Re: Shakespeare in Love
Friedman (bananafish_9@yahoo.com)
Sat, 20 Mar 1999 15:15:13 -0800 (PST)
Yes Jim I can see your point. I probably loved Branagh's Hamlet so
much because before I saw it I did not really have any idea of what
the play was like. I read the play afterwards. Oh and please don't
call Kenneth Branagh pretty again. (:
-Liz Friedman
---blah b b blah <jrovira@juno.com> wrote:
>
> Yeah, a lot of this is personal taste here. What I liked about
Gibson's
> Hamlet had more to do with production than Gibson's actual portrayal
of
> Hamlet, tho, that's the thing. I didn't sit there with the text of
the
> play in my hands to double check, I may do that next time :)
>
> But speaking of Gibson's portrayal of Hamlet, I liked that he wasP
> somewhat chubby and dark, like the Hamlet of Shakespeare, as opposed
to
> Branagh's who was thin and relatively pretty.
>
> The set of Gibson's Hamlet seemed more in line with what I pictured
(and
> certainly the feel of the original play) than Branagh's. The
setting for
> Gibson's Hamlet was dank and musty, dark, etc., while Branagh's was
more
> Hollywood, clean, almost closer to Baroque than Medieval. And what
> REALLY annoyed me about Branagh's Hamlet (the movie, not his
portrayal of
> the character), was its resort to film techniques (specfically certain
> special effects) apparently to "help" the story. I'm thinking in
> particular of a certain scene in the woods near the beginning...
>
> Jim
>
_________________________________________________________
DO YOU YAHOO!?
Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com