For Emily!
You asked which Hamlet would be best to see.
It depends on what you want.
Here's the long answer:
The 1946 Laurence Olivier version is my absolute favorite, because it is beautifully photographed and I have a huge gay-on for him in that movie. If you like handsome, mopey blond goth dudes, you'll love it. He's yummy. There are significant cuts (there have to be in almost any film version because it's a long-ass play), but it gets the point across. This one just nails everything - the mood, the character, and all the important scenes. Works best if you can appreciate black and white. I wouldn't watch a colorized version of this if you paid me.
The 1990 Mel Gibson version is my second favorite. I like the way he plays Hamlet. He doesn't overdo it. I like the sets too, and Helena Bonham Carter is hot as Ophelia. This one also has a lot cut out, and the opening scene was actually replaced with one that they totally made up out of the blue. It loses some major points for that, because I love the hell out of the opening scene of the play and the way it establishes the mood.
The 1996 Kenneth Branagh version is in third place. Most people say this is the "definitive" version, but I have to disagree. It's a little too long (totally unabridged), and it could have been sped up a bit. But the main problem is that Kenneth Branagh WAY, WAY OVERACTS. It's a shame because everything else is so great. Great sets and costumes, beautiful colors, awesome supporting cast (mostly), and good directing choices. It SHOULD be number 2 on my list. The thing is, for me, if Hamlet himself isn't right, then the movie isn't right. How he is played is always my number one priority. Kenneth Branagh just jumps around like a fucking crack addict, maniacally chewing gaping holes in the scenery. I hate people who play Hamlet crazy. I like depressed, tragic Hamlets.
The recent (last few years) Ethan Hawke Hamlet is interesting. It's a modern-dress version, so there are some creative choices (the "to be or not to be" speech is delivered inside Blockbuster Video, haha). However, Ethan Hawke is kind of a gay lameass and I dislike him as a person and an actor. He's so Gen X-y. I don't like his face either. The bright spots of this movie are Bill Murray as Polonious and Julia Stiles (hot) as Ophelia.
Other than that, I've seen a 1960's version with Anthony Hopkins as Claudius (it was okay), an early 80's version that the BBC did for TV (Captain Picard is in it so that's cool), another recent made-for-TNN version that was set in the mid 1800's (average), and of course the Shakespeare Santa Cruz one which I admired on many levels and which was a thrill because I was able to see the play performed live as it was meant to be.
Here's the short answer:
See the Olivier version if you can find it, otherwise get the Mel Gibson or Kenneth Branagh version. See the Ethan Hawke version if you like Shakespeare in modern dress, but don't expect it to bring you closer to the play.
I don't actually own any film version of Hamlet, so sorry I can't lend one to you.
It depends on what you want.
Here's the long answer:
The 1946 Laurence Olivier version is my absolute favorite, because it is beautifully photographed and I have a huge gay-on for him in that movie. If you like handsome, mopey blond goth dudes, you'll love it. He's yummy. There are significant cuts (there have to be in almost any film version because it's a long-ass play), but it gets the point across. This one just nails everything - the mood, the character, and all the important scenes. Works best if you can appreciate black and white. I wouldn't watch a colorized version of this if you paid me.
The 1990 Mel Gibson version is my second favorite. I like the way he plays Hamlet. He doesn't overdo it. I like the sets too, and Helena Bonham Carter is hot as Ophelia. This one also has a lot cut out, and the opening scene was actually replaced with one that they totally made up out of the blue. It loses some major points for that, because I love the hell out of the opening scene of the play and the way it establishes the mood.
The 1996 Kenneth Branagh version is in third place. Most people say this is the "definitive" version, but I have to disagree. It's a little too long (totally unabridged), and it could have been sped up a bit. But the main problem is that Kenneth Branagh WAY, WAY OVERACTS. It's a shame because everything else is so great. Great sets and costumes, beautiful colors, awesome supporting cast (mostly), and good directing choices. It SHOULD be number 2 on my list. The thing is, for me, if Hamlet himself isn't right, then the movie isn't right. How he is played is always my number one priority. Kenneth Branagh just jumps around like a fucking crack addict, maniacally chewing gaping holes in the scenery. I hate people who play Hamlet crazy. I like depressed, tragic Hamlets.
The recent (last few years) Ethan Hawke Hamlet is interesting. It's a modern-dress version, so there are some creative choices (the "to be or not to be" speech is delivered inside Blockbuster Video, haha). However, Ethan Hawke is kind of a gay lameass and I dislike him as a person and an actor. He's so Gen X-y. I don't like his face either. The bright spots of this movie are Bill Murray as Polonious and Julia Stiles (hot) as Ophelia.
Other than that, I've seen a 1960's version with Anthony Hopkins as Claudius (it was okay), an early 80's version that the BBC did for TV (Captain Picard is in it so that's cool), another recent made-for-TNN version that was set in the mid 1800's (average), and of course the Shakespeare Santa Cruz one which I admired on many levels and which was a thrill because I was able to see the play performed live as it was meant to be.
Here's the short answer:
See the Olivier version if you can find it, otherwise get the Mel Gibson or Kenneth Branagh version. See the Ethan Hawke version if you like Shakespeare in modern dress, but don't expect it to bring you closer to the play.
I don't actually own any film version of Hamlet, so sorry I can't lend one to you.