I.v. Swearing Oaths - Classics Illustrated

The originalThat is all. It's actually surprising that the return of the Ghost isn't included given this adaptations fascination with that supernatural element. There is no conflict between the men that requires ghostly intervention, although the narration is almost oxymoronic. "I won't tell you anything, but I'll swear you to secrecy." And that's the interesting bit, I suppose. Summed up that way, it seems a little absurd, but we do have a scene here in which characters are forced to swear to reveal nothing while also being told nothing. While that's not strictly true, it's not entirely false either.

The Berkley version
The sequence gets the better part of a page, with Hamlet immediately asking his companions to swear. There is no room here for madcap zaniness, and Hamlet seems to remain his same old dour self through the entire first Act. We do not see him change, though he does tell Horatio that he'll affect a madness. In other words, this Hamlet isn't mad or even distraught. His actions will be well planned (presumably). The Ghost appears one last time:
Instead of other the earth, he's above ground. The relevant lines are of course cut. Strangely, though Hamlet proposes the oath, we do not hear the men swear to it. There is a disjointed quality to the comic book form, with things (especially speech) occurring in a single sustained moment within the same panel, and actions and words possibly lost in the space between panels. Sequences can read as a montage in which things must be inferred (mostly movement). As readers of Hamlet, we know the men swear even if that is not depicted here. This is an artifact of the medium (and the difficulties of adaptation) rather than a conscious disjointedness.
At the end, Hamlet and friends go back to Elsinore. As usual, artist Tom Mandrake gives us moody images, though I'm not always sure if they thematically match their scenes. This panel gives the impression of three heroes going boldly into the night. As we know, Hamlet really goes it alone from this point. We have the darkness and uncertainty, but where is Hamlet's isolation and doubt? Again, something may be lost in the frozen moment.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Tennant '09

The camera work in this sequence is handheld, giddy, drunk and mad. The floor seems to tip like the deck of a ship. Hamlet comes towards his friends and walks away from them like the tide itself. This is an incredibly visual way to represent his state of mind. It pulsates with Hamlet's own sanity and with his alternating paranoia/trust with Horatio. There's good reason to believe Tennant's Hamlet has gone mad even beyond the way it is staged and shot. His characterization is very different from the grieving boy of the earlier scenes. He has just cut his hand, turning his oath into an even more serious affair. Is he asking the same from his friends? They never shed blood for their oaths, but they might well have thought Hamlet was going to require it of them. Even when he gets the idea of putting an antic disposition on, it doesn't look like he has far to go.
A good case could be made that this Hamlet is mad, but smart enough to know it. He justifies his present and future actions by turning uncontrollable behaviour into a conscious affectation. PR in Elsinore.

Insane or not, it's not all in his head. The Ghost returns, shaking the ground violently, bells ringing. In the stage play, they used sound effects to shake the seats, and mechanical effects to disturb chandeliers and lanterns. In the film version, simple use of shaky cam accomplishes the same trick, though it's not quite as visceral for the audience. Either way, it is quite clear that the director means for us to believe in the Ghost's reality. This is not anyone's point of view but our own. The two men accompanying Hamlet certainly believe in it and terrified, scream out their oath. Hamlet, for his part, is high on energy of the moment. He would hope Horatio could see things like he does and uses the more inclusive "our philosophy", but the sequence otherwise does little to bring Hamlet and Horatio closer together. They have contrasting attitudes, Hamlet's an alienating one. And once they've sworn, the men run out as Hamlet stays behind to say his final couplet to camera. The very last line is omitted. It would certainly have cemented Hamlet's madness for the audience.

A note on "There are more things..." from the director in the audio commentary: He rightly reminds us that this line also stands as an invitation to the audience to accept the weirdness of the play. There are politics and there is family drama, but there is also the supernatural and the more we dig into the play, problems and ambiguities. Shakespeare tells us, through this line, to trust him and go along with him on the journey. I accepted a long time ago.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Fodor '07

In this version, Hamlet encounters the Ghost is a sort of waking dream. Horatio (the only one on guard duty with him) startles him out of it. He is confused and paranoid, as people sometimes are when awakened from an intense dream. The actor even fluffs his lines a little. It's important to remember that though she seems to accept the fact that the Ghost was communicating with Hamlet there, she didn't see it. So she really doesn't understand why he's so panicked, nor why he suddenly doesn't trust her to keep his secrets. In turn, this lack of understanding from his best friend makes him angry.

There is a nasty cut from "'faith heartily" to "this is wondrous strange", making it about his behavior rather than the Ghost. At which Hamlet lashes out. He snaps at her, using "YOUR philosophy" as an accusation. He's drawn a line in the sand and pushed her to the other side. Making Horatio a woman allows for a certain additional mirroring with Ophelia, which he also pushes away at the start of the next Act. What follows is an awkward moment. He visibly regrets what he's said, and she is hurt by the comment. There is definitely a certain degree of romantic tension between the two of them (which I won't claim ISN'T there when the characters are both male).
We then move on to the swearing, which he proposes as a sort of apology. He means to draw his friend back into his confidence, but gives his conditions, not just to show how important it is, but because he knows her. This is the first time I've gotten the sense that the description of "ambiguous giving out" refers specifically to Horatio (and Marcellus, if present). If Hamlet knows these men (and this woman, in this version) as well as it seems, wouldn't he use their own tics in that description? Horatio's characterization as a mistress of irony and sarcasm in this film could well come from these lines. Hamlet not only tells her not to cross her arms and shaking her head, he catches her doing it! The turns of phrase he forbids her may well be the ones she tends to use. This Horatio is so noncommittal, Hamlet must earnestly force her to commit.

At the end of the scene (which omits the rhyming couplet), the voice of the Ghost tells her to swear, she reacts, and we fade to black on that spooky moment. The ambiguity of the Ghost's reality is restored.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Hamlet 2000

Hamlet 2000 moves lines around frequently, and in this case, prefaces this section with its actual end lines. The rhyming couplet is spoken over a video montage (presumably one of Hamlet's art films) of people and the city, resolving into the "real" world of the play, the Denmark corporation logo (above). The Ghost is still present, out on a nearby balcony, smoking a cigarette.
As you can see, it's nowhere near morning, so the line about time being out of joint is used here as a preface to that strangeness. Hamlet's friends walk in and see the Ghost there, witnessing not Hamlet's madness, but the Ghost itself. This is an important cut. Hamlet does not appear mad, nor does he warn his friends that he might start acting strangely (at least, not yet). There is no swearing, possibly as his friends are unlikely to tattle on him, and the Ghost does not ask them to. Most of the sequence is thus cut and Horatio jumps right to "this is wondrous strange". Hamlet tells him to "give HIM welcome", a notable change (from "it") showing that he is more accepting of the Ghost's identity. This is his father and not some evil spirit. The character's tangibility goes in the same direction.

Speaking of single words, this Hamlet uses the more inclusive "our philosophy", being just as mystified as Horatio is that the supernatural is real. The cumulative effect of this scene is to create a world where the younger characters are loyal to each other without needing to swear oaths. It is an accepted principle that they won't be talking to Hamlet's parents, the adults who have sold themselves out for money and power. These are two distinct and never overlapping worlds. It will make the betrayal of Guildenstern and Rosencrantz all the more unforgivable.

With couplet come and gone, Hamlet ends the Act on another voice-over line, this one pulled from earlier in the scene (and in the previous sequence from the perspective of these articles): "My fate cries out." Instead of referring to the impulse to follow the Ghost, it now refers to his call to arms against his uncle. It works, as indeed, the original use of the line ultimately invokes that same mission, though Hamlet does not know it.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Kline '90

Kline's version is staged like a play, but that sometimes puts its staging closer to the theatre. At the end of the previous sequence, it is customary for Hamlet to collapse. Kline goes up on structures and lets himself fall back into the void... and into the arms of Horatio and the soldiers (yes, here too, both soldiers appear). A common drama class trust exercise used to good effect as Hamlet falls from the supernatural world of the Ghost and into the embrace of the living world.Kline gives an unironic reading to the word "wonderful" when Horatio asks what news. I'd never really thought about Hamlet's answer, perhaps because it was always thrown glibly and quickly as part of the prince's mad speeches. Here, Hamlet wakes up as if from a dream and answers more honestly. We know the news is pretty far from wonderful, unless he means "filled with wonder", which would be warranted from a brush with the afterlife. We might wonder ourselves if Hamlet actually sees the prospect of getting to kill his uncle as something positive, or if this emotional inversion is an early clue to his madness. In the early part of this sequence, Hamlet does indeed seem mad. His moods change, he sweats profusely and seems deranged. There's even a sense that his friends don't hear the Ghost's voice at first, though there is a reaction the next time it does.

Perhaps we should look at the concept of the Royal Body as an explanation. The King is dead and Denmark grows cold. The new King has broken rightful succession, which relates to time being out of joint and the temporal strangeness of the play. But if Hamlet is the rightful, bypassed, King, should he not also relate to the State? The solution to the problem of the Ghost and Hamlet's madness (is there a Ghost or is he mad?) may be that Hamlet's grief and madness are spreading a new reality in the land. He misses his father so strongly, that his grief manifests as an apparition others can see. In this scene as played, it's like this imposed reality (born of the King-State connection) catches up to the group slightly late. Hamlet imagines it and so it becomes real. But that's as maybe.

An interesting touch from Kline is to include the soldiers at least as much as Horatio. He speaks his lines to one, then the others, keeping up with the giddy energy of the scene. The swearing is done without a sword, upon the ground from which the voice sprang, invoking how the stage play should feel.
As the voice moves, they shift their ground to that place and swear again. On the stage, the audience would be aware of that movement under the floorboards and be caught up in the chase. This is lost on television, but stage directors should do well to remember to play this out if they can. As the oaths proceed, Hamlet gets more and more stable, though the men with him seem amply worried. When he breaks with them to speak his rhyming couplet, as if coming to a sudden and almost cosmic awareness of the state of reality, they hear it all and don't know how to respond. Sometimes he's with them, and sometimes he isn't, and perhaps it's fitting that he would specify they should go in together. In his current state, just being present does not always mean he is "with" them.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Zeffirelli '90

Zeffirelli continues to frustrate with important cuts to the lines, which makes it at times difficult to glean some new understanding of the play from his version. As in the Olivier version, there are three men accompanying Hamlet on this journey into the supernatural, and the prince seems ready to tell them what's going on. The bird call seems an earnest invitation to learn the secret. Hamlet quickly changes his mind, fearing they will reveal it, though Gibson doesn't really play the next lines as obfuscation. He's matter of fact when he talks about the errant knave and it's only Horatio's frustration that turns it into a dodge. Hamlet makes sense to himself, but his words don't carry any meaning to his friends who are out of the loop.
Regarding the swearing, the Ghost's voice comes from above, as per its location in the previous sequence, motivating the cut of any line to the contrary. As day breaks, there's no reason it couldn't have returned to the ground, but in this version, the Ghost of woefully unambiguous. There is never any real indication that it might be an evil tempter or in any way dangerous. Making the voice from above makes it heavenly rather than hellish, and removing Hamlet's subsequent mockeries insures a son's respect. They run off to swear on more removed ground, leaving the walls of Elsinore and going outside where it is now light.
Hamlet is exhilarated by this point. The staging makes this new morning an entry into a new world, although one of light rather than darkness. It does not portentously foretell the tragedy to come. I'd call it ironic if it wasn't so wet and overcast. As is, the director's intent isn't clear. Horatio drops to his knees in fear, and the giddy Hamlet has cause to chide him about his philosophy ("your" is used). Gibson doesn't let us in on when he decided to act crazy, which is a shame. There's just not enough insanity in the sequence to warrant his getting the idea from his own behavior. The idea comes out of nowhere.

I feel the next cut most strongly. In this version, Hamlet ends the Act with the rhyming couplet, but does not preface or follow it with an invitation to go in. There's almost a sense that he speaks the couplet to the camera and that we are in a soliloquy-type space at that moment, but that's uncertain. I suppose Horatio and the soldiers hear him, though again, they have little context to make sense of it. By not looking to draw his friends back in - and perhaps he didn't ostracize them enough to warrant such a gesture, which is a problem in and of itself - he makes them unimportant. The cumulative effect of Act I's cuts is to turn these characters into ciphers. Zeffirelli might as well have cut them entirely from the film for all the importance they seem to have for Hamlet. Perhaps someone should stage a Hamlet where Horatio and Marcellus are ghosts themselves. Cut Scene I and it's rather doable. And then you have the whole of hell scheming against the prince of Denmark.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - BBC '80

Jacobi's Hamlet puts that "antic disposition" on very early in the play, and one could easily say that this is a mad Hamlet, not a pretending Hamlet. However, Hamlet is self-aware enough to know that he is touched with insanity (or has consciously given in to it in order to rebuild himself for his mission), so he can say he'll act mad, knowing full well he IS mad. Characters who lie to each other breed ambiguity.

The sequence starts with Hamlet's "Hillo, ho, ho, boy! come, bird, come" played as an actual bird call, immediately setting the tone for the "wild and whirling" nature of his discourse through the rest of the scene. As usual for Jacobi, the character is mercurial and can change tone on a dime, making something different of each line. Though mostly manic through the scene, he comes close to tears when he invokes his "businesses and desires". His grief comes in waves (as I can confirm such things do), usually upon any reminder of his father's death. The Ghost's voice coming from the earth is another such moment. Though the words are mocking ("old mole", "truepenny", and all that), Hamlet is on the verge of breaking down while uttering them. This Hamlet has adopted a "mad speech", but some of his emotions cannot be hidden.

Though he seems lost in his own world, Hamlet shows he is nonetheless alert when he overhears Horatio's "This is wondrous strange" from afar. He says "in your philosophy" in this version, but there's enough tenderness between the two of them that we don't necessarily feel that Hamlet is ostracizing Horatio. Instead, the old school friend seems to be the only person Hamlet is close to (he makes an effort to include Marcellus in "scholars and soldiers", so Horation must already be included). Horatio is so astonished by his friend's turn that he may feel like a complete outsider. He is indeed a stranger to this, where Hamlet is not, and so there is a divide between the characters, though not one Hamlet consciously creates. There is a certain obliviousness to Hamlet in Jacobi's performance that makes us believe he really has gone crazy.
In the Act's final moments, Jacobi throws in an unscripted moment to motivate the "let's go together" repetition. After his rhyming couplet, and as the other men are walking away from him, they stop and look back, as if doubting his sanity. Hamlet looks to them then makes like he sees the Ghost again. They look in that direction and there is nothing, and Hamlet giggles wickedly at them, like a child who has just pranked his friends. "Nay" here becomes a "no, no, I'm just joking". He has shown them what he means by putting an antic disposition on, but has he convinced them that it IS a put-on? This Hamlet is so wild that Horatio and Marcellus may be more motivated by fear than trust.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Olivier '48

There are a number of strange choices made here in the Olivier version, including cutting most of the Ghost's part under the floorboards. But I'm getting ahead of myself.

First, you'll note that Hamlet must force three men to swear, not just two. Horatio and Marcellus and joined by Bernardo who was, after all, present when they went to tell the Prince about the Ghost. Since Bernardo wasn't as trusted a confidant as the others (as infered from the text of Scene 2 itself), it means this Hamlet is even more careful about what he tells them. Olivier makes it very clear that Hamlet was about to tell them the whole story when he caught himself and went for "but he's an errant knave"). There's a long pause of realization there. Though he is distracted and evasive, I wouldn't go so far as to say Olivier's Hamlet becomes manic. The madness is definitely underplayed, leaving the crafting of an "antic disposition" for later. Which makes other choices a bit bizarre.

As the conversation progresses, the characters keep going down from platform to platform, a fine opportunity to signal a descent into madness. That Hamlet doesn't quite give in to it seems a missed opportunity. The move might also have helped motivate the Ghost's voice coming from the ground. Hamlet is initially too high up to do the whole "worthy mole" speech. However, in this version, the Ghost does not manifest itself before the incredulous men, so all of that is cut out. In this version, Horatio "this is wondrous strange" doesn't apply to the Ghost, but to Hamlet's insistence that they swear a second time. If reacting to Hamlet's madness, we're again left to wonder if Hamlet is acting strangely enough to warrant that reaction.
Only when they lay their hands on the sword does the Ghost let out the whisper of a "Swear!!!", accompanied by the trademark heartbeat sound effect. No reaction shot from the three men is edited in, so it might all be in Hamlet's head. If the trio hadn't seen the Ghost in Scenes 1 and 4, there would be no evidence of the spirit's reality and we'd have a completely mad Hamlet. We may still, and though a spirit walked the halls of Elsinore, perhaps their conversation was a fiction. And yet, Olivier is entirely too subtle about Hamlet's madness if indeed he suffers from it.

Time to bring Horatio closer as a confident. The twin lines about leaving the stage are used here to send the soldiers off first. Hamlet then has his asides in front of Horatio. He's including him more than the others into his secret (this despite earlier using "your philosophy", which distances him from Hamlet). When the final line says "let's go together" a second time, it's now for the loitering Horatio. Splitting the group off, though flying ignoring Shakespeare's stage directions, is well motivated by the text itself. Hamlet is last to leave, taking a look back at the tower where he met the Ghost, perhaps nostalgically looking back at the life he leaves behind.

I.v. Swearing Oaths - Branagh '96

As soon as Horatio and Marcellus come running up, Hamlet goes from quiet to completely hysterical, voice almost comically breaking. Does this mean he's already feigning madness? Well, yes and no. Based on the performance alone, you might think so. Hamlet has just learned about a terrible betrayal from his uncle and mother. It's turned his world upside down, and in the opening moments of this sequence, would not know if he can trust his old friends anymore. Certainly, even if they're not working against him, he wonders if he can trust them with his secrets. The story is so extraordinary that it would be hard for almost anyone not to want to tell it. And so he tries to dismiss them by appearing a little crazy (Horatio did bring it up earlier as a possible effect of talking to the Ghost) and evading their questions. On the commentary track, Branagh describes Hamlet's state of mind as hysteria. He is trying to process the new information and just can't talk about it now. They can't know it's that much of a shocker, so they push him. So Hamlet's mind is rushing (with swirling camera shots of trees to help his POV come across) and he's acting crazy, genuinely, but it's not meant to be taken as if he's falling into madness.

Horatio is soon impatient with him. In their friendship, there's no call for such evasions. Again, he does not realize how big the revelation was. Hamlet's not trying to destroy his friendships, he just needs more time. Once he realizes that they won't let him off without an explanation, he does start giving hints that things aren't right, but as I noted in the last article, he does not reveal anything about the murder here. Horatio is in the know later, so we must assume he had the conversation offstage. At this point, he's trying desperately not to include them, both to make sure they don't blow his secret and to spare them the weight of it. When Horatio mentions offense, he can't hold it in anymore. He sincerely doesn't want to offend Horatio, but is also incredibly offended himself by what the Ghost has told him.

The cat's out of the bag. He doesn't tell all, but will (we just don't need another expository scene at this point). That's why we have the swearing. And neither Horatio nor Marcellus realize how serious it is (quickly sick of this swearing business) until the Ghost once more intervenes with its big, bellowy "SWEAR!", the earth cracking and exploding with smoke, fire and shaking trees. They get a little touch of hell, and if loyalty doesn't keep them silent, fear will.
Hamlet calms down when the Ghost finally leaves. Is there a link between the spirit's presence and Hamlet's mania? Is the swearing cathartic in some way? Is there comfort in the sharing of the secret or the knowledge that one is not mad because the vision has been shared? Or is it simply that once they've sworn, he can show his true face, with no added ambiguity?

Though Horatio planted the seed of feigning madness in Hamlet's mind in the previous scene, the plan to put on an "antic disposition" is probably born even as the prince says those very words. He has seen his friends' reaction to his temporary bout of mania and seen that he could use such behavior as a smokescreen for his revenge activities. Though he proposes to con all of Elsinore, he will have two allies who know the truth (one of which is not seen again). In the closing moments of the Act, Hamlet repairs his friendships with them. "Let's go together" evokes a partnership between the three holders of the secret. Note also the inclusiveness of Hamlet's "in OUR philosophy" where versions of the play use "in YOUR philosophy". In this adaptation, Hamlet and Horatio have a very tight bond, and in this line choice, are made closer still. They have the same kind of education, the same opinions and thought process. Hamlet chooses not to exclude his friends, and the most cynical of us could say he's trying to ensure loyalty, manipulating them. In this version of the play, at least, Hamlet genuinely cares for them and keeps them close without ulterior motives.

I.v. Swearing Oaths

The Act will end with a swearing ritual, forcing Hamlet's friends not to reveal what they know of the Ghost's appearance, even as the prince takes on the appearance (whether feigned or not) of a madman. For the play's directors, one of the challenges is the representation of the Ghost moving and speaking from under the stage (meant to represent hell). In a stage presentation, the audience might be aware of the fact the sound comes from the floor, but watching film versions on a television doesn't quite allow for it. Special effects may come in handy, but many choose to simply use voice-over and let Hamlet's words and actions infer that it is coming from the ground. Directors and actors will also have to decide what to make of Hamlet's "wild and whirling words". Is he starting to go mad, or crafting an improvised performance before his friends' eyes (and ours)? One thing is certain. Regardless of whether or not Hamlet is mad or not after seeing the Ghost, the latter must exist. We're reminded once again that Hamlet is not the only one who sees and hears it.

Let's delve deeper into the text itself (in italics):

MARCELLUS HORATIO: [Within] My lord, my lord,--
MARCELLUS: [Within] Lord Hamlet,--
HORATIO: [Within] Heaven secure him!
HAMLET: So be it!
HORATIO: [Within] Hillo, ho, ho, my lord!
HAMLET: Hillo, ho, ho, boy! come, bird, come.

Enter HORATIO and MARCELLUS
MARCELLUS: How is't, my noble lord?
HORATIO: What news, my lord?
HAMLET: O, wonderful!
HORATIO: Good my lord, tell it.
HAMLET: No; you'll reveal it.
HORATIO: Not I, my lord, by heaven.
MARCELLUS: Nor I, my lord.
HAMLET: How say you, then; would heart of man once think it?
But you'll be secret?
HORATIO MARCELLUS: Ay, by heaven, my lord.
HAMLET: There's ne'er a villain dwelling in all Denmark
But he's an arrant knave.

I've always felt that there was an ambiguity to these lines. Is the knavish villain Claudius? Or it is Hamlet himself? The Ghost has, in a way, created a new villain in Denmark. Part of why Hamlet delays the murder of his uncle is that (and we've often spoken of his puritanism) murder is a sin. Though he was quick to swear revenge, the whole of the play has Hamlet working out how he can commit such an act (and abase himself to the level of Claudius - smiling and being a villain) in spite of his conscience. Even if we do not subscribe to Hamlet actually being mad, there is a dramatic insanity at work where a character cannot reconcile who he is and what he must do. This is dramatized further in the swearing ritual that is to come.

HORATIO: There needs no ghost, my lord, come from the grave
To tell us this.
HAMLET: Why, right; you are i' the right;
And so, without more circumstance at all,
I hold it fit that we shake hands and part:
You, as your business and desire shall point you;
For every man has business and desire,
Such as it is; and for mine own poor part,
Look you, I'll go pray.

Hamlet tries to protect his friends from what he is to become, but they will not allow him to leave without more explanation. It is significant that Hamlet talks about praying here, but pray to what?

HORATIO: These are but wild and whirling words, my lord.
HAMLET: I'm sorry they offend you, heartily;
Yes, 'faith heartily.
HORATIO: There's no offence, my lord.
HAMLET: Yes, by Saint Patrick, but there is, Horatio,
And much offence too. Touching this vision here,
It is an honest ghost, that let me tell you:

Hamlet at least believes the tale of murder (because it fits his own feelings towards Claudius), but the strange, indecorous way he treats the Ghost in the next lines indicates he does not necessarily trust the Ghost's motives. Hamlet knows that by the action he has sworn to, he has damned his soul. The Ghost is at once his father's spirit AND a goblin damned.

For your desire to know what is between us,
O'ermaster 't as you may. And now, good friends,
As you are friends, scholars and soldiers,
Give me one poor request.
HORATIO: What is't, my lord? we will.
HAMLET: Never make known what you have seen to-night.
HORATIO MARCELLUS: My lord, we will not.
HAMLET: Nay, but swear't.
HORATIO: In faith,
My lord, not I.
MARCELLUS: Nor I, my lord, in faith.
HAMLET: Upon my sword.
MARCELLUS: We have sworn, my lord, already.
HAMLET: Indeed, upon my sword, indeed.
GHOST: [Beneath] Swear.
HAMLET: Ah, ha, boy! say'st thou so? art thou there,
truepenny?

As soon as the Ghost makes its voice known and forces Horatio and Marcellus to swear to silence, Hamlet puts its honesty in doubt, calling it "boy" and ironically, "truepenny". Later it is a "fellow in the cellarage", and an "old mole". Hamlet (and the staging) treats the Ghost as the Devil, and the swearing ritual thus becomes a kind of pact with the Devil. Hamlet is to lose his soul in this (compare to Horatio's invocation of angels upon the prince's death). What we're seeing is a kind of Satanic ritual that pledges Hamlet's life to the underworld.

Come on--you hear this fellow in the cellarage--
Consent to swear.
HORATIO: Propose the oath, my lord.
HAMLET: Never to speak of this that you have seen,
Swear by my sword.
GHOST: [Beneath] Swear.
HAMLET: Hic et ubique? then we'll shift our ground.
Come hither, gentlemen,
And lay your hands again upon my sword:
Never to speak of this that you have heard,
Swear by my sword.
GHOST: [Beneath] Swear.
HAMLET: Well said, old mole! canst work i' the earth so fast?
A worthy pioner! Once more remove, good friends.
HORATIO: O day and night, but this is wondrous strange!
HAMLET: And therefore as a stranger give it welcome.
There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy. But come;

Some directors prefer "in our philosophy". I've come across both wordings, and we'll have occasion to discuss what difference this makes as we tackle the different adaptations. Horatio is here called a "stranger", which goes with his ignorance of Danish custom in the previous scene. Of course, all of Denmark has now become an alien land, one in which the supernatural is very real, shaking the foundations of Horatio's educated philosophy which denies superstition.

Here, as before, never, so help you mercy,
How strange or odd soe'er I bear myself,
As I perchance hereafter shall think meet
To put an antic disposition on,

Does Hamlet tell them his plan to put on a crazy act, or does he warn them that he's going mad?

That you, at such times seeing me, never shall,
With arms encumber'd thus, or this headshake,
Or by pronouncing of some doubtful phrase,
As 'Well, well, we know,' or 'We could, an if we would,'
Or 'If we list to speak,' or 'There be, an if they might,'
Or such ambiguous giving out, to note
That you know aught of me: this not to do,

It sometimes seems like the play has also sworn this, and will not give a definitive answer. Horatio and Marcellus swear not to tell us the truth of Hamlet (and it's clear that Horatio is told a lot more than what is said in this scene), and so we never really do. If the play is Horatio's telling of it at the very end, there are still missing pieces. He hasn't been freed from his pledge entirely.

So grace and mercy at your most need help you, Swear.
GHOST: [Beneath] Swear.
HAMLET: Rest, rest, perturbed spirit!

They swear.

So, gentlemen,
With all my love I do commend me to you:
And what so poor a man as Hamlet is
May do, to express his love and friending to you,
God willing, shall not lack. Let us go in together;
And still your fingers on your lips, I pray.
The time is out of joint: O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!
Nay, come, let's go together.

Exeunt

In the act's final rhyming couplet, Hamlet fully realizes he is doomed. Time is so out of joint that another line follows the couplet, which breaks Shakespeare's usual form. The next batch of articles will look at how this sequence was adapted for the screen.

I.v. The Ghost's Tale - French Rock Opera

Johnny Hallyday covers this sequence with not one, but three entire songs. Prière du spectre à Hamlet (The Ghost Prays Hamlet) has the Ghost asking Hamlet to avenge him. Roi vivant (Living King) represents the bulk of the Ghost's story. And J'effacerai de ma mémoire (I Will Erase From my Memory) deals with Hamlet swearing to avenge his father. Each title is linked to the song on you-tube for your listening pleasure. As usual, the full text of each song and its pedestrian translation (for clarity's and not art's sake) follow:

Prière du spectre à Hamlet
Une ombre qui venait de l’ombre
Une ombre noire, une ombre sombre
Une ombre a crié, «oh, venge-moi»
Une ombre qui apparaissait de l’ombre
D’un roi du royaume des ombres
Une ombre a crié «oh, venge-moi»
Une ombre qui sortait de terre
Une ombre en forme de mon père
Une ombre a crié «oh, venge-moi»

The Ghost Prays Hamlet
A shadow that came out of shadow
A black shadow, a somber shadow
A shadow cried "O, avenge me!"
A shadow that appeared from shadow
Of a king of the realm of shadows
A shadow cried "O, avenge me!"
A shadow that came out of the earth
A shadow in the shape of my father
A shadow cried "O, avenge me!"

The song starts out as the "Le vieux roi est mort/The Old King Is Dead" dirge, but as soon as Hallyday starts singing, a blues-pop feel comes in to thwart expectations. The song describes the Ghost as a shadow, dark and hellish. Only in the last couples lines is it revealed to be the father of Hamlet, and even there, Hallyday doesn't let go of the Ghost's ambiguity. It is a shadow in the SHAPE of his father, which doesn't make it his actual father. As with Hamlet's questioning of Horatio's story in Scene 2, the Ghost is required to convince the doubting Hamlet. In the play, by giving the details of his murder; in the rock opera, with another song.

In fact, Roi vivant, though on a separate track with its own title, musically just continues straight from Prière, the last note of one covering the starting piano riffs. It sounds like another movement of the same piece, with backup singers coming in with their part, and indeed it is. It's all the same scene.

Roi vivant
Pars pas, il veut savoir
Pars pas, oui ton histoire
Pars pas, il veut te voir
"Sur mon coeur de roi dormant
Ils ont posé un serpent
Dans ma vie de roi vivant
Il a planté ses crocs blanc
Et mon coeur de roi dormant
N’a plus été coeur battant
Roi vivant, roi dormant
Roi mourant, roi d'antan

Living King
Don't go, he wants to know
Don't go, yes your story
Don't go, he wants to see you
"On my sleeping king's heart
They put a snake
In my living king's life
It planted its white fangs
And my sleeping king's heart
Was no longer a beating heart"
Living king, sleeping king
Dying king, king of old

The first tree lines are sung by the chorus, outside voices commenting on the action (where most songs are in Hamlet's voice). They ask the Ghost to stay and tell his story, a different take on "I will not go further" that turns it into Hamlet's first "test" of the Ghost's agenda. Hamlet takes noting at face value, and here doubts his father(?)'s words. He needs proof in the form of details. Do these details ring true? An interesting thing that's done in these opening lines is that "Pars pas" (Don't go) sounds a lot like "Papa", calling out to the father through the sounds of the words.

The section in quotation marks is spoken, rather than sung, in the Ghost's voice. The music evokes courtly medieval music, and so the past. It tells the story of the murder, but does not reveal the murderer's identity. Either the audience's knowledge of the play is taken for granted or it becomes more of a murder mystery (not that there are many suspects other than Claudius, seeing as the songs uniformly look down on him). Possibly, had the rock opera been successfully staged, the action on stage would have made it clear. The poison is represented by a snake, continuing the Garden of Eden metaphor from the play ("oh what a falling off was there"), with a strong play on the epithets, each one used as a punchy reveal (in French coming after the noun). The practice continues in the next section as acoustic guitar riffs and the chorus take over. Those last lines take Hamlet Sr. from living king to forgotten king in four short phrases, then repeat them in a fade, cycling towards an actual end and sending the Ghost back into shadow.

J'effacerai de ma mémoire
J’effacerai de ma mémoire
Tout mes souvenirs d’enfant
Depuis couper le cordon
Jusqu’à ma première dent

J’effacerai de ma mémoire
Mes souvenirs de jeunesse
Depuis mes derniers boutons
Jusqu’à ma première caresse

J’effacerai de ma memoire
Depuis mon premier jour
Jusqu’à la nuit qui vient
Et dans le livre de mon histoire
Les pages deviendront blanches
Du début jusqu’au mot fin

J’effacerai de ma mémoire
Tous me souvenirs d’amour
Depuis mon dernier « je t ‘aime »
Jusqu’à mon premier « toujours »

J’effacerai de ma mémoire
Tous mes souvenirs d’hier
Depuis mon premier poême
Jusqu’à ma dernière guerre

J’effacerai de ma memoire
Mes souvenirs de demain
Et ma tête se videra
Je serai fou, enfin

J’effacerai même ma mémoire
Et le néant s’ouvrira
Mais je ne t’oublierai pas
J’y plongerai avec toi

I Will Erase From my Memory
I will erase from my memory
All my memories of childhood
From the cutting of the cord
To my first tooth

I will erase from my memory
All my memories of youth
From my last pimples
To my first caress

I will erase from my memory
From my first day
To the night that comes
And in the book of my history
The pages will become white
From the beginning to the word end

I will erase from my memory
All my memories of love
From my last "I love you"
To my first "always"

I will erase from my memory
All my memories of yesterday
From my first poem
To my last war

I will erase from my memory
All my memories of tomorrow
And my head will empty itself
I will be mad, finally

I will erase from my memory
And the void will open
But I won't forget you
I will dive into it with you

Hallyday takes the table of memory metaphor and runs with it. Though in the play, Hamlet enumerates what he erases from his memory to make room for his revenge, Hallyday gets more specific, in a way that only the ballad form can. He erases his childhood, then his youth, and so on, until he's actually erasing his future, dooming himself. He has no future except as an instrument of his father's revenge (of course, we know he's not able to respect that promise). In the last stanza, he jumps into the void to join with his father, making their "missions" one and the same by osmosis. This mirrors what is usually done in the play, with Hamlet collapsing at the end of the sequence. The empty space he has created in his mind is akin to the empty space under the earth where his father is doomed to walk (at the very least empty of God's love, in Christian cosmology). The next time we see Hamlet in the rock opera, he will have gone mad, as heralded here. Hallyday leaves little room for ambiguity on that point.

I.v. The Ghost's Tale - Classics Illustrated

The original
With its "for boys" fixation, the original Classics Illustrated adaptation gives over almost two pages to the Ghost's meeting with Hamlet, removing entirely the prince's lines at the end when he is alone. The flashback to the murder does include an interesting component we haven't seen elsewhere: How the Queen learned of her husband's death.For the sake of efficiency (and these comics are very compressed and efficient), she sees the body and Claudius is lurking in the background. This puts the brother and the queen in the line (as well as life and a crown) in the same tableau. Though the comic doesn't dwell on psychological verisimilitude, we might wonder what kind of impact this discovery would have on Gertrude. Indeed, part of why she is considered to be underwritten is that she never really talks about Hamlet Sr. except to tell Hamlet to forget about him. If events were as pictured here, we might justify this omission by saying she is in denial, keeping that image out of her mind, even refusing to bring it up. Either way, she has HAD to move on for the good of the State and may be pragmatic where Hamlet is sentimental.

With Hamlet's subsequent speech cut, we have no way to know if he has fallen into madness, or even if he has sworn to avenge his father's murder. Such things will, one surmises, be revealed visually later.

The Berkley version
In the more modern, painted version, the Ghost leads Hamlet to an elevated blasted wood, not unlike the hellish forest of Branagh's Hamlet.
Note the way the Ghost's speech is represented, with letters that do not follow a straight line and shaky speech bubbles with chaotic contours. We might imagine this iconography makes the Ghost's voice echo in an unearthly way. Artist Tom Mandrake makes good use of lettering later as well when he has Hamlet whisper certain lines thanks to smaller script. "O my prophetic soul", for example, is spoken under his breath, denoting a sudden realization. His beard streaks away as if part and parcel of the fog, something Mandrake uses strikingly in the body of the speech.
There is no flashback sequence here. Mandrake instead gives us the figure of the Ghost posing with his sword. Is he offering an avenging blade to Hamlet? Threatening him with it? Visually recreating the "serpent's sting"? Usually, Hamlet has the sword and swears by it. By holding the sword in this scene, the Ghost more firmly contrasts its action with Hamlet's inaction. Or you could say that while the Ghost is mentally able to take revenge, it is not physically able to. For Hamlet, it turns out to be the reverse.

Two other things of note: First, this is another instance of Hamlet stealing the "O horrible" line. Second, the speech ends early, and the Ghost does not scent the morning air. More importantly, he does not admonish Hamlet to leave his mother alone. So in this version of the story, when Hamlet is bitter and cruel towards his mother, he's not ignoring his father's edict. The very next line, indeed, attacks Gertrude.
Though the words are cut, Hamlet still "couples hell", a very wet one by the looks of things. The rank garden is a filthy swamp, and there Hamlet sees his uncle. I don't think we have a fouler hell-coupling image in any other adaptation. Hamlet really gets down and dirty.

I.v. The Ghost's Tale - The Banquet

Because it doesn't use the integral text (or even all of the plot) ot Shakespeare's original, I do not return to China's The Banquet very often, but some of its staging does at times deserve mention. Such is the case with the completely visual way Hamlet gets his mission from the Ghost. The Ghost does not truly appear in this film, but it does manifest itself. Earlier, Hamlet had paid homage to his father's armor and we saw it weeping blood. That was the only hint of something supernatural going on in the story. It does not communicate anything to Hamlet at that point.

Later, Hamlet is resting on a fountain inside the palace when a piece of cloth wafts down from above, right down to the prince's hand. The images on the cloth depict his father's murder.
That is a very efficient way to stage the scene, especially for audiences who already know the story. As audiences grow more used to elliptical story-telling (as evidenced by modern editing sensibilities, for example), such shortcuts may become more common, even in the theater (where technology may be able to show details actors alone cannot). In a version of Hamlet where the Ghost does not really appear or speak, the audience is left to puzzle out what is happening and why the prince is acting in such a way. There are enough mentions of the murder after this point that we know the basics, and the play within a play would reveal the particular details, bringing the image on the cloth into focus.

Early ambiguity would give way to satisfying revelations, as Shakespeare proves once again how impervious he is to cuts.

I.v. The Ghost's Tale - Tennant (2009)

Hamlet follows the Ghost into the mist-shrouded main set to confront his father's spirit. The Ghost is very angry at first, but mellows as the scene continues. Patrick Stewart's performance gets especially interesting when he starts telling the story of the murder, and seems to relive it. In the absence of a flashback sequence (which you would not normally have the luxury of in a stage production), this recreates the events without having to mime them. "O horrible", then, is the Ghost's entry into hell as he's experiencing it once more. When this Ghost talks of the morning air, he does not find it threatening, but more like a nostalgic memory. Here is what he has lost. Not only his life, crown and queen, but to never again see the sun rise or experience the joys of nature. This is a man who used to sleep in the outdoors and who uses a lot of animal imagery. He has a kinship with the land (and as king, is a symbol for it) from which he has been divorced.
As with the other two modern dress adaptations examined by this series, the Ghost's manifestation is a solid, physical one. He grabs Hamlet and almost throttles him when supplicating him to "bear it not", a gesture that turns into a final embrace before he leaves in a puff of smoke, taking the supernatural mists with him.

What follows is Hamlet's transformation. He collapses and starts running his fingers through his hair. By going from the perfect haircut of the early scenes to the wild, more modern style Doctor Who fans know and love so well, Tennant physicalizes the character's new wildness, of not outright madness. And there is reason to believe director Gregory Doran means for his Hamlet to be mad, with an odd jump cut in the middle of the scene creating a disjointed look. I'm not entirely sure it works as a piece of editing, but nonetheless, the effect is appropriately off-putting.
Hamlet's crazy eyes and smile are equally so, and when he says "That one may smile, and smile, and be a villain", he's definitely talking about himself as much as Claudius. He will now smile, act the madman and appear disarming, but he is in truth a villain, a would-be murderer. This is Hamlet coming up with the madness idea, and I wonder why I never really picked up on that line before, because it seems so natural here. Hamlet goes on to swear his oath, not upon a kiss on his sword, but by slashing a switchblade through the palm of his hand and collapses again.
A much more violent swearing, and one that is informed by more modern scenes of this ilk in other media. It speaks both to his madness (self-harm is not sane) and to the seriousness of his oath (that he is ready to shed his own blood to achieve his revenge), as well as provide a shock ending to this sequence. The idea that Hamlet even carries such a weapon tells us he is able to kill. When staged in more ancient times, this isn't needed, but in a modern dress adaptation, the audience expects such violence less. The audience tends to assume modern morality and law are a part of such a world, especially in the protagonist.

I.v. The Ghost's Tale - Fodor (2007)

Fodor's more experimental treatment gives us another very physical Ghost, but this one is unsympathetic, violent and malevolent. From the moment he appears, he's striking his son and grabbing him by the hair. How creepy is this Ghost when it smiles whenever it speaks of murder and transforms every act of fatherly affection into tense violence (such as when it pinches Hamlet's cheek, hard)? As we discussed in Scene 4, the Ghost here is more devil than man. Has hell corrupted his soul or was he always this kind of a man? Is he, in fact, a demon sent to damn Hamlet, entirely justifying the prince's delays? It may turn out that the Ghost was right about Claudius, but does it truly want revenge for its own sake, or is it just an opportunity for Satan to collect some extra souls? You'll note that this Ghost never says the "O horrible" lines, perhaps quite happy to walk into the fires of hell.

Sound design does a lot of the work here. The Ghost's words have a whispery echo, but you can also hear every wet sound to come out of the actor's mouth. It's almost stomach-churning.

More cuts
Because the first confrontation between Hamlet and his parents was cut, we have a Hamlet who harbors no particular resentment towards Claudius. The murder, for him, is a complete surprise. Therefore, he doesn't say "my prophetic soul" when the murderer's identity is spoken. That's an important shift in the play, as it doesn't taint Hamlet's motivation with a certain sense of wish fulfillment. In the text, there is reason to believe that Hamlet imagines the Ghost (after all, the thing never speaks except to him, what if it is a vision and never really speaks at all?) because it sends him exactly on the mission he wants to undertake already. It justifies his own murderous impulse. Here, he had no such bent.

The ambiguity of Hamlet's motivation is restored by the way the scene ends, not with the usual swearing speech, but by the voice of Horatio who pulls him out of his reverie. This was all in his mind and he hasn't moved from his waiting position. It's still night (no "morning air"). It was all in his head. It's a perfectly reasonable way for a spirit to communicate with the living, but if it was an unmotivated hallucination, then Hamlet may well be mad. And yet, because he has no prior negative feelings for Claudius (at least, on screen), there doesn't seem to be a reason for his imagination to act up this way. Fodor does tend to take a problem play and give it more problems.

I.v. The Ghost's Tale - Hamlet 2000

Sam Shepard is without a doubt my favorite Ghost and the power of his performance in this scene probably has a great deal to do with why it only suffered nips and tucks where other speeches in this version were ruthlessly cut down. His is a very physical Ghost, starting on Hamlet's balcony and waiting for him to open the door before he enters. He doesn't walk through walls. He's not accompanied by mists. And he's able to corner Hamlet, grab him, literalize the image of the prince's hair standing on end by physically grabbing it, and ending on an emotional hug before vanishing (off-camera) without going back to the door. This is the only real manifestation of his being a spirit. There need be no special effects when the simple act of holding a handkerchief to his poisoned ear is creepy enough, stigmata revealing details of his murder.

Shepard presents a complex Ghost, haunted by his prison house. His voice breaks when he speaks of being merciful to Gertrude. He is restrained, full of fury, but always catching himself before he goes too far. He does so just before "But soft, brief let me be", as if realizing that he's off on a rant, that he let his emotions get the better of him. The Ghost becomes a threefold mirror in this scene. Of course, he's a mirror of Hamlet himself. How far as the apple fallen from the tree? Will Hamlet let his own emotions run rampant, or will he, like his father, hold them in before taking a step too far? As always, he's a mirror for Claudius, his brother and false father to Hamlet. Claudius too holds back his true self and only lets it out when emotion overwhelms him. And then there's Polonius, another father who says he will be brief while uttering the most interminable speeches. Polonius is a fool because he does not "catch himself" as Hamlet Sr. does. While the Ghost imparts the "argument of the play", Polonius has it all wrong and gives a false argument to the king and queen. Through the repeated word "brief" (a pun, as both scenes are a sort of briefing?), Shakespeare links the two expositions. However, he makes one relevant and the other irrelevant.
Shepard's performance is touching, but there remains a sense of danger throughout. He is in Hamlet's face throughout as the prince tries to back away. The camera follows them around the room, slightly spinning, lending a giddy energy to the scene that could well represent Hamlet's impending madness.

When the Ghost disappears, this sequence ends without Hamlet's lone speech. Parts of it show up in Act I's ultimate sequence, in voice-over, but we don't see Hamlet swearing to avenge his father's murder. This is merely (but efficiently) inferred.

I.v.The Ghost's Tale - Kline (1990)

Kline offers another sympathetic Ghost in Robert Murch, again without armor, though he does have a sword and is in full military dress. The Ghost here is sad, but not particularly tormented, and if anything, is cut down even more than in Zeffirelli's version. The scene passes by very quickly, with none of the subtleties of Scofield's similarly sympathetic Ghost. Details and images are of course cut, as is the opening dialog, but notably, a line like "And to those thorns that in her bosom lodge, To prick and sting her". What we lose here is much of the Ghost's interior life. We no longer know his ambivalence towards Gertrude's role in the adultery. We don't know how he feels about Purgatory/Hell. And as in Zeffirelli's version, there is no ambiguity to the father-son relationship.

I dislike Kline's performance a great deal through most of this scene. His over-the-top delivery of lines is in stark opposition to Hamlet's own advice to the Players, and his emotions do not seem to fit the moment. For him, the big revelation is that Claudius seduced Gertrude, but he already knew this. Learning of the murder, he relishes the coming revenge, and then seems almost happy that it's Claudius. Not a bad take on it, truth be told, but Hamlet is still shocked at the wrong piece of news. Hamlet steals "O, horrible! O, horrible! most horrible!" for himself, robbing the Ghost of some anguish (again, Kline frustratingly chews the scenery with it). As the Ghost leaves, the two characters reach for one another and... connect! This is a rather solid Ghost compared to most interpretations, perhaps a side-effect of being so stagy. The Ghost then simply walks off-stage. No camera tricks. No special effects.
Hamlet then falls to the ground, progressively making us fear for his sanity. There's a great effect as the actor merges with his shadow, a veritable coupling with hell created by the lighting. Hamlet becomes this amorphous creature, his dark self exposed and combining with him. It underscores the lines "I'll wipe away all trivial fond records, All saws of books, all forms, all pressures past, That youth and observation copied there". Here, Shakespeare wipes the slate clean. Hamlet rewrites his own character (which is the triumph of the play). Hamlet overwrites his own psychology, and a new man shall emerge. Is this insanity or a new form of sanity? Hamlet is the self-made, self-written man. And he must finish his oeuvre (himself) before he can fulfill his destiny. He can only revenge his father when he is ready, and he is not ready until he is complete as a character. Shakespeare will have him think about a large number of things (mortality, love, art, etc.) before taking him to his ultimate end. For Kline, the end of the old Hamlet and the start of the new would probably be the end of this section, as Hamlet passes out again, plunging backwards into the unknown.

But before we get to that, there is some manic behavior on show. In particular, when Hamlet says "uncle, there you are", he points into the audience. Having wiped everything from his mind except his revenge, he sees Claudius everywhere. The story of Hamlet will now be how he creates the pieces of his mind (as opposed to putting pieces back together again) to come out of the madness he just created for himself. Madness as the incomplete self.

I.v.The Ghost's Tale - Zeffirelli (1990)

Hamlet runs up to the highest platform in Elsinore, and there he finds the Ghost skulking in a dark corner. The opening dialog is one of the many cuts made to this scene, so Hamlet does not here stop the Ghost in its tracks. There is no ambiguity about the spirit's intentions, he's not bringing him towards the edge. In fact, Paul Scofield may just be the most sympathetic Ghost ever committed to film. He does not appear in armor (lines relating to this were all cut), but as a sad and weak old man (not unlike his portrayal of the French King in Branagh's Henry V). There is anguish in his voice and defeat in his posture. Hamlet is visibly moved by all this, Mel Gibson keeping the Danish prince's emotions always very close to the surface.

The Ghost's speech is very much cut down, and being as long as it is, it was a natural place for the director to do so. Of course, anytime you cut text, you might hurt the play's meaning. In this case, "Brief let me be" is the order of business from the start, as the Ghost gets right down to the business of recounting his murder. One of the things that changes is the relationship between father and son. In the text, the Ghost is much more severe. He tests and judges his son ("I find thee apt") and in many ways, manipulates him into avenging his murder. He repeatedly forbids Hamlet from forgetting him, perhaps sensing that his son is not the most proactive of people. Most of that is lost in this version, leaving us with a more trustworthy and less ambiguous Ghost. He doesn't flaunt his own virtues at the expense of Claudius'. He doesn't overegg the vile details of his murder.

The text has been slashed, but Scofield takes it and creates a memorable performance with it. You feel for this Ghost in a way you usually don't. At the end, he reaches with both hands towards Hamlet, and one tear drops off his face.
Hamlet closes his eyes, and the touch never comes. The Ghost is gone by the time he opens them again. Gibson's Hamlet feels everything viscerally, and is enraged by this revelation. He runs down to look once upon on his uncle's party, where he raves and rants, out of earshot. Zeffirelli uses the castle's geography to create strong staging for this part of the scene. When Hamlet goes on about that "pernicious woman", he's looking down on her. "So, uncle, there you are" likewise sets Hamlet's eyes on the object of his rage. On "meet it is I set it down", Hamlet physically writes his thought in the stones with his sword.
Writing that turns into violent, but ineffectual, slashing. Seeing Hamlet in such a rage begs a question. Why does he later have so much difficulty carrying out his revenge? It seems that had Claudius been just a little closer, he might have died right then and there. This might be an important chink in this version's armor. While effective movie-making, the performance may not make sense according to the text. Did Hamlet want the revenge to fit the crime better? Did he want to see Claudius suffer more? Are there political reasons for not doing it "pat"? (Zeffirelli removes most of the political context from the play, so that's a hard sell.) Whatever the reason for the delay (and we'll have a chance to discuss the possibilities in the coming weeks), it allows doubt to creep into Hamlet's mind, leading to tragedy. But the director will have to justify his vision of a Hamlet with far less self-control.