Hamlet is a take on William Shakespeare's classic play that Sir Laurence Olivier directed and starred in. The film won Sir Laurence Olivier two Oscars- one for his acting and one for best picture due to his producing role in the production of the film. Olivier also appeared in an earlier best picture winner, 1940's Rebecca directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Hamlet was the second film that Olivier directed and his second Shakespearean adaptation. Olivier is considered one of the greatest actors of the 20th century and this version of Hamlet is considered his seminal work. Olivier was the first film actor to be elevated to peerage (knighted) for his work in film by the queen. While Olivier obtained four Oscars during his long and prolific career, Hamlet is the only film for which he won a best actor award. Olivier's other Oscars besides the two for Hamlet, came from a special award for his work on his first film, Henry V, and a lifetime achievement award given to the knighted actor in 1978. Hamlet is also the first film that we have reviewed where the director was also the leading actor in the film. While Olivier did not win the directing award, his achievement of directing a best picture where he also won best actor clearly solidifies his place in the annuls of Oscar history. While the previous two films we have viewed from the 1940's dealt with the post-war malaise in American culture and the despicable rise of anti-Semitism in America in the 1940's, Hamlet pivots away from reality and takes a stab at the escapist entertainment of the golden age of Hollywood. This import marked the first non-American film to win best picture and was the first film version of Hamlet to include sound. There have been seven post-war versions of Hamlet including this 1948 version, "Grigori Kozintsev's 1964 Russian adaptation; a film of the John Gielgud-directed 1964 Broadway production, Richard Burton's Hamlet, which played limited engagements that same year; Tony Richardson's 1969 version (the first in color), Franco Zeffirelli's 1990 version starring Mel Gibson; Kenneth Branagh's full-text 1996 version; and Michael Almereyda's 2000 modernization starring Ethan Hawke". While I had seen a few of the other aforementioned adaptations, this was my first time watching this 1948 version. While many of the shots in this depiction of Hamlet seem staged like the theatrical production, it takes the introduction of phantasmagoria to become more abstract. Using close-up angles and fog, Olivier symbolizes the arrival of Hamlet's father's ghost. The special effects in the film held up well to modern standards in most scenes, with only the shots of the entire castle suffering from a lack of CGI or expensive budget. On a somewhat related note, the voice of his father's ghost coming from the helmet of his armor reminded me of how George Lucas styled Darth Vader in Star Wars. Perhaps Lucas drew inspiration from this Olivier film.Without writing too much of a book report on Hamlet, whose plot and subject matter is some of the most well-known in the entire cannon of English literature, I will instead focus on the cinematic elements. This cerebral story, with many soliloquies and internal dialogue, has a tendency to drag a bit. With limited action for periods of time, the movie is largely saved by the peaks of action including flashes of violence and emotion. The acting is superb at parts, but does show flourishes of melodrama typical of earlier films. Additionally, the sometimes dragging moments are disrupted by the hits of the Shakespearean dialogue with a performance of the "To Be or Not to Be" Monologue delivered with Olivier's incredible acting chops. Besides Olivier, the real star of this film is the soundtrack. Between the brilliant score played by the orchestra, the sound effects in the form of heartbeats and gusty corridors add tremendously to moments of introspection and eeriness. Overall, I found Hamlet to be a very traditional yet innovative portrayal of Shakespeare's source material. While the play was cut down to deliver a film 2.5 hours long, it still captured the major action and dialogue for which Hamlet is known. In full honesty, Shakespearean English is not my favorite and watching this film was a little bit of a chore. Fortunately, there were sword fights and murder to break up the dense dialogue. Unfortunately, the film ceases to cross the line from cinema to entertainment for my particular tastes. Olivier's performance and direction breathed life into the already dramatic story and the themes of betrayal and loss are timeless motifs that will remain relevant for all time. With that said, in order to truly enjoy this film you really need to commit with both of your love of literature as well as the melodramatic style of 1940's cinema.

It can't get better than Hamlet. Maybe the most-quoted English piece of all time, Hamlet is a delicate piece that needs to be done right. In his 1948, black and white, Best Picture-winning Hamlet, Olivier delivered an adaptation that hung close to the letter and spirit of the original source, but didn't dare to fly free. It certainly grasped the mood Shakespeare wanted, but it doesn't take filming freedoms where the text allowed. Certainly, he achieved the most freedom from the stage through the cinematography, most noticeably the unique camera movements imitating the sound of a heartbeat that plays when the dead king's ghost is observed in anyway in the story.Hamlet feels more like a filmed version of the play rather than an adaptation. But at that, it is amazing. The dark presence and tragic undertones grow through Olivier's Oscar-winning lead performance and Jean Simmons's crazed Ophelia. As the narrator states in the beginning of film, "This is the tragedy of a man who could not make up his mind." In the play and film, Hamlet is visited by his father's (the former king of Denmark) ghost, stating that his uncle, now the king, had murdered him. However, Hamlet is unsure what action to follow, for if he murders his uncle, it would be repaying evil with evil. Unfortunately, a mistake causes Hamlet to be exiled to England, but he doesn't give up there, and the story builds up to a climatic ending.Like the play itself, Hamlet offers many questions but doesn't give any straightforward answers. The questions dive deep, and along with Shakespeare's old English, younger viewers might not understand. As with the play, an undercurrent topic of incest plays out, mostly through Hamlet's complaints against his uncle taking his father's widow as his wife. Furthermore, the ending is dramatic and sad – with a lot of dead people.Olivier, who has the skill to drop any obscure line of Shakespeare in a beat, manages to work a scarcely worthy adaptation of the play, despite having to cut many monologues and soliloquies in order to run under 160 minutes. One of the weak points of the film is Olivier's recitation of the famous soliloquy, "To be or not to be." To my disappointment, Olivier rushes through it with melancholy and something short of fake that it doesn't have much dramatic and emotional impact. The play did not have any rule or details that restricted it from emotional freedom, especially as a film. Olivier seems to restrict himself to rules that Shakespeare didn't put or intend. But otherwise, Olivier's Hamlet is extraordinary in its own right. He portrays it in the way Shakespeare might have imagined it – the non-extravagant set pieces, simply choreographed and bloodless duels, and few, select locations for different scenes. For the sources and educational material, Olivier's Hamlet is worth watching, but only for the artistic value of the spirit and letter of Shakespeare.

This is a great movie. It is a true classic. Great acting. Great story line. Great special effects. This movie is very scary. It is a masterpiece. See it. It is mush more fun to watch then reality TV. This one of best movie ever. Shakespeare was one of the best writers of his time. There a lot of people who like Shakespeare that are story snobs. But will say Shakespeare was as good at writing as Steven King. This is better then Godzilla (1954) and almost as good as Godzilla (1998). Godzilla (1954) is great movie. And so is this. It is nothing like. But good like Godzilla and a story just like Godzilla is a story. Great movie. It is a most see.

The only major flaw this movie has is how condensed it is. Subplots, characters, and lines are eliminated, to the point where it feels unfinished. Olivier did this for two reasons: time and more focus on Hamlet. Hamlet is Shakespeare's most complex and debated character, so Olivier condensing the movie isn't that bad. It also allows the movie more of a dark, Gothic feeling, much to Hamlet's self. But Olivier cutting out many lines, including all but the last line in the "O what a rogue and peasant slave am I" soliloquy: arguably the best soliloquy in the play, is what I didn't like. It is the most intense we see him, and it is also when he shows his main traits: sadness, anger, confusion, philosophy, wit, happiness and determination, all in the same part. It is also the play's turning point/climax (all of Shakespeare's climax's happen near the middle). Olivier including that soliloquy would has added just a couple more minutes and would have made Olivier's great performance even better. Though I have been bickering at the condensation, that is not enough to say this movie wasn't good or sucked. What makes this so good is the filming and portrayals. Sir Laurence Olivier was the greatest actor of the 20th century. Some similar actors in his time such as Gielgud, Guinness and Richardson became his greatest rivals, but none could surpass him. But on film, Olivier did crappy performances by being completely unconvincing and very robotic. This is one of those times where he would deliver a superb powerhouse performance. Plus, the delivery of the character was very plausible. Hamlet is a character that only the best can play. To do a good Hamlet, one must have strong acting and accuracy. Not just one or the other, or one outweighing the other. There is no correct way of playing Hamlet, only accuracy. The only way to attain that accuracy is by showing every kind of human emotion, all while keeping a basis for the general character (Olivier's was a man who could not make up his mind, which is the most popular and plausible generalization). Olivier's accuracy may very well be how Shakespeare intended on writing Hamlet. His strong accuracy and dazzling performance makes this one of the best portrayals in film history. If you have not studied Hamlet, you won't think so. Other than Olivier, everyone else's portrayals and accuracy were spot on too. Even Gertrude (who was noticeably 10 years younger than Oliver) was great. Kenneth Branagh's 1996 version disgraced all characters except for Horatio. What makes this a great piece of film are the camera tricks and special effects. Although Olivier did not like doing movies, he admired filmmakers and wanted to do an artful movie. For a movie in the 1940s, the ghost, smokes, and lighting were uncanny. His capturing of a dark Gothic feeling is so good and fits the play very well. He also incorporates many camera tricks that adding meaning and pull the viewer in. This is the only artful and skillfully crafted film about a Shakespearean play.