for his part, does a lot of shouting, but some of his line readings are nonetheless interesting, especially in regards to the accompanying gestures.

When he talks about conception, for example, he blesses Polonius' forehead. Is this meant as an insult? He's just discussed the conception of maggots from carrion, so Polonius may just have been compared to that "fatherly" carrion rather than the Fatherly son. Ophelia has no mother to be that carrion after all, and in the play's structure, has come out of her father whole, just as maggots seemed created from carrion to Medieval eyes.

Hamlet's "Words" are revealed to the clueless Polonius, not as if Hamlet were speaking to a child, but rather to a co-conspirator. He talks to Polonius in his own language, if you will, but mocking that language and the older man's self-importance. On the third "Word", he almost throws the book into Polonius' face, again very tactile and familiar with him. When he talks about the slanders, both characters are sitting on the floor at the same level. One reaches to high, the other mocks him by lowering himself. A mad Hamlet is equal to a supposedly healthy Polonius. The effect is that they both seem out of it in their own way. Hamlet ends that part of the conversation by ripping the offending page out of the book and sticking it to Polonius' anointed forehead. He labels him with those words.
"Except my life" is again a conspiratorial revelation that mocks Polonius' ability to keep a secret. When Polonius stays, despite having just said he was leaving (another failure on his part), Hamlet repeats the line twice, the last in a stage whisper accompanied by a clownish wave of his hand. There is no sense that Kline's Hamlet means it, or at least, that he recognizes his own fatalism here. As soon as Polonius has left, he immediately intones "These tedious old fools!". Amusingly, having heard, Polonius sticks his head in again. Hamlet covers by showing him the book and acting like he was reading from it. Indeed, the line is connected to the earlier slanders. He then goes to sleep on the floor with the book over his head, a visual link to such lines as "the book and volume of my brain". Hamlet has just erased that book and now works on another. The book here played as part of his madness replaces his mind in the short term. We've heard that Hamlet has been walking up and down the lobby reading of late, and this may be an image of an erased man/book, trying to fill himself up with words again, words he unleashes with fury in the rest of the play (to the point of frustration, as the "Rogue and peasant slave" speech indicates).

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Zeffirelli '90

At the end of the previous sequence, mad Hamlet walks into the lobby, ripping pages out of his books and throwing them away, but the fishmonger scene actually occurs in the library. When Polonius walks in, Hamlet climbs to the top of the shelves, underscoring his elevated status (both as a prince and as a character), as Olivier did, throughout the exchange. We also may note here that Hamlet wears only one boot, part of his "disguise" as a madman. Polonius thinks himself clever, picking up a book like he's there only by coincidence, but he never reads much of anything, and that includes Hamlet.

The actors keep the scene light, laughing at misunderstands and word play, though Polonius sobers up when his daughter is mentioned. "Words, words, words" has Hamlet looking through his book as if to check on its contents, then on the final word, confirming this fact to Polonius, and inviting him to climb up the ladder to get closer to him, to his truth. Upon reading the slanders, he rips the dishonest page from the book and throws it, crumpled, at Polonius' head. He follows up, on "go backward", by pushing the ladder back with his foot, causing Polonius to fall.
All of this is playful, if cruel, on the part of both the actors and the director. Polonius scurries off, afraid for his safety, and as he stumbles, Hamlet throws out an almost mocking "except my life". Polonius reaches the door, but stops at another "except...". Will Hamlet say something else? Something more serious? No, as we know, it is again "... my life". And when Polonius is gone, Hamlet realizes that what he said in jest is the truth. The last repetition, softly spoken to himself, reveals how far he is truly willing to go in his quest for revenge. It's a great moment. In a final gesture to punctuate the scene, he drops his book from on high and it hits the floor with a satisfying sound. Though this version of the scene is lighter than others, and the fatalism of some lines underplayed, that fatalism resounds in that final moment.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - BBC '80

Jacobi's Hamlet walks in on Polonius and the Royals, reading and feigning madness. This is very different staging from the usual scurrying away, allowing Hamlet to interact with his parents in this "state". He makes a show of being repulsed by and afraid of his mother, but his furtive looks provide proof that this is an act. His puts a lot into his gestures, for example actively seeing things he mentions as metaphor, pointing to God and to carrion (carrion that shockingly makes him think of asking about Ophelia). This is a character trait he picks up from other places in the play, such as when he makes Polonius look at clouds.

But of course, it's in his interpretation of the words that Jacobi shines most. He gives every line its own nuance. For example, his "God have mercy", usually an annex to his "Well" (i.e. thank the Lord that yes, I am well) becomes a show of exasperation with Polonius. His "Words, words, words" starts out as a strange realization that he is reading words, followed by disgust that that's all they are. Jacobi turns the line into a precursor for Hamlet's distress when he must "unpack his heart with words". For Hamlet, while words are his greatest gift and weapon, they are not enough to express his being - a central irony of the character. Hamlet actively dislikes being bound by his author's words, which is why we often talk about him getting away from Shakespeare.

From moment to moment, Hamlet's attitude may change. At "between who", he becomes conspiratorial, a parody of Polonius' obsession with hyper-surveillance. At "into my grave", where other actors have made the line sarcastic, Jacobi makes his Hamlet feign great fear and anguish, as if he were both misunderstanding Polonius and taking him at his word. He lets out little laughs, lascivious ooohs, and injects comic pauses (for example, when reading the "slanders", as if to confirm the words using Polonius as a template).

"Except my life" becomes a full-blown suicide attempt (again, for show), putting his dagger to his stomach and threatening to push it in.
Polonius' reaction is to quickly walk away, afraid perhaps of being accused of murdering Hamlet, or of pushing him into suicide. As soon as he runs, Hamlet stops this pretense, but it is a dark, cruel joke he revisits more seriously in the "To be or not to be" speech.

II.ii. The Fishmonger Scene - Olivier '48

Olivier's Hamlet is far less loony, his madness manifesting itself as deep depression, or else through his words. In this sequence, he is aloof and superior, speaking to Polonius always from a higher vantage point. Again, the idea of status is presented, and though minor cuts keep Polonius from comparing his love sickness to Hamlet's, there is a sense that this man should not try to match or keep up with the prince. He think he can, early on narrowing his eyes when he believes he has confirmation about his daughter's role in this, but the staging never allows him to win. Polonius is always looking up, and Hamlet down. The slanders are directed entirely at Polonius, Hamlet's eyes never moving to the book. He is in control here. That higher walkway also plays delightfully with the phrase "walk out of the air", as Hamlet seems to walk on it, while Polonius could be seen to be in the grave.

The first aside is done away with in favor of Polonius running back to the Royals, hidden behind a piece of scenery, to deliver his lines to them instead of us. This live report does little to change the scene except to make him look more clownish.

As for the sequence's key repetitions, Olivier chooses to deliver each as part of the same line, in the same tone. "Words, words, words" is one line, not three, and his only flourish is to show the book from afar as proof of what he says.
"Except my life" is spoken thrice as he walks off stage, obvious melancholy in his voice, but with very little variation in his tone. There's lassitude there, that of a character who is tired of life. And while it is theatrical in that he raises his voice so that the audience may hear him, Polonius has already run off. It's not for his sake. Must we assume that here he is finally speaking his true self? That would make cool, collected, aloof Hamlet the act, and depressed Hamlet his true self. Is this Hamlet madder alone than when he plays at being mad?